Details Of Steve Bannon's "Closed To The Press" China Speech Leak

Earlier this morning former White House Strategist Steve Bannon spoke at the CLSA investor forum in Hong Kong.  While the event was originally intended to be open to the press via a live stream, CLSA officials later closed the interview to outsiders...presumably Bannon's flare doesn't quite fit with China's desire to control media narratives. That said, luckily one local NEAsia correspondent, Wei Du, was kind enough to live tweet portions of Bannon's speech for our reading pleasure.

Ironically, what was billed to be an "anti-China" speech turned out to be anything but that with Bannon repeatedly praising U.S.-China relations and saying "there isn't a world leader he (Trump) respects more than the President of China."  Bannon went on to say that Trump will visit China in November and that the downside of an "economic war" with China is so huge that it has to be worked out.


On domestic issues, Bannon thinks a tax reform deal is pretty unlikely this year and that Paul Ryan's border tax adjustment has "ZERO chance of passing."  Of course, we can only assume that no tax deal in 2017 is a positive for stocks because it must mean that more time will allow for an even greater tax bill in 2018. 


That said, Bannon would apparently prefer that Trump avoid "working with dems."



On "America First," Bannon said there is a "big misunderstanding" that the term implies isolationism when it was really intended to mean that the Trump administration will pursue bilateral deals as opposed large, multi-nation accords where American sovereignty is sacrificed.


On future plans, Bannon said that he left the White House because Trump needed a "wing man" on the outside and that he has plans to expand Breitbart News internationally. 


Finally, apparently Bannon is not a 'yuge' fan of Google and/or Facebook...


malek Bay of Pigs Tue, 09/12/2017 - 13:30 Permalink

Now that's great discussion culture, BoP
Because he said one thing you totally disagree with, everything else he says on completely different topics is automatically false as well!

And the best of all is you 9/11-truthers are nitpicking about the details how and why the Reichstag burnt down, while ignoring the bigger picture how you were stripped of many of the most fundamental freedoms and rights in the aftermath.

Divide et Impera!

And as this is fight club: Fuck you narrow-minded ignorant asshole!

In reply to by Bay of Pigs

Bay of Pigs malek Tue, 09/12/2017 - 13:38 Permalink

Nit picking? That's pretty rich considering the event changed the country forever with very negative consequences for all of us here and around the world.

Shallow, ignorant and insane covers what he thinks about the subject. Maybe go read the thread instead of talking out of your ass?

In reply to by malek

thatthingcanfly Bay of Pigs Tue, 09/12/2017 - 12:54 Permalink

You have nothing useful to add to any thread on which you post.I actually DO have a technical degree (Mechanical Engineering) and was a Navy pilot in the past; so I kinda know what I'm talking about when I tell you that the official story about how the buildings were knocked down on 911 is absolutely believable, and the conspiracy theories about cruise missiles and controlled demolitions are absolutely ridiculous.  Yet when I try to talk some intelligence into you 911 Truther nut-jobs, you have the audacity to call me an "unenlightened half wit?" Now THAT is rich.

In reply to by Bay of Pigs

thatthingcanfly sleigher Tue, 09/12/2017 - 13:14 Permalink

Building 7 was not wired for demolition at all.WTC 7 was badly damaged by the fall of the North Tower. One of its two interior support columns was virtually taken out. Then, fires further damaged and weakened the support structure. When it began to collapse on the side of the weakened support column, the lateral strains on the remaining support beams (strains the building was not designed to withstand) pulled the building apart, and it collapsed fairly quickly once the initial cascade began. The only remarkable thing is that it took so long for the building to begin its collapse.The guy who said, "Pull it," was referring to "pulling out" the emergency responders, firefighters and the like, once it became apparent there was no saving the building, and that protecting the lives of those responders was the highest priority.This stuff was covered well over a decade ago.…

In reply to by sleigher

thatthingcanfly sleigher Tue, 09/12/2017 - 14:02 Permalink

I don't have to watch the video again.When people are involved in dynamic crisis situations, they sometime misspeak, or use phrases that don't sound quite right to get an urgent and important point across. I think the phrase "Pull it," sounds awkward, but understand completely that in the heat of that moment, the man probably didn't have the wherwithal to say, "Cease all firefighting and response activity and withdraw all personnel from the building." Instead, he said "Pull it!" I would have said, "Get them the fuck out!" But, hey: potayto, potahto.You 911 Truthers don't know what you're talking about.

In reply to by sleigher

thatthingcanfly Tue, 09/12/2017 - 18:07 Permalink

This is classic ad hominem.You assume 1) I have not dug as deep as you, 2) I've limited my conclusion to one source, 3) related to 1, I've not invested the time to draw an informed conclusion, and 4) there's some information out there that I've not seen, that, when I do see it, will definitely make me perform a volte face and feel like a fool afterwords.That's a lot of assuming.The 911 conspiracy garbage is as absurd as the junk about how the Apollo moon landings were faked. But the 911 conspiracy theories are actually evil, as they disguise from the fanatics who subscribe the real enemy of Western Civ.    

In reply to by

FixItAgainTony thatthingcanfly Tue, 09/12/2017 - 23:29 Permalink

You have got to admit, TTCF, eastern seaboard intercept and Pentagon air-defenses in particular, didn't seem to be providing much taxpayer value that day. It would have been proper if someone in the DC head-shed was held accountable for not protecting the nation they were sworn to serve. Or "does the order still stand"?

But except for Iraqis providing such easy targets and US citizens getting PATRIOT BOHICA for daring trusting beyond their state's Air National Guard units, there was no accountability for the colossal failure to protect the nation. With the massive loss of life for AWOL Dept. of Defense, that was UCMJ actionable no matter how those towers went down. To me, that was the worse conspiracy.

Hell, Pearl Harbor KIAs were less at 2,403 and the Japs didn't zig-zag around incommunicado for hours in violation of FAA protocols for fighter jet escorts.

In reply to by thatthingcanfly

XCantrekker thatthingcanfly Tue, 09/12/2017 - 15:28 Permalink

You must have been sick or asleep during the class on Newton's Laws of Motion or you are just stupid. A building cannot come down at near free fall speeds unless all of the underlying supports on all of the floors have been taken out simultaneously. The underlying support structure will push back and resist the force on top of it and slow down the speed of any falling material.

In reply to by thatthingcanfly

XCantrekker XCantrekker Tue, 09/12/2017 - 15:43 Permalink

The debunked magazine article in "Popular Mechanics has tried to posit the theory of lethal structural damage caused by the falling debris of the North Tower as reason for Building 7's collapse. But no existing public photographs, nor videos, show anything near their claim that 1/3 of Building 7's façade was gouged out. Furthermore, even if structural damage was significant, this would not account for Building 7's eventual symmetrical, box-like collapse, where all four corners, and all four facades of the building fell simultaneously straight to the ground.”  from 911 Hard Facts

In reply to by XCantrekker

thatthingcanfly XCantrekker Tue, 09/12/2017 - 18:13 Permalink

The PM article has not been debunked.Claiming that "no existing public photographs, nor videos, show anything near their claim that 1/3 of Building 7's façade was gouged out," does not refute the eye witness testimony that this did happen. I'd be surprised if there were any photos or videos available at all on that side of the building, given what was going on at the time. Did you take any? 

In reply to by XCantrekker

lew1024 Tue, 09/12/2017 - 17:04 Permalink Jones' paper was one of 4 such papers in journals of physics and chemistry, I know 2 were peer-reviewed articlesThe Europhysics News is a peer-reviewed journal also. Architects and Engieers for 9-11 Truth have been trying to get a physicist to debate them, but the last one dumb enough was nearly 15 years ago.There are no refutations of the FACT of the 9-11 collapses being explosive decustructions of the building in exact synchrony with very large airplanes crashing into the buildings.Right, those evil Muslim terrorists did all that. After which has followed 16 years of war.If peace is allowed, they will hang.  Peace will not be allowed if they have to foment internal rebellion to remain in control.Remember, the people promoting violence are the bad guys. It defines the bad guys.  There is no way to be promoting violence if you are a good guy. Violence does not produce good, never has. So no violence, but be fully prepared to defend yourselves.So long as we are all clear on that point, we will come though this episode of history OK.But we sure as hell can't depend on our institutions, they are corrupted to the point that dealing with the consequences of the facts of 9-11 and the massive corruption it represents it is now a major load on the sane parts of government.That is the core of the craziness. When the jetstream crosses the equator for the first time in weather history, we expect different weather patterns to follow. When a criminal elite are close to seizing control of the world via control of international criminal crings that have been taught how to infiltrate governments, expect some political craziness. 

In reply to by

khnum Tue, 09/12/2017 - 12:39 Permalink

Your treasury just threatened China of sanctions if they dont tow the line on North Korea,...reminds me of that scene in Blazing Saddles,'the next man to make a move the nigger gets it'.

Erek thatthingcanfly Tue, 09/12/2017 - 12:46 Permalink

/* Style Definitions */
{mso-style-name:"Normale Tabelle";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
"Toe the line" is often misspelled "tow the line", substituting a familiar verb "tow" for the homophonic but unfamiliar verbal use of "toe." "Tow" does not accord with any of the proposed etymologies, so "tow the line" is a linguistic eggcorn. 

In reply to by thatthingcanfly