Episode 4982: SCOTUS To Restore Presidential Authority; Lies State Funded Of Capitalism

Summary

Bannon’s War Room — Episode 4982 Summary

Date: December 9, 2025
Main Theme:
This episode dissects breaking political news including pivotal redistricting fights in Indiana, manipulation of AI and chip sales policy vis-a-vis China, and a high-stakes Supreme Court case about presidential authority over the administrative state. Host Steve Bannon, co-host Natalie Winters, Senator Mike Lee, and correspondents provide insider perspectives on perceived threats to American sovereignty, the MAGA movement’s state-by-state strategy, U.S.-China relations, federal regulatory sprawl, and conservative grassroots activism.

---

Redistricting Battles: Indiana’s Frontline ([00:52]–[14:29])

Key Participants:

• Host: Steve Bannon
• Reporter: John Fredericks (live from Indiana State Capitol)

Key Discussion Points

• Indiana State Senate Redistricting Vote:
  The episode opens with a deep dive into a crucial redistricting vote in Indiana, described as a bellwether for the 2026 midterms and Trump’s influence. Fredericks reports live from the capitol as Republicans scramble for enough votes to pass new district maps from committee—a prerequisite for advancing Trump-aligned majorities.

• Opposition Protests:

  • Large organized opposition was present—“about 300” protestors from groups like Planned Parenthood, characterized as "Marxist" and seeking a "communist takeover":

    "The anxiety I felt from the leftists that we have, basically the people that are here are Marxist. Steve. That's, that's, that's the bottom line." — John Fredericks, [06:26]

  • The Republican side is described as underdog and embattled, but fiercely determined.

• National Stakes and Republican Retaliation:

  • MAGA-aligned organizations threaten to "primary" any state Republican voting against redistricting and to cut off federal funding:

    "They're telling me that money that's going to Indiana and SMPs...the White House is saying we're cutting you off." — John Fredericks, [04:13]

• Impact and Precedent:

  • Indiana viewed as a model for rolling back Democratic strongholds elsewhere:

    "If we win this, it's going to give the backbone to other Republican state houses to do the same thing, redistrict and get us state..." — John Fredericks, [09:38]

Notable Quotes & Moments

• “This is probably the nastiest thing that I've been involved in... It's not for the squeamish.” — John Fredericks, [08:29]
• “Freedom is a long shot bid. When Trump went down the escalator, he was at 3%. That's a long shot bid. So you got to lace them up, lace them tight, dig in. Action, action, action.” — Fredericks, [10:18]

---

Redistricting Beyond Indiana: The Virginia Concern ([11:06]–[14:29])

Key Discussion Points

• Virginia as a Weak Link:
  Bannon and Fredericks warn that Indiana victories could be overshadowed by Republican disarray in Virginia, predicting a “blowout” loss on a pending referendum if MAGA doesn’t mobilize:

  “You're only going to win this by getting Trump involved and getting Trump voters out.” — Bannon, [12:43]

• Democratic Ballot Strategies:
  Democrats will likely attach culture-war issues (abortion, same-sex marriage) to the ballot “to spar the base,” making it harder for conservatives to win.

---

AI, Chips, and China: Strategic Sabotage or Business as Usual? ([18:43]–[36:30])

Key Participants:

• Co-Host: Natalie Winters
• Audio clips: Neil Bush (Bush China Foundation), references to David Sacks

Key Discussion Points

• Selling Out to China:
  Winters exposes U.S. “elites” and political families (Bush, Nixon, Carter) collaborating with CCP-linked organizations for financial and political gain, allegedly at the expense of U.S. security and independence.

• Notable Audio (Neil Bush at CCP-organized event):

  “We need more exchanges on all fronts, cultural and all fronts, including business... the ballast for the relationship going forward.” — Neil Bush, [21:16] “We need more interaction... so the less fearful Americans will be of China.” — Neil Bush, [20:40]

• AI Chips as Security Risk:
  Discussion centers on the “Thucydides trap” theory—the fear that relative U.S. decline is inevitable due to aiding China’s technological ramp-up. Winters and Bannon denounce this as self-fulfilling, fueled by business interests who profit from China’s rise.

• Elites & Moral Responsibility:

  “They are solidifying that fate by giving China these chips. It's like refueling our enemy's jet engines mid war.” — Natalie Winters, [25:03]

• Supposed Inevitability of China’s Rise:

  “It's this really backwards calculation... you are betting against America, you are needing foreign talent, right?” — Natalie Winters, [32:15]

• Transparency Critique:
  Moves to quietly roll out H-1B increases and AI “amnesty” via must-pass bills are viewed as attempts to prevent public scrutiny.

---

Regulatory Capture, AI, and State-Funded “Capitalism” ([37:14]–[43:04])

Key Discussion Points

• Corporate-State Entanglement:
  Bannon critiques the close relationship between a handful of tech giants and government labs, suggesting “state capitalism” is becoming the norm, not real capitalism:

  “One of the problems in our system today is that it's almost like state capitalism. Right now you have a handful of companies...most of the government benefit and most of the control of the labs." — Bannon, [41:30]

• Trillions in Public Guarantees:
  The build-out for AI infrastructure may ultimately require “$9 to $10 trillion” — much of it government-backed, linking public finances to private profit.

• Populist Solution:
  Bannon suggests “the American citizen should get his beak wet” if taxpayer money and public labs are integral to AI fortune-building, distinguishing this view from socialism.

---

Supreme Court Showdown: Reining in the Administrative State ([43:04]–[51:53])

Key Participants:

• Steve Bannon
• Senator Mike Lee
• Clip: Justice Sonia Sotomayor

Key Discussion Points

• Supreme Court Case on Presidential Power:
  Case concerns Trump's firing of an FTC commissioner and whether the President has unfettered authority to remove executive branch officials, even in “independent agencies.”

• Separation of Powers — Originalist Argument:
  Lee asserts the Constitution vests “all executive power” in the President, arguing current carve-outs for some agencies are unconstitutional:

  “He can undertake what an executive does for the entire US Government and should be able to fire anyone, any employee... for any reason or no reason at all.” — Sen. Mike Lee, [46:26]

• Path to Undoing “Fourth Branch” Precedent (Humphrey’s Executor):

  “It's led to a long train of abuses and it's a big problem. And I think ... the Supreme Court is very likely to undo Humphrey's Executor.” — Sen. Mike Lee, [47:41]

• Implications:

  • Clearing the way for future presidents, especially a returning Trump, to “deconstruct the administrative state” by firing entrenched staff in agencies like the FTC and USAID.

  • Lee sees this as a continuation of textualist jurisprudence, moving away from activist tendencies.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “Freedom is a long shot bid. When Trump went down the escalator, he was at 3%. That's a long shot bid.” — John Fredericks, [10:18]
• “They want a communist takeover of the country. They're out in force. That's what they want. Indiana is right now on the front lines to stop that.” — John Fredericks, [06:21]
• “They are solidifying that fate by giving China these chips. It's like refueling our enemy's jet engines mid war.” — Natalie Winters, [25:03]
• “Shouldn't the American citizen just get a piece of the action? Not the government. I'm talking about the American citizens themselves. If this is going to be a trillion dollar land grab...” — Steve Bannon, [41:20]
• “The fundamental Premise of Article 2 of the Constitution is that all the executive power within the US Government is vested in the President...” — Senator Mike Lee, [46:26]
• “I do. Look, in my lifetime, we have not seen a Supreme Court that is more dedicated to the rule of law…” — Senator Mike Lee, [50:08]

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

| Timestamp | Segment | |-----------|--------------------------------------------| | 00:52–14:29 | Indiana Redistricting Showdown | | 18:43–36:30 | China, AI, Chips: Selling Out or Strategy?| | 37:14–43:04 | AI Regulation, State Funding | | 43:04–51:53 | Supreme Court: Presidential Authority | | 51:53–52:37 | Mike Lindell on Faith and Activism |

---

Resources & Social Handles

• John Fredericks: @JFRadioShow (various platforms)
• Natalie Winters: nataliegwinters.substack.com; @NatalieGWinters
• Sen. Mike Lee: Book “Saving Nine” at Amazon, X: @BasedMikeLee

---

Tone & Language

As always, the War Room employs combative, populist rhetoric, framing current events as an existential struggle between grassroots America (MAGA) and “elites” in politics, business, and bureaucracy. The language is urgent, sometimes martial (“primal scream of a dying regime,” “going medieval”), and frequently calls for direct political activism.

---

Bottom Line:
This episode positions the MAGA and conservative movement as under siege in high-stakes state and national battles—from the trenches of Indiana’s redistricting, to America’s technological edge in AI, to the very structure of federal power. With calls for direct action, populist economic reforms, and systemic government overhaul, the War Room underscores a narrative of existential struggle—and the need for relentless grassroots mobilization.

Transcript

[A]

This is the primal scream of a dying regime. Pray for our enemies because we're going medieval on these people. Christians not got a free shot. All these networks lying about the people. The people have had a belly full of it. I know you don't like hearing that. I know you try to do everything in the world to stop that, but you're not going to stop it. It's going to happen. And where do people like that go to share the big lie? MAGA MEDIA I wish in my soul, I wish that any of these people had a conscience. Ask yourself, what is my task and what is my purpose? If that answer is to save my country, this country will be saved. WAR ROOM here's your host. STEPHEN K. BAND.

Foreign It's Monday 8th December at year of our Lord 2025. We are very packed today. Natalie Winner is going to join me as my co host to go through huge news on artificial intelligence and chip sales. We'll get to that in a moment with Natalie. Also Senator Mike Lee huge argument to the Supreme Court today. Senator Mike Lee will join us a little later. I want to go to though pressing business about 2026. Remember the theory of the case here, you got to win the reditioning war to win the midterms in 2026 and therefore to keep the Trump revolution going. John Fredericks is live in Indianapolis. It moved over to the Senate today. We were very successful in the House last week. John Turning points rally on Friday. You having the John Fredericks MAGA bus there helped. How we doing in the Senate sir?

[B]

Well today's a big day, Steve. We're here at the state Capitol. Thank you for having me. We're about 30 minutes away from the final vote on the committee. There's been hours of testimony. A few hours ago this rotunda was absolutely packed mainly about 300 anti districting protesters. Some I interviewed all of them coming from an organization whether it be Planned Parenthood or something else that is kind of thinned out now as the testimony gets done there's let me just bottom line this, this thing has got to get out of committee within the next hour. There are nine committee members. We need five votes. There are four hard nos, two Democrats and two Republicans who are voting no. They're with Roderick Bray. So we need the other five. We think we've got three of them solid. Two of them we expect to vote in favor of getting this out of committee. This should be about 06:00 Eastern Time. Once it gets out of committee then we start going through the three Readings, going to get this vote to the floor. And then we're looking at Thursday night or Friday where there's going to be a vote of the full senate. We need 26 votes right now. I'm told as of right now, this moment, we have 23 solid votes. We're down three. We're working them hard. Mike Braun, governor, just made a statement. He was pretty confident that he would get this over the finish line. But it's going to be a lot of work between now and then to get to 26. You hear some of the protesters screaming behind me. You know, there's a, there's a lot of people here that are very upset, obviously, but we need these three votes. Here's one thing that's concerning. One of the senators, Rick Neymar, who I talked to last night, should be with us. He's Southern Indiana, he's 50, 50. His cousin is running for Congress. But here's what's disturbing. He got a personal call last night, Sunday night from speaker of the House Mike Johnson and he didn't commit to Mike Johnson. So this is not a good sign. I think we can still get there. But when you're a state senator, you get the speaker of the House calling you up and you can't commit to him on the phone on a Sunday night. You know, that is, that is not the best. Let me get out of the glare. That is, that is not the best time we're going to have. Now what Maggie is saying is they're going to primary. All of these people that vote no. This is not Turning Point. This is Mag Inc. They got a billion dollars plus they're going to primary. Also. They're telling me that money that's going to Indiana and SMPs.

Which are the nuclear reactors, USDA hubs, all of this, the White House is saying we're cutting you off. You're not getting a dime. So that message is getting out. The stakes here in Indiana are tremendously high. Not only, not only for the redistricting, but very high for getting money from the White House. These guys are playing hardball, Steve. They're not going to take no for an answer. And so any of these people vote no and this thing goes down on Friday, the primary is going to start immediately. They're shipping Chris Las Vegas here. They're going to spend over seven figures apiece and they're going to cut the state off from the funding you're getting in some of these goodie bag things that they're allocating for Indiana.

[A]

Steve, talk to Me about the footage you sent me earlier about what happened today for their rally. Of course, Turning Point is always quite positive. The people today, that got pretty, that got a little ugly, didn't it? The rally they had of the opposition.

[B]

It was very ugly. Look, they had about 300 people here. They got here early and they were screaming and shouting as they went through the testimony on tv. Obviously you can't get that number of people in the chamber, but they were all out here in the rotunda. I interviewed a couple of them. I mean, they're just mad and, but none of them, this is, this is the thing. Nobody I talked to just got up and decided to come here. This was all organized by either Planned Parenthood or some other left wing organization. Right? That's why they all got here. And so, but then, look, they came out, there were about 300 of them. I mean, I found a handful of supporters of redistricting here that came on their own. Some of them camped out in the lieutenant Governor's office. That's Micah Beckwith, he's with us. But it was probably, you know, 350 to 10 as far as against and for, but it was getting really, really, really nasty here. Look, they, they want to stop this. All the signs are all about Trump, fascist, you know, one party system, all the things they're doing. It was interesting because I asked one of the, one of the ladies the question who has said, you know, this isn't the Indiana way and you know, the Republicans shouldn't do this. And I'm like, well, are you a Democrat? She said, yes. I said, well, what about California and Virginia and all these states that don't have a single Republican representative? How does that square reconcile with what you're saying? And of course you get the same answer. You, you, you always do. Hey, we can't control them. We can only control Indiana. But the anxiety I felt from the, from the leftists that we have, basically the people that are here are Marxist. Steve. That's, that's, that's the bottom line. They want a communist takeover of the country. They're out in force. That's what they want. Indiana is right now on the front lines to stop that.

[A]

Let me ask, you know, the optics here are very important because correct me if I'm wrong, you're saying it's. The committee is nine people. There's already four hard nos. That means we have to sweep the rest of them. Anyone would be looking for anything to hide behind. Of the testimony today in Texas, we went through three days and there Was not one Republican or not one group that stood up and did a positive. There was three days of negative to set today in front of the Senate. Were there any people there pitching for this is the fair thing to do? Or was all these Marxist groups, organized groups there just to intimidate senators?

[B]

That's a great question. And unlike Texas, I was not there for the whole time. I was there for about two of the. This thing went out for about four or five hours. When I was there, it was 50. 50. So they did a good job in getting somebody, four and somebody in opposition to it. And a lot of the speeches were max at two minutes. Two minutes came, you were cut off. So the ones that were opposed to it, obviously they get big cheers here because it's on tv. Those that were for it, you know, you get basically a boo or a hiss or whatever. But it was about 50, 50. So they did a good job in that.

[A]

John, you've been in some pretty tough gunfights over the last 10 or 12 years, doing this in particular, taking the bus around, explain to the audience how nasty and how tough these redistricting fights are. Sir.

[B]

This is probably the nastiest thing that I've been involved in. And, you know, I started this thing in 2015 with President Trump in Iowa, okay? And I saw Ted Cruz and Jeff Rowe steal the caucus by making up lies about Ben Carson. Right. Just said he was. Said he was out of the race. He didn't have enough people at the caucuses. He went home to get a suit, and they said he was out of the race and beat him. So I've been through a lot of nasty stuff on both sides. This is a nasty fight, Steve. And I tell you what, it is not for the squeamish. It is not for the faint of heart. If you're in this fight, you're going to be in it to the end. And for these state senators, the stakes are going to be high. And if, if you bail on us, there are going to be repercussions. You, you might as well find a new line of work because you're not going to remain a state center, I could guarantee you that. And it's also going to cost Indiana hundreds of millions of dollars. You know, the White House decides where to put these things, like a USD hub. That's their decision right now. It's going to Indiana. They lose this vote, that's. That's gone. The senators are gone. But the opposition here is dug in because they see the stakes. They know that if we start Winning these redistricting fights. We got a fighting chance to keep the House at as bad as things appear now and their power slips away. Indiana is more than two votes. It's like, well, why are you doing all this for two votes? No, it isn't two votes, it's 20 votes. Because if we win this, it's going to give the backbone to other Republican state houses to do the same thing, redistrict and get us state, get us like New England, who's got six states without a single Republican representative, including Hawaii and others. So we need to do the same thing. You can't go to a bazooka. They have bazookas. We want to go into the with a pop gun and we're getting slaughtered. That's really what the difference is. That's why we're all here. If we can take the fight with them here and win this fight, you got to remember when we got here on Tuesday, this thing had about a 10, 15% chance of passing. It didn't have a shot. It already got beat until Mike Braun brought it, brought it back. And they told me when I got here, this is a long shot bid. Well, we're all long shot bid, Steve. Freedom is a long shot bid. When Trump went down the escalator, he was at 3%. That's a long shot bid. So you got to lace them up, lace them tight, dig in. Action, action, action.

[A]

Okay, we got to sweep the five folks right now on the Senate. We got, we got four hard nos, nine man committee got to come out of committee today. We got to get all five votes. That'll happen sometimes around 6 o'.

[C]

Clock.

[A]

Before I lose you will follow the logistics here. Before I lose you, our beloved Commonwealth of Virginia. Understand you had some state convention or state gathering this weekend and my what people tell me there wasn't a lot of intense focus on this April redition. The people in the Commonwealth right now understand that when you talk about momentum because you're a, you know, you're a degenerate gambler in football. You know, it's a momentum game that when you talk about momentum, the momentum we would get here in Indiana and other places with victories would be washed out by a blowout loss in Virginia in April where they would go 6, 5 to 10 to 1. Sir. Any update on that?

[B]

Oh, they're going to get blown out. They have no plan, there's no party. They got a beeper and a couple of people and I think maybe they got somebody got a cell phone. There's absolutely no Infrastructure there. The only way to beat this referendum, if it actually goes to a referendum, because you know the Supreme Court of Virginia may put a stall on it. That's unlikely. It's going to go to referendum. I said this the other day. They have it, they have a ridiculous strategy. They want to beat it with good governance, get Democrats together, get George Allen, you know, get the old, the old guard, you know, go on, try to tell people about good governance. Okay, that is going to fail. You want to beat this thing, you want to get the Trump voters out. You got to go up and down I81. You can't stop. That's what you got to do. You got to put millions of dollars behind it in order to stop this. Otherwise you're going to get beat 2 to 1, just like they did with their good governance plan in California. How, how, how that work out, Steve?

[A]

It's a joke McCarthy and Schwarzenegger didn't invite. They kept Trump out, lost by 30 points, a blowout and launch Gavin Newsom's presidential campaign. This is why someone in the commonwealth has got to get focused. You're only going to win this by getting Trump involved in getting Trump voters out. Am I off base on that, John?

[B]

No, you're 100% right. But that, that too is going to be a long shot because if they put it on the, on a referendum. Look, we couldn't get Trump voters out this past election for Jason Meeres to, you know, beat it, beat a guy that wanted to assassinate the speaker in his wife and children. They just didn't want to come out. They were uninspired. Now you can try to get them out for a referendum. They don't even know what it is. Here's the other problem. If the Democrats put this on the ballot, they're going to tie to a gay marriage, same sex marriage. They're going to tie to it codifying abortion up to birth. They're going to codify that. They're going to get things in this referendum to spar the base and get them out. And this thing is going to be very tough to beat without a strategy that is hardball. I mean, they want to play softball. It's like they want to tee the ball up and then when it's on the tee, they want to, they want to punch. I mean, you got it. It's incredible.

[A]

Slay down a bunch, John. Social media, where we get the bus, where we find out the results of this vote this afternoon, where people go.

[B]

I got to put a right up. Go to @JF Radio Show. I'm on Instagram TikTok every Everything is There F radio show and you can find me 6 to 10am Monday to Friday at JF radio show. I'm on all social media, all our radio stations download our app and you're good to go. But I'll put something out right after this vote tonight and then it's on to Friday.

[A]

John Fredericks, thank you very much reporting live from the state capital, Indiana.

In Indianapolis. Great. The Hoosiers, number one seed in the college football poll. The folks in South Bend, not even invited. Pretty shocking. Okay, short commercial break. Take your phone out. Text Bannon B A N N O N 989-898. Get the ultimate guide which is free with no commitment from Birch Gold. For investing in gold and precious metals.

Let me be blunt. Gold is up around 40% this year. That's not speculation, that's reality. And if a portion of your savings isn't diversified into gold, you're missing the boat. Here's the facts. Inflation's still too high, the US Dollar is still too weak, and the government debt is insurmountable. This is why central banks throughout the world are flocking to gold at record rates. They're the ones driving prices up to new record highs. But it's not too late to buy gold from Birch Gold Group and get in the door. Now. Birch Merch Gold will help you convert an existing IRA or 401k into a tax sheltered IRA. In gold, you don't pay a dime out of pocket. Just text Bannon B A N N o n to 989-898 and claim your free information kit. There's no obligation, it's just useful information. The best indicator of the future is the past. And gold has historically been a safe haven for millennia. What else can I say? What else does Birch Gold need to say? The hedge against times of financial turbulence has always been gold. So text Bannon B A N N o n to 989-898 right now to claim your free information kit on gold. That's Bannon to 989-898 and protect your future today with Birch Gold.

[D]

Tell America's Voice family.

[E]

Are you on Getter yet?

[C]

No.

[E]

What are you waiting for?

[D]

It's free, it's uncensored, and it's where all the biggest voices in conservative media are speaking out.

[A]

Download the Getter app right now. It's totally free. It's where I put up exclusively all of my content 24 hours a day. Want to know what Steve Bannon is thinking go to Getter.

[B]

That's right. You can follow all of your favorite Steve Bannon, Charlie Kirk, Jack pos and so many more. Download the Getter app now.

[D]

Sign up for free and be part of the movement.

[A]

Okay, financial markets kind of in turbulence again. Although the market's got a. I guess from the market's perspective. Some good news today. Make sure you find out why gold has been a hedge. And I think it's going to be a bigger hedge going forward. Birchgold.com, promo code Bannon get to Philip Patrick and the team. We have all types of free content, but I think it's now time that you get a relationship with Philip Patrick and ask Philip, why has gold been a hedge for, I don't know, a millennium more? 5,000 years recorded history. Check it out because I think you're going to need a hedgehog. Natalie Winters, so much has gone on today. I'm a toss to you introduce. You got a cold open here. And part of this I want to get back and talk about the chips. You know, you got the AI we've got now. President's told us they're going to have an executive order. We've defeated the AI amnesty twice. The tech oligarchs are kind of misleading the president about where these things stand. I'm sure he's not. I'm sure they're not telling him, hey, we're getting wiped slick. That's what we need in the oh, but part of this, as you know, Natalie, and your beat has always been the Chinese Communist Party as the strategic existential threat to the globe, to the United States, to the Lao Beijing, to East Asia, all of it. And yet here we are worried about them. You know, we have to do everything in the world, have to turn over everything in the world to turn it to the boligarchs, to turn the national labs over to them because we've had a Sputnik moment and we're in this race with the Chinese. And then on the other hand, just Jensen Huang and these other arms dealers, because that's what they are as arms dealers are convincing people that they've got to sell the advanced chips to guess what? Keep China into the air race. I can't. Those two thoughts I can't hold in balance. So, ma', am, I'm going to turn it over to you and let it rip.

[C]

Sure.

[D]

Well, I think existential threat aside, obviously that's how we view the Chinese Communist Party here in the war room. I also think we're uniquely interested in in China, because it always sort of seems to be the punching bag and the cop out that whether you want to call them the tech broligarchs, the military industrial complex, take your pick. They sort of, you know, create to be this enemy that they don't actually want to address. They only want to address it with kid gloves, but they use it as sort of a distraction or a shiny toy to justify whether it's, you know, a bloated defense budget that, of course, coming from the Pentagon, whether it's these tech people saying, oh, well, we got to just give them every chip in the book. Or frankly, it's how you justify the H1B madness. Right? It always goes back to China. But then when we say, well, hey, let's actually confront the Chinese Communist Party, let's, for example, delist them from the stock exchange, then all of a sudden, you know, oh, no, no, no. It's all about collaboration. We're one in the same. We have an interesting story up on my substack today, which I think dovetails quite nicely into the broader chip discussion, which I know we'll have. I want to tee up the clip because I think we should play it because I think it's most powerful to hear those Americans that choose to sell out to the Chinese Communist Party in their own words. I won't paraphrase it, but the person that you're about to see speak. This is someone who has taken in millions, upwards of $5 million that's responsible for over 80% of the operating budget of the Bush China foundation, speaking in Hong Kong at a forum put on by the China United States Exchange foundation, the tip of the spear of the communist influence kind of global network that the Chinese Communist Party, their Ministry of State Security, runs bad enough that Neil Bush, the son of George H.W. bush, like I said, one of the leaders of, of the Bush China foundation, is speaking there. But listen to what his plans are, including making you guys the war room audience quote, less fearful of China. Let's roll the clip.

[F]

I spent very little time. David does all the heavy lifting for the Bush Foundation. I'm a businessman, and I think it's pretty imperative that we have more interaction between, you know, government leaders. So, so let's. Let's give credit for the President's meeting. The more they meet, the more they'll have better understandings, the lower the tension will get and hopefully the more normalized the relationship will look and the less fearful Americans will be of China. We need more minister to minister. We need more student exchanges. We need more exchanges on all fronts, cultural and all fronts, including business. And in fact the business relationships that exist Today from After 40 years of development, the roots of those.

Relationships are so deeply embedded. American companies doing business in China, American companies buying stuff from China, Chinese companies participating on the American U.S. stock exchanges. You know, there's a deep, deeply rooted relationship and that's I think going to be kind of the ballast for the relationship going forward. So I'll give you one example of a collaboration that I've participated in. There are two areas of, there are many areas of low hanging fruit for business cooperation. One is climate. So I've been working with an American company that has an interesting storage technology. It's never been built on a commercial scale. We brought a Chinese port, partnered in to invest in the US company. They also bought an exclusive license and now They've spent over $100 million building this gravity based storage solution in the renewable in for the new renewable business in Rudong, China. So it's a, it's a great example of an area where there's less of a fewer barriers to collaboration climate, where US technology and know how and intellectual property is being implemented by Chinese that happen to be pretty good at building stuff and doing it at scale. And so I'm not as discouraged, I think as many of you are, that there can be no more business done there because whether it's climate, food security, aging, there are so many areas, health related things where, where there are collaborations, there need to be more collaborations and those walls need to be broken down.

[A]

Collaboration is right. Is that, correct me if I'm wrong. The Bushes. This is the same family that when Deng Xiaoping slaughtered 10,000 people and freedom fighters and students, art students, building the Goddess of Liberty in Tiananmen Square, he sent over his general head of the National Security Council to say, hey, look, we just got to figure things out. You got to tone this down and we'll get you into the World Trade Organization, we'll get you into Most Favored Nation. Is that the same family, Natalie?

[D]

Well, I'll also raise you this. You got Richard Nixon's grandson also there at the event, speaking, giving not just a keynote address, but also participating in a panel discussion. So I guess there's like a genetic prerequisite for selling the United States out to China to speak at this forum. And of course the Carter center had multiple representatives there. We also had people who were formerly working at State Department, working on the sort of China desk. Also people who used to be at the National Security Council and even the CIA working on China matters. I would probably tell the DOJ to get on that one because something tells me there are probably a lot of documents ending up there in the hands of China that shouldn't be. Historically, that's always been their playbook, right? Sort of co opting these Western intelligence officers into giving them whatever they so seek. But why, I think, Steve, this story is so emblematic of sort of this H200 chip decision. People like David Sacks, right? All these people who think they're such intellectuals, the smartest people in the room, I guess it's a pretty small room. But those people are going to be responsible for ensuring that. What I think is the lie of the Thucydides trap, which is this sort of lack of agency that the United States has in terms of being overtaken by China, by the rise of China. They are solidifying that fate by giving China these chips. It's like refueling our enemy's jet engines mid war. I was looking at historical examples of where people have ever given their enemies that they are in active combat against such a influential and impactful device, technology, weapon, take your pick. There's absolutely no example of it because it is just unprecedented. And, and when you look not just at conjecture, but if you look at Chinese law, their industrial plans, their military strategy, they are openly admitting not just that AI, but more importantly that the build up, the actual kind of making these chips domestically, that's one of the key tenets of what they are trying to do from a military strategy standpoint. And it is not just, I mean, you can't plead ignorance. It is intentionally, I mean, nefarious to be giving the Chinese Communist Party access to these technologies when they're absolutely nowhere near these capabilities. They're clear leapfrog technologies that can allow them to then basically surpass the United States. And it's just so David Sachs and these types can make a quick buck.

I've covered the China issue for a very long time, as you know, on this show, and it brings me a lot of sadness to see the Trump administration doing this.

[A]

I want to go back to something you say, let's not bury the lead. It's about the Thucydides trap and kind of the architecture of how our elites look at this. This is the famous discussion Graham Allison and Henry Kissinger had about the rising, you know, Athens and Sparta, the Peloponnesian War, the, the rising power and the declining power. And Graham Allison one time came over to the, came over the Breitbart Embassy that sits atop the war room. Had lunch and we went through it. And he had a book at the time, Destined for War I think was the title of it. He put the Cities Trap theory was in there. And I asked him, I said, is there any example where on the way down that the dominant power, the elites, made more money on the way up? And I think this example today is perfect. I think it. What you mean by we don't have agency is that you actually let Jensen Huang and these guys talk you into and David Sacks talk, you know, allow the country to basically arm if we're concerned about artificial intelligence and if we're concerned about a Sputnik like moment, an inflection point, like we were against the Soviets. And if you're worried about that, we're in this race and we have to turn over everything, including our weapons labs and our national labs to the oligarchs so they can have it just rent free to do what they want. And it's because of this. Then why do you do anything to assist our enemies? You crush them. You shut it down. No kids in college, no people over here being trained, no access to equity capital markets, no access to debt, no financial markets, no help, no assistance, no logistics. And certainly ever since COVID the great pandemic, millions of Americans have started buying property, preparedness supplies, especially emergency food. And that's a very good thing. But there's a big mistake most people make with their emergency food supply. They don't have any way to cook it in a real emergency when the power is out or the grid is down. That's why our friends at my Patriot Supply created their Black Friday survival special. It comes with a 4 week food supply plus $150 worth of free gifts, including everything you need to prepare your emergency meals, like a cook stove, fuel and fire starters, plus a water purifier, bug out bag, and much more. It's the complete survival kit your family needs to ride out natural disasters, civil unrest, or anything worse. Also, it makes a great Christmas gift, but it's only available through Black Friday. So head to my patron supply chain,.combannon to check out everything that's included. With all the uncertainty in the world right now, we simply can't afford to be unprepared. So go to my patronsupply.com Bannon and get prepared and get prepared today. That's my patriotsupply.com Bannon. Okay, let's be honest. You never thought it would get this far. Maybe you missed the last IRS deadline or you haven't filed taxes in a While let me be clear, the IRS is cracking down harder than ever and this ain't gonna go away anytime soon. That's why you need Tax Network usa. They don't just know the irs. They have a preferred direct line to the irs. They know which agents to deal with and which to avoid. Their expert negotiators have one goal. Settle your tax problems quickly and in your favor. Their team has helped clear over $1 billion in tax debt. Whether you owe 10,000 or 10 million, even if your books are a mess or you haven't filed in years, Tax Network USA can help. But don't wait. This won't fix itself. Call Tax Network USA right now. It's free. Talk to a strategist. And finally, put this behind you. Call 1-800-958-1000. That's 1-800-958-10000 or visit tnusa.com bannon make sure you tell them, Bannon. You'll get a free evaluation. That's 1-800-958-1000. Do not let letters from the IRS or your failure to file work on your nerves anymore. Take action, action, action. And do it today. War Room. Here's your host. Step.

Natalie. We talk about agency a lot. One of the reasons for this show is a platform for the grassroots leaders of the MAGA movement is people using their agency to make a difference, to change the arc of history. What do you mean about that? In regards to the selling of chips, advanced chips to the Chinese Communist Party about, about the country doesn't have its agency. What do you mean?

[D]

Well, I think the Thucydides paradigm is uniquely applicable here. I think, as you would say, you would maybe call it the law of thermodynamics when we call it the law of physics. Right? What goes up must come down. But there's this sort of, I think, predetermined belief or idea that China is the rising power and therefore it will rise and it will overtake the United States. And I'm not sitting here like other China hands for decades, you know, who've been warning, saying China's going to collapse, China is going to collapse, though their economics reality right now doesn't look too strong. I'm not negating the obviously transition in the economy that they have, but it doesn't necessarily imply that they are going to overtake the United States. But I think that that narrative, which make no mistake, that the Chinese love the Thucydides trap concept, right? That's why they mainstreamed it because it's Sort of, I think the American foil to what is the number one piece of propaganda that you hear come from Beijing, which is the idea that, that China's economy is just going to rip and roar and overtake the United States and there's nothing we can do about it. And I think American elites have really internalized that, not just for one, because they view them, obviously it's the market access, wanting to expand and do business over there, but it also sort of, I think, absolves them of the moral culpability of partnering with, like you said, not just an existential threat to the United States, but look at the human rights abuses. Look at their whole track record on anything that we at least pretend or purport to value here in the United States. So it's only through that mindset, right, if you assume that China is going to overtake the United States, that you could justify giving them these chips and you sort of see that trend line, right, in the ideology as to why we have to give it to them, because otherwise, what, they're just going to continue to dominate us in a field where they actually, historically will not. Even if you look at exactly where these H2 hundreds are in comparison to where they are, obviously the very, very heavy restrictions, blacklists, where whatever we've put a lot of their chips on, from Huawei to smic, take your pick, giving them these chips really speeds up that timetable by orders of magnitude that otherwise wouldn't be accomplished. So I think that at the end of the day, in the same way you see that trend line in the H1B debate, the idea that you are betting against America, you are needing foreign talent, right? The idea that just America being the number one country is not enough. We have to somehow, I don't know, import a bunch of foreigners, or in this case, we have to export a bunch of technology to foreigners. It's this really backwards calculation that I just don't really quite know, know how you square it. And Steve, the key point here is that this was supposed to happen in the dead of night, right? This was supposed. They're supposed to, you know, pull, pull the rug, the wool over your eyes. And this was supposed to just go through, whether it's the AI stuff or the chip stuff. And thank God for the show for Joe Allen, people who raised awareness. But I asked Joe, when I was hosting, I was like, this was supposed to just be rolled out and sort of quietly tucked in whether it was the NDAA done as its own thing through Congress. Now it's the executive Order, but it's the same thing. If this is such a good idea, then pitch it to the American people. But they're not. They're only now trying to make a, you know, really dumb, asinine pitch to the American people that it's what, somehow good for the United States economy to maintain a competitive edge with China by giving away our only competitive edge because they've been outed by shows like this, by you. So it's. It's. It's so dumb. I wish we had a better argument to engage with. I'd encourage them to read the Thucydides Trap and then maybe read some, I don't know, founding documents, some revolutionary spirit, and understand that nothing is predetermined or predestined. Certainly not the Chinese Communist Party overtaking the United States.

[A]

I realized when Nixon did the geopolitical move, it was because we're after the evil empire, at least the beginning stages of it. But it's interesting that both Nixon, the two Nepos, you know, Neil Bush, and you had Nixon's what, Grandson? Both there. I want to remind people and Natalie, we got to go back down memory lane on this. I think this was late 2019, or I think it was early 2020, the first month, January, when we shifted the one hour of war room impeachment to war room pandemic. And of course, Raheem. And, you know, Raheem stuck around. Jason Miller said, I don't know. You guys have lost your mind. Her impeachment's on fire. What are you doing? But I believe you had been an end to. People don't know this. Natalie's worked with us forever. You were an intern first for Raheem over at National Pulse, and then you segued over. Your memory serves me correctly. Your very first story, the very first scoop you ever broke, was about the Bush this. This foundation. And they literally lost their minds, did they not?

[D]

They are the gift that keeps on giving. You know, we're always about exposing the people who are traitorous sellouts to this country. They were busy shipping masks. Not that we like masks here in the war room, but to China, back when we didn't know what was going on with COVID and we thought maybe we might need these masks instead of giving them to people in Texas who may have ostensibly needed them. Like I said, it was the early days. Don't worry, I'm not pro mask. But they sent me the equivalent of like, an email, cease and desist, saying, change the article. This is not true. People are calling us pulling their donations. They're really upset. And I was 19 at the time, maybe 18, I don't know. And I was like, no, it's true. Fact check me.

[A]

Intern in high school, just graduated. Natalie, where do people go to get all your stuff on substack and all your content? Where are your coordinates?

[D]

Thank you, Steve. Natalie G. Winters on all platforms. And it's nataliegwinters.substack.com you can read the piece, watch the clip and share it and mock the Bushes, because why not?

[A]

Thank you, ma'. Am. Appreciate you. Thank you, Senator Mike Lee. In fact, real America's voice has been good enough. I think we're below the last break and go all the way to the end of the show. Senator Lee's going to join us here momentarily, I think by phone. Very important endeavor over at the Supreme Court today that could set a new direction, particularly about presidential power. I want to go back to this and say about artificial intelligence, there is a. And we're not, although we're not accelerationist, we understand the great potential of artificial intelligence.

[C]

It does.

[A]

It has incredible potential, but it also has incredible downside. The only thing people are talking about here are some sensible controls. And people are not arguing that the state should have all the power here. But absent any federal regulations at all. Like I said, there's more regulations on Capitol Hill right now to open a nail salon or to braid hair than there is in the most, one of the most dangerous technologies that mankind's ever had. And you've got to be very careful about this technology. This is not coming from me. This is coming from the top experts in the field. And so you have to have a modicum of some, at least regulatory apparatus like we had for the Atomic Energy Commission and other regulatory apparatuses that we have. And President Trump is the leader in the deconstruction, the administrative state and taking on the deep state. But he still keeps a regulatory apparatus. Look at this. This basically investment banking gunfight you've got going on right now for Warner Brothers now have Paramount jumping in here in a hostile takeover. You have Netflix trying to, trying to make an offer people think could be, you know, could, could drive up your streaming bill. All those have to be worked out. The FTC and the main justice on antitrust are two of the groups that get in there. You have some sort of regulatory apparatus. What the tech oligarchs have done, and I'm not so sure they fully inform President Trump twice, not once, but twice on two must pass public. Just let me know when Senator Lee's up so we can get into the, we get into this cold open. Not once but twice in the last couple of months, within 100 days of each other, they tried to put in and to must pass legislation. The first being the reconciliation or the big beautiful bill. The second being the ndaa, the National Defense Authorization act, which is a must pass piece of legislation that keys that tees up the spending of the appropriations bill for the Defense Department and the spending of the defense budget for our national security. Twice they tried to put in, you know, this slip in the AI amnesty which basically overruled any state regulations whatsoever in the absence of any federal regulations. And a number of people on both sides say out. You talk about, you talk about working together. You have people that are Democrats and many Republicans are sitting there going, hang over a second. We don't have any control of, for our children, oversight for our children, our communities, our creators, conservatives to be blacked out, all of it. And that's just the start. We also don't really know where these people are going. A lot of this is funded by the federal government. More importantly, the financing for data centers and for energy and ultimately water will be trillions of dollars. The chief financial officer of OpenAI admitted that she said at the time, this is just weeks ago and this was verified by Zero Hedge that the overall looks like build out right now the capital budget as it exists today is going to be I think something to 5 to 6 trillion dollars. And 4 trillion of that may be put up by debt and lending and private lending markets, private capital markets, private equity, public equity. But at least a trillion, even on their first cut was going to have to be somehow going to be involved in some sort of government finance or guarantees. In fact, the cfo, when she was kind of outed and read the riot act by people over at OpenAI and other accelerationists in artificial intelligence, said, why did you say that? Why did you say the quiet part loud? She said it was at least a trillion dollars. 48 hours later, I went to a briefing for some of the smartest people in the world on this very topic. And I was told point blank, Steve, we really think, as we calculate, we think the number is closer to 9 or $10 trillion for the build out of this. And that would mean, and I said, well gosh, that would mean that you would actually have more involvement by equity and debt. Capital market said, no, no, no, no, no. That other 4 or 5 trillion is probably going to have to come with some sort of government guarantees. So you've got an active big part of this. The whole EO assigned the other day on the national labs and the weapons labs. We have no earthy idea about what the costs associated with that and who's going to pay that. Should it just be the taxpayers? We're going to have to get to a very tough conversation. It's going to be tough about the equity ownership of those companies and who actually owns the equity or who owns all the equity should just go to management and the existing investors. Or if this is going to involve tremendous access or full access to our government labs and national labs, which you pay for the taxpayers. And if it's going to take trillions of dollars of debt, that's going to have to have some sort of guarantee or maybe direct lending by the government, who knows, because it hasn't been discussed. Shouldn't the American citizen get his beak wet? Shouldn't the American citizen just get a piece of the action? Not the government. I'm talking about the American citizens themselves. If this is going to be a trillion dollar land grab and all this value is being created, this is not socialism. This is true capitalism. One of the problems in our system today is that it's almost like state capitalism. Right now you have a handful of companies that are the frontier labs that are driving this. They seem to be getting most of the government benefit and most of the control of the labs. And potentially I guess these government guarantees they're talking about now, that was waived off initially, but hey, they're going to start coming back and say we'll look to build these, to create these jobs. You're going to have to do this. Doesn't the American people, shouldn't the American people participate in this? If this is a whole of government approach, if this is a whole of society approach, shouldn't society take advantage of that? Shouldn't society have a piece of the action? More on this tomorrow. I want to know. Senator Mike Lee is with us. We have a cold open for Senator Lee. An incredibly important day at the Supreme Court in. And anytime we're talking about the Constitution, we want Senator Mike Lee of Utah to help us break it down. Let's take a cold open for certainly. And we're going to go right to him.

[G]

Supreme Court is considering even more power for the executive, in this case President Trump. During oral arguments today, the administration tried to convince the justices that the President has the ultimate authority to fire anyone he wants in the executive branch, including members of what are considered independent federal agencies like the Federal Trade Commission, specifically in this case. Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, a Democratic member of the FTC who the President fired back in March because he said she did not align with his agenda. The conservatives on the court appeared open to siding with the President, but Justice Sonia Sotomayor did not. Here she is laying out her core concern with the case.

[A]

Isn't it problematic, given what we know about the founders vision, that what this is going to amount to at the end of the day is putting not only all executive power in the President, but an incredible amount of legislative slash rulemaking power and judging in the President's hands.

[G]

Is it still a smart contract idea for all of us individuals to base our judicial theory, our legal theory, based on a bunch of guys 250 years ago guessing at what might be a good system of government?

[H]

I think it is and I think this President proves it better than anyone else ever could. The entire theory of the separation of powers was if you break up power both between the various branches and between the federal and the state governments, then our liberties are protected. And what we have done over the last 250 years is ignore that lesson and give more and more power to the federal government and then more and more power to the executive branch of the federal government. Now we have one person with way too much power over all of our lives. And I actually hope that what we learn from this is Congress, as Lisa notes, could set these rules itself for clean air and clean water. And hey, what about 50 state governments? They can do some of this stuff.

[A]

Stuff too.

[H]

We don't have to put all of our eggs in one basket.

[G]

They know that, at least according to Gallup, their sort of acceptance and approval rating among the public is as low as it's ever been since Gallup has been asking the questions. And yet they seem to want to do everything in the vein of immunity and helping Donald Trump with his political project, which is to consolidate power.

[I]

So the problem, there's a legal aspect and there's the real consequence that, that Claire talked about. Legally. This is what's so just unbelievable about what they're doing. Congress has created these agencies that the executive then oversees and Congress in creating them, can, has put in very few restrictions. They have reporting requirements. You can't fire people without a reason. That's not a big deal. You can still fire people. You have to actually have good cause. So Congress is spending and has the power to spend and they can create these agencies and they have conditions. And now you have the Supreme Court.

[A]

Mike. Mike Lee, the author of Saving 9 you. Every time we have a constitutional Issue, sir, we turn to you. You're phoning in today what happened at the Supreme Court. What are the stakes here, sir?

[E]

Look, the stakes are high, Steve. In this case we're dealing with the President's ability to be the President, to act as the President. The fundamental Premise of Article 2 of the Constitution is that all the executive power within the US Government is vested in the President. The President of the United States. A single individual is the Executive branch. And what that means is that he can undertake what an executive does for the entire US Government and should be able to fire anyone, any employee of the Executive branch, any officer certainly of the Executive branch, save only the Vice President, because the Vice President is also elected on the same ticket as the President. So that person can't be fired midterm, but everyone else should be able to. And certainly any officer wielding policy authority, making decisions, enforcing the laws, as is the prerogative of the Executive Branch. Those people should always be removable by the President for any reason or no reason at all. We've got a nearly 100 year old precedent, a case called Humphrey's Executor, which concludes that it's okay to have a special carve out for.

De facto fourth branch of government within the Executive branch that's untouchable by the President, that is lawless. It's led to a long train of abuses and it's a big problem. And I think that by the end of this term the Supreme Court is very likely to undo Humphrey's Executor.

[A]

You're saying this is the President going after the administrative state and deconstructing the administrative state. We already had the case on the Chevron, I guess, exemption, but this is actually on the Article 2 argument where he can actually go in and let people go. And what this really gets down to, correct me if I'm wrong, is Russ Vote as his own B director, talking about rifts, talking about not just taking out the head of the FTC or some of these people that are so controversial at the top in these Alphabet agencies, but this is really the President actually being the Executive and determining that, hey, I'm going to get rid of these people over usa, usaid. What is the scale of what we're talking about?

[E]

Yeah, good question, Steve. This certainly relates to all people within the Executive branch. I think an opinion could easily go that far. This case doesn't necessarily require it to go that far because this case deal specifically with members of the Federal Trade Commission. President Trump fired Commissioner Slaughter earlier this year, not for cause, as the statute contemplates. The statute contemplates that once somebody has been nominated by a president, confirmed by the Senate, that they serve for a term of years, and until that term is up, they can be removed basically only if they commit a crime or something like that, or some kind of wrongdoing or complete malfeasance in office. But my point is that when the President designates officers of the US Government, that should go along with the same mindset that allows the President to fire anyone of those individuals for any reason or no reason at all. In other words, they serve at the pleasure of the President. That's how it ought to work, certainly with an officer as important, as powerful as a federal trade commissioner.

[A]

You've been a student of Washington's court explaining it to us. Do you see? I think we've won 21 of 23 or 22 of 24 at the Supreme Court. And it seems like the Roberts Court is going out of its way to say we're not the Warren Court, we're not going to be interventionists, and that they continue to say in some of their opinions, these are political issues and it should be settled politically. Do you still see the trend line on that, sir?

[E]

I do. I do. Look, in my lifetime, we have not seen a Supreme Court that is more dedicated to the rule of law, that's more dedicated to the idea that the law has meaning. Its meaning is established based on the words and how they were used, how they were understood by the public at the time of their enactment. And answering a legal question, deciding a legal dispute necessarily, is going to turn on what those words mean and how they were understood by the public at the time they became law and that sort of thing. While it may sound obvious to us today, it has not always been obvious. And in our lifetime, we've had a lot of judges who haven't gone in that direction. This court, I believe, is going to continue as it has so far, to make decisions based on what the law actually says, rather than based on some weird theory of social justice or what, what professors at this or that Ivy League institution are telling them to rule as the law? They're interested in what the law says, not what they wish it said.

[A]

Senator Lee, where do we get your book which teaches about the Supreme Court? Saving nine. And where do we go for your coordinates on social media to keep up with all this?

[E]

Yeah, Saving Nine can be found on Amazon or pretty much anywhere books are sold. And if you want to follow my commentary, my personal commentary on things, you can go To X at basemikelee at basement. That's where I provide a lot of this commentary. I recorded a brief video today shortly after leaving the Supreme Court and after watching these arguments giving my reaction to.

[A]

That case, we're going to push that out. The video was great. Senator Lee, you're quite based. Thank you very much for joining us, sir. Appreciate you.

[E]

Thanks so much. Steve. Good to be with you.

[A]

Huge day at the, at the Supreme Court today. So at 6 o' clock I've got the head of afd alternative Deutschland talking about, guess what, losing the country to Islam in the fight. They're trying to shut their political party down because they're fighting it. Also Raymond Ibrahim, the author of Two Swords of Christ about the military orders and all the wars we fought against Islam and the courage of the Christians. Mike Lindell, we got three minutes. Give me a minute on what you're doing in Minneapolis, sir, to fight the good fight because you've got a Muslim attorney general who's trying to shut down a Christian network that focuses on saving people from drugs, alcohol and other abuse, sir.

[C]

Absolutely. And we worked on that all afternoon. Head to head with Keith Ellison. Remember everybody, he's trying to shut down my online platform to help addicts get off of their addictions and get to Jesus Christ. And this is, he's doing right middle, right in the middle of all the fraud that I believe he's part of the COVID up and, and who knows how much money he ended up with all the fraud that's come out of Minnesota for his campaigns. And so we spent the afternoon. Steve, we've got a very, we're kind of going on the offense here. You're gonna, you're gonna be hearing a lot about it, but we're not gonna let this happen. We're not gonna let him stop the Lindell Recovery Network from, from helping people. That's all it is a big help help center to help addicts. And, and this is back in the day, you know, when I came out of addiction it was all about helping treatment centers and people in Minneapolis, Teen Challenge, the Salvation Armies and the people in the streets. So we're not going to stop Steve. We're on the offense. We're always on the offense. And I want to quick tell you how we get on the offense is keep my pillow supported. You guys, you guys have been great and we've won. We're still standing here at my pillow and we, we're giving you the best specials in history on our five flagship products. This is our Christmas Special exclusive for the War room posse. Free shipping on your entire order. Starting with the My towels that came in all the colors. Get all the colors. They're half price. 39.98, you have the premium. My pillows, you save over 50%. The Giza dream sheets as low as 29.9. 98. He got the slippers. 39.90. You guys get all your Christmas gifts. Free shipping on your entire order. Go to mypillow.com forward/war room. You're gonna see the crosses. The best Christmas gifts ever made in the USA. You got all the five products and you guys, right now we have those five pack of Bible pillows for 29.98. You get five Christmas gifts for. Here they are right here, you guys. Five, five of them. You're getting five of these pillows for 29.98. Free shipping on your entire order. Call 800-873-1062. I am going downstairs. I enjoyed taking some of your calls today. Reach out to my reps. Tell them you tell them you love, love our products and we love you. And free shipping. Promo code, War room.

[A]

We'll see you down on the phones, Mike. Let's dial them up right now. Get Mike Lindell on the line. MyPillow.com promo code, war most powerful promo code in the business. Stick around. Next hour, go from Berlin. An alternative from Deutschland to the first Crusade in the taking of Jerusalem. All next in the War Room.

When you're buried in credit card and loan debt, it's only human nature to put it off and say, hey, I'll deal with this later if that's you. Here's a hidden fact the debt strategy experts at Done With Debt shared with me. They discovered a little known strategy that works in your favor to dramatically reduce or even erase your debt altogether. They aggressively engage everyone you owe money to in September and here's why. They know which lenders and credit card companies are doing year end accounting and need to cut deals. They even know which ones have you're in audits and need to get your debt off the books quickly. That means you need to get started with Done With Debt now. Done With Debt accomplishes this without bankruptcy or new loans. In fact, most clients end up with more money in their pocket the first month. Get started now while you still have time. Go to donewithdebt.com and talk with one of their specialists for free. Donewithdebt.com donewithdet.com Take advantage of this. These people are aggressive, they're smart and they're tough. You want them on your side. Donewithdet. Com.