May Mailman (2:40)

Yeah. So I think people are going to see a strategy a little bit more clearly in the coming weeks because we have something like 10 requests before the Supreme Court right now. And kind of depending on how the Supreme Court rules, you know, the administration is going to have to respond. And there is this balance I think people think of, you know, when a judge tells you to do something, you got to do it because you're a private citizen. And if they say, you know, you go to jail, like what are you going to do? You got to go to jail. But when you think about constitutional power and the judicial power versus the executive power, it's a little bit of a different question. If a judge tells the President to write an email or something or to say something that is completely invasive into the President's authority, his Article 2 authority. And so I think that, you know, what we're really trying to explain to people is that judges have the judicial power, the President has the executive power, and judges do not have the executive power by the Constitution. They just don't have it. And so if they're trying to say, hey, guess what, your military needs to kind of look like this. This is where you need to put your troops. They need to have this type of haircut, they need to run this type of mile, and definitely they need to be, you know, trans identifying, then that is going to be invading on the executive's power. So a lot of cases lined up in the Supreme Court. We'll see what the Supreme Court says. But the American public, I think, and Congress really needs to get engaged in ensuring that judges are using their judicial power, which is this is all it is. This is the judicial power to decide cases and controversies that are before them. So if you've got a case, you can decide it on the issue that's before you with the parties that are before you. We're seeing judges that are taking, you know, it's a lawsuit against the Department of Labor. And they're like, guess what? All of the government has to comply with this. Like, you sued the department. What are you talking about? So really trying to focus on what, what is the authority of a federal judge. And it's way narrower than a lot of these judges are trying to say.

Alina Haba (4:45)

And it seems like that interplay, all the revisionist History that we're taught aside is essentially the founding of this country is about.

May Mailman (4:52)

Right?

Alina Haba (4:52)

They act like it's something so just absolutely wild for you guys to be discussing. I want to get to the congressional component, but I'm just curious your thoughts. The way that the sort of left wing media, Democratic operatives are smearing you guys, always that sort of authoritarian, you know, dictatorial playbook for wanting to engage in interplay with the courts. Do you think that that line of messaging is going to be effective or do you think that the American people will kind of come to realize what you're saying, which is that this is how it always has been.

May Mailman (5:20)

This, we love democracy. We want to give the most power to the people as is humanly possible, because that is what built this country. And so guess what? The people have the power over the executive. You elect the executive, the people have the power over Congress. They write the laws. The people have no power over judges. So the more it becomes judges creating policy, not deciding cases. They can decide cases, but as long as it's judges deciding policy, you know who loses? It's not Trump. It's, it's not Congress, it's the people. It's because now the people have no say. They have no power. There's nothing they can do. The best they could maybe do is maybe ask their, their representative to impeach. That's no power at all. So if you care about the exact opposite of authoritarianism, if you care about democracy, if you care about having the voice of the people in shaping the policies, then you want Congress and you want the executive to be able to create laws and implement those laws. But that's why I mentioned Congress so many times, is because at the end of the day, our Constitution creates a Supreme Court, but it's up to Congress to create the lower courts and they can shape what that jurisdiction looks like. So Congress really has a role here to say this has gotten out of control. You guys are nullifying our laws. We have laws, you're not letting us do them. And Congress can step in and say, you know, we're done with this chaos.

Alina Haba (6:44)

And walk us through what you think that stepping in needs to look like. Obviously, we've had Elon Musk and some of the more hardline Republicans call for impeaching some of these very radical judges. Do you think that that is the best route to take? We obviously have a hearing coming next week. I believe Jim Jordan, Speaker Johnson saying that they're looking at all options to go after these radical judges. What do you think is the best path forward. And we also have a very activist, grassroots audience. They love to make their phone calls to their representatives. Is there anything that they can be doing, people that you would recommend they call, engage, liaise with, to help you guys sort of bolster what you guys are trying to do here?

May Mailman (7:17)

Yeah. So I think impeachment needs to obviously always be on the table for when judges are going beyond their judicial power. However, impeachment, like I said, is this imperfect solution because it's one by one, it's slow, and frankly, it's not going to happen. Like, it's just too high of a threshold in the Senate and in the House in order to happen. So what's a solution that's not one by one and that's actually possible? It is the judicial power itself. So these nationwide injunctions, it sounds like this big legal word and of course your audience knows what it is, but it's before the case is decided. It's like it's a judge saying, hey, I haven't really decided this case yet, but in the interim, I'm just going to prevent the entire nation from doing the President's policy, that type of action where you haven't decided a case, there's been no trial, there's been no documents, there's been no evidentiary findings.

Alina Haba (8:13)

And.

May Mailman (8:13)

And you're telling the entire executive from coast to coast that they cannot implement the executive's power. That is something that Congress can control. Congress could say, we're no longer doing nationwide injunctions. If a state sues, then, yeah, the state can stop the policy in that state. That's basically what happened during the Trump administration, where states would sue against, for example, Biden's illegal Title 9 rule. And there was never a nationwide injunction. I was part of a coalition that brought a lawsuit in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, a couple of those southeastern states. And so a judge did issue an injunction, but it was for those states. So you could easily see Congress doing some sort of policy that limits the ability of judges to be able to do these sweeping nationwide things. So anybody on the Judiciary Committee, if you want to make some phone calls, I'd figure out who's on House Judiciary, who's on Senate Judiciary, do I have a member who's there make those phone calls?

Alina Haba (9:10)

And I want to pivot to sort of the, I guess, other side of the lawfare aspect. What President Trump is, I would say, sort of proactively been doing against a lot of these big top tier law firms that were intimately involved with the Russiagate stuff. The Last four years of all things lawfare that I'm sure you know all too well. I'm curious, from your perspective, do you think that the revoking of security clearances and government contracts from, I think probably most notoriously, Perkins, we don't like Mark Elias here in the war room. But do you think that that is sort of the extent of where President Trump's, I would say, crusade against these very, very radical, subversive lawfare activists ends? Or do you think that you could potentially see perhaps criminal or otherwise investigations into some of these firms? It seems like our audience is very interested in seeing these people be held to account, those that committed crimes. But where do you think is left to go on that vertical in terms of these law firms?

May Mailman (10:02)

Yeah. So law firms have a tremendous power in our country that they can use for good or for evil. I mean, they have all. They have billions of dollars of client money that they are using to actively harm their clients. They're making their communities less safe. They're making their elections less secure. These are things that actively harm their clients. So I'd love to see clients, frankly, start caring about their law firms acting against their own interests. This, you know, and so as the government, yeah, of course we're interested in firms that are using their powers to weaponize justice in order to nullify laws, in order to do all these sorts of nefarious activities. But then there are individual actors who have gone further. I mean, there are people who, who have been engaged in the systematic destruction of election integrity from coast to coast. And so, yeah, that's going to be a longer term project, I think. But for the short term, for the immediate term, what we need to do is to get law firms to use their power for good. They have so much ability to make our country more just. I mean, that's the job of a lawyer. It's to seek justice and to not have a partisan, weaponized mission. And so we're seeing clients start to want that. But yes, there are, there's definitely longer term interest in some of the individuals that have, have done great damage to our country.

Alina Haba (11:32)

So when you see those individuals, are you talking particularly in sort of the election, they say we say integrity, they say that we're, you know, being too euphemistic, but that's what it is in that space. Or is it more broadly to going all the way back to the Russia hoax? Can, can you shed some insight on that?

May Mailman (11:47)

Yeah, so I think that there's. So we signed a couple of executive orders on day one that I think go a little bit to this. But one of them was the weaponization of government executive order. And what it asked for was a very comprehensive review for the ways in which individuals colluded oftentimes with the government in order to deprive Americans of their rights. And so these are people who are going to be inside government, outside of government. But this is something that the Department of Justice that other so government. We also did a censorship one too, because that's actually just as nefarious. So there are people who are using their power to ends that they should not. But then there's also the censorship where you couldn't even say anything about it. And so where you had the Biden administration colluding with third party entities to make sure that voices just like yours would not show up on any search results, that people would not be able to see a full spectrum of opinions and to very much violate First Amendment rights of Americans. So there's a lot actually going on and it's not just going to be an election integrity. It's a full scale investigation into the weaponization of government, full scale investigation into censorship. And there's a lot to uncover, there's a lot to talk about. But these things take time. But these are investigations that are 100% ongoing.

Alina Haba (13:04)

And in terms of the kind of post Trump potential for law fair, right. Four years from now, obviously it's great. These are wonderful four years. But the way they've dismissed a lot of these cases, right, without prejudice, they want to reintroduce them, obviously they're going to try to go after him. I can only imagine. Probably every day these people are writing lists of every single thing that he's done. They're getting more and more mad. Do you see a lot of these lawfare efforts as sort of President Trump trying to stop a potential, say, Democratic president or whoever if they were to take the Senate or be able to weaponize these forces again, not just against him, but, but more broadly. But do you see the Democrats wanting to sort of re up those tactics should they regain power?

May Mailman (13:45)

It's an interesting thing because, yeah, they wanted, they wanted to say that their dismissal, they wanted to do it quietly almost, and they definitely wanted to do it before the Trump administration came in because Lord God forbid that there be a active investigation that the Trump administration would be honestly able to close. So, yes, this was a very targeted effort. And so, you know, have the Democrats changed their mind? Have they decided that they want to pursue evenhanded justice? We'll see. But if the Law firms are not going to help with this. What we saw with a lot of the Jack Smith investigations, that, for example, Covington was giving $150,000 of pro bono assistance to Jack Smith himself and the other, a number of law firms who gave lawyers over to the January 6th committee who were giving work product over to Jack Smith. So can you stop crazy people from being crazy? That's a tough question. But can you stop the systemic assistance of law firms to weaponize justice? I hope so. I think.

Natalie G. Winters (14:57)

America's home.

Steve Bannon (15:00)

I've been telling you about a very serious threat to your home equity home title fraud. One document, a fake notary stamp and about 40 bucks. And your title is out of your name and into someone else's. And the scammer who took it will take out loans or even worse, sell your home behind your back. You have to protect yourself. The best way is Home Title Lock's million dollar triple lock protection. Now this service gives you 24. 7 Monitoring urgent alerts of any changes. And if fraud happens, their US based restoration team will spend up to $1 million to fix the fraud and restore your title. Go to hometitlelock.com, use my promo code Steve25 to save 25% and get a free title history report to make sure you're not already a victim. And make sure you check out the million dollar triple lock protection details when you get there. That's hometitlelock.com promo code steve25 hometitleock.com promo code steve25. Do it today. And let me remind you, this service is 24. 7 Monitoring urgent alerts of any changes. And if fraud does happen, their US based restoration team will spend up to $1 million to fix the fraud and restore your title. Do it today.

Stephen K. Bannon (16:28)

Here's your host, Stephen K. Banner.

Alina Haba (16:36)

Welcome back to the War Room. I'm honored to be joined now by the one and only Alina Haba. Thank you so much for coming on.

Stephen K. Bannon (16:42)

Thank you for having.

Alina Haba (16:44)

I think the last time we were on War Room together we were up in Bedminster. They were doing a preview of Sound of Freedom. And I think the story is why the audience loves you so much. I remember. I think you cussed.

Stephen K. Bannon (16:52)

I cussed?

Alina Haba (16:53)

I was going to say.

Stephen K. Bannon (16:54)

Is that what you're going to say? Because I did it. Did it. But it's because you're so passionate.

Alina Haba (16:58)

Yes. And you care about actual accountability, not.

Stephen K. Bannon (17:02)

The old the next time.

Alina Haba (17:04)

It's okay. It's all good. We're real.

Stephen K. Bannon (17:06)

You know what? I got so fired Up. Bannon got me revved up and I was.

Alina Haba (17:09)

He does have a way, a way with words and I cussed. But I think it's because you care about actual accountability. Right.

Stephen K. Bannon (17:14)

So I'm very authentic.

Alina Haba (17:16)

Strongly worded letters and tweets, people. Right. Old guard, Republican. You, I think, represent that new fire breathing stripe of Republicanism that I think this audience loves and cares so much about. So I have some of the topics that our audience cares the most about. And I'd love if you could just sort of give us where you think we stand, where we need to go. Doge has obviously expressed an interest in wanting to audit Ukraine aid. Keith Kellogg had intimated that that process was underway. Where do you think we stand on that? Do you think that that's an integral part of negotiations? Do you think we need to see the funds and where they actually, I.

Stephen K. Bannon (17:49)

Honestly, I don't see it as any different than anything else that they've done. So we've seen aid going through NGOs, going through different tunnels and different avenues to be hidden and buried. This is just another one. There's no question that we have sent a ton of money to Ukraine. And I think it's not so much a political thing or a strategic thing as more of a just consistent ability to cut government waste and fraud, make sure we're spending taxpayer dollars as we should, and, and clean up the mess so that we can balance our seriously terrible deficit in this country.

Alina Haba (18:24)

And speaking of messes and waste, fraud and abuse, it seems like Act Blue is something that is also on the forefront of everyone's mind. The sort of smurfing, the weird contributions.

Stephen K. Bannon (18:33)

Yeah.

Alina Haba (18:34)

You're obviously going to be joining her. I think you've been now obviously announced as the interim U.S. attorney for New Jersey. Congratulations. But through that vertical, or even sort of the DOJ with what the White House is doing, I know there's been a lot of reporting that you guys are looking into that, but what do you think that will ultimately sort of shape up to be? Are you guys just looking at it? Do you think there could be a criminal investigation?

Stephen K. Bannon (18:54)

I'm not going to speak to that. I can tell you that I'm obviously aware of what Apps Blue is, and I think that we have to make sure that there's no illegal activity again across the board. I did see that a few people left from ActBlue and Mass Exodus.

Alina Haba (19:09)

No conspiracies, no coincidence.

Stephen K. Bannon (19:11)

Right. So. So we have to look at what happened there. Look, I don't know. I'm not in charge of it. I can tell you that, that it's concerning. I think that it's not the first or last time we'll hear about it. And I hope that, that we continue to look into anything that has corruption, that has any sort of ties to any foreign dollars just not acceptable in this country. And we have to keep our elections and our campaigns honest. So, you know, as to that, I hope we get to the bottom of it if there is something to get to the bottom of.

Alina Haba (19:39)

And in terms of the election integrity aspect, our war room audience is obviously on the front lines of that. Scott Presslers are making a full court press in New Jersey. You're obviously going to be up there, obviously politics, campaigns, you know, details this side. But what are you looking on in terms of the election integrity and making sure that elections are free, safe and secure in the state of New Jersey and across this country?

Stephen K. Bannon (20:00)

Well, I read about an indicted individual just this past week when I got put in this role that, you know, was taking ballots and was allegedly taking ballots. Let me be a lawyer for a minute. Allegedly taking ballots, although they've been indicted and writing in names and telling people and then basically pushing in 2020 election things. That's problematic. I mean, if we don't have election integrity as, as the RNC really pushed for in this election, we do not have a country. I mean, the thing that differentiates us from third world countries is that we have fair and free elections. As the president has said, he doesn't believe in, in, you know, having an election that lasts two weeks and counting ballots and all that. He thinks everybody should have to go show id. You should be an American to be able to vote.

Alina Haba (20:47)

How radical.

Stephen K. Bannon (20:48)

Yeah, crazy. But, but he's just, you know, been very clear on that. And that's because he has dealt with this before. He dealt with it in 2020. He'll deal with it. You know, he dealt with it in 2024. And we made a very big effort to clean up election integrity and, and make sure that there is no fraud when it comes to our elections. I think that it's important, frankly, for the country in general. I don't, I don't see, see how you could not get behind us making sure that people don't vote multiple times, that they're not getting absentee ballots in one state and another, which I knew my, I knew people that would call and say, I just got a second ballot to my house in Florida. I just got a second. You know, that's not acceptable. It's not the Way we operate, we have to tighten it up. And for New Jersey, I could tell you I'll be looking at the voter rolls and cleaning that up too. We can't have dead people voting.

Alina Haba (21:32)

I know, it's crazy. Or illegals. Right? I think it seems like one of the ways that President Trump is going after a lot of the sort of anti election integrity lawyers like Mark Elias is by stripping the security clearances, the government contracts from firms like Perkins Coy, obviously Covington and Burling. Do you think that that is sort of where the anti lawfare drive stops or do you think that these.

Stephen K. Bannon (21:54)

I think it's the, it's the financial backers. I think that it's the, it's the individuals that I could name, but the big mega donors that have spent money in a really unlawful way, funding warfare and witch hunts, as I know very well. And that has to stop. I mean, there should be some sort of reform towards that end because you should not be able to go after a political opponent through the court system. That's just not what it's meant to be there for. So I think you follow the money on that. That's really where I believe the problem is. And, and of course we have issue with some of these judges, some of these rogue ages, some of these rogue days that are more politically motivated than legally minded. So.

Alina Haba (22:34)

And when, when you look post 2028, they've obviously a lot of the cases the lawfare against him they've dismissed without prejudice. They're already talking about probably trying to appeal.

Stephen K. Bannon (22:44)

Yeah, right.

Alina Haba (22:46)

How do you think the administration is working to ensure that once President Trump is no longer president, that we're not going to sort of go back to the third world territory we were in?

Stephen K. Bannon (22:57)

Yeah, no, we're making sure of that. You know, number one, we expect that after seeing what he's done just in a couple of months, after four years, the American people will yet again vote to keep somebody of his party in place that has the same compass and morals and policies and agendas that we've had. America is definitely stronger very quickly and we'll see what happens there. But I can tell you that in this administration, that is something that we are 100% worried about, is making sure that the changes that we make are long lasting, that these aren't temporary fixes. No more band aids. Let's end it. Let's end all the things that America voted to stop that they were tired of in the last administration. So when we are doing things, when we're writing executive orders and Policies, we're not doing them as a temporary fix, we're doing them to really change, fix the country, frankly, because it was very broken when we came in.

Alina Haba (23:48)

And something that you've tried to overhaul systemically across government, across society is the issue obviously of human trafficking intertwined with illegal immigration. Our audience is obviously very attuned to that. I'm curious your thoughts. Secretary Kristi Noem had talked about how they were getting ready to revoke a lot of the funding from these NGOs that sort of aid and abet the invasion of this country. But do you think that just stripping the funds from some of these organizations is enough or do you think that our audience should expect. I know they certainly want it, but investigations into a lot of these, New.

Stephen K. Bannon (24:23)

Jersey, if there's any of that, if there's any shelters that are harboring illegal immigrants, they will be investigated. I will not have that in my state, I can tell you that for sure. And you know, I love Christie. I think she's doing a stand up job. These all. I'll be continuing to work with them. I'll be continuing to work with ice. I'll be with DHS cleaning up human trafficking. And America unfortunately is a very, very, very large human trafficking problem because of the open borders that we had. We have another problem. We have a cyber sex trafficking problem in this country where it's transnational and going overseas through Skype, through these things. And it's really disturbing. I will expect that anybody who has a crime of moral turpitude, anybody who is a pedophile in the state of New Jersey, I will have no mercy on you. I can tell you that. I will go for maximum penalties all the time. There will be no breaks. And if you are here illegally and you hurt a child, you will be, I can tell you, you'll be visiting Christy Noem over there in El Salvador. Yeah, exactly. But I have no tolerance for that. It's been something I've been very, very passionate about since I've been here and working with Tom Holman and Kristi Noem and Secretary Kennedy. It's just been great.

Alina Haba (25:34)

And last question, your message to other, say Democrat state ages or the states where they have, what is it, 23, the super majorities that they're shepherding all their resources to go after the mass deportation agenda to block the, what's your message is sort of, I think a representation of how you can use state power to stop illegal immigration potentially.

Stephen K. Bannon (25:56)

Well, I just would, I would like to understand why they, they think it's Better to keep terrorists and a terrorist, I use that word not just because of the executive order, but because these are people that have come into our country unwelcome, maybe they were welcomed by Joe Biden, but they are no longer welcome here. That you have come into our country and you have terrorized our people, you are bringing in drugs, you are hurting children, you are raping people. Whatever it is that you are doing, you, you have no place here. So I would just ask when they go to sleep at night, how they sleep after knowing that they are trying to get these people back off a plane and into our country. People that look at Lincoln Riley. I mean it was the first bill the president passed for a reason. I don't understand what conscience, this, what God you pray to that you find it okay to encourage criminal behavior in this country. I don't know if they don't have children, I don't, I don't understand. But I think about my children. When I took this job, I thought about my children.

Alina Haba (26:48)

Last question on the. Because you brought up terrorism, obviously the attacks on Tesla being classified as domestic terrorism sort of twofold. One, there's been a lot of reporting, we've done a lot of it here in the war room. How a lot of these people who are, you know, so anti Tesla and protesting Elon Musk, a lot of it is funded by that same sort of dark money, left wing groups that you're talking about.

Stephen K. Bannon (27:05)

Dark, right.

Alina Haba (27:05)

We know the money very, very obvious. But in the state of New Jersey, for people who are going to vandalize Tesla, going to vandalize Tesla's, not only, you know, how are you going to handle that from a criminal angle, but will you investigate who is propping up these people, who is funding them?

Stephen K. Bannon (27:20)

Absolutely. I. Look, the great thing about, about this role is I am the one USA in New Jersey, but I have a huge office and we, we have several offices and I will 100% stand behind the fact that you do not get to target somebody who has served the country in a capacity that was asked by the president that has sacrificed so much and then go after. It's not even him. People's private property, vandalizing it, scaring people from driving their cars. Unacceptable. If you are a terrorist, if you are a criminal, if you are going to hurt anybody, especially now in the state of New Jersey, I can tell you I'm coming for you.

Alina Haba (27:56)

Thank you so much for joining us. If the audience wants to follow you, stay up to date with everything you're doing. Where can they go to do that.

Steve Bannon (28:01)

Wow.

Stephen K. Bannon (28:02)

Alina Hava on everything. Twitter, Instagram. You can find me at my little check mark, my White House Twitter will probably be shut down soon, but it's a good handle.

Alina Haba (28:12)

Someone's got to take it.

Stephen K. Bannon (28:13)

Not my main one. So obviously you can find me on Twitter and Instagram and all the social media platforms and true social.

Alina Haba (28:19)

Thank you so much for joining us to have you back on.

Stephen K. Bannon (28:21)

Thank you.

Steve Bannon (28:27)

While we may have won this election, the fight to restore our great nation is only beginning. Now is the time to take a stand and Patriot Mobile is leading the charge. Only America's Christian conservative wireless provider, Patriot Mobile offers a way to vote with your wallet without compromising on quality or convenience. Patriot Mobile isn't just about providing exceptional cell phone service. It's a call to action to defend our rights and our freedoms. With Patriot Mobile, you get outstanding nationwide coverage because they operate on all three major networks. If you have a cell phone service today, you can get cell phone service with Patriot Mobile with a coverage guarantee. But the difference is every dollar you spend supports the first and Second Amendments, the sanctity of life and our veterans and first responders. Switching is easy. Keep your number, keep your phone or upgrade. Their 100% US based customer service support team will help you find the perfect plan. Now. Right now, go to patriotmobile.com Bannon or call 972 Patriot. So call 972 Patriot or go to patriotmobile.com Bannon. You get a free month of service. That's a free month with promo code. Bannon. Switch to Patriot Mobile today and defend freedom with every call and text you make. Visit patriotmobile.com bannon or call 972 Patriot. Remember, you get a free month service. Do it today.

Stephen K. Bannon (29:56)

Here's your host, Stephen K. Ban.

Alina Haba (30:04)

Welcome back to the War Room. I guess maybe with questions like that, it's not hard to see why the Biden White House did not want anyone from war Room anywhere near the press office or any of their cabinet officials. We still have more content. We're going to go back talking all things government weaponization, even asking about dark money. Arabella advisors with may mailman Alex Pfeiffer, who's one of President Trump's deputy comms advisors. We're also going to talk to him about some of their unique comm strategies and how they're going to get those deportation numbers up. But in the meantime, of course, we're as grateful to birchgold.com Bannon being the reason that we can bring you content like this. So you got to make sure you're Texting Bannon to 989-898 or checking out birchgold.combannon while you're at. You also know we love guys over at Tax Network USA. That's tnusa.combannon or you can give a call if you like to do that to 1-800-958-1000. You can get a free consultation and of course, Patriot Mobile, the guys who put on wonderful events down in Texas. If you didn't have a chance to go there, go talk to Glenn Story and the team. You know, you can always check out patriot mobile.com Bannon. We're about to bounce back to some of the exclusive interviews, like I said, that we filmed yesterday. I think that one with Alina Haba is probably going to make some heads roll. But when I say heads roll, I probably mean illegal aliens, people who should be in jail, election fraudsters, and probably a lot of corrupt Democrats and establishment Republicans at that. In the meantime, let's go back to May Mailman and Alex Spifer, more, like I said, exclusive content live from the White House. And but do you think that just revoking the security clearances and the government contracts, do you think that that is enough, or are you telling our audience who I can tell you certainly once more, there's potentially more coming down the pipeline to really stop this from all happening again.

May Mailman (31:54)

So without getting into the Department of Justice and potential announcements that you can see there, I will say that law firms themselves are only one piece of the puzzle in order to end the systemic weaponization of justice. Looking at the nonprofit sphere and the abuse of nonprofits in filtering foreign money, that's, for example, another thing that is criminal but at least should be expensive because that's not nonprofit activity. So let's just go with nonprofits are one piece or, sorry, law firms are one piece of the puzzle.

Alina Haba (32:33)

Okay. And you let us know when you have to go because I know you're a busy gal, but our audience is extremely involved in this. Obviously, they were, like I said, on the receiving end with Steve having gone to prison. But there was a really interesting New York Times article a few weeks ago talking about how the administration was looking into potentially Arabella advisors and a lot of the dark money network groups on the left, 6035 New Venture kind of compounded with the act Blue, the potential for smurfing and the kind of weird donation scam that was going on allegedly is there. And I know the New York Times isn't Always accurate. But do you. Are you guys talking about looking into that sort of dark money apparatus?

May Mailman (33:09)

Yes. So I think we have two executive orders that already mentioned this a little bit. And I know that there are things in the works. So the ones that are working on this a little bit is the executive order that does mention Mark Elias, which talks about the nefarious actions, the disbarring actions of lawyers across the country and mentions things that should be done as far as dark money. But I would say also the Election Integrity executive order that we just signed this week, that one also has a section that says that you need to track money in American elections, including foreign money. And there is a continued effort on both election integrity and foreign money specifically. But I will say the actual blue issue of money falling from the sky is something that I worked on, actually, when I was in the private sector. And it's a little bit of a tough nut to crack because we need the state attorney generals to go after this. This is happening to voters in their states. Most of the election laws are at the state level. So I will say if you've got a state, state attorney general who is willing to help with election integrity, they have all of the authority in the states. They need to be starting their own investigations too, because there are three Democrat states who started taking actions against Win Read based on this exact thing. So why is it that the Democrat attorney generals are able to go after Win Red, but there's no Republicans that are. Well, it doesn't make any sense. Call your call your attorney.

Alina Haba (34:54)

Symmetric warfare. We're not. We're not very good at waging it. I'm curious how you view DOGE as a force for sort of supplementing what you guys are doing, Almost sort of backdooring, potentially. I know there was discussion about turning the voter rolls over, potentially for them to audit, but in that sort of space of the dark money, the foreign ngo, just very black box. Maybe Pandora's box is a better way to describe it. But how has Doge sort of augmented or helped what you guys are doing?

May Mailman (35:20)

So DOGE is excellent. If you give Doge a project and you say so on our very high iq. Yes, on our Election Integrity executive order, actually, we put DOGE in there because there's such a problem with the voter rolls, Right? You've got these states and they're supposed to have their voter rolls public. So you should actually be able to. If we, the government can supply citizenship information, you should be able to do that quickly. So guess who we gave that job to? That's gonna be doge. And of course, this is all public information. This is voter rolls that need to be public. So people freak out about that. All right, but walk us one sec.

Alina Haba (35:52)

Through that angle of attack, because it is so hypocritical, Right? They say that, oh, you guys are not being transparent with DOGE or whatever. That's always their line. But these are probably the most, like, hidden. Not like the 990 form. You can barely tell who's giving billions of dollars.

May Mailman (36:06)

I know.

Alina Haba (36:06)

Yeah.

May Mailman (36:07)

So for. Americans want transparency. They want to be able to know how money is being spent. And so one of the great things about DOGE is that they really are and can be tech support. So one of the biggest challenges of my job sitting in the White House is I don't know what's happening in the agencies. If I want to say, hey, what's. What is this grant being spent on? Or what's this grant program doing? I got to call somebody who's got to call somebody who's got to call somebody who's got to call somebody who has to get a document. They can figure it out. What DOGE is trying to help do is make sure that we know. We know where the money is being spent. And I think, you know, Doge is about cutting, and they want to eliminate this. I think there are other people who want to just move it, Right? Like, instead of cutting it, why can't we hold. Harness it for good? Why can't we give it to people who are going to make the world a better place? And so that's a conversation. I think that's maybe the difference between pure Doge and the White House, which is we want, like. And that's the conversation that's happening. And I think that's very healthy for the White House to have, which is you've got people who are just all about saving money, and then you've got people who are all about making sure that Americans are well provided for. And then those conversations are happening every single day in the White House.

Alina Haba (37:29)

Can you walk us through a little bit of that interplay? Because I think the media is always on you guys saying, oh, there's no transparency. Elon Musk is the real president. Right. The one at the shadow cabinet, whatever all the terms that I guess the left sort of coined. But what does that sort of not riff, but the different kind of differing schools of thought on how to go after waste, fraud, and abuse, which I think you see. Right. Can you repurpose the Department of Education, or do you Just abolish it. Right. It's sort of that essential question.

May Mailman (37:53)

So, in a sense, Doge is the help, but the agencies and the White House are in charge. So, for example, everybody knows that Doge would like to save money by cutting a certain number of people who aren't doing anything. In the agencies, we've got millions of government employees. What are most of them doing? And so, you know, Doge wants to cut those people, but whose responsibility is, at the end of the day, that's going to be the cabinet secretary. And so the cabinet secretary, I think, feels, you know, they receive that message and then they say, what can be cut? So today, you know, people are working on where is their waste? Where is there one agency in your department that's doing the exact same job as another one? But it all needs to be going through. So that's the conversation that's happening, which is like, hey, you guys need to identify waste. You need to shrink your workforce to the minimum that's required. You need to close buildings that are unnecessary buildings. You need to do all these things. And then what happens next is the agency figures out what's good, what's bad, how can we consolidate? And it's kind of like, you know, bringing the businessman in who's going to say, let's go, go, go, go, go, and then bringing the lawyers in who was like, let's go figure this out. And that's exactly how business. That's how a successful business, that's how successful government operates and should operate.

Alina Haba (39:14)

It's, I guess, open discourse, which we know they don't.

Natalie G. Winters (39:17)

Yeah, I'll love to walk through this. And let's set the stage for what is the thing. If you're at home and you've been. If you've own a TV set, every time you've watched Fox or whatever channel and it's flipped to commercial during election season, it's Republicans running ads about closing the border. Right. That's all everyone talks about, about. And President Trump and this administration has actually closed the border. I mean, border crossings are down 99% in some areas, they're down so much so. And illegal immigrants are so frayed across our border that they're now turning around in Mexico. So I think the important thing for everyone to keep in mind is the securing of the border. The thing that people have campaigned on for years now, maybe decades, has actually been accomplished. And we have the 10th mound division at the border. We're now building the wall. And so that part, that key part, has been accomplished. And then as it comes to deportations, as you know, the President has said, as Tom Homan has said, as everyone has said, you know, we're going to keep ramping up the numbers. We're never, we're never going to settle for what we have. And obviously we're also working with Congress to try and get more funding to increase, you know, ICE's capabilities. But you know, I think everyone's very proud of the work ICE is doing. They, you know, this morning an operation, you know, led by the FBI and state and local officials arrested a top Mississippi 13 leader in Virginia, just, you know, 30 miles or so from here who wasn't a legal immigrant, of course. So every single day, you know, we're getting good numbers on ice, arresting criminals throughout the country and those numbers are just continue to increase. So I don't, I think people should be very happy about where we are. And especially because I don't think anyone watching this could have predicted that within, you know, months of the administration, we would basically halt border crossings. You know, I just saw a stat actually that the other day we only had 66 got away at the border. And under Biden, you know, I think sometimes we would have, you know, close to a thousand in a day. So, you know, of got away. So the border numbers are tiny compared to where they were.

Alina Haba (41:24)

And so I think that's thousands a month. And now they're down.

Natalie G. Winters (41:28)

Yeah, I think it was like 10k. 10k a month in February. My numbers a little off, give or take, but like the numbers are tiny. And also why would you want to cross here legally? You know, you're going to get deported.

Alina Haba (41:37)

Gonna go to nice El Salvadorian, you.

Natalie G. Winters (41:39)

Know, it's not going to turn out well if you're, if you're an illegal immigrant gang member here. Yeah. If you're a member of Ms. 13 or Trust Nicaragua, you can end up in Guantanamo Bay. You know, this is not, this country was a safe space for illegal immigrant killers and it is not anymore.

Alina Haba (41:55)

And walk us through some of the efforts to hamper, whether it's securing the border, the mass deportations. We obviously focused a lot on the sort of left wing NGOs whose reason d'etre is to essentially keep the borders wide open. We know that they were sort of preemptively lobbying Joe Biden and his regime to get rid of the detention facilities to allow the mass amount of people possible, you know, ever they were hiring extra ICE agents not to stop people, but to allow them to process more people. The city of New York was doing the same thing. Where has that sort of resistance, at least on the immigration front in particular come from? Is it the Democratic Party? Is it more these NGOs, is it people who are opposed to sort of the, you know, first administration, the divesting from ice, what is that resistance?

Natalie G. Winters (42:38)

I think on the immigration front, the political opponents, I think like politicians have been a bit more quiet than they have in the past because they realize the American public is on our side. So the Washington Post had this whole story basically saying, well, you know, the problem with trying to advocate against President Trump's immigration policies is the majority of the country's with them. It's not just that, like people always like to say, oh well, you can just deploy criminal, legal immigrants. Well, all illegal immigrants are criminals and the majority of Americans support deporting all illegal immigrants. So I think the opposition you see, you know, oftentimes from activist judges. You know the judge who recently put out this ridiculous comment saying Nazis were treated better than these trend. Narago. Yes. She's donate. She's been a heavy, she's a heavy, she's a heavy donor to Democrat politicians. And I might be breaking some news here for a war room audience. She was a volunteer on the Obama campaign.

May Mailman (43:38)

Wow.

Natalie G. Winters (43:39)

Yeah.

Alina Haba (43:40)

Who do you think is the most radical judge that has waited?

Natalie G. Winters (43:43)

I don't know if I, I don't know if I have, but obviously judge, Judge Boasberg, you know, he might be the current prize winner.

Steve Bannon (43:50)

We rejoice when there's no more. Let's take down the ccp. 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 the 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 tastes 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. 7 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.

Stephen K. Bannon (45:24)

Here's your host, Stephen K. Ban.

Alina Haba (45:31)

I want to pivot this a little to how I think the sort of riff, right? Obviously Trump is, I guess I won't put words in his mouth, but I'll say the worm audience were very populist, nationalist. I know President Trump has described himself in some ways is that too. But the idea that now on the left, right, you have AOC and Bernie heading essentially, it feels like the campaign trail, but holding these what they allege to be huge rallies, saying that they're fighting oligarchy, they're putting families over billionaires. But then you go to AOC's website and the first thing that you're hit with is a know your rights campaign, how to avoid illegal aliens being deported. Pro open borders. How do you think that that message, right, the idea that the left, the Democratic Party, that sort of more maybe popular populist wing of it, says, oh, we're so pro worker, we're so pro American family, yet concurrently, they're wanting to open the border wide open, right, to essentially the most depressive for.

Natalie G. Winters (46:21)

Yeah, I think it's completely phony. I don't even, I don't think we should give Bernie Sanders AOC any credit of letting them have the populist mantle. Because, you know, look, this weekend on abc, Bernie Sanders was asked, you know, what? The President's doing well? And he was like, oh, he's doing well. Immigration. Okay, then why during the four years under Joe Biden when you know Bernie, because the Senate has such a tight margin, he could have wielded his power. He never spoke up on immigration. He didn't. And in fact, in his last run for office, his platform spoke about abolishing ice. So it's completely phony when these people like Bernie or AOC have these rallies and they talk about speaking up for standing up for the American people. Standing up for the American people means standing up not only against crime, but also standing up for their wages. And study after study after study shows that the flood of illegal immigration drives down wages for American workers. And that's why when we're securing our border and stopping the flood in. So we're stopping and then we're pushing them out, we are going to help lift up wages in this country. And at the same time, as we're doing that. We're creating good jobs for them by bringing manufacturing back. One thing I want to point your viewers to, and I don't know how much time I have, but during the. Oh, all right, I'll be here for hours. So during the first term, the Trump administration did a successful ICE raid on a chicken processing plant in Mississippi. And there was all this hysteria like, oh, how dare he, you know, arrest these illegal immigrant workers at a chicken plant. Well, the New York Times of all places, did a story, basically a follow up story on what happened to this chicken plant. And they found out that all the local residents in that Mississippi area, many of whom were, you know, poor black Americans citizens, they all got good paying jobs at this poultry plant and they were really happy. They're like, this is a great job. I'm getting paid more money than I got in my last job. So we're helping out Americans when we deport illegal immigrants. And so, you know, Bernie Sanders or aoc, they talk a big game, but, you know, their actions don't reflect it.

Alina Haba (48:20)

It was Obama's I think own economic review commission that put out, it was in 2000, that large studies saying that the most detrimental force to the wages of black Americans, it was illegal immigration and legal immigration to some extent too. I want to pivot a little bit to how Congress is sort of augmenting, bolstering your fight on the immigration front. And then we'll get to the judge stuff too. But how can our audience sort of help you guys get the necessary allies in Congress or where else? You know, they love making phone calls, they're ready to dial. Who should they be talking to? What's the best way that they can get involved to sort of help you.

Natalie G. Winters (48:56)

Guys Look, I think the best thing is, you know, speak your voice. And I think it's always going to be clear what the president supports on any issue. He doesn't really hide his feelings. He's going to be either telling it to the press and one of our many media availabilities or talking about it on truth. So you're going to know where he stands and you can, you know, let your member or senator know you agree with him. I think it's also one thing that's important. I think in general politics is there's always too much emphasis sometimes on the stick and not the carrot. And I think we need to tell people when we think they're doing a good job. You know, for example, one person did a great job. Brendan Gill yesterday at the NPR hearing did you watch that. That was, that was amazing. If you guys haven't seen Brendan Gill's NPR CEO questioning, it was amazing. Like, we need more, you know, fun, cool questioning of these witnesses on the Hill because, you know, these, these people don't come prepared and we need to, you know, hold their feet to the fire. And in the case of npr, as the president made clear this morning, it needs to be defunded. I mean, NPR takes your money and it funds stuff like reports, I'm not kidding, on genderqueer dinosaur enthusiasts. They did a report once that said doorway sizes. That is 100% true. They did a report on saying that doorway sizes are examples of latent fatphobia. Same with seat belts. They did a report saying we're not going to get involved in the latent fat phobia space, but we will get involved in the funding. Npr, of course, as the president stated. And NPR also funded an insane report that said fear of fatness is more unhealthy than fat itself. So your tax dollars are funding commentary that makes the American public less healthy.

Alina Haba (50:39)

I saw, too, they were already weighing in on Signal Gate trying to make the idea that a bunch of Europeans were really offended by the messages that J.D. vance had sent. And they won't stop. On the day of the hearing, they thought it was a good idea to put out that article. I want to pivot, though. You're talking about Brandon Gill. He has obviously put out, I believe, several or at least one, articles of impeachment against certain judges that have really tried to, I would say, extra constitutionally interfere with everything that this president is trying to do. Can you sort of walk us through what the administration's approach. We were getting into it with May and she was walking us through the sort of full spectrum dominance that you guys are using to tackle the law fair. Going after the law firms are part of it. There's other stuff coming down the pipeline, but just help our audience understand. We know there's a hearing next week. Jim Jordan, Congress is going to be talking about potentially maybe impeaching. I know they're proceeding, pursuing other courses of action too. But what you think is sort of the angle of attack to ensure that his administrator, his agenda can actually be implemented and not subverted by these radical, unelected judges.

Natalie G. Winters (51:39)

The impeachment thing, that's sort of out of my purview. What I'm focused on, at least from my role and one of the things I do here at the White House is help run our rapid response account is educating people.

Alina Haba (51:51)

It's A great account if people want to follow it.

Natalie G. Winters (51:52)

Where rapid response 477 is sort of educating the public on who these judges are. And we did many tweets and threads last week on a lot of these judges themselves are former Democrat Party activists. Some of them hold leaderships in Democrat Party groups. Some of them are donors. So these are.

Alina Haba (52:11)

Their spouses are even worse.

Natalie G. Winters (52:13)

So these are very partisan people. So that's where my focus is, looking into these people and making sure people understand, you know, to look beyond the headline that people impacting our country, making it sound like, oh, they're just, you know, they're just looking at things fairly. They're partisans.

Alina Haba (52:27)

And last question, because I think I'm being told we're about to wrap. Our audience loves the content on the Rapid Response 47 account. They love the memes, they love the videos, they love the music choices. Give us a little inside baseball. What's the team like? What's the story?

Natalie G. Winters (52:43)

The team's great. I mean, I think generally the general attitude is if you have a good idea, execute it. I think here, what I love about working at the White House, here at this team, is there's very little micromanaging and everyone trusts each other to sort of execute. And so I think the guys and girls here, when they have a creative idea, they execute it.

May Mailman (53:17)

Foreign.

Steve Bannon (53:24)

The April 15 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. 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. 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.

Alina Haba (55:07)

And of course, the beef liver being our flagship products. For those who don't know, beef liver.

Natalie G. Winters (55:12)

Is loaded with highly bioavailable ingredients such as vitamin A, B12, zinc CoQ10, etc. And because it is 100% grass fed and natural, your body is able to absorb these nutrients far better than taking any other synthetic multivitamin or any other synthesis synthetic vitamin in general. So we have some other amazing products.

Alina Haba (55:34)

But if you'd like to check us out, you can go to sacredhumanhealth.com and cheers to your health.

Steve Bannon (55:40)

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 roomhealth.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 percent 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. How we're going to do that is with salty. Go there, do it today. Check it out.