Take a look behind the curtain with a real whistleblower and American patriot. Prepare to embrace the uncomfortable truth because this program has no time for comforting lies. Here is civil liberties enthusiast, Second Amendment defender, and recovering FBI agent Kyle Seraphin. Oh man. Well, hello my friends, welcome to the Kyle Seraphin show. Today is Wednesday, it is March the 19th. We are rolling and I'm in. I was actually sort of distracted just before we went live.
I was looking around and I went down this little rabbit hole, literally the rabbit hole talking about the tar baby. And so I'm like doing this Googling and I'm like 1881 Uncle Remus. And then I went like, oh crap, it's time to go. It's time to go live. So if you guys are joining us live, we really appreciate that.
Make sure that you're joining us either on Rumble for the chat, that's rumble.com/kyle Seraphin. You can find us on X at Kyle Seraphin. You can find us on YouTube at Kyle Seraphin. And then if you want to get into the behind the scenes stuff, it's Kyle seraphin.com on locals, share us on Spotify. We really appreciate that. That's a good place and you can get there on a cheat code.
We're actually using Kyle Seraphin show.com if you guys want to play that game and that's the easiest way to get it. Thanks for all of you that have already joined us. Our chat is already running wild and doing the thing. Let's go do a sponsor read for the folks that are keeping us going. If you can't tell, I'm coming in full speed with a full speed cup of coffee from Blackout Coffee and it is in a Patriot cooler.
So we're going to start with those two, but we're going to start with Patriot Coolers up front. And let me just say Patriot coolers.com, the longest sponsor of the Kyle Seraphin Show, the promo code Kyle will continue to get you 10% off. If you spend 50 bucks or more, you're still going to get free shipping. And they are a Texas America company, someone that I've been using their products for quite a while now. I've been using them since 2017, October of 2017.
I actually ordered them on Amazon before they had their own distro site. As far as I can tell it's one of their first reviews and I've been using them ever since and I have literally an entire box full of them. When we moved as I moved from one house to another house, I had an entire box of tumblers and backpacks and hats and soft coolers. We've got the hard cooler which sits in the back of our minivan. I highly recommend them. I've never been disappointed by them.
They are maybe one of my favorite all time products simply because we just use them all the time. Every single day there's a use for a Patriot cooler. If you guys don't have 1:00 and you're in the market for a new Tumblr or you're ready to throw out an old one, check out Patriot coolers.com again, promo code Kyle. There is a link in the show description if you want one engraved with one of our cool logos that Garreto Boyle created, the flag, the suspendables, merch stuff.
You guys can do that in the background. Like I said, just Scroll down and you'll see it should be the first link in today's show notes. And let's go ahead and get into it. I got a lot of stuff I want to cover on today, and I think we're going to be making some salient points that will arm you for your discussions in the world. All right, all right, all right, all right, all right. OK, so here's what we got. We're going to go down the list
of a bunch of different things. I went to a couple different websites, as I always do. I wanted to see what the news of the day is per the people that do it for a living and the folks that came up with it. What I saw over on CBS was nonstop discussion of judicial power. There is a deep and abiding hope that the courts will stop, will hinder, will create a stumbling block for Donald Trump's agenda. But it's not held by people writ large.
It's held by people that are in the media and it is held by people that are on the hard left. And I think basically, as far as I can tell, the rest of America is sort of feeling pretty OK about it. And so we're seeing this development of shoot the, the development of what the Democrats are going to come up with to be able to resist the Republican agenda for the midterms. They don't have a ton of time to
be able to get off. They don't have like a long off ramp to be able to light this thing up. And all I'm seeing is their their agenda is going to be as follows. We're the best, you're the worst. It's not your money. The money you earned is not yours. I feel like that was like the Barack Obama thing. Like you didn't build this kind of thing, right? They're going to go back to that.
They're suddenly discovering a renewed love for the Constitution and the separation of powers is being argued over and over again without really any understanding historical context or like really, even without even looking into what the things mean, they're just mouthing platitudes. I've got some pretty funny things. And then they've got the the new thought leaders and they're they're trotting out their most masculine and non offensive men.
They're going to trot out Chuck Schumer and Tim Waltz, who we were like this far away, right from having as a vice president yikers. They've got AOC and Bernie leading the charge. These are all hard leftists. And so we're going to start with, yeah, this this idea that as Trump and the and the courts are clashing, the voters are going to decide should the branches of government have too much power and which ones are doing it. This is a poll coming from NBC, if memory serves.
And based on the coloring of the the title, yeah. Democrats are now suddenly weary. They're concerned about the power of the presidency and maybe what the judiciary is supposed to be able to do amid frustrations. Yesterday, I gave you an analogy. I think it's a good one. The purpose of the judiciary has always been more or less the
same, has it not? The purpose of the judiciary was so that it could be the referee or the umpire in the game of politics, in the game of how our government operates. What is happening, though, and what government Democrats have used both times that Donald Trump has been in office, what they've done is they've tried to make the referee or the umpire actually play in the game and do some outcomes.
Imagine if somebody took a shot in basketball and the referee who was down at the baseline decided to jump up and tip it in. You'd go like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. You're not part of this. You don't get to decide who wins. Same thing. Imagine if the umpire suddenly thought that he had a call on how the pitcher was going to deliver the ball from the mound to the catcher. That's what's going on right now. That's what an activist judge does.
They've said, listen, there may be, there may be certain people that are supposed to do certain things, but they're not doing it the way that we like it. And unilaterally we're going to go out there and declare that this must be done. It's not allowed. It's it's a decidedly unhealthy imbalance. And I want to go to my final point 1st. I'm going to make it up front. This is what the joint session of Congress looks like. It has the Supreme Court justices sitting stoically in
the front. The only court that is specifically named by name, that is actually described in the Constitution under Article 3. Yes, there are other judges that are listed as being transient, the inferior courts of time to time they appear, but they are not specifically named. There's no such thing as a District Court according to the Constitution. There's no such thing as an appeals circuit according to the Constitution. Those are all things that were created.
They were all devised by Congress, as is described, arrived in Article 3, and they are meant not necessarily even be permanent. The reason that we had a circuit is because people used to have a certain number of judges and they would literally ride the circuit. They would go from court to court to court to hear what had come up and percolated up in that circuit at the time.
And so they were only hearing cases from time to time as they moved around the country in let's say the 9th Circuit, the 8th Circuit and so on. These circuits were literal loops. They were, they were, you know, horse rides away like a Pony Express style. They're bringing in judges to come in and hear what it percolated up from the district courts, which heard the day-to-day business of the courts. Those are not described in Article 3, not even close.
And they're all referred to as inferior courts. When we look on the screen right now, what you are seeing is the joint session at the center. And the focal piece is the president of the United States giving that joint address. It's not really important that the president is there other than he is representing the executive, which is to think that goes forward. You could actually have the president turn his back on the group behind him and look
directly into the American flag. Then from many one this idea that the president is leading the charge and executing what has been done by the many who represent the people and look how they are arranged. There's a reason why I don't like seeing a dysfunctional Democrat party, why I don't actually like political parties to begin with, and why I'm not a member of one. As an independent, I can look from the position that we're looking at and I can see all of
those faces out there. What you see are many people representing many different parts of this country from east to West, from north to South, from all the different things, from the Rust Belt down to the Riviera of the rednecks down there at the Gulf of America, right. You've got, you've got the, the folks out in California, which used to be the most hopeful and optimistic people in the world.
That's why they traveled all the way across the entirety of the, of the, the vast expanse of America. You got the people that are the old guard, the New Englanders and so on. What they're all supposed to be doing is looking in the same general direction from different perspectives. We have a collegiate organization as a legislator, not an adversarial.
If we wanted to just have two parties, we would be very much more like the Brits. We would line up face to face with, you know, an arm plus an arm plus a sword link between us so that we couldn't cross swords down on the floor of the House of Commons, that we would toe the line and back off. And we would all be fighting against each other for which idea was superior. It's a 0 sum game over in the British House of Commons. That's the way it's designed.
The American system is collegiate, which means we're supposed to collaborate and see things from different angles and all of those different angles together look forward towards one thing, America doing better. That is not what is happening in the current Democrat party. It is not successful in that. And that is why they are leaning on one of the three branches running after hoping that judges will spare us.
There's actually there's Supreme Court case precedent for what Donald Trump did over the weekend, which has caused the left to meltdown, crying suddenly about due process. They didn't seem to care about the the fairness of the judicial system under the J6 prosecutions. They can't let those things go. They refuse to evaluate things in historical context. They won't do it and I don't know why. It is ugly and it's not good for this country. It does not make us form a more
perfect union. What it's done is divide us very aggressively, and this is the final place where we are sitting with that. So here is their solution. Effeminate men talking about toxic masculinity. Here's Gavin Newsom, one of the potential frontrunners for a Democratic run in in in 2028, and Tim Waltz, the guy who was leading the male side of the ticket from 2024, talking about how badass they are and how masculine they are and how masculinity it actually needs to be reimagined.
While Gavin Newsom does some very effeminate flaley hand gestures, which make everybody question, because I don't know any straight men that do this. By the way, both of these men are questionable when it comes to masculinity. So having that discussion is a little bit goofy. Here they are talking about it on Gavin's new podcast, the same one that they were decrying the other day because Dee Bannon was on it, because they let Charlie Kirk come on.
They also decided to balance out the scales and bring on Tim Waltz. This is literally the opposite of those two men in many ways. But I think this notion of, I think it's this notion of toxicity and masculinity needs to be separated. And I think it's been conflated. And I think we, we, we, we're going to have to work on that a little bit. And I think there's, look, there is a crisis. I think some of us scare them. I think I scare them a little bit.
Why they spend so much time on, no, I'm serious because I can't fix a truck. They know I'm not bullshitting on this. I'm not putting this in people's grill. I don't know if my identity is not hunting. My identity is not football coaching. My identity is not, you know, a beard and a truck. I'm pretty sure his identity is touching other men with very soft hands. I don't believe that he can fix a truck because I did see him go out there and pretend to be hunting.
I did see him fail to load his own shotgun, supposedly. I did see all of the things that made it look like he was a flipping cartoon of a wannabe person. Look, the people from the upper Midwest, the folks from Michigan and from Minnesota and from Wisconsin. I come from Wisconsin stock. I used to go there every summer when I was a kid. There's some really, really hard men that came out of those tough winters.
My friend Garrett is a man from Wisconsin and for all of the soft spoken nature that he has, he's a hard dude with a burly mountain looking beard. Even though he didn't come from the mountains. Tim Waltz is the exact opposite of that. He's a cartoon version of it. He's folksy and soft and his face looks exactly like what we expect. There's a reason why he doesn't have a beard. I assume that he can't grow one of any kind of substance, that he didn't come from a warlike
and capable people. There was a guy that I met years ago in Eagle River, WI and his name was Carl and now I can't think of his last name, but apparently he was partners in the logging business with my grandfather. Who would have been old enough to be many of your grandfathers if you're older than me or your great grandfathers if you're my
age. My grandfather was apparently born in the 1890s, my dad's father and by all accounts and every story that I've ever heard of him was like one of the most colorful and wild dudes, like a classic American story. We don't talk about this stuff all the time here, but it's kind of fun. He was a bootlegger ran around and, and was moving whiskey and, and was doing still work up in the, in the, in the Northwoods of Wisconsin.
He was a logger and I had a famous story of starting his own business because he realized he didn't want to be a logger or something like that. There's this like apocryphal family story about him basically taking a piece of wood and slapping it down against 22 barrels and getting a bottle of whiskey that he borrowed the money for and slapped it down with some little like, you know, Dixie cup things and started pouring shots and opened his first bar and ran bars.
And the guy Carl that we met, who was apparently one of his logging partners, had something like 4 total fingers across all of his, of his two hands. I mean, he had four full fingers. The rest of them were cut off either at one third 2/3 or completely down to the nub. He was one of the scariest people I've ever met under the age of 10 years old when I met him because he only had a couple of fingers the rest of them had cut off and logging and trapping
and other wild stuff. And he wrote like 11 books about crazy stuff like a fur trapper's legacy and fur trapping in the blah, blah, blah and, and, and you know, cutting things off. And his son was a chainsaw artist, and he ran Carl's Wood Art Museum. I was a really hard dude. Like, if that guy was telling me something about masculinity, I'd go, yes, I get it. But when Tim Waltz does it, I don't believe you. And he's out there making claims
that he could kick your ass. Carl only had four fingers across two hands and was absolutely terrifying and even into his 80s was a man that if you were in your 50s, you'd be like, I don't think I want to mess with that guy. I'm pretty confident he's basically beaten Badgers to death with those nubs that he had for fingers. Then you got Tim Walz, Ted. He could kick your ass, by the way, he could kick your ass singular and he meant plural
doesn't even speak properly. How did we get this guy as a candidate up there? I've got another goofy thing on this, but this is him saying, you know, what do we do about this? How do we solve this problem of masculinity? His his argument is that we're going to fight you WWE, which by the way, it is appropriate for him to say that because WWE wrestling. I don't want to ruin any spoilers here, but but it is fake. It's scripted.
The muscles might be real. The testosterone is legit, the injections and the and the hormones and the, and the steroids these guys are using for real. But it's staged. Do you know that, right? Does Tim Walz known that? Does he know that that WWFWWE wrestling is not real? And that's not where you actually go to prove fights. That's where you go to script out who wins. I suppose that's probably the only way he wins a fight. Here we go. How do you fight it? And well, this this notion of
talks kick most of their ass. I do think that if they wanted, you know, I know I cannot run them, but I I don't know if we're going to fall into that place where we want to OK, we challenge you to a, to a, you know, AWWE fight here type of thing, right? Yeah, that's what we would do. The same guy that's going to go out there that used to be
leading the ticket. Listen, the only reason why it's important to talk about Tim Waltz in any way, shape or form is that he was the choice that they floated forward at the last minute, right, to join Kamala Harris as the potential vice president of the United States. Somebody thought that guy was a good representative and would appeal to, what, 50% of the voting base males? I get that he's not a threat to
women. He might actually only be a threat to men from what we can tell from the way that I've seen him dance and walk and carry his hands and say things like that that seem very false. This is when I always think, when I think about masculinity, when I think about dudes who really represent American values of, of true masculinity and I want to push back against things. What I think about is, is being a snarky celebrant of somebody's stock options being less valuable.
That's how I keep score, right? Not who's got the tougher dad, not who can bench press the most, not who can deadlift more, not who can knock out the most pull ups or run the farthest or shoot the straightest or kill the most animals or do anything. Have the most kids. I don't care. Like pick your pick your battlefield where you want to be victorious. I always want to go like near 10. Your stock options are worth
less. There's Tim Walz celebrating the Tesla stock is going down because a former Democrat in Elon Musk, a person who is by all accounts still kind of a liberal in the same way that Donald Trump has a lot of liberal sentiments. Again, a liberal from the 1990s, but a liberal nonetheless, not a conservative. Just look at the way that that these guys have lived their lives. Look at Donald Trump and look at Elon Musk together. Multiple children from multiple
partners, right? Doesn't mean that they don't think children are important. They just don't think that the sanctity of marriage is the same thing. Elon, as far as I can tell, is a self professed atheist or maybe an agnostic at best. He's very kind of engineering autistic about the concept of God. He's not real into it. He doesn't ever mention it. That's OK. We understand that. We know who you are, but you're one of those people in the seats. You're one of the people in the
seats. Elon Musk is somebody who can look forward at an American, say I see things differently than you, but I like it. Tim Waltz apparently is going to celebrate the loss of value of a stock of an American company with American workers while claiming to be a guy who represents things like unions and American workers and American success. This is a really hard sell.
This is not, this is not even close to successful, which is why they're in disarray, which is why you're going to end up with Chuck Schumer saying we're making fun of businesses and people who want to keep their own money. Tax evasion might be the most American thing that you can do. Or you could celebrate the loss of stock option values. Take your pick. I mean, this is not even close when it comes to the sort of they're not even putting up a
credible resistance. Tim Wallace on stage doing like a Ted talk, I guess about the Tesla value saying on my phone, I don't somebody know this on the iPhone. They've got that little stock app. I added Tesla to it to give me a little boost during the day 225 and dropping. So and if you own one, if you own one, we're not blaming you. You can, you can take dental floss and pull the Tesla thing off, you know, and take out just telling you, I'm just telling you how you can be a guy.
I see Teslas all over my neighborhood. By the way, I live in a neighborhood that is full of people now that is that are like, I think they work in tech. There's a lot of Indian type immigrants here and there's a lot of people that work in tech. There's a lot of people that have bought into the Tesla idea. Maybe they like the performance, maybe they like the looks, but I see them around everywhere.
And whenever I see a Tesla drive by, I'm like, man, there's a lot of gay people that live around me. I don't know if that's true or not. Neither do you. I make front of all my friends who have Teslas because I've got friends who also like told me they'll never buy something that's not got an internal combustion engine. I also think that the the model of how Tesla works is silly, but I don't want to burn it down and I don't wish I'll against those people.
I just don't like their taste in cars and I don't have to own them. That's the best part about being in this America. We can all have different preferences. I also don't cheer about people who are a publicly traded company where people's pensions and their wealth is locked up in it that there are workers in America making an American product for American citizens.
And I don't cheer them having a stock option drop down to 225, which by the way, is more that 225 is more than any stock that's ever been created by any company that's ever been created by Tim Walz. Maybe we should be looking at the the difference here. The original people who created this country, they were no one's fools. To quote Bernie Sanders in a quote in a little piece that we have coming up here. The men who wrote the Constitution for this country were business owners.
They were land owners. They were producers of things. They believed in the separation of power because they all thought everybody should have a say in it, because they all had different and competing, but similarly aligned interests. They had similar values and they wanted to see similar outcomes. What they didn't do was make fun of you because you didn't want to give money to the government. America was basically founded on a tax evasion principle. The the principle was this.
You're the king of England. You have the biggest military that's ever been seen in the entire world. You're asking for all of our stuff. We don't feel like we're being represented. We're willing to fight you to the death over small taxes. Stop taxing our stuff. Stop. And by the way, some of those taxes were totally justifiable. We love to act like the American Revolution was something where it was like everything they did was righteous and and it was a
tyranny. Maybe it was certainly not as much tyranny as we live under today. We've all sort of like blindly accepted that the government has a right to our cash. There's a joke that we say taxation is theft, except it's not a joke. And your representation is less and less reasonable because you've got people on the other side that Chuck Schumer types who are making fun of you for wanting to keep your own money. If this is the thing that you want to run on.
You think Democrats don't also own businesses? How do you how do you sell this to your base that basically you will be a wage slave and working for someone else your entire life. That's the only way to be. And by the way the government is going to provide for you and if you don't like it, you are a problem. It's UN American for you to oppose the American government. I would argue there is nothing more American than than opposing the American government. There's nothing more American
than opposing government period. How do I know? I looked at the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights isn't is a leash on every bit of government from them not being able to stop your speech, your assembly, your ability to go to your representatives and tell them how pissed off you are about it.
It's there about you being able to freely exercise your religion, your subservience to God and not to man, your ability to own weapons to protect yourself and your offspring and your property that you actually have This idea that life, liberty, and your pursuit of property and or happiness and or material wealth are all within your purview as an American citizen. Or you could be Chuck Schumer and you can sell this crap. Here we go. Let's make fun of people with businesses.
Let's see where that goes. And you know what their attitude is? I made my money all by myself. How dare your government take my money from me? I don't want to pay taxes or I built my company with my bare hands. How dare your government tell me how I should treat my customers, my the land and order water that I own or my employees. They hate government. Government's a barrier to people. The the barrier to stop them from doing things. They want to destroy it. We are not letting them do it
and we're united. We are not letting them do it. We are united. The head in the head holds a weak little hands up. Why does he do that? Who told who told Chuck Schumer? Whenever you need to make an emphatic point, hold two hands up like you're grasping a pair of dildos in the hand and then just shake them. Make the floppy dildos shake like an old man with Tourette's. Like like butt head or Beavis rather. You like your corn, Julio? Joe Biden did it too.
He just did it lower because he didn't have the range of motion. Chuck Schumer is like 25 or 35 or 100 years younger than Joe Biden was. So he can actually get his hands over his shoulders. In a couple years, we'll see. Chuck Schumer, he won't be able to get that, that elbow mobility, He won't have that shoulder mobility to get his hands up higher. So he'll just be low going the same thing. Look, we are yelling, we're going to get into the Bernie Sanders thing.
Who thinks that? The men who wrote the Constitution, suddenly they've discovered the Constitution, the separation of powers. Remember when they're in charge, they love to see I've got a pen and I've got a phone. They like to see Barack Obama coming in like King Barack Black Jesus, save in America. He's going to straighten us out with hope and change. That was a big deal. I don't want to see a strong executive. I don't want to see Donald Trump stroking out executive orders
leftover. I don't. I think it's bad for America. I think it's absolutely atrocious that we don't have a functional opposition party and that we don't have multiple parties, 3rd, 4th, and 5th parties that have a say in it. We're built for that, literally. I will. I'll show you again, here it is on the screen. This is not a party system. The fact that there is a center aisle is just an expedient way to get out. If there's a fire.
You're supposed to be able to sort people all over the place. We should have more independents who caucus with each other and not only have Republican and Democrat options. That is the way that America is set up to be. And nobody wanted this, but it is what we've evolved into. And now I would say we've actually devolved into an oppositional system. So the way that we're physically
set up, it's vestigial. It's left and right, and they might as well be facing each other and throwing poop and tomatoes and whether other things like the dancing monkeys would do. Can you guys tell I'm a little fired up? I'm a little fired up This stuff gets me really riled up. I hate it it's awful. So let's get going let's go ahead and talk about it. I'm drinking a cup of blackout coffee. I alluded to it earlier. Let's go ahead and say thanks to
those folks who keep us going. They are feeling the rage right now or whatever this is blackout coffee.com slash Kyle is where you go listen up I'm putting you on to something that could change the way that it starts your day. Many of you are already on to it. Blackout coffee isn't just a coffee. It is a wake up call that call to rise and grind. It's the first thing I do. I push the button.
I turned it up to a an 8 out of 10 and I give my myself 2 liters of energy with no compromise on what I stand for. It's not an average cup of Joe, it is a black of back out coffee. I don't even know I just said there. Roasted with purpose, packed with bold flavor fueled aggressive thinking and the people that built this country, you know those, those founding fathers who were no one's fools. Grit, determination, refusal to back down. That's what we ought to do.
They don't just make coffee, they're making a statement. You can make one too. Black out coffee has added people so that their their orders are coming out faster. Nothing we like more than hitting the button and the next day or so, pop, there it is, bag on your doorstep. When you hit the order button, your coffee is going to be coming fresh and it is ready to fuel your next move. It doesn't matter if you are powering through a daily grind.
Boring stuff. If you're doing big goals, chasing a big project, whether you're trying to keep your Test Whistle stock over 225 or you're just refusing to accept mediocrity and soft hands like Tim Walz, Blackout Coffee's got your back. Don't just drink coffee, drink Blackout. Go to blackoutcoffee.com slash Kyle. Again, coupon code Kyle will save you 20%. That's one in $5 back to you. You're still going to have to pay the government, I'm sure of it. Blackout coffee.com/kyle.
Check them out. All right, let's keep, let's keep pressing onward, shall we? I'm going to play you this Bernie Sanders clip. I just find it very funny when they suddenly have this newfound respect for the Constitution again. They were nobody's fools. These men who had the Constitution, they knew what they were talking about, didn't they? Here they are. Listen. And this very masculine looking, you know what?
Caitlin Collins used to look much more feminine when she was working for the Daily Caller. I don't know what it is about being on ACNN that makes you want to look a little bit more emasculated, but she's definitely like she's beefed up. I feel like she's doing jaw exercises as well, and she's talking to the oldest socialist who's also a millionaire but not a billionaire. So that's his problem. Here he is. We need to separate the powers.
The guys who wrote the Constitution back in the 1790s were nobody's fools. What they wanted to do is have a separation of powers between the executive, the legislative and the judiciary so that one person could not assume enormous power. And what you are seeing right now is a president who is authoritarian. He just attacked the media the other day. I think he called CNN illegal because I gather the now and then you criticize him.
He is trying to encroach on the constitutional responsibilities and spending powers of Congress. And now he's going after the courts. Look, he's going after the courts. He's going to go after them. Who started this? You did. You did. You made this a thing. You guys made this a thing. In 2009. You had Barack Obama come in and assume power that he didn't have, ignore authorities that were supposed to be shared out there. Look, that was better.
America's been dysfunctional for a very long time. Anybody who thinks otherwise is not paying attention. But should we not agree that this was not created? This has been an arms race of stupidity. That arms race has been fostered by bad decisions on the left very aggressively and the right has always answered, you want to know a really bad decision? This is four or three back-to-back stories, Rather from CBS talking about judges trying to block Trump's executive actions.
What you've done is you've set up the constitutional crisis that they like to talk about. This is CBS reporting that a judge has now temporarily decided to block the executive order barring transgender people from the military. Under what authority? How? Of course, look at this picture and and just try to picture that. 15 years ago, imagine three men wearing women's military uniforms. 15 years ago. What year would have that? That would have been in 2010. Could any of you have ever
imagined three men? Long hair, mentally ill fat dumpy, out of shape tactical fupa. That's the fat upper pelvis area, right? I said it the nice way for you. These are men with male pattern fatness that suddenly only have to do female fitness standards so they can afford to put on an extra £30 because of their hormone therapy. They've grown out their hair. They've made themselves look completely ridiculous.
They have made a absolute mockery of the uniform that some of us used to wear for all the different branches of service. Disgusting. Now a federal judge is going to come in and be like, listen, you have a right under the Constitution that we just made-up. We just created something out of the whole cloth because the constitutional Founding fathers were nobody's fool.
Yeah, I'm sure that's what they were expecting when they said that we are going to put the president as the commander in chief of the armed forces and the militia. They were imagining dudes in dresses trying to step up and do administrative garbage. Are any of these guys combat troops? No. Do they have the ability to face down like hostile fire? No, of course it's a female judge. In this case, it doesn't matter. It's always going to be a
leftist U.S. District judge. District Judge again, a district, the lowest level, an inferior court that will be established from time to time by Article 3 that the Congress will establish. U.S. District Judge Anna Reyes has granted a request for a preliminary injunction shot by these transgender active service members and transgender people who are in the process of enlisting. They're not even in the military.
Imagine going to the MEP station dressed up in the wrong costume, you know, like you're a, a chick and you decided to wear like jeans and A and a wife beater for some reason. And you're showing off your breasts or your scars where you've tried to get rid of them or you've run duct tape over your, your chest. Try to look like a dude like, or what you believe a dude looks like, even though in reality you end up looking like a 13 year old that's at like a Backstreet
Boys party. The judges ordered temporary blocks. Secretary of Defense Pete Hagseth, who represents directly the authority of the president and the military services from implementing Donald Trump's executive order and additional guidance, prohibits transgender people. Because they said, hey, not everybody has a right to serve. Isn't that simple?
You don't have a right to serve if you have flat feet, if you can't appropriately duck walk, if you don't have the range of ability, if your eyes don't have the proper eyesight, If there are all these genetic and or situational things that have happened to you in your life, maybe you contracted some sort of a disease and you don't have like the proper height, you don't have the proper fitness. You can't be in the military. There are standards for a reason.
Or we just do whatever the hell you want. This is like that. Oh, you're transgender and there's no point at the bar. Oh, you do whatever you want. It's the Family Guy thing. That's where we're at. Maybe it's because the thought leaders on the other side don't know anything. They don't even, they don't hate America. They just don't make any sense.
They just say things that aren't real and you've got a bunch of people that are buying into it. The left is non functional when you when you advance the idea that Bernie Sanders, a millionaire claiming to be a communist and Chuck Schumer, a millionaire who claims that you didn't build your own business despite the fact that he has no business of his own and has
never built one. And he and that you're wrong for wanting to keep your money from the government that you have AOC, a former bartender and pretty face talking about things that are so far beyond her. She shouldn't even have a collegiate degree. She should have barely gotten through high school in reality. But because we've watered things down and everybody has a right to be in the military. Everyone also has a right to a college degree, including one in
economics. Here she is talking about those really big words, capitalism and socialism. My 7 year old can spell both of those. I bet she could sound them out and spell spell them out no problem. My 6 year old might be able to. These are big words to AOC though. Do we really let these people represent us? Then tell me how we are properly being represented and that these people who are telling us what the taxes should be. By the way, doesn't she own a Tesla?
Isn't that something? Maybe she'll use the dental floss like Tim Wall said. Here she is talking about the big words. This is 2022. This is not some old gotcha clip. This was two years ago. You self identify as a democratic socialist and have called capitalism irredeemable I believe. But what does that really mean? So when you toss out these big words, capitalism, socialism, they get, you know, sensationalized and people translate them into meaning things that perhaps they don't
mean. So to me, capitalism at its core, what weren't what we're talking about when we talk about that is the absolute pursuit of profit at all human, environmental and social cost. That is what we're really discussing. And what we're also discussing is the ability for a very small group of actual capitalists. And that is people who have so much money that their money makes money and they don't have to work.
And they can control industry, they can control our energy sources, they can control our labor, They can control massive markets. Or maybe we could just give all that money to the government. We could give it to the EPA. And then we could give that to these climate justice idiots so that we could give $20 billion worth of climate grants despite no performance, because we believe that the government has
a right to your money. The judge now has temporarily blocked the efforts of Lee Zeldin, who's been trying to recover $20 billion in climate grants that were handed out to some third party, I think a Citibank organization, in order to hand them out to Democratic friends. The judge is stepping into this. There are three titles of judge blocks following of Donald Trump's agenda. I think he needs to just continue onward and ignore them.
I think that in the end, we need to accept that inferior courts do not have the ability to stop and steamroll. One person not elected shouldn't be the people that get to go stand up against the elected will of the American people. And I'm not even crazy about the American public electing the president. For whatever it's worth, I don't think the president should be the most powerful person in this country because I've read the Constitution that these people
seem to love. What happened though, is we watched Congress abdicate all of its authority. They stopped doing the job with the Administrative Procedures Act. They started giving it all to these groups like the EPA. They said we're going to give you broad mandates and you go and translate that into some sort of like rule that becomes law or has force of law and we're going to just abdicate our ability to do the job. Congress is Article 1. They're the ones that are
supposed to have the power. People like AOC, God forbid, but they've they've they've shirked it, they've walked away. So now you got these dimwits handing it over to big environmental agencies like EPA or they've given it over to the IRS or they give it over to the Treasury or they've given it over to the DOJ. They've given all these authorities away and say write your own rules because you know
what to do on elected people. This the party of so-called democracy really seems to be pretty authoritarian in nature. They like to be bureaucratic in nature and they don't like anything to do with the will of the people unless those people are appointed and just happened to be working in government. You know that government that you don't want to give your money to, that you're the problem. Maybe you don't like having people call you up.
Maybe you don't like having your Social Security compromised. Maybe you don't like being scammed. Listen, there are plenty of examples of data breaches, many of which, at least in my case, come from the the federal government failing. And here we go. This is the way that you can combat that. This is one of our good sponsors. This is patriot-protect.com/K YLE, that'll save you 15% on an annual subscription to Patriot Protect. Newsweek has reported data breaches.
OPM had data hacks before I joined the FBI. Millions of Americans have been put at risk. All of these breaches include background checks. They include your Social Security number, your full home address, your name, phone number, drug test results, all kinds of crazy stuff. Public and private. People are pretty bad at protecting your data unless you go out there and do something about it. You wouldn't want to leave your front door unlocked.
Why would you leave your identity wide open so you can stop this? One of the ways you do it is you sign up for their protocol. They've got two different services. 1 is called the search and destroy protocol and it goes out there and it removes from like 100 data broker websites, scammers, cyber criminals, take your pick. People that are out there trying to get your information to be able to scam you and take things that you have earned.
That's one way to do it. The other way they have is this other protocol they've added. It's called the blackout service, which actually goes in and scans the dark web for people who are selling and moving around and trafficking in your data. Not just publicly posting it, but actually individually selling it off to nefarious
actors. If you guys want to start limiting some of this stuff again, the biggest way you can tell is you get less scam calls, you get less phone number, like people dialing you up and trying to get it where your phone says this is probably a scam and you shouldn't answer it. If you want to protect someone you love, if you want to protect like yourself, you guys can sign up. patriot-protect.com/K YLEI have it now. My wife has it.
I have to ask her about whether she's getting scam calls or not. She's probably listening right now and she'll tell me in a minute. But at the end of the day, this is a service that we work with. You guys pick something like that. Secure your own data. You only have one choice. You got to prepare so you don't have to repair. Being scammed is expensive and it's terrible. How about another scam?
How about this scam? Judge Roberts, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, which is actually mentioned in Article 3, he said impeaching judges is not the appropriate response to disagreement. Isn't it interesting when someone frames the argument as such? We're not talking about disagreements with a judge. We're talking about a judge who is actually doing the thing that is impeachable. He's acting in bad faith. He is doing things that are outside of the purview of a
judge. If you are not doing the job of a judge, wouldn't you expect that impeachment, the process for removing you, would happen? Imagine if you did a job. Let's say you're a customer service Rep. Let's say you're sitting and you take phone calls and for a living, you're supposed to answer phone calls and you're supposed to tell people the thing that the company has, they give you training. They say these are the things you're supposed to respond to. This is how you ameliorate the
problem. You have these different tools and this is what you're supposed to do. And when you pick up the phone, all you do is make fun of the customers. You hold like a roast line and you do a TikTok channel off it. So you're you're taping people and you're going like, oh, you got a problem with their
service. And then you post it online and you make money on Tiktok. Imagine if you were not doing the job you were hired to do. You're doing the job that you wanted to do. You always wanted to be an influencer, TikTok asshole. So you're doing that and the company comes in and goes, listen, this is bad behavior. This is not what we hired you to do. We hired you to come in and do one thing. You're supposed to adjudicate the validity of the complaint of the customer and solve that problem.
Oh, you don't want to do that? You don't get to work here anymore. And here are the articles that we are going to file that show that this is a justifiable termination. That's what an impeachment is. It's not the appropriate response. It's not about a disagreement. It's about a judge trying to play in the game. Imagine again my referee or my umpire thing. If the referee or umpire starts interfering with the gameplay, you remove the referee or the
umpire. You don't say, well, that's just the nature of the game. We just have to deal with it. He just runs around and sometimes he tips the ball in. He just likes to tell people what kind of play to do. He likes to get in there and tag the runners out. He just wants to be part of the team. That's not what you signed up to do. John Roberts does one thing and one thing only. Always. He defends the courts.
He is self interested, not in the democratic process, not in the sanctity of the United States Constitution. As far as I can tell, he basically always comes down on the side of how do we keep the job that I have legitimate. He is a classic status quo, perfect example of a government employee like you see all the people in the FBI doing. I think I actually have a great story about that too. Another human being that I'm not a big fan of.
How about this piece of garbage? I served in the FBI for 20 years and I have never heard anything so ominous as Donald Trump's DOJ hate speech. That's Frank Figlucy. If you guys are Dan Bongino listeners, you know exactly who this guy is. He's a coward. He has a soft handed Botox. I want to say some like really nasty things about this guy. He is exactly the thing that I signed up not to be around. Soft face, soft hands didn't
work. Cases didn't show up to be anything of other than a manager and an administrator. The worst in all law enforcement, the kind of person that didn't sign up to be in law enforcement, they signed up to be in leadership or management of law enforcement. And there he is, posed thoughtfully. He wrote an entire book about serial killers, having never worked serial killer cases because he was a freaking administrator. He hasn't been in the FBI for what, like eight or nine years now?
So for 25 years, he had five years with a case experience, Six years like every other senior executive. You always know that they're useless because they won't say. I'm a former FBI agent and I used to do FBI work. No, they come and they go. I'm a former FBI executive. I'm like, really? I'm a guy who would like to kick senior executives in the kneecaps. That's what I would like to do. My friends actually signed up to go do that. They're walking around
headquarters today. My friends are walking around FBI headquarters right now at 10:15 in the morning, and they are kicking the shins and scaring the crap out of dudes who look like that soft beta males that have no business around a law enforcement agency because they're Intel weenies. And all of you guys who would know what I'm talking about that were in the military. Everybody who's ever seen what a command track loser looks like in law enforcement.
That's what Frank Figliuzzi is. This is my favorite piece about it. He served for FBI 25 years. OK, so 25 years in the FBI. That's an argument to authority. That is credentialism, classic leftism. My favorite is this. He said I served in the Justice Department as an FBI agent and an assistant director. Just a little bit of a flex, not the flex you think it is. I've never seen anything this ominous. Oh my God, really? You should hang out with Tim Walz. The two of you guys touch each
other gently. What makes it worse is that there are two men who now lead the Bureau that are well positioned to carry out the retribution Donald Trump called for in his speech. Good. The FBI is in the hands of two men who've never LED anything. Fact Check. False. False on all accounts. How about you just point at Dan Bongino? He led a company. How do I know? Because he ran a podcast where he had multiple employees. He ran a show. He also LED a Secret Service detail.
You want to say never let anything be factually accurate. Cash Patel LED prosecutions in Africa. One of my friends reached out and said, hey, I feel like I know Director Patel. And I go, I don't know. And then when he met him, he's like, I feel like I know you, Sir. And Cash was like, yeah, I feel like you look really familiar, too.
And then they realized that they were working on a team together that was being led by an AUSA prosecuting terrorists in Africa. You know, because he never LED anything before, even though he had senior level positions in DoD and DOJ. Whatever, dude. Here's what he says. FBI Director Cash Patel with a smattering of experience in criminal defense work in Miami.
Yeah, that's what we call it. And a stint as a federal prosecutor and a political flunky at the Pentagon and White House says he'll bring credibility. OK. I hope he does. You should, too. Frank Figgs, Dan Bongino, a former FBI, sorry, a former Fox News host, a failed U.S. Senate candidate and far right conspiracy podcaster who was permanently banned from YouTube and temporarily suspended from Twitter, will serve as the FB is Deputy Director. That's how you're going to characterize it.
Just ignore the decade and 1/2 or decade and change of Secret Service time. Ignore the four years over at the NYPD. Dan and I can have our problems because Dan and I don't agree on everything and we never have. I'm sure of it. And he said some nasty things about me. But if you're not rooting for Dan Bongino to be successful as a former FBI agent, you are a piece of garbage. You are an anti American idiot.
You are Tim Walz dancing on the stage, flailing your hands and cheering about Tesla stock going down. That's who you are. And you should be ashamed of yourself because we're ashamed that you're out there too. You're owning yourselves. It doesn't work, by the way. It's not effective when you see someone who ignores obvious facts. Why is Dan Bongino in that space? Because he had a former 1811 background that he spent probably more time doing.
He probably did as much investigative work, let's be honest, as Frank Figs. They probably did about the same between his time at the NYPD and his time at the Secret Service. Mostly, he wasn't doing investigative work. That's not what Secret Service does. But he probably has about as much experience, and it's probably about as relevant as Frank Figs is.
And Frank Figs would would just fall all over himself with the most exciting management boner you've ever seen to go be the deputy director of the FBI, the honor of his lifetime. I'm sure of it. Screw you, these people. Anyway, it's not working. So, so here you go. Here's here's how it's working, how it started, how it's going. This is this is another piece of little Caitlin calls talking to Bob Bernie Sanders. How come everyone is in despair?
Let me tell you why. Because they expect more from us. No, they just expect you to be functional. And you're not. Safe to say there's a lot of despair in the country over what Democrats are doing, how they're responding to this. You're an independent, but you caucus with the Democrats. I want you to listen to what happened in a town hall tonight with Democratic Congressman Glen Ivy. You aren't even working together on a shared strategy.
And that is failure. We are not interested in hearing that you are in the minority. We know that we want you to show some of the backbone and strategic brilliance that Mitch McConnell would have in the minority. Why can't you be strategic and brilliant like Mitch McConnell? Imagine that guy is is cheering on a Mitch McConnell. I mean, yeah, Mitch McConnell also seems soft, weak, doughy and 1000 years old. So, yeah, Why are you not like Mitch McConnell? Why are you not stroking out on
live television? I don't know. And just the the examples of masculinity that continue to get trotted out from the political left are pretty incredible. Maybe that's when people are excited because like, we've got a little turn of of, of regular people coming back. Here's Carrie Sheffield. She's a female. She's a lady. She's on CNN. And look at the faces of Anna Navarro, who looks still pretty
unhappy and kind of chunky. And this lady, Abby, whatever the hell her name is, like all these people, look, they look like someone peed in their Cheerios this morning. Someone peed in their Frosted Flakes. They can't do anything about it because the things she's saying are absolutely true. People are like, yeah, I'm pretty excited. Look, I wasn't expecting everything, but we're getting something and it's better than nothing. And it's better than where we
were. And yeah, it's probably going to take a little bit of time when you go and you mess up the house. You guys ever do this? You go into your house, you start cleaning and you look around after like an hour and you're like, everything looks worse than when I started. That's because you had to move a bunch of stuff to get all the dirt and the grime and the and the mess up. That's what happens.
Tariffs are a little bit sloppy. Things have to get more expensive before they can get a little bit cheaper because you got to go through the process of undoing the damage. You have to go through what are called austerity measures. We always talk about this for other countries, like Greece had to go austerity measures and people are like, it's terrible, like everything is hard. We can't ride our Vespa anymore and celebrate in the Adriatic Sea or whatever the hell it was
that they were upset about. It's like, yeah, well, you've squandered all your money. You had all your fun time. My buddy used to call it party credits. He'll hear this and laugh. He used to say that if you drank too much the night before, the next day was going to be ruined. Because if you had to, like, repair yourself, you know, prepare, repair. That's your options.
If you do not prepare by living a good life, If you have to repair, it usually takes a little while, and it usually sucks for that time that you're doing it. We're going through that right now, and people are still optimistic. They're like, yeah, this is the most good we've seen in a long time. Even people that don't like Donald Trump as a person, maybe because they can see through the utter bullshit that is being slung their way. And I got a couple of examples
of that. Maybe because the one party that should be oppositional and trying to actually hedge things and say, hey, let's, let's have a reasonable discussion around about reasonable people that have the same values of the American people. They're not doing it. They can't do it on their best day.
They can't do it. They have to cheer on and get mad about January 6th, completely forgetting the context that January 6th happened after six months of riots and burning and looting and people being killed off in this country during 2020, the entire summer of love and insanity, which I lived through in a unique fashion as an FBI agent in multiple different areas. I saw how jacked up it was and I heard from friends all around
the country how stupid it was. And the culminating event was not the worst thing that's ever happened. January 6th, which didn't even involve a single firebomb or a single car exploding or being burned. The amount of property damage that happened on January 6th was only expensive because it was at the US Capitol and it's being repaired by the federal government. If it's if January 6th had happened anywhere else outside of a federal building with the most inefficient solutions, it
would have been no big deal. I honest to God they were bigger damages done in single nights in Portland hands down. I saw downtown Portland in September and October of 20/21/2020 rather I saw it it was atrocious. It looked like a damn war zone and I don't say that lightly like they were there was an occupying army. So these people have lost it all right here's here's the CNN clip of the glum faces and then we'll play like how they respond to it, which is even funnier are actually excited.
NBC News on Meet the Press they reported their polling found the highest level of enthusiasm and the country going in the right direction since 2420 years. So President Trump is doing exactly what he campaigned on. That's the why 76% of people said, according to CBS polling, agreed with the State of the Union speech, which included a lot of independents and a lot of Democrats who are watching that speech. That is why. Kerry. Kerry. My name's Kerry.
Yes, my fellow Kerry. You, you do know what you're saying is incorrect. I don't care. You know it's incorrect, right? It must be incorrect because it is definitely disagreeing with me. OK, fine. What do you guys stand for here? Sure. Michael Singleton, same show, he's a Republican. Watch him. Just say, yeah, you guys don't know who you are. That's your problem. You're going to try to, you're going to try to major in the 20% of every 8020 split.
You are siding with the weird, the weirdest and the dumbest positions, and nobody is making you do this. This is an unforced series of errors. You're going to side against district judges, against the president of the United States because that's what you want. And Americans are like, that doesn't seem very reasonable. I don't think so. I might want an outcome differently, but I don't believe it. I'm going to give you guys something that's going to blow
your mind in a second here. There's Supreme Court case decisions about this stuff and it's already been done, particularly about what happened over the weekend. All right, here's sure, Michael Singleton. But I think the problem is no one knows what the Democratic Party stands for. No one knows what their policy positions are. I think that's a part of the reason why many Democrats are angry. You look at the recent data that just came out.
Most younger men, Republicans, people of color, starting to teeter more Republicans, younger voters writ large starting to teeter more Republicans. Because they look at the Democratic Party for answers and solutions for a litany of problems that they have experienced over the last eight
years. And the Democratic Party has made a lot of promises, but they haven't delivered much on many of those promises, John. So this is an opportunity for the Republican Party, I would argue, to actually offer solutions to the problems that Americans do. Yeah. OK, so you want to offer solutions. There's our great chat. By the way, if you're listening right now, if you're in one of these chats, make sure you've hit the like button over on the video that is on either Rumble or on YouTube.
I'd appreciate that. Make sure you hit a like over on X if you're watching the stream over there. That would also be appreciated. Kind of boosts us up in the algorithm, lets us know how we're doing. More importantly, share it. If you guys get an opportunity, that would be great. Let me just give you the
counterpoint here. Instead of giving us masculinity, instead of giving us men who have an idea of what things should be, what if you gave us a woman who I assume is named Karen, lecturing us in kind of Aunt Nasally voice? And maybe she could talk about how America is in major danger because of the judicial review process and then allow me to debunk it right afterwards. OK, so this is the alternative. This is your answer. This is one of the most popular
podcasts in the leftist media. This is from Crooked Media. So this is a woman who's working for Pod Save America, which is a clever name, by the way. It actually is. Except that they suck. Here you go, 321. Enter Karen. Earlier today, the Chief Justice of the United States issued a rare statement saying that the recourse for decisions that you disagree with is not to impeach judges, but instead to have those decisions be reviewed by
higher courts. The statement is pretty clearly a rebuke of President Trump and his allies, including Elon Musk, who have called for the impeachment of judges who have ruled against Donald Trump. This actually isn't the first time the Chief Justice has had to issue a statement rebuking Donald Trump. If you remember, back during the first Trump administration, the Chief Justice issued a statement saying there are no Trump judges and no Obama judges after Donald
Trump attempted to vilify some of the judges who had ruled against him and his policies. I mean, that would be true except the fact that we can just look at who appointed these people and then we see that what's your thing is ridiculous and wrong. Why do they all talk like that? At least seriously. I watched Alec Baldwin's wife talking. She also talks like that and she says it's disgusting. This is not a, this is not a marketable way to speak. I'm not even sure that woman
speaks like that normally. That is her kindergarten. I'm going to lecture you and you are going to receive it information. It's like, no, nobody's going to listen to you. I tuned out. I don't even know what she said. I heard the words, but they didn't mean anything. Here's a man doing the exact same thing. This is the actual Pod Save America podcast, and I think this is Favreau of I can't
remember who's who. None of them seem particularly interesting to me, but here he is making the same argument about World War Two. OK, we're going to be talking about the Alien Enemies Act and using it to intern Japanese Americans. It's really interesting that he decided to reference World War 2 and ignore the actual case law on this. So I'm going to bring this to you. And if you haven't heard this before, this will in fact blow your mind. Just keep this in mind. Ledecky V Watson, 1948.
We're going to get there in one second here. This is actually critical talk about the biggest and most alarming development from over the weekend, which is that the Trump administration is now rounding up, deporting and jailing people in foreign prisons without due process. No evidence, no hearings, no judges.
The president has invoked the Alien Enemies Act, a law which was last used to justify the internment of Japanese Americans during World War 2, to deport 137 Venezuelans to El Salvador, where they are being held in a mega prison that's been accused of human rights abuses. Trump administration claims it has the authority to deport these migrants due to their alleged membership in Trende Aragua, a Venezuela based gang that Trump's Justice Department has labeled a terrorist
organization. But the administration has offered no evidence of this, which is one reason why AUS District Court judge temporarily blocked the deportations. And nobody freaking cares. I'm probably pronouncing this wrong because this is a Germanic name, but Ludecki versus Watson. US Supreme Court case decided in 1948. It was argued in May, Decided in June. They used to do things quickly. This is what that court case
held. Here are the findings from Ledecky V Watson. The Alien Enemy Act precludes judicial review of the removal order, pages 163 through 166. Did you hear that? The same thing that Stephen Miller was saying on TV and probably had some good basis for was the fact that this was not justicable. It was not something that actually allowed judicial
review. The removal order of the people involved after the decree are not up for debate #2 in the circumstances of relations between the United States and Germany in this case, this was a German national in the United States post World War 2. The issue was whether or not there was a declared war. They said there exists there exists a declared war notwithstanding the cessation of actual hostilities and the orders enforceable.
That's 166 to 170. In other words, just because the the World War 2 was over doesn't mean that there wasn't actually hostilities involved between those two countries and so the declared war had existed. OK, we have a war on terrorism. I don't think anyone ever ended that right. Call it Jiwat. Who cares #3 the alien enemies act construed as as permitting resort to the courts only to challenge the validity and the construction of the law itself.
You can go to to court over the law, but not over the hearings and the and the actual actions that the executive involved in. They tried to raise the existence of the declared war of
the alien enemy status. None of those violate the Bill of Rights. There's a misspelling here of the Federal Constitution that's on page 170 to 171, and the fact that the hearings are utilized by the executive in order to secure an informed basis for the exercise of the summary power conferred by the ACT does not empower the courts to retry any such hearings. In other words, the executive can come to their conclusion any way they choose because that's
the way that the law is written. It does not make withholding of such power from the courts the denial of due process. You do not have a right to fight for this stuff because of the way that Congress wrote the law. And unless you are going to go and challenge the law specifically, which they've said is actually Congress's power again, Article 1, the strongest group, they handed it over the executive and said, hey, yeah, in this case, do what you need to do.
Alien Enemy Act 1798. Oh, well, if you want to fix it, you know how to do it. Chuck Schumer, use that government money that you guys are getting paid and go write yourself something else, Write an alternative. Or you have to get it to the Supreme Court for them to have a different decision. But the default decision is already there. It's in place, and it shouldn't be up for debate. So now you got to ask, why are they so mad at Elon Musk, who, again, used to be a Democrat?
He's on the edge. They're OK with burning his stuff. So we're going to do a little bit about this. This is Sean Hannity asking him what the Hell's wrong with these people? And apparently it has to do with money, you know, money that they've taken from you and they want to give to other people, just not you and not do things that you like.
Here they are justifying. You know, he he's explaining that he went and found all the corruption and that apparently pissed a lot of people off because it was a ton of money involved in it. I've also got a really good Al Jazeera clip where when you ask the guest the wrong question and you suddenly get the real answer about what happened with US aid money in Africa kind of telling. And Al Jazeera is pretty left wing. Start with right wing.
Here's Sean Hannity saying you're working on helping the blind see and all of these other things. Is it really, Is it really come down to the basic. You're aligned with President Donald Trump, who also is a friend of mine, and that you have identified well over $100 billion of waste, fraud, abuse that our federal government never should have been spending. Is that what it comes down to? Yeah, it's. It turns out when you take away
people's. You know what, the fraud, the money they're receiving fraudulently, they get very upset and they, they basically want to kill me because I'm stopping their fraud and they want to hurt Tesla because we're stopping this, this terrible waste and, and corruption in the government. So they're going to defend that, right? They're going to defend this and they're going to say it's totally fine. We're going to play the ultimate.
What about ISM burning Tesla dealerships, which are not a government entity, which have nothing to do with anything other than the fact that the owner of the company, the founder of the company, or the guy who's actually moving it forward and making it profitable the way it is. He's now aligned with Donald Trump. So therefore he's a like a legitimate political target. Do you know what we call violence with a political aim in
the United States? There's actually statutory evidence of what this looks like. I did it the other day. I played you the statute. I think it's 18 USC 2331, if if memory serves. I might be a little bit off. I know it's in the 2000s. When we talk about using violence to get political aim and try to get the government to do something we want, that's called terrorism. Doesn't matter whether you define it as international in origin or national, can be
domestic or international. It's not up for debate. That's what it is. It's statutorily defined as such. But let's do what about ISM and make it about January 6th. This is how you lose by the way. Try to re adjudicate January 6th again. That'd be cool. Here you have a lady who is the Center for American Progress founder or whatever.
She's the president of that. She's going to go head to head with Scott Jennings. I saw this clip and this clip is actually pushed out by left wing social media influencer types. And what they're saying is look at him. They brought Scott Jennings on to yell at these people. Scott Jennings might be the most milquetoast, gentle, nice, easygoing dude that you've ever seen on this stuff.
He just happens to be right. And then you just impugned his motives and he decided to get a little bit frustrated, which I can imagine we all have bad days. I don't trust people who don't have a bad day. Here he is just kind of setting this lady straight because she tried to say that January 6th is the equivalent of burning down Tesla's, you know, at A, at a car lot.
One of them was pieces of the government where people were actually pissed off about something that was pretty legitimately a problem and the behavior was abhorrent and fighting cops was still wrong. You're never going to find people that are actually conservative that are actually on the real political right. Not the ones that pretend, but the real ones. Nobody is going to defend violence against police officers or destruction of property.
We don't do it. We might understand why, but we don't say it's OK and we still think you should pay for it. And I know from watching Scott Jennings enough he's never made that claim. So here's some lady falsely framing the argument and then getting straightened out. Terrorism people ought to be put in table and left there for a very long time and be taught a lesson. So when they do it to a Tesla dealership, it's really bad. But when they do it to the halls of Congress, we should pardon
them. Is that your position? No. I've never. Are we OK? I know, I know, I know. I know. You haven't been around for a while. So let me educate you about my position. About January. I'm so sorry. Let me educate. Let me educate you. No, no, no, no. You don't need to. You don't. You don't need to be condescending to me. So let me educate you about my position. You want to attack me? Let me. Let me finish it. Let me finish it. Let's do this January 6th. And then Yeah, I'm sorry you're
getting. Yeah, I'm sorry. You're a condescending person who hasn't been paying attention to what I do. So. So here's. So here's the issue. I didn't support what happened on January the 6th and was one of the first Republicans to call it out. I don't support the pardons. I have repeatedly, just like my friend Ashley here, said that no violence in our political system
is acceptable. But this right here, what's going on with a guy who helps our country, who runs successful companies, who doesn't have to be doing this? And now one of his companies is under systematic terroristic threat and violence all over the country and people seem to be laughing about it or fine with it. It's outrageous. I've sat at this table and had people say we should cut Elon Musk from the government totally. He rescued our astronauts today.
Is that what we want? The treatment of this guy is outrageous. These people who are doing this need to be found, put in jail and made an example of. That's my point. Anyone who commits violence against Tesla or Congress or anyone else should be put in jail 1000%. OK, so I agree with you, but I wanted to just kind of like score some points because I want to say things that have no like I was trying to get a sound bite about January 6th. That's what she said.
Like you're on the same page. You're fighting to the exact same statement. You just wanted to be snarky and thought that you were going to be able to. This is not how you do this. You're actually sitting in the seats looking in the same direction and you're pretending like you don't. For what? Donor money that you had to go score something cuz he could clip that thing out and you're hoping that he wouldn't respond in a way she'd be able to go after it.
All of these women are detestable. They really are. They're really gross. I've got a good palate cleanse. It's going to make us laugh about it. So just hang tight here. One more thing, just a piece of news. Speaking of detestable, you know, I'll always go left and right and I'm happy to punch either direction. Two things that I saw that were interesting articles. These came from ABC, both of them. Number one, what are Republicans doing with this newfound
momentum? They're making laws in Alabama, a red state, so they can ban machine gun conversion devices, so-called switches that go on the back of Glocks. And there you have the 10,000 year old, what's her name, Kay Ivey. The 10,000 year old governor of Alabama is expected to sign a law that says that machine guns are not allowed to be created in Alabama, even though there's already a federal law. So well done there.
Great use of our resources. Way to go after the real problem switches in Alabama. Unglock pistols, which are already illegal under federal law. They're already illegal to possess. They're already illegal to be shipped in. They're already illegal in every situation. You cannot manufacture new machine guns. Thanks a lot, Ronald Reagan. After 1986, all of this stuff
that's theatrical and stupid. And then I found this is a really funny self owned for all the people that were trying to pin aircraft disasters on Donald Trump. We've already debunked that on the show here and showed you that they were actually less disasters in January, February and early March according to FAA records. Then happened for the previous like 5-6, eight years before that for the 150 three months prior.
But this is really funny. Apparently there's been concerned about FAA air traffic control systems dating back decades. You mean like the federal government is a crappy steward of our money and doesn't do a good job? We know that's literally the purpose of what Doge is doing. That's literally the reason why Elon Musk is involved. We're trying to get people that have run companies the opposite of Chuck Schumer's attitude where it's not your money and they're like, hey, by the way,
it is our flipping money. And how about you stop screwing with it? How about you stop expecting government level results and maybe treat it like America is a company or you know, America is a country. Run like a company and putting a couple of people who used to run companies or currently do the way that this country was founded. You remember Bernie Sanders said it, The people who started this country were no fools.
They were all business owners. They were all people of wealth and had leisure time to be able to go out there and engage in politics because they had a lot of skin in the game, also known as money and property. And they had some vested interest in having a solution that didn't suck. Or you could throw all of our money to Africa. Here's a funny little thing. I teased it earlier. This is Al Jazeera, highly left-leaning. If you guys didn't see our show with Richie McGinnis, go back
and watch the interview there. He used to actually worked there and the the American English speaking version of Al Jagira is massively hardcore left, but the right version of it, the hardcore conservative version actually is in Arabic and he worked for the Arabic version. So they were ultra conservative. So they probably have some crossover. Guess where people get interviewed on both sides.
Kind of interesting. Anyway, this is when you asked your your guest a question and you don't understand what you're about to get back. This woman is basically breaking down what it looks like, which we've all known USAID money was being used for all kinds of nefarious purposes, many of which didn't actually help African people. Shocker. You mean like the money we gave
them didn't do what we wanted? Here's a here's when you don't know what your guess is about this say and you think you're setting up for something else. Let me just ask, you know, if I look through the USAID program, some of which have been cut off in Congo, there's an aid group, Action Against Hunger. In Ethiopia, food assistance stopped for more than a million people. How is Africa feeling this
moment? We need to understand the real reason why USAID is in Africa and not just USAID, but other NGOs. Their sole purpose was to act as if they're coming to rescue Africa. They are coming in claiming that they're introducing grassroots initiatives that are going to help the people, but they're actually wolf in sheep's clothing. Their form of government advocacy is supporting whoever can keep the government in a turmoil. The American taxpayer needs to know the billions of dollars
that are being given to USAID. A fraction is making it to the people. Let's look at what HIV AIDS was used to do. We know of a program that was run out of South Africa where they actually were injecting people with the virus. The reason some of the AIDS virus spread, spread as rapidly as it did in Southern Africa. There were some very dirty games being played. Yeah, no doubt dirty games being played.
Which is why, of course, we have this headline coming from NBC, Elon Musk and Doge. Efforts to close USAID are likely unconstitutional based on something that was made-up. The agency must be restored. A judge who doesn't matter rules. Unbelievable. I mean, that's the time we're in right now where judges think that they can undo the will of the American people as represented by their congressional representatives. And also by who? Yeah, the president.
Nothing in the Constitution says that billions of dollars must be given to a a, a continent that is not ours. So all of this stuff is all just this minor nitpicky pedantic. It's that Lady with the caring voice talking me and he spying on me. There's nothing that makes any sense here. And that's why when we started this week off talking about a revolution of common sense, Americans are looking for common sense. The alternative is crazy people who think that the government
owns all of your money. Burning it down is not a problem as long as it's in favor of our preferred outcomes. And Elon Musk is a very bad, mean, mean man, and we got to get him. That's why you end up asking questions like this. I think I still have this on the clip here. This was maybe I don't I got rid of it sorry. Tom Holman the other day they were asking him what do you think about using such an old law and he was like Constitution's pretty old We still listen to that gangster stuff.
All right I will give you guys something funny to enjoy before we do again. rumble.com/kyle Seraphin share that if you guys want to catch us live it's at 0930 Eastern Time 830 Texas America follow us on X. You can see the same thing there. You can catch the show after the fact or during the time Locals channel is done by Kyle seraphin.com. You guys can find all the links in the episode the videos that I do I often link up there.
I also will put up the the the links to the articles that we're referring to. So if you want to read them yourself, I'll always give you the thing, including the Supreme Court decision from today. And then lastly, make sure you're sharing us on Spotify. Let's get that thing rolling. I really appreciate it. Let's have a laugh before we shut this thing down. Here's a comedian talking about man, we knew that Trump was going to come in and do some stuff. We didn't know it was going to
be that fast, did we? I don't care who you vote for, like left, right, You know, it's just crazy to me that Trump, like he got right to it. He wasn't even playing around. I thought we were going to get like a month head start at least. You know, I didn't think he was going to get right. He was like, yo, soon as I get in office, I'm getting rid of the immigrants. But I didn't think he was going to do it like right away.
You know, You know, like when you get home and you're pulling into your driveway and you're thinking about everything you got to do, you're like, yo, I got to put in a load of laundry, take out the trash, clean up the kitchen a little bit. But you don't do it all like right away. You, you put on Netflix, you heat up, you heat up a meal, you, you do things in between, you know, you take little breaks. But Trump, he didn't watch no Netflix, bro. He just, he got right to it.
Everybody, everybody on the Internet, they've been making fun of this one dude. I don't know if y'all seen that picture. It's a Mexican dude wearing the Latinos for Trump shirt, and he's being arrested by ICE. And everybody in the comments was like, that's what you get. That's what you get for supporting Trump. But I don't think he was really a Trump supporter. I think he was just like Incognito, you know what I mean? Like, you know, like when Bugs Bunny dresses up like a woman,
like he went that way. Like, I think this man just knew that any day now, Ice would pull up to his job. So he wore the shirt and so that he could be like, what do you mean? Come on, it's me, baby. Come on. I was at the rally, you remember? I recommend everybody should
wear those. I can't tell you apart, you know, just I don't, I don't know if this is true, but I heard a rumor that there's like an ICE hotline, like you can call ICE and if you give up an illegal immigrant, they'll give you like 1000 bucks. I called them right before this show. It's tax season. I'm sorry. You know, they were like, there's an illegal immigrant there. I was like, there's got to be like 20 at least. Pay this man his money. I said all I know is you better
bring 20K cash at least. At least, ladies give him the money. All right, that's all I got for you today. I hope you guys have a wonderful Wednesday out there. Yeah, look up you. Somebody send me in the comments. Tell us what that 800 number is so we can call the ICE hotline. We'll start referring to everything at all the home depots out there. We're going to get we're going to get paid out in cash is what we want, right? Take that USAID money and put it to work at home.
Just kidding. I don't want them taking it because it comes right out of our pocket. All right, God bless all of you. Look forward to seeing you again tomorrow on Thursday. Have a great Wednesday out there and let's go. Thanks for listening to the Kyle Serafin Show, streamed live weekdays on rumble.com/kyle Serafin. Follow Kyle on Twitter, Truth Social and Instagram at Kyle Serafin.