Are you familiar with FBI Special Agents Kyle Serafin?
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 Seraphim.
Kyle Seraph, 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
putting your face and your name to this.
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.
I don't know where it happened. What a weird moment.
Hey ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Kyle Serafin
show. Today is Tuesday, it is November
the 26th, and it seems like we've got something goofy going
on in the audio. Maybe you guys are hearing this,
maybe you're not. Just double check, 1-2 check,
check. OK, there we go.
We had a little issue getting connected to locals this
morning, but it looks like we've got that resolved and we are
going to be rolling over here live for the rest of the
channels, which is on X and it is on Rumble Kyle, serafin.com,
and it's going to be at rumble.com/kyle Serafin.
Yeah, I'm a little bit disjointed.
That was a weird moment. For some reason, some things
popped up on our screen that don't belong there.
We got a lot to cover today. I've got a full deck, tons of
topics, tons of things to get through.
We're going to be discussing the Biden legacy and the legacy is
actually kind of troubling on top of it.
We are seeing this attempt to deflect from this Biden Levins
legacy by this mainstream media that wants to just focus in on
Donald Trump, the incoming president, and they're freaking
out about things that you wouldn't even believe people
could be upset about. It's actually kind of shocking
to me. Our first story is going to come
from our friends over at Catholic Vote.
So I want to say thanks to them right up front.
And then we'll get deep into the weeds here with just I think a
little bit of comedy, little bit of seriousness and maybe sort of
the terrifying nature of what they're leaving us in the wake
up Cash Patel said it on our program or on on our clip we
played yesterday that we're in sort of a scary time in the next
couple weeks before we see Donald Trump take office because
there's a lot that can be screwed up.
And it seems like that's what's coming our way.
So we got to be aware before we do that.
Let's say thanks to the buddies over at Catholic Vote.
They are at catholicvote.org. It's catholicvote.org,
catholicvote.org, or at Catholic Vote.
If you follow them on the various social media platforms.
We're going to be talking about X today.
And they are, of course, on X, putting out some decent content.
They have collaborated with people like RFK Junior, which is
pretty wild. And they did deliver the vote of
Catholics, which may have been the decisive turn for Donald
Trump in this election cycle. If you guys want to support them
financially, if you want to support them by getting great
news, go to catholicvote.org/loop and the
Loop will come to you in the morning.
Our first story is going to be from the Loop and we really
appreciate them supporting us. Let's get right into it.
Let's try and get my head straight here.
All right, so the first story I want to talk about is our
borders are and the key is not just that he wants to do mass
deportations, which is the thing that Donald Trump has campaigned
upon and said he would do. But the bigger thing is, is what
are we going to do with these states that want to resist?
Now, resistance is something that Donald Trump dealt with in
the first term as well. In fact, for those of you that
have been paying attention to this program, won't surprise
you. There were copy accounts on
Twitter X. It seems like a Twitter X is
going to be more and more in the focus, not just because Elon
Musk is going to be doing this, this department of Government
efficiency, but because it's where the public square really
is. It's what that 40, four, $45
billion bought. It bought a real opportunity to
represent American voices. And of course, now that we have
roughly even representation, we showed you this this survey the
other day saying it's kind of like 47484849 Republican,
Democrats, sort of liberal conservative views on X that's
made people on the left flee because they don't want to stand
and have ideas debated 1:00 to 1:00 with an even footing.
So they're going to places like blue Sky, which apparently is
nonsensical. In any case, the borders are
wants to talk about sanctuary states, sanctuary cities.
These are the people that are resisting at a state level.
The things that the border that the borders are would do that
the federal government actually has the charge to accomplish.
There's a lot of thing the federal government does that it
has no business getting involved in, let's say education.
That should be a state and a local issue.
No question in my mind. But when it comes to handling
policy and the efficiency of deporting human beings that have
snuck over the border, that seems like it's a pretty clear
cut case. Whether you call it DHS or
whether it's something that that existed before that.
The idea of having a border and having Customs and Border
Enforcement, having a Border Patrol, having immigrations and
Customs Enforcement people and enforcement removal operations,
These are all things that have been going on for a very long
time. And in the wake of Donald Trump,
the first time you got this big push, you had accounts created
at the government agencies that were going to resist at the
Department of Interior. They're going to resist at the
Department of Education, all of the Trump policies.
So what do you do with the people that are at the local
level? And here's kind of the article
on it for President Donald Trump's incoming borders are Tom
Holman, who they mentioned is a Catholic because this is
Catholic. Votes Peace vowed that he would
hold states accountable if they defy the administration's border
security efforts. He said what's happening at the
southern border is, in fact, the biggest national security
vulnerability in this country. And it has been since 9:11.
We know the terrorists have crossed the border.
These are all factual. Everyone's kind of like focusing
in right now on the Trans de Agua or Aragua.
Trans de Aragua who you had the story of Lincoln Riley coming
through. You had others that were
potentially taking over apartment buildings in San
Antonio and in places in Colorado.
But there are a lot of other people that have come in.
They've come in from China, they've come in from Pakistan,
they've come in from various parts of Africa, from
Afghanistan. We've seen people come in from
various Latin American countries, still a lot of Ms.
13, El Salvador and the like. So Venezuela is not just the
only place that's exporting these folks.
So the question is, what do you do with them?
First, let's hear what we've heard, promises of some of these
local politicians because this is a truly wild take.
This was a sit down interview with Mike Johnston.
He's the mayor of Denver, which is notoriously blue and
left-leaning right now. Unfortunately for those of you
who live in Colorado, you already know this.
But if you don't live in Colorado, Colorado is a captured
state by just a few little areas, Colorado Springs and
Denver. There may be one others out
there that essentially have the population base in the same way
that you see New York City captured New York where it's a
very red area and 40 of the 45 counties or 42 of the 45
counties or whatever the number is, it's very, very high
percentage. Like in the 90 percents, you
have conservative counties, conservative sheriffs that would
get on board. But the major urban areas are
fighting against it. And this guy, Mike Johnson is
one of them. A little clip of him saying that
he's willing to go to jail. I really hope that the Trump
administration and particularly Tom Holman pushes this forward,
that if these folks want to stand and and act like AOC and
do this sort of this performative nonsense as
politicians, that they actually do get the courage of their
convictions. They get to go sit in a jail
cell, a federal detention Center for harboring illegal aliens in
violation of federal law. I would certainly protest it and
I would expect other residents would do the same.
Trump's new borders are Tom Holman has said that he is
willing to arrest leaders like yourself for standing in the way
of these policies that they want to enact.
Would you be willing to go to jail for these things?
Yeah, I'm not afraid of that, and I'm also not seeking that.
I think the goal is we want to be able to negotiate with
reasonable people how to solve hard problems.
Republican and Democratic presidents in the past have all
tried to find solutions to these problems.
President Reagan help people get access to work so they can stay
and support themselves. Biden, Harris worked on
restricting entry at the border to close down.
There a lot of ways to approach this problem.
We don't think it has to come to this.
But, yeah, I think when you look at, you know, Ralph Carr has
always been one of my heroes. He was the governor who, in the
middle of the internment of Japanese American, said this was
the wrong thing to do. And he stood up.
It was unpopular. People were mad at him about it.
That was the middle of wartime. If the president or any of his
actors are going to do things that we think are illegal or
immoral or UN American, we'll stand up against them.
Oh. If it's illegal, immoral or UN
American as determined by this guy, you also heard him talk
about Japanese Americans and the internment of actual American
citizens that actually lived in this country that actually had a
legal right to be here and were simply rounded up because of a
fake loyalty concern. Isn't that something?
I hope he does get a chance to stand up for his convictions.
He just did a massive gaslight and conflation and and this is
the the problem with fake media. If you said something that
absurd in a public square where many of you can interact, how
many of you would let that stand?
I heard six or seven inaccuracies in there.
He also said that the Biden Harris administration tried to
shore up our problems at the border, tried to tighten them
up. We all know that that's a
gaslight. If you're not familiar with the
term or if you are familiar or you think you're familiar with
it, it just doesn't sit really well with you.
Gaslighting is when someone says something is happening that is
not happening, or vice versa. Something is happening and it's
obvious to you with your own eyes, you can see it, and you're
being told that you are in fact wrong, that your perception is
inaccurate, totally absurd. The new incoming borders are the
opposite of Kamala Harris has gone forward and talked about
this. We're living in the upside down
where people who are supposed to enforce the law are trying to do
the opposite. People who are trying to
actually bring in new policies and are talking about, hey, this
is what this is what the American people voted for, and
we're going to go do it now. He's getting death threats, I'm
sure of that. The number of people on the
loony left that lose their minds.
And I guess maybe the difference between someone like, first of
all, he's got a bigger, a bigger microphone to talk about it.
But Tom Holman doesn't look as nearly as capable because he
looks like he's a little bit out of shape and he's obviously got
a little bit of age. Shouldn't they realize that
they're talking about a armed, an armed grown man in the
conservative space that will not tolerate this sort of thing?
He's talking to Mark Levin here. Give you a little taste of how
upside down it is when saying that you're going to enforce
federal law. The thing that they're going to,
you're going to hear about in a minute because the left is
crying about the fact that Donald Trump is quote UN quote,
getting away with it, that they're shutting down the Jack
Smith investigation. That's where we're going to go
with this, these legacies of upside down.
I think the final piece that I will make the argument and we
will prove over the next show is that the Biden Harris legacy is
that the legacy media has mortally wounded self and
probably cannot recover, not in our lifetimes, in the same way
that the FB is reputation is too tarnished.
In any case, here's Tom Holman saying that everything is
backwards right now. This administration's turned
this world upside down. So now I'm being attacked,
right? I got death threats.
My family's not even living in my home right now.
So all of a sudden, the guys who want to enforce law are the bad
guys. The guys who break the law are
the victims. And for those mayors and those
governors who say they're going to stop me from stop ICE from
doing the job, stop me from doing this job, listen to the
Lake and Riley tape. Listen to the 17 minutes of this
girl's suffering, fighting for her life, fighting for her
breath. This little girl didn't want to
die. She fought like hell.
And listen to that tape that happens every day across this
country at the hands of an illegal alien.
And finally, I'll say this. President Trump has made it
clear we're going to prioritize public safety threats and
national security threats right out of the gate because they
pose the most dangerous country. What governor or mayor is
doesn't want public safety threats and national security
threats out of their neighborhoods, out of their
community. That's your number one
responsibility. So you can hate Trump all you
want, but you got to love your community more than you hate
President Trump. That was actually the same
argument that that RFK Junior made.
He said that we need to love our children more than we hate each
other, and you'd have to love your community more than you
hate Donald Trump. There are people that have
suffered needlessly. Does that mean that there's
going to be no violence if you get rid of all the illegal
aliens in this country? No, of course not.
Does it mean that you're going to stop crime?
No People suck. Now you have a sociology degree.
There are a lot of people that are not great people and they
are from this country. But should anybody be subjected
to an illegal alien that has no right, business or purpose in
this country being defrauded, being harmed or being killed
because the federal government refused to do its job, which is
what we saw? Ugly stuff.
I got a scoop for you. Apparently this is going to go
into the fact that legacy media continues to the clown itself.
Scoop from Axios. It's relevant where it comes
from in a second here, Axios reporting that Trump is likely
to tap loyalist Cash Patel for the top FBI or DOJ post.
This was 20 hours ago. How is that possible?
Oh, it's possible because they actually have no information.
They simply say whatever it is they feel like.
And this is this thing that they think is inflammatory.
People are scared of cash Patel. It lets you know why cash only
is the kind of the move. But Axios is reporting this.
And then they also report the other person that's in play,
which is also accurate from what we've heard.
Andrew Bailey sounds like Andrew Bailey is probably a decent pick
for some things, but I don't think he's the right guy for the
FBI. You got to understand what it
looks like inside the FBI to deal with him, to go out there
and deal with this animal that needs to be wrangled.
It's like, it's like sending someone that's had really good
success training horses to go deal with a rabid dog.
It's just it's not the right tools box.
Andrew Bailey may be great, but maybe they put Andrew Bailey
somewhere if he wants to go and work within the Justice
Department under Pam Bondi. We heard that he was initially
one of the people that was being considered for the AG pick in
the first place in his own right.
There were people that were pushing that along.
But even the folks that were pushing that along are now
pushing Cash Patel to be in charge of the DOJ.
I'm sorry, at the FBI. The weird moment is, is that
this is Axios, which is calling it a scoop and the scoop.
And I read the, the, the, the entirety of the article, the
same thing I read the other day ACNN article that was talking
about why Trump is mad at the FBI and it had no information in
it. This has no information.
There's no there's no sources that they're talking to that
know anything more than you or I Doesn't sound like they can talk
to Cash Patel. Just something that we can do
here. Suspendables can do.
I don't get it. So maybe This is why Axios is
sort of ranting and raving. This is their CEO.
His name is Jim Vandehei. And he's very upset that scoops
can happen by regular people, that regular people can ask
questions, that we can push back against the Denver mayor when he
tweets out something inaccurate or the Biden administration
does. Remember we said it the other
day that Elon Musk was sort of making the argument that you are
the media, Social media has basically been a cesspool of bad
ideas and trolling and all the other kind of nonsense.
But with the opening up of people being able to share their
actual opinions and actual people being able to share
information that they actually have insight on.
If they say so respectfully, if they say so in a meaningful way,
if they add some sort of public discourse value, then you can
build up a pretty good following.
And for this guy to say that that is not media.
The funny thing is their institutions like the FBI and
the DOJ have now actually acknowledged that influencer
types fall under the media category, that people who are
doing podcasts are getting media recognition under their own
policies. It makes it even more
interesting when we go into deeper into the legacy of the by
administration, which was going after the First Amendment.
This is the last gasp of an angry animal that wants to be
able to remain relevant even though they killed their own
relevancy. So here's Jim Vandehei railing
to the National Press Club. Nothing like going to your
friends and telling your friends we are so important while nobody
else agrees with you to take. That's his.
Everything we do is under fire. Elon Musk sits on Twitter every
day or X today saying like we are the media, you are the
media. My message to Elon Musk is both
You're not the media. You having you having a blue
check mark, a Twitter handle and 300 words of cleverness doesn't
make you a reporter. You don't do that by popping off
on Twitter. You don't do that by having an
opinion, you do it by doing the hard work.
Yeah, come on, slow clap 1st. Nothing better than Joe
Scarborough doing a slow clap for losers.
This is losers who keep losing audiences crying about losing.
That's all you can call this. It's actually very entertaining.
The reason that they don't have the recognition is because they
cheated it. They cheated by, by lying, by
censoring, by injecting their opinion and acting like it was
fact. And they've been doing this for
for decades. But it's gotten so egregious and
it's been so easily fact checked in real time that you can't do
this anymore. You cannot get away with this
nonsense. So I'll turn to a media outlet,
a admittedly biased media outlet. 120 years of being
biased in favor of Russia. This is from TASS.
TASS, the Russian news agency. It's a state sponsored agency.
And yet their information is actually much more credible in
some spheres because we know what their bias is.
It's right out in front. The problem that the mainstream
media has had is that they have tried to act like they have no
bias, when in fact it is obvious that they have this clear bias.
This article is important. Military operations in Ukraine
stated this morning as of 334 Eastern Time.
NATO disregards all etiquette in discussing possible pre emptive
strikes on Russia. The NATO military committee
chairman Rob Bauer earlier called for producing more
weapons for precision strikes inside of Russia.
There's also been talk about preemptively placing nukes
inside Ukraine so that we can now nuclearize a conflict in
order to be a deterrent. And these discussions of
preemptive strikes are obviously very unsettling for those of us
who don't want to see a nuclear conflict while we are in the
middle of changing administrations.
How terrifying is it that the people who used to be the anti
war party, this is the reason why they lost the RFK, is why
they lost the Tulsi Gabbard's. It's the reason why they've lost
people like Matt Taibbi, people that are old school liberals.
Look around and say, I cannot abide by what you guys are
talking about. You're talking about something
that used to be known as nuclear proliferation, which is to move
nukes into more places. And I thought the entirety of
the 20th century, at least the end of it was, is that we
thought that was a really bad idea and we were trying to work
against it. And now you have people
legitimately arguing, like, who Who's advising the Biden
administration? Is it Nikki Haley?
Is that who's in there doing this?
Like the warmongers that just want to see bodies stacked up?
It's bad enough that they are killing off 10s of thousands of
young men that will like never be able to go and live in these
places. These countries are going to be
devastated for a long time and our media is just ignoring it.
This is the coverage that they had.
This is ABC. This is why our US mainstream
media continues to die. The article, by the way, I
didn't know we were keeping records on this sort of thing,
but here we are. Apparently Russia sets a new
drone attack record overnight in a Ukrainian barrage, a record
high 188 drones. I don't know where they're
getting their numbers from. And apparently the United States
Air Force tracks this stuff. So they must have a capability
to see what's going on in the skies over there.
That tells you that there are US either planes up like a wax or
something, some kind of collection, or we've got people
on the ground doing collection and, and grabbing this
information, say Gint and so on. A record high 188 drones
attacked Ukraine. Russia launched these drones
into Ukraine on Monday night and on Tuesday morning, expanding
its long range campaign against the Ukrainian infrastructure to
coincide with the onset of winter.
And so you have this whole thing talking about how the Ukrainian
Air Force knocked down 76 of them.
There were 95 that were lost in flight due to possible jamming.
55 ended up flying into Belarus, blah blah blah.
There were four MMM class ballistic missiles.
None of those were shot down. They all made it in.
Critical infrastructure is being hit.
This is the way that they're actually reporting this stuff.
How nuts. So it's very one sided.
It's without any sort of nuance and it's acting like the media
actually have something at stake within this conflict, which they
don't. In theory, they should just be
talking about what is happening, but they weigh in and they only
cover certain types of the news. The one thing that I'm seeing
very conspicuous, so that's part of the Biden legacy, is that not
only have they killed themselves over there, but they've also,
we've got this war that's going on, right?
This is probably one of the major reasons why we saw these
folks lose the election. This is something that popped up
the other day. That's not the right one, is it?
Give me just a moment. How about this, The UN chief and
the Pope are calling for nations to end the use of anti personnel
landmines. This is something I saw pop up
yesterday. I wanted to cover Pope Francis,
maybe not Catholic, but still the UN chief, various people
calling about nations to end the production and the use of
landmines. This is an area denial tool that
goes in on the ground, but then it doesn't actually sit there,
doesn't have any ability to go away.
So you end up with active landmines that are around for a
very long time. They go through and they talk
about why this is a problem and why many nations in in the world
have agreed not to use them. There's something called the
International Mine Ban Treaty, also known as the Ottawa
Convention, and it's been of force for about 25 years.
Notably, the United States is not one of the signatories to
this thing. And anybody who's ever lived in
an area where they have what they call UX OS or unexploded
ordnance, Anyone who's ever spent time walking around where
they have to see a sign pop up. And they have them in New
Mexico, where I used to live. And they had them in in various
parts of even Quantico in Virginia, where there are
bombing ranges, like the possibility of coming across
unexploded ordnance going back all the way to World War 2.
And they get more and more dangerous the more they sit
there. The longer they sit there, the
less likely you are to have the sort of the continuity of that
particular capsule and the and, and the safeguards that are
supposed to be in. So it's only supposed to target
the things they could just blow up all people are nearby and get
hit by them. The thing that's most
interesting and what I would assume a serious media would
cover is the fact that Biden has also recently approved anti
personnel landmines for use in Ukraine.
So this is something that's going to affect the Ukrainian
areas for generations. And of course, it is actually
undoing his own policy from earlier on.
It is the legacy of the Biden ministration in the last few
days to try to throw all of the crap against the wall possible
and leave a mess as much as it can.
And landmines are a pretty ugly mess.
For whatever it's worth. They're not smart weapons.
They are the dumbest possible weapons and they are invisible
and they often times will get put somewhere and the
possibility of them being forgotten, particularly in
war-torn areas as they try to rebuild it becomes a real danger
for kids, for women, for people who are just going about their
business and don't realize what they're talking about, what
they're walking through. This is one of the big legacies.
This is another piece of it right here.
A judge dismissing charges against Donald Trump.
Well, it's not so much the legacy that the charges are
being dismissed. The legacy is 1, The cost, which
we'll cover in a second. Two, the fact that it happened
and we saw the most unbelievably weaponized Justice Department
probably in American history, a blatant and political targeting.
So let's go ahead and go to ABC. Sorry, this is CBS.
We're going to start with CBS. There's a couple of different
people Forbes covered at DOJ's Politico's DOJ desk, couple of
others. I want to kind of dig into what
this thing was as it kind of closes out.
First of all, it does seem like they're shredding documents and
running out the door, doesn't it?
So the judge is dismissing the charges in the DC election case.
It's without prejudice, which means they could bring it back.
I saw Bill Shipley make the argument that the Ballerus move,
the boldest move possible, is that a Trump Justice Department
could reinstate those charges and then ask for them to be
dismissed with prejudice so they're never coming back.
That's actually not a bad idea. Federal judge overseeing the
2020 election case against former President Donald Trump
agreed to dismiss the charges. CNN, not in this particular
article, but in another, said that we were going to hear
echoes of this lack of accountability for generations.
They are catastrophizing it. The District Judge in
Washington, DC agreed to the to the filing because apparently
Justice Department policy forbids the prosecution of a
sitting president. Sure.
But that's not to say that special counsels have an
investigated sitting presidents. We saw it under Trump.
We've seen it under Clinton. We've seen it under others.
Like investigating them is not a big deal.
They usually bring them in for impeachment.
And if they really thought that there was something there, which
we know there's not because it's been adjudicated ad nauseam, but
if there was, they would have kept this thing open.
They would have stood by the courage of their conviction.
And so all they've done with this is let us know exactly how
blatantly partisan it is. And we've also seen members of
the DOJ run away from it. They are taking their toys and
running. They are shutting up shop and
trying to get out, whether they leave the country or whether
they're just trying to fade away.
If you, if you ever work in the in the survival space, if you
ever go to a survival training, especially military ones, one of
the things they tell you to do is the minute that you're
spotted and you know that you've been identified by an enemy
force, you stop moving immediately.
And then you slowly shrink down into your position and you
slowly fade away. Grass, brush, whatever.
And then you go in a different direction.
You create time and distance between you.
And we're seeing these people try to take December and January
to create that time and distance.
I'm going to cover the Southern District of New York in a second
because they're doing the exact same thing.
You can't get away with the stuff, folks, but that's what
they're trying to do. This is the statement that Jack
Smith wrote in his filing. He said after careful
consideration, the department has determined that the Office
of Legal Counsel's prior opinions concerning the
Constitution's prohibition on federal indictment and
prosecution of a sitting president apply to this
situation, and as a result, this prosecution must be dismissed
before the defendant is inaugurated.
That doesn't sound right. It must be dismissed in order to
cover your ass. The prohibition is categorical
and does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charge.
Once again, this is an attempt a a poor attempt to strengthen
what they did and the strength of the government's proof for
the merit of the prosecution, which the government stands
fully behind. Well, it turns out that it the
government doesn't stand fully behind it because if they did
think this was a real problem, you wouldn't allow this thing to
disappear and you would continue to investigate.
You would continue to stick around and you would wait and
present it to members of Congress and say this is an
issue. That's not it.
This is CYA and always has been. So what did this cost us?
In addition to the legacy being that we've lost tons of
credibility in institutions that people used to actually believe
in, it actually had a a tangible a monetary cost.
And I want to talk about that in one second before we do, I want
to say thanks to my buddies. Speaking of cost, go ahead and
pay some bills here with our friends at Patriot Coolers and
you guys can get the link on the show's screen right now.
It's Patriot coolers.com. The promo code is on the screen
as well. It's Kyle.
You can stand by and we'll probably get hooked up with a a
new promo code tomorrow. I'm thinking they're going to go
with their Black Friday deal pretty soon.
So if you guys are thinking about it, shop it now.
Figure out what your card's going to look like, if you
wanted to get one for yourself or as a Christmas gift for
somebody that you love and they will love you back because they
are fantastic. Patriot coolers.com is where you
go. You can also go into our show
descriptions for those of you that are looking on places like
Rumble, you hit see more and it'll drop down the list and
it'll show you all the links we have and it'll give you the
promo codes. But you can find the Kyle Serif
and show collection, which is some of them are sitting right
over my shoulder right there. They're going to be pre engraved
with either our badge or a flag and so on.
Whatever it is you guys want to get, whether it be a small
coffee cup, a larger 11 that'll fit in your your minivan cup
holder or not, because you got that option too.
You can get the massive general. What is it called?
No, the major, which is 40 oz, which is apparently also an area
denial weapon for dogs if you put hot stuff in there.
In any case, let's get into the cost of this thing, shall we?
Here it is. This is not even current.
They haven't even released their actual current.
This is coming back to August, so months ago.
The accountability for Jack Smith and the DOJ special
prosecution of Donald Trump have run a tally of more than $35
million. This reminds us of the Mueller
report, which cost roughly $40 million to generate, that there
was, in fact, maybe some talking but no crimes that they could go
after. Special counsel Jack Smith and
the Justice Department spent more than $35 million
prosecuting Trump, according to disclosure documents, through
March only. So we've got about another
almost year worth of prosecution that is not accounted for.
You can expect that this thing is going to cost, well, more a
way over that $40 million mark that we saw the Mueller report.
So now 80 to $100 million, let's say, of wasted government
dollars. Will we see those people
prosecuted for fraud, waste, abuse?
Probably not. Are they those things, though?
I think pretty undeniably special counsel and the broader
Justice Department, $35.7 million between November of 2022
when he was first appointed and then going through now we're in
November of 2024, so you'd imagine it's going to be quite a
bit higher. Clues, $19.4 million
specifically spent directly by Jack Smith's office, plus
another $16.3 million in resources.
Some of these are people that would otherwise have been doing
something else. So what was the opportunity
cost? What was it that we were
spending this money on that could have been spent on
something else that the American people wanted?
Would it have been prosecuting those that belonged in prison
instead of sneaking across our border?
DOJ only has a finite amount of resources, even though it feels
infinite. And then you think about the
other things they were doing where they were investigating
me, they were investigated Garrett O'boyle, they were
they're investigating a doctor, a Tam Heim who's in who's in
Dallas area and and they're out there investigating what?
Because he went and said there are members of the Texas Medical
Board that are violating Texas State law and engaging in trans
surgeries and hormone admissions, even though they
said they're not. That's what our Justice
Department, because it's a federal case.
That's what the Justice Department's going after.
This is another thing I found pretty incredible.
DOJ boost their spending. This is not another, this is a
one, one of these articles that's not super current.
It's actually going back a full year.
But look what they spent on security for these people
because what they were doing was blatantly partisan.
And then they're going to act like you're the problem, you're
the problem because that's why they needed the security.
By the way, the Justice Department spent more than $4.4
million on protection for the special counsel's team between
April and September of 2023. What is that?
May, June, July, August, September, five months, almost
$1,000,000 a month on security in 2023 because of threats to
them. Can you believe this stuff is
coming from Politico? They released this findings and
then they just show that they had to get the United States
Marshall Service. So what did the Marshall Service
normally do? What does the Marshall Service
spend their time doing when they are not protecting Jack Smith
and members of this disgusting, you know, political witch hunt?
They go after fugitives. They go and they hunt down
people that have done violent crimes and are on the run under
what are called unlawful flight to avoid prosecutions.
You FAP warrants. The Marshall Service is a great
manhunting organization. And instead they put US
marshals, deputy marshals into protective details.
It's pretty wild. It's pretty wild that that's
what the the Democrat Party decided was most important with
our money, right? That's where it went.
So that's a legacy that the Biden administration is going to
have to own. The destruction of the
credibility and media, media piece of it as well.
How about this other one that we don't want to ever forget?
This is the Taliban. Now they're in charge of
Afghanistan. Why?
Because in the first year of the Biden administration, they just
ditched it. 13 service members killed at Abbey Gate.
But there's a bigger legacy. There's more legacy there.
There is the absolute abandonment of the women and
children that were living there that knew nothing except United
States occupation, which meant a more western existence and a lot
more freedom. And then we pulled out.
So what happens? Taliban takes over.
They do what the Taliban does. This is from NBC.
They unironically are talking about how Donald Trump is an
existential threat to America at the same time they're talking
about a Biden administration legacy without giving them any
credit. Taliban detained journalist over
250 times in Afghanistan since its takeover, per the UN.
This article says that the Taliban land Foreign Ministry
said the arrest figure was exaggerated.
Because that's what we do. We take their word for it.
The reason we have to take their word for it is because we're not
there to do what we were doing. And we were doing it pretty like
they wanted to do military spending.
I guess the best way to do military spending is to abandon,
what, $80 million worth of, or $80 billion worth of equipment
and then try to build it up again.
This is a, this is a legacy you have to sit on.
Those arrested had committed a crime, they said.
I'm sure there was a real crime. By the way, that is a great
picture which comes from the Los Angeles Times of these of these
Taliban fighters driving around this this time, at least they
have a case. If you're looking on the screen,
at least they're not driving around with like, American
jeeps, Humvees, tanks and holding our ARS.
For whatever it's worth, the journalists in Afghanistan have
worked under, quote, UN quote challenging conditions, says the
UN mission and the UN Office on Human Rights.
They often face unclear rules on what they can and cannot report.
Interesting. So in addition to shutting down
the Free Press here, we did it pretty definitively in a place
that probably needs a little bit more information than that.
What are you going to do? It's part of the legacy.
Should we do another piece? This one's good.
This one actually hits a little bit closer to home for me.
Top prosecutors in New York announced resignation. the
United States Attorney for the Southern District of Newark, his
name is Damian Williams, he prosecuted Puff Daddy or
whatever. He goes by Diddy.
Also, Bob Menendez says he's going to step down next month.
He's going to be leaving effective end of day on December
the 13th. Also went after Project Veritas.
He started in 2021, the beginning of the Biden
administration and has been doing political prosecution for
quite a while. How interesting, huh?
But remember the DOJ, the FBI, because that's who's going to
give the information for these prosecutions.
They are very, very unbiased. They are very normal, regular
people just doing the right thing at the right time.
And that's why we should be, you know, upset that we're seeing
this change in time, that we're seeing this, this, this sea
change over there. It's it's unfair and and
unreasonable if you were to listen to the mainstream who
continues to gaslight us that that Donald Trump doesn't use
these people to vet his cabinet, which is another thing we keep
hearing about. I've got a little taste of that
coming in from the folks at MSNBC playing clips from CNNN.
Again, they've the clown themselves.
I want you to listen to this fantasy from Joe Scarborough.
Again, I didn't mean to do 2 on that.
I actually didn't realize he was at the end of the other clip,
but Joe Scarborough talks about the situation that his
father-in-law got engaged in. We're talking a little bit about
that legacy. The the, the concept of putting
nukes in in Ukraine. It's it's pretty close to home
for this guy, except he's talking about a fantasy.
Because if you listen to the end of this, you're going to hear
the last and most important thing, which is what most of
this media does. They operate on things that are
made-up anyway. Why is Trump not letting his
cabinet get vetted by guys like this?
Here's why. We would have an ineffective
military that was not capable of deployment if we were to pull
out all the women and say you cannot be in combat.
The policy is set by the president, the United States,
not by the cabinet members. I think Pete Texas will follow
the lead of the commander in chief.
These latest revelations prompting questions about
vetting for Mr. Trump's cabinet picks and apparently skipping
the traditional FBI background checks.
Why wouldn't we get these background checks for the most
important job in the United States government?
I don't think the American public hears who does the
background checks. What the American public cares
about is to see the mandate that they voted in delivered upon.
Well, actually, I would rather the FBI investigate people that
have the most important positions in the world than
Barney Fife. And I think most of Americans
are with me. Why in the world would you not
want the FBI to look into the background of people who are in
the military chain of command and will have a say in whether
the United States launches nuclear weapons or not?
I can tell you, Bob Gates tells the story time and again about
the night that Doctor Burzynski got the message to the Soviet
Union. Had launched incoming nuclear
missiles towards the United States.
And he said that he sat downstairs while his children,
including Mika and his wife, were upstairs because he knew
they would all be dead in 15 minutes.
But they called around. They made the right choices.
They realized that actually it was a false alarm and the
country and the world was saved. Ah.
The country was saved from a threat that never existed
because it was a false alarm. This reminds me of the reason
why one of my brothers doesn't talk to me very often.
And it was because while Donald Trump was president, you guys
may remember this, there was a a warning message that went out
and said incoming ballistic missiles threat take cover to
those in Hawaii. It turned out some idiot had
pushed the wrong button and sent this thing out.
And so they were saved, I suppose, because some guy sent
out a fake, you know, false alarm.
And then that that that problem didn't actually end up
materializing. He just told the story that they
famously tell about how sober people realized that the world
was about to end because the Soviet Union had launched
missiles when the Soviet Union didn't actually launch missiles.
How is that on a mainstream media?
How is that a mainstream story being told when there's no facts
in it? It's just his like it's his
memoirs of things that he remembered that didn't happen.
It's like the equivalent of Joe Scarborough telling me last
night I had a dream and I dreamt that the Trump cabinet was very,
very bad. It was so bad that they launched
nuclear weapons. And then I woke up and I
realized that we could stop them by not letting them become the
cabinet and not letting the thing that happened in my mind
not actually happen. It's fantasy.
It's his fantasy. It's a leftist fantasy.
It's the same thing. How about the guy that didn't
actually start any new wars is stepping in?
And why would you want the FBI to do it?
Because there's been unlimited examples of the FBI being
politicized and nobody wants it. I don't understand how they
don't get it. They don't get it.
They'll, by the way, they think that they are still relevant.
They think that they are balanced.
They think that they are fair. They think they are telling the
real stories and the best is watching them debate it.
Maybe the single most interesting part of the last
couple months has been watching Scott Jennings just dominate CNN
the entire network. He just body slams them
regularly with actual facts. The funny thing about it is, is
once you put one conservative who's allowed to actually speak
with a hot mic, one regular person with a little bit of
sanity on one of these networks, it suddenly becomes really
compelling because even five against one, the facts are in
his favor. That's why X is more interesting
right now. That's why watching these
things, which I've actually seen the progression of it, not as a
guy who watched Twitter very much, but as it's gone from
Twitter into X and we're kind of seeing it move.
What we're seeing is, is that there's a less and less
censorship of people saying things that are probably true.
There's also some BS out there. I actually put some out last
night. I let you guys know that they we
need to ban these 556 cartridges.
If you guys didn't see that, you can go to my my Twitter page
right now and see people that are on the right that are just
losing their minds because they're used to being gas lit.
We're seeing all these people very angry about things that are
not true, but watch Scott Jennings just dismantle this
lady and they think that they're the most balanced because
they're the the voice they agree with.
It's funny to watch it, especially from the outside.
It's like they don't know the rules of the fight anymore and
they're still trying to maintain some relevance.
Also, I heard what you were saying about XI, saw a survey
this week. It's now the most ideologically
balanced user platform. God, stop.
Stop. It's too early.
I just sat down. I've only been here for two
years. I continue to say you cannot say
that what I found, we've reported it on this network.
It's not accurate and you know it.
OK, you I'll let you make your say thought can I but my point
is can I reframe it a different way because the what the site
changed radically right. So whether you think the voices
it are it is somehow more balanced now that's fine.
But no doubt Musk's influence is profound and that you open it up
and now you're there with his opinion and he is now part of
this administration. So does anyone else think think
that there should be this greater concern about
billionaires purchasing media companies?
Would you be worried if Bill Gates controlled MSNBC?
No. Because he's sane.
Because MSN. Would you be worried about
anybody? No, you're just worried about
the guy that doesn't agree with you, which is why you have it
stacked like basically five against two.
And you'll notice they tend to be black women who don't know
what's going on. I think they were chosen for
looks. I think they were chosen for
their their aesthetic appeal because they are relatively
attractive where they're easy enough.
They're they're relatively articulate about the wrong
things. They don't make any bit of
sense. And then they also put stuff
like this on there. This is also from CNN.
So remember, Axe is biased. Elon Musk is a far right wing
extremist. The guy who's basically like a
libertarian Democrat from the 90s.
He's like this weird kind of mix about personal freedom, but he's
certainly not conservative. You couldn't say that, nor would
he claim that, I don't think. Then you've got Dan Goldman
coming on and they're going to spend their time talking about
Donald Trump trying to subvert the Constitution.
This is why Jack Smith shouldn't have quit.
So say it. One of the dumbest members of
Congress, one of the most spoiled and entitled brats, a
person who be clowned himself by people who don't do this for a
living. Like my buddy Garrett, who went
in front of Congress and basically just ate this guy's
lunch even though he theoretically he was a
prosecutor. Here he is arguing that Donald
Trump might subvert the Constitution because after a
Democrat was elected four times, the first person that ever sort
of disobeyed or went against the tradition that George Washington
established, FDR, went out there and made us pass a
constitutional amendment saying that we shouldn't have a
president for life, but Donald Trump might try.
Even though it's settled. It's not even it's not even case
law, people. It's a constitutional amendment.
So it is the supreme law. So here you go.
Here's Dan Goleman talking about introducing legislation in a
pure virtue signal that would reaffirm an amendment to our
Constitution. I don't know if you can get more
diluted than this, but this is the serious balanced news
information of CNN. You recently introduced a
resolution to clarify the Constitution's two term limit
for presidents. Do you think that there's a
serious push among Republicans to change federal law to allow
Trump to run in 2028? Well, let me just give you the
example that I just mentioned, which is that it appears to have
been completely normalized that Donald Trump could either pardon
himself or dismiss criminal charges against him if he
becomes president. At one point, that was anathema.
And everyone was like, oh, my God, that's crazy.
That can't possibly be. It's the same thing now.
This is how Donald Trump operates.
He floats it, he normalizes it, and then it just becomes part of
the common parlance. And so we wanted to lay down a
marker to say and put everyone on record.
Republicans included. That the Constitution is very
clear that he cannot serve another term.
And what my fear is, is that with him floating that with some
of his cabinet picks, which clearly are prioritizing
political loyalists, that Donald Trump is well on his way to
dismantling our government and the way that it operates.
And we and Congress, the Republicans, especially in the
Senate, need to be a check and balance to ensure that our
government continues to function for the people, not for Elon
Musk and other billionaires. OK, All right.
Well, that sounds great. So you think that Donald Trump
is going to ignore the 22nd Amendment, which was passed in
and ratified in 1951, that has been settled for most of his
lifetime, and he's going to need up another federal law, another
piece of paper, 'cause he's going to run through the
Constitution. So obviously we should have a
federal law that's restates what is in the Constitution so that
our government can continue working the way that it's
supposed to for the people. And we're really, really scared
apparently, of the political actors, these partisan hacks
getting involved in cabinet positions they don't belong in.
OK, Dan Goldman, let me play your buddy Pete Buttigieg
because he's trying to answer for something that seems pretty
hard to do. Again, a totally non political,
a totally qualified and capable person, a former mayor of a tiny
town. He did a great job as a as
secretary of Transportation, right?
This is what you're standing behind.
Guys, do you know this story, $7.5 billion?
What do we get for? It the Federal Highway
Administration says only 7 or 8 charging stations have been
produced with a 7 1/2 billion investment that taxpayers made
back in 2021. Why isn't that happening more
quickly? So the president's goal is to
have half a million chargers up by the end of this decade.
Now, in order to do a charger, it's more than just plunking a a
small device into the ground. There's utility work.
And this is also so really a new category of federal investment.
But we've been working with each of the 50 states, every one of
them is getting formula dollars to do this work, engaging them
in the first handful again by 20, thirty 500,000 chargers.
And the very first handful of chargers are now already being
physically built. That's a hell of a spin.
It is 7 1/2 billion dollars, seven or eight chargers.
They had to lay down the cables. Apparently there's no
electricity where they wanted to build them.
Pretty incredible. I guess that by Nomics is
working. He just said coppers become much
more expensive in the chat. Very good.
Parker's saying it. OK, got it.
How about this one? How about another piece of the
legacy, Hurricane Helene, millions of North Carolinans
speaking about like laying down cables and making sure that we
have power and shelter. Isn't that the whole purpose of
the federal government? When we have things like FEMA,
isn't it supposed to go out there and be able to hedge
against emergencies and manage them properly?
They've bailed out the National Guard in North Carolina, nowhere
to be found. I'm being, I'm talking to Steve
Baker who's got folks on the ground over there saying that
the North, that the North Carolina National Guard is
pulled completely. So they are not just doing a bad
job with our billions of dollars in infrastructure.
They are actually maliciously attacking by pulling resources
away so that people die. It's actually getting into the
freezing cold right now. I'll show some videos maybe
tomorrow as we think about Thanksgiving of the number of
people that are living in tents and RV's, if they're lucky.
We have the resources and we squander billions of dollars on
stupidity. But let's not forget that there
are people that are basically being punished because they
voted the wrong way. And again, that legacy of
mainstream media kind of clowning itself.
What do they say about this story?
Because there's a much bigger story.
It's that lots of people are are without water and power.
They're without any sort of like safety and shelter.
This story brought in by ABC, predictably, there are some very
ethnic names that wrote this, said that Hurricane Helene is,
is impacting the socially vulnerable.
I don't know what a socially vulnerable person is.
I don't actually know what that definition means.
Apparently it's a heavyset black lady with a Marge Simpson
haircut. I guess that's a socially
vulnerable person based on the picture they show of Angela
McGee, who is the person you see on the screen right now.
But I don't know what's socially vulnerable about her.
I'm, I'm sad that she's sitting there in a position where she
doesn't have a place to live. That's not good, but I don't
think it has anything to do with social vulnerability.
How about physical vulnerabilities where you don't
actually have 4 walls and a roof?
A storm passed over. She found her house razzed to
the ground. Priceless sentimental items gone
forever. Four of her eight children with
her. Apparently they lived in a
trailer. Is that?
Is that what it is? Socially vulnerable people are
people who live in trailers. Because it seems like we have
the resources to be able to do something about this.
And Americans sort of assume that when we write our checks or
we see the deductions for our federal taxes that they are
going to go to do the things that the federal government kind
of claims that it has the capabilities of doing with no
evidence. It is the reason why I said it
the other day, A lot of the cabinet picks are not going to
matter that much because the federal government doesn't do
anything. Well, it just doesn't.
It's never been effective. It's the worst solution to every
problem, including when it's the only solution and when there are
problems that arise that they're supposed to solve and they
don't. It should encourage people,
including people on the left, that there is no evidence that
the federal government does a good job.
And so who cares if you spend the money on it?
So that might be one of the last little legacies that Biden is is
hammering home in his final days in office.
I'm going to show you 2 little more piece of example.
One of them is what's happening at the University of Texas at
Austin. Now, I'm taking that with a
grain of salt because it's being reported by, again, mainstream
media, but it's interesting. The, the first one though, is
going to come from the Financial Times because this is the the
worry. There was an entire information
like like organization built up. There was an industry called the
misinformation industry or the anti misinformation industry.
Again, going back to that place, that Twitter censorship, that
social media censorship, that all media censorship, including
like regular print publications couldn't get their word out.
Donald Trump's return to office sends shivers through the anti
misinformation world. Some of the quotes in this, by
the way, by the Financial Times are absolutely hysterical.
They are like I, I, I cannot help but laugh at them.
The incoming Trump administration's vowed to
dismantle the left wing quote UN quote censorship cartel.
I like how they put that in scare quotes has thrown a shadow
over the cottage industry of academics, nonprofits, and
researchers that sprang up to combat a tide of digital
misinformation. Can we just, can we just take a
second to to just look at the opening sentence of this
particular article? A cottage industry of academics,
nonprofits, and researchers. So professionally useless people
in this case that have have obsessed about what they think
are improper opinions or improper phrasing of actual
factual things. Because remember that the
misinformation world is not just misinformation, it's miss diss
and malinformation. Misinformation is things that
are theoretically inaccurate, but it's not on purpose
disinformation or information OPS that are intentionally
seeded with false information, kind of like what we see from
the White House press secretary. And then we'll talk about
malinformation, which is giving out information that is
inconvenient, the inconvenient, improper opinions because they
don't go along with it. The thing that we heard that the
MPRCEO said yesterday about our, our, our mistaken interest in
the truth and our reverence for the truth, that has gotten in
the way of getting consensus and narrative.
Researchers fear Donald Trump will make good on his past
promises to crack down on further misinformation fields
after because of alleged election interference.
Among those threats, he said he would seek to curb funds to
universities. Thank flipping God, curb the
funds to the universities that have engaged in censorship
activities such as flagging social media content for removal
or blacklisting. So if you were someone that was
going after censorship, which was antithetical to American
academics for most of history, if you were, if you were
interested in flagging things for blacklisting or removal, if
you were part of the censorship apparatus, then you're worried
you're going to lose federal funds.
There is no reason there should be federal funds.
Again, this should actually be prosecuted.
This is something that I would say is a conspiracy against
rights. You do have a First Amendment
right, do you not? If there are more than one
person talking about how do we keep people from expressing
their opinions? That seems like a 241 charge
which they used against Donald Trump.
That's just me. That's just me saying that this
guy, sorry guy, this is Megan Squire.
We don't want to assume that that's a man, although it could
be. Quote, I think it will be just a
tsunami of critiques and witch hunts, says the deputy director
of analytics at the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is a
hate group, by the way, and the FBI leaned on to create their
anti Catholic Intel product. Quote, I suspect some people in
academia where you get to choose your research will self censor
or soften the research or shift their application to another
area. We'll just have to wait with
bated breaths. Bated breaths.
She waits for bated breaths. One professor in the field,
speaking on a condition of anonymity for fear of
retribution, said, I'm pretty effing scared this stuff
happens. I will be on a plane out of
America. Good flippin riddance.
Take your crap ideas and your communism out of here.
Take your authoritarian for literally Hitler out of here.
That'd be fantastic. We would all benefit, we really
would. Should we check in on the libs
and see how they're doing? These opinions are totally fine,
by the way. You're totally OK with having
these? They don't mind people saying
things that are false as long as it agrees with them.
This is coming from a shell shock KKK or shell shock Kaka.
I don't know how you pronounce it.
It's a count on X Very fun has been categorizing the leftist
meltdown. It's kind of like a Libs of
TikTok style, but specifically for people that have meltdown
about Donald Trump coming back into office and the, the, the,
the crying of this guy who looks very soft and gentle and
probably needs to get on a plane along with that professor and
the cries from academics. They're almost identical.
You can't actually separate them.
They have the same exact bad information.
This person is operating on miss diss or malinformation, but
there's no censorship of it, nor should there be.
By the way, let them go. I want to hear what they have to
say. Academics used to do that too.
I see Trump supporters and Donald Trump himself celebrating
justice not being served, celebrating that his federal
cases are have been dismissed or being dismissed, celebrating a
convicted criminal not facing justice, a criminal who
committed crimes with classified documents January 6th and all
the other crimes he's committed not having any culpability, any
accountability. Yet they say they are for law
and order. Yeah, they sure like to call
immigrants coming here for a better life criminals.
Especially the criminals. But they don't want any
accountability for the billionaire who tried to be
above the law. Now, I've said it before, I have
nothing against criminals. I mean, there are a lot of
people who are good people who commit crimes and they're sorry
for those crimes. They do restitution for those
crimes. They making amends for what
they've done, give back to society, better their life.
That's great. But if you voted for Donald
Trump, you're probably a real criminal, the kind that needs to
be dealt with. Who says that?
Who says I have nothing against criminals?
Man, some captured goofiness right there.
I don't want to get too deep on it.
So maybe that guy who probably went to university and probably
didn't get educated needed to go to a university where they
actually sorted people out by their ability to think.
Maybe sorted out their their academic, their faculty by the
ability to assess mental capabilities.
I remember my dad actually taught in College in Florida for
a little while. He was told that he had to give
certain grades to people they had to pass, even though they
were not competent to pass the course.
And then he didn't want to do that anymore, which makes sense
because my dad kind of has the same sense of fairness than I
do. University of Texas at Austin,
which is a pretty good school here in Texas and historically
was a decent school is kind of trying to flip it up.
When you listen to this, imagine hearing this and thinking that
this is controversial, that people who are simply brought
into the university that are offered admission because their
capabilities of their minds, the thing that they're going to
train. If that is controversial and
they don't look diverse. I recall that friends of mine I
went to, I graduated high school in the year 2000 and plenty of
us knew that we couldn't go to the elite universities because
we couldn't afford it. We wouldn't necessarily.
We might get in, but we wouldn't get to offer scholarships
because the scholarship money was going to people that were
dimmer and less accomplished academically than we were
because diversity. That was happening in the 90s
for sure. I had a buddy who was
essentially a white guy, but he had like a one quarter Puerto
Rican background. He's a friend of mine and and
Rob managed to get admissions to everywhere because of that
Puerto Rican scholarship that he was given, but otherwise would
not have been granted. I wouldn't have been granted the
same thing even though I had superior test scores and all the
others. It's very interesting to see
that. So imagine an academic
university that simply is evaluating people on the thing
that they actually do. This might be one of the lasting
legacies breaking the woke spell, which would be
incredible. Gender, race, ethnicity.
What is the factor of that in your admissions decisions?
We don't take any of that into consideration and admissions,
the primary thing that we're interested in is the mind.
Meaning what? The kind of capacity to think
deeply, to answer questions, to challenge norms.
I've got to tell you, we did not see a particularly diverse
student body. We are putting resources into
finding talent of an intellectual variety, and if
you're interested in diversity, I recommend you look at the
social backgrounds of our students at the family
circumstances of our students. As for admissions, UATX swaps
DEI, diversity, equity and inclusion for what some call Mei
merit, excellence and intelligence.
How would you describe members of the founding class?
You're outspoken. You'll never enter a
conversation and leave without something that you didn't know
before talking to someone. Olivia On Tunes.
Dylan Wu, Constantine Whitmire, Grace Price and Jacob Hornstein
are among the 92 students in the inaugural class.
If UT is built around Longhorn football, the focal point of
UATX. Pursuing the truth.
So you stop by telling the truth.
Pursuit of truth, Fearless pursuit of truth to me is I have
this kind of mentality that the best way that you should go
about your life is to always assume that you're wrong in some
capacity. You're prepared for that right
to be challenged and stress tested.
And it's not just even prepared. It's I.
That's why I'm at this school. I want them to be challenged
because I know that I'm wrong in some way.
What are some things that differentiate you guys?
We're very intellectually diverse.
I've met people of every political persuasion here from
like far left Democrats who are for Bernie Sanders, or to the
left at that. Even to people who would make
Donald Trump look like liberal. Roughly half the students come
from Texas, 1/3 are female. They share academic strength,
averaging in the 92nd percentile on the SAT.
Some were accepted at schools like the University of Chicago
in Georgetown, but chose UATX for what it is and is not.
OK. I have to say I just misspoke.
I got caught in there with the words University and Austin and
Texas. All of their UATX is University
of Austin at Texas or in Texas. So that is not University of
Texas at Austin. That's a shame because I really
thought that maybe they were turning around the state school
down the street from us. OK, that makes so much more
sense. I always like when I was, I was
like a man. That's kind of like a big
reversal. No, the founding class of a, a
new university that is actually prioritizing academic
achievement. Good for them.
All right, so you learn something new everyday.
All right. With that being said, the one
thing that many of us do know, we're going to kind of wrap this
thing up. I like I said, I think that is
the legacy of the Biden administration.
They're going to end up killing woke and these kind of ideas are
going to be much more prevalent and all the people that are
whining and crying will find themselves with less and less of
an audience. The one thing that will never
not have an audience is comedy. The one thing that will always
be true is our human experiences that are generationally
accepted. It doesn't matter if you are in
your 80s or if you are in your 20s.
If you are a man and you are married, this will likely
resonate with you. And if you have dealt with women
in your life, even if you are unmarried, you probably can
understand where this comes from.
It's a little light hearted poke at the thing that we are all
trying to do, which is just get along as we get close to
Thanksgiving. It's hard.
It's hard for some people. It's harder for us to try to
figure out what the right answer is.
Tell me that this man is wrong. Let me know in the comments.
This is a good little moment that we women, we, we do love
you and we do. We are trying, but sometimes
it's more complicated than you realize.
My wife and I cracked up about this yesterday.
So my wife fluctuates pretty violently between We don't have
any money, the kids need shoes, we're going to starve to death
tomorrow, and let's go on vacation.
We never go anywhere. Let's go to Norway.
And there's no criticism in there because I know there's a
storm inside of you ladies. It's just raging and you don't
understand it any better than we do.
And that storms trying to take all of us out.
And I know that's got to be difficult, but when I hear women
say their husbands don't listen to him, that's not the problem.
We are listening. The problem is we don't know
which one to listen to, because if we listen long enough, you'll
say everything, and we don't know which one counts because
you don't say Simon Says. So if we show up at the wrong
place with the wrong thing, just know that we're trying.
Just know that we're trying. That's all you got to know.
That's a short palate cleanse for you guys today.
I hope you have a fantastic Tuesday.
We will be doing our last show of the week tomorrow.
I want to thank all of you guys for being part of it.
And for those of you that don't think that I like the Second
Amendment because you don't understand sarcasm, humor and
sort of the snarky trolling that I do on the political left, how
about you go check out my buddies over at Shield Arms, an
American firearms manufacturer in Montana, America, centrally
located, but in the Flathead Valley in Bigfork.
It's an awesome place. They're awesome people.
The people that run it are great.
You should check them out if you're interested in a fantastic
firearm or the accessories they do, which are great to be able
to add capacity, including the high capacity clipizines for
your semi automatic, fully semi automatic pistols.
Yeah, yeah. Check themoutshieldarms.com
promo code Kyle. Promo code Kyle saves you 10%
site wide on there. Don't miss out on that.
If you're looking for something for someone who loves the Second
Amendment in your life for the Christmas, the Hanukkah, the
Kwanzaa holidays that are coming up, check them out.
We appreciate all them. All right folks, have a great,
fantastic day. God bless you.
I will see you again tomorrow with more snarkiness and
trolling, I promise. 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.