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. 2nd Amendment defender and recovering FBI
agent Kyle Seraphin. Hello my friends, welcome to the
Kyle Serfin Show. Today is Thursday, it is March
the 5th, and I appreciate you guys being along for the ride.
We are going to be talking today about the interesting case of
Christy Noem, who has made a second appearance in front of
our elected representatives to talk about some really troubling
stuff. And I have this kind of
sensation that at least a significant number of the, the,
the high Trump administration are like pirates.
And I have this, this memory, which I'm going to go dig the
clip up for you guys in a second here of a scene from Pirates of
the Caribbean where Johnny Depp and the, and his, his buddy, the
round faced guy, they're, they're deciding to go and get
all the treasure or something like that.
And they go, you know, take all what you can get and give
nothing back, you know, And then they have this little clink of
the glasses, which are made out of wood and they drink their
beer. Mr. Gibbs, that's his name.
And and then, and then they go and they try to go be pirates.
They're gonna and but they're honorable pirates, right?
Do we have honorable pirates that just run this country?
Is that what we're dealing with here?
People that are just looking and saying Americans are useful
idiots and they're basically an ATM that we can just write
checks out of. We can take everything from
them. And as long as we're the Lords
of the Ashes when everything burns down, then we'd rather
have that. That seems to be the case, and
there's a story that was written in Pro Publica in November that
I think we covered at the time, and now it's getting coverage in
congressional testimony. The funny thing about a way that
these stories work is some scandalous thing will happen and
then everybody will go, Oh my God, like, Can you believe that
thing? And then they move on to the
next thing 'cause we have this sort of goldfish memory.
The new story moves real quick. By the way, did you know that
Nancy Guthrie still missing, still still not found, mostly
decomposed in the desert somewhere or something like
that? Not to be flippant, but that I
mean, where did that story go? It was wall to wall Fox News
coverage right up until everybody had a freaking war
boner. And so they they they play on
this attention span that we move on from so quickly and Christy
Noems chaotic, you know, use of of our federal funds is
absolutely absurd. And under any other
administration, people would be losing their ever loving minds.
But because we've come into this like ultimately highly divided
tribal moment where people are they, they, they literally put
their political slogans in their, their bio.
They put it on their head, they put it in their clothing.
They're mad at you if you don't describe yourself by a political
slogan. MAGA make America Great Again
was a slogan that a man ran for office on.
And then you people define themselves that way.
Like I'm MAGA, you're not MAGA, you're not MAGA enough.
You're too MAGA. Like how about you just be an
American and go maybe an elected official shouldn't send $220
million out to do an advertising campaign that comes from our
pockets to boost their public image.
Because they have this like mis misguided belief that a overly
made-up woman with questionable morals and significant amounts
of of public expenditures that seem to be beneficial for only
her like that person would make it as a president.
We actually have some some good news, at least in the the sense
of people understand a little bit more about the mission.
We have a senator that has decided to retire and or not
seek re election Steve Daines up in Montana.
He's 63 years old today and he is a mediocre Liberty scorer.
He has like a mediocre sort of compliance with being an actual
conservative that may actually be appropriate for Montana.
When I talk to my buddies that live up there.
Yeah, the the statement was something to the effect of is
that Montanans kind of are like, leave us alone.
But they also have kind of like this hippie type mentality about
certain things. So they're not like some staunch
hardcore right wing group, especially considering that they
have cities that are very, very left-leaning.
But how about someone who understood the mission?
You're 63, you're coming up on 65.
What a great time to just walk away and go do the rest of your
thing. You got 13 years in public
service. It'll be 1415 by the time it's
all said and done. Great.
And then you just step out and you go be a regular person again
because it's time to retire. Wouldn't that be nice?
So I've got just this mixture of kind of like sloppy, gross
pirates who can't wait to take everything we have and, and a
couple of people that understand that it's maybe, you know,
whatever it is, your time is over to, to, to be part of that.
You get to go back to being a citizen again.
At some point, we will all leave whatever job we have.
We will leave whatever role that we think we occupy.
And we will all end up just as regular people who are
underneath the crushing burden of federal government.
This is something I always knew when I worked for the FBI.
And if you guys don't know that if you're a police officer, if
you're a firefighter, if you're a paramedic, if you are in the
military, if you work in federal law enforcement, state law
enforcement, if you extend federal authority from the
United States government over your fellow man, that will one
day leave. And so if you don't look around
and recognize that you are a maybe a person, you're a
husband, you're a wife, you're a sister, you're a brother, you're
a family member 1st and you're an American citizen second.
That can be taken away, but it's pretty well rooted in for most
people that are Americans, especially if you're listening
to this in America, there's a small number of people that live
in outside and then then whatever job you do is a distant
third. Whatever role you occupy is a
distant third. That was something that was
always right at the forefront of my mind.
I was like, I don't want to operate in such a way that I'm
going to live under some tyranny that I'm willing to be part of
because one day it'll come back on me.
It'll be revisited on me when I'm just a regular guy again.
And it turned out that was a lot faster than I expected.
I thought I was going to get 20 years of being a federal agent.
That was not the case. Here I am sitting here, I got
six years, but it was always front and front, center.
And it seems to me that these short lived pirate type
attitudes, maybe they don't, maybe they don't know that one
day you'll be back underneath the crushing weight and you'll
be susceptible to hearings and potentially you'll have to
answer for what you did or you'll just have to live under
people who do exactly what you do.
And how do you, how do you universalize that?
It just seems very short sighted to me.
So let's, let's get into that just in a second here.
Let's start off by talking about the folks over at Undertac.
I haven't heard from them a little bit.
Undertac is a website. So you go to it.
UNDERTAC, period.com under tack.com.
You've worked for maybe long days.
You've been on your feet, you've been in gear, you've been in
real world conditions. You've gone out there and you've
dug ditches with your hands and maybe you work on a factory.
Maybe you are just a dude who has to walk long sales.
I saw some people that were doing door to door sales the
other day and I remembered what a rough gig that is.
Maybe you're just on your feet moving around.
The small stuff matters, and one of the smallest things that
matters is like, are your underwear serving you in a
useful way? Are they doing the job they're
designed under? Tack was designed for guys who
do really hard jobs, Special forces operators that know that
a base layer cannot fail, especially one that's right up
on your junk. They use premium fabric, it's
cooler, it's moisture wicking, it's better than cotton so
you're not overheating halfway through the day, you're not
running around with monkey butt or whatever else people like to
call it. There's a lot of colorful terms
for that. It moves with you and it doesn't
bunch up. There's also a hidden E&E
pocket. So if you're like Steve friend
and you need an extra almond to snack in the back there you keep
emergency gear, handcuff keys, I don't know, cash, microfilm,
tiny little flash drive of of your Bitcoin locker.
I don't know. Whatever it is, whatever you
keep in your undies that you need to hold on to right now,
you can get 20% off on everything they have go site
wide. It's Kyle 20 is the the promo
code. So use Kyle, Kyle 20.
You get 20% off absolutely everything.
They've got American made shirts, they've got hoodies,
they've got Marina wool socks. I wore those the other day with
my boots when I was out shooting and I very much appreciated
that. Make a switch check them out.
I've worn the same sort of undies for like 16 plus years
and Undertack are the only ones that I've actually integrated in
to my to my little regime there. If you guys are looking to make
a change. They also make like, I don't
know, lady booty shorts type stuff.
They look they look comfortable, but then again, I don't have a
woman's body so I don't know. Check them out.
They're a good product and they work well.
They're gear that's designed to stay out of your way and just
let you do what you're supposed to do.
Undertack.com again, UNDERTAC k.com promo code Kyle 20 easy to
remember because it's 20% off. There's a link in the show
description. Check them out today.
Let's get into let's get into pirates.
Let's do that right now. OK, Should we do the pirate
thing first? Just because I'm thinking about
it? I, I think I should.
OK, so let me go grab this clip, which I downloaded, I think, and
then we'll we'll go back. I have another video clip that's
entitled Donald Trump is great. It's the White House spokeslady
just saying that Trump is great. I think this should be the
pirate clip. We can might even need to be
sized here. Let's let's do that little short
scene, give nothing back. OK, So that that that was the
scene. This there's like 8 seconds to
it. That is the motivation for at
least some members of the cabinet who are out there
looking around and saying can we get all the things?
Can we take everything from everybody around us?
I don't know, like, again, short sighted, that'd be the nicest
way of saying what I'm talking about here.
I don't know how you operate that as a, as a universal
policy. It doesn't make any sense to me
that you would go out there and look around and say, I
understand that everyone's going to do this to me too now that
I've done it, but I've got an opportunity, so I'm going to
seize it. There's been these discussions
that I've had with some friends too, about about people who make
a ton of money, and they do it by being very unscrupulous.
And we look at them and we're like, oh, do they have some
special skill? It's like, no, there's special
skills called dishonesty. Being highly dishonest is
actually not. It's not a superpower.
It just means that you're a scumbag and the people around
you are trying to play by the rules.
And you're like, oh, rules are for people who play by them.
I don't play by them. It's gross to kind of look at
that. Yeah.
All right, let's jump into another story that's sort of
disappeared for I want to focus on some things as as
overwhelmingly the discussion is still about Iran and what we're
doing there. And I've got obviously some
coverage of that too, because I think we should continue to hear
what people are saying. The new words have gone out by
the way, the the new words which it used to be the first one was
a nuclear threat and then it was ballistic, short range ballistic
missiles. And then it was we need to
attack their Navy. And then there was they were
threatening Donald Trump. And then it was back to the
nukes and it was back to the Ballistics.
And then some of the things, the new kind of talking point the
Trump administration has marched out is imminent, OK, imminent
threat. Iran was an imminent threat to
us for 47 years. Iran was an imminent threat.
Everybody knew about it. And also people didn't want to
do military action. The reason Donald Trump was the
president of peace is because people thought the military
wasn't strong. That's another talking point
that's got marched up. Some of that's kind of weird.
How about some of the promises that people thought were going
to be taken care of? I voted pretty transactionally.
I think I've said that to you guys a a number of times.
My transactional vote was how does my friend Steve Baker,
who's an investigative journalist, not go to prison?
How do people who are J Sixers who just showed up at a rally, a
First Amendment protected activity, showed up to protest
something they thought was wrong, whether they were correct
or not. I tend to believe that there was
problems with the 2020 election. There are people that think they
have proof. I'm probably not sophisticated
enough to analyze it. Many of you are not either.
But I think you should be able to show up and ask for the the
government to redress your grievances.
And if somebody were to go forward and bring good faith
arguments about that, kind of want to see them made whole kind
of see want to see them get their lives back.
That was what the election was about for a lot of people.
Unfortunately, we still have 12 J Sixers that were not pardoned.
They were commuted. So they're not in prison.
But now they're just screwed on the outside.
And Joe Biggs is one of them. Stuart Rhodes is one of them.
You know, people that I've personally spoken to who wanted
the same things that everybody else want.
That was the transactional vote. They're not squared away and
neither is Tina Peters. And it's interesting to me that
this popped up in my news feed as I was kind of like looking
around. I've got a I've got a
congressman from Colorado who even though he's a lefty, he's
making some really good points about Christie Noem.
We'll play those in a little bit here.
What about this situation? There's there's anger and
frustration and confusion about whether or not they're going to
reduce the sentence for Tina Peters, who, what is she in her
70s at this point that this is a big cause for some of my
friends, Joe Altman thinks this is a big deal.
I tend to agree that whatever the punishment is in this case,
it doesn't fit whatever we believe the crime was there.
This to me also seems like a weaponization of government
where you go out there and say, if you're trying in good faith
to live in a world where you don't want to see corruption and
you try to say, I think something bad happened.
I like to bring it to the public's attention in some way,
want to preserve evidence of it. And then the government goes,
well, you're not supposed to talk about that and you know
better, so we're going to toss you into prison.
And then, God forbid, the governor of your state decides
that maybe this is a little bit unjust for the age and the
appropriateness of who this person is.
And then that causes a major backlash.
And that's what the story is. This is something that came out
of my NPR reads this morning. So this is a local station, as
far as I can tell, that's out of Colorado.
Colorado Governor Jared Polis latest comments on the prison
sentence of Tina Peters are worrisome, his Democratic
colleagues said, And that any attempt to commute the former
Mesa County clerk's prison sentence would be, quote, a big
mistake as well as a gross injustice.
That does tell you how divided we are in this country right
now. It tells you a lot about the
division. Colorado Democrats, as well as
the Republican District Attorney who prosecuted Peters, issued a
flood of statements in response to poll's latest musings that
included top Democrats vying to replace the term limited
governor. There's a current senator named
Michael Bennett and then the attorney general, which is Phil
Weiser. All of them say things against
Tina Peters because this is a really big deal for them.
Remember, we need to have justice it.
It should not matter who you are in theory, unless you're on one
side, then you don't need to have anything.
What do they say? Nobody's above the law and they
believe that right up until they want to do things that are not
in comports with that. And then we're supposed to
forgot that. Forget they said it.
Quote, Tina Peters knowingly broke the law, undermined our
elections and was rightfully convicted by a jury of her
peers. At a moment like this, we cannot
capitulate to a lawless administration.
I guess that's a reference to the Trump administration, which
is not lawless as far as I could tell, any more than the previous
administration was lawless. Although we are finding out that
the Trump administration is limited just like every other
that they they don't tend to keep their promises, although
the teams like the left gets a lot more of their promises kept.
Weiser, who will prosecute Peters and secured her
conviction on 7 accounts, said, quote, reducing the sentence of
convicted former clerk Tina Peters for tampering with
election equipment would be a grave miscarriage of justice and
dangerous for free and fair elections.
Well, there you have it. Bringing forward information to
the public and quote UN quote tampering.
That's the dangerous thing. Free and fair elections can't
happen. So the free Tina Peters movement
still not getting what they asked for.
And more importantly, what we've proven is that our federal
government can more easily do a rendition of a foreign leader in
Venezuela, grab them in the middle of the night with Black
Hawk helicopters, or can decapitate A regime 700, you
know, 7000 miles away from us, but can't get 1 old lady out of
a prison cell in Colorado. And yes, that is our system.
It seems like they only care about the way the system works
when it's working for them. And I don't know.
And the they is like whoever it is that wants it.
This is this is universal. This is not like a left or right
issue. This is not a Republican or
Democrat issue. This is as long as my team is
doing what I want, then everything is good.
And that's when I can invoke things like the Constitution.
That's when I can invoke steaks, rice.
But if, God forbid, the things that I want happen to be in
conflict with actual principle, then I don't care about that at
all. That's just then.
Those are just things in my way. I watched the video clip
yesterday, which I felt was very telling.
And it was a young Indian man who looked like he was in his
20s, I don't know, probably early 20s.
And he got up in Frisco, TX, which is a very, it's a very up
and coming suburb outside of the, you know, it's in DFW.
It's outside of the Dallas Fort Worth metro area.
It used to be nowhere. Frisco used to be like the
boonies when I was a kid growing up, but now it's a place where
there's a ton of people, There's a lot of tech workers.
From what I can tell, it's radically changed.
I haven't been there in probably 20 years, but having seen
friends move through there and having friends that live in that
area, you got a young 20 something year old guy stepped
up in front of the City Council with a bunch of people wearing
matching blue shirts to back him up.
And of course, the video clip is now gone.
I was going to play it for you guys.
And he got up and he made a complaint about the Second
Amendment. You know, that thing that's in
the Constitution that in theory, if you become a citizen of this
country or if you actually are born here and raised in, you
know, some other kind of tradition.
He talked about getting up in his 20s and coming downstairs
and hanging out with his parents and having a Saturday morning
breakfast. And he was really, really
terrified because he heard about the shooting that happened in
Austin last week. And he was really worried that,
or I guess last weekend that he was going to know somebody who
had been shot. And then the punchline was that
he didn't actually know anybody that was shot.
It was just a fear that he had. So he got up and he read his
fear. And because of the way that he
felt about something that didn't end up being true, we shouldn't
have guns in Texas. What's amazing is, is that
Democrats love this. People on the left love this.
People that want more of whatever the totalitarian type
push is want that. And then so you vote for the
other side, you go out there and you go, oh, well, can I get a
Republican to represent me? And that's going to stand for
gun rights and it's going to stand for minimal government.
And then they go, no, no, no. We also think the solution is
government. We just have a different
expectation of the size of the government that we want to go
with. If you guys want a good example
of how minimally functional all of this can be and how
theatrical it all is, the story of of Samantha slash Nancy
Guthrie is worth bringing up. So here I have it.
I saw this this morning and it was way, way, way below the fold
on ABC News. I scrolled through all the Iran
news. I scrolled through the
controversy with Kristi Noem, which we'll get to in a second.
And I scrolled through like the things that are being pitched
and they're all the same across all the news networks.
ABCCBSNBC, there's a a story about the autopen investigation
going away. We'll cover that in a second
here from NBC. Couple other people covered it
as well. And I kept scrolling, scrolling,
scrolling down. And then all of a sudden I saw
this, the Guthrie name, and I went, oh, what about that?
Is there an update? There is in fact an update,
guys. It was wall to wall on Fox News.
Somebody sent me a meme this morning of a dog.
It's a shadow of a dog taking a poop.
You know, so the dog has like that characteristic squat where
the back hind quarters are like hunched underneath the squatting
rear legs and the front legs are kind of stiff.
And then the the nose is up in the air.
So you can imagine a dog nose in the air going to the back, tail
is up, butt is hunched down and the dog is standing over the top
of a man. And it's.
Pooping directly onto, I don't know, his face or mouth, which
is gross, super gross. And then somebody filled in Fox
News, which is the dog. And then it was like Trump
voters. This is perfect proof of that
because Fox News ran Nancy Guthrie like it was the end of
the world. Because their audience basically
meets the the demographic concerns that a 8 year old woman
who got kidnapped like this might be a real thing for you.
It's not a real thing. Nancy Guthrie, 84, taken from
her home early on February the 1st.
We are now March the 5th. We are now five, what, 5 1/2
weeks away? Six weeks away.
Here's the headline for those of you who are just listening.
Person who left DNA on recovered glove has been cleared.
Do you guys, do you remember the excitement?
The I've got the clip somewhere of Jesse Waters going like we've
got the backpack and it's a Walmart backpack for $10.84.
The most commonly sold backpack in the largestly distributed
store in the United States. Literally anybody anywhere could
have this backpack. And then they were like, we got
a glove. It was found 2 miles out in the
desert. Like randomly we found some
fucking glove. Excuse me, man, I got to do
better. I did not mean to let an F bomb
slip out there. They found a freaking random
glove. And they were like, it kind of
looks like a glove that we saw on the video that was not
supposed to be saved. But we found out that Google was
saving all the Nest footage. Remember that?
Yep. And then they clear it as the
search for Nancy Guthrie continues into its second month.
I think it's now in a, you know, you know, when they have those,
those really bad situations where something bad happens and
it's in the water and then somebody's been theoretically
like underwater for a day and then they go, unfortunately now,
you know, it's like some grave announcer voice.
Unfortunately, now the rescue efforts have turned into a
recovery. Pretty sure we're in the body
recovery stage of the Nancy Guthrie search now that we're in
the second month. One lead that hasn't panned out
for investigators is the glove. Shockingly, that was recovered 2
miles away from Nancy Guthrie. I got to put this on the screen.
OK, I'm going to highlight it for you.
The lead that didn't pan out was a glove that was found 2 miles
away from her home. Imagine where you live just for
funsies. This will tell you the
theatricality of all this stuff wherever you live.
Imagine the amount of trash that is on the ground if somebody
were to search A2 mile radius of your home.
I don't care if you live a rural.
I don't care if you live in the suburbs.
I don't care if you live in the city, imagine what sort of
random garbage is on the ground within two mile.
Do you think that we could find a glove?
Within 2 miles of your home, I guarantee you, you could find a
glove. 2 miles of my house and your house and everybody's house
that lives in America, we could find a glove.
And the fact is that they grabbed this and sent it off to
a laboratory and thought we might find the guy who did the
thing. It shows you how ridiculous we
are. That is, that is a ridiculous
moment. DNA on that glove, traced back
to a person who works at a nearby restaurant, had nothing
to do with the case. But it was a Fox News headline.
There were endless speculations by former FBI agents who turned
out to be complete fools. It was a discussion of how dark
and dangerous and desolate the desert.
You remember all that, the Jimmy Gags, former New York supervisor
and FBIHRT guy who I don't know how many kidnapping cases he
worked, but likely very few. We're just living in such a a
comically stupid moment where people just, they just forget.
They don't, they don't have that anymore.
I have this clip from Caroline Lovett.
What is Fox News feeding people? They moved on from the glove.
They moved on from the Guthrie story.
Anyway, it's, it's a really sad story because the woman is gone
and likely forever. I don't know if they'll ever
find her. She's like one of those stories
you'll find like 30 years now when I'm, when I'm in my 60s,
I'll be reading some news story. They'll be like, oh, they found
the, you know, the desiccated remains of Samantha Guthrie.
She actually just fell down a hole in a well that nobody knew
was out there or something. Right.
Like we'll find some really sad thing about it.
So Fox News has moved on from that.
They've moved on to letting you know that just Donald Trump is
super awesome. He's the best.
And that's how we're going to justify the new thing.
The new thing is that like there's a war.
It's not our fault that we're at war.
It's actually the fault of the people who are being attacked.
The reason why we attacked the people is because we knew that
they were going to attack us. And then we proved it because
after we attacked them, then they did attack us.
That's kind of where we're moving.
That's kind of the, the circular logic that I guess this
administration thinks the supporters fall behind.
And I guess that's the same group of people that were super
excited about finding a random glove that was in the trash 2
miles away from a missing lady's house like 3 weeks after the
lady was gone, they found trash. And for no particular reason,
they believe that it might be, it might be related to the case
and it turns out it wasn't, which I think if you were going
to put money on it, everybody could decide.
Anyway, Donald Trump is awesome. He's done a great job.
And anybody who says otherwise is wrong.
This is where it gets really hard.
And I've actually got a really kind of emotional clip from Alex
Jones that I want to share with you guys.
If you didn't watch this program yesterday, it's the reason why I
like Alex and I'm going to help you guys understand it.
Here we go, deep breath. President Trump has done more to
crack down on illegal immigration and to strengthen
our legal immigration system than any president in history.
Several months ago, he announced a travel ban on 19 Third World
in failed state countries around the world.
Secretary Gnome announced tonight she's recommending that
travel ban widens and covers more countries around the.
Globe Special Immigrant Visas, which we know many Afghans have
used to come into our country. There has been a complete
suspension. And pause on all of those.
If you look at the entire visa process in general, we have
greatly strengthened and heightened the vetting process
and requirements for that Under Secretary Rubio's leadership at
the State Department. And he has used his authority,
which is unprecedented, to actually revoke the visas of
many individuals who, yes, came here legally but still pose a
risk to our country and should have.
Never been allowed in in the 1st place and I would just.
So all that's really great news. It's all really good to know.
You probably didn't know that, but here we go.
Breaking exclusive, breaking exclusive.
One more breaking exclusive. Oh, the House is going to vote
again on DHS shutdown because the DHS is not open for
business. And it sounds like the things
that Carolyn Levitt was saying are great is that they closed
the barn door after all the horses are out.
And by the way, everything else that lived in the barn is also
out. So we brought in 100,000
Afghans, but we've now changed the vetting process in case a
couple others want to come in. And then also, we've really
tightened up our visa program. But it turns out that that we
can't even, we can't even get that organization funded.
The House is going to vote on a government shutdown bill.
They're going to try to open up DHS.
Did any of you know that DHS was shut down?
I mean, you did maybe intellectually, but did any of
you actually like go out in your day and go like, oh doggone it,
I was going to do fill in the blank activity, but DHS is shut
down so I'm unable. I would love to know if some of
you actually experienced the DHS shutdown in any in any way.
Do any of you have an example of that?
If you do, I beg you. I rarely will do this, but I, I
have no examples of it and I can't even figure out what those
examples would look like. Will you please put a comment
below, Put one in on Spotify. If you're on Spotify, put one in
on on on Rumble or YouTube. Will you please tell me what you
experienced with the DHS shutdown?
If you're listening to this right now, that's my ask of you.
I would very much appreciate it. You might as well hit the like
while you're doing it as well. We're going back to the story in
just one second. You're watching a Rumble
YouTube. Subscribe to the channels there.
Hit the like. Follow us on Spotify.
Kyle seraphinshow.com. We'll play a Spotify ad if they
want to do it right there. OK, the House is going to vote
to send funding after a weeks long impasse and the GOP is the
GOP is stressing the urgency of this Iranian war situation.
It's very urgent now that we've started a war that you fund our
Homeland Security program because we're not funded
currently and we may have homeland threats.
Had a conversation with my buddy George Hill.
You guys who listen to this program know George is a former
NSA analyst. He was an FBI supervisory
analyst. He also worked in military
intelligence for something like 26 years with the Marine Corps
and the Navy. Our discussion was as follows.
If we do not see sleeper cell attacks in the United States
within the next probably 2-3 weeks, then all of the things
that were being told to us about the threats, all of the dangers
that were being briefed to the American people for literally 2
decades, are complete and utter bollocks.
They're completely fake and they have to be because this is the
greatest reason to activate some terror cells.
This would be you've got a Homeland Security shutdown.
You have an ineffective FBI director.
You have a kick off where now there are missiles that are
flying. And whether you're on one side
of the Sunni or the Shia divide, you've got Iran has attacked.
And then Iran is now sending stuff all over the place.
And all of it can be directly tied to the president of the
United States who, quote, UN quote, had a feeling, I'm going
to play that in a second for you as well.
You had a feeling that something needed to be done.
So he acted whether you like it or not.
But if there are no sleeper cell attacks and one random guy from
Sudan, which is a pretty weird movement, and a lot of people
think that it might be a, you know, false flag.
There's lots of crazy people out there, folks.
So whether he's legitimately mentally ill or groomed by the
FBI or whatever, doesn't matter. One guy taking an AR down to 6th
St. in Austin, he is not the same as showing the conclusive
proof that we have a massive enemy infiltration of jihadi
type terrorists hanging out in the United States waiting to
attack us. And if they don't take this
moment, not that I want it, I mean, but I'm just telling you,
when I travel now, I travel extra armed compared to my
normal thing. Normally I'm like a handgun guy.
I don't need an extra magazine because if I need an extra
magazine, I need a plate carrier.
If I need a plate carrier, I need a rifle.
If I need a rifle and a plate carrier and extra magazines, why
am I going there? Like I'm a free citizen that
doesn't have to go anywhere. I'm not in a war zone.
I don't have anywhere that I have to go.
I'll go somewhere different. So I don't do that.
I generally don't carry an extra magazine.
For those of you who've never heard this logic, go listen to
DJ Shipley and the podcast he did with Sean Ryan.
He makes the argument about the the escalation of your everyday
carry, which is something I'm borderline obsessed with, and it
was the most coherent argument. If you're not rolling around
every day with a rifle and a plate carrier and extra
magazines, then you're normal. And that's normal.
So fine. But now might be the feud
minutes for the next couple of weeks when there's a window
where you might see this sort of thing be necessary unless it
doesn't happen. And here's the crazy part that
we have to recognize. If we do not have a sleeper cell
terror attack that we have been promised forever, and then we've
got to really, really, really seriously ask the question, why
have we seated so many civil liberties in this country?
Why have we funded a absolutely massive intelligence capability?
Why are we putting so much money into the federal threat
detection systems of the FBI and DHS and so on?
If they're actually turns out when there is an opportunity and
there is no more opportunity that is more like profoundly
motivating then a another war in the Middle East, then ADHS
shutdown, which is a huge chunk of our national security
apparatus. Why, why would why have we
seated all these freedoms? Why have we allowed them to have
like incredible amounts of surveillance on our digital
life? We created SISA under President
Trump's first term, right, The Cyber security infrastructure
Security Agency. You know, it's important because
it has the word security in it twice.
SISA which wanted to to regulate your thoughts.
Do you guys remember how crazy some of this stuff was?
I'm going back to like in my mind, Trump one point O Biden
now Trump 2 point O. The things that we have ceded in
this country for the sake of security is shocking.
And if we don't see a terror attack and I and I and I pray
that we don't actually all it should make everybody do is go,
hey, why in the hell are we actually funding this crap?
And again, the DHS is shut down. So they're going to vote today
on legislation to fund DHS. The Republicans are stressing
the urgency because the partial shutdown amid the war.
Republicans have pressure Democrats to support an
agreement that appropriators have reached on a bipartisan
basis earlier this year to fund DHS through September.
But there was a second fatal shooting.
And so they reacted and they were able to get their base
motivated. And so Democrats decided that
funding an organization that took the life of two people
under very different circumstances, one of which
looked like a one was trying to run a guy over or at least could
be easily articulated. The other one of Alex Pretty
looks a lot more suspicious and a lot more problematic.
Still may be justified under the law, which may bother a lot of
you. But the questions still remain.
You know, how fast we moved on from that.
That happened in January. We went regular lesbian soccer
moms who are also wild political activists are trying to run over
ICE agents. Then hero VA nurses are carrying
guns to protest, and you don't have a right to carry a gun to a
protest to where is Samantha Guthrie And how can we find out
what the backpack and the glove look like?
And by the way, Google is downloading every single thing
and maintaining a bunch of files on you that come out of your
camera that you're not supposed to be recording to.
Don't worry about all that stuff.
The president had a feeling and it was time to go after Iran
because there's no other way about it.
That's where we're at right now. Mike Johnson said that military
action Iran makes it all the more urgent and critical to have
a fully staffed, fully funded Department of Homeland Security
across all departments, rather than own the possibility of
defunding some part of government and shrinking the
sides of some part of government when you have an opportunity to
do so. Mike Johnson, Republican Speaker
of the House, has decided that this is a reason why you must
fund all of it. And so This is why you'll never
find me as a Republican again. They think that the answer to
the problems with government are just fixing the problems with
government, with more government.
The people on the left think that the problems with
everything can be solved with with more government.
And so they are both on the same Rd. going the same directions.
It just turns out that government, you know, the, the,
the pro government forces of Democrats have their foot on the
gas all the way down. And the people that are on the
Republican side, they have it on cruise control.
Their foot is off the gas and they're maintaining the speed
limit, but they're all going the same direction.
It's really hard to find anybody to support when that's the case.
You guys want more excuses? I mean, sorry, You want more
examples? Excuses, examples, excuses.
Let's do that real quick. Here we go.
DOJ, this is the news of the yesterday afternoon.
DOJ quietly shelves the Biden autoped investigation that
Donald Trump demanded. So this is the, this is the
pattern. I told you that my sense of
this, this administration which has been very PR focused is that
they will start off with a strong statement like APR, you
know, press release. This is the press release, this
is the public relations attempt to get you to back up what we
say. We are going to hold everyone
accountable. We are going to investigate
these people. We are going to make sure that
nobody is above the law. That's why Tina Peters has to
stay in prison, and that's why everybody who did the Biden auto
pen is going to prison, except nobody's going to prison.
They'll probably have now a really nice congressional
hearing about this. That's the plan.
So first announce the investigation.
That is the entirety of the outcome.
Quietly close it when no one is looking, and then do a big
hearing about why nobody went to jail about it.
And that is the end result. Is that about right?
I'll go to the chat over here. I'm pretty sure that's the
pattern. Recognize a problem, message
strongly that it is a problem, open investigation, and that's
the end of it. Quietly close it and hope no one
notices. And then when anyone notices,
like a headline in NBC that announced congressional hearings
where there is in fact no ability to do anything.
And then when Congress is done, they might even make a referral
for prosecution. Too bad the story is already
closed. Or maybe they open an
investigation, Maybe they announced A reinvestigation and
then we can do the circle jerk all over again in another
circle. Government by this is a great
line in the chat. Government by executive order,
Government by press release. Both of them are awful, it turns
out. Fiat, dictate, etcetera.
So all that's bad. All right, let's do do a couple
things before we get to Christina and let's touch on the
war. By the way, here's another story
from CBS that did the same thing.
The probe on the use of the auto pen is going to be closed,
according to The Who is it? Oh, Jeanine Pirro, federal
prosecutors in Jeanine Pirro's office, the same woman that is
fighting the FOIA that I have with the FBI, the same woman who
is defending the Bureau in multiple places.
You know, the people that were supposed to go in and reform,
they're not doing that. Why would they do that?
Because it's not Trump's DOJ, it's nobody's DOJ.
It's DOJ's DOJ, just like it's the FBI's FBI.
They're not running things either.
I actually saw a really nauseating post the other day on
X from CPAC. The, the like the organization
that puts on the C PAC conference put out a tweet and
it was a video, like a hype video of Cash Patel acting like
he was going to do something and nobody liked it.
Nobody. It had 200 + 1000 views and
three comments and they were all like F Cash Patel.
Two sources confirm the existence of the prom, with one
telling CBS News that the matter has since been closed.
We're talking about the autopen probe because prosecutors were
never actually able to find a legal hook that was able to
pursue the matter further. Let's go a little bit deeper
into this for one second, just so we're all on the same page.
Just because something is wrong doesn't make it illegal.
Wait, just because something is, is immoral, unethical, doesn't
make it illegal. And that's the major problem.
The messaging and the PR is always like, this was wrong.
This was treason. And then you look up and you're
like, that's not what treason means.
How many people have told me that?
Joe Biden committed treason. The people in Biden's
administration committed treason.
That former members of the FBI committed treason.
And then nobody recognizes that treason means giving aid and
comfort to a declared enemy during time of war.
And the last time we charged it was like in the 1950s because it
was a World War 2 crime when we actually had a declaration of
war. The problem with people being
ignorant of like what it is and using words sort of like in
artfully is that they are also doing the exact same trap.
They're falling into the trap of the PR messaging sounds really
good. And then we think that something
should happen. And the reason they think
something should happen is because they don't even
understand the thing that they're asking for.
There was literally no crime, apparently.
That's why they couldn't prosecute it.
The elements of no crime fit the information they were trying to
do. And by the way, I thought we
were trying to get away from that in this organization, in
this administration. Rather the whole, the whole
point of when we talk about weaponized government is that
the government presupposes that somebody is guilty of something,
you know, in violation of due process.
Then they go out and find a crime to be able to charge them
with in order to get it. I didn't vote for that.
I think that's the scariest thing ever.
And if you live through the last five years, you also should
think it's really scary. It doesn't matter who's in
charge. You shouldn't want that.
All right, let's do some imminent threats, shall we?
The threats are imminent. That's the talking point.
Here's Tom Cotton. He's going to let you know that
for the last 47 years now, you probably didn't know this in the
same way that you didn't know that the DHS was shut down until
I brought it up again. You're like, Oh yeah, yeah.
Got it. The DHS is shut down.
Yeah, the government shutdown thing.
In the same way you didn't recognize DHS was not being
funded, you probably also didn't wake up every single morning for
the last 47 years. Apparently for the entirety of
my entire lifetime, every minute that I was awake, the United
States was under the imminent threat of the regime in Iran.
And so we've always been at war with Iran.
It feels very 1984 ish, Brian. No, not at all.
I thought Secretaries Rubio and Hexa, Chairman Cain and Director
Ratcliffe did a very good job of laying out the intelligence and
the current state of operations. The the simple reality is Iran
has a vast missile arsenal fought that far exceeds the
combined missile defenses of the United States, our Arab friends
and Israel. And it gets much worse every
single month. That is an unacceptable risk for
the United States. It's an existential risk for our
Arab friends in Israel. And it wouldn't get better if we
waited for six or 12 or 18 months to find a more imminent
risk. In fact, Iran has posed an
imminent risk to the United States for 47 years as they've
maimed and killed thousands of Americans without that vast
missile arsenal. The president was right to act
when he did. OK, Rodger, that I think Orwell
had a warning for us. The past was alterable.
The past has never been altered. Oceana was at war with East
Asia. Oceana has always been at war
with East Asia. Kind of the same jam there,
isn't it? And that what Tom Cotton just
said. By the way, did he also mention
that it was about Israel? Got to love that, Got to love
it, got to love that. Israel comes into play and it's
look, I don't need Israel to be involved.
I don't know why they keep saying it, but they keep saying
it. I just found out that the
junior, the junior senator from Montana, which is the place I'd
like to go live. Fortunately they have like some
real sketchy representatives. Steve Daines is their is their
senior senator and he's going to be stepping away and not seeking
re election. So good on him.
Kudos to someone who recognizes I'm in my mid 60s, it's time to
go live the rest of my life. I very much appreciate that even
if his liberty score is a C and he only has like 74% of his
votes go with the conservative side, that's still fine.
The junior senator is a former Navy SEAL who apparently had
like a questionable discharge that happened in Glacier
National Park. There's some stories about that.
Started asking my friends in Montana like, what's up with
this dude? And they're like, Oh yeah, he
had a huge loan grant thing that showed up.
He started a company and immediately had like $100
million infused into his company.
And then they were going to investigate it.
But then they didn't investigate it because he was able to get
marched out by the GOP. And he's got nice hair.
And so he says nice things and he does what they want.
He may or may not have shot himself in the arm when he was
out doing screwing around with a weapon system in Glacier, may or
may not have. I don't have any proof of that.
There's just stories about it. Said some things to Park Rangers
that are questionable and don't really line up.
And then he said some stuff like this.
So remember, it's not about Israel.
Again, I don't need this to be the answer.
They just keep saying this stuff.
And this is the same guy that broke a man's hand yesterday who
was an anti war protester who also probably was doing dumb
things. He was dressed up in his Marine
Corps uniform and he was trying to interrupt a hearing on the
war powers. More on that in a second, But
yeah, so Navy SEAL, former Navy SEAL senator decided to step in
and drag that guy off. Let's see a little bit about who
he is. I'm Tim Sheehy.
I'm a recently elected US senator from the state of
Montana. And I'm here as my first act as
elected senator to show our allies in Israel and the broader
allies throughout the Middle East that America still has a
commitment to this region. And there's no question that
America stands with Israel, stands with the men and women of
Israel. And of course, we'll do
everything we can to make sure the IDF and the men and women,
the IDF had the best gear, intelligence, technology and
support they have to get this done.
And of course, we've seen recent events unfold continually from
the events in Syria to, of course, broader geopolitical
events in the region, that this this is still unfolding.
And the next couple years are going to be very pivotal for the
future of the Middle East and the world.
And we need to make clear that the United States has a strong,
consistent foreign policy that projects strength and projects
the certainty that we're going to be involved here.
We're going to support our allies, most importantly the men
and women of Israel. I'd say finally, Israel's got a
friend, friend in me and America's Got your back 100%.
And most importantly, we've got to bring those hostages home
tomorrow. We're not going to stop.
We're not going to relent until we bring them home.
We're going to have your back 100% as you pursue that, as you
pursue that aim. And it's an hour of the year.
AIPAC brought to you by AIPAC, actually brought to you by
actual AIPAC as their watermark was on their GOP senator joins
the police in ejecting an anti war protester from a Capitol
Hill hearing. This happened yesterday.
Republican Senator Tim Sheehy of Montana, you just saw on the
screen, assisted several police officers and physically ejecting
a man who interrupted a Capitol Hill hearing on Wednesday as he
objected to the US and Israel's war in Iran.
The protester was Brian McGinnis, a Marine veteran who's
running as a Green Party, Green Party candidate in the South
Carolina Senate race. Probably doesn't have a huge
chance, but he's definitely got some notoriety after that.
I mean, that was probably a, that was probably a, a very high
impact PR stunt that he did as well.
Shortly afterwards, he said his arm was broken.
During the clash with the police and the senator, the US Capitol
Police accused him of violently assaulting police officers.
The incident took place at the Senate Armed Services
Subcommittee, a hearing that featured testimony from senior
military officials on military readiness.
Just under 30 minutes into the hearing, McGinnis began yelling
at one point, saying America does not want to send its sons
and daughters to war for Israel. Members of the US Capitol Police
attempted to remove McGuinness, who was wearing a military
uniform, from the hearing. And during the struggle, he
fought with the officers at some point looked like he shoved his
hand inside of a door, try to hold on to it.
And then she he came in and then tried to pull him out of it by
basically like breaking his arm. It's all on camera.
It's all on video. You guys can go see it.
It doesn't look like anybody was necessarily in the right on
that. But, you know, maybe not be the
senator who decides that you have to step in.
There are people who do it. Sure.
That's super important. I actually have a little clip
here from Tom Massey, who was talking on a war powers
discussion that was going on in the House.
God forbid, God forbid we actually bring up like the way
that our country was set up. This is why people hate Tom
Massey. He has things like books and he
reads things from people who, I don't know, helped set up our
system of government and thinks that there are some answers that
have already been debated and determined.
You know, like the Article 1 powers of Congress are meant to
hold the ability to declare war and that it's not supposed to
just rest in the executive. Now, there's some obvious
problems with that because what if people don't agree to go to
war and we already agreed to go to war?
It's Tom Massey. This is a 5 minute clip.
I'm only going to play a little bit of it.
Mr. Speaker, James Madison wrote to Thomas Jefferson in 1789.
The Constitution supposes what the history of all governments
demonstrates, that the executive branch of power is the most
interested in war and most prone to it.
It has accordingly, with studied care, vested the question of war
in the legislature. The Constitution is clear.
Article 1, Section 8, Clause eleven of our Constitution
provides Congress initiatory powers of war.
Article 2, Section 2, Clause one of our Constitution, gives the
President operational powers of war to wage that war.
Even if this body were to pretend that the 1973 War Powers
Resolution supersedes the clear language of the Constitution,
the President still has not met the conditions required by that
law itself. The 1973 War Powers Resolution
states plainly that the President may only introduce US
armed forces into hostilities pursuant to three conditions
either 1 declaration of war, 2. Specific statutory
authorization, or three a national emergency created by an
attack upon the United States. None of those conditions exist
today. Iran has not attacked the United
States. Congress has not declared war,
and Congress has not granted specific statutory authorization
beyond the OK, that sounds really boring.
So Tom Massey is like reading things from the law.
And that seems like that has something to do with the way
that Congress does business. But like, none of that's
particularly cool. And what do you mean there's
been no attack on the United States?
There's obviously been an attack on the United States.
Here's Speaker Mike Johnson explaining to you that after we
bombed Iran and after we killed their supreme leader and after
we've sent military forces into the theater and we've been
sending like a bombing campaign. And not just on Operation
Midnight Hammer where we sent some B twos over to take out
their new program. No, I mean, like recently, a
couple days ago when we started this aggressive bombing campaign
on behalf of ourselves because Donald Trump had a feeling and
had nothing to do with Israel, especially when all that
happened. Like, guys, you're not going to
believe this. This is actually kind of
shocking. Let me put the chat on the
screen. We bombed the crap out of Iran
and killed a bunch of people. There have been reports of
casualties, like numbering over 1000 so far.
Guys, they're now firing weapons at us.
They've attacked sovereign embassies.
Do you understand? Like now they've declared war on
us after we bombed them. So now the now the War Powers
Act applies because, you know, they, they started it after we
started it. Iran has attacked three of our
US embassies in the last couple of days.
OK. Those are sovereign territories
of the US. They have declared war on us.
I don't believe in the semantics.
We've talked about the language this morning.
We're not at war right now. We're four days in.
To a very specific clear mission, an operation, Operation
Epic Fury, which has two components, as you know.
That we have articulated over and over, the president has the,
the commander, Joint Chiefs, everybody is is explained.
Look, everybody's on the same page.
This is all about whether or not they're going to have access to
a nuclear weapon system. And then if they had an access
to that, then they also can't have access to short range
ballistic missiles. But they also cannot actually
have a Navy, which could cause problems for us.
But they also can't say that they are going to attack us if
Israel attacks them. So it's about this.
It's also has nothing to do with the Epstein file roll out or any
domestic policy failures. It's not about that.
And the reason we can't get a a statement from our elected
representatives who show up to represent the American people.
The reason why we can't get a declaration of war is because
some people might not want it. And listen to me, if some people
don't want a declaration of war when we're not at war because
we're not at war. But they declared war on us
after we did some warlike stuff to them.
Can you guys imagine if, like, I don't know, like Iran or China
or Russia, like flew a bunch of long range bombers over the top
of Washington, DC, did a decapitation strike, took out
the White House, took out a bunch of members that were
sitting in for a hearing in Congress.
And then they flew home. And then they just started
bombing a little bit of crap out of like, I don't know, New York
City, which is not even as as densely populated as Tehran.
And then and then started bombing, you know, I don't know,
Philadelphia and a bunch of other cities that are up in the
communist territories of the Northeast.
They just started doing that. And then and then we were like,
that's not going to, that's not going to be good.
So then we started bombing things in Russia and some of the
friendly countries to Russia. And then they were like, well,
we're not at war with you. You are at war with us because
you started coming after our embassies.
You could see why this would be a problem, right?
Yeah. It's an imminent threat.
Like we got to, we've got to get our our ducks in a row.
The thing is, is that they were two weeks away from having a
nuke, even though they've been saying that for 30 years.
They were this time for sure. If we didn't hit within two
weeks, they would have had a nuclear weapon.
If we didn't do the B2 attack a number of months ago, they would
have a nuclear weapon. And when crazy people have
nuclear weapons, bad things happen.
So we're in very good shape now. I want to let you know that.
And we will continue forward. But it's a great display of
military strength and I'm very proud to have with some of the
people in the room, both senators and congressmen, we
rebuilt and women. We and women.
This came out of my NPR reading as well.
I thought this is pretty interesting.
This is coming from WBUR. Why declarations of war?
War declarations are a thing of the past.
It was written yesterday before Donald Trump.
President Donald Trump launched a massive military campaign
against Iran on Saturday. He collaborated with the Israeli
government, but he didn't ask Congress for permission to
strike another country. The Constitution gives Congress
the power to declare war, designates the president as the
commander in chief of the military.
And this has long caused political conflict.
I think Tom Massie explained why those reasons were there.
There's, there's plenty of contemporaneous writings that
went into this. Declarations of war are long
gone, though, says Princeton University historian Julian
Zesler Zelizer. Zelizer.
That's kind of a fun name. It's not since World War 2 that
Congress has done that. An authorization to use military
force is different from declaring war.
In 1950, the United States sent troops to South Korea.
Why was that a turning point? It's a real turning point.
That's former President Harry Truman.
And he was relying on directives from the United Nations rather
than the rather than the US Congress.
And it was called a policing action rather than a war.
And historians say that that was the real change because that's
when presidents felt freed up to avoid the request for a
declaration of war. From that point on, they didn't
do it. There's five other points on
here talking about LBJ, the War Powers Resolution of 73.
All of these things are kind of irrelevant at this point because
they're ancient history. What's relevant is, is not
everybody would necessarily agree.
And if everyone doesn't agree, then we're not going to have the
question. Listen, if I don't think I'm
going to get your vote, then I'm not going to hold an election.
That sounds kind of totalitarian, doesn't it?
No, that's just what Mike Johnson says.
This is democracy at work. The idea that a few colleagues
here would try to move a war powers motion and resolution to
the floor right now is dangerous.
Imagine a scenario where Congress would vote to to, to
tell the commander in chief that he was no longer allowed to, to
complete this mission. That would be a very dangerous
thing. You see that Iran is firing
almost seemingly indiscriminately at targets.
They're trying to intimidate America.
They're trying. To, to, to test our resolve and
the idea that there's some members of of this legislative
body that would play along with that plays right into the hands
of the enemy. And I, I think it's shameful.
I. Yeah, that is shameful.
That is totally shameful. I mean, after all, they attacked
us, guys. They attacked our sovereign
territory. They went after our embassies.
You can't do that just because we bombed you.
You can't go after our embassies.
Iran has attacked three of our US embassies in the last couple
of days, OK? Those are sovereign territories
of the US They have declared war on us.
I don't believe in the semantics.
We've talked about the language this morning.
We're not at war right now. We're in four days in to a very
specific, a clear mission, an operation, Operation Epic Fury,
which has two components, as you know, that we have articulated
over and over. The president has the the
commander of the Joint Chiefs, everybody is is explained.
Mr. Burns said that Oceana has always been at war with East
Asia. It's it was at war with East
Asia, always has been at war with East Asia.
And they came after us first. And that's why there was an
imminent threat, because they were always an imminent threat,
going back to the 1930s, in which somebody had done
something then about Iran. Let's put a war boner on the
screen. It's been a little while.
Let's do that. The big questions that I think
you're going to hear from a lot of the senators is why now there
was no imminent threat. We know that's what Mark Warner
is already saying. What will you say to that?
And what do you expect that Trump folks will say to that?
I think that's a ridiculous idea that there's no imminent threat
from a regime who chants death to America since 1979.
There's no imminent threat from a regime that sponsored
Hezbollah who killed 220 Marines and 18 sailors in 1983 in
Lebanon. Go tell it to the families of
the of IED victims in Iraq and Afghanistan sponsored by Iran
that this regime is no threat. You know, in 1939 out of 35.
I don't know if he was an imminent threat, but I wish
somebody would dealt with him any me too.
I wish in 193935. He's having a hard time getting
some of his words outlook. Give Lindsey Graham a break.
OK? It's been a long time since he's
had a priapism. A priapism like that.
If you guys don't know, that's like a a medically long term
erect phallus. That's when the blood flow is
diverted down there and it can be in a medical emergency.
It's what happens if you take too much Viagra or if the United
States actually goes to war. After years and years of trying
to stroke a war boner. Boom, suddenly it hits you and
you can no longer think straight.
Look, there was a totally reasonable discussion, and then
Donald Trump had a feeling. Maybe it was more than a
feeling. The president had a feeling,
again, based on fact that Iran was going to strike the United
States, was going to strike our assets in the region, and he
made a determination to launch Operation Epic Fury based on all
of those reasons and. Got it.
All right, got it. So it was more than a feeling.
There was a there was a feeling based on facts.
Anyway, I'm, I'm, I'm beating this up because it's just like
the, the messaging is ridiculous.
You don't have to. You can want good things for
American troops, which I do. I want them to come home safely.
You can also look out there and say, didn't you say the opposite
of this for a long time? And that's also true.
That's also true. But also then you look at the
messaging and you're like, what kind of convoluted garbage are
you guys trying to sell us? And why would you think that we
would listen to you? You're not even making sense.
You're not having a, you're not having a coherent message.
Maybe the reason that we can't do, we can't do military action
is because people think the military is too woke.
Is that a talking point that's coming out?
Here's Stephen Miller. I'm going to do that in just one
second. Stephen Miller said the reason
that people didn't want war, it wasn't so much that Donald Trump
promised peace. He said he was going to make the
military strong again. And people thought the military
wasn't strong, so they were afraid to go to war because they
didn't want wussy people going to war.
But now that we have like bad asses that are back in there,
then now we can do the war game. We can do the war thing, right?
God forbid, OK, give us a like on Rumble if you're watching,
give us a dislike if you like it to, I don't know, engage with
the post, subscribe wherever you're watching.
If you're on YouTube and you haven't been there before, if
you're on Rumble and you haven't got a backup on YouTube, like we
get screwed with on on Rumble occasionally join us over there.
Very much appreciate the audiences.
We'll play something from the Spotify archive ads if they want
to play something. Now you can find the Spotify
show. It's Kyle seraphinshow.com.
It looks like this Kyle seraphinshow.com.
It gives you the access to video and audio.
So if you're listening anywhere else and you don't have video,
then you might as well get it. It's free, it costs you nothing.
It's way easier, it's way better.
Everybody who switches over and starts using Spotify is like, Oh
yeah, it is better. Look, I didn't use Spotify
before. I used their hosting service,
but it is better. OK, So it's always been at war.
Let's see, The reason we were worried about the war is because
we thought that our military was a bunch of wimps, and now
they're not wimps. So here we go.
One of the reasons I fear, Sean, that some people in this country
lost faith in the military and the capacity to use that
military to defend us is because we had a woke Pentagon, because
we had a military who at the very highest levels, not the war
fighters, was forced to fight a less than full fight.
What you're seeing now, Sean, is a military that is unleashed in
all of its lethal prowess to go out and seek, destroy and kill
the enemy, which is what militaries are for.
Yeah, Merca, maybe somebody should ask some veterans what
they think about that, because that's kind of gross.
I don't think that Steve Miller has served in the military.
He claims that Americans think that we weren't capable.
I think Americans always knew what they were capable.
They just kind of wanted a judicious use of the military.
You know what sucks? When Donald Trump makes Kamala
Harris correct. This clip was dug up.
They're going to be able to play all the clips of Donald Trump
saying I am peace. I am the president of peace.
I'm the only guy that ever started a new war.
That's not good. You're going to make Rachel
Maddow and and Kamala Harris correct about this guy.
It's just a really bad look. It's totally unnecessary.
He did have a feeling though. Tweeting out, you know, this
bravado about, you know, lock em, lock and load it.
What the what does that mean? OK.
And also well. It's an implicit military
threat, the. US is, yes it is.
Yes it is. Yes it is.
And again, you know, listen, as far as I'm concerned, this, this
president is, is motivated by his his personal insecurities
more than he is our national security.
If this president is thinking about putting us in a position
where we're in a war with Iran, the consequences will be
absolutely. Unacceptable and and and tragic
in terms of the young men and women who are American soldiers
who would be sent and deployed into something that was
completely avoidable in a Harrison.
It doesn't make me like Kamala Harris anymore.
I still don't like her. I think she's a moron.
I think they would have sent pallets of cash.
They would have tried to appease and buy off the Iranians.
But interesting that she was calling that out.
Kind of not great. Again, it gives people on the
left fodder to be able to say, look, we warned you.
We told you told you was going to do this thing.
Does she care about American soldiers and lives?
No. She was part of the Biden
administration when they abandoned Afghanistan and had 13
people killed at Abby Gate. Do you think they really cared
at all? No.
Do they come from the same tradition as the Hillary Clinton
types that did Benghazi and said what difference does it make?
Yeah, they do. So do I buy what she's saying?
No. I'm just telling you that her
words line up with fact now. And that's not great.
It's just a talking point that gives them an opportunity to
launch in. Told you back then.
Look what I said back then. You want the worst possible
thing you could do is, and I, and I'm not even exaggerating
here, the worst thing you could do is try to motivate the
talking heads. You could try to get the, the
most trusted quote UN quote conservative Con Inc types.
And if you could just set them up with an opportunity to
interview, what would our founding fathers have said?
Now we know what the founding fathers would have said because
they actually had debates about this and we know what their
letters said and we know what the discussions that were had at
time. And we understand what The
Federalist Papers did and the anti federalist wrote against.
And So what there was a robust discussion about how should the
the the United States exist and what should they do?
And there were court cases and speeches and all this kind of
stuff. But you know what would be
better? Because we're just dumb
Americans who need to have slop fed to us.
We need to be told that there was a glove found 2-2 miles away
from some lady's house. And it could be the solution.
We'd like to see an AI version of George Washington invented,
created, and then give propaganda into that AI bot's
mouth. What if we could get Glenn Beck
to interview fake George Washington that comes to the
conclusion that Donald Trump is correct?
No matter What Could we do that? Would that have like a really
good reception? There's a reason why Glenn
Beck's new project, which is called Torch, is not taking off.
Maybe interviewing a fake George Washington bot is not the win.
Are you guys ready for this? I saw this on X this morning and
it is getting destroyed by everybody because it is super
freaking weird. It might be the weirdest thing
that I've played this year, George.
We are trying to not fight foreign wars and not be involved
in an in the world's policeman. But there are times that we have
to demonstrate strength in order to prevent conflict.
But I I don't know where the foreign entanglement begins and
where it ends. When I was president, I did not
crave power. I didn't strut in my uniform
dreaming of conquest. In fact, I begged several times
to not be the general and not be the president.
I didn't want it, but I understood my responsibility,
and I also understood that some things that that are easy to
forget when you're staring down bayonets.
Peace is not the default. It has to be guarded
deliberately with foresight and strength.
My generation lived through a fragile independence.
Our New Republic was surrounded, literally and figuratively, by
instability. Most of the founders believed
that we would not survive to 1820.
We thought it was an interesting experiment.
European powers were sniffing the opportunities.
States were threatening to splinter.
Loyalists were lurking. None of this was hypothetical.
It was the daily background noise of early America.
So how did you protect that freedom?
Well, you said it through strength.
Weakness didn't just invite disagreement, it invited
disunion. And I had already seen what
happens to authority when it is too diluted.
The Continental Congress couldn't pay the troops.
They couldn't enforce unity or act decisively.
That kind of vacuum doesn't stay empty.
Either Chaos fills it, or another power does.
And that's why. What in the actual hell is going
on right now? That was a fake George
Washington created by AI that talks exactly like Glenn Beck.
If Glenn Beck pretended that he was 200 years old, like, what?
What are we doing, man? And also the music in the
background sounded like he was going to break out and Pat
Benatar, we belong at any moment.
Many times I tried to tell you, many times I cried alone.
Like what was going on there? That's the weirdest, sloppy,
gnarly propaganda that I've ever seen, and I am not exaggerating
even a little bit. He created a fake George
Washington to be the answer to what he was.
This was like that was that might be the most masturbatorial
thing that I've ever seen by a by a talking head.
I can't fathom interviewing myself.
Yeah, he just interviewed himself.
Where he was himself and George Washington.
And so he did the Sean Hannity where he told the guest the
answer, except the guest was himself.
Wow. Cool.
Anyway, take a deep breath. Acknowledge that we live in a
strange, strange time when that just happened.
That was real. That was real fake.
That was a real fake thing that just happened.
Good God almighty. Let me make sure I'm not missing
any other ridiculous moments or clips about this.
Oh, Tucker Carlson, another talking head, but someone who
tends to be closer aligned to what I think.
I think Tucker is brilliant. I think he's really smart when
he speaks. He did this and it was really
well done. This was on Piers Morgan.
And maybe a moment of just sanity going like, hey, we could
all be wrong. We all may be wrong at some
point in time, but some things just end up always going the
wrong way. You know, like assuming that
you're going to have a short military, short military
interaction when that's not going to be the case.
So here's Tucker and Piers Morgan, who's awful, but Tucker
and he have a debate. A Brit tries to own an American
and an American pulls a George Washington.
Is that the segue? And let's call it that, where
Donald Trump decided to attack Iran.
What did you feel about that, given that it ended so
apparently quickly? Do you think Trump was
vindicated in his short, sharp strategy there by by bombing
Iran? Or do you think that this will
come back and haunt him down the line?
Well, of course, I can't say. I mean, my, my life is a kind of
unbroken chain of bad predictions and, you know,
embarrassing analysis. And I've been wrong so many
times. And I will be in the future
without question. However, it's just a fact that,
you know, events have consequences that we can't
foresee, often for years or generations.
And I think it's very unwise to use military force without a
clear, achievable object objective that serves the
American National interest. In fact, it's not.
It's not allowed to use it under any other circumstances.
And in that case, I was concerned and remain concerned
that this focus on Iran is not actually connected to our
national security. How many Shiite terror attacks
have there been in the United States in my lifetime?
Let me do the math 0 So don't tell me that the greatest threat
we face is Iran. That's a lie.
You're telling it on behalf of a foreign power.
Maybe they feel the greatest threat they face is Iran.
It's not the greatest threat we face.
It's not an endorsement of Iran. OK, Doesn't make me a simp for
the Shiites. It just makes me an American
who's trying to think clearly about what our problems are.
And our problems would include 10s of millions of foreign
nationals living illegally in my country.
Nobody knows their identities. They would include a collapsing
economy that makes it very hard for my children to have children
and would live the life that they grew up with and and their
friends and all American kids. It would include a drug crisis
that's killed millions of Americans over the past 20
millions of Americans over the last 20 years.
Iran is not even in the top ten list.
So you can scream at me all you want and call me names and call
me a bigot or whatever, but I just, there's no evidence to
support that. And so if the energy of the US
government is focused on a threat that's not the primary
threat to us, it is by definition ignoring threats that
are. And that's a kind of negligence.
And so I pointed that out. I was, you know, roundly
attacked. My family was attacked,
whatever. I don't care.
It's true. And everyone kind of knows it's
true. And being bullied by Ben Shapiro
into pretending that it's not true, it's just not on the
program for me at 56, I'm just not not doing that anymore.
That sounds kind of reasonable. I had this theory about gun
control people because there's a lot of people that are
completely irrational. They're very emotionally
involved in debates where they don't understand the actual
things that are at play. And so I just break it down to a
scientific level. It's like, OK, here's the deal.
There are threats to people's lives in the country I live in.
Let's look at what they are. Let's look at them by number.
Let's rank them by number so that we have a priority list.
And when you get down to the thing where we've sold all the
other preventable causes of death and me owning guns is is
the next on the list that I'm willing to have a totally
rational, reasonable conversation with you on whether
or not I should voluntarily disarm.
I'll have that conversation with you right after you solve heart
disease, right after you solve obesity and chronic pulmonary
disorders and all of the dietary and metabolic symptoms that that
destroy people. When you start removing all the
ability to to end accidental death, many of which are
predictable. When you start solving that,
when you, when you end medical malpractice deaths where 500,000
people die at the hands of surgeons and physicians and the
wrong prescriptions giving out and the wrong medical procedure
being done. When you get there and you've
done all those things and you end up down there in the bottom,
you know, 15 of the list, and you go, hey, we solved all the
preventable causes of death, and the last thing that's going to
keep people from dying now is you and your guns, which could
be used to kill them. Then we can have that
conversation. But until we get there, I don't
want to talk about it. And I think Tucker Carlson's
point is there's a domestic policy.
There's a whole bunch of things that matter to regular Americans
way more than anything that has to do with Iran, feelings aside.
Then maybe we could talk about Iran when it makes the most
sense and it makes the most sense only when we get down to
that level. I've got a I've got a story here
that came from the New York Times of all places, which
should illustrate to you where real priorities look.
This is again New York Times archived.
I'll put it in the in the, the, the comments for the two video
platforms we normally do. Why does childcare seem less
affordable than ever? It's always been expensive, but
but recently prices have risen and faster than inflation.
The funny thing is, is you have a got.
You cannot make this stuff up. Guys.
If you're listening, you're missing out.
Join me on Spotify. Check that out first.
If you're watching, look at this lady over here.
This is Sherri Pica. She runs a child care center in
Lacrosse, Wisconsin. Unless you think this was
somewhere in New York City or San Francisco, CA, anything.
OK, here we are. She has a second job because
working at the child care center pays so little and she has legit
purple hair with a streak of white.
I don't know if it's because she's naturally white haired or
if she's dyed it white, bleached it out, but purple and white
hair. And she has a hard time making
enough money. And then they go in to talk
about how childcare is really expensive.
The craziest thing is, is that if anybody could actually do
math, and this is always a tax on math.
If you have someone who's looking and going, gosh, it is
so expensive for my wife to go to work.
We have to pay most of what she makes in childcare.
And then you don't consider what's the value of having my
wife home to be able to help raise my kids and make meals and
all the things that go on because it's not just child
care. The minute you start putting
your kid into child care, the additional costs stack up.
There's taxes on any earnings. There's the fact that you're
paying for the child care. There's the loss of being able
to actually raise your own child and be there when they get home.
There's the the preparation for food, which can be very
expensive if you have to eat out or if you have to buy pre made
meals. It's way more expensive to buy
something that's pre cooked than it is if you're going to make it
yourself, right? And so as you go down the list,
you can find that a lot of these things, if you were to just do a
straight financial analysis of it, it's like, it actually
doesn't make sense for a lot of spouses to have two incomes.
You get more money on the on the top end for your, your gross
revenue, but your net is actually so low that it actually
doesn't actually pay out. There's plenty of people in that
scenario. Obviously some people will be
exceptions, but most people don't actually know how to even
look at the stuff and do a, a, a, a sober analysis of am I
getting my money's worth by sending my wife to work?
I know my parents did this discussion at one time when I
was younger. The deal was is because of the
income tax bracket that my dad landed in.
Like almost every penny my mom would have made by going to work
at a certain point would have just been taxed out.
She would have made 1/3 of whatever the salary was.
Then there's the opportunity cost that you have to add on top
of it anyway, just really interesting.
But this is a real American problem.
Affordability for whatever reason, whether it's talking
about childcare or whether the fact that Americans are just
struggling to be able to to put food on the table or all the
other kind of things, right. There's lots of different
domestic priorities that are far more important.
And guess what? Your money is going to get
stretched because as we talked about yesterday, we're spending
money on a war effort, which means we're building bombs,
we're building munitions, we're fielding, all these things that
are disposable. In time of war, we tend to move
into theater and then leave, you know, 10s of, of billions of
dollars worth of material and equipment.
We have to build out infrastructure that gets
exploded and then we have to build it again.
And that's just what militaries do.
But all that money comes from somewhere and it comes from
taxing you and it comes from taxing you.
That means there's an opportunity cost.
Either we're going to just keep spending more money on military
plus the things we want, or they're just going to do it in a
deficit and we're going to get taxed so that our kids are going
to pay for it, which sounds awesome.
Anyway, Tucker's point being there are seriously more
important priorities that we could be looking at and we are
not. And that's what's called
opportunity cost. The opportunity cost of focusing
in our our energy and our media coverage and all the other kind
of nonsense that goes along with this.
It basically comes down to what are we not working on?
Oh, we're not working on the domestic agenda.
And more importantly, we're not covering this story, which I
know we've covered before, but I'm going to do it today again
because it's freaking wild day #2 yesterday of Kristi Noem
being grilled about this Pro Publica piece.
And kudos to Pro Publica, which doesn't have a normal place in
most people's news cycle. They're not really well
publicized, but they are doing real good work, real decent
work. This firm tied to Christy Noem
secretly got money from a $220 million DHS ad contract.
Switch out Christy Noem and put in Alejandro Mayorkas, the DHS
secretary under Joe Biden. It took $220 million to do
advertisements with his face on it.
Are you pissed off? That's all I want to know.
I want you to do the mirror test.
Hold it up and say it's not my guy, it's their guy.
Am I pissed? If the DHS secretary is doing a
propaganda pro campaign and attempting to fluff his own
image up the same way that we're paying for Cash Patel to have a
personal publicist, would you be pissed?
And you should be. This story was written November
14th of 2025. It was published first thing in
the morning. The company is being run by the
husband of Christy Gnome's chief spokesperson.
A woman named Trisha Mclaughlin's husband got a huge
chunk of a no bid contract. And then it sounds like she may
have misspoken Underoath when she was talking about this
stuff. So that's freaking wild.
So let's go ahead and pull up a really good exchange with
Christy Gnome. This one might be the most
salacious version of it. And notice she doesn't answer.
She dresses what I think. I think my buddy Steve friend
refers to as the Fox News like a boomer sex doll or blow up doll.
It's not a very nice thing to say, but she's so cosmetically
made-up. She's got hair extensions.
She's got a face full of makeup. If you ever see a high, you
know, definition zoom in of her face, you look like you could
paint a canvas of it and get a really nice beige smeared across
a large, large space because it's caked and piled on there.
Her real skin is nothing like what they actually show her at
and how interesting that the what is he?
What does he call her? The Fox News, the Barbie blow up
sex doll or whatever she is the gross.
She can't answer whether or not she's been boning one of the
guys who works for her. And then she goes on this tirade
about how he's a quote, UN quote, special governmental
employee. And there's bunches of them and
it's allowed all. That's super gross.
And if it was anybody else in any other administration, you'd
be horrified by it. But because people are so
tribal, we've got to the point where people are going to
actually ignore this and they're going to be mad at the Democrat
lady. I side with the Democrats on
this one. They're correct, by the way.
So did a bunch of Republicans, including John Kennedy.
We played it yesterday. Here's a question.
Are you having sex with your employee?
And she has no answer. That's not it.
Here it is. So, Secretary Noam, at any time
during your tenure as director of Department of Homeland
Security, have you had sexual relations with Corey
Lewandowski? Mr. Chairman, I am shocked that
we're going down and peddling tabloid garbage in this
committee today. Reclaiming.
And ma'am, one thing that I would tell you is that he is a
special government employee who works for the White House.
There are thousands of them in the federal government.
So, reclaiming as an advisor. But wait, were you boning him or
were you not boning him at any point while you were working
there? Super easy question.
It is OK for you to be no authority by the question.
It is OK for you to be no authority by the question, but
it is also a real question. So what I would say and you
should be able to answer what we do at the Department of Homeland
St. every single and without any hesitation every single day is
to protect if someone is asked to make decisions you or any
federal official is sleeping with their subordinate that.
Are you sleeping with your subordinate?
Yes or no? Should be absolutely not.
Thank you for the question. I'm glad to clear that up.
I'm, I'm cringing right now with everything I have.
Look at that face. Look at that pause.
You asked me something and I cannot.
I She can't tell a lie either. She's in modern George
Washington. She cannot tell a lie.
She chopped down the Cherry Tree, but we're going to talk
about a different kind of tree. She was like, there are no pecan
trees in the orchard that anyone has said could not be touched.
And therefore, Oh my God, just say no or don't.
Here's The funny thing. When you don't say the answer to
a really simple question like this, the odds are is that
somebody probably has the proof on it.
That's probably where it gets really shit and sketchy.
So OK. I have the easiest You should be
wanting to answer that question because it is not about your
senses. It is about your.
That kind of garbage. It's about reclaiming my time so
that I can hear my recognize. Belongs time belongs to the
general lady from California. The the the time does belong to
her. But what I love is imagine when
you're in the right. Have you guys ever been in a
question where someone asked you something really offensive?
I did this with James O'Keefe. They said something really dumb
during one of the depositions I did with O'Keefe.
And they're like, have you ever talked dirty to your wife?
And my, my attorneys like objection, like, you know, it
doesn't need to be answered. And I was like, no, but I'll
answer you. No, The answer is no.
I have a ton of respect for my wife.
That's not the kind of relationship we have.
So this is not really a big deal.
That woman is married. Did you sleep with one of your
employees? Should be like, thanks so much
for giving me the opportunity to address this.
No, I know there's been a lot of rumors.
They're all false. I can say that unequivocally.
Thank you for the time. Do you have any other questions
for me? This is super easy.
I'm not offended by the question.
I think it's offensive that you think it's important or it's
really, really bad. And I'm I, I welcome the
opportunity to straighten the record out.
By the way, this goes on for a little longer on you, but it'd
be nice if you would let her respond.
I will. I want to let you know it is
about your judgement and decision making.
It is about the 260,000 employees that work under you
that want to make sure that you are giving information and
making decisions clearly. It is about conflict of
interest. That's all true.
It's about a national security risk.
Also true. Department of Homeland Security
was created right after 911 to protect the homeland, and DHS
has circulated an internal bulletin to law enforcement
partners warning that the conflict of the war we're in
could inspire lone actors or small scale cyber activity
inside the United States, according to a memo obtained by
ABC News. So American lives are at risk.
The people who work for you are at risk and they want to know
that the person at the top you, they're making decisions
clearly. That's a great.
Without any sort of cloudiness and that they're your decisions
because you're the secretary who was confirmed.
That's what this is about, saving the lives of Americans
and not costing them millions of dollars.
I mean, it's hard to argue with what she's talking about there.
That's not the most salacious thing.
That's just the thing that it should have been an easy slam
dunk answer. By the way, that's a great
opportunity to say great messaging.
Like, no, I don't. I'm faithful to my marriage.
The reports are all false. Thank you for giving an
opportunity for me to say it. Really welcome it.
Do you have any other questions that I can answer?
I'd love to be, you know, clear these people are bad at PR and
they're supposed to be doing PR. And the reason why people are
bad is that when you catch me on my back foot because I know I'm
in the wrong, then it's really hard.
Then I then I start making counter accusations, right.
This is the the thing one of my buddies used to say.
It's the it's the number one rule they teach you when you go
to spy school. I don't think he was a spy, but
he used to say this. He said, what are you supposed
to do? Confirm nothing, deny
everything, make counter accusations.
You guys ever heard that before? Because that's what just
happened. Confirm nothing, deny
everything, sort of make counter accusations.
She left to deny everything because she couldn't even do it.
OK, now let's talk about money, $220 million seemed like a lot
of money. Seems like a lot of money to
spend on an advertising campaign to put that lady's face out
there in the world. Seems like something that I
don't need as an American. I don't need faces and pictures.
I was always irritated when I saw Ali Henry Orcas's face at
the airport. I was like who made this damn
video? Why do I have to look at this
bald freaking Weiner standing in front of me telling me that I'm
about to get touched by TSA and how happy he was that we're
traveling. Like F you bro stop making
videos. At least they were made in Adhs
studio from what I can tell. Maybe I don't know.
Here is the here's the congressman from what's his
name. His name's Nagus, I think from
Colorado. And I've been watching some of
his questions and he's very sober.
He's very articulate and he seems to be pretty squared away.
Like I probably disagree with all of his politics, but I don't
disagree with people asking reasonable questions and
reasonable ways that are not stupid gotchas there.
He's not like a falling asleep at the table where you've got
some of these other kind of dirt bags that are 1000 years old.
He's young, he's sharp, he's honed in.
He kind of reminds me of like a like a left wing version of
Brandon Gill, who also does a really good job of like honing
in. This is what we're talking
about. These are things if you're going
to do a gotcha, do it well. This is a gotcha.
That doesn't sound like a gotcha.
And the reason it's a gotcha is because they probably did what's
called fraud. Nasty, disgusting.
Hundreds of millions of dollars in fraud.
I want to discuss in greater detail the expansion of
advertising in your department under your tenure, and I believe
you testified regarding some of these matters yesterday in front
of the United States Senate. In particular, I want to discuss
the department's 200 million dollar, $220 million ad
campaign. This is the ad campaign that
featured you at Mount Rushmore. You're familiar with this ad
campaign, correct? I am familiar with it.
It was an ad. Campaign that was.
I'm going to ask you some questions about it, Madam
Secretary. So as I understand it, this is a
$220 million ad campaign. It's split between two
contractors. One of those contractors got
$143 million. That contractor is called Safe
America Media, correct? Correct.
OK. That company is affiliated with
a former political director of the National Republican
Congressional Committee. Now, yesterday you testified, I
think I'm quoting you, right? You said, quote, in reference to
this contract, they quote, it went out to a competitive bid.
Do you stand by that statement? It was a no bid contract where
two vendors were. It was a no bid.
Contract It would have been a. Maybe if you did less time
putting your makeup on and your hair extensions you'd know the
difference between a no bid and a competitive bid.
Which by the way is a world of difference.
Very funny that she switched it up in 2 days.
I don't know if somebody read back her testimony and was like
yo lady, you said something that's not true.
You may not have meant to but that was factually inaccurate.
Now you're going to have to go out there and act like you
didn't say what you said. If it would have been a no bid
contract, if I'm using that correctly, it would it goes out
to two different vendors. Correct.
So it was not a competitive. Let me let me try to explain
what the discrepancy because a competitive bid is very
different than a no, no competitive bid and I'll just
explain why we know that your testimony yesterday when you
said again I'll quote it went out to a competitive bid is
untrue. The reason we know it's untrue
is because under federal law, your agency is required,
whenever the agency decides to skip competitive bidding, to
file a notice with the public explaining why.
And in this case, your agency filed a notice.
Yikes. So she claimed it was a
competitive bid and the first thing you can get things wrong,
it happens. Then you have to be confronted
by your own agency's notice saying that not only was it not
competitive, but it was a non competitive.
And here's the reasons why it was non competitive.
And by the way, the non competitive reasons are freaking
atrocious. And they gave it to a company
that had been in existence for like 8 to 11 days.
And the person who ran the company was an RNC operative.
OK, he's about to explain all this stuff.
She's getting hit in the face with her own words, with her own
agency's movements. And her action was is to flip
hair behind her. There's multiple pictures that
were online when I was looking. I couldn't find a high red
version of her flipping the hair.
But that actually seems it's like, but I'm pretty, that seems
like the the fence right here because there is no excuse for
what they did. And she's trying to explain away
something where they gave $143 million, handed it to a company
that just got created and that company turned around and then
hired one of her political buddies who ran $8 million worth
of advertising for the state of North Dakota.
We talked about that yesterday. We played some clips about that
who was also married to one of her chief spokespersons.
Trish Mclaughlin's husband is the one who received that.
Trish McLaughlin is the spokesperson that we saw the
most. She's the blonde haired lady
we've seen talking on on behalf of DHS.
This is exactly what basic fraud and corruption looks like.
This is like this is corruption. There's no other way to describe
it. And the case is really, really
clear and it's being laid out in this testimony.
And her answer is to flip hair and blink a lot.
Aware of that right justification and approval for
other than full and open competition, your agency made a
decision not to proceed with competitive bidding and one of
the contractors that got the award was this Safe America
Media company that received $143 million.
Many vendors got the chance to look at that contract and to
participate in it, so that is why the two of them.
Were Madam, Madam Secretary, I'll read from the notice from
your agency. Yesterday, she said that the
career staff at DHS are the ones who determined which ones to go
with. Now, suddenly she knows how it
was selected. Given the immediate action to
significantly reduce illegal immigration and border
crossings, DHS invited, excuse me, identified 4 companies, four
of the hundreds of thousands of companies in the United States,
but you identified 4. One of those is this Safe
America Media company. Where is Safe America Media
headquartered? I don't know either, Madam
Secretary. We can't find it.
We can't find a website. We did find an address that's
registered for this company. Do you know where that address
is? Is there a problem with this
contract? I'll tell you about Madam
Secretary, The address is registered to a political
operative. Madam, Madam Secretary, the
company, and then I'll give you an opportunity to respond.
The company is registered to a political operative in Virginia.
Do you know just by way of example, whether this company
that received $143,000,000 in taxpayer dollars, has it ever
done work for the government before?
I don't. Don't know, I can't.
We pause it. He just said that the company
has no website, it has no public face.
It received $143 million contract with the federal
government, and it's based out of a dude's house in Virginia
who worked for the RNC. This is where it gets really
wild. Have they ever done business
with the federal government? Did you guys choose them because
they were the best choice? Because we've previously had
really good success? That's what he's asking the.
Answer is it has not. And do you know why we know
that? Because it was incorporated 8
days, 8 days before this contract went out.
You want the American people to believe that this is all above
board, that $143 million of taxpayer money just happened to
go to this one company that doesn't have a headquarters,
doesn't have a website, has never done work for the federal
government before, and is registered apparently, or
attached to a residence from a political operative.
And of course, one of the subcontractors of that contract,
as you know, is a political firm that's tied to to you back when
you were governor of South Dakota.
The reason why I ask these questions is that this is
taxpayer money. That's why, and I presume I
don't know this for a fact, but Senator Tillis noted yesterday
the way in which your agency is blocking the Inspector General
from 11 different investigations that it is trying to conduct.
I don't know if this happens to be one of them.
I certainly hope it is because eventually the facts will become
public in this regard and there are serious laws implicated,
conflict of interest laws, federal procurement laws, that I
believe. All done correctly.
All done, all done. She's probably right.
They probably did everything according to the law.
They probably did everything according to the procedures,
because that's how they do this stuff.
And they fleeced you for 10s of millions north of $100 million.
You, the taxpayer, me the taxpayer, saw a question in the
chat. Sometimes I see you guys scroll
the stuff by. Would that man who's asking the
question, Negus or whatever his name is, would he be asking the
same questions if it was Alejandro Mayorkas, if it was a
Democrat that was sitting in that chair?
I don't know. I don't care because if anybody
that works for the government is doing the thing, it's not about
team. That's the whole point here.
The truth has no agenda. The truth has no team.
It has no side. If you're involved in corruption
and somebody says, well, it's OK because it's our people doing
the corruption, screw you, please leave.
I don't want to be dealing with you.
Here's John Kennedy, he's a Republican.
He's asking the same questions. Why would that be?
Why would this woman be allowed to continue doing this job when
she's fleecing, taking money hand over fist, pushing her own
agenda? And why does she want it?
Why does she want to have her face out there?
All the indications that I have from folks that are working
inside DHS is that she intends to run for president.
If this woman runs for president, first I'll be
nauseous, and then second, I will do everything to point out
what a corrupt piece of garbage she is.
John Kennedy from yesterday, This is when she was in front of
the Senate. The thing you just saw was in
front of the House where she wouldn't answer whether or not
she's banging Corey Lewandowski. OK, very simple.
If you are involved in scumbaggery then you are being a
scumbag and you should be called to account for it.
How do you square that concern for waste, which I share with
the fact that you have spent $220 million running television
advertisements that feature you prominently?
Sir, the President tasked me with getting the message out to
the country and to other countries where we were seeing
the invasion come from, with, with putting commercials out
that told them that if they were in this country illegally, that
they needed to leave or we would detain them and remove them and
they'd not get the chance to come back to America the right
way. That has been extremely
effective. Ask you to run these
advertisements, is that right? We had that conversation.
He's trying to get to the point,
which is to say, did Donald Trump tell you to run these ads?
That's all I want to know too. Did the president tell you to do
these things? And if so, then he's also part
of the problem there? Or did you have that
conversation and you got no answer and you decided to go
back and do it? Because if it's way better to
ask for forgiveness than it is to ask for permission in
something like this, wouldn't you think?
Station, Yes, Before I was put in this position and sworn in
and confirmed, and since then as well.
OK. Did you, did you bid at those,
those service contracts? Yes, they did.
They went out to a competitive bid and career officials at the
department chose who would do those advertising commercials.
OK, that is a false statement. While she's underoath.
We just know it because the DHS released contrary information.
Long prior. She made a definitive statement
about something that was not true.
Now you can make false statements and you can go back
and try to correct the record. She needs to be issuing a
correction of her false statement and she probably
should resign because you shouldn't be banging your
subordinates and you shouldn't be doing things like, I don't
know, doing a presidential campaign on the public dollar,
$220 million is a lot of money. Even if it's not a lot of money
compared to the federal budget. That's like that is a a shocking
amount of money for regular people to think about.
And the people that you ended up picking were people who had
formerly done your political work back in South Dakota, is
that right? No, that's not correct, Sir.
I No, it's not, Sir. We, the individuals who I
believe the careers who they chose, were two different media
firms. What she's saying and she's
going to finish her thought. You know, we didn't pick people
that had previously worked with us.
We picked people and those people picked people who
previously worked with us. We had a cut out which made it
legal. It's kind of like putting on the
Marshall Star because you just got sworn in as being a deputy
and then you can go do the doc holiday routine.
And this time it's legal, right? Getting I got a badge.
So now we can do the shootout. I can legally give money to
somebody who's going to give money to the person I want.
I can't give it to the person I want, but when I threaten the
career people that work for me to pick the right folks in a no
bid contract and part of the deal is, is that they turned
around. Can we get those emails?
Can we get all the comms on this communication like all the other
background knowledge and all the people deposed?
Shouldn't there be a federal investigation, maybe by OIG,
maybe by the FBI? Shouldn't we doing that game?
Shouldn't somebody be looking into where what this this what
looks like obvious corruption because it's so blatant.
There's only one step in between them, and if the Democrats did
it, I would be equally appalled. I don't care who does
corruption. I care if you take our money and
do something that serves your own personal interests.
And if you want to do it through one, cut out gross.
There's been conversation about their subcontractors, but we
have no legal authority to look into subcontractors on work like
that. OK.
And you're saying that you're testifying that President Trump
approved this ahead of time, so I'm understanding.
We had conversations about making sure that we were telling
people. No, ma'am, she's done this three
Times Now. Did Donald Trump approve this?
We had conversations. Did Donald Trump approve this
action? We had conversations.
You guys get it? She's a shitty liar.
I'll swear on this one. She's really bad at this.
She's also trying to dance around saying a lie underoath
even though she's already said things that are underoath.
I'm asking you, sorry to interrupt, but the President
approved ahead of time you spending $220 million running TV
ads across the country in which you are featured prominently.
Yes, Sir. We went through the legal
processes. Did it correct?
Did the President work with OMB? Yes.
He did. OK, now we've got the answer.
Cool. OK, Also, shut the F up.
The Dow is over 50,000, or at least it was one time.
The Dow hit a record 50,000. We should be talking about that.
The S&P was over 7000, We should be talking about that.
She would have been better off making those arguments.
Even Pam Bondi is smarter than this woman, and that is
terrifying because I think Pam Bondi's IQ hovers around just
under 100. Donald Trump keeps putting women
that he thinks looks nice and then they end up doing this like
just awful job. If you're going to be a liar,
just at least be good at it. They're not even good at it.
So that that disappoints me in a big way.
You know what else is really disappointing?
We're going to end with this. I thought there might be some
good news. The good news is, is that
Congress held a vote to decide whether or not they were going
to expose their slush fund. That pays off people who've been
sexually harassed or sexually abused by members of Congress
and members of the Senate. OK, they held a vote.
Nancy Mace got in front of her. I don't like Nancy Mace all that
much, but Nancy Mace got a vote out there on deciding whether or
not we, the people who pay for this crap, would be able to see
what goes on and how much we paid and to who and what the
allegations were supposed to be against these members of
Congress. What they did, we finally got
the vote. It went like this all right, I
support representative Mace Mace's subpoena here as well as
the amendment to it. And I just think it's really
disgusting how this institution protects itself because y'all
just half of them voted to send this stuff to House Ethics where
you know it's going to die. We know that members of Congress
are using taxpayer dollars to pay off sexual harassment.
We just had a member of Congress literally sexually harassing one
that then lit herself on fire and you guys all protected him.
You guys all protected my my own side, your side.
And so if you guys want to talk about about victims, if you want
to go out and virtue signal and then you guys are you're going
to kill her stuff on the floor and then try to pass, Yeah, of
course we should subpoena all this stuff.
But just I'm not going to sit here and play games.
I think it's a complete fraud. I think that's why the American
people hate us. I think the midterms are coming
up and everyone should go on record for this.
And I hope that members are exposed for this.
I hope it goes back, I think it to the 70s.
Because it's wrong that it's happening.
It's wrong that we cover up for. It's wrong that we can't center
our own side because people are busy making deals because you
guys want to center your side. It's a deal that's been cut,
people. Hate us for it.
So yeah, I support it. OK, good.
Well, she supports that resolution.
She forced a vote to get it done.
And then what happened? Oh, it lost dramatically and
overwhelmingly. It lost 357 to 65357 in that in
that House decided that they didn't want to reveal the
congressional slush fund that pays off for sexual malfeasance
and misconduct. And there's probably like $17
million in payouts is what we know so far.
Guess who's on the right side of things?
Tom Massie was turns out so was Nancy Mace.
That was Anna Paulina Luna, who is not particularly articulate
when she doesn't have talking points or a script, but she did
it as well. So there you have it.
That's what it ends up looking like.
That's freaking nauseating people.
It really is. It's just like the worst
possible news. It's super frustrating.
If you guys want to support a company that doesn't suck, check
out my friends over at Shield Arms.
I was just putting one of their rifles up on the on the
Tackleberry project wall. shieldarms.com promo code Kyle
will save you a couple of bucks. I'm not sure what the percentage
is that changes. Sometimes they have soft goods
if you want to look at a like a chest rig.
If you don't wear body armor, which most of you probably don't
wear body armor, but it is a nice way to be able to reload or
keep batteries or medical stuff or have a radio or whatever else
you might be doing. It's good for hiking and all
kinds of stuff like that, but it carries your munitions and
things like that. So check out shield arms for
their soft goods. Check out the rifles.
They make the single best folding lower for an AR.
If you build your own rifles, you should be using a a shield
platform. If you buy one completed, they
make a really good one too. There's an affiliate link in our
in our show description. You guys can click through
there. And I don't know what it pays
me, but it pays me something and more importantly, like they make
a really good product so I can 100% get behind what they're
selling. I've been to their factory
people who run the company are good people and what you're
seeing on the screen right now is my local gun dealer and the
product specialist kind of walking through it at the SHOT
Show two years ago. I think I've got some video from
their from their space this last SHOT Show as well.
All right, we need a palate cleanse of some kind.
Good God, don't we ever. Let's see if we can figure out
what it make us laugh just a little bit.
How about people waking up, finding out that we're at war
with Iran? They were like, man, I just want
to have breakfast. I was just trying to get through
my day. I'm going to go back to bed.
I think many of you guys probably see these shows and
then wish you could just start the day over.
Maybe we could do like a reset like a couple weeks ago.
A little time travel would be nice to not have to be pointing
out all this hypocrisy. But that's not an option.
So here we go. the US dropped Tomahawk missiles on Iran.
I just woke up in retaliation. Iran will block off 20% of the
world's oil. So expect oil prices to go way
up. And I get breakfast or at least
a cup of water first before you ruin my day with this horrible
news. 35,000 troops have been deployed or will be deployed and
the US president has said to expect casualties from the death
of American hero. I thought the airstrikes in June
on their nuclear sites wiped out that capacity based thing that
they still have it. Well, they're trying to rebuild
that nuclear capacity so that gives them a one free voucher,
all inclusive freedom package. I, I thought he was a no wars
president. What happened to that?
Well, make no mistake about it. This was not a limited air
strike. the US is at war with Iran and oh, did I forget that
we're trying to send a freedom package to Cuba.
I haven't even pooed yet. Well, it's actually pretty cool.
the US is trying to start an insurrection so that the Iranian
people will overthrow their own government where the people are
so oppressed. I mean, women can't go to
school. Acid is thrown on their.
I'm going to just go back to, yeah, if you listen to this
program and you work in an office, then you're probably
that guy who's out there spitting facts at people and
they just want to go back to sleep, literally, figuratively,
etcetera. Sorry.
I mean, the world, the world's got some sketchy things going on
it right now. So we should at least be open
minded about it and we should also be fair minded about
principles. If you're on either team and you
suck, then we're going to call them out here.
So we do anyway. Hopefully you're more informed.
Disagree with me with all the things.
Use facts. Don't just say I don't like what
you said because it doesn't help me any.
I actually am open to hearing your perspective.
Include links if you like, especially if you're doing
something on Rumble or if you're doing it on on YouTube, you guys
can drop a link in there and say here's some evidence of what you
said was inaccurate. This is why I support a
different opinion. I'll rate it.
I will. Thanks for being part of it.
Bacon Cheeseburger National for the win.
If you guys want to just, I don't know, do regular things
that normal Americans would have done 30 years ago.
That's what I keep hoping will happen, but there's no evidence
it's going to work. So we'll just keep doing what
we're doing here. I think we'll probably have a
friendly Friday tomorrow with Steve friend.
You guys can look forward to that.
Share the show call in shows tonight starts at 8:00 PM.
We will be doing that for the locals members, for the members
of our YouTube channel and you guys can sign up there at the
various places, Kyle seraphin.com or go to our
YouTube. It's youtube.com slash at Kyle
Seraphin. See all tonight or I'll see you
in the morning. God bless you.
Thanks for listening to the Kyle Seraphin show, streamed live
weekdays on rumble.com/kyle Seraphin Bobble Kyle on Twitter,
Truth Social and Instagram at Kyle Seraphin.