Take a look behind the curtain with a real whistle blower, an
American patriot. Prepare to embrace the
uncomfortable truth because this program has no time for
comforting lies. Here is civil liberties
enthusiast, Second Amendment defender, and recovering FBI
agent Kyle Seraphin. Well, hello my friends, welcome
to the Kyle Serif and Show. It's Monday, it is September the
29th and we are rolling late by about 5 minutes.
Sometimes I I underestimate the scope of work coming in from the
weekend. There's not a lot of people who
are going to get yelled at for being 5 minutes late.
But yes, our chat is already grouchy with me for being the 5
minutes late and I will do my best to make it up to you.
Here's what we got. We're going to do a touchback on
Jimmy Kimmel and the story of the worst censorship that's
happened in America. Did Americans respond and
support this man? You guys will be shocked to find
out the answer. We're going to do a do over.
I think what we're seeing right now at the end of this summer of
2025 is a Mulligan from five years ago.
It's the first year of the Trump administration versus the last
year of Trump One point O. And there's a very interesting
dichotomy being played out right now.
A lot of the things that Trump promised previously are getting
done right now. They're not getting done
perfectly. I'm not necessarily crazy about
the way that they're going about it all.
But it is a concerted effort to to really retouch a bunch of
these bases, these these issues that got left in the dust at the
end of the last Trump administration.
And maybe he would have done them in 2021 had he gotten
another shot at it. I also kind of think that we got
a Mulligan on the Trump administration game because I
think that he would have probably been cowed into
submission. We watched the way that the end
of the Trump administration field filled out at like the end
of 2020, right? There was a compliance with BLM.
There was this instinct that we shouldn't push too hard.
And then after four years of Biden, we're seeing kind of a
different touch. I don't hate it.
I don't I don't think it's perfect.
I think we should always criticize where we can and try
to get we should try to get the ball rolling in the way that we
expect it to because we're the voters.
They work for us. They are federal agencies, our
federal politicians and so on. And yet, I don't know, it seems
like they're doing a better job, mostly because I got to watch a
bunch of Portland protester a holes get like their their got
their business rocked. I'm trying to say this without
swearing. So we're going to get into that.
Some FBI agents were fired on Friday afternoon.
That was kind of interesting. Get into that story, something
I've been covering for literally years at this point.
I may have been the original agitator on that story and I
brought it up as soon as I became a public figure.
And yeah, we're going to do a bunch more.
So we're going to start off with the folks over at Under TAC.
That's where I'm going to lead off with today.
And some of you guys may know this already, but the best day
starts with the best underwear. Is that wrong?
Is that, is that a weird way of looking at it?
Go to Undertac, UNDERTAC, undertac.com and use promo code
Kyle 20 to get yourself 20% off anything in the in the store
there. They have men's and they have
women's. All right.
They have some of the most comfortable undies.
And I say that as someone who's worn the same types of undies
for about 16 years now, and they've changed my mind on it.
The summer's coming to an end. It doesn't mean that the heat
and the humidity have stopped. That's why we switched over here
in the Seraphin house to Undertack.
They have the leading edge of premium comfort and function.
Forget your old boxer briefs, especially if you're an old
boxer brief. What are you doing?
Undertack was built for Special Forces missions in brutal
conditions. They can handle a little bit of
Texas lawn mowing. They have a premium modal fabric
which which way moisture better than cotton by 50%.
It's naturally antibacterial. That's the stink part of it.
They give you something cool, dry, chafe free.
And whether you're crushing a workout or you're just owning
your day, whether you're hanging out on your couch 'cause you got
your comfy undies on, you can do that too.
As long as nobody else has got the windows open, they're
functional. They've got a hidden E&E pocket
that's for holding on to cash or a micro SD card or a handcuff
key or whatever. It needs an extra almond.
If you're Steve friend, Undertack is more than just
boxer briefs. They've got a battle weave
Marina wool socks. I've been wearing those in the
gym as well. I don't care about having high
socks because I have high motivation.
I want comfy feet. They're five times stronger than
regular Marina wool. They are rugged and they have
soft everyday T-shirts. They've got all kinds of things,
hoodies, joggers, you name it. Check them out now. 20% off site
wide. undertack.com promo code Kyle 20.
Easy enough to remember, Kyle and 20 will get you 20% off site
wide. Check out under TAC.
The link is in the show description.
Folks. You will not be disappointed.
I've been very pleased with all the stuff that I've worn from
them so far and I'm sure that we'll continue on as the weather
gets cooler here. All right, let's get into
today's program right now. Don't ever forget about
sponsors. They're always easily to find in
the link below. Let's do a Monday morning show
here. Let's talk about a Mulligan.
All right, round run Part 1. First story right off the bat.
I didn't even add it to one of our presentations here.
This came from The Gateway Pundit Sugar High just three
days after Jimmy Kimmel. You guys remember that guy?
He was the defender of freedom and the First Amendment by
making jokes about MAGA and getting his facts wrong.
Just three days after his comeback, his ratings have
crashed by about 70%. Three days after Democrats in
the media made a huge deal again.
We said maybe that was the whole point in the 1st place to go and
see could we get a little durable ratings bump for this
guy. It turns out that his ratings
have evaporated. Since the beginning of the week
he returned to air, his ratings have dropped by 70%.
The much hyped return was little more than hype.
A sugar high last longer, says the Gateway Pundit.
That is not a good sign. Now they are going to return him
to some of the Sinclair affiliates.
But the claim was here you go. So Wednesday night ratings, you
had Gutfeld with 3.2 million cumulative and you had Jimmy
Kimmel with 2.4. That's a drop off because the
day before that he had 6.3 million.
And I assume it will continue to fall and fall.
So just saying, remember when there's what was that?
Just remember when there's media hype, Is it Monday or what?
Just remember when there's media hype like this and they're all
crying about something that is obviously going to be a big
problem. We know that it's going to land
and be about as durable. Yeah, about as durable as
something cheap from Walmart that just falls right apart.
OK, I listened to this this morning.
Speaking of people that are produced, people that are
selling something. You know, they're selling
something because the pitch is polished.
You ever get that phone call or they call in and if you, you,
they, they have this real smooth opening and they say something
and then you say something really weird and then they're
derailed. They don't know where to go with
that. I do this with telemarketers all
the time and I can't tell you what I say.
I just like randomly will say something weird that doesn't fit
into whatever their protocol is. I'll ask them a question or so
on. I feel like Scott McFarlane from
CBS is one of those guys. This is what I woke up to and I
and I must follow him over on social media 'cause this was the
first thing that I saw this morning when I opened up my
phone. I like it.
I like it because what we're doing is as we talk about re
adjudicating 2020, as we talk about a Mulligan for the BLM
protest, which I don't think were handled very well both at
the local level or the federal level, having been a part of it
in multiple different jurisdictions.
I'm also I'm also seeing people kind of like try to push things
that can't be real. We watched this weird push where
Cash Patel tried to roll back a press release that happened on
on Friday. You recall there was this story
the blaze ran and then you had some other people go out there
and talk about 274 FBI agents were quote UN quote embedded in
the crowd on on January 6th. If 2020 was the Mulligan, the
culmination of that sort of bad, that bad decision theater was
January 6th and then the federal rollout, because that was the
actual tail end of Trump's first administration, right?
Right up until January 20th. So the first J Sixers were
arrested on Trump's watch. That's worth knowing.
What's crazy is, is that no matter what information comes
out, everybody immediately gathers a side.
So the left goes out and says, ohh, it's totally crazy.
Like our federal people are our favorite, except that we really
hate them when they're part of ICE and they're doing
immigration enforcement. But they were really good under
Biden. And this is a totally new game.
It's all the same game. It's always the same people that
are doing this stuff. It just turns out the orders at
the top make a difference. Here's Scott McFarlane giving
you a welcome to Monday, which is kind of funny.
I don't know. Is this what you guys are
looking for? Do you want, like, something
falling apart and randomly hitting the wrong song button?
Or would you like this kind of nonsense?
Listen, Hey, good morning. It's Scott McFarlane.
It's Monday. That was way too short of a
weekend, but we're back at it for the big week ahead.
But this day and this week start in a place I wouldn't have
imagined a few days ago. But again, we're talking about
conspiracy theories and really bold claims about the US Capitol
attack in January 6th, including this allegation that the 200
plus FBI agents who were deployed to respond and help
stop the pillaging of the Capitol were somehow there
before the attack began and somehow a part of inciting
January 6th. I'm going to pause it with him
on the screen. So the problem with the folks on
the right that jump at every single opportunity without the
facts behind it, the problem with saying things like 274
means that they were there to set up this event.
I'm going to, I'm going to pose a question to you and I want you
to consider it very, very, I want you to consider it as
logically as possible without emotion, because January 6th is
an emotional event for a lot of people.
Consider this, if you were planning an operation, let's
say, and you wanted to really be successful with
compartmentalization, knowing everything you know, let's say
it's just from watching spy movies.
And let's say you didn't have a training or a background in
intelligence or operations planning.
Let's say you weren't in the military, you weren't doing Gray
and deniable OPS. Would you have the FBI, the
overt federal law enforcement agency that has significant
amounts of oversight and is regularly having the director
pulled out in front of, you know, members of Congress for
hearings? Would you have them both
quarterback and create the event to set up whatever your scheme
was and then simultaneously also make them the people that had to
investigate and respond to it? Or would you, as I've said here
many times, and I think this is the more likely thing, would you
farm out potential nefarious deeds to other and maybe
deniable governmental agencies? I've always told you that DHS is
kind of a black bag when it comes to what they can and what
they can't do. And people that are assigned to
DHS temporarily, maybe they have some additional authorities.
Why would you want to put FBI agents who are regularly
required to go and be underoath and who aren't necessarily
particularly good liars, just in my experience?
Why would you put those people on the front line inside of a
crowd to rile them up and then turn around and ask those exact
same people in the exact same office that would know those
people have them do the prosecutions?
Does that make any sense to you? This is the problem with jumping
on the 1st narrative that you hear.
Because I saw people that are otherwise credible and
intelligent human beings immediately jump to some some
sort of like unsupportable and unsubstantiated claims.
It doesn't make any sense. I'm fairly confident that the
number and this is the other reason why was the document that
was released. Why was it created in the 1st
place 'cause we need to actually know that the vast majority of
FBI agents in my experience are, are pretty conservative leaning.
Maybe they're libertarian, maybe they're apolitical altogether,
but they tend to be a kind of a political, you know, right of
center group. And the reason you know that is
because they go to church, they join the military, they want to
be in law enforcement in the 1st place.
I do think that the left lean from the FBI comes from the the
Intel community, but it's strange to imagine that you'd
have a bunch of people do something that they know would
be against their own interest and principles and then turn
around and then they would investigate it with vigor.
You really need to have plausible deniability in this
sort of scenario. So what Scott McFarland is going
to set up is, I think a straw man argument.
They're they're running this red herring of of hey, look at 274.
These people are all part of the conspiracy theory.
Just because the way that he lays it out probably didn't
happen, and the way that people on the right have jumped on it
didn't happen doesn't mean that there were not federal assets
engaged in inciting people. I just don't think that
everybody has found the right department.
It's kind of like when you go out and say the CIA did
everything, it's usually because you don't know what the CIA does
or who it might have been. There's other Intel services.
There's 17 Intel services in the United States government.
So to just broadly refer to them as the CIA makes you technically
wrong and therefore you're vulnerable to criticism.
Harry, he's going to go out and lay out something that I think
is one of the dumbest arguments, but I, I wanted to just give you
guys that sort of interjection. The boldness of those claims
aside. So those who've gone through
every case file, all 1500 plus US Capitol riot prosecutions,
talking about 10s of thousands of pieces of paper, you just
don't see it. You don't see evidence presented
that somehow there was this fed surrection and that was borne
out in the criminal cases, wasn't it?
Because in 100% of the jury trials of January 6 rioters,
there were convictions. There were hundreds and hundreds
of guilty pleas, people who acknowledged what they did on
January 6th. There were convictions by
judges, including Trump appointed judges.
So he goes and leans on Trump appointed judges.
He leans on the fact that people pled out.
For those of you who are not familiar with the way that the
federal law enforcement system works, it's over 90% conviction
rate in some way, shape or form. People don't actually get a fair
trial in the Fed. Well, let's be wrong.
Some people do not get a fair trial because they are
overwhelmed by how much the cost is, the capabilities and what is
being presented to them. So they plea out to a lesser
charge because they're overcharged and that is all an
incentivized system. I quote Bill Shipley here
regularly. I don't agree with a lot of
stuff Bill Shipley says, but I do agree with this.
The government's job is supposed to be process and not be
interested in outcome. What we saw in January 6th for
people that had never experienced the legal system
before is that there was this vested interest in coming out
with an an outcome. And when they went for outcome,
they overcharged people pled to to lesser charges and they got
the 90% Federal prosecutors do not want to have, you know,
acquittals unless they decide to go up against like a Mark Houck.
You guys are asking who is this guy?
This is a mainstream presenter for Cbsi.
Like the word presenter, 'cause I don't think he's reporter.
He's clearly saying his opinions about stuff.
And he's even referencing there were Trump appointed judges on
the bench as though that somehow changes the game.
Once you're inside that system, the system is very, it's very
circular. It serves itself.
It doesn't necessarily serve those that are being that are
being accused and brought before it.
I don't think there was any justice for January Sixers.
I think that the people that were involved in assault on
federal law enforcement got heavier sentences than normal.
I think people who weren't even there got insane sentences
because there was a predetermined outcome.
And that a lot that a lot of that has to do with the way that
we are now looking at this Jim comedy scenario.
There are people that want retribution, and I think I
understand that instinct. My answer is, is that even
though that probably feels good, it would be far better for us to
break down this system and this weapon than just wield it for a
little while. And I'm going to continue to
make that. I just want to finish the last
little thing that he says, which is funny because it reminded me
of Portland, and we're going to touch on that as well.
During this Mulligan in bench trials, there were precious few
acquittals on charges. What's more, the crowd that was
there that day, the riotous mob to have been incited.
They sure did come equipped. For what happened among the
things January 6 rioters carried that day, bear spray.
Some had knives, a tomahawk axe in at least one case, Bats,
hockey sticks, lacrosse sticks, pipes, Confederate flags, and in
some cases, in some cases, guns. Guns.
Oh my God, they had lacrosse sticks and hockey sticks and
pipes and and Confederate flags. Guys, a tomahawk axe.
Whatever the hell a tomahawk axe is, Can you imagine there are
more capable and more deadly guns and other assorted weapons
in my bedroom, in my bedroom right now than there are or
there were in the entirety of the crowd that went into the
Capitol. I don't have any Confederate
flags, which I don't know how they're deadly, but they, you
know, Confederate flags. Can you imagine?
There were a couple of guns in the crowd.
There was like a guy with a revolver.
But the real serious people that would have seriously brought
guns that seriously wanted to take over the Capitol didn't
show up. They didn't.
It wasn't, it wasn't there. They were guns in the crowd from
law enforcement officers and from federal agents.
And you know, one of those, one of those Capitol Police officers
who decided to shoot an unarmed veteran in the face, which I
think was one of those things that should be revisited.
We're just talking about, we're talking past each other and
we're out of reality here. And so as we enter this, this
interesting sort of swing back where we're getting a second
touch at Portland, we're getting a second touch at BLM injustices
and at the FBI where people are now trying to get a little bit
of transparency. Let's remember what we don't
have. What we don't have is a, an
honest accounting from all of the government agencies of who
the hell was involved in what. What were the DoD assets that
were on the ground? What were the DHS assets that
were on the ground? Those are two different
departments outside right of DOJI think DOJ has been pretty
thoroughly, you know, adjudicated.
The questions have been asked and answered and maybe some
people were able to fudge around the corners.
There's a story that we're going to cover in a minute about Chris
Ray. And is he going to be the
someone? I he's been conspicuously quiet
and I think rightly so, smart move on his part to be quiet
about all this. But we need to ask the question,
what other departments were there?
Because if you're not asking all of the assets that we have, both
the deniable and the ones that are accountable, you're not
going to get the real story. And you're going to peg your
hopes on 274 FBI agents who as far as we can tell, And I've
been talking to Steve Baker over the weekend about this too,
there is almost no evidence of FBI agents showing up in some
sort of plain clothes. There's no such thing as an FBI
uniform. So I'm in plain clothes right
now. If I were to put a plate carrier
on, I'd still be in plain clothes.
If I were to show up and look like, let's see what I got here.
If, if I showed up and looked like this, This is what I, this
is what I look like in Portland in 2020.
For you who have never seen this, it's kind of funny.
I'm at an in and out. I was doing surveillance.
We went and got some lunch. This is one of my teammates who
I blacked out his face, 'cause he's still working.
That was it. It was like, that's
plainclothes. I had a, a neck gaiter on
because it was 2020 and there was a lot of stupidity in
Portland. You had to have it to be able to
go up to, you know, to order food.
And there I am. It also was useful for my job
'cause I needed to conceal my face sometimes.
And then there we are. I've got a, a Plaid shirt on.
That's plainclothes. If I would have put a plate
carrier on, I would be overtly marked as FBI, but I also would
have still been quote, UN quote, plainclothes, as you heard.
Now, as I was talking to Steve Baker about all this stuff,
there was almost no evidence of FBI agents going up to skirmish
lines, showing their badge or credentials and then joining in
the fray. OK, That's just what it is.
It didn't happen. So the odds are that 274 that we
heard about on Friday, it wasn't a bunch of people that were
embedded in the crowd to get them all riled up.
Again, use the process of elimination.
Use your your most honest thinking head and think, would
you really want the same people that are going to go investigate
and have to sit up on the stand setting those folks up?
Or would you rather use a different deniable organization
and then have your FBI operate in quote UN quote good faith?
It's like, well, we know we didn't set this thing up.
My guest to you is that that 274 number not only included the
SWAT team members who responded, of which there was probably 50
or 60 in that you had your your comms people responding.
So there's another dozen there. You have your evidence response
people that could be 4050, Sixty people in that alone.
But a lot of it was the investigators that came in after
the fact that we're asking questions.
We know for a fact that a third of the Washington field office
was required to deploy, but they couldn't get there because all
the roads were blocked up. So they didn't actually make it
on scene. And so remember who created that
document, the document that said that the 274 agents specific
we're looking for something and they weren't looking to expose
their undercover operations to to help overthrow the MAGA
movement. I promise you that's not what
they were interested in. That was generated under Biden
as an after action. What that was, was an
accountability saying, look how many resources we deployed to
this thing. Look how much more funding we're
going to need. The simplest answer for
government is how does it benefit me?
I just want you guys to be thinkers when you see this
stuff. And then we start talking about
the narrative about violence and the narrative of violence is
ongoing and it is happening in multiple different areas right
now. There's a story at CBS.
This LED. This was their 60 minutes piece
After Charlie Kirk's murder. The Utah governor, Spencer
Spencer Cox grapples with rising political violence.
Again, they're very nonspecific about this thing.
He's Americans have condemned political violence as
inflammatory rhetoric. The people are upset, they're
angry, they're nauseous and disbelief.
This is the Republican governor of Utah, and he's saying that he
decried political violence against both Democrats and
Republicans, and he focused on an opportunity for all Americans
to disagree in nonviolent ways. I'm not asking people to hold
hands and hug it out. I'm just saying stop shooting
each other. Well, that's a reasonable thing
to say. But we have this moment where
people could all quote UN quote come together.
But you got folks on the left that just can't really let it
go. They can't just be like, hey,
this was someone from quote UN quote our side and we need to
really decry that this happened on CNN last night, night before
last, I think Scott Jennings, this LED guy, they're going to
have a discussion about what is violent, who is violent.
And I think that leads into another little sort of piece of
evidence I have from Bill Maher talking about, you know, you
hear about the issue with with Islam and violence.
And it's not that all people that are Islamic have an
instinct towards violence. It's just that the people that
are not necessarily violent don't really decry and cast out
those who do. I think the political left has
that same problem. We're going to go ahead and
evaluate that for just a second. Yeah, I'm pretty tired of
conservatives gaslighting about the current political
environment and Donald Trump's rhetoric.
When all of this escalation can be traced back to his entrance
into American politics. His claim to fame was saying
that Obama wasn't born in America.
He was the first presidential candidate to have his crowd
chant lock her up about a political opponent.
You can bring up the insurrection.
Even the past few weeks, my home city of Chicago, he posted a
photo of Chicago being invaded by the Department of War.
So the broader point here is Donald Trump endlessly deflects
and tries to blame it on the other side when he is the one
responsible for amping up the tension in America.
And I've spent all of my formative years throughout high
school, throughout college, looking to the president, who
I'm supposed to be able to look up to, and seeing somebody who's
trying to place blame on the left, who's amping up the
rhetoric constantly. And yeah, it's not good.
So you think it's Donald Trump's fault that a deranged leftist
climbed up to the top of a building and shot up the ICE
facility not once now but twice in Texas?
I think it's Donald Trump's fault that America has gotten to
this heated place. I think that's no responsibility
for the for the radicalization on the left that's causing this
violence that 29 year olds radicalized by online
communities and online algorithms.
I'm not going to blame that Trump, but he was caught in a
lot of online video game algorithms and all these
communities, Donald Trump, but it's Trump. 10 years ago, Donald
Trump amped up the tension in America.
So, so, so he ran 10 years ago and this guy then ten years
later, somehow you're connecting.
Can't you just take responsibility for it?
Oh, let's not do. The like he has to take
responsibility to the. Democrat.
I'm a 22. Year old YouTube, you want me to
take more? Responsibility than the
president. It always devolves into that.
Let me go back to a premise that we introduced last week.
I think that it is. It is really useful for framing
these thoughts. When you see people on the left
and on the hard left that want to make excuses for the left,
what do they always seem to do? They blame systems.
They're happy to blame Donald Trump too, individually.
Like one person individually can take responsibility, but it's
always the system's fault because the person is inherently
good. It's not that person's fault.
They fell into YouTube algorithms and Reddit and video
games as opposed to saying sometimes people do really bad
things. Conservatives believe that we
are fallen creatures, that we we come from a place of original
sin, that there was pride introduced into the world and
therefore there's been suffering ever since.
If you're on the left, people are sort of like utopian ideals,
even though there's no evidence of that being true.
It's this very sophomoric sort of juvenile belief that people
are inherently good and it's these systems that keep failing
them. And every time I see it, it's
really good to come from a 22 year old YouTube who said my
formative years in high school and college.
If you're 22 years old and you're a man, like a young man
in America, you don't know anything.
Like there are so few of them that do.
I knew one guy that had his his SHIT together at that age 1.
Only one of all my friends and my friends were absolutely like
the top tier of America's intellectual talent.
My friends had 10s of million, like like a dozen guys had 10s
of millions of dollars in scholarship offers.
So by all the accounts of what people cared about for like
kids, they, they were sports studs, they were intellectually
capable, they were getting scholarships to go to college.
They were all going to be super successful.
And then guess what? Like none of them had their,
their, their business together, Not one of them.
And the one that everyone sort of looked at in my group of
friends and said, Hey, that's the one guy who's made a really
goofy mistake. He's one of the best people in
the entire world as far as I'm concerned.
He got out and dropped out of college and got married right
away and had a baby and then went back to college and he's
been providing for his family. He's an empty nester right now.
He's an empty nester. He's my age and I have a 2 year
old. He figured it out.
I think that 22 year old Ben in America often times are, are
like the worst people to listen to.
So listen to that guy. Have a very juvenile
understanding the world. It makes perfect sense to me.
Here's kind of an older guy who's saying the same thing that
Scott Jennings is, when Scott Jennings, who's kind of like
center right, and Bill Maher, who's kind of like an old
school, he's like a classic liberal we can agree with
sometimes. If they're saying the same
thing, they're probably saying something that most Americans
can get behind. The basic problem we have in
America is conservatives think the liberals are insane and
they're not completely wrong. Now I don't think most liberals
are insane, but neither do they make it clear they disapprove of
the ones who are and they're cowardice in not marginalizing
their own crazies has been their downfall.
I couldn't get Neil deGrasse Tyson, a genius scientist and
pre eminent scientific voice in the media, to agree that it was
ridiculous for Scientific American and the Atlantic to be
claiming that separating sports by sex doesn't make sense.
Yes, it does. Actually.
It makes perfect sense and it's obvious that it does.
And there's a lot of stuff like that on the left.
And when conservatives see it, they say I'm sorry, we're just
not going to go along with reinventing society, often
pointlessly, even if we have to cancel democracy to do it.
That's what they're saying. They see gender is only a
construct and sex is assigned at birth and they say we're not
doing that. Transient kids by self diagnosis
with no age limit, no parental notification and no
acknowledgement of social contagion.
Not doing it. Asylum now covers any reason for
anyone to come to America. Not doing it.
Homelessness is a lifestyle. Natural immunity doesn't count
anymore. Whiteness is toxic.
Penises in women's prisons welcoming the intifada.
We're not doing it. I think penises in women's
prisons is my new favorite expression.
I don't know where he decided to throw that out there, but it's
pretty good, right? Isn't that the thing?
This is the do over? This is the touch.
We watched the insanity sort of get a a strong foothold in 2020
and it was insane. It was insane that people burned
American cities over the injustice of a guy overdosing on
drugs underneath a a a taut and authorized police hold tactic.
Anyone who's ever seen the truth about what happened with George
Floyd knows the guy was claiming that he had difficulty breathing
prior to getting on the ground. He was in the back of the car.
Why was he on the ground in the 1st place?
Because he wouldn't sit still long enough to be in the back of
the squad car that they had or the SUV they were trying to to
shackle him in. The guy committed a crime.
He was in the midst of having a fentanyl overdose.
What is fentanyl but an opiate? And what are opiates but
respiratory depressants? So people have difficulty
breathing. It's actually very common.
You usually don't get to see it happen in that slow period of
time. But I'm guessing that he
probably had a pretty high tolerance.
And then they burned cities over it, and they got this crazy,
this crazy movement behind them that raised millions and
millions of dollars from corporations and that allowed a
bunch of other crazy stuff to happen.
We've got a chance to retouch that.
I think I say that as somebody who actually was in Portland in
2020, September of 2020, like right now, let's call it five
years ago, I was sitting and taking pictures like this.
What you're seeing on the screen, This is a great reason,
by the way, for you guys to have Spotify.
If you don't use Spotify, you can't just switch between video
and audio. But if you're listening and
you're not seeing this, you're missing out on some visuals that
came from my actual surveillance camera while I was actually in
Portland working for the FBI. On the left side closest to me,
it's a guy who looks like he's out of a Mad Max movie
graininess is because I had a cheaper iPhone back then.
But the guy was wearing a handmade leather vest with a
scabbard that had a sword that was made from rebar and it
looked like it was welded together.
The thing was probably 4 plus feet long.
It was rusty. It was pointy on one end.
It was not sharpened. It was this like cudgel,
ridiculous weird weapon. He's wearing a bandana and
sunglasses and he's stomping around with patches and like a
like a he's a, he's a Larper. He was sleeping on cardboard in
a parking spot that I had to pay 20 bucks a night to park in for
my government vehicle. And he was sleeping there for
nothing while I was sleeping in the nicest hotel in Portland,
which was available at government rates, which meant it
was under $100 a night normally like between 400 and $500 a
night. But because Portland is so
jacked up that could actually afford their on the government
rate. And next to it, what you're
seeing was called the snack van. That was one of the subjects of
our investigations out there. The snack van was a graffitied
sprinter van full of snacks to be able to feed rioters.
And it has the word or the letters BLM on it and a bunch of
other crazy stuff. It had the ACAB all cops are
bastards. It had that FUC KA12 and a bunch
of other sort of nonsensical anarchist and, and BLM type, you
know, rioting stuff. The reason that people lumped
BLM and Antifa together is because the Antifa folks said,
ah, you are ideologically aligned with us, we're just
going to be more violent than you and we're going to use you
for cover. And so they did.
And so you're seeing right now this complaint about Portland
not wanting, quote, UN quote, Trump troops sent in.
This is the same exact signs that we saw in 2025 years ago
today. I saw signs up in windows.
Federal troops go home, despite the fact that Portland
desperately needed somebody to come in and clean it up because
the people that were in their city, we're not doing it.
So we're not going to accept the craziness.
And if you're going to burn down cities over a a black criminal
who died of a drug overdose, then you might also think that
other crazy things are possible. Like maybe we should just let
women do men's jobs or we should put men inside women's locker
rooms. All of this stuff is
problematic. This was a hearing that was just
done with Pete Hegseth. I think that seeing this touch,
this is the pushback that that Bill Maher was saying.
It's like we're just not going to accept the crazy as much
anymore. It's not coming in a perfect
manner and it's probably not even going to achieve the things
that everybody wants in the end. But it is going to give us at
least a slight push back against something that, you know, maybe
we'll take a little bit more ground.
I don't think we're taking the hill, folks.
But this stuff has to happen because we have to have these
conversations. And then you're going to have to
win it over by being reasonable with those around you.
And that's going to be the really hard part.
Let the loud movers be loud. You cannot accept false
statements to be said in your presence and not say anything
back. I told you guys that this is
what a cultural crusade would look like.
The cultural crusade looks like your family member, your friend,
your person at work says something that is over the top
radical leftist and you're just like, I don't agree with that.
You don't even have to be mean. You say I don't agree with what
you just said. That's not true.
You don't have to make an argument even.
You just have to tell them that what they're saying so that
somebody in their circle lets them know that you are not in a
consensus of everybody agreeing with you.
This is Pete Hagseth essentially doing that because.
If it were, you would be keeping these women in.
Instead, you are the one injecting culture wars into the
military, and it's at the detriment of our military
readiness and national security. Now, General Kane, I'd like to
turn to you. Should be clear these are these
are men who think they're women these are women I'm happy to
educate you on but these are men what we've identified is that
there's mental health issues I'd like to belief system.
I'd like to turn to General. Are detrimental to readiness and
that's the determination that we've made and that we stand
behind gender default. And so you don't.
You don't. OK, we're not going to let you
just say that men are women and women are men.
We're just not going to let you do it.
You can't do that anymore. You don't get to say crazy
nonsense, but we should also be really careful to police things
that happen on the right, on things that people want to
believe right away. What's the thing that people
want to believe right now? Someone takes a potshot.
Someone goes and attacks a church.
Is it always left wing violence? Is it always some sort of
craziness that has something specifically to do with
politics? Probably not.
It turns out there's a lot of people that are very flawed and
broken in this country. There's a lot of mental illness
and it doesn't necessarily align with one politic or another
right now. We had two shootings over the
weekend that were pretty significant and pretty troubling
for folks that are paying attention to this.
I think that random violence is something that we are going to
find out more about and we're going to see more of it in the
same way that if we're revisiting 2020, if we can
correct some of the wrongs, we're also going to see some of
the sporadic and random violence.
The question is how do we react to it?
This is a story from ABC. Investigators are probing the
motive for a Michigan LDS Church shooting and fire.
At least four people were killed at the LDS Church in Grand
Blanc, which is in Michigan. This happened the other day.
Gunman named Thomas Jacob Sanford, 40 years old, drove his
truck into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in
Michigan on a Sunday morning, began shooting concrete and set
the building on fire. All of this stuff is horrific.
Four people killed, eight others injured in the shooting.
There was questions about what the what the shootout happened
because some people were armed and they decided to respond.
You also had law enforcement get involved.
The FBI is calling it a targeted attack of violence perhaps, but
it doesn't mean that it was necessarily left wing terrorism
that caused this to be the case. And so this idea, you guys may
have seen this. There's a what's his name?
There's a, a Saturday Night Live clip.
And I think it's like Shane Gillis, he does this bit where
they're like claiming the newscasters are claiming,
whether the blacks or whites, they're claiming whether it's
our people or your people are responsible for the violence.
The left and the right are playing that game in America
right now. Every time there's a story about
something horrific. The question is, is, can we say
this was a trans shooter? Can we say this was a left wing
looney? Was this an Antifa?
Was this a BLM activist? Is it possible that sometimes
bad things just happen because people are broken and they have
mental problems? I would say yes.
Here's a man named Chris, his name is Chris Johns.
He supposedly talked to this, the guy who was actually
involved in the shooting a couple days prior, and it sounds
like he was just upset with LDS. There are a lot of people that
don't like Mormons. I'm not actually one of them.
I understand that. I think that it's kind of
cultish and that it's not necessarily what Christianity
is, but I've found that Mormon people tend to be really, really
nice. They come and knock on your door
and they want to try to sell you their story.
And it's like, invite them in and have a cup of coffee.
Talk to them about the Bible, explain to them that you're not
interested in Joseph Smith and they don't get mad at you.
One of my best buddies in the in the, in the FBI Mormon guy, we
used to talk about what was and what was not and why and where
they where the root was, why they couldn't drink coffee.
You know what the issues were with tobacco.
And he was totally honest about it.
He's like, yeah, this is what we believe.
Does it make tons of sense to me all the time?
No, But this is my religion. This is, you know, the the whole
system of beliefs as a whole. It works.
And guess what? He's happily married.
He's a conservative dude. He's a military stud and a hero,
right? He's the kind of person that
stands up. He worked in Portland for the
FBI for a little while. And he was hated there because
he had principles and he spilled blood for this country, a lot of
it. Like he's a really deadly human
being. And he's the kind of guy you
want on your side. So am I going to turn away and
say, you know, Mormon people in general?
No, I'm not. But I can also say that certain
people crack and they demonize something that is different from
themselves. And when they do that, like, we
need to call that stuff out, too.
It's like, hey, man, you don't have to love Mormon people.
But I tell you what, they're probably not going to come and
violently come after you. This guy had this interview.
This is a looks like a local affiliate.
This is Dave Bondi. Maybe you guys know who Dave
Bondi. I actually don't.
But I saw this clip and I thought how interesting to find
that you randomly encountered this dude and you might actually
have the motive. And the motive has nothing to do
with one politics or another. It has to do with the guy
getting mentally ill and probably fixating on something.
Hello everyone, I'm talking to Chris right now and you
contacted me a short time ago. Pretty, pretty distraught
because actually earlier today you came to the realization that
you say that you talked to the person who did this horrible
thing in Grambling Township. I did last week, it was
Wednesday or Thursday. I'm running for City Council and
I'm canvassing and I just, I had an address on my map that I went
to and I came across a gentleman.
He was very friendly and he had interacted positively with me.
And then we got out of the vehicle, we started just to
talk, and after a short while it the conversation went to the
Church of Latter Day Saints. Mormonism.
And he just made the position multiple times that that Mormons
are the Antichrist. And he and not so many terms
said that several times. He gave me his background, but I
just walked away from a person who had some very sharp views
about Mormons. Yeah.
So you were just out campaigning for the election in November
coming up. I'm assuming that is correct.
And so you're just shaking hands looking to meet people.
You come across his door. Have you matched it up?
Is it the address the same as this person?
Have you looked? It is, yes.
I mean, it is not only is the address, but it's also the
person that I spoke with. I again, I have a friend in Utah
who is involved with the LDS church.
I sent him a voice message saying I had a conversation with
a person who had very sharp views.
And it's just like you come across a lot of different people
while you campaign. And I shared this with him on
Friday and then we had our Sunday dinner.
And I end up seeing a photo that was the exact guy I spoke to
last week. So it doesn't necessarily always
have to be the pattern that we hope it is.
And I think that we often times we have to confront our own
confirmation bias. I'm looking at the story right
here, which comes from CNN. And it says four people were
killed, eight were wounded, others are unaccounted for.
The Chapel who joins, amongst others, a Minneapolis Catholic
Church, a Pittsburgh synagogue, A Sikh temple, all places where
both young and old were killed. They were gathering for
different reasons. So you're talking about Sikhs,
you're talking about Jews, you're talking about Catholics,
you're talking about Mormons to celebrate the start of a new
school year, to mourn the loss of a leader, blah, blah, blah.
They're all doing this thing. They're all praying and they all
had violence. But it doesn't mean that they're
actually related. It doesn't mean that the reasons
that people went there are the same.
We want to put things into nice little easy boxes, but that
doesn't actually work in our regular life.
People don't actually tend to fit in nice little boxes and
occasionally decent. Otherwise, nice hard working
people will just go and and and snap and they do something that
is completely illogical. And what is the most common
thing you hear? He was such a nice man.
He always kept to himself. I had no idea that he would ever
do this. There are plenty of stories like
that. That used to be the most common
thing that you hear on the nightly news when they would do
these things. I just want you to consider
break the bias. When you hear something, if your
first instinct is to say, I hope it's somebody that did this
thing that I disagree with, that's the wrong instinct.
That's not going to get us where we want to be.
And we all do it. I do it.
You do it. Yeah, I assure you, the news
media does it. The difference is, is their
voice is really loud. And we need to be very critical.
We need to look at them for the propaganda that they are
slinging in the way that they are slinging it, which is why I
played you, Scott McFarland, who told you in a very, very
polished voice, this is exactly the way.
Can you believe they had they had pipes and lacrosse sticks
and they had Confederate flags and even a tomahawk axe and
guns? But we've got tomahawk axes and
guns here on this set sitting right behind me.
They don't cause any problem for anybody.
There's a will to act. That's what has to happen.
And so again, if you're going to go out there and try to blame
systems, you're probably on the left.
If you're going to blame people individually, you probably are
on the right. But don't be a person on the
right who just says all these types of people are the problem.
We should still be interested in people individually and not just
do this process as the punishment.
We're fine with it because they're probably on the wrong
team. Can you guys tell that the word
tomahawk axe really bothers me? It really does.
All right, you know what doesn't bother me?
Having a power grid go out because we have a Grid Doctor
3300 sitting right outside of my studio wall here, and it powers
this particular broadcast it's running through, giving us clean
power in a universal or uninterrupted power supply.
Have you looked at your power bill, lady?
Your electricity prices are probably at all time highs.
I know they are over here as well.
They're only going up and power outages are becoming more and
more common because our grid is not keeping up with the people
we have. The Department of Energy said
blackouts could increase by over 10,000% over the next few years.
If you don't have a backup generator for your home, it's
time to get one. I've actually been thinking
about this all the time. Like, oh man, how much of our
life is actually tied to having electricity?
If you're worried about something like that, you can
actually put a one time investment in and really solve
that problem, which is what we have here.
At least in the worst case scenario, I can both have power
and I can recharge it on a solar generator.
We've got the Grid Doctor 3300 sitting right outside here.
You can get one from my Patriot supply.
The website ismypatriotsupply.com slash Kyle
mypatriotsupply.com/kyle. Here's the deal.
It's fume free on like a gas generator or a propane generator
or a diesel generator. You can use it indoors.
You can run one of their long cables.
We've got a 75 foot, I think, or maybe 100 foot cable.
And it's a flat space to go underneath your door where you
can actually set up your solar panels outside and then keep
your your grid doctor indoors, keeping out of the sun and
giving it like the ability to to hook up to it.
You've got all these different little plug outlets in there and
whatnot. You don't have to run extension
cords all over your house for things that are critical.
You can just one, one little kind of clean cord.
mypatriotsupply.com slash Kyle. And right now they're a deal.
If you guys need to find as one, if this is something that you're
panicking about and you don't have the money up front, if you
want to, you can actually finance it for 0 down with as
little as $104.00 a month. Not usually a big fan of of
financing things, but if you're in a position where you're like,
hey, this, this is the time where I can budget it out
responsibly. You can get 3300 watts of backup
power delivered to your door for as little as $0.00 down.
Again, mypatriotsupply.com slash Kyle, be responsible guys.
Check something out and make sure that you are, I don't know,
insulating yourself against of this stuff.
Looks like stuff looks like, you know, running out of power.
OK, we're going to do another quick story here about violence
because I want to get into this further.
This is another random story that we found out again,
multiple people covering the story in Michigan.
The other one was a shooting that took place in North
Carolina at a waterfront bar. Subject was arrested, left three
people dead, eight others injured.
Very similar as far as death, the numbers of death and the,
and the numbers of people injured.
It's this little coastal town called Southport, NC.
Guy used a quote UN quote, assault rifle.
Can you tell I'm looking at mainstream news, The suspects
from Oak Island, NC, he's been charged with three counts of
first degree murder and five counts of attempted murder.
This is a local crime. You didn't see the FBI getting
involved because it's not a church.
Truly sad stuff. And again, both of these guys
are military veterans. We find out that there's
probably some PTSD or maybe some trauma involved in there.
This plays into all kinds of narratives.
If you want to just lump people in and not consider them, if you
only want to look at them as a group.
I saw a sarcastic remark in our chat earlier.
Yeah, military veterans are dangerous.
Well, maybe so because they have some of these skills.
It was a it was a joke from one of our our chatters.
We want to find an easy answer and an easy solution, but it
turns out life is pretty messy. And again, if you have a
confirmation bias where you want to do something like, I don't
know, like what Janet Reno wanted to do.
Wasn't she famous for saying something to that effect, that
we needed to make sure that we kept guns out of the hands of
veterans like, well, who's more capable and competent using
weapon systems that people that trained in our military?
Probably not very many people. It turns out we could be honest
about certain things and say some people have broken from
their experiences. Some people are are going
through difficulty and we don't have to just lump everybody in
together. We can have simultaneously a
need to be able to arm ourselves against violent criminals that
just do not care about what's going on in this country or do
not care about being socialized. And at the same time, some
people, we should try to make them safe.
The answer is not more government.
It turns out if you're me, I don't think that's the answer.
The answer is how do we build up a community and a family so that
when you see someone who's struggling that we can actually
step in and and do something about this?
Whose responsibility is it to make sure that a dangerous
person or someone who's having like mental difficulties doesn't
have access to weapons? Is it our government?
Should they be screening us? Should they be checking every
single thing that we write? Should be they look through our
emails and our text messages and try to find out.
Oh, we're going to keep track of all the crazies.
We already know they can't do it.
How do we know? Because this weekend there were
two guys that went on shooting sprees and killed strangers for
various different reasons. We know they can't do it.
Every single time that you guys hear quote UN quote, he was on
the FB is radar. Some shooter at a school, some
shooter in a mall, some shooter anywhere else at a bar, at a
church, he was on the radar. All that tells you is it affirms
one thing and one thing only. It's not that the FBI is letting
them go. It's that the government cannot
solve this problem. You can't do it with red flag
laws. You cannot do it by pre crime
and pre thought. You can only do it through
trying to help heal people around you.
How many of these people could have been saved if somebody in
their family had reached out on the day before and just said,
hey man, how you doing? Hey, I want to come by.
I haven't heard from you a little bit.
Want to stop in and just check in on you.
How many people just like thought, you know, I should pick
up the phone and call that person that I've been, you know,
not hearing from. I've been kind of thinking about
them, but I'm also really busy. It's our responsibility.
It turns out your cops are not, are not your babysitters.
They're not your social workers, the people that work law
enforcement at the state, federal and, and at the local
level. None of these people signed up
to be a parent to an adult. And maybe they didn't need that.
Maybe they just needed a buddy. I used to tell my wife that
about counseling all the time. My wife is a she's a master's
degree in counseling. So she used to work as a
marriage and family therapist. She used to work as a licensed
professional counselor. And I used to tell her, all of
your friends that need counseling, like a lot of them,
just need a friend. They don't need a strategy and
they don't need some sort of way to fix this.
They just need another human being that gives a a rat's ass
about how they do that checks in on them periodically.
Isn't that our responsibility? You don't have to necessarily be
your brother's keeper, but shouldn't you just keep up with
your brother, whoever that person is?
We can't do it for everybody, but there's a small circle.
If every one of us had a dozen people that we kept track of
over a period of a month, which is what I used to do.
If you have a commute home, some of it you can listen to this
podcast and some of it you can use to reach out and just talk
to folks that you haven't talked to in a while.
Put them on a schedule. Once a week I check in with this
person. Once a month I check in with
somebody who's a little bit further out on the on the list.
I had a mental category of people that I checked in with.
And so I have dozens of people that I keep track of over the
many years of weird places that I've lived.
Can we not be looking out for our neighbor?
Not because we want to make sure that they don't do something
bad, but because we care about them, that we want good
outcomes? And it'll make you more
empathetic to the rest of it. When I tell you guys that
community is probably the answer here.
That's what the that's what the crusade is going to look like.
I think the crusade is going to look like, how do we go out
there and look after each other and build a societal structure
that doesn't let people fall through?
Not how do we legislate it and build government and put a bunch
of sort of like, I don't know, law enforcement armed.
You can't legislate your way out of this.
You can't government your way out of this.
It just doesn't work. That's just not the way that
we're wired. We are trying to fix this 2020
thing. We do need to see an
accountability happen, but I would argue that going after
every single bad guy, and I know a lot of people want to see it.
I think that time has probably passed.
That time was probably 2017 when Trump one point O came in and he
said a precedent. We're not going to go after the
Hillary Clinton's. We're not going to lock her up.
We could, but we're not going to.
And it's a shame. It really is.
I think that was a bad decision for this country.
I think what it did is it gave this this thing that one of my
my team sergeants used to talk about.
Never mistake kindness for weakness.
The left did that and 2021 through 2025, the beginning of
those, those four years of Biden were an opportunity for the left
to mistake kindness for weakness.
And they did it in a big, big way.
And now they're really crying about it because they don't want
to see the alternate. They don't want to see
accountability happen. And in some ways they're right.
It's kind of like punishing your child like a week afterwards.
If I was, if I was on a work vacation or a work work
vacation, if I was on a work trip, let's say I'm, let's say
I'm in Portland and I come back and I find out that my daughter
four days ago, who at that time was 3 or 4 years old.
If my daughter had done something bad and there wasn't a
proximity to that bad action and I came back and punished her
right away, it wouldn't have the desired effect.
It's the same as seeing a puppy. It pees in the corner and then
an hour later you beat the crap out of it.
The the puppy doesn't know that it's because it peed in the
corner an hour ago. You really have to have your
your discipline and you need to have your reactions happen
proximate to the actual offense. And that's not necessarily the
case. So I do see people on the left
right now are completely bewildered.
Like, what do you mean we're retouching 2020?
The way to retouch 2020 is not going to be go back and punish
everybody from the previous Trump administration or the ones
before. That's my assessment.
OK, you guys can disagree with me.
I think the answer is to set policies up such that we don't
make those same mistakes. And that's a little different.
And we are seeing that happen in Portland right now.
And I think that is the right answer.
So here's the here's the confusion that you're seeing on
the political left right now. People voted for him in huge
part to bring costs down. The more they watch him focus on
personal retribution. Yes, it motivates his base.
Yes, it motivates the Democratic base.
But for these voters in the middle who are looking for their
cost of living to come down, for their lives to be better, they
say, why are you not focused on what matters?
I'm I'm stunned to hear you say we're now worried about
normalizing this kind of thing. We had an what we're about to do
right now. Let's hear it.
I'm I'm about to tell you what happened in the state of New
York when the Democratic attorney general ran an entire
political campaign promising, promising not to uphold justice,
but to prosecute one person, Donald Trump.
And I didn't hear a lot of weeping and gnashing of teeth
among Democrats about normalizing the weaponization of
justice. That chart you put up there.
My question is, do they deserve it?
If they didn't do anything wrong, I'm not certain anything
bad is going to happen to them. Bolton that started under Joe
Biden. James, I mean, these people that
you put on the screen, they may have something that needs to be
looked at, but don't you have trust in the in the processes,
grand juries? This is how the system works.
OK, so a couple things can be true at once.
If comedy lied to Congress and he technically committed a a
felony during that time, then he could be prosecuted.
I get it. But isn't it interesting that
all the people that were on the right that were looking for
retribution and looking for correction, every single person
I heard said the same darn thing they said treason, sedition,
conspiracy against rights. We're going to go after Jim
Comedy. We're going to get him for all
the evil things he did. Here's the thing that is most
unsettling. If all they could get him on was
a false statement and the potential that he was
obstructing justice with said false statements, it tells you
something a little bit darker. It tells you that most of the
things he did were actually legal, not that that they
couldn't fall, that they were outside of the statute of
limitations. No, they were actually legal
within the parameters of the system that was created.
So the answer is not like, oh, we should get him on a
technicality. The answer is this system is the
problem and it has been the problem.
And so if you fall on the side of the coin that I do as a
conservative where you say I don't want weaponized anything,
I don't weaponize government, then it tells you that the
government is the actual issue. And then when they used it, they
use that weapon appropriately for their own causes.
That's really scary stuff. Consider this.
What if you can't go after Obama?
Because the things that Obama did were, technically speaking,
legal and they were within the purview and the power that he
had. The entire federal government
was set up in an argument in the 1790's.
The argument in the 1780's the discussion was how strong do we
make it so it doesn't fall apart and how weak can we keep it so
it doesn't come after us and kill us.
We have arrived at the point where the anti federalists were
correct, where the government has grown outside of its bound.
It needs to be trimmed aggressively to fit back in the
box that it belongs in. The answer is not going to be
going after the people that did stuff that we don't like on
technicalities. The answer is going to be
cutting back pieces of that machine that operate as they are
designed. Because if all you can do is
find out that Jim Comedy lied and was like in Artful in one
expression where he didn't believe that somebody was an FBI
employee because they were an unpaid special governmental
employee that he brought on because he was his buddy.
All of that stuff is like majoring in the minors.
You're dealing with minutiae when the real problem is we have
an FBI director who can order, we're off the books honeypot
operations into a current president.
That's the real danger. I'm going to play you that again
because we seem to forgotten that before we do it.
Let me take a quick break here to remind you guys that you may
hear an ad from Spotify right now and you can find Spotify by
going to kyleseraphinshow.com. I think that in the the interim,
if you were just listening to us, you have never been able to
see some of the video stuff. The ability to switch back and
forth between audio and video, it's fantastic.
If you're watching one of the video platforms, no big deal.
Make sure you're liking, make sure you're sharing it.
Make sure you subscribing to our YouTube channel.
Really appreciate that. We're almost at 14,000 over
there, which means we are. We're about halfway caught up
with Rumble and it's gotten a meteoric rise over this last
year. It's been fantastic watching
people join over on YouTube. So thank you for all the
chatters that are on YouTube. You guys are great.
Make sure you guys like the video before you leave.
Same story over on Rumble. Appreciate you guys there.
I want to show you this. This was something that got
swept under the rug and it's really problematic for one
reason and one reason only. The people within the FBI got
the ear of the FBI director. That's going to come into our
next story. They got the ear of the FBI
director and they said. This.
Happened, but it's not what you think it was.
It's not the problem. It was actually all OK.
Those people were the mutual admiration societies that exist
in the orbit of the FBI. So a lot of the danger and
damages that have happened to the American psyche and
certainly people on the political right historically was
always the left that was worried about the FBI.
Isn't that funny? And now the right is.
If you zoom out far enough, a reasonable person says the FBI
has always been a problem. It just goes after whatever
serves itself. The mutual admiration societies
are the Society of ex FBI Agents or Sock ex FBI and the FBI
Agents Association or FBI AA. Those groups are captured and I
think that they are roughly Marxist organizations at this
point. But they exist for one reason
and one reason only, mutual admiration.
They love the FBI because the FBI loves them and the entire
purpose of those groups are to maintain contact with and
influence over the FB is director.
And that's why you got a backpedaling after a very
salacious story went out in The Washington Times.
Carrie Pickett covered it. Cash Patel quashed it on the
advice of the FBI Agents Association and Sock X FBI.
The mutual admiration societies killed this story which was
covered by Fox. Listen to how breathless they
are and how scandalous this sounds, and then we're going to
get into the BLM firing that happened over on a Friday
afternoon. Trade President Trump's first
campaign by using two undercover agents in a so-called honeypot
operation. Incredible.
Todd Pyro joins us with details. Todd.
This is big. Under the leadership of new FBI
Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino, the Bureau
has reportedly launched an investigation into the agency's
plan to infiltrate President Trump's first campaign using two
female undercover agents. The Washington Times reporting
that the program was launched in 2015 by then FBI Director James
Comedy. The honeypot scheme was actually
kept off the books. And according to a
whistleblower, Comedy's investigation was separate from
Crossfire Hurricane. You of course know that as the
FBI's operation that looked into allegations Trump's campaign
colluded with Russia. OK, so Patel pushed back on
this. I actually covered this a couple
of Fridays ago. And what did he push back on?
He didn't like the word honeypot because the FBI Agents
Association didn't like the word honeypot because they didn't
want to actually have that sort of connotation that the FBI does
it. But was it legal?
It sounds like it might have been.
Was it out of FBI policy? Certainly.
Can the FBI director break policy?
Yes, they can. They can make all kinds of
movements, which is why when you have this big organization that
can do things that it ought not be able to do, but it can
without any sort of technically illegal actions, that's where we
have a real problem. And that's what we're looking at
now. One of those things got
corrected, but it's so far away from the proximate cause.
And the reason why is because the FBI Agents Association
actually covered for this group. What you're seeing on the on the
screen right now are all of the FBI, what we call Neil Team 6.
If you've never heard that term before, I feel like I actually
created it. I may have parallel constructed
it with some other people. Neil Team Six were the FBI
agents wearing FBI body armor marching around in June of 2020
that took a knee for BLM despite the fact that there was no
danger, there was no de escalation required and it was
spun over and over again and Chris Wray embraced them.
Apparently everyone that took a knee in this photo and that were
out there on this quote UN quote presence patrol, you can see
they're wearing masks. The ones that are not wearing
masks, what are they doing? They're smiling, they're not in
danger, there's no threat there. They took a knee because they
thought it was the right thing to do socially and one of the
major reasons they did it because you'll notice 123456789.
Of the 12. People I see on screen, at least
nine of them are women, and they took a knee for BLM because
they're women, because women are agreeable.
That's what women do. They try not to create social
strife. It's a survival instinct.
I don't hate that, but isn't it interesting as we have an
argument about whether men can be women and women can be men
and who should be in the military?
And if you have a confusion about that, there's also
something to be said about certain personality types that
are going to cave to public sentiment.
And that is exactly what I think happened here.
The supervisors on scene, Amy Oakes, she's in the back there
with the white mask. Sarah Linden, she's about to
take a knee. She's the hefty girl.
Those people took knees and they're females.
And almost all of the people that took knees we saw get
promoted so aggressively. How interesting.
I want to read you the story here that comes from CBS, which
is 100% critical of what just happened.
Again, the danger is, is that you spank the puppy.
But it was years after the fact. They got hugged by Chris Ray.
They got defended by Larissa Knapp, who is the executive
assistant director of the National Security Branch.
When she retired. She was the the special agent in
charge of counterterrorism at the Washington Field office when
this went down and she yelled at me about this.
So this has been a story that I have been aggressively think
it's weird to take these scalps because that's what we've been
calling him here to grab 20 or 22 or 15 or however many people
were fired. I don't really feel great about
it, but I also think that it had to happen.
It just happened so far afterwards that we've lost the
impact of what this message was supposed to be because all of
these people got promoted. They got five years longer on
the job than I did, so I guess there's that or three years
longer. Leaders from the FBI have
removed more than a dozen agents who knelt for BLM in the summer
of 2020 in Washington, DC during the Black Lives Matter protests.
Many of these agents had already been demoted or put on
administrative leave. Apparently there was some sort
of like half measure that was done in April.
One source said that the termination letter to the agent
cited their lack of judgement, which is true.
This is a tactically unsound move and dangerous.
The agents had been photographed kneeling after an encounter with
protesters during the demonstration that followed
George Floyd's death in May of 2020.
This was, I believe, in June, if my memory serves, Kneeling
angered some of the FBI, but was also understood as a possible de
escalation tactic. I'm going to debunk that for you
right now. The oversight Project, my friend
Mike Howell actually published a letter that went as a it was an
unattributed letter from from an FBI agent at Washington Field
where I was working on June the 12th of 2020.
So again, this was June and this event that took place, the
kneeling was on June the 4th. There was a couple of people
that got together and wrote a letter to Chris Wray.
Now it went nowhere, but let's read this real quick.
We're writing to address the situation that occurred on June
the 4th, 2020, in which some agents of the Washington Field
Office knelt at the demand of protesters in the District of
Columbia. We feel it necessary to a voice
our opinions on this event for we believe to abstain from doing
so would be a disservice to our organization and our mission.
There are two lens which ones can view this situation.
The first is that agents who did so knelt under duress for fear
that failing to kneel would incite violence for the
protesters. And the second is to view the
agents as making a choice to kneel, either as a political
statement or for the convenience of following social pressures at
the time. Are we being fair?
They were being fair. I just said the same thing to
you at did I not? It's our belief that in either
event, the agents ended up making a profound public
statement and a political statement on behalf of the
Bureau. And after viewing all available
video and photographs of this incident, it is evident that the
agent's actions were not taken under duress, but rather by
choice. This has been my claim since the
beginning and it's nice to see that other people saw it at the
time. The agents lack of duress can be
clearly seen in the photographs and the videos as the group
smiled and clapped, even fist pumped in solidarity with the
protesters. Further photographs of the
incident show a clear path of escape for the agents if they
had in fact been under duress. Additionally, one other FBI
squad patrolled a nearby area that same afternoon and met with
the same group of protesters had much closer proximity.
This squad did not succumb to the demands to kneel, and those
agents were not met with violence.
So as I understand it, these people were in fact removed and
they were done. They were removed after an OPR
investigation, which is the FBI's internal affairs process.
And that did the job that it was supposed to do.
But it took an awful long time. And those people likely did not
actually see the proximate cause of what they did.
And then the eventual punishment that happened after the fact,
that should have been dealt with swiftly.
Instead, what you saw was five years of encouraging this type
of behavior, which I think resulted in the stuff that went
on on January 6th. Imagine if the Trump, if the
Trump administration had actually nipped this in the bud
right then, if they'd said, Nope, Chris Ray, you need to be
dealt with. Chris Ray was influenced by the
people at the Washington Field office who are part of that
mutual admiration society. You're not going to hear me weep
or shed any tears for anybody on the screen that lost their job.
And also, I don't think it's going to have the required
effect, which is that people in the FBI are like, aha, we cannot
engage in leftist policy. No, I think we're going to see a
little bit more. And the reason is, is because
you keep putting people into this office that keep having the
same types of behaviors. They are too little too late,
far too long after the original inciting incident, and they are
not effective. And that includes what they just
did with these folks. You know, even though this is a
win and Patel did the right thing on this at the long run,
they started investigating this in February on his first couple
days. And the reason I know that is
because the people who started doing that investigation,
they're friends of mine. They did this investigation in
good faith, but they were not given resources to go out and do
it overtly. They were trying to do it in a
sneaky way so as not to offend anybody.
And that is not how you make an aggressive touch on this
organization. We actually understand John
Brennan's statement here. He's saying these people cannot
move on. The reason we can't move on is
because of all the bad things that happened.
But the only argument for moving on is that we are now going to
adjust our tactics, that we have corrected those tactics, and we
are no longer going to have these things happen to us again.
Instead, what you see is we're going to try to re adjudicate
things from the past and we are going to be so far away from the
proximate injury that we're not actually going to have a desired
effect. I actually agree with what he's
saying, but not the reason why he's saying it.
If you will listen to this, this is coming from MSNBC.
And it's very, very unfortunate that again, Donald Trump and
his, you know, people who are supporting him refuse again to
acknowledge that and move on. We have so many challenges
around this world. I was, you know, quite frankly
appalled by what I heard at the United Nations from Donald
Trump. We have so many challenges that
we really need to bring this country together to focus on as
opposed to continuing to go back 810 years and trying to re
litigate things that have been, I think, appropriately
addressed. They weren't appropriately
addressed. That's the part where he's
wrong. But I think they might be too
far away. There's a reason why we have a
statute of limitations. It's because the cause is so far
in the back that we can't actually get a real good grab on
it. Nevertheless, we're getting sort
of hollow statements coming from Pam Bondi.
I'm not real keen on this kind of stuff.
I'm OK with the idea, I just don't like the execution.
When I was growing up, my dad used to say this all the time.
Good idea, bad execution. That was when you had a good
plan, but your rollout was not excellent.
That would be a great way of categorizing some of this stuff
here. I think it's fair to say that
the mindset is not wrong, but the actual implementation is.
Whether you're a former FBI director, whether you're a
former head of an Intel community, whether you are a
current state or local elected official, whether you're a
billionaire funding organizations to try to keep
Donald Trump out of office, everything is on the.
Table We will investigate you and we will end the
weaponization. No longer will there be.
Be A2 tier system of justice and we are working hand in hand.
Director Patel and I Todd Blanche with our incredible
Intel community. Tulsi Gabbard John Tulsi Gabbard
John Radcliffe going non-stop around the clock.
People will be held accountable. Why is it every time that I see
Pam Bondi talk, it looks like she's like taking deep breaths
and she's saying things off like a weak teleprompter like her?
Her ability to speak extemporaneously is so low.
It's really strange. I, I, I just, I'm always turned
off on it. I keep waiting for her to say
things like we just need more maps such as the Iraq, like a
beauty queen girl from South Carolina.
That's kind of what I they have the same energy to me.
It's not entirely convincing. But I think I think the scarier
thing is this, look, this is another story here.
This is coming from NBC. Trump says he would think that
the DOJ would be investigating former FBI Director Chris Wray.
And you would think that, right, because he falls directly within
the statute of limitations. Everything he did was within the
last five years, including this or most of the things he did.
So I would agree. I think the scariest thing is,
and we have to, we have to accept this, most of what was
done by Brennan, by Clapper, by comedy, by Ray was actually in
line with what those authorities of those jobs are.
They actually have the ability to execute things with a broad
latitude the way that they did. And therefore there's not a
crime there. Even though we're all offended
by it, even though we all think it was terrible, even though we
had an election that I think was a slap down of this information.
The fact the matter is, is that Pam Bondi has wide latitude to
do all kinds of things, but it turns out she still has to
operate within the law. And guess what?
So did Merrick Garland. He had the ability to do things
that were truly wrong. Remember one of my whistle
blower allegations, my first one that most people heard about was
about parents at school board meetings.
But I want to be super clear right now, because Merrick
Garland actually had the ability to go out there and tell the FBI
to investigate parents at school board meetings.
That was within his purview. That is not a whistle blower
disclosure that I made. What he didn't have the ability
to do was lie about it. Do you see how subtle that is
and why it actually says the thing they were doing is
something they were allowed to do?
I've been very, very cautious about this whenever you hear
people. I actually had a guy that was on
some very large YouTube channel the other day who was making
allegations about what I said as a whistle blower to Jim Jordan.
And he was like, oh, he was an anti vaxxer.
And he was talking about how parents, you know, we're being,
you know, unfairly investigated at school board meetings.
False. That's a false statement.
What I said was, is that you cannot go out and tell Congress
we are not going to use counterterrorism resources and
then have the FBI counterterrorism assistant
director send out a memo saying we're going to be using those
resources against parents. You cannot lie to Congress
during oversight, but you can totally investigate parents at
school board meetings. You can find all kinds of
reasons to do that. And for anyone who was AJ Sixer
or had friends that were J Sixers, you understand that they
can mobilize the entire weapon system to come after people.
And they did so under the authority and the color of law,
and they did so properly. The problem is, is that if
you're me, you think that the weapon system should be
dismantled, not that a new person should hold the weapon.
OK, You're not going to hear me cry about James comedy, period.
You're not going to hear my tears for that guy.
I think he's a narcissist. I think that he is a legend in
his own mind and operated as such.
And some of the the behaviors that he had were totally
pathological and they were also within his purview as FBI
director, which is why he got fired.
That's what we can do. The answer should have been make
a smaller FBI and not give them the ability to go after people
and not give them FISA authority and not give them the ability to
go out and do all kinds of intelligence investigations with
no allegation of criminal activity.
This has been the ongoing supposition we have.
Here's a little taste of why nobody feels sympathy for James
Comedy on the right, because this is truly mean spirited and
nasty. But it doesn't mean the things
he was saying are not legal. And they were not even legal
uses of the FBI. It turns out they were.
Do you agree with the strategy of focusing on the Oath Keepers
and focusing on prosecuting that group of individuals 1st in
order for it to be a deterrent, you've got to throw the net
wide. Get all of them, both the
organized groups, Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, but find everybody
who went into that building. Find them all again, Not because
of my concern that those people committed a misdemeanor are
going to, they're going to go into the community and reoffend.
The message has to be sent of 0 tolerance.
We will find everyone and punish everyone who went in there so
that no one does it again. We will hunt you to the end of
the earth, even for a misdemeanor, and make you pay
for that to send that message. This is the same guy that spoke
at my graduation where I was taught explicitly that the FBI
does not waste its time on misdemeanors.
So he clearly was politically motivated with this thing.
That's very clear to me from listening to his words.
Cast a wide net, go after misdemeanors.
Name a misdemeanor offense that was prosecuted stand alone by
Jim Comedy when he was the FBI director.
I would suggest to you that they were not even allowed as policy.
We would have been I had I turned away major felonies where
10s of thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars were
defrauded from people because our bar was in the millions.
You're going to go after a misdemeanor rating charge
because somebody happened to be physically in a place where you
didn't like it. Now you're playing politics.
And again, they have that ability.
Patel has that ability. Ray had that ability.
We should be concerned about that.
Don't give these people the out. This is a story that was from
CBS. Amy Klobuchar saying it's
appalling that Trump is accused FBI agents of being in the
crowd. Trump said it badly over the
weekend, folks. He said things that were likely
untrue. He said now we need to
investigate this. You are being distracted.
This is a laser pointer. The problem is, is that the
agency has too much power that it is dangerous to Americans
writ large, regardless of your political stance.
Again, get rid of your confirmation bias.
Assume that the FBI is just interested in doing what's best
for the FBI and you will suddenly understand why it can
go after you and after BLM people at the exact same time.
Then you don't give Amy Klobuchar any talking points on
this. Here's Chris Ray being asked
questions when you let them wiggle around like this because
people who know the FBI are able to get away with it.
He's probably not saying anything false in this statement
and we're acting like he did. Two were there in an undercover
capacity on January 6th. How many were there?
Again, I I'm not sure that I can give you that number as I sit
here. I'm not sure there were
undercover. Agents on scene.
I find that kind of a remarkable statement, Director.
At this point, you don't know whether they're undercover
federal agents, FBI agents, in the crowd or in the capital on
January 6th. I I say that because I want to
be very careful. There been a number of court
filings related to some of these topics and I want to make sure
that I stick within what's in. I I understand that, but I I
just, I thought I heard you say you didn't know whether there
were FBI agents or informants or human sources in the capital or
in the in vicinity on January 6th.
Did I misunderstand you? I thought that's what you said.
I referred very specifically to undercover agents.
Yeah. And so are you.
I referred very specifically to undercover agents.
Why did he do that folks? Because technically he's
correct. Because being an undercover
agent in the FBI is very specific.
All agents are in plainclothes. All agents have the ability to
tell you something false. I used to sit in a non
undercover role in somebody's neighborhood and if you knocked
on my window and asked me what you're doing, I would tell you
I'm with the Postal Inspection Service or I'm part of the US
Marshals. If you if you made me as law
enforcement, I might tell you I'm part of a neighborhood
watch. I can lie to you with impunity.
I don't have to tell you anything.
True, but I wasn't an undercover agent.
And even though I'm sitting in regular clothes looking like you
guys saw me, you guys are getting a kick out of the the
lumberjack outfit. Yeah.
This is like a this is just a Costco flannel Plaid shirt that
I wore when I was working in Portland.
I had a couple different color stuff like that.
And it's like, OK, you just look like a guy in Portland.
You know, I had a picture underneath there of the of the
state of Utah and it was shooting a pine tree out.
I don't have to tell you anything as a federal agent, but
I wasn't an undercover. Undercover is a program.
It is a certification that's like you asking, let me give an
example for those who who have a previous experience in in
military, let's say, let's say if I went up there and said, you
know, were there any soldiers in the crowd last night?
And I said there were absolutely no infantrymen in the crowd and
people would go, oh, I see. So, so there were not any
soldiers in the crowd there. I thought they were like members
of the United States Army in there.
You're like, there was no member of our infantry marching around
in the crowd. Do you see how I'm talking past
it? An infantryman is a very
specific and exclusive subset of the broader speaking term
soldiers, which refers to everybody in the Army.
Does that make sense? It's really critical to
understand that they are playing a game.
Chris Wray, he even double s down on says I'm very
specifically talking about undercovers because he probably
knows they didn't authorize any specific undercover, undercover
authorization. That doesn't mean that they were
not plainclothes people that were in the crowd.
I know for a fact that there were people in the crowd that
wanted to be there. They took time off to go out
there and they were protesting because they were pissed about
what happened to Trump. So that's a thing.
We have to be very careful where the stuff comes from.
All right? I want to talk about Portland
because Portland is maybe the most important retouch of all of
these things. There are multiple news stories
right now where everybody is upset and everybody wants to get
involved. This is coming from NPR.
Three things to know about Trump's plan to send troops to
Portland and also to Memphis. He says he's ordered the
deployment of troops to Portland.
He's authorized to use full force to curb protests outside
of ICE facilities. And in the latest, he wants to
deploy military troops into various cities that are plagued
with crime. No, I'm sorry.
They aren't plagued with crime. He says are plagued with crime.
This is NPR after all, with federal troops expected to rise
in Memphis later this week as well.
One expect a legal fight. Well, that's going to happen.
I can show you that the the state of, of Oregon is actually
suing. He's called Portland war
ravaged, which is not the case on the ground.
They say it definitively because they are totally not doing
editorials. That's pretty funny.
What else should we expect? Trump has been making these
threats for months. He's been talking about cracking
down on these facilities. And lastly, the larger picture
is becoming clear that the National Guard is not trained
for community policing or to make arrests.
And that's not generally how they use when they've been in
DC. They've mostly been patrolling
federal property and beautifying city parks.
Guess what's really interesting about beautifying city parks?
When places look nice, people tend to act as they as they
should in that environment. When people are living in spaces
that look like this where Mad Max clowns are running around
with freaking swords. I, I kid you not, when I walked
around in Portland, my wife and I were talking about this over
the weekend. I carried a tomahawk with me
because I knew it was a melee weapon that was capable of
defending me over and over again and I didn't have to reload it.
I also carried a gun that had like I loaded with, with cotton
gloves on. I was a federal agent with a,
with the authority to carry a firearm on an airplane and in
any city in America. And I also knew that if I went
to Portland and I got involved in saving my own life with
lethal force, I would probably be prosecuted by the AUSA there
and I probably would have never been able to see my family
again. So I made sure that if I had to
have a deniable weapon system, which is a really unsettling
thing to say if you're in law enforcement right now, imagine
the idea that you might need a drop gun not to be able to put
on someone that you arrested because you needed them to
understand what was going on. Like, you needed to like, fake,
like you needed a reason to take them down.
No, you needed a drop gun so that if you shot somebody and
you abandoned the weapon system that you would not be found.
Do you understand? Not because you were not
justified in using force, but because the system was set up to
come after you and protect like the a holes that you see on the
screen here that were running around in the snack van or this
clown that's got a skateboard and a freaking sword made out of
rebar. Do you know how scary that is?
Because that's how scary it was. There I sat wearing body armor
underneath my my, my hoodie almost every night.
And I had six people surround my vehicle when I was miles away
from a protest because they called in my license plate.
Because this was an organized group of people trying to do
violence and they were looking for federal, they were looking
for federal officers or agents that were involved.
And they didn't care if they were right or wrong.
They ran off a couple of our guys.
We disengaged because we were not authorized to stay there and
hold our ground. That's why we need this touch
because a lot of these people learned the exact wrong lesson
from 2020. So retouching 2020 in a
different way is very good. I'm going to read you this story
about Portland that's going to go and do this lawsuit.
Portland has filed A lawsuit against the Trump
administration. Again, NPR is correct about
that. There will be law fair.
After the president said he's going to send troops to
Portland, the attorney general, Dan Rayfield, announced on
Sunday that they were going to do it.
This comes after Secretary of Defense, AKA the Secretary of
War Pete Hegseth, sent a memo to Governor Tina Kotek, an openly
lesbian, the first openly lesbian governor of Oregon.
I found out she dresses like a man, just not a particularly
attractive man. That's neither here nor there.
It's just funny that like, that's the first thing that it
says in her bio, that she wants you to know that she's openly
lesbian. So if if it's important to her,
it's important to me, I guess. They are authorizing 200 members
of the National Guard to do what?
To be deployed around to protect federal property where protests
occur. The lawsuit said that Trump
lacks the authority to federalize the National Guard.
Turns out that California already tried this in Los
Angeles and they were knocked down.
They're going to do it again because everything has to be
processed is the punishment. Let's kind of consider what's
going on there. Let's kind of do a little a
little take on how this works. I want to show you a city
Councilwoman in Portland that is going to attempt to quote UN
quote, resist getting their city back into order to to rid
themself of some of the some of the nonsense that's been going
on. And then I want to show you kind
of like back-to-back this flower protest and then some beatings,
which are pretty fun too. I don't know, one of the best
things that came out of this weekend was like watching a
harder touch on people that really, really needed to be
spanked like toddlers. All right, so here's what
council is currently looking into right now.
Some of our offices are looking into doing a ban on ICE agents
being able to mask up and not be identified.
This has been a huge issue because people are getting
kidnapped off of our streets and it could be just any random guy
in a mask telling you that he's a federal agent when it could
just be a kidnapper. So obviously that's a huge
issue. There are folks at the
congressional level that are trying to get a mask ban passed,
but they might not have the votes to do it.
And again, because of the supremacy clause, we are trying
to look into any and all options, but that doesn't mean
that we are going to be able to pass something that will
actually be able to be implemented.
Councillor Samir Kunal is researching policies regarding
munitions and tear gas because we know that's something that is
heavily impacting the health of our residents in Portland.
My office has taken more of the data and surveillance privacy
approach because I think that the next frontier of fighting
fascism is going to be immense government surveillance.
So that includes anything from license plate readers to facial
recognition technology. And it would be really helpful
if people who. Are on the ground who are able
to see some of that technology that ICE is using if you could
photograph it and send it to. To our offices, that's all
information that we can use to try to figure out where we need
to target because it's not freely available to us all of
the tools that they have at their disposal.
OK, you cannot do anything about what the federal government
wants to use when it comes to tools.
You can't. You're not able to do that.
That's not an opportunity that you have as a as a City Council
member in Portland. If the federal government wants
to employ license plate readers, it's not fascism and you can't
stop them. There's a supremacy clause,
which she stated you cannot mandate that they not wear
masks. You have no authority on them
and they don't have to listen to you.
I have walked away from cops who were trying to stop me when I
was doing my job as a federal agent.
I've driven away from cops who had their lights on when I had
no license plates. And I was driving into those
protests in 2020 in Washington, DCI drove away from Virginia
State Police. I just drove on.
I just didn't stop. There was no reason to.
They had no authority to stop me.
So I just kept going. And the guy was confused.
He pulled up next to me. He's like, what the hell?
And here I am dressed up FBI van.
Like I got FBI body armor on. I'm in quote UN quote plain
clothes, although it looked kind of tactical.
And I just kept driving. So what you're seeing right now
on the screen, for those of you that are seeing and you're
hearing some traffic in the background, if you're just
listening, this is a good thing to see.
This is a flower protest. This is a silent marching
protest for people who are laying down flowers at the ice
facility. This is how they are going to
quote UN quote resist. There's a man wearing a woman's
spaghetti strap little tiny tank top that's super gross.
There's a bunch of like real nasty gnarly Lib tards that are
from Oregon. There's some really odd ducks in
Oregon and, and in Portland specifically.
The sad thing is it's an absolutely beautiful state and
it has such a great potential. What you're showing here is the
mean, mean ice people. They've got everything all
boarded up, all the glasses all covered and they're laying
flowers down and people are, are, are throwing the thumbs
down sign silently. They're flicking off the the
federal agents silently. They're all giving exactly what
they want to see in the world. They're sharing how angry they
are. OK, I'm not a terrorist.
This lady says. The guy wearing a chicken suit
says Portland will outlive him talking about Donald Trump.
There's the the man wearing the spaghetti strap.
OK, This is how ridiculous these people are.
That went until it got dark. This is the same way it was when
I was in Portland. Everybody was peaceful.
Everybody was demonstrating, everybody was marching and had
something to say until it got dark and they thought they could
get away with shenanigans. And then you start seeing stuff
like this. I would be totally fine if your
entire protest was dropping flowers on the ground.
That's not where it ends. It ends with you getting dragged
into those exact same gates that they are flicking off just a
little bit later. Here we go, somebody threw a
helmet. You got 8 guys dragging somebody
like a rag doll right into those gates that they were flicking
off a few minutes earlier. And then you're going to see the
riot tops come out and here they are.
They've got the right equipment on, they've got helmets, they've
got gloves, they've got eye protection, they've got pepper
ball guns. And you're going to see there's
that exact same space that all the flowers are.
They were just stepping on on the right hand side of the
screen. This is the post Millennial
showing some. And suddenly those same people
that were peaceful and friendly are all wearing gas masks and
they're all ready for violence. Isn't that something?
It's truly craziness to see it. This is why we need a do over
from 2020. This is why we need another
touch on some of this stuff because these people are not
making sense and the people that don't make sense, they all kind
of have that same sound. They sound like that city
Councilwoman. They sound like the women that
we're going to see here. They sound kind of like Kamala
Harris if given enough time. Word salads and nonsense.
This is what we're talking about.
We're talking about absolute ideological leftist that believe
that the system is the problem and that the person can be
redeemed. The person is inherently good.
Well, we can see that people are not always inherently good.
They can pretend to be good and put flowers down and they can
immediately turn around and do the other thing, like try to
fight with cops. So this is kind of an
interesting little exchange. This is a man who's talking
about, hey, maybe we could talk about that.
Not everybody is good. Some people are mentally ill,
some people break bad. Some people are just always bad.
It's a human condition. This bill is really focused on
punishment, and I just want to look at these types of
considerations with a bigger lens.
We're talking about people, we're talking about victims.
We're talking about. Perpetrators, We're talking
about human beings doing things to other human beings that
should not be done, and what are we going to do about that?
And again, what this bill says is that when you get your third
violent felony conviction, we're done.
Like we're not playing like I, I passed that point.
I don't know if I care if you've ever become a productive citizen
because you have opted out of productive society.
Your third violent felony conviction, I don't know how
interested I am in making sure you get educated and you you get
a like. At that point, you're talking
about a chronic dysfunction in a person's ability to be a member
of society. And past that point, it is the
responsibility of those of us who govern society to protect
everyone else, to protect everyone who is functional, who
isn't harming their neighbor, who isn't violating the rights
of others. I'll give you some stats that I
know are solid and that. He goes on to talk about some
juveniles who had hundreds of victims between like 6 guys, 6
young men who were juveniles and got engaged in felonious
activity and violence. It's some people just don't want
to be part of the social system and maybe we can Co opt them in
at a young age. But if you can't at some point
in time, he's right. We have to kind of cut bait
there. We got a lot of real gentle,
soft, positive parenting in 2020 for the angry toddler toddler
like whatever they were tantrums that were going on in the
political left and they learned the wrong lessons.
So it's suicidal empathy, it's compassion, it's it's kindness
for weakness, right. The mistake, it is time to come
in with a hand, but it needs to actually be proximate to the
cause. And you can start in your own
house. You can start in your own
community and like I do it and I don't even want to do it.
I feel weird doing it. But like when I see people like
not disciplining their children and their children are acting in
a completely antisocial manner, I'm going to do it.
Apparently you need someone else to do it.
It's either going to be me or a cop.
So when your kid wants to run up this the the slide, when there's
a 2 year old coming down the slide and it's made for two year
olds and your 10 or 12 year old wants to run up and doesn't care
about little kids safety, I'm going to backhand them off the
slide for safety. They're the little ones because
I care about kids. And then I'm going to look at
them very meaningfully and say don't do that because you should
have done that as a parent. Sorry, real simple.
And if my kid does it and you happen to take my kid off the
slide because they're acting like a little A hole, so be it.
I cannot imagine some of the sort of disrespect that young
people have and they grow up into those adults that drop
flowers and then show up later and try to fight with ice
officers. And I wonder if they come from
people who are children of the community.
Well, as Kamala Harris said, the children of the community are
the children of the community. That means the community does
have a role. I don't actually disagree with
her, even though she sounds drunk and crazy.
Let's do some words out. I'm not going to call a trigger
warning, but Kamala Harris warning.
You know, one of my favorite things to see, and it would
always happen spontaneously at our rallies and thousands of
people would come and there it would happen is invariably
somebody would want me to take a picture of the hub, their child
and someone in the back would hand that baby over through the
crowd up to you people who would pass the baby but pass the baby
and then pass the baby back. And I don't know, there was
something about that when it would happen.
I mean, I could be very emotional about it right now,
but but but, you know, I believe that we should always feel that,
you know, the the children of the community are the children
of the community. Yeah, yeah.
Of all of us, that. Our next leaders, our next
thinkers, our. Next and that we all participate
in caring about that child and in caring for that child.
And there was just something about that and.
Seeing the baby. Travel from the parent, yes, and
the parent. Look, I'm speculating here, but
I think that's a gay guy talking to a childless woman in her 50s.
What a weird, weird moment we're living in right now.
All right, if you guys are watching, make sure you like us
over on Rumble, like us on YouTube.
If you're on X, do the same thing.
Locals you can find. This is Kyle seraphin.com.
If you want to see any of the articles that are referenced
today, do that. Check out us over on Spotify.
We'd really appreciate if you did.
It's Kyle seraphinshow.com. It's super easy to do.
I won't torment you anymore. Let's get a reaction to that
drunken breakfast, whatever nonsense that was because it
turns out that our vice president actually said it
correctly. And for all of his book tour and
talking about, oh, Kamala Harris, 107 days of this, this
is probably the funny this is I actually do like JD Vance.
I think he's smarter than Trump for whatever, it's worse for all
of you guys out there. I like him more than Trump
because maybe because we're closer in age and he seems like
he's got the right amount of Milton.
He's also not mean, but he is. He's very accurate with this
fire. Check this out.
The problem is not that Kamala's campaign was too short, is that
it was too long. That when people actually listen
to what she had to say, her polling went down and down and
down. I think that if we had had 150
day campaign, we probably would have had three additional
Republican senators and Donald Trump would have won by an even
bigger landslide. Because the more people know
about Kamala Harris, the more they realize there's no
substance there. I mean, agree or disagree?
With Barack Obama or Bill Clinton, they actually had
substance. They could actually articulate A
viewpoint. I listen to Kamala Harris for 90
seconds and I actually feel like I've gotten Dumber in the
process and I have no idea what she actually believes.
That's the problem with Kamala Harris and it's going to
continue to be her problem. And let's see, she actually
learns how to develop a viewpoint, articulate it for the
American people. Just say what you actually
believe. Don't do this word salad talking
around in circles. It doesn't work.
And it's why she didn't win. OK, Brilliant.
Actually, that's a broader problem for people on the
political left, the hard left, not people that are liberals
that we can have like, good faith debate with because there
are people like that and I see them all the time.
No, I'm talking about hard leftists that are not being
disavowed by their own party and by their own system because they
don't get it. They're living in La La land.
And they actually think that the reason that Kamala Harris didn't
win was because of racism and misogyny, I guess.
I think the people came out and spoke and said, yeah, we want
something. We want to retouch.
We want to revisit the stupidity that happened at the end of 2020
and and maybe all the way through all that COVID chaos.
What we'd like to see it done is, is like as an adult, say
real things, do real meaningful actions.
De weaponize government would be great.
By the way, The left will benefit from it just as much as
we will. They'll benefit right now and
then we'll benefit the next time that they're in power.
We could have a good faith society if we have that, or we
can keep doing this thing where we do tit for tat and see how
many people we can really, really destroy.
Again, you know, you're in an interesting space when JD Vance
makes a point and Bill Maher is making the same point.
I say JD Vance is probably a little bit more moderate than I
am when it comes on the right. Bill Maher, he's liberal, but
not a wild leftist all the time, and he's moderated on Trump even
because he got to meet the guy. It turns out.
Isn't that something? You go out and meet your
neighbor, you go out and meet somebody and you realize that
there's a human being behind that face.
Isn't that fun? I'm going to give you guys a
palate cleanse in one second. Maybe.
You know what? This is the palate cleanse.
Let's just take a breath when Bill Maher says the same thing
that JD Vance says. He could have had 701 days and
would have still lost that race. 107 days.
Way too many for anybody but including her.
But the more they got to know her, the less they liked her.
I've said this many times on this show.
Other countries don't do this. They don't have years to run.
They they call an election and they have an election in, in a
month. Yeah.
And nor the influence of money. We should do that, right?
That's going to be hard to get rid of.
That's right. But one of it, you know, it's
like you don't need 100 days. You need 107 days.
You tell people your plan. This is what I am for.
This is my thing. You're selling something.
You're selling a vacuum cleaner. If I'm selling a vacuum cleaner,
I'll tell you why I think it's best.
I'm going to tell you every God damn day for two years.
Did I tell you about the attachment that gets under the?
Yeah, you did. You told me 1000 times.
They told you all the things and nobody wanted it.
That seems pretty reasonable. I'm kind of behind that.
I like the idea of a shorter campaign season.
Also, I really actually hate politics.
Guys, if we don't have to talk about politics because it wasn't
a life threatening thing for all of us, my life would be better
too and I would be probably less stressed.
I probably wouldn't have an FBI directors girlfriend suing me
because of the political pressure that he was dealing
with because he wasn't good at his job.
That's my final shot on that one.
I hope you guys have a fantastic afternoon on this Monday.
I hope you come back and listen again tomorrow.
We go live at 0930 Eastern Time. That's 8:30 here in Texas,
America. Share the program, send the
link, find a friend and send Kyle seraphinshow.com.
Send them over to Spotify. We'll look forward to seeing you
guys after after this little evening.
We'll see what this week has for us.
I'm sure it'll be a lot of fun. God bless you.
See you then. Thanks for listening to the Kyle
Serafin show, streamed live weekdays on rumble.com/kyle
Serafin. Follow Kyle on Twitter, Truth
Social and Instagram at Kyle Serafin.