Steve Bannon and Jack Posobiec discussed the evolving political landscape, focusing on President Trump’s strategic approach to maneuver warfare. Bannon emphasized how the Trump administration’s rapid and aggressive political tactics, such as targeting entities like USAID and dismantling the institutional framework that perpetuates establishment power, are central to reclaiming control from those who do not prioritize patriotism. They criticized the current political elite, noting their lack of resilience and inability to adapt to the new normal of fast-paced, disruptive politics.
Bannon also highlighted the corrupt practices within the U.S. military-industrial complex, pointing to wasteful spending on defense projects like the F-35 and the LCS program. He argued that these failures represent a broader issue of inefficiency within the government, driven by misplaced priorities like diversity quotas instead of excellence.
The conversation turned to the importance of perseverance, with Bannon stressing that the key to defeating the opposition lies in maintaining momentum and consistently challenging the status quo. Posobiec underscored the need to treat the political opposition as hostile, reflecting a hostile government takeover by those who love the country. They concluded by calling for relentless action to reform and reclaim American institutions.
In a recent discussion between Steve Bannon and Natalie Winters, the conversation focused heavily on the role of Tom Homan, the former acting director of ICE, in the ongoing immigration crisis and efforts to manage illegal immigration. Homan’s strategy is central to Trump’s plans to curb illegal immigration, with a particular focus on deportations.
Winters criticized the resistance from groups like the ACLU, claiming their efforts to sabotage ICE raids are detrimental to the government’s mission. “These left-wing groups, particularly the ACLU, are actively working to undermine ICE’s ability to do their job,” Bannon stated, highlighting their campaigns that encourage immigrants, including criminals, to avoid cooperating with authorities.
Winters shared insights on Homan’s challenges in handling raids and deportations, mentioning that the White House is pushing for larger-scale actions. “They’re facing logistical issues with detention facilities and lack of resources,” Winters explained, pointing out that Homan is under pressure to meet more considerable deportation expectations. The White House is seeking “bigger numbers, faster” to ramp up enforcement significantly.
Homan’s efforts are critical to Trump’s immigration policies, but as Bannon noted, resistance from both the media and political circles remains a significant obstacle. Despite these challenges, Homan’s leadership continues to be a key component of the administration’s approach to border security.
In a candid discussion on WarRoom, Harvard Law student Kimo Gandall, a third-year student (3L), shared insights into his experiences at the prestigious institution. He expressed his belief that Harvard’s rigorous “paper chase” system, akin to military boot camp, was designed to toughen students and build them back up. Gandall, openly conservative and a supporter of MAGA principles, emphasized the importance of strong, explicit opinions, contrasting them with what he described as the “spiritually weak” left, which lacks direction and often turns to existentialism or pseudo-religious ideologies.
He also critiqued the growing influence of artificial intelligence, noting how companies controlling large language models, like OpenAI, are against natural law and actively censor conservative views. Gandall warned that transhumanism, as part of postmodern Western ideals, represents an attempt to “reconstruct God’s world,” driven by pride.
Addressing legal debates, Gandall reflected on the slow pace of the judicial process, attributing it to intellectual elitism and pride. He encouraged open, honest discourse despite ideological divides, suggesting that respectful conversations can change opinions. He also shared his views on social media and artificial intelligence, stating he posts regularly about the conservative movement and AI.
Part One:
In this discussion between Harvard Professor Amy Wax and Steve Bannon, Wax criticizes the current state of academia, particularly at elite institutions like Harvard, for neglecting its duty to preserve and pass on the foundational values of Western Civilization. She laments the shift in academic attitudes, where institutions once rooted in historical sacrifice and achievement are now being debased, with an increasing focus on identity politics, diversity, and the rejection of meritocracy.
Wax points out the hypocrisy of elites who advocate for equality while exempting themselves from its implications, creating a divide between them and ordinary people. She argues that universities have become strongholds for far-left ideologies, which often promote self-fashioning and the pursuit of equality of outcome, as exemplified by the rise of woke culture.
In her advice to President Trump, Wax suggests defunding these institutions, particularly those that violate civil rights laws, as a way to force them to refocus on Western Civilization and restore their integrity. Wax believes that cutting off federal funding would compel universities to prove their worth and adherence to the law.
In a discussion with Steve Bannon, Harvard law student Sam Delmar shared his experiences as a conservative at the prestigious institution, shedding light on the challenges of maintaining religious and political beliefs in an increasingly liberal academic environment. During his first week at Harvard Law, Delmar recalls how simply expressing his faith caused two-thirds of his classmates to avoid him. He describes the atmosphere as one where conservatives are marginalized, and even his devout practice of praying daily led to being labeled a "religious bigot.”
Despite these challenges, Delmar highlights a silver lining: forming a strong, tight-knit conservative community within the law school. He criticizes what he calls the "milk toast” conservatives—students who claim to support originalism but vote for figures like Kamala Harris, demonstrating a lack of absolute political conviction. Delmar notes the issue of careerism in law school, where many students prioritize their professional futures over ideological consistency, fearing the consequences of deviating from the left-wing norm. He argues that the conservative movement needs to exclude these opportunistic figures to maintain integrity.
Delmar also shares insights about his background, mentioning his time at Notre Dame, which has shifted from its Catholic roots toward progressive ideals. He believes that growing support for MAGA among younger generations signals a shift, even within elite institutions like Harvard.
In this conversation between Ambassador Carla Sands and Steve Bannon, they discuss several key issues, primarily focusing on America First policies, institutional reform, and national security. Sands emphasizes the need for a revolution that will change the nation’s approach to higher education funding, particularly targeting Ivy League institutions like Harvard and Penn that receive large amounts of federal money. She and Bannon agree that Title VI should be used to hold these universities accountable for how they manage these funds.
They also discuss the decision to shut down USAID, which Sands describes as a “piggy bank” for funding ideologies pushed by entities like the Clintons and NGOs. She supports the idea of redirecting resources to benefit American taxpayers and national interests, particularly in foreign policy and trade relations, where countries rejected the U.S. due to the imposition of foreign ideologies.
The conversation shifts to the excitement of political action under the current administration, with Sands describing the rapid pace of executive actions and orders. She also highlights the challenge posed by media resistance and the courts but expresses optimism about pushing forward with policies, emphasizing the importance of judges not obstructing the president’s agenda.
On the topic of Greenland and Arctic strategy, Sands shares her insights as a former U.S. Ambassador to Denmark, explaining the strategic significance of Greenland in relation to national security, particularly its proximity to Russia and its role in controlling vital sea lanes. Sands describes the tense geopolitical competition in the Arctic, with Russia militarizing the region and China seeking influence through its Polar Silk Road initiative. She notes the potential for a strategic relationship with Greenland, which is seeking independence from Denmark due to its financial struggles and lack of development. Sands reflects on her efforts to support Greenland’s development and its desire for help in mining and other industries, while rejecting Chinese influence.
The conversation concludes with Sands expressing her eagerness to continue serving under President Trump in any capacity, whether as an ambassador or special envoy, due to the excitement and significance of the current political moment. She also shares her social media handles for those interested in following her work.
© 2023 WarRoom
© 2023 WarRoom
