Oct. 30, 2025 - Bannon's War Room
48:49
Participants
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| This is the primal scream of a dying regime. | ||
| Pray for our enemies because we're going medieval on these people. | ||
| Here's not got a free shot on all these networks lying about the people. | ||
| The people have had a belly full of it. | ||
| I know you don't like hearing that. | ||
| I know you're trying to do everything in the world to stop that, but you're not going to stop it. | ||
| It's going to happen. | ||
| And where do people like that go to share the big line? | ||
| MAGA media. | ||
| I wish in my soul, I wish that any of these people had a conscience. | ||
| Ask yourself, what is my task and what is my purpose? | ||
| If that answer is to save my country, this country will be saved. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Waru, here's your host, Stephen K. Mann. | |
| It's Thursday, 30 October, year of our Lord 2025. | ||
| We've got a cold open. | ||
| I've got Dave Brett writing shotgun. | ||
| We're going to have Josh Hawley here, Clearo Pascal. | ||
| We're packed this morning, as usual. | ||
| I want to start off, though. | ||
| I've got a few minutes with John Solomon. | ||
| John, Arctic Frost, the dump that came out the other day, Grassley, the Senate's now fully engaged. | ||
| And Jim Jordan over the House is going absolutely ballistic on this. | ||
| I think this is the biggest scandal I've ever seen in American political history. | ||
| Your thoughts, sir? | ||
| Yeah, I think we're getting there. | ||
| I think this could be one of the greatest civil liberty violations in American history under the color of government authority. | ||
| You've got a predicate that's open that, according to the FBI agents, I show to experts, the prosecutors, it doesn't meet the standard. | ||
| It's basically there's no evidence. | ||
| The evidence is, oh, Steve, you were on CNN. | ||
| That was the evidence for literally opening the investigation. | ||
| They're trying to criminalize in this memo when they open it up in April of 2022, 15 months after January 6th, and just four days after Donald Trump is announced he's going to run for re-election. | ||
| And I think that's really important. | ||
| This investigation, if you thought what happened on January 6th with the electors was bad, you could have done it on the 7th or the 8th or 9th of 2021. | ||
| They wait a whole year until Donald Trump raises his hand and says, I'm getting back in the arena. | ||
| I'm running for 2024. | ||
| And they open up an electronic communication that every expert I talk to says is thin, doesn't meet the rules. | ||
| Then they try to say the crime is by some people offering alternate electors to the Senate. | ||
| That is a criminal conspiracy. | ||
| Now, if you're going to do that, the FBI has an obligation to go back and look at how alternate electors were done in the past. | ||
| They don't do that. | ||
| They ignore the fact that in 1876 and in 1960, alternate electors were submitted to the Senate twice. | ||
| Nobody got prosecuted. | ||
| Nobody thought it was a crime back then. | ||
| Oh, by the way, in both of those cases, it was Democrat candidates who were doing it. | ||
| So they ignore the precedent and they just simply open up and then they just go fishing. | ||
| I call this a MAGA dragnet. | ||
| 400 and plus Republicans and their groups are targeted. | ||
| Eight senators, one House members. | ||
| They're getting millions and millions of lines of phone data, geolocation data. | ||
| They're looking at anything and everything they can, trying to find a crime that they can hang on someone that is close to Donald Trump. | ||
| That's not what law enforcement's done. | ||
| That's not what the Fourth Amendment says we should be doing with our law enforcement. | ||
| I think when you saw the Jim Jordan interview I did last night, he is furious. | ||
| He said, listen, if Jack Smith doesn't come voluntarily, he's getting subpoenaed. | ||
| And by the way, I'm not settling for another renewal of FISA. | ||
| We are changing FISA. | ||
| We're changing the spy rules. | ||
| You can see people are worked up. | ||
| This may be a moment where we get some real civil liberties reforms and some civil and some real accountability. | ||
| Here's the news I want to give you. | ||
| I just got off of the phone with some senior law enforcement officials. | ||
| The FBI is internally now investigating some of its own personnel for their conduct in Arctic Frost, meaning they're looking at the possibility of their own agents engaged in criminality by opening up this investigation or conducting or doing things in the investigation. | ||
| The entire unit that ran this has been dismantled. | ||
| Most every agent that played a role in this has been fired. | ||
| This is unlike the FBI in the past, which would just sweep things out of the rud and say nothing to look here. | ||
| There is accountability internally going on. | ||
| And if the FBI refers people for prosecution, Pam Bondi will be able to do to maybe people who committed crimes here, which he's now done for James Comey and John Bolton and Letitia James. | ||
| And I suspect with the referral that happened earlier this week, John Brennan could be someone who's facing an indictment soon as well. | ||
| So you're getting an accountability lens, which never happened in the first Trump administration. | ||
| People got away with all sorts of crimes in the first Trump administration. | ||
| No one really got anything more than a slap on the wrist. | ||
| This time, you're starting to see real accountability, firings, criminal investigations, prosecutions. | ||
| So this looks a little different than the frustrated storyline you and I have covered for the last 10 years. | ||
| John, is there a realization now? | ||
| Because this began, I believe, with a whistleblower coming forward with the situation about the senators. | ||
| Is cash and Bondi and Todd Blanche and others, have they come to the realization that this is systemic? | ||
| This is just not bad apples and that there's a deep festering problem of this is the way the cultural and institution, these institutions have been warped. | ||
| So it's beyond now even just we have to have accountability individuals. | ||
| That has to happen or this is a joke. | ||
| But now this is systemic and you've got to go in and break that culture and start taking it apart piece by piece. | ||
| Yeah, absolutely. | ||
| In the interview I did with Cash Patel 10 days ago, he said, listen, we are stamping out the notion that the FBI settles political scores or that they go after their political enemies. | ||
| You only see the crime and the evidence. | ||
| You don't look at the person or the political affiliation. | ||
| And we are reorienting a large organization. | ||
| Now, I want to give you a little timetable on this. | ||
| I know Grassy mentioned the whistleblowers. | ||
| It makes it look like Chuck Grassy broke this whole story. | ||
| Cash Patel first found these documents back in March. | ||
| They're part of the grand conspiracy case. | ||
| Remember, you and I have been talking about that. | ||
| The documents that just made were made public because they go through a review process, and that process is always really slow with the Justice Department. | ||
| They were in the Justice Department's hands in spring and summer. | ||
| So the Justice Department has been looking at this for some time. | ||
| We just didn't know about it until it became public. | ||
| There is a real turning inference. | ||
| And I think the big thing that's going to happen, Steve, I think the U.S. Attorney in Miami is going to be made the key prosecutor and this whole case is going to move down. | ||
| And Jack Smith's final actions in Florida are going to move the case to Florida. | ||
| And then we're going to go all the way back to maybe as early as 2014 in the IRS and look at this as one large grand conspiracy case to misuse the power of the FBI and the Justice Department to go after MAGA Nation. | ||
| This is a MAGA dragnet. | ||
| That's what you see here. | ||
| And one FBI official I talked to today said, what they did, they took a boat into the ocean and they were towing to find any license plate they could tag on Donald Trump's car. | ||
| They were simply looking for anything. | ||
| You don't do criminal investigations that way. | ||
| You have to have a reason to look at Americans. | ||
| That didn't happen here, according to the people who've reviewed this evidence. | ||
| You've been on top of this more than others. | ||
| Directionally, because they put out another 2,000 pages, I think, last night or the night before. | ||
| Where is this investigation going to go? | ||
| And what are the next, you believe, major reveals we're going to see? | ||
| I think some of the people who were part of Arctic Frost are going to get both congressional and grand jury subpoenas. | ||
| People will be hauled before the court and forced answer. | ||
| And I want to remind people something that Jim Jordan said on our show last night. | ||
| Jack Smith's two top deputies have taken the Fifth Amendment, have taken the Fifth Amendment. | ||
| Prosecutors have taken the Fifth Amendment about what they did in this case. | ||
| What does that mean? | ||
| They think they may have engaged in criminality. | ||
| You can't take the Fifth Amendment if you don't think you have criminal liability. | ||
| That is a stunning thing. | ||
| We don't normally see prosecutors and FBI agents saying, I'm taking the Fifth. | ||
| You know, something serious is here. | ||
| And I think what's going on now is that people are starting to get grand jury subpoenas. | ||
| I've been talking to defense lawyers. | ||
| There was about 20 or 30 that have gone out in the last couple of weeks. | ||
| The big conspiracy is now being put together. | ||
| Now, whether a grand jury indicts, whether you get convictions, we'll see. | ||
| But they're looking at a decade as one criminal machine, that the Comey, McGarland, Jack Smith era was an ongoing criminal enterprise like a mob or mafia or drug kingpin. | ||
| And the crimes were violating innocent Americans' civil liberties to try to score a political score in politics. | ||
| That is so extraordinary. | ||
| I don't think I ever would have uttered those words, ever thought I would utter those words as a journalist. | ||
| That's what went on here. | ||
| You're saying that even as much emphasis as we do in you and the worm put on Papadopoulos and Crossfire Hurricane and the honeypot, you know, what Stephen Halfer, all that, the Cambridge crowd, in the spring of 15, you're actually saying, hey, folks, I think they may go back even before that and start rolling this thing off. | ||
| This thing could look like 10 years, a decade or more. | ||
| I think you're right. | ||
| Listen, Jack Smith is at the origins of the IRS case. | ||
| There are emails between him and Lois Lerner that we focused on and some other people in the Justice Department. | ||
| That same group carries all the way through the raid at Mar-a-Lago. | ||
| The prosecution's up to 24. | ||
| I think they're going to look at that as, hey, this was an effort to drain Republicans of money and reputation, maybe put some in prison to make sure that the populist movement that Donald Trump was building across America could be side railed. | ||
| They failed. | ||
| And now because they failed, and we now have people like Cash Patel and Pam Bonnie turning this evidence up, I think people could end up going to prison for this. | ||
| I think we're moving towards that direction. | ||
| And the evidence is really strong. | ||
| I mean, I had career FBI agents very non-political look at this last night like, my God, I've never seen anything like this in my life. | ||
| What are we doing? | ||
| This isn't FBI work. | ||
| This is political opposition work. | ||
| When people who wore the badge for 40 years start saying that about their old agency, you know something bad is rotten in Denmark. | ||
| One of the issues we've had is that, you know, Cash has got a couple of people over the FBI. | ||
| Pam is holding on by her fingertips. | ||
| She's got, you know, in Maine Justice, she's got some of her top people. | ||
| Is the manpower issue about just enough prosecutors? | ||
| You've got Halligan, you know, she's doing a bunch, but is this, I know the Miami is talking about a grand jury in January. | ||
| But is there at Maine Justice a problem that we still don't have just enough senior level bodies that are senior prosecutors? | ||
| Because this case is going to have enormous complexity. | ||
| It's going to have to have a massive team. | ||
| Do you think we've got the manpower to, because we are burning daylight, do you feel that we're making strides in the manpower issue? | ||
| You and I talked candidly about this three weeks ago. | ||
| I think we got the Justice Department's attention. | ||
| I heard a lot after I made that appearance on your show, which shows how many people watch your show every day. | ||
| There is a ramping up of hiring and of really skilled people. | ||
| They're bringing some retired FBI agents back to come back on contracts. | ||
| They're bringing former prosecutors back. | ||
| They are staffing up, and I think they're actually now ready for that process. | ||
| And I think when they hit that January grand, by the way, there are grand juries right now gathering the evidence that will get shifted to Florida in January. | ||
| But there's a lot of activity that wasn't going on three, four weeks ago. | ||
| And I actually think the conversation you and I had on your show had a profound effect. | ||
| And that's why we do these things, what we do. | ||
| But it's ramping up now. | ||
| We're going to keep a close eye. | ||
| We always got to keep a distrustful eye on government. | ||
| But I do think that we're seeing the sort of investigation that we wanted for 10 years. | ||
| John, you're breaking stuff all the time. | ||
| You got the show that follows us here in Real America's Voice at 6. | ||
| But how do people keep up with this? | ||
| Because you and the Justin News team were putting out updates and articles and analysis, breaking news and analysis and observations all the time. | ||
| So what are all your coordinates? | ||
| Because I know the audience, this is a top priority for the Warren Posse. | ||
| First, we're grateful that we get to work with you every day. | ||
| JustinNews.com is the website where all the stories up. | ||
| They had 13 stories on this yesterday. | ||
| Jay Solomon reports it's the fastest way to follow us on all social media platforms. | ||
| 13 stories yesterday, folks. | ||
| Make sure they're taking them all in, read them, and share them. | ||
| Be a force multiplier. | ||
| That's what we need right now. | ||
| John Solomon, patron and hero. | ||
| Thank you, sir. | ||
| Appreciate you. | ||
| Thank you, Steve. | ||
| Appreciate you. | ||
| Dave Bratt, we're going to get a minute or two for a break. | ||
| The scale of this, and they were targeting the MAGA movement. | ||
| They wanted to put the populist nationalist movement down, Trump and all of his key supporters. | ||
| It's pretty breathtaking. | ||
| This Bordergate is nothing. | ||
| It is a second-rate burglary. | ||
| And even the conspiracy, the so-called conspiracy is nothing compared to this, sir. | ||
| You know, that's right. | ||
| Congratulations to Solomon in the war room for all of this accountability. | ||
| There's a restless, the base is very restless. | ||
| And going down this road, just look what the FBI and our law enforcement haven't been doing as you go around the country. | ||
| Tucker had a nice show on yesterday about the crime, the violence, they're not doing anything on just looking at the wars. | ||
| They're not doing anything on censorship. | ||
| They're not doing anything on monopolies. | ||
| It's what's not there, what our law enforcement community has not been doing. | ||
| The riots in the streets, they weren't doing that because they were going after the president of the United States in a coup. | ||
| They were spying on senators. | ||
| They're spying on the Congress. | ||
| And so this oversight work is huge. | ||
| And the American people are rightly restless because they want to see action coming back onto their streets. | ||
| But you first have to have the rule of law and order before that can happen. | ||
| So Trump's in a, you know, he was left a terrible shape. | ||
| He's fixing this stuff systematically. | ||
| And eventually it's going to show up for the base and for the American citizen at home in their cities and across the country. | ||
| Dave Bratt's riding shotgun with me this morning. | ||
| We're going to pivot now to this, quite frankly, this trip, historic trip. | ||
| But the meeting, if you were with us last night from 10 p.m. to about 1 in the morning, you saw it live. | ||
| We're going to break it all down. | ||
| Cleo Pascal is going to join us. | ||
| Dave Bratt's riding shotgun. | ||
| We'll take a short commercial break. | ||
| Markets are turbulent. | ||
| Geopolitics is turbulent. | ||
| Take your phone out. | ||
| Bannon, B-A-N-N-O-N, 98-9898. | ||
| Get to Birch Gold, the ultimate guide for investing in gold and precious metals. | ||
| Don't forget silver. | ||
| In the age of Trump, it's all free. | ||
| You get access to Philip Patrick's team. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Back tomorrow. | |
| Phil America's Voice family. | ||
| Are you on Getter yet? | ||
|
unidentified
|
No. | |
| What are you waiting for? | ||
| It's free. | ||
|
unidentified
|
It's uncensored, and it's where all the biggest voices in conservative media are speaking out. | |
| Download the Getter app right now. | ||
| It's totally free. | ||
| It's where I put up exclusively all of my content 24 hours a day. | ||
| You want to know what Steve Bannon's thinking? | ||
| Go to get her. | ||
|
unidentified
|
That's right. | |
| You can follow all of your favorites. | ||
| Steve Bannon, Charlie Hurt, Jack the Soviets, and so many more. | ||
| Download the Getter app now. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sign up for free and be part of the new page. | |
| What about the Taiwan issues, sir? | ||
| It never came up. | ||
| Taiwan never came up. | ||
| There's nothing to discuss, actually. | ||
| This didn't come up that you got might come up. | ||
| You mentioned you didn't get to everything. | ||
| You know, I mean, we had a long meeting, as you know, but a lot of things we discussed in great detail. | ||
| A lot of things we brought to finalization. | ||
| A lot of finalization. | ||
| What about resuming nuclear testing? | ||
| What prompted you to do that right before the meeting? | ||
| It had to do with others. | ||
| They seem to all be nuclear testing. | ||
| We have more nuclear weapons than anybody. | ||
| We don't do testing. | ||
| We've halted it years, many years ago. | ||
| But with others doing testing, I think it's appropriate that we do also. | ||
| Any details around the testing, sir? | ||
| Like where, when? | ||
| It'll be announced. | ||
| You know, we have test sites. | ||
| It'll be announced. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Mr. President. | |
| I thought it was an amazing meeting. | ||
| He's a great leader, great leader of a very powerful, very strong country, China. | ||
| And what can I say? | ||
| We have it was an outstanding group of decisions, I think, that was made. | ||
| A lot of decisions were made. | ||
| There wasn't too much left out there. | ||
| And we've come to conclusion on many very important points. | ||
| And we'll be handing that to you in a little while. | ||
| You know, we're having, because there was a lot of different things, many of them very important. | ||
| We're in agreement on so many elements, large amounts, tremendous amounts of the soybeans and other farm products are going to be purchased immediately, starting immediately. | ||
| If you notice, President Xi authorized yesterday for China to start, did you know that, right? | ||
| China to start buying in very large quantities of soybeans and other things, which I appreciated. | ||
| That was a very nice gesture. | ||
|
unidentified
|
What will your new tariff rate on China's goods be once you start? | |
| Other than what we, there's the tariffs have made exactly the same. | ||
|
unidentified
|
55%. | |
| It's about, no, it was 57, now it's 47. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And because we reduced it by the fentanyl. | |
| And because I believe they are really taking strong action. | ||
| We've already seen the action on fentanyl, and they're taking very strong action. | ||
| So we reduced it 10%. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So that's a number date is gone when it was going to go up again. | |
| Yeah, that's right. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So that's all on fentanyl. | |
| I think what we've done throughout this trade war is we've basically gone back to the status quo ante, right? | ||
| And I think from Beijing's perspective, that's a win. | ||
| I think part of what's troubling about the approach to these trade negotiations is that we are not focusing on the big strategic trade and macroeconomic issues that ostensibly animated this trade war in the first place. | ||
| Instead, I think what Beijing has done since the USA. | ||
| What are those issues? | ||
| I think things that are long-standing concerns, China's non-fair, non-market, unfair trade practices, the trade imbalances that President Trump in particular seemed quite concerned about, we are not really addressing those. | ||
| I think instead, what Beijing has done has orchestrated a game of whack-a-mole for the Trump administration, where we are focused on relatively narrow issues like soybeans, like TikTok, that are either sector-specific or firm-specific. | ||
| The other thing that I think is missing in this approach, too, is that their approach to China is suffering from what I call trade myopia, right, or trade and tech myopia. | ||
| These are the two issues that we are really focused on in these discussions. | ||
| And what's omitted from these discussions then are some of the bigger strategic issues that are at play in the relationship, such as China's coercive activities in the South China Sea. | ||
| Or it's striking that the President mentioned that Taiwan didn't come up at all. | ||
| So let's follow up on that. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Like, if that's indeed the case, that would mean that Xi Jinping didn't say, hey, we're going to take Taiwan. | |
| That's good. | ||
| But it also perhaps means that President Trump didn't offer any sort of warning either. | ||
| Yes, exactly. | ||
| Exactly. | ||
| Because it's not that you don't want the two sides to talk about this issue. | ||
| It's that you want the U.S. to send a signal of consistency and reaffirm our long-standing policies on Taiwan. | ||
| Now going into this meeting, of course, there was a lot of concern that Taiwan, if it's not good, that they could be part of the negotiations and that President Trump could change our long-standing policy. | ||
| So it's good that that didn't happen. | ||
| But you don't necessarily want to omit it altogether from the conversation. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So I think you're going to see a big difference. | |
| We've had discussions on many of the elements that you're talking about all the time. | ||
| You're asking me questions. | ||
| And most of those things were, I think, agreed to for the most part. | ||
| I think we agreed to almost everything in a very acceptable form. | ||
| I wouldn't say everything was discussed because of the things that probably in retrospect we could have discussed that we didn't for some reason didn't come up. | ||
| But if you have any questions, let me know. | ||
|
unidentified
|
What about chips, sir? | |
| Did he agree? | ||
| Did you agree to sell any more chips? | ||
| We did discuss chips, and he's going to be, they're going to be talking to NVIDIA and others about taking chips. | ||
| Look, we make great chips. | ||
| NVIDIA is the leader. | ||
| And I'll be speaking to Jensen from NVIDIA. | ||
| But they're going to be discussing that with NVIDIA to see whether or not they could do it. | ||
| I said that's really between you and NVIDIA, but we're sort of the arbitrator of the referee. | ||
| It's a little rough up here. | ||
| The skies are a little rough. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Just to clarify, sir, that is the downgraded Blackwell chips. | |
| You would authorize those to be exported? | ||
| Not the Blackwell. | ||
| We're not talking about the Blackwell. | ||
| That just came out yesterday. | ||
|
unidentified
|
But a lot of chips, you know, a lot of the chips. | |
| And that's good for us. | ||
|
unidentified
|
How soon do you think you'd be able to sign an action? | |
| Please, come on, Jen. | ||
| You know what you do? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, come on. | |
| Let's stand right over here. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, hey, everybody. | |
| Thanks. | ||
| Let's make a point on the chips. | ||
| As the president was saying, there's so many chips we already sent to China, a lot of advanced chips, etc. | ||
| And as he said, you know, NVIDIA will talk to China and see what's possible. | ||
| The Blackwell chips, of course, weren't discussed. | ||
| We focused on export controls of China on rare earth, and they're going to keep those flowing, which is quite important. | ||
| We have not too many major stumbling blocks. | ||
| We have a deal. | ||
| Now, every year we'll renegotiate the deal, but I think the deal will go on for a long time, long beyond the year. | ||
| We'll negotiate at the end of a year. | ||
| But all of the rare earth has been settled. | ||
| And that's for the world. | ||
| I mean, you know, worldwide. | ||
| I guess you could really say this was a worldwide situation, not just the U.S. situation. | ||
| So we continue to produce the rare earths and buy the rare earths and everything else. | ||
| You know, when you see from other countries, but China is that whole situation, that roadblock is gone now. | ||
| There's no roadblock at all on rare earth. | ||
| That will hopefully disappear from our vocabulary for a little while. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Is that a one-year pause on the policy they announced? | |
| It's a one-year agreement, and we'll extend it after a year like we do. | ||
| It's a one-year deal that will, I think, be very routinely extended as time goes by. | ||
| Could have been a very bad war, too. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sir, for the nuclear announcement, just one more on the nuclear announcement. | |
| Do you worry that we're entering a more risky environment when it comes to nuclear issues? | ||
| No, I don't think so. | ||
| I think we have it pretty well locked up. | ||
| But we have more than anybody. | ||
| But I see them testing. | ||
| I say, well, if they're going to test, I guess we have to test. | ||
| I'd like to see a denuclearization because we have so many and Russia has some Russia's second and China's third. | ||
| And China will catch up within four or five years. | ||
| I think de-escalation would be, they would call it denuclearization, would be a tremendous thing. | ||
| And it's something we are actually talking to Russia about that. | ||
| And China would be added to that if we do something. | ||
| Thank you all. | ||
|
unidentified
|
It was a great success. | |
| It was a great honor. | ||
| What do you hear, though, as you read between the diplomatic lines? | ||
|
unidentified
|
What really came out of this meeting? | |
| Look, I think one thing about Trump that we all have learned is that the highs are never as high as the highs, and the lows are never as low as the lows. | ||
| He makes huge threats, and then he backs off them. | ||
| He makes huge claims of progress, and then it turns out not so much. | ||
| For example, in the first Trump administration, the Chinese also agreed to buy a lot of soybeans, but then they never bought the soybeans. | ||
| And so you have to see how this all unfolds in real time. | ||
| But what was important to Trump was getting this rare earth mineral thing resolved, because that is a huge problem for us because we just need those. | ||
| Those are critical ingredients and so many electronics, particularly that we make. | ||
| So it was definitely a good meeting, no doubt about that. | ||
| The question is: is it really going to amount to much when the dust settles? | ||
| So, what I worry about in the short term right now is that I think the approach that we have from the administration is basically friction without competition, right? | ||
| That we are still not organizing ourselves in a disciplined and methodical way for the competition with China. | ||
| What concerns me, I would say, throughout my career, our strategic position vis-à-vis China has just steadily eroded over time, right? | ||
| I think that's true if you look at the technology domain. | ||
| And one of the areas that really concerns me is the military domain, right? | ||
| And there's a lot of talk right now about the administration's forthcoming national defense strategy. | ||
| China has been considered the pacing threat for the last two national defense strategies. | ||
| But a bipartisan commission looked at this last year and they said China continues to outpace us in a growing number of domains and has negated our advantages. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Which domains? | |
| Hypersonic missiles? | ||
| What are the military? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I know you could talk about Navy, missile technology. | |
| What are the largest Navy in the world, right? | ||
| They have considerable Air Force prowess. | ||
| They're going through a dramatic expansion of their nuclear capabilities. | ||
| So it's a comprehensive, dramatic military modernization program. | ||
| It's the most dramatic since World War II, right? | ||
| And unlike the United States, that has global responsibilities. | ||
| We have to deal with Ukraine and the Middle East. | ||
| China can just focus on us. | ||
| From their perspective, when they think about military contingencies, we are priority number one, two, and three, right? | ||
| So there's a level of focus that allows them to then reverse engineer what they need to do to catch up to the United States. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And their focus remains China and the neighborhood. | |
| Yeah. | ||
| This is talking about Bridge Colby, this new national security plan that focuses on China, but just China, not as a global threat, really as a threat to East Asia. | ||
| So Cleo Pascal is with us. | ||
| We're going to get to her next short commercial break. | ||
| We've got Dave Brett. | ||
| The question is, like we had last night, the rare earths, unless I'm misreading it, looks like a massive win. | ||
| Where they're going to renew or immediately start to ship the magnets and the heavy rare earths, which allows our production lines to continue on that at least be for a year. | ||
| The knife to the throat is away. | ||
| Now, the Chinese Communist Party does not have a history of taking the knife to the throat away, unless there's some big gives, but it looks like maybe we have to redo that Jensen Hong tape from last night from CNN because it's quite confusing about the chips. | ||
| And Taiwan was not discussed. | ||
| Yes, there are soybeans and the tariffs. | ||
| That's all important, but the most important things: chips, Taiwan, which is a subset of chips, and rare earths, the main event. | ||
| Cleo Pascal, next. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Here's your host, Stephen K. Bannon. | |
| Okay, geopolitics, capital markets, national security, intelligence, all of it. | ||
| Jim Rickards, he's worked in all these different areas, a great contributor here at War Room. | ||
| Rickardswarroom.com. | ||
| It's a landing page. | ||
| You go there immediately, you get two things. | ||
| Number one, access to strategic intelligence, this newsletter that's kind of famous for CEOs and chairmen reading it throughout the world. | ||
| So if you want to see what the C-suite, the corner suites, are reading, Rickardswarroom.com. | ||
| Go, you get strategic intelligence, predictive analytics. | ||
| Check it out. | ||
| He throws in a free book, Artificial Intelligence and Money, Fiat Currency. | ||
| Check that out today. | ||
| Free, totally free. | ||
| Money, Chat, GBT. | ||
| Cleo, Pascal. | ||
| We covered it last night. | ||
| The president then put out a bunch of true socials, put out kind of what we call a readout. | ||
| The CCP put a readout. | ||
| It seems to me, and maybe I am misguided here on signal versus noise of the situation with chips. | ||
| It looks like, and it's kind of confusing. | ||
| They're going to get into a discussion with Jensen Wong, which I told you Summer 4 had the story last night. | ||
| The company is now $5 trillion. | ||
| Jensen would be both, I guess, the richest guy in the world and the most powerful combination. | ||
| And he's an agent of influence for the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| It's not me saying that. | ||
| Just listen to him on this Fariza Cura interview. | ||
| So he's going to be in discussions, but we're not selling the Blackwell chip or any of the, looks like the super advanced chips where they need for AI. | ||
| Also, there was no discussion of Taiwan, which we were told in advance that she was adamant about, particularly since he just purged the military, that he's got to have a framework for us backing off the defense of Taiwan. | ||
| And then, I guess most importantly, this situation where they kind of had us because the globalists sold all of our processing capability a decade ago, that they're going to continue to ship us rare earth, particularly the magnets and the other things we need for full production lines up in Detroit and other places. | ||
| Your assessment, ma'am. | ||
| This is like two fighters in a ring who you may shake hands publicly at the beginning, but make no mistake, they're going after each other and buying for time. | ||
| We're sort of in a position where a few hits have been taken. | ||
| They go back to their corners and reassess. | ||
| The problem is that the U.S. has been playing by Marquess of Queensbury rules very much kind of a boxer, whereas you've got the Chinese on the other side, which is much more mixed martial arts. | ||
| And not only that, they've brought this vicious dog into the ring in the form of Chinese organized crime, which is fed off of, in part, at least the fentanyl trade that can do savage damage on the ground at the behest of the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| So this is obviously something that's going to be going on for a while. | ||
| The president himself said it. | ||
| And just as an aside, how great is that? | ||
| That within an hour after the meeting, you've got the president saying, ask me anything. | ||
| I've never seen anything like it. | ||
| So this is going on. | ||
| It's going to continue to go on. | ||
| The problem is that, and if you do go to the White House website and take a look for the readouts or whatever else you can find there, you'll see that on October 27th, the president wrote a letter about the birthday of Teddy Roosevelt and talks about why President Roosevelt was such a great president and mentions everything he did for hemispheric defense, the Panama Canal, that sort of thing, and mentions speaking softly and carrying a big stick. | ||
| And the president is speaking softly, saying, you know, terrific meeting, all that stuff, but he was handed a twig. | ||
| Very difficult for him to fight in the way that the U.S. is used to fighting if it only has this depleted Navy, as Captain Finnell points out, and very limited options of that sort. | ||
| So that's why it was great to see all of these other tools that he gave himself when he went into the fight, the talk of the nuclear tests. | ||
| He did all those deals with other partners, including the Japanese, before going to meet with the Chinese. | ||
| So when you look at it in total over what he's been doing in the last few years, hang on, hang on, full stop, full stop, full stop. | ||
| I want to talk about the strategy because the war imposse and the guys on Getter are very smart and have been following us on this. | ||
| He really laid between the huge trade deal with Southeast Asia, what he's talking about with Japan, which I think is the most successful trip ever to Japan and talked about them getting up and rearming, even coming to South Korea, which, as you know, we have fought that party with the Christians in the right wing in Korea. | ||
| This current administration in South Korea is quite lenient towards the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| Everything that Trump did in the lead up to this, including I was kind of shocked on the tarmac, he sent a hot one right across Xi's bow. | ||
| Now, it was specifically to Putin, but he did throw in there: hey, you know, China, which is number three in nuclear weapons, although they're gaining on us, which had to be a loss of face for Xi. | ||
| Is all that combined? | ||
| Could you say a twig? | ||
| Let's be frank. | ||
| I know that the tariffs have forced a big economic pullback in China. | ||
| Actually, Scott Besson said the depression. | ||
| He's under tremendous pressure from Lao Beijing because the economy is not working for the average guy in mainland China. | ||
| But it was a leverageable moment for Xi. | ||
| He just did this purge. | ||
| He came to the platum stronger than he's ever been, I believe, because we never bought for a second that he was being weakened. | ||
| He comes out, he's got us on these on the rare earth. | ||
| He's just got us. | ||
| President Trump's dealt a very bad hand. | ||
| What was it cumulatively that allowed President Trump to essentially, on the surface of it, and more details will come out, it looks like an amazing American win. | ||
| And look, soybeans are important. | ||
| This other stuff is important. | ||
| But on the main thing, as Finnell tells us to keep focusing on, President Trump essentially, it looks like got everything he wanted? | ||
| We'll find out. | ||
| I mean, there's always for the Chinese, an agreement is always the starting point for the next negotiation, and often they don't deliver. | ||
| Hold up. | ||
| Tell people that. | ||
| Because they have a phrase, circumstances change. | ||
| If you negotiate a deal, this is why Trump took two years with Lighthizer-Navarro and negotiated the finest deal you're ever going to see, fair to everybody, but incorporated China into kind of the world's economy. | ||
| No more state-owned industries, no more skimming off the top, no more using it to drive down prices. | ||
| Just a brilliant, you know, as only Leidheus and Navarro can do. | ||
| After two years, and I mean, of daily in the trenches of negotiation, they tore it up in front of our face. | ||
| And they've never, whether it's Obama or Biden or President Trump, they've never lived by a, like the guy says on the, on the package, which was magnificent. | ||
| I want to thank Denver and I want to thank our production team here. | ||
| That was an incredible package. | ||
| They didn't buy the soybeans last time. | ||
| These guys are not trustworthy. | ||
| Why are they not trustworthy? | ||
| They're the Chinese Communist Party, the most brutal dictatorship in the world. | ||
| So do you think this is all on the surface? | ||
| First off, the tell is going to be if the rare earths start coming immediately, if those restrictions are pulled off, Cleo? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| And if they get what they actually ordered, it can be, they have so many ways of gumming up the system. | ||
| They've been buying low-level and mid-level bureaucrats across the board in every key position that you can think of. | ||
| This is, you just need, it's not only trust, but verify. | ||
| You have to verify in a way that is actual. | ||
| And that's why it would be nice to see the president adding even more tools to his toolkit. | ||
| If you remember when Rubio was in the Senate, he put out that he got this law passed to say the IC, the intelligence community, has to expose the wealth of the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| And the intelligence community didn't want to deliver. | ||
| Let's start doing some damage at the top. | ||
| Key, key. | ||
| Okay, I'm going to get, you hold right there. | ||
| I want to get back to you. | ||
| It's only your brilliance to bring up the fentanyl situation and who's the Chinese Communist Party's partner from the beginning has always been what? | ||
| The Tongs, the Chinese criminal gangs, and these criminal gangs are brutal. | ||
| Every Chinatown in the world has always been started by, was it Fujian province, the pirates, right? | ||
| And the Chinese gangs are brutal. | ||
| They've been the partner of mouse egg tongue in these guys from the beginning. | ||
| They would have never risen to power if they didn't have the muscle of the gangs. | ||
| And the muscle in the gangs is in fentanyl. | ||
| And they're making a tremendous amount of cash money. | ||
| We're going to get to that in a second. | ||
| And also the Teddy Roosevelt situation. | ||
| Dave Bratt, you're the economist. | ||
| You're the dork economist, right? | ||
| We're talking deals and how you actually Donald Trump is muscle, right? | ||
| So he knows, because he's done so many real estate deals all over the world, but particularly New York City, where they're always trying to bait and switch it, right? | ||
| So he knows about the execution of this thing. | ||
| But on the surface of it, it's kind of breathtaking how we went in there with so much stacked against us. | ||
| And he really looks like he's come out, particularly with chips, depending what that is, particularly with chips and particularly with Taiwan, sir. | ||
| Yeah, well, Trump's doing great work. | ||
| But what I'm concerned about, you know, we've lost free market capitalism. | ||
| That's gone. | ||
| We now do statist capitalism, but we only do it on behalf of the richest 10%, for the artificial intelligence guys, the big money guys, and the Wall Street guys. | ||
| And so right now, the message has to be to them when it comes to this rare earth kind of thing. | ||
| The piece we're missing here is a command economy for the U.S. people and for our defense needs going forward. | ||
| No one's moving the chips at that level in our favor, right? | ||
| In World War II, when you needed to get something done, the Russians moved 15,000 large firms to the east, thousands more small firms, a million workers and scientists, and they moved it all 1,000 miles. | ||
| This is with World War II technology. | ||
| And so this decoupling, I know you're in favor of it. | ||
| There's going to be pain. | ||
| It's just a matter when you take it. | ||
| So I think Trump also has to announce the forward expectations for the modern capitalist that your time's up, right? | ||
| You better get independent of China right now because I'm not the left commentator on MSNBC, you gave it away a little bit in terms of we have some huge wins here, but the big pieces are still on the chessboard. | ||
| And that game is coming up. | ||
| And that's the brutal game. | ||
| And that's going to require sacrifice. | ||
| I don't think that's the strategy. | ||
| I just don't. | ||
| I'm going to get clear on this. | ||
| Hawley's going to join us. | ||
| Senator Hawley at the top of the hour. | ||
| Keep the main thing, the main thing, as we've talked about. | ||
| This is why I say the Middle East is a sideshow. | ||
| Israel is a sideshow to our sideshow. | ||
| The bulk of the Ukraine, we got to get that thing wound down immediately. | ||
| It's taking too much attention. | ||
| This is it. | ||
| The United States is a Pacific power. | ||
| The giants of the late 19th century, and remember these guys like Secretary Hay, et cetera, they had been, he had been Lincoln's secretary. | ||
| Back in the day, women were not secretaries. | ||
| He was actually, I think he was 20, 21 years old. | ||
| He was the secretary to Lincoln and saw up close and personal Lincoln like nobody else saw him in the Civil War. | ||
| The young captains, lieutenants and captains that fought in the Civil War as they came to have real power in the late 19th century, these men and women were giants, almost as gigantic as the Civil War generation and the revolutionary and founding. | ||
| This is why we're so blessed. | ||
| They understood something, that we weren't just going to be a continental power. | ||
| When they said manifest destiny, they looked across the Pacific to Asia. | ||
| They looked at those three island chains. | ||
| We actually went to a war with the Spanish about this. | ||
| They saw that the Pacific was the, as the Mediterranean was to the Roman Empire, the vast Pacific, not the Atlantic, the vast Pacific was going to be our Mediterranean. | ||
| That we, quite frankly, were going to move away from the old world and that a new world existed, the one that Columbus had originally gone looking for. | ||
| And what they do, the manifest destiny went across the Pacific to the island chains. | ||
| It is they understood that the central power of the United States was not simply to be a continental power, but to be a global power. | ||
| And the way that you're a global power is you must become a Pacific power. | ||
| Why is that? | ||
| Asia. | ||
| And that is what this is about. | ||
| The biggest geopolitical focus of the 21st century. | ||
| Short commercial break. | ||
| Back in a moment. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Here's your host, Stephen K. Band. | |
| We got massive budget deficits. | ||
| Of course, the tariffs are helping a lot. | ||
| But the IRS, if they think that the bid in the ass between what they think you owe and what you think you owe is probably a gap. | ||
| You're not going to close that gap. | ||
| And, you know, the tie goes to the runner, which is the IRS. | ||
| So if you fail to file, if you're late filing, or if you got a letter from them that they're kind of saying, hey, here's the dough you owe us, don't think unless you get somebody in the middle of that that can help you kind of negotiate, you're on your own. | ||
| That's the reality. | ||
| Check out today. | ||
| Go to tax networkusa, t-n-usa.com, or call 800-958-1000. | ||
| Tell them Steve Bannon and the war room posse sent you. | ||
| They'll give you a free consultation. | ||
| They've solved a billion dollars worth of stuff. | ||
| Nothing you can show them is one, going to shock them, or two, going to be something they haven't seen before. | ||
| So take the anxiety away. | ||
| At least get the straight skinny. | ||
| If they can't help you, hey, get on with it directly to the IRS. | ||
| But if they can, talk to them and find out what they can do for you. | ||
| 800-958-1000, do it today, because guess what? | ||
| IRS is coming looking for their cash, okay? | ||
| What they think and what you think is probably two different things. | ||
| Make sure you guys sort it out today. | ||
| Cleo Pascal, they were giants. | ||
| They had a vision. | ||
| Our country's been built on men and women that had a vision of this country. | ||
| And for Paul Ryan and everybody, it's not, oh, the America's not an idea. | ||
| It ain't an idea to them. | ||
| It was a physical thing that manifested itself. | ||
| That's why it's called manifest destiny. | ||
| But the manifest destiny did not end at the shores of Washington State, Oregon, and California. | ||
| They had a vision that it went across the Pacific and that vast Pacific, which is bigger than the Eurasian landmass, would become like the Mediterranean was to the Roman Empire. | ||
| That we would dominate. | ||
| And the way you dominate it, Cleo Pascal, is you put American citizens on the other side, ma'am. | ||
| Yes, sir. | ||
| And also, it's not just about expansion of trade, but it's also about defense. | ||
| So if you look at what McKinley was saying about the Spanish-American War, which is how the Philippines and Guam became part of the United States in 1898, he specifically said if the Dons, which is what he called the Spanish, had control over that area, they could hit Oregon. | ||
| They could hit the mainland United States. | ||
| It was very much the center of the Pacific, being the point of vulnerability for the U.S. | ||
| And so after, and that's exactly what happened. | ||
| The Japanese got control over the center of the Pacific, and that put them in a position to hit Pearl Harbor. | ||
| And the 100,000 Americans died fighting their way island by island, beach by beach, getting back across the Pacific to try to create the zone of peace so that there could be prosperity and that the U.S. could just continue to be the U.S. | ||
| This is not an expansionist thing. | ||
| This is not an aggressive thing. | ||
| This is purely the way to create peace and prosperity across the Pacific as the base of the free and open Indo-Pacific that we talk about now. | ||
| And the outcome was after the war, the people of Saipan, Tinian, what's now the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands, voted to join the United States of America. | ||
| They became the newest part of the United States in 1986, and they believe in America. | ||
| But they've got China knows how important it is to the U.S. | ||
| And so they've been systematically, through political warfare, trying to undermine the U.S.'s position in Guam and the Commonwealth of Northern Marianas. | ||
| And still today, Chinese can arrive without a visa in the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands because of their influence over the local leadership. | ||
| And I'm just very concerned that the national defense strategy, which talks about, you know, sort of if it is as reported, leaving kind of West Asia being not that important, there are Americans eight-hour flight west of Hawaii. | ||
| And from what I've seen of things like hospital facilities, they do not have the capabilities to keep the U.S. military that's stationed there healthy in case of a fight, let alone the civilians. | ||
| I think Bridge Colby's, I think it is, I don't think it includes that. | ||
| I don't. | ||
| I think they're saying that the threat of the Chinese Communist Party is really to become a hegemon in East Asia, in the Straits of Taiwan, in the South China Sea, and even in that part of the Pacific. | ||
| It just doesn't look at them as, I think, a global threat to the United States of America, which I would disagree given Latin America, the Caribbean, all of it. | ||
| You're going to stick around for the second hour. | ||
| Holly's going to come up in a minute. | ||
| Dave Bratt's with me. | ||
| The vision of these individuals and collectively, this group that really led America, and you can see President Trump, like he was with Jackson in the first term, he's quite taken with McKinley and actually the muscle that was put in to manifest destiny, right? | ||
| And you're absolutely correct. | ||
| They saw the Pacific as a central strategic pivot for the United States. | ||
| Think of the vision. | ||
| This is back in the 19th century. | ||
| Really, I would say, Dave Bratt, the beginning decades of really the Industrial Revolution, they already had a vision of what America was going to be. | ||
| And hey, guess what? | ||
| Paul Ryan and crew, it won't be some Airy Fairy idea. | ||
| This was about sovereignty. | ||
| This is about keeping our sovereignty. | ||
| This is about keeping our prosperity. | ||
| And they understood for the United States to be protected, that Asia would be the dominant, you know, would dominate the 20th and 21st century. | ||
| They could see 100 years downrange. | ||
| That's the giants whose shoulders we stand on. | ||
| And we have an obligation to everyone that came before us. | ||
| This is what Burke's dictum that we have, you know, because our burden talks about the children and grandchildren, obviously very important in America, and particularly the working class and middle class, have always sacrificed of themselves in the current time to make sure that prosperity and peace were there for future generations. | ||
| That's why so many American generations have eventually, let's say, okay, we got to get on with this. | ||
| We can't allow this to fester and we can't let it get kicked down the road to our children and grandchildren. | ||
| Let's us face it in our time. | ||
| As importantly, it's to look back to every patriot's grave to the beginning. | ||
| What do we owe those people? | ||
| That's what this is about when President Trump's negotiating. | ||
| And hey, he got dealt a bad hand. | ||
| The Biden, you know, you look back at the Biden years, and I will also tell you, folks, that just didn't happen. | ||
| There was all type of subversion, dealmaking, and flat-out treason dealing with our enemies. | ||
| This is one of the reasons I got such a big problem with Jensen Wong. | ||
| Hey, that brother's right up in your grill. | ||
| He's beyond an agent of influence to the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| He's like their spokesman. | ||
| It's just not acceptable. | ||
| I don't care if he's a $5 trillion man or not. | ||
| Just don't care. | ||
| But we can't build a policy around a guy like that. | ||
| We cannot build a policy around a guy like that. | ||
| He's not on the side of the Americans, American citizens, or this country. | ||
| I don't care how genius he is about the chips. | ||
| He's clearly, this free Saqara interview is outrageous. | ||
| Okay, Senator Hawley's going to join us. | ||
| Dave Bratt's going to stick around. | ||
| The great Cleo Pascal is with us for the next hour of the war room. |
Export Selection