Are you familiar with FBI Special Agents Kyle Serpen?
I'm familiar with the name. Is that?
Yes, I'm familiar with the name, familiar with the name, familiar
with the name. Let's bring in Kyle Serafin.
He's the FBI whistleblower who helped expose government
censorship of our First Amendment rights.
Now, we only have this memo because a recently suspended FBI
agent called Kyle Serafin brought it to the public, and
we're grateful that he did. Kyle, thank you so much for
joining us tonight. He's the host of something that,
strangely is called the Kyle Serafish.
Kyle Serafi, I can't thank you enough for speaking out.
I knew you guys were out there, and I knew it was just a matter
of time. But you got a lot of guts put in
your face and your name today. So you're doing a service on
behalf of the American people. And from the bottom of my
cracked and broken heart sometimes, thank you very much.
Take a look behind the curtain with a real whistleblower and
American patriot. Prepare to embrace the
uncomfortable truth, because this program has no time for
comforting lies. Here is civil liberties
enthusiast, Second Amendment defender, and recovering FBI
agent Kyle Seraphin. Well, hello my friends, welcome
to the Kyle Seraphin show. Today is Thursday.
It is December the 5th. A good morning to all of you.
Good afternoon. For those who are listening on
the replay, want to welcome you and thank you for being part of
this program. We got some fun news from
Spotify yesterday, which I will show a little bit later, but got
a little wrap up on how the year's been going.
And it's not, it's not too bad over here.
We are in the small percentage of podcasts that they recognize
top 5% of all video podcasts. So thanks for sharing it, Thanks
for liking it. Thanks for being part of the
program. For those of you who are in the
live chat right now, I do appreciate it.
And if you're watching on X or if you're watching over on
Rumble, if you're watching on locals, good time to remind you
if you go to kyleseraphin.com, Kyle seraphin.com is how you get
to our local channel. You can sign up and you can be
part of our call in show, which will happen this evening where
you get to call in and tell me whatever interesting weird
things you have on your mind. We can talk about real topics.
We can talk about aliens, we can talk about whatever you like.
And there are no rules on the call in show.
It's just whatever you're into. So we look forward to talk to
you guys tonight. That happens at 8:00 Eastern
Time. Before we get to deeper the
Weeds, let's talk about what today's going to have.
We're going to talk guns, We're going to talk suppressors.
We're going to talk about boosters, Pistons and devices,
which you may or may not understand.
We're going to talk about, obviously, the assassination
that happened in New York and the manhunt that is ongoing.
What else we got. We're going to talk about some
shady drops going over on the mainstream media, talking about
maybe some diseases coming our way, some attempts to derail the
new Trump agenda. We're going to talk about
trannies. Why not?
We're going to talk about the case that is going on in the
Supreme Court that was argued yesterday regarding, quote UN
quote, transgender rights for children, which equals child
manipulation and mutilation. Really weird stuff.
Before we do anything deeper, let's say thanks to folks that
make sure that we can tell you what we want the way we want the
guys who sponsor our program. And we're going to do that right
now with our friends over at Patriot Mobile.
Thanks so much to them. Let's let's do this thing.
So if you follow me on any of the social media platforms,
you'll know that even though we talk politics and even though we
talk guns a little bit, mostly the thing that I care about is
talking about firearms and technologies and gear.
And I don't really like politics.
Like so many other people that were interested in one thing, we
have to talk politics because politics is the thing that's
going to come in and screw with our rights and screw with our
civil liberties. And yesterday was one of those
moments that only America can have if somebody was gunned down
in New York City. His name is Brian Thompson.
He was the CEO of United Healthcare.
And he was killed by an assassin wearing a hood and an expensive
backpack with a suppressed pistol on video.
And there's this just doesn't happen.
It's the equivalent of people getting killed with machine guns
that were legally purchased in America.
It just is not a common experience.
Everybody sort of thinks that the the National Firearms Act,
which was institute in 1934 and limited the ability of Americans
to get suppressors. Hold on a second.
This is a suppressor. I have 13 of them.
OK, so that's not that many for people who have tons of them,
but it's more than many of you. I've got 13 suppressors.
They are a pain in the butt to get.
They take the first ones. Took me 14 or 15 months of
waiting for the ATF to do a basic background check, and all
they do is find out that you're a federal employee and you work
for the FBI, and then they sit on it forever.
They collect your $200 for the privilege of it.
And then I paid the government to own my own stuff.
This is a little Sig suppressor for a 9mm, which is what we're
going to be talking about today. They think that the idea of the
National Firearms Act, this 1934 act was created to stop
assassins. If you were to ask anybody on
the political left that knows nothing about guns, they think
suppressors and silencers, which are the same thing.
The legal term, by the way, is silencer.
The industry term is suppressor. So before any of you get bent
out of shape, I know what I'm talking about here and I'm just
trying to help you out. The legal term that the law uses
is silencer, and that's the name of the original patent as well.
When they went to go limit these, it wasn't about people
assassinating people. In fact, I would say this, if
gangsters and losers that are trying to commit crimes would
all use suppressors, every law enforcement officer would win
that gunfight. Why?
Because just like the Joker, just like that, that 55 inch
long barrel on the revolver that you saw in the original Batman
where he goes drawing it out, the Tim Burton one, right?
He draws it out of his pants and it just keeps coming out.
Keep coming out. If you have to draw an extra,
what is this, 7 inches, 8 inches?
Yeah. Like if you have to draw an
extra 8 inches of a gun barrel out of your pants to be able to
shoot at a cop, I will beat you in every single gunfight all the
time. I will outdraw you from a
holster, from concealment. It doesn't matter.
So it's not about assassins. They actually put this law in
effect, and they included suppressors, silencers for one
reason and one reason only. Poaching.
Let that sink in. The federal government banned
your ability, limited your ability, restricted your ability
to own, possessed, transport, and otherwise hold onto after
your death and give to your, to your, to your progeny a device
that is not a firearm, classified it as a firearm.
You can tell this shoots 0 bullets.
This is a tube. It's a tube that is made out of
3D printed titanium. That particular device is
limited because of poaching, because they thought that they
would be able to, that people would be able to frustrate game
wardens and take game out of season.
It's already illegal, all right? It's already illegal to do that.
So they created another thing to try to make the technology that
would allow maybe some people. It also is crazy because there's
no reason why you wouldn't want to limit the sound of a gunshot.
It destroys hearing. Anybody who's been around gun
ranges, they have problems with it.
Tinnitus, those who serve in the military.
In any case, first, I want to start with the actual story,
which is right here. This is the United Healthcare
CEO Brian Thompson, fatally shot outside of the Hilton Hotel.
He was attending a conference apparently in Midtown Manhattan,
and this is a target attack. So this is the timeline.
You're seeing it up on the screen.
This was a little piece that was put together by the folks over
at CNN at 644. He's walking alone towards the
building. A couple seconds later, he is
actually jumped and shot. Then you see that the shooter
runs between an alleyway, 54th and 55th St. in New York City.
You can see the distance to the park if you're looking at the
screen here, it's only a few blocks away.
So that's about 1/4 of a mile and maybe a little bit more than
that. You've got from 56 at the park,
starts at 59th St. So there you kind of are.
And he's on the north side of 55th, just South of 56th St.
OK, so maybe three blocks, maybe 1/3 of a mile on top of that.
Then they see some other things. He jumps apparently on an
electric bike and beelines it directly to the park.
Does a costume change, most likely, and then disappears and
is now on the run. Let's hear what the experts have
to say. You guys are going to enjoy this
a lot, at least I am. Let's hear what the experts have
to say. A former FBI agent talking to
Jake Tapper on CNN about what happened and his assessment of
the shooting. And then we're going to laugh at
him. So let's do that first.
A suspected gunman has now been on the run since just after 6:45
AM this morning. He's believed to have used a
silencer. What is the with the information
we have? What does it tell you about the
sophistication of this attack? Well Jake the the details and
nuances of this attack are extraordinary and they do betray
an astounding level of pre planning of organization and it
should also save cool headedness.
And all of those things together would point towards a very
competent assassin and potentially even someone who
does this for hire. We know first by his use of the
weapon he's carrying a 9mm semi automatic pistol.
It appears to be equipped with some sort of silencer or or
suppression device. These are not things that you
see on everyday ordinary homicides, drive by shootings,
things like that. This is a this is a pretty
advanced piece of equipment. He uses it with great precision.
His timing is impeccable. He waits behind this the SUV
until the target walks past. He steps out behind the target
so as not to be seen. He shoots once and then follows
it up with two additional shots to make sure he's got a, you
know, a complete kill. And of course, he's able to
recycle the weapon to clear an ammunition jam in the middle of
the attack. That shows a high degree of
training on firearms, training that in in which you practice
over and over how to clear a jam from a gun in the middle of a
firefight. He's clearly adept at those
skills. And I think the timing and the
way he conducts himself also really lend to this impression
that this is someone who is very serious and spend a lot of time
thinking this through. Wow.
Andy, that's really good analysis there.
They must pay you. Well, Andy McCabe was an FBI
agent. He stopped being an FBI agent in
2003 when he became a supervisor.
So he hasn't been an FBI agent that worked cases in over 21
years. And Andy didn't work on violent
crimes from what I can tell. He probably has zero death
investigations. Based on this.
It sounds like he's never shot a suppressed weapon before.
Doesn't know anything about the things that we are talking about
today. How shameful.
But he did say that he thought this guy was a professional
assassin, that he had a high degree of competency, that he
was doing a bunch of things, you know, precision with the weapon.
I'm going to go the other way with that because I know what
I'm talking about. This guy definitely thought this
through, definitely has a high degree of premeditation and is
absolutely not a professional and definitely doesn't do this
for hire, at least not more than once, because he's going to be
found after this. The odds are very high.
What would make me think that maybe the people that saw him
hanging out all night waiting to do this.
This has personal written all over it.
All of the signs are there, including literally signs
because he signed the ammo and wrote things like deny, depose,
defend. It sounds like a personal
vendetta against someone that has denied an insurance claim
and he went after the head of this insurance company.
That's the most probable thing. This is somebody that was pissed
off, that made a relatively decent plan because he did get
away with it, but is not a shooter.
He didn't understand the device and clearly didn't actually
check his gear prior to getting involved.
You know how I know that this guy's not a pro?
Because you wouldn't have had this information happen.
Here we go. He was here in this corner the
whole night. Yeah.
Who was on the corner? The guy who showed the guy.
The driver told me he was hanging around the whole night
waiting for the guy to shoot up. And he just inside the car
waiting for him. Soon he see him.
He just shot him. There you go.
That's what he knows. OK, So what he knows is, is that
the dude was hanging out there all night waiting on this guy.
People saw him. There's two witnesses.
There was another witness who was right next to him.
And let's get a little deeper into it because this is what CNN
said. This is my favorite.
CNN has two different pieces. Detectives believe the gunman
operate in a way that suggests he was an experienced marksman.
Except the fact that he decided to shoot a guy from distance
without accurately presenting the firearm using a suppressor
that didn't allow the gun to cycle because he didn't test his
equipment. It's really amazing.
And then what you're seeing on the screen is something I
grabbed out of a screen grab of that CNN video, which they they
didn't want to actually show you the shooting.
It was too graphic. We will show you that.
Obviously. Let me throw this on the screen
a little bit bigger. This is a screen grab from the
CNN video outside of that Hilton Hotel, directly the way that the
shooter would have approached Brian Thompson from the rear.
What you're seeing with those little dots, those circles,
those red things, those are cameras and they are so visible
that you can see them when it's dark outside. 1-2 and three,
catching the entire angle of everything.
You know, how many professionals want to go and do a hit in front
of a bunch of cameras that are going to be immediately able to
be pulled by law enforcement and then used to identify them?
None I'm going to play you something kind of fun right here
let's see here let's let's get a little deeper into it.
This is another piece that kind of tells us this is not a
professional and that it's 100% personal.
The police are examining critical evidence at the scene,
notably shell casings and bullets with the words deny,
defend and depose written on the casings.
They also found live 9mm rounds. If you believe the New York
Post, and there's no reason not to, the story of the New York
Post says is that essentially every single time that you see
him working the slide, he's actually ejecting around.
And what that tells us is a couple of things.
It tells us that he approached and waited all night.
So he was seen, He went in front of a witness and multiple
cameras, and then he used rounds that were written with
information that he was going to leave as a message.
And he had a gun that didn't cycle properly.
OK, all of those things are there.
So this is the actual video. I'm going to play you a little
loop of the guy doing the shooting.
Let's throw it on the screen here and take a look.
This is Brian Thompson in the blue suit.
He goes walking past the doors. The guy levels the gun in what I
call the tomahawk motion. More on that in a second.
Fires one round, has to has to re racket, fires another round
has to re racket, slams the gun from the back, which means that
the gun was not going into battery and then goes and
finishes him off with another shot.
Now, all of this is horrific. And I'm I'm truly sorry that
this is something that we are morbidly fascinated by.
I really am, because being fascinated by the stuff is a
distinctly American weird moment.
But this doesn't happen in our country.
That's why people don't do St. side assassinations the way that
you see in Latin American countries.
This happens all the time in Colombia and in Venezuela and in
places like Brazil where people are going to drive up and some
guy on the back of a motorcycle levels a pistol, drop somebody
on the side of the road and then drives off on the motorcycle or
whatever. And they're wearing a hood and
they're wearing a helmet and they're wearing a backpack and
they got a handgun to make it happen.
That's a thing that happens in Latin America regularly in all
kinds of different countries. We don't have that happen.
Let me tell you how I know this guy isn't a pro.
Here's the loop again. Look, if you just followed this
man for another 15 steps, you are now out of the camera and
then into the dark. You're standing.
Look at the witness sitting there that just turns and runs
completely. There's no doubt that this is
premeditated and there's no doubt that this person is is
focused in on. There's no robbery.
There's no care about the witness, but we're talking about
somebody that didn't know what he was doing with firearms.
So let's get a little deeper into it.
There's a man that goes by the name of Mr. Guns and Gear.
His first name is Mike. And Mike is talking about the
problem of not having a Nielsen device, which is why this guy is
not a professional. It's why he didn't know how to
test his gear. Seriously, if you, if you make a
suppressor illegally, which is what we're talking about here.
If you illegally create your own suppression device and you mount
it onto a pistol and you were going to go do an assassination
in New York City of all places, which has a police force like
close to 50,000 men and women strong.
And you didn't test out your gear with what I would call a
yard pop? Or you didn't fill up a bucket
with sand and drop a couple rounds in there to make sure the
gun cycled? How nuts are you?
Should you be shooting in your yard?
Probably not. Should you be dropping it into
the He could have gone over to the Hudson and dropped it off.
He's not far enough away. He could have done it in Central
Park for God's sake and seen that this thing actually worked.
Like behind a tree. There are places that you can go
if you're if you have a decent suppressor and subsonic ammo,
which is the claim he had subsonic ammo and it won't cycle
the gun. There's all kinds of idiots that
are making this claim that could be true, but it doesn't have a
problem on any of the weapons that I have.
The guy's not a pro. OK, We're going to show you the
Nielsen device. I'm going to show you a video
of, of it being used. So you'll hear a bunch of
gunshots if you're listening and that the, the clinks of the
steel. And then on top of that, I'm
going to show you there's a, a graphic that I'm going to direct
your attention to. And then I'm going to show you
the actual device because I've got 1 sitting right here.
So you can see how these things work, how they don't work.
OK, so you're seeing in the corner the way that little
device works. That device looks like this in
real life, OK. And it's on the bottom of this
little SIG suppressor that I've got.
And I want to show you it's a spring.
Let's go over here. It's a spring and it's a piston.
This is where the threads are that lock into the barrel.
This is what locks up with the actual suppressor.
This is the spring that moves it.
And this is a little kind of canister that holds it all
together. This is the Nielsen device.
If you have one of these, it will run your Glock pistol, your
semi automatic striker fired stuff, OK.
The big difference is this, if you know what you're doing,
you're not going to use a gun like that.
Let's do guns. I brought some.
OK, this is a clear Glock pistol.
The difference is, and this is probably what he used, something
to this effect, a striker fire. That's either M and PA Glock.
It doesn't matter if it's a Sig or anything else.
The way these things work is that when you push them
backwards to cycle, the barrel drops downward.
The barrel has to drop out of the way in order to cycle the
gun, which is what happens when it goes back.
If it doesn't come all the way forward, the gun will not seat.
It'll put the bullet in the chamber, but it won't chamber
the round fully and you won't be able to strike it.
That's why. Why?
This guy had to pull the gun backwards and he's rejecting
live rounds, which is what they found.
Multiple live 9mm rounds on the ground.
The alternative is using a gun like this, which has a fixed
barrel. This is a Sig P322.
So that was a Glock 17 clone. This is a Sig.
Look, you'll notice the barrel doesn't move anywhere.
It's the slide moves on its own. People that are serious about
doing something like this, if you were a professional, you
would make sure that your weapon system was actually competent
and capable of delivering the round that you wanted to do so
you don't have to wait. This guy's not a pro, OK?
Regardless of what anyone has to say about it, it doesn't make
any bit of sense. He sat there.
He got picked up by the by the cops on the video.
And the best thing is, is CNN ran Andy McCabe and then also 20
minutes later ran this story, which makes me laugh.
This is not a professional killer.
Finally, a voice of sanity, a guy named Zeke Unger was brought
on. He's a liaison of the United
States Marshall Service. As I said, the marshals are the
manhunters. They are capable of doing this
kind of work, and this bounty hunter says that there's no way
it's a pro. His mannerisms do not reflect
that of a professional killer. Obviously, if you've been around
shooters, you understand that the presentation of the gun like
this here, let's lock this thing back.
If you do this tomahawk motion, it's very movie like.
It's very Larpy. Writing your messages on a
bullet is very Larpy. It's very much like something
you'd expect to find in an action movie, but it's not what
real serious people do. If that guy was serious, he
would have walked twenty more feet, shot him in the leg in the
dark, put one in the back of his head and left and you would have
never even heard it. He would have never introduced
the pistol into the visual range of cameras or witnesses.
You would keep it as close to your body as possible.
I'm not telling you how to kill people.
I'm just saying there are better ways to go about doing this
stuff. And for all of the amateur like
assassin sleuths that are out there, and Reddit's full of
them, and I know Twitter is as well, they don't know what
they're talking about. So let's just be real about it.
Let's just be honest. It's a really sad moment for
that guy's family. It's a really interesting moment
for American law enforcement. And the worst part of it, which
I'm sure is going to be the only thing that we're really going to
see out of any of this. Hopefully they catch the killer.
I don't want that guy to get away.
It's a terrible decision to go kill somebody that runs a
company. But the most likely thing is
that we're going to see a bunch of pressure from people on the
political left talking about how dangerous silencers are
suppressors and the reason why that's critical as we get Donald
Trump in the office for the second time and he's looking,
you know, Pam Bondi, you guys can say what you want about
that. But when it comes down to it,
his son, Donald Trump junior, he's very pro gun, he's very pro
suppressor, has talked about moving legislation forward.
We've heard Trump say concealed carry reciprocity.
All of these things are good indications for those of us that
are Second Amendment types. You're going to get the left
bouncing up and using an argument that was never made in
the National Firearms Act. There's going to be a push that
suppressors create assassins, and they have this great video
that is going to push it forward.
It is an object of opportunity for the left.
So I want you to know why it was created and why that law was
there and why it has nothing to do with potential assassins on
American city streets. People carrying suppressed
weapons are actually a benefit to law enforcement when it comes
to actually engaging with those people.
And if somebody ambushes you with a suppressed or otherwise
weapon, you're already screwed. Ambushes work for a reason.
It's because they get outside of what they call the OODA loop,
your ability to make decisions and be able to protect yourself.
And so you have these things. They're a real problem.
Any ambush will take down more skilled, more capable, more
trained people if you catch them off guard at the right time.
All right. And as kind of evidence of that,
I'm going to pivot to one quick story here because there is
something that's going on right now on Capitol Hill today, in
addition to getting the Daniel Penny verdict, which will be
very interesting. Again, a New York City story.
They're in the news quite a bit. The Secret Service director, the
guy who stepped in since the last one stepped down, Ronald
Rowe, is going to be grilled over the Trump assassination
attempt and where they are in the investigation and what they
found with the failings and the faults of the Secret Service.
So you'll remember this happened in Butler, PA, July the 13th.
How recently was that? And it is out of the news
because we have moved so wildly and so quickly on to the next
story. The ability to rebuild public
trust in the Secret Service is a critical thing.
We haven't heard Donald Trump say that he's going to name
somebody new to run the Secret Service.
So it'll be interesting to see how that plays out.
And I don't have any insight information and I'm not here to
give you any of it, but it's worth knowing that in this
insane time that we are living, that this story is kind of out
of the news and maybe it should bring it back in, especially
with the Secret Service director talking out there.
We need to know that the people that are in our political
offices, the JD Vance types, the the Donald Trump's, we don't
need Joe Biden assassinated. We don't know anybody
assassinated in political office.
That is the third world stuff. And that is the darkest reason.
The fact that the left was not upset about this, that they were
people, including people in the FBI like Jenna Howell, who we've
exposed on social media, people who were cheering on the
assassination attempt of Donald Trump, it tells you how sad our
our dialogue is right now. It lets you know that we are not
a country that has any potential of healing.
It's one of the reasons why I think Cash Patel is going to be
so important for FBI director because he actually can heal
some of the agencies that have sown that distrust, my former
agency being one of them. It'd be really nice to see that.
So while I'm talking about the the New York stuff, there's also
a pretty decent chance that Mark Naughton is going to be covering
the verdict delivery if it's delivered today in the Daniel
Penney case. God willing, that man will be
acquitted and let go and go back to his life and he will move
away from New York where he can own weapons like a regular
person and not deal with that. But for those of you who are in
New York, whether it be New York City or New York State, if
you're captured by New York City and they're terrible politics,
the penny verdict is going to be a very strong indication to you
about where your fellow citizens in that state lie.
We're going to talk a little bit more about states rights.
I guess. They do have the ability to
regulate certain things. There's a reason why you should
vote with your feet. There are plenty of people who
are commentating. The number one other show that
people listen to, if they listen to me, is Dan Bongino.
And you guys know he always asks, is it bad enough?
And that's a reasonable question.
And when you see this verdict come down, like I said, God
willing, he will be acquitted. But on the on the chance that
they do what New Yorkers often do, because there were people
chanting the word guilty outside yesterday in a protest.
Truly atrocious, truly awful to think about that that he may end
up being not just going through the the process here, but
actually being found guilty. And and I don't have a lot of
faith in a New York jury as as most of you probably don't
either. It's a good reason I would think
to move. Let's go ahead and do a quick
read for our sponsor Patriot Cooler because they are people
that we believe in and that we do appreciate.
Guys, it's Patriot coolers.com. The the Black Friday sale is
over, the Cyberweek sales over. Many of you guys took advantage
of it. I haven't even got the numbers
yet yet. We're going to do a live
reading. I will announce it before we do
it and I will make sure I play it on the social medias as well
in a clip. But we're doing a live reading
of the giveaway for all of you that use that promo code during
that time. Go to patriotcoolers.com if
you're interested in getting anything on there like this.
The 19 oz coffee mug. This one is my favorite for
keeping as much much coffee as necessary warm even during the
show and it's currently warm as it sits next to me.
Promo code Kyle saves you 10% Kyle.
Just my name Kyle. Like most of our promo codes, it
will save you a couple of bucks. If you guys spend 50 bucks or
more, you'll get free shipping. It makes an outstanding gift.
And since they ship from the United States of America with
the warehouses that I believe they're in Houston cuz that's
how fast it got to me like overnight.
I actually told them once and they sent me something and I got
it there in the morning, which is crazy.
Check them out and you will be able to use them even for your
last minute gift shopping ideas. Patriot coolers.com.
Again, stick around for the idea that we will do the giveaway.
It's going to be two tumblers and a small cooler for anybody
who used it. And last but not least, you can
always find the Kyle Seraphin show collection in the show
notes. If you don't know how to do
that. If you were looking on Rumble,
just hit expand or show me more and it'll give you the notes
that all the links are right there.
OK, so let's go. Let's go to states rights
because we're talking about Daniel Penny.
We're talking about some of the things out here that go on that
things are supposed to be a little bit different in each
state. The left, oh God, that went too
fast. Oh, they hate it.
They hate the idea that the federal government can't come in
and tell all people to do the thing that they want unless the
state is doing the thing that they like already.
So whenever states rights benefit people on the left, they
want to nationalize it. And whenever the national
platform is or whenever the state platform is not good, they
want to nationalize it. So they want to make it go and
get pushed down. So they're all about bottom up,
top down, as long as it favors their position.
They don't actually have any principles on this.
I'm kind of OK with some of these horrible things going on
in states that suck because people will vote with their
feet. They're allowed to and they're
able to and they need to. The Supreme Court, being
reported here by CBS, is likely to uphold Tennessee's ban on
gender affirming care for kids. I've got a couple of the
arguments being made by the dumbest member of the Supreme
Court. How do I know she's the dumbest?
Because she says the most. They've done a quick analysis of
the the the highest number of words spoken by Supreme Court
justices and arguments in this term and the lowest number and
you can basically rank them. How smart you are equals how
little you say. It means you're concise, it
means you are thoughtful, and it means you are listening.
You already know what the argument is.
You'll be shocked to learn Clarence Thomas, the least
number of words spoken, as usual, and Ketanji Jackson
Browne, the most number of words spoken.
Here's a little clip of her from that hearing that went on
yesterday, the oral arguments in front of the Supreme Court.
And she's going to make the argument that transgender
identifying children, which is kind of like trans housing by
parent, is it not by proxy sick people who decided to mutilate
their kids so they can show off to their friends at brunch.
It's a lot like trying to marry a black lady or a black man if
you're a white person in the 1950s.
Anytime that you see a lawyer in the Supreme Court using the
expression back in the day, I feel like that's probably an
indication that we have someone that is too young and maybe not
serious enough to be on the court.
Here's KB JKJB take your pick giving her take about how it's
about something called The Loving Decision, which was a
strike down of interracial marriages being outlawed at the
state level. They sound in the same kinds of
arguments that were made back in the day, fifties, 60s, with
respect to racial classifications and
inconsistencies. I'm thinking in particular about
loving and I'm wondering whether you thought about the parallels
because I see one as to how this statute operates and how the
anti miscegenation statutes in Virginia operated.
Yes. And and I think the court has
recognized that the equal protection clause was was
intended to force some changes in society and get us to think
more closely about the way that people were being classified,
including when that was based on overbroad generalizations of how
we expect them to to live and order their affairs.
And the court has made that clear in the sex discrimination
cases as well, where it said sometimes these laws operate to
disadvantage someone who falls outside the average description
and that person needs the protection of the court.
Well, and everything I thought what was most interesting about
the potential comparison to Loving is that in that case,
everyone seemed to concede upfront that a racial
classification was being drawn by the statute.
That was sort of like the starting point.
The question was whether it was discriminatory because it
applied to both races and it wasn't, you know, necessarily
invidious or whatever. But, you know, as I read the
statute here, the, excuse me, the case here, you know, the
court starts off by saying that Virginia is now one of 16 states
which prohibit and punish marriages on the basis of racial
classifications. There's more of that.
The name of this case is the United States versus Committee,
which is a reference to the Attorney General Jonathan's
Committee of Tennessee. I want you to understand that
our tax dollars, that's why the US Solicitor general was the
person. The US solicitor general was the
one that was making that argument on behalf of the
American people because that's what we want our government
doing, getting involved in suing the state for having a law that
the people of Tennessee wanted that their legislature through
the democratic process that you always hear about on the left.
That's what they pushed forward. That's truly incredible that
that's what's going on here. Now this is even funnier.
Double down. Same thing, same justice, same
argument, making even more and saying, hey, look, I, I think
I'm making the right comparison here.
Can you can, am I making your argument correctly?
It's nice to see these non partial, non partisan justices,
right? Of course they're not.
This is an advocate on the court
for insanity and we are actually listening.
I'm going to show you something in a second, actual little
transcripts. I'm not going to give you the
the voice and maybe I will, maybe I will of the of the lead
ACLU attorney, but we've got we're actually taking this like
this is a real discussion that anybody should be having.
It's completely absurd. Listen to this.
Maybe I'll just ask you to react to my loving parallel because
I'm getting kind of nervous. Is that in loving those same
kinds of scientific arguments were made.
So I'm, I'm reading here where the court says the argument is
that if the Equal Protection Clause does not outlaw
miscegenation statutes because of their reliance on racial
classifications, the question of constitutionality would thus
become whether there was any rational basis for a state to
treat interracial marriages differently from other
marriages. On this question, the State
argues the scientific evidence is substantially in doubt and
consequently, the Court should defer to the wisdom of the state
legislature. Oh.
OK, and they're going to talk about science in training
surgeries. As you guys said in the chat,
Sotomayor was the first dumbest and now she is relegated to the
second dumbest. And you'll be shocked to find
that she said the second most number of words.
These loony Lib women just talking on the court, they're
bad at this game. So not to be outdone, we now
have Matthew Rice. He's the solicitor general for
Tennessee. He's defending this on behalf of
the people of Tennessee, on behalf of the attorney general
of Tennessee, being asked really simple questions about medical
treatments and saying, aren't these substantial the same?
And then he just lays them out in a way that is it's
incontrovertible that they are not the same.
How about how does puberty work for boys and girls when you give
cross sex hormones? This is overwhelming here and
I'm going to show you a little bit more.
They cannot get their heads around the fact that this is not
even a close to scientific argument.
It's nonsensical. Individual level that if there
is a line that is being drawn based off of race, like in
Loving where you had a white male who could not who could not
marry an African American female under that law that is a race
based line. You are creating multiple groups
of permissible and impermissible behavior based off of race.
Where we differ from from our friends on the other side is we
just don't think that there is any sex faceline in this I.
Don't understand why not. I mean, these laws, the law here
operates in the same way. There, there, the question of
can you marry this other person depended upon what your race
was. You could marry the other person
if it was the same, consistent with your race.
You couldn't if you couldn't, and I take your law to be doing
basically the same thing. You can get these blockers if
doing so is consistent with your sex, but not if it's
inconsistent. So how are they different?
We think it's different because we think in their use of
inconsistent with sex and all these examples that they have in
the briefing, those actually do create separate categories of
conduct that is permissible either based on sex or based on
race. But in this case, the only way
that they can point to a sex baseline is to equate
fundamentally different medical treatments.
Giving giving testosterone to a boy with a deficiency is not the
same treatment as giving it to a girl who has psychological
distress associated with her body.
These are this is. This is not only.
Your faces for saying that, I'm sorry, is it just because of the
why they're asking for it or is there some kind of medical I I
took the SG to be saying that it operates on the body in the same
way. So what?
What's your basis for saying not the same?
I don't think it operates on the on the body in the same way.
Take testosterone. If you give a boy with the
deficiency testosterone because he has constitutional delayed
puberty that allows him to go through the the and develop the
reproductive organs associated with being a male.
If you give it to a girl, it renders the girl infertile.
So we have a into. If you give it to a girl, she's
infertile, she's sterilized. If you give it to a boy, it
makes him normally develop. This is the stupidest, the fact
that we were even discussing it. But that's probably why I think
I've got a little clip here so you can hear the voice before I
show a little bit of the transcript of this Chase
Strangio, a female dressed as a man taking hormones in order to
have like, a mediocre little mustache.
Beard I would say nobody has to provide this this medication to.
OK, so I didn't, I didn't even size the video properly, but
like, just so you guys know, that is the voice that is
reading the following transcripts.
Justice Alito asking counsel, I don't think you had a chance to
answer, to finish answering my question whether transgender,
sorry, I better say this properly because it's important
whether transgender status is immutable.
This is the big question here. And I'm getting this from my
buddy Etam Heim. You cited a bunch of other
criteria, but is it immutable? The question is transgenderism,
is that an immutable thing? Because, you know, you're
setting up a trap here, right? We've all watched the left get
so stupid about things that they call gender, which they think
are differential from biological sex.
And now in that tiny little weird voice that you just heard,
I, I, I, I think that the record shows that that the discordance
between a person's birth sex and gender identity has a strong
biological basis and would would satisfy the immutability test.
Man, I'm having a hard time getting some of these words out.
OK, sex, gender, strong biological basis, immutable.
This is the argument. Are you ready?
And then I think that the distinguishing characteristic is
to have a birth sex that does not align with or a gender that
does not align with one's birth sex.
So it may include people who have different understandings of
their gender identity, but I think it's still the
distinguishing characteristic of birth sex and gender identity
that are incongruent. This doesn't make any sense to a
normal human being. What you're saying is that
gender fluidity, which is something the left continues to
argue. It's all based on your thoughts,
your impression, your feeling, which could change.
That is by its very nature not immutable.
You're making an argument that's really obvious to the Supreme
Court justices that are not absolutely out of their damn
minds. It can't be because these people
change back. It's like enter the D
transitioners. What about those people?
Did they have an immutable gender that was not changed when
they decided to cut off their body parts and then they
regretted it later and they've come back.
I get that you don't like them because they destroy your
argument. Once again, it's a number of of
of the objection from liar, liar objection.
Your honor, what's your what's your what's the reason for your
objection? He says because you're totally
destroying my case, not because there's any reason.
I just have a bad argument. My argument cannot stand.
On its own, that's what we're dealing with.
We're dealing with wild people saying stupid things we can't
help. But here's the nicest version of
this argument being made, something that people should
just listen to. If you're one of these folks
that is like, well, I have a lot of sympathy for people that want
to cut off their own penis or want to just, you know, cut off
their breasts and, and, and have some sort of surgical necrotic
tissue turned into a phallus. If you're that person, here's
Coleman Hughes on CNN making a very reasonable argument.
Far too nice for my taste, but appropriate for the audience of
people that probably listen to CNN are looking for something a
little bit more balanced. How about this?
There's no consensus, so maybe just hold off on destroying
children's lives. Coleman, your thoughts on that?
Yeah, well, I think it's a it's a controversial procedure we've
seen in the past few years. Places like Norway and the UK
have re evaluated their guidelines on it, which goes to
show that the science is not settled on whether this is the
best way to approach gender dysphoria in minors.
You see, in states, you know, states are allowed to regulate
lots of things. You're not allowed to get a
tattoo. You're not allowed to get
certain procedures. You're not allowed.
You know, states have banned all kinds of medical procedures for
minors. And so I think it's an issue
that is probably best left with the states at this point in
history until the science becomes much more settled on
what actually is the very best gold standard scientific
protocol for kids with gender dysphoria.
What do you mean? I think we, I think we have that
gold standard. This is medical best practice as
determined by a number of national and global health
organizations that says this type of Healthcare is life
saving and medically necessary. So there you go.
It is life saving except the fact that it relates to, and it
was brought up in the discussions at least as many
suicides, if not more suicides. So it's not life saving.
It might actually be life taking, but it certainly is life
altering to the point where if you sterilize somebody, their
life will be decidedly different.
Of course, the left took this in stride.
They decided to go to their friends in the halls of Congress
and stage what I've been reasonably told is called an
insurrection in the ladies room. They're really mad about Nancy
Mace trying to say something. You don't have to let like Nancy
Mace, you just have to know that men are men and women are women,
and if you can stand up to pee, you have to go and do it at a
urinal in the men's room. The end.
If you're a dude, you got to go to the men's room or you should
see dudes dragging you out of the ladies room because that's
appropriate. Instead they decided to do a
political protest which resulted in zero FBI by attention.
You guys will be shocked to learn.
And here is a weird meet me in the ladies room meeting.
That wasn't it. Where is it?
Stand by. OK, so you've got a bunch of men
here, creepy men, queer identifying females or whatever
the heck this stuff is. Dancing, laying out, obviously
making a scene, staging a TikTok video, women who shave their
heads, men who have long hair, and they're doing what I think
is generally referred to as insurrection.
If you do it inside the United States Capitol.
This was done yesterday. Again, no attention by federal
law enforcement. You don't see any Capitol Police
officers in there. Nobody's getting hit with rubber
bullets, nobody's getting tear gassed, nobody's being arrested
or LED out. And Bill Shipley accurately
pointed out the federal statutes, which would be
improper parading. It's a trespassing charge.
It can be punishable by up to six months in jail, particularly
if you're in Washington. DCI guess that's only if you're
a conservative. It seems like something that
should actually be taken into account if we believed in
fairness, but obviously we do not.
And we obviously know, we totally know that this is the
reason why Donald Trump got put into got put into the next spot.
He's lined up. Oh, they're, they're they're
touching the toilets. We're doing fake pole dancing.
That seems gross. There's people licking their
hands. Did you see that?
You really want to lick your hands in a government clean
bathroom? There's something wrong.
That's another type of mental disorder.
All right, so that's enough on that.
I got a little deep into the weird transgender thing here.
And because it was a protest that was going on across the
world from Washington, DC, which is not America, into Montana
America, which is America, at least part of it is, but
certainly not in the areas like Helena where they have the state
Assembly. Here you have Montana lawmakers
crossing the aisle. So some Republicans went over as
well. This bothers me in a big way
because I want to move to Montana.
I want to live in Montana. I love Montana, I love what
Montana is about. I despise that urban areas in
Montana are like urban areas everywhere else.
They're full of weirdos, sketchy weirdos like this one called Zoe
Zephyr. Zoe Zephyr's name is actually
not Zoe Zephyr originally. That's a man with a big Adam's
apple, very long neck and a bunch of long hair standing
there getting a bunch of folks to go and stand in the bathroom
to say you cannot ban me from the bathroom because trans
nonsense. You'll be shocked to learn that
the story comes from NPR, who believes that at least 60% of
the world's population are trans, including those in Uganda
and Canada, Kenya. If you listen to the NPR, you
will get a solid smattering of like between 40 and 60% scent of
transgender news from across the globe.
Lawmakers in Montana crossed the lines this week to reject a
measure that would have banned transgender representatives from
using the women's bathroom in the state Capitol.
I don't understand how this is even remotely controversial.
The proposed rule would have designated 2 bathrooms located
in the House chambers and the Senate chambers as male and
female and require the legislators to use the ones that
were assigned with their sex chromosomes that they got from
their parents at birth, which is to say the innate nature of
their humanity. They didn't name Zoe Zephyr, but
Zoe Zephyr was of course the person that they were targeting
with this bill. And then I started getting
really curious, What the hell is Zoe Zephyr's real name?
The name Zoe Zephyr by itself tells me that we are talking
about something called Woman Face.
It is dudes pretending to be women in the way that only men
could think about women, which is that it's about some silly
name like a damn cartoon or a, or a drag, you know, dance off
Zoe Zephyr would be a really bad drag queen name.
And the fact that a human being who was elected to state office
uses that as their moniker, it's bizarre.
So who is the real Zoe Zephyr? This is an article from a guy
named Jeremy Karl. He's at the Claremont Institute.
He's a senior fellow. And this is the radical
transgender activist who held the Mons Montana legislator
hostage. Kind of an interesting little
story here. Who?
This person is Zoe Zephyr's true name, apparently when when dug
into is someone named Zachary Rash RAASCH.
So who's Zachary Rash? Zachary Rash was a high school
wrestler, apparently a gay man because he's married to another
man that dresses up like a woman.
We're talking about woman face. We're talking about decorating
yourself in the vestiges of what a woman might be externally like
putting on high heels and pearls.
That has nothing to do with what women are like.
My wife never wears high heels, not ever, not ever.
When she does, it freaks me out because I don't know what she's
doing. I don't know where we're going,
but I know I better be in a suit.
If my wife happens to have the one pair that she probably has
of heels, If she has on makeup, it gets called out like her
mother goes, you put on makeup, what's going on?
She's like three times a year I do that.
So what? These people spend all their
time putting on the vestiges of what a woman is.
So this guy who who wrote the article again, Jeremy Carl lives
in Bozeman and wanted to write out, he says that that Zachary
Roush was born in Billings, Mt, grew up there, went to
Washington state where he was a champion high school wrestler,
didn't take his new name until 2019, which is why it's hard to
find much about who he was as a young person.
He was disowned by his conservative Christian parents
when he decided to transition. He abandoned a master's thesis
at the University of Montana that he was working on that was
interested in transhumanism and the melting of man and machine
through technological enhancements of the human body.
This is a person that sounds deeply disordered, not because
you're interested in transhumanism, although I think
that's pretty awful. This is a rejection of all all
the things Christianity, conservatism, rational things
that happen in the world, and probably like all the cautionary
tales that some of us learned about mixing men and machines.
Like maybe he never saw the Terminator 'cause he's too
young. He's been dating slash married
to a guy named Anthony Reed, who goes by Aaron Reed, another
prominent transgender person, both in Montana.
I don't know how people end up weird and sick like this, but
they do. So there you have it.
And so there are pictures of little Zachary you can see here.
That's young Zachary and that's him today and is pretending it's
a it's a national crisis that it made it to.
I do think it is it's a national crisis that we have that being
argued in front of the Supreme Court.
I I constantly make the argument we are not a serious nation.
We are we used to be a proper nation.
The same people that would have been sort of like up in arms
about women shooting bikinis in the desert because they were
machine guns and like outside of the Las Vegas in Nevada in the
80s are the same people now that would celebrate this idiot
dressing up with fake boobs and long hair and pretending to be a
woman and using like standing up and pissing in the women's
bathroom with his Dong hanging out.
It's craziness. I don't know how we got here,
but we did and we are far too gentle about it.
Let's go to a couple other little things.
Some some of the craziness. The meltdown continues about the
Biden pardon. Apparently the the folks in the
Democrat Party now are getting told to go out on on national
television and tell everyone that they were behind it and
they were always behind it and they supported it.
So here is James Clyburn and he's a representative from South
Carolina. He's one of the reasons why Joe
Biden got supposedly the votes that he did with the black folks
in America when he did. If you believe that he did,
which we don't necessarily, but here he is saying he actually
not just is OK with it, he actually encouraged it.
He said he should totally go out there and pardon his son.
Kind of fun. Then I'm going to have the
alternate take, which is Dumber from New York by Dan Goldman in
one second here. OK with the pardon of Hunter
Biden. Well, first of all, thank you
very much for having me. I am absolutely OK with it.
I don't know how many people urged him to do so, but I did.
You did. Yes, I did, because I know he
was targeted. We all know that.
But for the fact he was Joe Biden's son, he would never have
been taken through these gyrations.
Gyrations. I like the idea of gyrations.
We saw some gyrations in that bathroom video, didn't we, where
they were gyrating on there trying to dance.
This guy's a clown. Let me just tell you something
that is very true. Depending on where you live in
America, you could find yourself not charged for very significant
gun crimes at the federal level, or you could find yourself
charged for the most minute thing that would barely even fit
into the statute. There is a huge degree of
variance in the way that local prosecutors approach criminal
activity. Now, he's probably right that in
Washington, DC and in Maryland, you're probably not going to see
that. I don't know about Delaware.
I didn't work Delaware. But the odds are in the lefty
leaning places, you probably wouldn't see AUS prosecutor,
United States attorney's office, OK, an AUSA, the assistant
United States Attorney that the federal frontline prosecutors
doing that kind of work, You probably wouldn't.
But where I worked in New Mexico, we had an AUSA who
charged a known drug addict with violations of 18 USC 922, which
is some of the stuff that Hunter Biden is looking at for having a
single round of 22 ammunition in his pocket, no gun, and didn't
have a felony conviction. But the statute is broad enough
and can be applied enough. And that guy did prison time.
And you can get up to 10 years for that.
So don't tell me that nobody would have targeted Andrew
Biden. It's not that they targeted him
because he did one thing bad and they were waiting as a gotcha
and they sprung the trap. The dude is basically been
dirty. And like we have video of him
smoking crack with what looks like underage hookers.
Give me a flip and break. They're making this argument.
The best argument is that the change in the administration is
so dangerous to America that Joe Biden better run after and
pardon all of his friends, from Doctor Fauci to his son to
anybody else, maybe to himself. Dan Goldman's making the
argument. The funny thing is, we've had
the same political left tell us that the only people who need
pardons are criminals. Why would these people need
pardons if they weren't involved in documented federal crimes?
It doesn't stop the states from going after him for whatever
that's worth too. Which is why the Daniel Penney
thing is so bad. It's a state charge.
So there's nothing that Donald Trump could do in January if he
is not acquitted. Just be aware there's a
difference. You can only acquit federal
charges if you are the the US president.
Governors have to deal with the state charges.
Here's Dan Goldman making a an argument that seems to say
everybody that is in the Biden administration might be involved
in criminality. That seems like something to
look into. I think the fact that they have
to have that discussion says everything about Cash, Patel and
Donald Trump's nominees. There is no reason why any
president must consider preemptive pardons because the
incoming administration has made it so clear that they will go
after political adversaries. And Cash Patel has been
incredibly vocal about that. And I hope that the Senate
Republicans, who know Joe Biden very well and know he does not,
would not take something like this lightly, really consider
the fact that that's even part of this discussion about Cash
Patel. He is unqualified.
He is unhinged. He has made it very clear that
he is out for retribution. He is sending cease and desist
letters and lawsuits. This is a dangerous person to
head up our top law enforcement agency.
And just the fact that this is even part of the conversation
says everything that the Senate Republicans should need to hear.
It says everything they should need to hear.
You know what they heard? They heard that you just called
him a dangerous person. That's the same thing that you
called Donald Trump, who just won overwhelmingly in every
single swing state. So there you have it.
That's what you should hear. He's a dangerous person, per Dan
Goldman, dipshit extraordinaire. So let it be done.
Bring on the Cash Patel. I've got this article here.
This is coming from NBC. This is the first of like a semi
hit piece. It's actually relatively fair
for NBC. So good on them for at least
kind of getting the story closer to correct than most people
would. Cash Patel once said he would
quote UN quote come after journalists.
That now hangs over his FBI candidacy.
No, it doesn't. It just hangs over the things
that you want to say. I had an NBC journalist ask me
the same question and and I answered it in a very similar
way, which is to say if there's criminality, then it then you
should have someone come after you, which is exactly what Cash
meant and said. Here is some relatively fair
quoting from the article. They said now that Cash Patel is
running to head one of the most powerful agencies in the United
States government, the question of whether he will be really
able to come after journalists is troubling on both sides of
the aisle and is likely to become a central point of
contention. If he comes out for Senate
confirmation. It's only going to be a point of
contention, by the way, because NBC is trying to make it 1, if
we actually believe it. 1 Senator called his remarks vile.
That senator is not named. Go figure.
Go on record with that clown. Patel has privately conceded
that he publicly needs to clean up that remark, according to an
ally of Trump who's spoken with him.
No, he doesn't, because he actually cleaned it up by
talking to them. Because he said exactly what
normal people say. Take it in context.
A hole. In a brief interview with NBC
News in February, Patel laughed off the notion that he was hell
bent on attacking reporters and even praised them as invaluable.
Well, that doesn't sound right. At least they're reporting it
here. He backed off his tough talk
with where he he did it with Steve Bannon, saying that his
words were blown out of proportion.
Added that he meant for his threat to apply only the people
that had broken the law. That's actually implied.
This is a guy who's been a federal what?
Oh yeah, public defender, he said.
Quote, I would love for you to go back and get the whole quote,
and I appreciate you letting me talk about it.
That full quote kind of speaks for itself.
It was 3 words taken out of two sentences.
But I basically said we're going to use the Constitution and the
courts of law to go after people criminally and civilly dot dot,
dot, if they broke the law. I have to back off the mic on
this. This is obvious to anybody.
They're trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.
This was a question that was brought up to me while I
discussed something with an NBC reporter.
We'll see how that article turns out.
I'm still waiting on seeing it. But the fact of the matter is,
is I would be, I would be appalled if I found out that
there was an instinct or a, or even a mechanism to target
reporters. For those of you that remember,
I'm not a big fan of James O'Keefe as a human being.
I haven't been a big fan of James O'Keefe for a long time,
long before I met him. I just didn't think he was
great. What I do know is that James
O'Keefe, Project Veritas, people who do undercover type
journalism like that, which I'm not a big fan of all the time,
Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad.
They have a right to practice journalism.
They are the press in the same way that I am the press in the
same way, damn it that you are the press because you have a
social media account. And I would go to the mat.
And I believe that Cash Patel would too because I've never had
any conversation that would that would indicate otherwise.
He would go to the mat because the Constitution is the
overarching principle. If you're going to be a
constitutionalist, you just stick by what it is.
It turns out some people incriminate themselves and they
do dumb things. A lot of people don't and having
tough talk and rhetoric is not that big of a deal.
It really isn't. Let me drop a couple things on
you that are developing in the background worth knowing.
First of all, Trump's IRS pick. Kind of a little light hearted
moment here. This is a guy named Billy Long.
He's a former representative from Texas.
He's also apparently an auctioneer.
This is the new IRS pick talking about the national debt.
Worth hearing this kind of fun. We are one of the few people
that can actually keep up with a national debt.
Now I'm going to trillion, 2 trillion now three able to bomb
13 and 4. Four trillion dollar 5-5
trillion 6006 trillion 7 equal to 5-7 trillion 88 trillion
dollar 9991010101111 trillion here. 12/12/2013 You're out of
here. 13 trillion, 1414 trillion now 15.
I have sold at 14 trillion. Thankfully, Mr. Speaker, we also
can say those numbers backwards so we get the spending under
control here. I'll be back.
It's pretty charming. That was in 2011, back when the
debt wasn't nearly as insane. I've got some other stuff that I
want to cover. We're going to go ahead and do
it tomorrow. Peter Hotez dropping some clues
about what's going to happen in January and some of the
influenza pandemic, dangerous viruses that are going to come
and stop the American people in their tracks and try to stop the
Trump agenda. We'll deal with that tomorrow.
We got the call in show tonight. I'm also going to talk to you
tomorrow about a Monsanto immunity bill in 737 is the
House bill that is trying to get passed in there.
Let's go ahead and do our pallet because we've gone fairly long
and I want to get to the American Radicals podcast.
If you guys are not aware, they are going to be broadcasting
right after us and I will dump you in there if you are watching
on Rumble. And if you did not just go find
them. They're at Amradpod on X,
they're on Twitter and they are on rumblerumble.com/amradpod.
OK, here is your palate cleanse. We talked a little bit about LAR
Ping and people who think that they're in a movie or whatever
else with this assassin guy. How about people who go after
Samuel L Jackson, who I love my. Son was attacked by because you
saw you in deep blue sea. How's that even my fault?
My son is a 22 year old overweight nerd living in my
basement because you decided to do Star Wars and my son has a
severe peanut allergy because of you.
There he is. Hey, hey, you stalking me?
I have a son who's in prison because you were in Shawshank
Redemption. I wouldn't need me.
That was Morgan Freeman. Well, you anyway.
I got a kid who's an insomniac because you never sleep in your
movies. My 3 year old saw you in Django
Unchained. Now she can't stop saying the N
word. You let your kid watch Django?
OK everybody listen, I know I play some bad dudes in movies,
OK? But if my pictures on the
poster, maybe your kid shouldn't watch it.
Don't you people read the descriptions of these movies
before you show them to your kids?
Huh. Look at the ratings that's.
Your responsibility, not mine. See, I can be a monster.
You could be a role model. No big deal.
Yeah, look at the ratings. Take care of your own kids.
Don't let them cut off their genitals.
Go out there and love your neighbors.
Go out there and get to know who the people are so that we can
get some consensus in this country and stop having
ridiculous Supreme Court cases. And for God's sake, learn
something about guns if you're ever going to go talk about it
on CNN. Nothing worse than ignorance
being propagated by people who should know and don't.
Anyway, thanks for coming here to be part of the program.
I appreciate all of you. I appreciate you sharing it.
If you get a chance, make sure you leave a comment over there
on Spotify as we continue to grow.
And Oh yeah, I was going to show you this here.
Do I have it? Boom.
Look at that. Your show was in the top 5% of
video podcast on Spotify. That's the top 15,000 is what I
can tell. They got about 300,000 video
podcasts. So thanks for making the Kyle
Seraphin show what it is. God bless all of you.
Look forward to see you soon. And American Radicals coming up
next. Thanks for listening to the Kyle
Seraphin show, streamed live weekdays on rumble.com/kyle
Seraphin. Follow Kyle on Twitter, Truth
Social and Instagram at Kyle Seraphin.