Take a look behind the curtain with a real whistleblower in
American Patriot. Prepare to embrace the
uncomfortable truth, because this programme has no time for
comforting lies. Here is civil liberties
enthusiast, Second Amendment defender, and recovering FBI
agent Kyle Serif. Well, hello my friends, and
welcome to the Kyle Serafin Show.
Today is Tuesday, December the 12th, and we are rolling live on
rumble.com/kyle serafinrumble.com/kyle Serafin.
Join us there if you're anywhere else.
That's where we're at and that's where the chat is going on.
I just had to tell Joe Dirt that he has to lock his doors and
drop his drawers. Give me a hard time for being on
time today. I don't know what that's all
about, folks. Today was one of those days.
When we woke up in the morning, we looked out, We went, What the
hell is going on? And then I remembered, oh, yeah,
of course I know what's going on.
There's a war. There's a war going on in this
country right now. And the war is for your speech
and for your thought. It's been going on for for
months. It's been going on for a couple
of years, actually. And one of the things that's
most troubling about it is that it is actually getting kinetic.
And it's going after places like rumble.
We're going to talk about what was going on yesterday, what may
happen even today because it looked like it was already
having some issues. And we're going to get into sort
of the denial of service. What that means, why the left
has decided that they are not interested in free speech.
I think it's worth noting they've changed the terms.
We're going to discuss that a little bit.
We're also going to talk about what's going on with this Trump
indictment. There's been a movement on it,
taking it up to the Supreme Court.
What it means we're going to revisit, we're going to revisit
the indictment because every time I read it, it makes me just
shake my head and just go, what in the actual hell is going on
in this country? So we're going to cover that
down and we'll give you a little bonus, a little sneak peek on
something that we read in the loop yesterday with a little bit
further information. That's always interesting, the
way that even people that tend to be on our side cover stories
makes me interested. And when people leave things out
of stories, I think it's also interesting.
So we're going to talk about what is being said and what is
not being said in some of these stories that are going on
related to attacks on Catholic churches or churches in general,
face Act violations and so on. So stick around for all of that
stuff. Let's get started off.
There was a very vigorous discussion going on in our chat
before we started rolling about water purification, which is to
say people are concerned. I think many of you that are out
there are interested what happens if everything stops
working? What if it just stops working
when you turn on the tap, when you go to the electrical switch,
when you go to the to the store and then the food is all sold
out. So let's bring up one of our
sponsors here. This is an option to hedge
against the uncertainties that are out there.
For patriots.com/kyle, that's using my promo code.
Kyle, you can always go and do that instead.
But for patriots.com/kyle, let's check out water verification you
guys are worried about. There's a couple things you
could do. Number one, you can carry water
around with you. They've got pouches, emergency
water. That may be a short term
solution to be able to get a case of potable water that you
can move around. It's not the easiest thing to
do. The better thing is have some
kind of a filtration system so you can take water from any
number of places. And I also would say do some, do
some double, double service on this.
You should have yourself a little bit of bleach, a little
bit of iodine, a little bit of ways to take water from, you
know, if you didn't have any other options.
We used to philtre it and survival school through a sock
in a canteen just to keep the sediment out.
Then you throw your iodine in there.
Then you drink whatever horrible stuff you've got in and you'll
live. And you know, it's an option.
If you want to have better tasting water, you can always go
and check out one of these types of water filtration systems.
I have one very similar to this. We bought it before I started up
with four patriots, but I've got one that does the same thing.
It's basically a charcoal philtre.
As long as it philtres out all of the sediment and the dye,
that's what you want to see. If you want to put like a little
bit of red food colouring in there, you should be able to run
it through the philtre and come out the other end of it without
that coming through and you'll know that you've got something
that is doing its job. Yeah, there's some other
independent things, but the EPA has been starting to crack down
on water filtration. So folks, if you don't have it
and our government tells you you can't have it, usually tells me
that we should have it. There's a lot of things like
that. Crypto is one of those things
that I'm kind of on the fence about.
Same sort of deal where they're telling you they want to
regulate. Anytime the government gets
involved, I'm kind of like whatever.
I'm going to set my my, my watch to the opposite.
And when a bunch of people that are in a cult go against it,
then I also go like, oh, now, now I'm once again, I don't like
it. If you try to force me to think
anything, you guys will find out that you are going in the wrong
direction. So some of you have found that
out as you've tried to tell me what I need to think.
Anybody that pushes me, whether it be my wife, daily, kids
daily, Ryan Matta, who constantly has tried to tell me
certain things, be like, what's your angle here, bro?
Even people I like. So all my friends know this
about me. I'm just a noted contrarian and
I actually encourage all of you to do the same thing.
Not so much that you're a contrarian, but you're a
sceptic. You should look at all of the
things, even what I tell you as like a little bit of scepticism.
You should be evaluating it and thinking, what's the angle here?
Why is he telling you this? In my case, I just like talking
to you all. So that's part of it.
Alright, let's launch into our stories because it is.
It is denial of service day yesterday, today it's been going
on and on. We're going to bring up an
article here from the Post Millennial covering it.
Their format may be awful. If you guys ever go to the web
page, it's our least favourite web page to screenshot.
It's just constantly covered with advertisements in every
direction and they pop up when you're not ready.
But the story is worth reporting on here.
This particular story, I don't know if this was written by
Andy, doesn't even say it's just attributed to the staff over
there. Rumble under attack.
The CEO confirms an unprecedented attack on free
speech platforms and servers. Suspects a political motive
subtitled. I suspect it's political, says
Chris Pavlovsky. So Chris, who I met at Mira Lago
and is a very nice guy, he's pretty, pretty soft spoken for a
dude who runs a tech platform like this and he's pretty
mellow. And he seemed almost nervous
talking to people there at Mira Lago, which is always actually.
I think it's kind of refreshing to see people that are not
polished and always ready to talk for a guy that's out there
doing this sort of work. But we've invited him on the
show. Hopefully he'll come on and join
us on the Kyle Perfect Show and talk about some of the dangers
that are going on. Some of the the attacks are
happening on this platform, but the question is why is Rumble
right now a target? It's much, much smaller than the
other platforms, OK, but you don't see the denial of service.
Maybe it's because of the distribution and they have a
bigger and more robust network, but I don't see the concerted
attacks happening on other places the way that they've
decided to come after Rumble specifically.
And maybe that has to do with who is broadcasting on Rumble.
We talked about it yesterday that we had Steven Crowder
actually tweeted about this. Steven Crowder had Alex Jones
on. It's not the first time that
they had Alex Jones on the programme, but it is the first
time since he was brought back on Twitter, and that represents
A fundamental threat. For some reason, the leftists
don't want to engage people who have different opinions and
different ideas. They don't want to engage them
in the place where that they're at.
I just think I I saw like a like a silly satirical quote that
said if only we could just have a safe place on Twitter for all
the leftists to sit and maybe it could be moderated by the ADL
and then maybe we could just let, I don't know, Disney, maybe
Disney could be an advertiser there, something like that.
It's it's very strange to watch them the the party that used to
champion and fight on behalf of free speech, that used to
actually be the conservative thing, like, hey, you're kind of
gross. We don't want you out there
talking. You had conservatives that were
pushing back against free speech.
Now we've sort of flipped the rolls on that, and I think that
conservatives have opened up and warmed up to the idea that
robust discussion and debate has to be done in order to preserve
freedom. And I think the people on the
political left have decided that any kind of discussion of their
ideas is going to expose how crappy their ideas are.
It goes back to something that Ronald Reagan said, not the way
that the the education secretary misquoted him the other day
talking about how people are here from the government and
there to help you, but something that Reagan actually said.
He said the problem with the people, he calls them liberals,
but I think now they're more accurately called leftists.
The people that are that are actually in that leftist
ideology, it's not that they don't know anything.
It's that the things that they know are not true.
I'm paraphrasing a little bit here, but it seems very true
that the folks who seem to be the most willing to engage with
you are the ones who know things that are false.
It's they have, they have inaccurate information and they
will continually push back at it.
I find this all the time. Whenever I try to engage these
folks on social media platforms, it's kind of fun for me.
Like you guys may know like I'm I'm like there's a type of horse
when you when you bet on horses, one of them is called a mutter
and that's the one that like runs best in the crappiest
conditions. They're just like sort of brute
strength, but none of the skill or for the finesse.
That's kind of where I live. Like I want to get down in the
mud and just like roll around with these idiots and I find it
very amusing. It's kind of like a brawler type
of thing when it comes to the the verbal or the the rhetorical
discussions. I'm more than happy to engage
there because they don't know anything, and the things that
they do know are wrong is very fun to point it out.
And they're almost always intrinsically disagreeing with
themselves. If you hold all these weird,
strong positions and you don't have the background to actually
flesh them out against your other weird positions, like most
of the stuff in the political left actually ends up
disagreeing with things on the political left.
That's what we keep finding, all right.
In any case, Chris Pavlovsky says once again that these
things they were trying to censor rumble.
That's his belief that they have been willing to do all kinds of
interesting things, like host debates for the GOP.
They've been willing to do things like host footage for the
January 6th capital riot. So it is his belief that some of
these decisions by Rumble, to just lay it out there and let
the public make their decisions is in fact the the real problem
for these folks. And that's why.
And Rumble is just small enough, it's still nascent enough, that
they can attack it. You had a bunch of different
content creators yesterday that were saying that they were
unable to go live. I think we came out right at the
end of it. We were rolling down the show
and it popped out like we basically cut the feed and it
basically went down. The entire site did.
I was talking to Dan Bongino's producer and of course he said
classic right when we were about to go live, that's when it goes
down. So folks, we're going to work on
some redundancy here. We talked about redundancy for
water, you got to have redundancy for the stream.
We always have redundancy on Twitter.
You guys can go there and they seem to have a pretty durable
platform. The size and the reach seems to
be pretty good. So you guys can always go to our
Twitter account that's at Kyle Serafin, at Kyle Serafin and and
check that out. But the real question to me was
sort of this is like, how did this movement happen?
And and usually when it happens with people on the political
left, they're not actually, they're saying the same words,
but they're not talking about the same thing.
So I went to a PBS article here. This goes back to the beginning
of this year, but I think it's actually, I think it's kind of
illuminating. So let's talk about this.
First of all, let's look at this.
If you're looking on our rumble channel, what you are seeing is
the quote, unquote, banned book section with caution tape up.
It's a really nice visual talking about things that are
dangerous to read. Now they've got Catcher in the
Rye and Lord of the Flies, which I think are outstanding letter
1984. I'm just looking at this, this
little display. But then they have The Color
Purple and they have beloved and they have a couple of others.
The hate that you give is on there, which looks pretty lefty
just based on the colour of the the cover.
I haven't even read these books. And.
And when you when you consider the fact that the political left
is also crying about experts saying attacks on free speech
are rising across the United States, this is PBS.
If you ever want to know how the world is not, I encourage you to
watch PBS, the News Hour and definitely turn on NPR.
I've got an FBI agent. He's a friend of mine who is an
actual American, a regular person.
And you will regularly update me with his NPR listenings if you
were to go and drive across the country and turn on NPR.
All of the local affiliates have some of the weirdest takes on
the way the world exists. And and they're basically the
opposite of what goes on. If you were to take the
statistics from listening to NPR story coverage and apply them
across the population, you would assume that about 48 to 64% of
the population are transgender. Because obviously that's the
biggest thing that's going on. That's what they cover long form
all the time. And they're not just happening
in the United States. There's actually transgender
people that are being discriminated against in Kenya,
even though apparently they're the majority of the population.
And so you just listen to these things, NPR, PBS and you realise
it's all insanity. They're not talking about the
same things. They don't live in reality.
However, this particular article was of note to me because it
says all right. Washington state lawmakers
proposed a hotline so the government could track
offensively biassed statements. That seems like a violation of
the 1st Amendment as well as hate crimes.
And I have a major issue, actually, I've always had an
issue with the idea of hate crimes.
I think that trying to ascribe certain animus and making them
worse because they're they're based on like, does it matter if
somebody really loves you but then they still embezzle all of
your money or if they they dislike you and they decided to
do it because you're Jewish or you're black or you're Catholic.
That doesn't seem to make any bit of sense to me that the
reason, the motivation should actually add something to it.
But that's that's our our current system.
It says in Florida we've got, we've got other lives, lives
that are going on, or rather other fights that are going on
where bloggers are trying to stop the state from making them
register. I think that's a really bad
idea. And then meanwhile, here's where
they really got down to it. There are bands on books and
there are performances, drag performances that continue to
grow increasingly nationwide. So the ban on books and the drag
performances is where they've honed in on it, OK?
They're honing in on the things that are most valuable to them.
So when they say free speech, what they don't mean is robust
political discussions and the ability for us to engage in a
push back and forth on ideas and policy and whether or not these
are the correct solutions that make America the best place to
live, that's not what they're talking about, not even a little
bit. What they're saying is if you
don't want to celebrate the things that I celebrate, and if
you're not willing to say that my drag performance is free
speech, and that not only is it free speech, but you must show
it to children, your children, That's the thing that they're
crying about. And if you don't need to push
these, these sort of books in schools specifically, if we
don't need to push books that have pornographic imagery to
little kids, if you're not going to help indoctrinate your kids
into their radical ideology, then you're not a fan of free
speech. That's not what free speech
means. No one says free speech means
you must listen to them. Just means you have to be given
a platform. You must be given an
opportunity, and the government can't get involved.
If a private industry wants to be involved, so be it.
This is the real issue with the Twitter files, folks.
This is why it was always an issue.
It was never an issue that a private platform, whether it be
a Google or a Facebook or a Twitter or a YouTube, was
involved in censorship. That's actually totally fine in
most ways. The problem is that the
government was encouraging it and subsidising it, and that the
government is a big client there.
This has always been the issue. The 1st Amendment doesn't
protect you from bad ideas or consequences thereof.
It just says the government can't get involved.
That's the major part. And for whatever reason, when
the left starts conflating it, that you must celebrate whatever
their crap ideas are and they want to censor you, it's because
they're not using the words free speech in the same way.
They want you to affirm their radical ideology.
And you might just be wanting to say, like, hey, I don't want to
and I want to disagree with you and I want to have my own speech
on it. I want to just have an opinion.
Have your drag show. I don't think kids should go to
it. We should protect children.
We should look out for the future and we should be able to
robustly disagree with you. Enjoy whatever it is you have.
The consequences may be whatever they are.
That's not where it is. So there there's this, this
really fun thing where this guy, what's his name, Joe Cohen, He's
a legislative and policy director for the foundation of
individual rights and expression known as FIRE.
Now I've seen stuff. FIRE is done.
I was actually at a free speech conference, a libertarian
conference in Memphis this year. And the people from FIRE, they
sponsored people like Matt Taibbi.
So like kind of classical liberals.
His statement is that we're seeing a wave of bills tracking
drag performances where simply being gender nonconforming is
enough to trigger a penalty. I don't actually think that's
the case. I think they're mistaken.
And Fire does a lot of good work, which is why this country
can be great. We don't have to agree with
everything that our friends or even our allies say.
You can tell me that crypto is the only way and I can disagree
with you, and we can have a friendship that continues.
We don't have to agree with each other.
That's the brilliance that was always the brilliance of this
system and the best ideas went out.
And if it turns out that crypto is the only money in the future,
and I have none of it, then that's my own problem.
That's the way it's supposed to work.
Unfortunately. What they're acting like is that
drag performances are being targeted, that these people with
the gender nonconforming things, that these waves of things,
pulling them out of public schools and libraries, is a very
different animal than saying that you're being punished and
that there is a penalty. Nobody said that you get to be a
victor in the public circle if your ideas are roundly rejected
by the majority of people in the public circle.
But I don't think you should be punished for it.
Very interesting to see that. Like I say, I think they're
talking about different things. They are talking past each
other. And so the idea that we were
going to protect people for their political ideas, that's
not to say. That's not to say that we didn't
actually have these problems historically, because we totally
did and the FBI was totally involved in it.
For those of you who have ever listened to me talk all the way
back, people tell me like, Oh well, what?
When did this go wrong? I said when did this all go
sideways for the for the FBI and so?
Well, it's always been there as an undercurrent.
As early as 1917, as early as 1919, there were raids against
so-called communists. There was a Red Scare with the
Mccarthyist where they were going after people, socialists
and workers organisers. They went after people in the
civil rights movement. Like those are all evil.
There's always been an undercurrent of our federal
government getting involved and violating the 1st Amendment.
The question is, is whether or not one major political party
gets in and goes, yeah, and. And they're correct.
And I think historically, conservatives lowercase C We're
probably on the wrong side of some of that because they're not
a big fan. Like, how many of you are big
fans of commies? Like it's it's a pejorative in
our circles. So we have to be aware that we
need to have robust discussion and that includes people telling
you their worst and stupidest ideas without you getting
violently angry. You just agree to disagree.
If you can agree to disagree then you can actually roll this
thing back 20 plus years the way that it used to be done, which
is that we used to just not always agree on everything and
we could still be friends. I don't know.
That was sort of the spirit of the way I grew up with the 80s
sportsmanship. It's like somebody wins, someone
loses, everybody goes home, everybody gets a Coke at the at
the thing. Erica, what is the thing?
The concession stand, That's what I'm looking for.
Let's keep pressing on to this because it's not, it's not a fun
or a fair fight at this point. Before we go there, let's let's
bring on one of our other sponsors.
Let's do that's two page recolor.
Since I'm sitting here, I need some coffee Patriot coolers
folks. You guys know how to go to
theirwebsite@patriotcoolers.com, our OG sponsor.
You talk about durable products that are going to survive.
These are all like survival type things.
Everything I do is sort of like outdoors oriented.
Looks like they actually just sold out of one of their smaller
coolers which looks very, very functional 50 quart rotomolded
cooler. Those are the ones that I keep
in the car, that's what I keep in the truck.
I also have one of the soft packs over there, the 24 can.
The 24 can, by the way, folks, is not just a 24 can.
It's also a 17 bottle if you want to stuff it.
Couple of beers. I don't drink very much beer,
but when I do I stuff 17 bottles into my 24 can soft pack cooler.
It says Patriot on it. It's durable.
It's got those, the those very cool sort of zipper, what do
they call a radio welded zippers?
I'm a big fan of those too and I like things that are that are
box stitched like that. It's made really well.
It handles really well. It does what it needs, sharp and
it's like, you know what I mean? Like have you ever done
stitching before, Ryan? Have you ever stitched any of
the like nylon like that? Absolutely.
Yeah. All my products were similar
stitching like that. That's a really nice zipper.
I mean that's top of the line right there.
It's it pulls really nicely too. I get nerdy about certain things
and then I want to put wax on there where I put like a
petroleum which helps seal it but it also makes it like real
smooth. Tell us about this, Jelly.
No, no, tell us. I gotta know.
I'm so nerdy about this kind of thing.
If you put a petroleum based Jelly on these things and
sometimes they actually even give them to you.
I don't know if it came with the Patrone if I just had some from
extra, but you literally can put it on the zipper and it makes it
lubricate but also gives it those the places between the
zipper teeth. It makes them sort of waterproof
with the with the petroleum anyway.
Wow, where to get the petroleum? Is that so you get on?
Amazon You could just do like any petroleum Jelly like
Vaseline or or a generic. Highly recommend doing that to
all your radio well zippers if you want to keep water out of
your life folks. Patriot coolers.com promo code
Kyle KY Elliott saves you 10% and you get free shipping over
50 bucks. I get nerded out about weird
things like that. I really do, though.
That's like like a good zipper makes me very happy.
Like if I have a jacket with a bad zipper, it's gone, like I'm
dealt with it. And if it has a, if I have a
product like that that has a good zipper, I'm like, yeah, I'm
into this thing. So strange.
I just blew through, like 4 minds in the chat room.
Just like, what am I even hearing, like a discussion of
petroleum Jelly on zippers? This is where we go, folks.
This is where the mind goes on a Tuesday morning.
I'm just saying, you have to, you have to know what you're
into it. If you're not into your products
and your gear, then you're probably have things are going
to be inferior. OK, let's get deep into the
weirdness. The weirdness is, is that
there's this sort of power play that's going on right now in the
Trump indictment in DC Now we have to be very, very serious
about this. Because no matter how flippant
you want to be about how absurd Jack Smith is with his bad teeth
and his terrible takes and the fact that he is clearly
politically motivated and just seems to have like a complete
hard on to go after this guy, that he is a basically a hitman
for the deep state at this point.
It's really scary stuff to think that this is a this is as as
silly as it should be. This is deadly serious and the
odds of Trump not being convicted of these charges is
very, very small. We're watching the play out for
all the J. Sixers.
It's like they don't have to be serious people to have the
wheels of power behind them to do serious things.
And so I want to pull up this NBC article.
We're going to get into what it is and what what just happened.
Sort of the development in this week.
It's really troubling to me. Special counsel asked Supreme
Court to immediately decide if Trump is immune from J6
prosecution. OK, in some ways this is like a
calling of the bluff. So Trump's lawyers basically
made a motion to dismiss stating that Trump should in fact be
immune from prosecutions from the time that he was on duty as
the President of the United States, which included January
6th of 2021, right up until the day the minute that Joe Biden
steps in and one guy flies off an Air Force One and it becomes
not Air Force One, that's the minute when he no longer has
that presidential immunity. There's sort of an argument to
be made there. The special counsel got the the
lower court to reject that. Shockingly, the anti Trump judge
that is running his case disagreed with the with the
presidential immunity there. But the crazy thing is, is that
Jack Smith said OK, we're going to skip the appeals circuit,
we're going to take it directly to the Supreme Court and we are
going to petition the Supreme Court to rule on this.
So Special Counsel Jack Smith. On Monday, I asked the Supreme
Court to immediately step in to decide whether former President
Donald Trump has immunity from prosecution for his actions for
seeking to overturn the 2020 election.
I'm going to tell you why I have so many problems with this case.
Just as a regular person who reads the law like I think the
minutiae of the law is actually, none of these things actually
matter all that much. We we're looking at the law in
such a bass ackwards way. And I was on Joe Altman's radio
show and his his Conservative Daily podcast the other day.
They had a guy on who was saying everything we do about the laws
backwards what people do. And I think this is worth.
Actually, let me just square up on here.
One of the things that goes on right now with the the position
of judicial review is they review, you have all these
lawyers and they're all very educated in minutia and many of
them have a very weak grasp of constitutional law, which we
continue to find when they go on to be confirmed for as judges.
We're seeing that with almost all the Biden appointees that
they're very, very weak on the foundational nature of this
country. But what they do as they learn
case law, all the most relevant current everyday case law that's
happening right now. And so they understand the
things that are going on in their little circle.
And it's very, very specific. And it's like a guy that knows
only how to repair a certain type of thing.
We used to know a guy he only repaired the HVAC systems on
like 1980s Mercedes Benz, like that was his thing.
He was a expert in a strange thing that cost a lot of money
and nobody else knew how to do. And so the factory would fly him
around the country to go do those repairs on those vehicles.
That's kind of what we're training our lawyers to be like
right now, very atomized in their focus.
And when they do that, they've forgotten the bigger picture,
which is that everything that they are looking at is
completely irrelevant if it disagrees with the Constitution,
the main overarching principles. And the constitution is only
relevant in the foundation that it was actually set in.
And the foundation is British common law.
And the debates that were going on about the federalists and the
anti federalist and what was going on, what was happening at
the time when they wrote those words and what do they mean?
What was the purpose of those laws as they came in to govern
this country? So much right now has decided on
minutia from like silly precedents that are 10 or 15
years old, when in fact we should be looking at 200 and
5300 and 400 year old principles that everything is actually
rooted and grounded in. And we're not doing that.
So as we consider this, we're looking at a judge that
basically said yes, you know, we, we don't think that the
president is immune from any kind of prosecution.
This, this is a very old question, by the way.
So this one says that this is Jack Smith's people riding in a
court filing said the state. The the case presents a
fundamental question at the heart of our democracy.
God, I hate it when they say our democracy.
It makes me want to scream. It just tells you that you're a
leftist. Without telling me whether a
former president is absolutely immune from federal prosecution
for crimes committed while in office.
Ryan, can we jump forward a little bit?
I want to bring up the actual indictment, which was that we
had on topic #5. Let's pull this up.
Let's look at what Trump is actually accused of in the
District of Columbia. OK?
This is probably the most dangerous indictment that he has
simply because the district that he's in, taking this forward in
the District of Columbia, is inherently dangerous.
Count 118 USC 371 Conspiracy to Defraud the United States.
Count #218 USC 1512 K Conspiracy to Obstruct an Official
proceeding. Count 318 USC 1512, Obstruction
of and attempting to extract, Obstruct an Official proceeding.
And the 4th count is 18 USC 241. Conspiracy against rights.
Now conspiracy against rights. That's the one that's the same
one that Doug Mackey was involved in.
That's the guy who wrote the memes about Hillary Clinton.
You guys remember this? That he was in a conspiracy
against the rights, even though they couldn't actually prove
that anybody was defrauded of their right to vote.
That's really weird. Douglas Mackie just had a
victory, which we talked about, and Douglas Mackey is going to
be on our show in the next week or two, probably next week
sometime. We've been talking about it on
Twitter that he and I have been dreaming back and forth to set
up a time for him to come on and talk.
I think he's going to come on and do a live show.
So if you guys have your questions for Doug Mackey, make
sure that you have mentally ready and we can start dropping
them into the comments when we do that next week.
But here's the thing I want you to look at.
Of these four counts, 1-2 and four are all conspiracies.
Now, we've talked about it on this show before.
I've talked about it with Steve Friend.
When you use the conspiracy as opposed to the actual crime, it
means the crime didn't happen. And that that the idea of
planning a crime is what you're going to prove, a crime that
didn't happen fundamentally is kind of an unamerican principle.
It's thought crime and it's really, really dangerous stuff.
The idea that conspiracy, unless you actually stopped a
conspiracy to do something where they were in the process of
doing so, we're talking about bringing this indictment many,
many months after the fact. All of these actions all
happened. He was the president.
He was supposedly going to defraud the United States.
Their claim is that that Joe Biden won.
I think a lot of us have problems with what was going on
with that election and somehow by Trump sticking around.
He was going to defraud the United States.
He was going to obstruct an official proceeding, and he was
going to conspire against the right to the people that voted
for Joe Biden. And yet we saw him going on a
plane and he left the White House.
So all of this talk, they brought on Cassie Hutchinson as
well. And she said, well, he said he
was never going to leave. It's like, you know, he was
going to leave. He left because it was in the
past because your conspiracy, which was charged, was not
interrupted by your charging document.
It wasn't interrupted by a criminal complaint.
It wasn't interrupted by federal agents who were under power of
law going in and removing somebody that refused to do
something. It's a conspiracy that expired
and never happened. It didn't happen.
So how are we going to charge conspiracy for a crime that we
know didn't get committed? It's like Ryan and I planning to
rob a bank. Talking about how fun it would
be, we would really like it. We would have all the things.
This is what we would do. These are the weapons we would
use. This is the car we would drive.
And then we were like, yeah, that's a dumb idea, And then we
move on. And then someone coming in and
charging us for a bank robbery, conspiracy to commit bank
robbery, because we talked about the idea.
That is fundamentally, in my opinion, that's part of the war
on speech, that you can't even discuss what's going on.
And this is not even like a crime where a crime of violence
or a crime of depriving people of anything.
This was a crime, theoretically, of conspiracy against rights,
obstruction of official proceeding, and defrauding the
United States. This was a crime that was 100%
political. It was a politician deciding
whether or not he had powers in the political structure to be
able to negotiate out some sort of alternative resolution to
what we saw as a real problem, particularly in an unprecedented
time, an unprecedented time of COVID lockdowns and people in
massive amounts of fear and media doing all kinds of wild
things. And then, of course, as I just
mentioned, you go back in there and the government was involved
in censoring First Amendment rights and trying to keep
people's political opinions out and stopping the debate about
what was happening. And we also know that the FBI
wasn't investigating the thing that it was supposed to do,
which was whether or not, in fact, that election was legit.
In all the places that there were attempts to say that there
were problems with it, there are people coming forward with
affidavits and going on record. You didn't hear it.
You didn't hear anybody actually go out and say the FBI has done
a conclusive discovery of this. They have gone through and they
have investigated all the people involved and there was nothing
funny here. There's no funny business.
We couldn't have that because they didn't do it.
And then we also know that guys like Timothy Tebow, who was the
assistant special agent in charge of criminal at the
Washington field office where I used to work, he was actively
removing people that he thought might be pro Trump.
So what is that about when you're actively removing people
because you think they may hold an alternate political opinion?
It's about speech. It's about we can't investigate
things and we can't even talk about it because if you talk
about it, you're the problem. This is a very leftist,
totalitarian idea. This is the war on speech.
This is shutting down rumble. So you can't have an Alex Jones.
You don't have to like Alex Jones.
You don't agree with Alex Jones. I happen to think he's
hilarious. I happen to find him very
amusing. Alex Jones is one of my most
amusing people to watch. And he was very fun to be in an
interview with when Alex Jones was coming at me.
It was like the energy level of Kyle Chapman coming at me.
There are very few people that can match me for energy and for
excitement. And he did it and he did it in a
really fun way that was not offensive.
And we only stayed on the subjects like most of the time.
I would say probably certainly more than 50% of the time what
Alex Jones covers is correct. His take on it may be on
unpalatable to you. There's a lot of people that
present things that are true that I don't like the way they
say it. Donald Trump is one of them.
I don't like the way Donald Trump says a lot of things, but
it doesn't mean he's wrong and it doesn't mean he doesn't have
a right to say them. Alex Jones being on there is not
a reason for you to try to go out and commit federal crimes.
And do we see overwhelming responses where you hear the FBI
saying we're going to mobilise all of our capabilities to
protect free speech in this country.
We're going to make sure that this country, this company,
which has a bunch of American businesses that are based in on
Rumble, the Dan Bongino Show, the Steven Crowder Show, all the
others, are they gonna go out there and defend it?
They gonna go out and investigate it or not?
Cause I think not is what we've seen so far.
It's pretty wild for me. The only supposed real crime
that was actually supposedly committed was the obstruction of
and the attempt to obstruct an official proceeding and that is
pretty weak. That's actually going to be
ruled on in a meaningful way I think in some of the other J6
cases by the Supreme Court as well.
So that's wild. Now here's where it goes back to
I pulled this thing up when I went looking for the
constitution today folks. I found and you can bring up the
the Mississippi V Johnson piece real quick if you want Ryan.
But I went looking for a copy of the Constitution.
I don't have it bookmarked. I always go and just grab it and
it comes out of my normal links. And one of the things I do is I
go look for it. And when you do, the sad thing
is to find the actual, just verbatim text of the
Constitution. You actually have to go to the
Heritage Foundation to find a really clean one.
There are other versions of it out there, but like, that's the
one that that pops up in my searches.
That's easiest. The Constitution Annotated is
what comes up if you go to constitution.congress.gov
Doesn't it seem like our our federal government should
actually have the cleanest copy of the Constitution posted for
us? When it's the founding document
and it is the supreme law of the land, it always has commentary.
You can't just get it to like run through and just have it
laid out in in in long format like a scroll, which I would
prefer. In any case when you do the
annotated version, something pops up that's kind of
interesting. So Article 2, Section 3, these
are the Article 2 powers of the executives specifically talking
about the president right now says he shall from time to time
give Congress information the state of the union.
So it's laying out what he's supposed to do.
What is, what is the job of the president.
And underneath it annotated, I did actually find something of
value here. It says in 1867, a decision,
Mississippi V Johnson, the Supreme Court established that
the president is largely beyond the reach of the judiciary by
holding it that the president could not direct Andrew Johnson
in how he exercised his purely executive and political powers.
Now that's going to be really important because the decision
actually noted there are executive and political powers
to being the president of the United States.
The court stated that it has, quote, no jurisdiction to enjoin
the president in the performance of his official duties.
Now, if the president chooses to do something that is outside the
range of what people like, it doesn't necessarily matter.
And in this case, I went back to the case and kind of gave like a
quick memory. The facts are in 1867, Congress
passed the Reconstruction Acts. And although President Andrew
Johnson vetoed the acts, Congress overrode that veto, so
it passed into law. In an attempt to delay or
prevent Reconstruction. The state of Mississippi
appealed directly to the Supreme Court.
Mississippi asked the Supreme Court for an injunction
preventing the president from enforcing the acts on the
grounds that they were unconstitutional, and the court
ruled in a unanimous decision that it held no jurisdiction of
a bill to enjoin the president in the performance of his
official duties. It could not make him do them
and it couldn't make him not do them.
That's very interesting. I don't know exactly how that's
going to play in in some ways because this was sort of like
the the negative and we're now looking at the positive.
They're claiming they couldn't force him to do something or
they couldn't stop him from doing something was within his
powers. What the what they're actually
claiming now, the Jack Smith claim is essentially that he did
something that was outside of his official powers And trying
to justify that, the question is, is, is the court going to
rule on whether or not he had the authority to do the things
he did, which was to say that whatever he wanted, that he was
going to give a speech, that he was going to have a rally.
And then that rally ended up being charged as an obstruction.
But you'd have to argue that the president was somehow in control
of these people. I think it's going to be really
interesting. The fun thing is, is that if you
go to the Daily Wire piece here, which will pull up, Ryan says
Trump Camp accuses Jack Smith of election interference over the
Supreme Court. Gambit.
It is, in fact, a gamble. It's a real gamble for Jack
Smith to send this thing up to the Supreme Court.
Now, it's a bold move. Four days after having a ruling
in his favour, they said, OK, fine, let's take it up there.
Let's preemptively solve this problem.
Let's put it out in front of the Supreme Court and get this
decidedly figured out. There's a couple things that are
that the Trump camp is saying #1.
They're saying that this is an attempt to force a trial date
one day before Super Tuesday, which would basically be a real
issue for Trump when it comes to primaries.
They're trying to keep him out of the the presidential
election. They want to make sure that they
keep him as a as a front mind that he is a guy with a bunch of
legal troubles. So they're trying to do that.
It hasn't been working so far as we covered yesterday or the day
before. It's like he continues to rise
in the polls even in battleground states, mainly
because his opposition is so bad.
This is the statement that spokespeople put out, which
sounds like Trump may have been sitting there and dictating it
to him, he says. Crooked Joe Biden's henchman,
deranged Jack Smith, is so obsessed with interfering with
the 2024 presidential election with the goal of preventing
President Trump from retaking the Oval Office.
As the president is poised to do that, Jack Smith is willing to
try a Hail Mary racing to the Supreme Court and attempting to
bypass the appellate process. So for you guys to understand
what was happening, the idea was, is that they were going to
make a claim that they didn't think was going to be successful
in the lower circuit. They were going to have a long
appeal about it, which was going to be decided where they decide
the points of law in the appellate process and then it
would eventually probably make it up to the Supreme Court.
Jack Smith is attempting to cut that timeline, cut out the
middle part, which is the longest piece for those of you
have never been involved in this kind of litigation.
We filed our first suit and got our injunction regarding the
federal Max VAX VAX mandate rather.
We did that in shoot when we file it maybe like October of
2021 and then six months later we have like a favourable
adjudication of it. It was too late for me, but it
was good. It works out six months later
that a judge actually ruled on it and said yeah, we've got an
injunction. Then it took like the better
part of a year to get to 1 appeals thing.
Then you can go from the appeals, you get a single judge,
then you can ask for a three judge panel, then you can ask
for an end bank review. So there are multiple stages in
the federal appeals process for you to get multiple different
opinions and then you theoretically can still appeal
to the Supreme Court whether or not they'll take it as another
animal. And it may be that one of those
appeals actually is where it stands.
Whatever the highest level of the appeal is, you get to,
that's where it stands. And generally speaking what they
do is they rule on a point of order, then they kick it back to
the district and then the district gets to decide.
So that's what's going on here. They've actually cut out that
middle piece because the Supreme Court said, yeah, we'll take it
on. And they said it really quickly.
Now you could read that as all the judges think that they're
going to solve this problem and they're going to put Trump and
he's going to have to deal with the the indictment in in DC is
going to have to deal with this trial or you can read what they
said. Trump spokesperson said Jack
Smith may need to be reminded that the Supreme Court has not
been kind to him handing down a ruling in a rare unanimous
rebuke when the court ruled against him in the 8 O
McDonald's case. And now McDonald was a Virginia
Republican governor and there was some sort of a question of
whether he he'd received some sort of gifts that got, you
know, were sort of a bribery and or extortion situation.
And the Supreme Court went against Jack Smith when he was
with the Justice Department working in the public integrity
unit, which is to say the public corruption prosecutions they
they got slammed down in 2016. So kind of interesting now the
the judge that that that Trump has in in DC obviously not
interested in doing things doesn't seem fair has made
multiple multiple statements from the bench that Julie Kelly
has coloured long form and should basically she shouldn't
probably be involved in this case at all.
Her name is Tanya Chuckin. You guys have seen her before,
Obama appointee. But like man, it's interesting.
It's an interesting move. So now we are in kind of
uncharted waters. But I do think that it's worth
noting that a lot of the stuff has to do with whether or not
the president was able to even just say things or exercise
political power. We're we're going to see
something. It's going to come up sooner
than later. They have until December 20th to
figure it out, and then right around the first of the year,
right around the anniversary. Interesting, interestingly
enough, of January 6th. On January 5th they are going to
be supposedly deciding this thing.
So it's not gonna be some long, long timeline.
We'll know in January just how ugly this process might get.
And it might be a complete strikeout for this DC event.
That would be a major, major change.
So we'll have to just kind of keep watching it until then.
Let's let's talk about some other stuff on the Let's do a
quick promo for my buddy Garrett because he just got back into
town. He told me he was buried under
orders. You guys did a great job on that
18 plus orders behind the 8 ball.
Now the O'boyle family sweatshop.
You can see it at the dash expendables.com.
Today I'm wearing the last line strength.
This is the blue line. I now have it in blue, red and
green and I actually interesting enough kind of fit into all
those. Red is generally public safety.
That's your EMS fire. So if you have someone like that
in your life and you want to get the last line strength.
I get compliments every time I wear the shirt.
Everywhere I go, people want to come and talk about it, which is
kind of nice. The the red line obviously, like
I said, fire EMS, the blue line, law enforcement, probably not as
much federal, but yeah, people in federal trying to do the blue
and then the green. Generally speaking military.
So you guys can check out this particular shirt if you guys
want to do it. You can always pick up the pins
or the patches as well. Kind of Adam in there, make a
little package and then use promo code.
Kyle. Kyle, to save you a 10% off
there as well, pretty easy to do.
Worth your time, check out the Dash suspendable.com.
It's a pretty good it's a pretty good little stocking step.
If you need to roll up a shirt or maybe some of the pins and
you want to hand it to somebody that's a suspendable in your
life, expect that there is a video.
Actually there's a video that is live right now on Gargoyles
Rumble channel. Maybe Garrett will will throw it
out there into the chat. Maybe get will throw in the chat
if he still hanging out in there.
You can see his rumble video. He just gave a speech in Fargo
ND talking about what is a suspendable what is his story
and you guys will like it. I think it's about 45 minutes of
your time. You could take it anytime you
like. Go check it out on rumble.
I'll make sure I share it on my social media.
So make sure you share either following me at.
Kyle putting the live chat too. Sounds good at Kyle Serafin on
True Social and on on Twitter. And then GOB Actual on Twitter
is where you'll be able to find Garrett.
He's not as easy to find on on True Social.
Sorry, True Social, where you can find him on Twitter, he's
actually locked out. Sorry about that.
All right, So that being said, let's push forward in some of
the other weird things Ryan alluded to this, I just saw
this, and you just go like, oh, what's happening?
Big things happening over the horizon, No question about it.
Warren Buffett selling $28.7 billion in stocks.
Ringing alarm bell over the economy.
I saw that in a I think it was in the loop initially.
And I went like, Oh my God. And that's something $28.7
billion is not a small amount of money, $28.7 billion in stock in
the 1st 3/4 of 2023 in a move that some economists have
interpreted as a ringing alarm bell for the American economy.
Now I always look and see like, what is, what are the wealthiest
people in the world doing and what are they doing with their
money? And people have done the same
thing. They call him the Oracle of
Omaha for a reason. Warren Buffett has two of The
sad thing is Warren Buffett could do things.
He can predict markets, but he could also make markets do
things simply by the way that he moves around that kind of
wealth. And so the question is, he may
be the greatest investor of all time, but he's now sitting in
that sort of big stack poker chip scenario where that gamble
that he's playing can also be things that he can bully things
into happening. He can make things happen that
we're not otherwise, simply because he chooses to do so and
he's ready to make a move that everybody else is going to have
to follow suit because he's moving so much money around
$28.7 billion it's worth keeping an eye on.
Says they sold a total of 10.4 billion in the first quarter,
followed by 13 billion in the next, while buying less than
five on top of it and the third quarter selling another $5
billion worth of stock. It's a lot of money, people.
That's a lot of money to be moving around by one guy and one
company. So worth noting that there's
only a couple of possible outcomes.
We'll bring somebody on to talk about the the economics of all
this off at some point soon because I just think that
whatever's happening is going to happen all at once.
It's all happening at once because there's a lot of lies
and as long as they can keep you from the from the information
they're going to be able to manipulate you in a big way.
In fact, we actually have a video about this.
You want to talk about money and you want to talk about power and
information. Why don't you play video number
one right now. This is kind of like a little
little break in the in the in the segment here.
It makes me feel kind of good because we have at least we
still have speech and that that speech is fighting back.
A lot of people, I think, overplayed their hands at the
the sort of influence and the power that they had in 2020 and
it went on into 2021. It ended up where we saw my
friend Dan Bongino and guys like Tucker Carlson getting cancelled
off what we thought were conservative outlets.
Many of us knew that they weren't for a long time, that
they were sort of playing the edge.
But the pushback is places like Rumble and things like this,
which is kind of fun to announce.
It's just push this up. If you didn't see this on
Twitter yesterday, this was just announced video #1.
They told you the guys torching Wendy's in 2020 were mostly
peaceful. They said that mask worked.
They told you the VAX was safe. They've tried to convince you
that Russia blew up its own pipeline.
The corporate media lied too much and it killed them.
We're driving to see Julian Assange.
Believe me when I. Tell you I should be boycotting,
but like Jeff, thank you. One of the things I like most
about Tucker, when I watch him and I've seen him live a few
times, when you watch Tucker talk, it's just coming out of
his head. There's no teleprompter, there's
no script. He's able to sit up, walk in
front of a podium, put his hands in his pocket.
He's got a a can of skull or something like that, or
Wintergreen or whatever the hell he's got for dip.
Then he just walks around and he just dishes information because
he's been consuming it voraciously for a long time.
He's obviously very, very intelligent and he's able to
articulate it in a way that many people cannot.
And to us that are listening, you go one way or another.
I think that person is being honest because I think he
actually believes he's you can tell.
You can tell by the way he delivers it and that's coming
from someone who basically doesn't trust anybody.
As a point of fact throughout most of my life I just look at
people and if you say something I just go like, OK, I don't
believe you, you may turn out to be true, but I'm going to
basically set my opinion opposite of that and I rarely do
that with things that Tucker says, not everything.
There's certainly things that I will question.
It's nice to see just another voice entering the fray in a big
way because Tucker Carlson is both a big force.
He has a certain amount of money behind him which is not not
small and and he's going head to head with people that have
basically lost all their legitimacy and people are going,
where do we listen? You listen to people like Dan,
you listen to people like Tucker, and they're the ones
that got cancelled. And in many ways whatever
happened to them gave them more legitimacy, which is quite
funny. I think the same thing has
happened when everything is being attacked on a Donald
Trump. You just go like all they've
done is they've highlighted who their biggest threats are.
Whether you know the word deep state, I think is so massively
abused. But the powers that be, if you
will, the the, the forces in this world that are trying to
steer things and think that they can guide the ship humanity to
the way that they want onto whatever shore they'd like it to
crash on. It's very interesting.
It's very interesting to me to see that the the ones that they
have decided to destroy and Alex Jones is in that category too.
And the two of them doing that show together is also worth
noting. Tucker was just, you know, just
did a long form with Alex Jones. When you start having these
these forces combined, this is the pushback.
That's what resistance looks like by the way, folks, for all
the folks that are the hashtag resistance out there on the
political left that have all the means of government and major
corporation and the public sentiment and political
correctness behind them, like they're not resisting anything.
It's you just kind of being yourself in your house, raising
your kids the way that you want, trying to keep your money,
trying to do the things that you want with your money.
Trying not to be have anything spoon fed to you or have the NPR
or PBS sort of version of reality where you believe that
everybody around every corner is trans.
Which is a bizarre take based on me being in the world for 42
years. I've just, I don't see it.
It's not real. But that's what they love to
shovel on you and they love to make you think that you are
alone. It was the reason why a lot of
the COVID stuff was very successful because everybody
started thinking, hey, I'm the only person that's that's not
with the programme. Maybe I need to get with it and
for all of you, suspend tables out there and that's why we have
the merch store. That's why we exist.
That's the way that we all looked at it.
That's the way that the guys like Gerard Boyle and Steve
Friend and myself and George Hill, we all looked at the same
way we went. You know what, Everybody when
they're in a mass is generally the correct answer except when
they're wrong. And in this case you're wrong.
We're going to stand against the masses.
It's very hard. Takes discernment and it takes a
strong will and many of you guys know that's why you're here on
the on the show. We do appreciate all of you guys
joining us for that. Let's talk about one more story
that I think is kind of weird. I'll cover my sponsor because
Catholic Vote is one of our sponsors and they're fantastic.
They are doing the Tournament of Champions, which will kick off
again until I think tomorrow. You guys can sign up for the
loop, which is great and it's full of all, all times of great
information in there. For whatever reason, when you
click on that loop and see if they update, I just emailed
them, no, it's still on December.
So I told people a Catholic vote, they need to update That
particular link. The one that I got on my email
is still correct, which I can tell you there's good stories in
there left and right. There's always good stories and
they're as good a news aggregator or better than
anybody else. If you guys get like an update
from the from the AP, it will not be as diverse and useful to
you. As far as number of stories and
the types of stories that are interesting, there was one in
there today about abortion being sort of a travel requirement
that is happening. Something like a whole huge slew
of increases in travel based abortion which means it's harder
for people to get and still getting them worth noting.
That's a values problem in our society I think.
But catholicvote.org, check them out, sign up for the loop.
You can always give and support them as they give and support
us. You can make a monthly or one
time donation anytime you guys feel fit.
They have a 501C3 and A501C4. I think you can give to either
one of them. I'm not 100% sure which one is
listed there. That's the C4.
So that's the action oriented one and they are suing the FBI
which we're thinking about doing here as well.
We got some negotiations about FOIA, more on that tomorrow.
But they also covered a story which we're gonna pull from
their website. Let's pull up that that story
about the priest that was killed.
I mentioned it kind of offhandedly.
Yesterday there was a priest killed in the 100th attack on a
Catholic Church. This year a guy turns out to be
like a 43 year old black man from Sioux City, IA stabbed a
priest to death on Sunday this Sunday early in the morning.
The guy's name was Father Steven Goodsell.
Goodsell says He was, quote, unquote, assaulted during an
invasion of the rectory. The rectory is where Priest
lives, if you guys don't know, at Saint John the Baptist Parish
in Fort Calhoun. Early Sunday morning, I was
released in a statement by the Archdiocese of Omaha says he was
transported to Nebraska Medicine.
I guess that's the hospital there where he died of his
injuries. The Washington County Sheriff's
Office is investigating it. There's no further details this
time, and they asked for prayers for the repose of his soul, so
that's kind of interesting. It's interesting to note that
that the the victim was also they did kind of casually
mention here says in addition, the victim in this case, the the
priest who was stabbed to death has also been the subject of
significant local controversies and once admitted to a large
scale financial theft. Now that was at least touched
on. So I think that's fair.
The actual sort of details of it we're going to cover on one one
more second cause I think it's worth looking at.
But moreover, I want you guys to consider the fact that there's
almost nothing, there's almost nothing about the person who
killed him. We don't know his story.
We don't know if he had previous convictions.
All they know is that he's 43 and his name which is Kiara Care
Williams, which will show him in a second.
No indication if it was an anti Catholic motivation, if he was
just a a thief who ended up stabbing someone to death in the
middle of the night. The the attack happened
somewhere between 4:00 and 5:00 AM, something like that.
And of course if you follow Catholic vote you know they have
a thing called the Catholic Accountability Project where
they've been documenting all these attacks on pro-life
properties and Catholic churches since 2020.
We saw this dramatic rise. Once again it's about free
speech except when you have some opinions we don't like like
particularly religion. It's you're free to speak and go
out and protest and burn things and have all your thoughts but
but you're not free to have a Catholic Church and have the
FACE Act set up. There's all kinds of pro
abortion things that are being written on.
These are sort of like in the Dobbs decision wake, but let's
pull up that that article from the New York Post.
This is kind of our last little thing here.
This is what I found interesting when you even look like the New
York Post, even though they are generally conservative.
And I think it's worth noting that they do a great job
covering a lot of stories. They also, I don't know if it's
a bias or if it's just because it's the most interesting
because it's the most salacious stuff.
They talk about how the Catholic priest he's in a small city,
etcetera, fatally knifed by the subject who broke in.
Good for them. If you Scroll down, we can
actually see, are you able to pull that, that actual web page
up, Ryan? Because we can actually see that
the subject who exactly. 10 seconds.
Yeah, no big deal. So he's a skinny black guy and
they've got his mug shot here, 43 years old, etcetera.
But what was interesting is they honed in on that financial fraud
that you heard about that Catholic vote very, very briefly
covered. And it says more than a decade
ago, Father Gutgold pled guilty to theft by deception in 2007.
Keep scrolling down if you would.
That's the guy. So there there's the subject.
It's just worth pointing both out.
This is the look. So is this a hate crime?
Because I know if it was the other way around, we would
assume. Imagine.
Scroll back up, Let's show the priest.
Imagine this. This white guy breaks into a
black church in anywhere and stabs to get a pastor who looks
down like the subject. Kind of interesting.
I don't know. I'm sure our Justice Department
would be all over that. But I don't hear the FBI.
I don't see pictures of the FBI. I see sheriff's departments
investigating it. So maybe not a hate crime, even
though it's out of Catholic Church.
Kind of interesting the story is, is that the the priest
though, actually pled guilty to a $127,000 fraud deception.
It was a theft by deception or fraud case, and that he was
sentenced to probation and restitution.
He had to, you know, make up the money and he stole it from an
area church no less. So that's interesting to note
that it is covered a little bit longer form.
Like I said, you pick your news outlet, you pick the news you're
going to get and you're going to pick the depth of coverage and
what they're going to do. In this case, I think that is
interesting. It's totally irrelevant for the
reason he was stabbed to death. If he made his peace with God
and and and his community and they were OK with him.
I don't think it's any of our damn business, but that's the
way it gets covered, and so we should at least cover all the
facts. Who knows what sort of weird
things may have been involved? I don't.
I don't assume any more than that.
But what I don't see is the FBI, and that's the real thing for
me, for hate crimes mattering and the free speech mattering
and protection of the 1st Amendment supposed to be
mattering. You don't see our federal law
enforcement stepping into that one.
To me, that's a little problematic.
Let's go ahead and say thanks to the folks that are out there
supporting the show. Let's do one more too.
Let's also throw up. You want to throw up the my
pillow? I think we could do that real
quick if you guys want to do it. I saw a number of you guys used
our pillow code. I get an update every week.
Michelle people, send us a quick update.
You can go to mypillow.com/kyle, which is nice that there's not
another Kyle promo code being used, just hours.
So if you want to use promo code, Kyle.
Kyle saves you all the same deals you get anywhere else.
I just had one of you tell me how much you love the my pillow
2.0. I may have to give it another
look. I used the 1.0 folks and I sent
it back. It wasn't my jam, but I do know
my folks like their sheets. I know Ryan is out there doing
construction wearing their freaking pillow.
They're my pillow slippers. He's doing wash them.
He's doing drywall Washington. He's doing drywall tear downs
and and mudding and stuff in his new house and working on it that
way. So you guys could check out
those deals. Right now it's 50 bucks just
under $50.00 with the promo code.
Kyle, check out the My Pillow. If you guys want to support Mike
and all the many products in there, and many of you do, My
wife is always like, how many people need sheets?
I'm like, I don't know, people buy them all the time.
You might as well use them. Alright.
Let's say, thanks to our rumble rats that were on there, I saw a
couple come up. You want to throw on?
There's one from Chad Zody says the FBI hooked their credibility
to Morning Joe types. Ain't that the case?
They really did. Yeah, they really sort of fudged
that by by hooking their waggons up to people that have lost all
their credibility in the mainstream media.
And that's, I guess the good news why people like Tucker
Carlson are out there. Attack P, still giving us his
MRE rants and drag shows and story hours are Satanic
indoctrination. Possibly that look, I defend
their right to speak and say horrible things.
It's just not in front of kids. You don't get a right to pick
your audience. That's the really funny thing
about free speech. If you're free speech sucks,
you're gonna be by yourself in a park corner just yelling to
nobody. And that's actually what's
supposed to happen. They have a thing called
Speakers Corner in London. If you go into downtown London,
you go in there and yeah, you can literally try to gather an
audience, but nobody has to listen to you.
They can just walk by you and eventually you might just quit
because nobody cares. So that's kind of the way it's
supposed to work when they start telling you that you must have
it if you want a captive audience.
I think it was mentioned in the chat here.
I saw it scroll by really quickly.
Go to a nursing home. Do you know who has time all day
long to watch your weird drag performances?
People in nursing homes and pretty old demented guys who
can't tell the difference might really get excited about it.
It's not about that. It's always about going after
your kids, which we've done entire shows on.
So you guys know what I'm talking about.
Here. Let's let's say thanks to our
five our view of the day folks. If you want to go to Apple and
you watch us or you listen to us rather on the Apple podcast app,
you could always leave us a five star review there.
But like this one from a snake Moe lent just a couple of what
about a week and a half ago? Says dude five star great
podcast today first heard Kyle on Dan Bongino show and like Dan
Kyle is using his expertise and connections to give us the
truth. We're just trying to claw back
the truth I think. But I really do appreciate that
Snake. No, thanks for watching us like
so many of you Dan Bongino fans. Also, I'm a damn Bongino fan.
I watch Damon Gino when I'm on a spin bike, which I do sometimes
because my my knees may hurt because I'm too heavy to be
running as much as I do. And I like listening to Dan.
It's like listening to my friend who's also as angry as I am.
Isn't that isn't that the way it works?
Just got like your buddy from New York.
You guys have any other buddies from New York?
I have a great picture by the way of Dan.
He went up to an area called Nyack.
He went to a local bookstore. And my best buddy who sounds
like Dan and kind of is built like Dan and thinks about the
world like Dan and it's from New York like Dan.
The two of them are are like shaking hands and it's like my
favourite picture. It just got sent over my buddy
Charlie Ray. So anyhow folks, we appreciate
it. That's our show for today.
I hope you guys are being safe out there.
I hope you're watching your money and I hope you're watching
that they are trying to shut down your speech.
Hopefully it flowed out OK on Rumble, but be here on
rumblerumble.com/kyle Serafin. Support your shows on Rumble
because they are coming after you.
And like I said, if they've picked it as a problem, you know
who you need to be defending and we need to defend Rumble and
Chris. Like I said, hopefully he'll
come on the show here too. So thanks so much for joining us
today. God bless you all.
I will see you again tomorrow morning.
Thanks for listening to The Kyle Serafin Show streamed live
weekdays on rubble.com/kyle Serafin.
Follow Kyle on Twitter, Truth, Social and Instagram at Kyle
Serafin.