Senator John Ratcliffe (2:50)

So on the question of whether the President has the prerogative to get clearances is really the area that I want to touch on. Because you're formally responsible for security clearance policies. And that's why I'm asking about It. So can a president decide who gets the clearance?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (3:09)

Yes.

Senator John Ratcliffe (3:11)

So what about your role? You're formally responsible for security clearance policies.

Director Tulsi Gabbard (3:15)

That is also true.

Senator John Ratcliffe (3:17)

So how do we resolve it? President just gets his way.

Director Tulsi Gabbard (3:22)

The elected president and commander in chief has the authority to provide a security clearance to those who he deems necessary.

Senator John Ratcliffe (3:29)

Mr. Chairman, and to the ranking member. I think we have to have a further discussion on this and figure out what the ground rules are. I think it's clear what the director says. I just think we need more clarity because I think you have the formal responsibility for security clearances. And now we've heard that this somehow is going to be the President's project, and I think we ought to have further discussions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Angus King (3:56)

Senator Lankford.

Steve Bannon (3:58)

Mr. Chairman, thank you.

Senator Angus King (3:59)

Thank you to all of you and your service to the country. It matters.

Steve Bannon (4:03)

There are a lot of countries, there.

Senator Angus King (4:04)

Are a lot of citizens of our country right now that have.

Jack Posobiec (4:08)

I'll be blunt. After. After Lankford's. All Lankford's lies regarding the ridiculous bill he put forward on immigration, which we know, Jack Posobec, was a total and complete lie because President Trump secured the border in 40 days. Right there, Jack, so help me out here. Tulsi Gabbard starts by taking a hard line, a line that I believe is absolutely appropriate. This is for the commander in chief and the president to kind of. The Commander in chief, President Trump, to figure this out. These cheap shots taken by guys like Warner and Wyden, the senator from Oregon, you know, they can ask questions, but it doesn't mean you have to sit there, particularly if you're. And we already know, I think the White House counsel or others has been reported so far today, are looking into this. And Tulsi says at the beginning that they're looking into this, and she has nothing further to say. I don't know why they're going back and forth and actually now starting to answer questions. Maybe I'm missing it, but I think that breaks the hard line. You take a hard line, you dig in and take a hard line. Am I wrong in that, Jack Bosovic?

Steve Bannon (5:21)

I mean, look, you can do that. You can even respond in various ways. And I understand they're doing so in terms of their representatives of the national security team, as well as the highest intelligence officers in the country. But, you know, I also remember, by the way, when Mark Werner was leaking the details of the dossier investigation back in 2017 to Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, I remember when he was running around doing that. I remember when this guy was totally fine with the Chinese going and buying all the Venezuelan oil, which was helping Maduro and helping him to be able to block the, you know, President Trump's migrant flights that are going on right now and all the insanity. So, you know, there's plenty of ways that we can point out that Warner has done the same thing. But at the end of the day, look, at the end of the day, it's simple. You take the hard line, you maintain the hard line. This is already under investigation. You don't need to submit to an audit because there already is an audit. The audit's already coming down. It's from the top down at the National Security Council level and from the White House counsel.

Jack Posobiec (6:23)

And you don't need to tell Wyden and these guys. And Wyden started off, we were coming out of commercial break. And I really want to thank Real America's voice for cutting the break and going right to Wyden when he started talking Widen, I think started his comments by saying, hey, he's calling for the resignation of the national security adviser. The Democrats, they're not here to help. They're not here to assist the nation. They're here once again. You have the judicial insurrection and you have now the deep state in the intelligence community. They're loving this. They're loving this because their two biggest weapons are not their political weapon. They're kind of feckless, as you know, on the political side. They have the courts and they have the deep state. And now they're going to put President Trump under a pincer move. As we've been talking, Jack over at the both coming out of the House conference and Jim Jordan are both saying Scalise and Jim Jordan are talking about actually in the appropriations dramatically cutting and Johnson, Speaker Johnson came into dramatically cutting the courts. In fact, they're talking about cutting out maybe one entire district of the federal court system for just cut off the funding. My point, they're playing hardball, right? They've called for, I think, a hearing this week. There are a couple of judges up there not on impeachment, but to maybe start the process and hear from some of these judges. They're talking about cutting the budget. So on the judicial side, and President Trump threw down last night, can you explain the state secrets, what Pam Bondi in the White House did last night about this one judge? And we will go back as soon as we get another cheap shot question here.

Steve Bannon (7:59)

Steve, the concept is simple. The concept is that these state Secrets were put out in open court. And we put out something in open court that makes it a public document. It is accessible. You don't even need to foia. It is already public. That's the whole point of the court system, is that it's supposed to be done in public. By the way, this is one of the reasons that I totally support video cameras in all federal courthouses. It's ridiculous that we don't have this. We absolutely should have it to be able to monitor the conduct of these people. And we do need to have checks and balances. And that's why I love the fact that the legislature is finally bringing up their own power and taking up the reins of this without allowing this unelected bureaucracy to maintain so much power. And that's exactly what Stephen Miller was talking about last week. Look, the fact that it was an open court, an open forum, that is fundamentally different than having a closed discussion between government leaders, which, yes, of course they allowed someone in which they shouldn't have. That is fundamentally different. You put something out in court that means everyone in public can access to this thing. If it is not done under seal. That's a huge reason, a blinking red flag that Pam Bondi absolutely has to look after. And by the way, these judges, they don't have full immunity, right? They don't have full immunity from. Remember, no one is above the law. Remember that no one is above the law. So we need to look at all of these procedures if we're going to. They want to play hardball, we can play hardball all day long. When it comes to the conduct of these judges, when it comes to the purse, when it comes to the budget strings, we're going to look at every single piece of it.

Jack Posobiec (9:32)

Okay, we're going to cut right to the question. Right now they're asking the question.

Senator Angus King (9:40)

Actually. Did you just determine it was not.

Jack Posobiec (9:43)

Classified or was there any declassification after the fact?

Senator John Ratcliffe (9:47)

So, so to be clear, so everyone understands the process as we talked about, Signal is a permissible use. I understand that the CIA has been approved by by the White House for, for senior officials and appropriate for many conversations and, and rec CISA for high level officials who would be targeted by foreign adversaries to use end to end encrypted apps whenever possible like Signal. In this case, what the National Security Advisor did was to request through a signal message that there be coordination. So you mentioned the name of a CIA active officer, correct?

Senator Angus King (10:34)

So I didn't mention the name.

Senator John Ratcliffe (10:35)

You didn't mention the name. Existence of that and in the article the implication was that somehow that was improper. That was not the case. So a CIA officer was not operating undercover. So the request for coordination was for a staff member to coordinate on the high side. So I communicated the name of a CIA officer not operating undercover, completely appropriate, who does openly and routinely coordinate with the White House as a member of my staff. So the intimation there that there was something inappropriate was clearly incorrect.

Senator Angus King (11:11)

Did it occur to you that given the sensitive nature of this discussion that it could just move to the high side?

Senator John Ratcliffe (11:19)

So that was clearly. Senator, I think the intent was that this was initially set up by the National Security Advisor with the instruction that send a point of contact and then you will be provided with information further on the high side for high side communication. So I think clearly it reflects that the national Security advisor intended this to be as it should have been, a mechanism for coordinating between senior level officials, but not a substitute for using high side or classified communications for anything that would be classified. And I think that that is exactly what did happen.

Jack Posobiec (12:01)

So I'm curious, did this conversation at some point include information on weapons packages, targets or timing?

Senator John Ratcliffe (12:12)

Not that I'm aware of.

Senator Angus King (12:15)

Director Gabbard, same question.

Director Tulsi Gabbard (12:19)

Same answer and defer to the Department of Defense on that question.

Steve Bannon (12:24)

Well, those are two different answers.

Jack Posobiec (12:27)

But you're saying that did not. That was not part of the conversation. Precise operational issues were not part of this conversation.

Director Tulsi Gabbard (12:34)

Correct.

Steve Bannon (12:35)

Okay.

Senator Angus King (12:37)

I want to ask you, Director Gabbard, something on a very different track here.

Steve Bannon (12:44)

Which is I very much agree with.

Senator Angus King (12:47)

The the conclusion of the ATA that.

Jack Posobiec (12:51)

Foreign illicit drug actors are a major.

Senator Angus King (12:54)

Threat in the United States. And many of you have spoken to this today.

Jack Posobiec (12:58)

Okay, Jack, we're going to take a, we're going to go to commercial break in a second, but I want your summary. I don't understand and I realize we're doing this in real time. If you're going to take a hard line, you take a hard line. There's supposedly the White House counsel or somebody's looking into this. There's no and I don't understand why Ratcliffe's getting into this kind of detail back and forth with these guys. They're not here. The Democrats here are not to illuminate. They've already said, they already said they want the national Security advisor to resign. The whole Democrat left wing media is all over this. I don't know why and I don't understand why there's not coordination between in the White House between the central Intelcia and Tulsi Gabbard and my belief is that for right now, while this thing kind of, you know, is playing out and people at the White House are kind of working through it, why you have Ratcliffe going into chapter and verse and trying to explain this. They're not interested in an explanation. They're interested in taking down the commander in chief, the President of the United States. And somebody's got to get savvy over there on this topic. This is, they're not there to illuminate and help the American people think this thing through. Jack Bosovic.

Steve Bannon (14:11)

Steve, this, this is every. When you're in a communications environment like this, which is politically fraught from a strategic level, every time that someone gives a different message than the main message, the White House level down. This is under investigation. This is under investigation. But when someone goes into business for themselves and starts putting out a different message, giving additional information, pushing back or, or giving anything out, now you're creating more challenges for either members of the White House team, members of various other teams that, you know, communications teams and security teams that are involved in all of this. And you're giving them avenues of attack to come down. Look, it's very simple to explain what's going on here. Democrats have politicized this. That's what Warner's doing. That's what Wyden's doing. They have politicized this. They're not. And you could easily say, look, if you want more information, let's talk about it in a classified setting. You're trying to get me to leak classified information in an open setting. Right now.

Jack Posobiec (15:10)

It's, it's time to move on. These people. There's a war going on that President Trump's trying to stop. This is a senior intelligence advisor. It's time to move on. Right, and you move on not by playing ball with these guys. It's ridiculous. This is just to all drive the news cycle. Stupid. Okay, short commercial break. We're gonna be back in a moment to this hearing. Jack Posobic, Stephen K. Bannon giving commentary and observations. You don't go out and buy a life jacket when the boat is already sinking. And you don't buy gold when the economy has already collapsed. Clearly, others are heeding this advice as gold hit an all time high. The first part of 2025, multiple times. It's not too late for you. The company I trust to help you diversify into physical gold is Birch Gold. The company I buy my gold from. Birch Gold specializes in helping you convert an existing IRA or 401k into a tax sheltered IRA in physical gold for no money out of pocket. Just listen to this five star review. Quote knowledgeable, helpful, non pressure, end quote. That's what you get with Burch Gold. And that's why I've endorsed them for so long. Get your free info kit on Gold by texting the word Bannon B A N N O N to 989-898. There's no obligation, just useful information with an A plus rating from the Better Business Bureau and countless five star reviews. Text Bannon B A N N o n to 989-898 and let the experts at Birchgold help you secure your financial future today with Gold.

Director Tulsi Gabbard (16:56)

After I've had that opportunity.

Senator Angus King (16:57)

Thank you, Director Patel. Thank you, Senator.

Steve Bannon (17:03)

With my background In FISA and 702, I just want to clearly delineate between FISA Title 1. 3 and 702 collection. We need to both ardently defend its use, but also ardently support reforms that allow the American public to entrust that those charged with those capabilities are not violating the Fourth Amendment or any other violation. Speaking to Title 1, Title 3 When it comes to US persons, I have already included an amendment in terms of FBI language to make sure that when a US person is targeted that the FBI specifically is responsible for culling through all exculpatory information that is reasonably known and satisfying that burden and stating it in the application. When it comes to 702, Senator, some.

Senator Angus King (17:49)

Of the biggest.

Steve Bannon (17:53)

Enterprise efforts we have.

Senator Angus King (17:54)

Had to thwart national security risk would.

Steve Bannon (17:57)

Not have occurred if 702 collection had gone dark and the FBI continues to use that information to protect the homeland. We've had multiple takedowns in the last six months based on 702 and interagency collection processes. But we just need to ensure the American public, and I'm working with my team, that Even in the 702 sphere, American citizens information is protected.

Senator John Ratcliffe (18:19)

Thank you all. I look forward to the discussion in the closed session.

Senator Angus King (18:22)

Senator king. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Director Gabbard, I didn't intend to get into the Jeffrey Goldberg story, but. But something you said has sort of puzzled me. According to open Source reporting, at 11:44 on the morning of March 15th, Secretary Headseth put into this group text a detailed operation plan including targets, the weapons we were going to be using, attack sequences and timing. And yet you've testified that nothing in that chain was classified. Wouldn't that be classified? What if that had been made public that morning before the attack took place?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (19:08)

Senator, I can attest to the fact that there were no classified or intelligence equities that were included in that chat group at any time. And I.

Senator Angus King (19:17)

So the attack sequencing and timing and weapons and targets you don't consider should have been classified?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (19:23)

I defer to the Secretary of Defense, the National Security Council on that question.

Senator Angus King (19:28)

Well, you're the head of the intelligence community and you're supposed to know about classifications. So your testimony very clearly today is that nothing was in that set of texts that were classified. I'll follow up on Senator Wyden's question. If that's the case, please release that whole text stream so that the public can have a view of what actually transpired on this discussion. It's hard for me to believe that targets and timing and weapons would not have been classified. Well, let me, let me move on. You approved this report, this annual report prepared by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Is this submitted to the White House routinely in anticipation of its public release?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (20:15)

I don't know what you mean by submitted routinely.

Senator Angus King (20:18)

Was this report submitted to the White House before it's released today?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (20:23)

It was submitted to them once it was completed. I think probably around the same time it was sent to all of you.

Senator Angus King (20:32)

I want to move on. One note that surprised me. I've been on this committee now for this is my 13th year. Every single one of these reports that we have had has mentioned global climate change as a significant national security threat, except this one. Has something happened? Has global climate change been solved? Why is that not in this report? And who made the decision that it should not be in the report when it's been in every one of the 11 prior reports?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (21:04)

I can't speak to the decisions made previously, but this annual threat assessment has been focused very directly on the threats that we deem most critical to the United States States and our national security. Obviously, we're aware of occurrences within the environment and how they may impact operations, but we're focused on the direct threats to American safety, well being and security.

Senator Angus King (21:28)

How about how they will impact mass migration, famine, dislocation, political violence, which is the finding, by the way, of the 2019 annual threat assessment under the first Trump administration. Do you don't consider that a significant national security threat for the intelligence community?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (21:47)

Being aware of the environment that we're operating in is a given. What I focused this annual threat assessment on and the IC focused this threat assessment on are the most extreme and critical direct threats to our national security.

Senator Angus King (22:01)

Let me ask a direct question. Who decided climate change should be left out of this report after it's been in the prior eleven, where was that decision?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (22:09)

I gave direction to our team at ODNI to focus on the most extreme and critical national security threats.

Senator Angus King (22:17)

Your direction include no comments on climate change?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (22:22)

Senator, As I said, I focused on the most extreme and direct national threats.

Senator Angus King (22:26)

That's not a response to my question. Did you instruct that there be no, there no finding in terms of climate change in this report?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (22:34)

I don't recall giving that instruction.

Senator Angus King (22:39)

Final questions in a few short seconds that I have left. You all concede, and it's in the report repeatedly about the cyber danger from China, from Russia, from Iran. Why then is the administration deconstructing CISA? 130 people fired. The General Hawk talked about the importance of public private cooperation. That section of CISA seems to have been disestablished. What possible policy reason is there for undermining CISA's relationship to the states with regard to elections and to the private sector with regard to cybersecurity when the cybersecurity threat is only growing? Anybody want to tackle that?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (23:25)

I won't speak for all of my colleagues here, but I don't believe any of us have any insights into those specific staffing decisions that have been made.

Senator Angus King (23:32)

Well, let me ask you this question. You've all found the report has found explicitly cyber growing cyber threats, including to elections from Russia, China, Iran. Do you believe that it's in the national interest to diminish our capacity to deal with those cyber issues? Yes or no?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (23:52)

President Trump is focused on effects and making sure that the people that we have and the resources that we have are focused on our national security. He and his team recognize that more people doesn't necessarily always mean better effects. Those are some of the things that are driving the changes that we're seeing across the administration is getting all of our agencies back and focused on their core mission.

Senator Angus King (24:17)

General Hawk, do you agree that. Sarah King, your time is up. Thank you, Senator rounds.

Jack Posobiec (24:23)

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator John Ratcliffe (24:24)

First of all, thank you to all.

Senator Angus King (24:25)

Of you for your service to our country with regard to the issues surrounding.

Jack Posobiec (24:29)

Let me bring Jack Posovic back in. Very interesting on. On. On CISA and climate change right there, Jack. But let's go back to the. They've already announced they're going to go to a closed door. When I say closed door, that means the classified part of this, where they can get into it deeper. Jack Bosovic, as we know, most of the action takes place behind closed doors. When they're asking, they can get. They can ask classified questions or information. They can ask questions about classified information and get it all. These senators are essentially cleared at a pretty high level of classification once again. And you see Angus King, what they're going to try to do is pick this apart. If you don't take a hard line and just say, hey, we got business we're taking care of. This is already being reviewed by the White House counsel of the White House. Check in with them. You take a hard line, then you move about your business. And the business at hand is providing the intelligence to stop the kinetic part of the Third World War. These guys are fully occupied, Right? And so in anything you do, and particularly, you know, I'm not trying to be on John Radcliffe's case, but the more that you are chatty, the more you're just opening up, these guys are trying to pick it apart. They're gonna try to, you know, get to every verb, every pronoun you're using, pick it apart. And then the jackals in the media will turn it up. And I'll be blunt. They've made Jeffrey Goldberg now a central part of the story. He doesn't have to be. He somehow got involved in this chain. If you don't have this debate publicly about whether it's classified information or not, you keep him off to the sidelines. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, you've made him a centerpiece. And that's what King and Wyden are teeing up. You see the tee up they're doing for the rest of the day to be a firestorm in the media and to try to make a mountain of a molehill here, sir.

Steve Bannon (26:23)

Think about it. Def Goldberg has been the center of so many of the psyops that we've seen before. He was at the center of suckers and losers. This was the guy that they ran Suckers and losers hoax. He's been the center of the Russiagate dossiers, the center of the ral, Iraq War architect and cheerleader. So why was it that Jeff Goldberg. Think about this. You need to tell me this wasn't coordinated, that he didn't get with this, with the staff of the ssci, the Democrat staff of the Central Committee on Intelligence, and say, hey, guys, I've got this thing. It's going to drop the day before. I'm going to hold it to the date. Remember this pre scheduled hearing. Pre scheduled hearing. So if you don't think this is a coordinated operation, then you have not been paying attention to the last eight years. This is what they do. They work with their allies. They're able to get their leaks out. They're able to coordinate all of this stuff. So the fact that holds the whole thing right. This wasn't yesterday that he got this. He held it all the way up until the very day before the hearing drops the bomb. When he does yesterday afternoon, blows up the whole thing gives, doesn't give people much time to respond and boom, here we are in the hearing itself. Look, this, this whole thing stinks. It stinks to high heaven. I've got potentially even more questions about. Okay, so if this thing was a signal chat on government. Let's go. Let's, let's, let's play that game. Steve. If this was loaded onto government computers, who all has access to be able to add people into these signal chats? Who all has access on a server level to be able to see those messages? We actually need to start asking questions because I remember there were Vinmin's in the ointment last time around and there may be Vinmin's in the ointment here again. All of a sudden it's Jeff Goldberg of all people who gets added. Come on man. So this, this thing stinks.

Jack Posobiec (28:03)

Okay. This is why I said there's no coincidence at the top of this. This, this whole thing was planned. The leak was planned. The timing that this all happened on the 15th of March. Jack Posic is absolutely stone cold right. This was put out yesterday because they knew they had a pre scheduled hearing today on the annual report of of threats and they're going to use this. This is why you take a hard line. You don't play their game. They're not here to like get information to help the nation. Birch Gold in times of turbulence that tell you going to need a hedge birchgold.com Go text right now Bannon B A N N O N 989898 get the ultimate guide to investing in gold in the era of Trump. You talk to Philip Patrick and team over Burch gold short break back to the senate intel hearing. Jack Bob is my wingman this morning. How well do you sleep at night? Real peace of mind comes from knowing your family is prepared for anything. My patriot supply America's most trusted name in emergency preparedness is offering a time limited discount on their best selling three month emergency food kit. Now this is the basic the three month emergency food kit. This isn't your typical survival food. Each kit provides over 2000 calories and 100% of the recommended value of 12 essential vitamins and minerals daily for 90 days with delicious meals and extras including chicken beef, fruits and veggies. We're talking quality meals that last up to 25 years in storage and still taste like home cooked. The Pandemic taught us how quickly store shelves can empty. Don't wait for the next crisis. Your three month emergency food kit includes free shipping, a disaster replacement warranty and 24.7us based customer support. This special discount is available for a limited time only. Visit my patriotsupply.com now to secure your family's future with a hundred dollar discount. If you order by 3pm they'll ship your order within the same day so you have peace of mind right away. Get my Patriotsupply.com by going to my Patriotsupply.com do it. Do it today. Use your agency Action Action Action. You wish you could have invested in the stock market last year when investors scored the highest profits in decades. But between that mountain of bills and credit card debt, you had nothing and I mean nothing left over. It's time to stop letting debt hold you back. Let me tell you how Done With Debt can help. They have a brilliant new strategy designed to tackle your debt and put cash back into your hands so you can save and invest and build the life you've been wanting. Done With Debt goes head to head with credit card and loan companies. Their team of negotiators and legal experts work to significantly reduce your bills, eliminate interest and erase penalties. This frees up cash to invest while the stock market is still hot. The bottom line is this Done with Debt helps turn crushing debt into financial freedom. That's crushing debt into financial freedom. But some of their strategies are time sensitive. So don't wait. Start building the life you deserve. Visit donewithdet.com and talk with one of their strategists. It's free. Go to donewithdebt.com that's donewithdebt.com National Security.

Senator John Ratcliffe (31:39)

Advisor invited him to join the Signal thread. Everybody in America knows that. Does the CIA director not know that? I've seen conflicting reports about who added the reporter to the signal message. Perfectly appropriate that there was a reporter added, especially one that the Secretary of Defense says is deceitful, highly discredited. A so called journalist who's made a profession of peddling hoaxes over and over over again. Do you is your testimony that it was appropriate that he was added to this signal threat? No, of course not. And why? Why did you not call on you are the miscarriage you can you answered the question. Let me ask you when he was added to the thread. You're the CIA director. Why didn't you call out that his he was present on the signal thread? It I don't know if you use signal messaging app. I do. I do not for classified information. Not for targeting. Well, neither do I remote. Neither do I send. Well, that's clear. Your testimony is today. It absolutely is not, Senator, where you know I'm listening at the beginning. No, when I said that I was using it as permitted. It is permissible. I agree. That's your testimony. Yeah, I agree. That's your testimony. You asked me if I use it and I said not for targeting. Not for classified information. And I said I don't either. I also know Jeff Goldberg. I don't use it to communicate with him. But you thought it was appropriate by the way. I think he's one of the more outstanding journalists in America. But I'm shocked to find him on a thread that he's reading in the parking lot of a grocery store in Washington D.C. and your testimony as the director of the CIA is that it's totally appropriate. Is it appropriate? No, the President. That is not what I say it was. When did I use the word appropriate? Well, go ahead please. Well, I didn't. Everybody in America clearly something to. Senator is what your testimony is. No, I never said that. This is just a normal day at the CIA where we chat about this kind of stuff over signal. In fact, it's so normal that the last administration left it here for us. That's your testimony today. That's your testimony. No, that's not my testimony. That's what you said. I didn't say any of those things. That you just related. I heard you say it. We'll let the American people decide. Let me ask you one final point. Miscarry. Well, are you going to give me a chance? Is it appropriate? Did you know that the President's Middle east adviser was in Moscow on this thread while you were as director of the CIA participating in this thread? Were you aware of that? Are you aware of that today? I'm not aware of that today. This sloppiness, this incompetence, this disrespect for our intelligence agencies and the personnel who work for him is entirely unacceptable. It's an embarrassment. Senator, you need to do better. You need to do better. Thank you. I'm being gaveled by the chairman and I apologize for over going over my tongue.

Senator Angus King (35:02)

Senator Young.

Senator John Ratcliffe (35:05)

Thank you all for being here.

Jack Posobiec (35:08)

Okay. Okay, Posovic. This is why I said at the beginning, you take a hard line and say it's being investigated. You don't open yourself up. This is. Hang on. Ratcliffe, in trying to be the explanation. That's Michael Bennett of Colorado. And Michael Bennett is a very skilled guy coming in and taking a cheap shot. And right there, you can see the whole news cycle. And this is. Let me be blunt. If you're gonna take on the deep state, you gotta take them on. There's no half measures here. The deep state is this apparatus of the intelligence community, the law enforcement community. You got people in dod, you got Brennan, and all these jackals on the outside. You have to be rock hard. I mean, rock hard. Bennett. Bennett came in for the kill because Ratcliffe had set himself up in the opening thing by getting chatty. These hearings are not to be chatty. They are not a search for truth. They are not a search for truth. They're there to use this as political information warfare. And this was amateurish of the Director of the CIA. He should have never gotten into that discussion. I said at the very beginning. And Michael Bennett, who's a smart guy and a tough guy and a guy that you can't trust, came in for the kill because Ratcliffe set him up. And look at Ratcliffe's response right there, Jack Posobic. And Posobic, you nailed it. About. You and I were talking at the break about Goldberg. We get back, and the whole thing is about, how the hell did you have Goldberg in here? And there's no ration and there's no reasoning. And then Ratcliffe set himself up about Steve Witkoff being in Moscow. This is not a search for truth. It's not a search for truth. Tulsi Gabbard's hard line at the beginning was the appropriate hard line of this administration. It's basically, screw you. We're here to work for the Commander in Chief. And ending these wars that you have allowed to get out of control, full stop. It's being investigated. You got a question, call the White House. Jack Bosovic.

Steve Bannon (37:15)

See, this is exactly what you warned about. Look, these people are going to twist your words. They're going to twist your statements. This is why you don't talk. This is why you say, hey. You know, when. When the FBI rolls up, you say, hey, talk to my lawyer. Okay, talk to my lawyer. Maybe, maybe not the current FBI, but we'll see. All right, so of course they're going to twist your words. Of course the Democrats are going to do this. This is a show trial. This is a Maoist style struggle session. And anything they put. This is. This is what the cultural revolutionaries did yes. This is what the Red Guards did. They put you on the struggle session. And the more you talk, the more you give them, the more ability they will use to hang you with your own words. Plus you said it was appropriate. I never says appropriate. Oh, it's appropriate now and then watch.

Jack Posobiec (37:58)

Jake Tapper is going to be up and Jim Radcliffe. Yeah, John Radcliffe is a good man. John Ratcliffe tried to engage them, right? And try to engage. And look how they twisted. Look how Bennett came in and waited for the kill. Right? Waited for the kill. And look at Ratcliffe trying to defend himself. This is a Moscow show trial. You're 100% right. This is like in front of the Nazi judges where they just keep haranguing you on everything you said and twisting it and twist you in the wind. This is exactly a struggle session. This is what Mao Zedong went back to every village and did. This is why you do not engage with them. 101. You engage with them now. This thing is going to take on a life of his own because these people are jackals. This is not a search for truth. Posobic, not a search for truth.

Steve Bannon (38:48)

What it is is a search for dirt. And if there is no dirt, they will throw the dirt on you and say, look, this guy's got dirt on him. They're going to say, look, this admin's got dirt on him. They're going to let. We have no idea, by the way, who, who actually added this person to the signal chat. And I'm even going to sit there, and since Darren Beatty is. Is otherwise occupied, I'll be the one to say it. We don't actually know who added Jeff Goldberg to this chat. And I'm not going to stipulate that it was, you know, it was the staffer, it was the NS who added him to the chat. Who actually did that. How is it that the guy who did the Suckers and Losers is at the Atlantic, which has been the centerpiece, the centerpiece of the Atlanticist operations, of the Deep State operations, the mouthpiece for Ann Applebaum and the neocons. And the of them that this guy who's the overall head of this is the one who's added. I don't know, man. Something does not smell right to me. It doesn't smell right at all. The coordination leaking at the exact day before this hearing comes out is obvious. It's clear that this happened. By the way, I'm sure he's in a bunch of signal chats with Democrats that never come out in the Atlantic or anywhere else, but designed to set up the struggle session that you were seeing today. And you need to see that coming and say, no mas. I'm not playing ball, not giving you anything.

Jack Posobiec (40:04)

First off, these people have to understand something. There's, there's a bunch of these senators on the Republican side are wobbly. You got a bunch of wheat. There's a, that's weakness up there. It's 53, what, 5347. It doesn't take a lot of couple, a couple of three of these people get wobbly and get wobbly. All sudden you have a vote in the Senate. You can have an investigation. This is, this is, you have to take a hard line. This is the national security. Like President Trump's taken a hard line. He implemented stake secret last night on the Judge Matt Gaetz said, game over. That is a smash mouth as you can get. President Trump is in the business of peace and prosperity in taking on the administrative state and the deep state. He's taken on a judicial insurrection about as hard as you can. He's taking on the system. The CNN article yesterday, he's taking on the elites in this country and their institutions. And the last thing you do is play into their fricking hands. They're not here to assist you. They're not here to basically make up for all the mistakes that they have made. Mistakes of, you know, conscious and unconscious. Many of these were done on purpose that were in these wars. Your job, your task and your purpose is not to feed the machine. And now you fed the machine in a struggle session that you wait the rest of the day. And tonight in the New York Times, this thing's gonna go in a million different directions. Take a hard line. The hard line. He's commander in chief, right? And they're gonna review it. He's got anything to say about it, the White House has anything to say about it, they'll get back to you. We've got a job to do. I'm here to answer any questions about this document that's there. It's the annual intelligence review Posovic.

Steve Bannon (41:49)

Look, this is why they're going after Tulsi on the climate change stuff. This is why the rest of that is coming out. You say, look, I'm not going to give you anything. I'm not going to participate in the struggle session, which by the way, people tried to put me on a struggle session a week ago over the whole Christ is King thing. And I had, I had Jordan Peterson and eight people associated with the adl and they were saying, oh, sober means something else when he says, Christ is king. And I had. I'd be a set. Dylan, the Babylon V is coming out. What'd you mean? I said, I'm not playing, so I'm not playing. You try that somebody else. You could go ask somebody else that. Try it on somebody else. I'm not playing this game. I'm not interested. I'm not going in. Not gonna play this game. Hardline. It's hardline. And it stopped. And now all those people are backpedaling completely on the crisis game. Said, well, you know, you should say.

Jack Posobiec (42:31)

It, but you just got.

Steve Bannon (42:32)

Yeah, no, stop. We know what you're trying to do. We know it was a struggle session. I know when you're trying to put me on a struggle session or get me to co sign someone else's struggle session. I don't play that game. I do not play that game. It's because I'm Polish. Maybe it's because we've seen the communism before.

Jack Posobiec (42:46)

We're gonna jump back in. Let's go. Let's go back to the question of the Democrats.

Director Tulsi Gabbard (42:52)

Signal chat.

Senator Angus King (42:55)

Mr. Ratcliffe, you're nodding your head. Any mention of any military unit whatsoever, Mr. Radcliffe?

Senator John Ratcliffe (43:02)

Not that I recall.

Senator Angus King (43:03)

Ms. Gabbard?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (43:04)

Not that I recall.

Senator John Ratcliffe (43:05)

Okay.

Senator Angus King (43:06)

So I understand that DoD policy prohibits discussion of even what is called controlled unclassified information, or cui on unsecured devices. Are both of you aware of that DoD policy?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (43:24)

I haven't read that policy.

Senator John Ratcliffe (43:27)

Not familiar with the DoD policy, but I would say that the Secretary of Defense is the original classification authority for DoD in deciding what would be classified information.

Senator Angus King (43:39)

Ms. Gabbard, does the intelligence community have a policy that prohibits discussion of controlled, unclassified information? Yes, it does.

Senator John Ratcliffe (43:50)

Okay.

Senator Angus King (43:50)

Controlled, unclassified information, according to dod, includes information that is information that has not been approved for public release. Would you of what's been disclosed publicly of the signal chain, would either of you feel that that would be approved for public release? Ms. Gabbard.

Director Tulsi Gabbard (44:20)

The discussion that took place in that Signal chat group was a conversation reflecting national security leaders and the Vice President around the President's objectives.

Senator Angus King (44:33)

So, yes or no, would you approve that for public release?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (44:38)

I don't feel I can answer that question here.

Senator Angus King (44:42)

Because of the nature of this hearing.

Director Tulsi Gabbard (44:45)

Because of the nature of a private discussion that took place between individual leaders in our government, it would make sense.

Senator Angus King (44:55)

That you would not approve it for public release, wouldn't it?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (44:59)

There are other factors that I. That would go into that consideration.

Senator Angus King (45:02)

Mr. Ratcliffe?

Senator John Ratcliffe (45:03)

Yes. Or, no, I wouldn't approve the release of classified information. Again, as I've said, I'm not talking.

Senator Angus King (45:10)

About classified information, Mr. Ratcliffe. I'm talking about information that has not been approved for public release. That is information that is considered controlled, unclassified information.

Senator John Ratcliffe (45:22)

The principles that would have been on that would have been individuals capable of approving that for public release.

Senator Angus King (45:29)

Do you.

Senator John Ratcliffe (45:30)

Let me.

Senator Angus King (45:30)

I got 20 seconds. The deliberation as to whether or not we should launch a strike on another country. Would you consider that classified information, Ms. Gabbard?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (45:45)

Well, the information was not classified.

Senator Angus King (45:48)

This is a. This is not. I'm not talking about this. I'm just talking about deliberation from principles as to whether or not we should launch a strike on another country. Would you consider that classified information? I'm not talking about what happened this week.

Director Tulsi Gabbard (46:06)

There are other factors that would go into determining that classification.

Senator Angus King (46:10)

Mr. Ratcliffe. The deliberation between principles in our national security apparatus about whether or not to strike another country. Would you consider that to be classified information?

Senator John Ratcliffe (46:20)

Pre decisional strike deliberation should be conducted through classified channels.

Jack Posobiec (46:26)

Thank you.

Senator Angus King (46:26)

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I may, I just want to return, Mr. Ratcliffe, to your answer there in part. Senator Kelly. It's been raised at several occasions now in this hearing about whether classified information was discussed in this chat, and you mentioned about the Secretary of Defense being.

Senator John Ratcliffe (46:45)

What you called, I think, the original classification authority. Correct?

Senator Angus King (46:49)

Correct.

Steve Bannon (46:51)

I think it's important for the public.

Senator Angus King (46:52)

To understand that although you and Director Gabbard are original classification authorities on many matters, you're not that for all matters.

Jack Posobiec (47:01)

That might be classified in the government, is that right?

Senator John Ratcliffe (47:03)

That's correct.

Senator Angus King (47:04)

So if the Secretary of State has classified sensitive diplomatic details, that that's his authority. If the Secretary of Energy has class of sensitive classified information about our national laboratories, that's his authority.

Senator John Ratcliffe (47:18)

And the two of you can't speak.

Senator Angus King (47:20)

To other departments who have their own original classification authority, in which, of course.

Senator John Ratcliffe (47:25)

As Director Gabber said, ultimately rest with.

Senator Angus King (47:29)

One person, the President of the United States. Is that correct?

Senator John Ratcliffe (47:31)

That's correct.

Steve Bannon (47:32)

Okay.

Senator Angus King (47:33)

I just wanted to clarify that.

Steve Bannon (47:35)

It looks like the Vice Chairman wants.

Senator Angus King (47:36)

To weigh in as well, just very briefly. I mean, I think it strains the audience and the watching public's credibility. If we're talking about timing packages that somehow this would be okay to put out or just, frankly, senior American officials trashing Europe. I've been around this for a while. This is not information you generally put out. And the notion there's not even acknowledgement of hey, gosh, we screwed up. Is stunning to me. And the idea somehow. Well, none of this was classified, but we can't talk about it here. You can't have it both ways. I think the witness's point is they can't speak for every official in the government who has original class classification authority. Sherman, I don't. That's not what we're. I'm not trying to litigate that. I'm trying to litigate on the face. Unless Senator Bennett said this reporter is. Is somehow making this all up. And I think the White House has acknowledged that the text change that he submitted was authentic. It strains my mind to think. It strains my mind if the shoe had been on the other foot, what my colleagues would be saying about this. And again, we're going to get to the bottom of it. I appreciate your comments, but you guys have both testified. Under law, there's nothing classified in that information. There was nothing. In a sense. I've not heard any. Either one of you say, gosh, we screwed up, so we'll find out. This is too important to our national security. And again, I know we've got more members to. They.

Senator John Ratcliffe (49:23)

They testified.

Senator Angus King (49:24)

Is my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, that there's no intelligence community classified information. Is that correct?

Senator John Ratcliffe (49:31)

That's correct.

Senator Angus King (49:31)

Left. Is that correct, Director Gabbard?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (49:34)

Yes, Chairman.

Senator Angus King (49:35)

Well, again, that's not correct. She said, repeatedly, there's nothing classified. Right. Period. You can't have it both. And again, we'll see. I cannot believe this is not going to come out. And if it's not classified again, we. We'd ask you to make it, Give it to the public today. I'm sure one of your aides back there probably got it on paper. If you've got it here, it's not classified. Stand by your position. Or is this just one more example of a careless approach to how we keep our secrets in this administration? With apologies to Senator moran.

Senator John Ratcliffe (50:12)

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you.

Jack Posobiec (50:13)

To our witnesses for being here. I want to explore a little bit about Ukraine. And I'll direct this to Director Radcliffe. That is called a cleanup in aisle three by Senator Tom Cotton, the chairman, and folks, Warner just said it right there. This is now, because they play, they're going to, quote, unquote, get to the bottom of it, and you hear how they're parsing it. Like I said, once again, Jack Basobe, this is not a search for truth. These people are jackals. They're gonna use this to weaponize against President Trump. And now we're you got the courts, you got the, you got this radical judiciary coming at one angle and now you got the Deep state that's now got fuel to come at President Trump for the other angle. Hey, buckle up folks, cuz this is gonna get pretty bumpy. Jack Posovic.

Steve Bannon (51:03)

Well, it's getting fun now. The ops are moving. The ops are moving, the operations. Did you think the Deep State just was going to roll over? Did you think those guys disappeared? Do you think all the people that we've been fighting since 2016 onward have just magically vanished and all of a sudden, Steve, look, it's the same players. It's always. But that's what gets me, man. It's the same players and we keep falling for the same thing over and over. You got the intel community, you got the ssci, you got Mark, Mark Werner I who was shopping the steel dossier around that same guy who was coordinating with the steel dossier with. And, and Chris Steele's going up on Piers Morgan. At least Natalie Winters at least treated Chris More Chris Steele on. On Piers Morgan the way that he deserved. That's how you treat a Deep State apparatchik. You don't sit there and act like these guys are operating in good faith. They are enemy agents. They are trying to take you down and through you the agenda of the American people and the America first movement, period, full stop. That's what this is all about. And now you're playing along. You're acting like the struggle session has merit. You're acting like the investigation has merit. That any of these people have meri. That any of these people should be allowed to have control of our country. No, absolutely not. You are trying to wrest control from them. This is a regime change. And old regime is still in place. Their infrastructure is still in place. They're burrowed deep in there. That's why we call them the Deep State and that's why they're throwing sand in the gears of the machine. They're doing this. You're watching interrogation. You're watching a struggle session. This is something out of Moscow. This is something out of Chairman Mao. And by the way, at the end of these with Chairman Mao, what they used to do with the Red Guards is they, they put the sign around your neck. They're putting the sign around the neck right now. And usually, usually the gunshot and then the Duncet family for the bullet.

Jack Posobiec (52:52)

Yeah, you put the dunce hat on in the. And the sign around the neck. I want to go back. So we're going to end our broadcast this morning, we're obviously going to have so much about this. There's a common thread here from Wisconsin. We were going to have the folks from Florida 6 on DeGrasse is going to be on. Also the Chairman of the St. John's County down there about we gotta get on top of this race. There's a problem in Florida 6, there's a problem in Wisconsin. Part of the problem here is people have just said, hey, we won in November, man, this is a good time. I told you from the beginning, this is a war every day. And they're on point. They mean to crush President Trump, to end maga, to end the Trump movement, and guess what? To impeach him and put him in jail. Don't think we're through that. If you think you're through that, you don't understand reality. Look at what happened today. Jack Basova, before I leave, I want to go back to the most important point today. All of this happened. This text chain, everything you're talking about is the attack on the Houthis that took place on March 15, Saturday, the Ides of March. Do you think it's just random that it got released yesterday? I got a minute for you before you got about. Talk about that. Talk about this. This was a hearing that was set up. It was. Andrew, go ahead, tell us about how this was set up.

Steve Bannon (54:14)

It's not random. It's 100% coordinated. You really think that it's the Atlantic, which we've always told you is the central mouthpiece for the Deep State apparatus, the Blob apparatus, as Mike Benz calls it, the Atlantis apparatus mouthpiece, Their number one guy, the guy who was behind the suckers and losers hopes, the piece that was the same outlet that was behind the Russian bounties and so many other Hope folks throughout the years, in coordination with the Democrats on SSCI on this hearing the day before they knew it came out. If you don't understand you're looking at a coordinated operation, then you must have been asleep for the last eight years. Understand this is being done to derail maga. This is being done to derail the agenda. This is being done to try to isolate various cabinet members, to pick them off and attack them one by one or to get them to fight amongst each other. That's why it's going on right now. That's how these things always happen. You're looking at an operation. If you don't think you're looking at operation, you better wake up because you're in one, okay?

Jack Posobiec (55:17)

Let me some programming notes. Charlie Kirk, the great Charlie Kirk is going to pick this up live. We're going to continue coverage on Real America's Voice. Jack Bosova will be back at 2. We're going to be back 5 to 7, break all this down for you. Also, so much other news going on, the judiciary. This is a full out assault on President Trump's presidency and they're gearing up for it. Jack. Okay, we have the. Let's go right down to the Democrat question. Go ahead.

Steve Bannon (55:45)

Reported in the Atlantic Monthly, is that correct?

Senator John Ratcliffe (55:48)

No, that's not correct. So Senator, what I've related is that that any information that was related from my perspective or that I observed from the intelligence plan perspective was not classified information with respect to the assertions and the allegations that there was strike packages or targeting information or things that relate to DoD. As I pointed out, the Secretary of Defense is the original classification authority for determining whether something's classified or not. And as I've understood from media reports, the Secretary of Defense has said the information was not classified.

Steve Bannon (56:28)

Are you aware that the Secretary of Defense declassified this information prior to the cuscut.

Senator John Ratcliffe (56:34)

I'm not.

Steve Bannon (56:36)

Director Gabbard, same question you've said you've indicated.

Jack Posobiec (56:40)

At least the impression I got was.

Steve Bannon (56:42)

There was no classified information discussed. Is that correct?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (56:45)

Senator, my answer is the same as the director of the CIA's.

Steve Bannon (56:49)

So the question has to be posed to Secretary Hegseth whether he declassified the information and at what point he did declassify it. Do you agree?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (57:00)

Yes, I defer questions to the Secretary of Defense.

Senator John Ratcliffe (57:03)

Okay.

Steve Bannon (57:06)

Director Patel, are you conducting an investigation of this, these discussions and activities? Thank you, Senator. As I informed the chairman, the vice Chairman on the same question, I found out about this late last night, early this morning, so I don't have an update for you on that. Well, thank you. When you get an update, we'd appreciate it very much. Yes, sir. Director Gabbit, were you overseas during any parts of these discussions?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (57:35)

Yes, Senator, I was.

Steve Bannon (57:37)

Were you using your private phone or public phone for the signal discussions?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (57:45)

I won't speak to this because it's under review by the National Security Council. Once that review is complete, I'm sure we'll share the results with the committee.

Steve Bannon (57:53)

What is under review?

Jack Posobiec (57:54)

It's a very simple question.

Steve Bannon (57:56)

Are you a private phone or officially issued phone what could be under review?

Director Tulsi Gabbard (58:02)

National Security Council is reviewing all aspects of how this came to be, how the journalist was inadvertently added to the group chat and we're pitching this live.

Jack Posobiec (58:13)

To Charlie Kirk right now. See you back here at five.

Steve Bannon (58:17)

But. So you were not going to disclose anything about whether you use the phone? Director Radcliffe, there's been indication that the CIA has warned. Recently retired.

Jack Posobiec (58:32)

The April 15th tax deadline is coming and it's coming fast. Do you have unfiled tax returns? Can't pay the irs. The IRS is more than aggressive and the more aggressive than ever. And the longer you wait, the worse it gets. Wage garnishments, bank levies, even property seizures are all on the table. You need to get ahead of this. You need to get ahead of it today. But going up against the IRS alone is a big time mistake. Take my advice. Call the experts at Tax Network usa. They know the system. They have an edge. A preferred direct line to the irs. They know which agents to deal with and which ones to avoid. Whether you owe $10,000 or $10,000,000. Their genius strategies are designed to quickly settle your tax problems in your favor. Tax Network USA's attorneys and negotiators have already resolved over $1 billion in tax debt. Let me repeat that. They've already resolved over $1 billion in tax debt. Tax Network USA can help you, too, but you need to move. You need to move fast because April 15th is already here. Remember, if you get that letter, don't put it in the drawer. It just metastasizes. Talk with one of our strategists today. It's totally free. Stop looking over your shoulder. Stop the anxiety, stop the worry. Put it all behind you. You call Tax Network USA at 1-800-958-1000. That's 800-958-1000 or visit tnusa.com Bannon that's Tax Network USA. Go to tnusa.com Bannon and of course, the beef liver being our flagship products. For those who don't know, beef liver.

Director Tulsi Gabbard (60:21)

Is loaded with highly bioavailable ingredients such as vitamin A, B12, zinc CoQ10, etc. And because it is 100% grass fed.

Jack Posobiec (60:31)

And natural, your body is able to absorb these nutrients far better than taking.

Steve Bannon (60:35)

Any other synthetic multivitamin or any other.

Director Tulsi Gabbard (60:39)

Synthetic vitamin in general.

Jack Posobiec (60:41)

So we have some other amazing products, but if you'd like to check us.

Director Tulsi Gabbard (60:44)

Out, you can go to sacredhumanhealth.com and cheers to your health.

Jack Posobiec (60:48)

700,000Americans every year. Yes, heart disease is the number one killer every year, year in and year out. Heart disease builds over time. Hypertension, high blood pressure, bad cholesterol, diabetes, all of it affects our heart. A healthy heart is key. To being energetic as we get older. It is never too early to take care of your heart. You see, heart disease sneaks up on us. You can start in your 30s and when this happens, you're at serious risks by the time you turn 60. If you want to take care of your heart and those you care about, please go to war roomhealth.com that's war room health.com all one word war roomhealth.com use the code war room at checkout to save 67% of your first shipment. That's code war room at checkout to save sixty seven and do it again. War room health all one word war roomhealth.Com go there today. You need if you're going to be part of the posse, you need a strong heart. You need a lion's heart. Art how we're going to do that is with salty. Go there, do it today. Check it out.