Are you familiar with FBI Special Agents Kyle Serpen? I'm familiar with the name. Is that yes? I'm familiar with the name, familiar with the name, familiar with the name. Let's bring in Kyle Serafin. He's the FBI whistleblower who helped expose government censorship of our First Amendment rights. Now, we only have this memo because a recently suspended FBI agent called Kyle Serafin brought it to the public, and we're grateful that he did. Kyle, thank you so much for
joining us tonight. He's the host of something that strangely is called the Kyle Serafish. Kyle Serafi. I can't thank you enough for speaking out. I knew you guys were out there, and I knew it was just a matter of time. But you got a lot of guts put in your face and your name to this. You're doing a service on behalf of the American people. And from the bottom of my cracked and broken heart,
sometimes, thank you very much. Take a look behind the curtain with a real whistle blower, an American patriot. Prepare to embrace the uncomfortable truth, because this program has no time for comforting lies. Here is civil liberties enthusiast. Second Amendment defender and recovering FBI agent Kyle Seraphin. Well, hello my friends. Welcome to the Kyle Seraphin Show for Monday the 25th of November. I want to say thanks to all of you for joining us on this Thanksgiving week.
And let me just lead off camera here. I know it's Thanksgiving week because my five year old daughter just gave me this. She's about to be 6, so that's pretty cool. And you guys are kind of our family here, so I'm just sharing it with you. Thanks for being part of the program.
And if you guys have not joined us already, you can do so over at rumble.com/kyle Serif. And if you've never seen the video, if you're just an audio listener, I don't want to say just, but if you've only seen it on audio with the Mind's Eye, join us over on one of the platforms where you can see it visually. You can now watch the video over on Spotify. You can see it on X at Kyle Seraphin, POD at Kyle Seraphin, and so on. And of course, the Rumble channel and locals are always
available to you guys. Thanks so much for being there. All right, so here's what I think we're seeing kind of like a a mixture of meltdowns from the people on the political left and they're melting down about some of the cabinet picks and they're very quiet about some others. And you might think, what's going on here? We always talk about how people on the left are playing a different game, particularly the power structure is playing a
different game. They're playing the demolition Derby while we're over here trying to play chess or checkers, right? And so they're going to angle against the people they don't like and they're going to be OK with the folks that they do. There are plenty of people that have been sort of a reach across the aisle pick by Donald Trump. And I want to kind of breakdown what that means. The big tent that is the current, let's say, perspective Donald Trump regime, the incoming administration.
It's not everything you hope for, is it? It never was going to be. And we've known this. If you were to go back to let's say July to the RNC, I've got an article that's going to kind of explain that. We're going to talk about some of the pics. Some things are better than others. Some things probably don't matter to you at all. For all of the the hand wringing and everybody thought that they were going to get 100% MAGA cabinet. It was never going to be that because that's not who put him
in office. And I think Donald Trump understands that and I think Ben Shapiro actually said it very accurately going back about six months now. So we're going to dig into those things. Before we do, we're going to say thanks to one of our sponsors that is keeping the program on the air and we're really grateful for their support. Folks, most of you guys have probably seen that there are some changes on the horizon. You're picturing people like RFK Junior taking over the CDC and
the NIH and the FDA. More on that later. Get ready for the shake up. RFK Junior even posted that the FDA had a war on public health and it's about to end calling out the suppression of treatments like iverbectin, hydroxychloroquine, essential vitamins, keeping America healthy. The timing couldn't be better to introduce the Wellness Company's emergency kits. You're seeing them on the screen. These kits cut through the red tape.
The Wellness Company is a premier source for hard to get medications that may save your life. Until doctors catch up with us, be prepared for over 30 illnesses without having to step into an urgent care where you're probably going to get sick again. We're talking about ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, AZ pack, or azithromycin, amoxicillin, even Epipens if you so choose, where you can take control of your own health.
They've got these guidebooks that are sitting right here on my desk that are actually very useful. They're written by people who understand what needs to be done. Common treatments. These are things you've used before for UTI, like urinary tract infections. You got strep throat, bacterial infections, bite wounds, respiratory illnesses, More things you can take control of at home.
All it takes is filling out a digital intake form and your kit will arrive to your door in one to two weeks. Yes, they have kits for kids too, including kids Epipens. No more sick out inconveniences. You can order your kit by heading to the Wellness company that's TWC dot health, TWC dot health slash Kyle and use the promo code Kyle, save up to 50%. Fifteen percent, 15 got to make sure I read it correctly. Plus shipping is going to be free.
TWC dot health slash Kyle, use that promo code Kyle, save up to 15% and get free shipping right now. This is for US residents only. Always a little bit more criteria to talk about. It's not quite the same thing as talking about a Tumblr, is it? Or some of our favorite firearms things. All right, let's get into the meat and potatoes of the Big Tent and Big Tent and bingo. All right, welcome into the big tent. You guys are part of it. This is what you asked for,
whether you like it or not. You wanted to go out there and reach across and find those people that were amenable on some things but not on others. I want to consider something. If you were to go back 20 years ago, think about the people that would have been resistant to getting a childhood vaccine for their kids. Think about it. Who is that person? What do they look like? Was it a crunchy mom? Was it a kind of granola? Went to Berkeley kind of gal, kind of a hippie leftist type.
And now think about the same person in 2024, and what do they look like? They look like me. They look like my old boss, kind of long hair, big beard, tactical guy, Ranger battalion. They look like my wife and they might look like you. Things have changed in some of these these particular arenas because there's more information. But one of the biggest things that changed is that we all live through certain experiences.
We all sort of take those and the cumulative, some of our experiences have changed the way that we operate now. Donald Trump is a lifetime of experiences. He's not a young man. He's almost 80, and he spent most of his time as sort of kind of what we would call like, a conservative in the financial sphere and sort of a social Lib. Why? Because he lived in New York. He's a New York guy, and New York people operate a little bit differently than those of us who live in the middle of the
country. I've got some unique insight into this. I'm married to a New Yorker, a recovering New Yorker, if you will, in the same way that I've recovered from the FBI. So I want to talk about this big tent because if you are going to go out there and recruit people like the crunchy granola mom who was petitioning and crying for RFK Junior to read all of the findings that were out there about vaccines, you're going to get a very different group of people that's going to step into the cabinet.
I saw one of you in the chat and I'm sorry, I didn't catch whose name it was, but somebody just said 50% of the picks I don't like. That's by design if I were to guess. Here's Ben Shapiro, July 17th, 2024. So this is 6 months ago talking about a night of unity at the RNC. Now, most of us who watch the RNC that are conservative saw
all kinds of strange things. We saw tatted up people like Amber Rose talking about digital pornography and the and sort of embracing Donald Trump. And you went, that's not conservative. But Donald Trump's not a conservative, is he? He's a populist that's run under the Republican banner, and he's got a lot of the ideas that those of us that are conservative are excited about, and he's got a lot of them that we don't like. He's sort of wishy washy when it comes to abortion.
He's got a, you know, a new Health and Human Services secretary that he's nominated who is a Catholic but kind of in the Joe Biden Catholic realm. Kind of troubling unless you understand that the entire point was to bring a bunch of people together. And Ben Shapiro actually nails it down with this sort of little piece at the end of this article. And I want to read it to you, he
said. Trump has a unique capacity as a non ideological, larger than life figure to hold together coalitions that include people who are both pro-life and pro-choice, people who are pro gay marriage and anti-gay marriage. He's able to cobble together a coalition between union leaders and people who think that right to work is a top priority. It's a non ideological coalition, which is to say that it's not conservative.
Which is why the meltdown on the left is so interesting to me because they are basically ideologically aligned, not for necessarily principles, but for goals that they want to accomplish, which is moving the ball forward in the leftist regime in their sort of way of life, which continues to be working against itself. It's a non ideological coalition. And that's what the RNC is about. That's what it's been about for
the last six months. That's why he was able to take the votes from people who otherwise may not have agreed with it. People who are criticizing the RNC platform don't understand that the RNC is not an actual policy statement that matters. It's not, it's just not what the RNC is for anymore. And it gets really critical right here. There may have been a time when the RNC platform mattered, but the RNC is just a is not just a
tool for ideology anymore. That's why some of the things from 2025, the Project 2025, will be adopted in many and then will not, because it's not going to be his only playbook. It's merely a tool for victory. This is Ben Shapiro's words. Ben is a very insightful person. He's been watching this for a long time. He's an incredibly bright. He's a very high IQ guy. He said it's a particular tool for the victory of Donald Trump in this election cycle.
That's what the Big 10 is. That's what it looked like. Is that a uniparty kind of nastiness? Maybe so. We'll have to see. There are certainly people that are working against what we would call like a MAGA agenda, what people would call an America first agenda, and we can see them.
But the entirety of this tent structure, the he just, he uses a metaphor in there about the tent structure being like the various poles of ideology are so far apart that the tent would collapse, except the highest single point in that tent is the person of Donald Trump. So it's held together by a cult of personality. And that's always been the case. And for anyone whoever wondered, hey, how can you always say that Donald Trump's not your favorite?
Because he was never my favorite because that's what he does. He does something different. It's not built on ideology. It's not built on what we believe is right and proper in the world, what I believe is right and proper in the world, but it is politics. This is not a role model. This is not someone that you have to to to entrust to raising your children. In fact, he's actually put what a former WWEWWFCEO in charge of the Department of Education,
which is great. If you don't like the Department of Education, let's run it like a business and run it out. You would shudder that thing if you saw how it operated so great. But Donald Trump's not the solution and he's certainly not going to be a messianic figure. At the very worst, he will be a speed bump for the evil that's been going on, and that's OK. And at the very best, he will dismantle some of it. But all of these things are not going to be fixed in this short period of time.
And we have to know that CNN is doing the bingo card over here. I've got 2 pages of the bingo card. So we can kind of run down through some of these folks. Let's talk about who's on the list, who's not on the list. We'll talk about the FBI director pick, which is very upsetting to the folks over at CNN. They seem to think they understand who.
So let's just go through it. For those of you that have been not paying attention because it's either not interesting or there's too many names, Let's just go through who has, in fact, been nominated. We had a couple of them come in at the end of the day on Friday. You got JD Vance, who's the president, vice president-elect, OK. He's going to be the president of the Senate. Marco Rubio at the Secretary of State, which leaves an opening in Florida for an appointment of a senator.
We've got the secretary of the treasury, Scott Bessnett. We'll talk about him in a second. Pete Hegseth, Secretary of Defense, who is being maligned as a former Fox host, but of course served in the military. He's got some interesting things in the background. Kind of what you expect testosterone later, dude. I much prefer somebody that has been closer to the ground combat forces and been closer to real people in the military than
these sort of like generals. Or how about this Ash Carter, an academic, No military time whatsoever. Wouldn't it be nice? It was actually somebody who actually signed up and said, yes, I'm willing to serve. We've got Pam Bondi listed as the the attorney general replacing the original nod for Matt Gaetz. Matt Gaetz dropped out. I'm sure there was a ton of pressure on it. You've got the governor of North Dakota, Doug Burgum, stepping in for the secretary of the
interior. The question is this, how many of these positions really affect your daily life? And the answer is probably not that much because the federal government, although it does set some broad and sweeping policies, as long as the guiding instincts are on par and they more or less stay out of your way. The less we have of these people doing anything is probably the better. We've got Brooke Rawlins, the
secretary of agriculture. She was out of the she was out of Texas. She ran a pro energy coalition here in Austin. Howard Leitnick, the secretary of commerce. There's some some people fretting about his talk about tariffs, but his his statements pretty sensible Secretary of Labor, which is kind of a communist position. We've got Laurie Chavez, Dreamer, I think is how her name is pronounced and she is not the pick that many people are excited about.
Again, RFK at HHSA guy who has been a Democrat his whole life comes from, it's sort of a Democrat legacy almost a they're almost the, the dynasty over there, are they not? There's always going to be a black guy running house in Urban Development. I saw this HUD always ends up with some black guy or another. This is Scott Turner. I haven't read much on him, so we're not going to cover a lot
on him. But I did see some folks that I follow on Twitter that that say they're always going to give us this like black pic at HUD, which is amusing. Sean Duffy, who I have done a couple of interviews with and who I'm very fond of as a human being, seems utterly confident.
Him and his wife Rachel Campos Duffy and other sort of Fox personality, great people taking over the Secretary of Transportation. Let's talk about the the contrast in that in and of itself because I sent a little congratulation message over to that family. He's got 9 kids and he's a practicing Catholic. He lives in Wisconsin as a contrast to the current Pete Buttigieg, married to a radical leftist man with adopted children or surrogate children doing his chest feeding routine.
Kind of nice to see a family person. I mean, if you think about that, your, your life is basically dependent on the way that the United States does transportation of all the things that are out there, agriculture and so on. Without a functioning transportation system, a Federal Highway system that allows trucks to get to you, your modern way of life goes away. Amazon, Uber Eats, your ability to go and drive and see your your in laws and your family members in different cities.
It's gone. Another really big one here, Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, who we talked about the other day. I've got a little clip that I want to play about energy in general. It's worth noting that having really serious people in the energy and the transportation section, people that are actually conservatives that do actually understand the spaces they're getting into, they may be more important than almost anything else outside of like a Secretary of Defense.
And I would say that the DOJ and the sort of the FBI picks are my personal biggest ones, but that's only because I've seen that those people will take your freedoms. If the secretary of agriculture has some sort of opinions about AG that you don't align with, is it really going to destroy you? Does the secretary of Commerce really decide how your life is going to work if they're out there making a trade policy
indirectly, maybe. I just don't think it's going to be as nearly the dire situation and circumstances. And then you've got Linda McMahon again, CEO hanging out with the folks getting getting body slammed on WWE public. Some really wild footage of some of the folks picked in here because Trump is an odd guy, right?
He picked a very large and wide tent of people that we don't all agree with, got Green Beret, Mike Walsh, National security advisor, Christy Noem, kind of a wild pick for HH or for for Homeland Security, which is a new department that didn't exist until George Bush. We've got Elise Stefanik who's who's representing New York in Congress. And also apparently, I don't know if she's going to stick around, but she's going to be representing us to the UN.
Hopefully an indicator that she's going to do it as a part time job because we don't care about the UN. That'd be OK. And Doug Collins as the secretary of Veteran affairs, Lee Zeldin got EPA administrator. People were crying about this. So the people that left really freaked out about who do they, who do they freak out about? They freaked out. I'm going to leave them on the screen. RFK Junior, who was one of theirs forever. He was an EPA crusader, an eco warrior, if you will.
And then he got into vaccines about 20 years ago and started asking questions and they were very, very upset about this. Why is that? Because he's threatening to disrupt the status quo. Lee Zeldin, somebody who is not a big fan of EPA regulations, also a status quo disruption. You haven't heard a lot about Sean Duffy. That's probably good. You have heard a lot about Pete Hegseth. Why?
Because you've had elitist in charge of the DoD and this is something that would represent a very, very big departure from that. I want to stay on medicine for just a second because we've seen a couple of people named the the head for the FDA is a is a Doctor Who also shows up on Fox and is friends with a friend of mine. His name is Marty Makari. This is some stuff that he did talking about masks. It's worth just hearing people's
positions. You could see why people will meltdown over the medical When you want to live in a nanny state, which the political left loves doing, where the government tells you what to do, then you need people that toe that party line for you. But if you want to be a free citizen, having people that tell you we need more data and you should make your own decisions is actually preferable. And having some dissent within a cabinet is not a terrible idea.
Having dissent from the medical establishment that funds a lot of these things. We found out that like up to 50% of the FDA's funding is not from governments, but actually from the people that pay to use their products. That'd be the equivalent of saying that the ATF was coming after all of us, but we funded 50% of the ATF by our tax stamps and for the paying for background checks. Just saying it does change the way that these things are
beholden. There's something to be said about having government beholden to the agency of the people and the and the stakeholders that they actually serve. But you do want to check and a balance on there. Here's a little taste of what this might look like. At least we're hearing some people that are partying and there's there's disagreement within that cabinet space because the surgeon general doesn't seem to be on this this
kick. Anyway, here's Doctor Makari talking about masking and efficacy of vaccines and questions. This is the kind of stuff I want to see. I want to see people that are intelligent at arguing from reasonable positions to try to see if national policy can be the best for Americans and represent also the fact that we don't all agree.
The greatest perpetrator of misinformation during the pandemic has been the United States government misinformation that COVID was spread through surface transmission, that vaccinated immunity was far greater than natural immunity, that masks were effective. Now we have the definitive Cochrane review. What do you do with that review? Cochrane is the most authoritative evidence body in all of medicine and has been for decades. Do you just ignore it, not talk about it?
That myocarditis was more common after the infection than the vaccine? Not true. It's 4 to 28 times more common after the the vaccine. That young people benefit from a booster. Misinformation. Our two top experts on vaccines quit the FDA in protest over this particular issue pushing boosters in young, healthy people. The data was never there. That's why the CDC never disclosed hospitalization rates among boosted Americans. Underage 50 The vaccine mandates would increase vaccination
rates. The George Mason University study shows it didn't. It did one thing. It created never vaxers who are now not getting the childhood vaccines they need to get. Over and over again, we've seen something that goes far beyond using your best judgement with the information at hand. We've seen something which is unforgivable, and that is the weaponization of medical research itself. Did you hear that? He brought up two really, really critical things.
One, he's created a whole class of people that have an inherent distrust at this point, people like me. I have a daughter that's never been to a doctor because I don't want to take her to a doctor because my judgement has been better than the doctors by a lot. And she's fine and she's thriving as a human being. But he mentioned the fact that the single biggest provider of misinformation was the federal government itself.
And that's why having an FCC director, like having having Brendan Carr step into that role, who laid out his policies, which you see the left crying about that there should be either enforcement or get out of the way when it comes to the FC CS policies. And more importantly, the federal government needs to be not enforcing censorship. We need more information. So a big tent does actually accommodate more voices. That's what you all voted for.
If you don't realize it, it's what you voted for. So all of you that are upset about some of these folks that don't agree with you, they're not supposed to all agree with you. And just think about this. If somebody agreed with you about absolutely everything, wouldn't that be the person you'd be married to? Any of you who found that person, let me know.
Please put it in the comments. If you found a person that agrees with you 100% of the time, it's time to check and see if they have like a an on switch and they're an AI bot. I've never seen that. I've never seen anybody have 100% agreement, even if it is 100% agreement in public, in private. Do you or do you not have disagreements with your spouse, the person you love the most in the world, the person that you have stepped into a lifetime
with? Just saying, let's be real about this, You're never going to agree with all these choices. So I do see a lot of that lead meltdown and I think it's kind of interesting to watch. We have another really critical piece here. This is Dave Weldon talking about. He's the new CDC director. So this came out as well. I want to play this little video. This goes back to 2002. He's a former representative from Florida talking about
vaccines and autism. The reason why you need pics that are probably going to be outside the realm of what many of us think that need to have conflicting, there needs to be argument to be able to get to the point of finding out what truth is. We've sort of seen the left abandoned the the concept of truth like actual truth for its
own sake. They've abandoned truth and that helped them lose the respect of people that looked into these institutions and said, are you purveying accurate information that I can make good decisions on. And the answer was no. In today, in November of 2024, as we go into this new year, you can't do informed consent, which is the standard. It's the legal standard for you to make decisions about medicine, which is why so many people have opted out. You're not given the right
information. It's not even available to you. So I think it's important that we're seeing some of these big pushes. And I don't need to agree with every single person when it comes to the medical picks, which is what people have been mostly freaking out about over the weekend. That's what I saw. Here's here's Dave Weldon as as discussed, talking about autism vaccines. Is there a relationship? Shouldn't we just at least have the data?
There's some, I think, some very, very troubling issues that have not been resolved. And the thing that I continue to find extremely disturbing is the fact that the CDC still does not allow researchers access to the vaccine safety data. If, if everything was so objective and any scientist at all can look at this stuff, it would be one thing, but they continue to deny people access to this information.
And I until we get a free and open a dialogue within the scientific community, I don't think for one, I will ever be satisfied that there that there isn't some some data suggesting that some children may have serious side effects from some of these vaccines that is really going undetected, unnoticed. And yes, it may actually cause autism. Let me let me just conclude by saying that the issue with the, the MMR that got all this started was a clinical study.
And and the Danish study is again, another epidemiologic study. And a clinical study is very, very cheap and easy to do, but nobody seems to want to do it. We had somebody at one of our previous hearings, Doctor Kriegsman from New York, who had replicated some of Wakefield's work showing that these kids are developing inflammatory bowel disease. And then he wanted to do the next step. He wanted to actually do the pathological analysis on these biopsy specimens.
And the institution that he works at said, no, they don't want to get into it. This is too controversial. And so if everything was so objective and scientific like. If it was everything was scientific and objective, then wouldn't you just seek out truth and accuracy? Wouldn't you just want the information that's 20 years old at this point? Got an article from Fox talking about how Doctor Dave Weldon is going to restore transparency.
That's the goal. Said in addition to being a medical doctor for over 40 years, he's an Army vet. He's been respected in the conservative space on fiscal and social issues. So a guy that has experience in politics, isn't that interesting that somebody who's running the CDC has to have a background in politics? If you told us this maybe 10 years ago, most of us would not have been on board for putting people that had a political experience in charge of things like the CDC 'cause we didn't
know the CDC was the enemy. Some of you maybe did. Most people didn't. Most people didn't look around and see what should otherwise be basically a non political actors, even though they were all operating in the political
sphere. So having someone with that sort of background, he served as a leading role in the government oversight and the Reform Committee hearings, got all kinds of different hearings that he's been involved in with HHS and the CDC and successfully worked with the CDC to enact a ban on patents for human embryos is what Donald Trump sort of cited when he put him out there. That's not nothing.
He's not young. He's closer to Donald Trump's age at 71. But again, putting vaccine skeptics and critics in charge of things is the way that you get to truth. That's how you find things Socratically. You ask questions. You don't have to be a vaccine denier. You don't have to be a vaccine hesitant person. You have to just be a skeptic because you've told me something. Now show me the data. Allow me to make my own decisions. That's how you be. Have a bunch of people that are
citizens and not subjects. The left doesn't want that right now. It's kind of interesting. This is a video clip. I'm pretty sure we played it at the time when it went out. It's coming around again, and I think it's worthwhile talking about the way that the counterparts are going to discuss this. That truth is actually the stumbling block and the obstacle, and it's not the goal of a press and it's not the goal of the way that you build consensus.
Well, it is if you believe in America and that there are a bunch of independent operators, 300 million people that are trying to make their own best lives and that the sort of game theory play out against each other. That everyone is going to make the decisions that help themselves in the first thing, their families, their communities, and then the country more broadly.
That they're going to make the best decisions for themselves as they see it, and that all of these things will essentially be in conflict till they get to the point where we get the greatest good. That's a marketplace that's sort of freedom. This is Catherine Mayer saying
that truth is really in the way. That's how we ended up with the previous regime of people that were hiding information from us, that we're making declarative statements and then censoring you and trying to hide it if you disagreed with them. And I think it's very telling. So we're going to listen to it. Also, if you want to listen to the way this woman speaks, it's performative. This is the kind of way that you do when you've rehearsed a speech.
It's not extemporaneous. It's not her thoughts. This is a practiced delivery, giving something. So these are not accidental words is my point to you. These are deliberate, and they are saying something very, very explicit. That truth is in fact an enemy, and it is secondary to their actual purpose, which is
narrative. But one of the most significant differences critical from moving from polarization to productivity is that the Wikipedians who write these articles aren't actually focused on finding the truth. They're working for something that's a little bit more attainable, which is the best of what we can know right now.
And after seven years there, I actually believe that they're on to something that for our most tricky disagreements, seeking the truth and seeking to convince others of the truth isn't necessarily the best place to start. In fact, I think our reverence for the truth might become might have become a bit of a distraction that is preventing us from finding consensus and getting important things done. The truth is really getting in the way from us manufacturing
the thing that we want. How interesting. The only way that you get to that truth again is by questioning assumptions, by operating as a skeptic and by having voices that don't just agree with you. She was talking about Wikipedia, which we used to be able to go to and think that it was probably non biased, that it just had information. But obviously that's not been the case for quite a while. And she's talking about how you build consensus through information manipulation.
And that's currently what we keep seeing. Donald Trump is building discord into his very cabinet. There's an article here from CNN Politics about how he chose Representative Lori Chavez de Raimer as the pick for labor
secretary. And if I ever get names wrong, by the way, which happens all the time, I'm fairly confident because almost everything I do comes from reading because I don't want to hear other people's commentary because they're all slanting at the way that we just heard Catherine Mayer do. They're all trying to slant it. So I want to see it in print without whatever tone they're trying to add to it so I can analyze it with the way that I put my lens to it. And that's what we do here every
day. So she was a favorite of Teamsters President Sean O'Brien. Now, you remember, the Teamsters didn't endorse anybody, but they were at least over 60%, maybe 70% in favor of Donald Trump. And so they sort of abstain from their typical Democrat endorsement that happened during this cycle. And I'm confident a lot of people from labor unions went forward and chose Donald Trump because he represents more of their their view of the world. So this may have been one of
those compromises. When you make a big tent, you're going to get people that you don't necessarily like that I don't necessarily like. But I have to at least understand that that's what the vote was for in politics. So often we're doing something that's like a lesser of two evils. And this is one of them. She's a favorite of Teamsters president.
She's the most labour friendly Republicans in Washington, one of the few GOP members to Co sponsor the protecting the right to organize or the proact legislation that got stuck in committee. But it was trying to gut the right to work in 30 states, make it easier for workers to unionize. There was a companion bill in the Senate that was endorsed by Bernie Sanders, who's like a communist. She's had a strong support for her business and labor communities and so on.
This is all Donald Trump selling it because Donald Trump doesn't have to be ideologically aligned. You can watch these people. The other thing that we know is that Donald Trump is a populist, so he does listen to the people around him. Think about how quickly he pushed out people like Sessions and held on to other people. There are some people that that that sort of escaped notice and there's some people that got kicked out.
What we are seeing though, is that the left is trying to exert whatever pressure they have because there is a piece of Donald Trump that still listens to them and so they're going to lampoon him. The upside is it just seems like he just doesn't care anymore about at least what the hard left is saying. I wanted to give you a joy read. This is how she's characterizing what they're doing. She's mad about Pete. Anybody they're mad about, we're all kind of excited about, right?
But notice the people they're not talking about because they're actually excited about those folks. They're going to focus all their fire on the Tulsi Gabbard's on the RFK Juniors. They're going to focus all their fire on the Pete Hagseths. And they're not going to talk about folks that fit into sort of their worldview. They want to win, all of them. But real politics should be always about compromise a little bit because this country is not
ideologically aligned. Interesting enough, Donald Trump might be the best representative of the United States in 2024. Against all of the expectations of these people. They're just used to getting everything they want. I'm going to give you a couple of reasons why this is funny, but let's listen to her little clown car statement here.
The former and future president is moving quickly to fill the clown car and round out his cabinet before he changed his mind and fires them all moments ago. Trump announced today he has selected Fox Weekend morning show host and can't make this up. Pete. Pete Hangsack to serve as Secretary of Defense, because why not? The funny thing for me is, is that she has essentially the the
same job on the week days. So does she think that she's an unserious person and that no one should listen to her? There is a like a decided lack of self-awareness there. It seems like we're going to get a little bit deeper into that in just a second here, because I've got a couple other little, little moments of, of folks that, like I said, people
telling us who they want. The left is more than happy to have completely unqualified folks step into space, whether it be a Katanji Jackson Bragg who can't tell you what a woman is as she's being confirmed to the Supreme Court or the the action chief of staff over at the the FAA, who I'm going to play you Mr. Washington's little take here. Give me, give me one SEC before we do that. Let's go ahead and just say thanks to the folks that
continue to support our program. You guys can check out our friends over at My Pillow. It's mypillow.com/kyle. I thought I had one on my little board here, but I guess I didn't build one out. It's real easy to remember it's mypillow.com/kyle Kyle. Use the promo code Kyle whenever you're over there shopping on Mike Lindell's website.
And since we're coming into the holidays, we're coming into the Black Friday. They're obviously going to have some capable deals and if you guys want to spend your money over there, that's how you do it. Just use the promo code, Kyle. It's 4 letters. It's just as easy as anybody else's promo code, except it benefits us and it supports our program. And it continues to support Mike Liddell, who's been in this, another one of those sort of fearless voices that the left
hates. And he's more or less been on Team Trump since the beginning, isn't he? There you go. Rose Lopez just threw it in the chat for me. Thank you so much, Rose. Really appreciate all of that. Mypillow.com/kyle, you're supporting our sponsors, which means you're supporting our program as you guys make your your sort of holiday choices. How about a little taste of the left getting deep into the weeds
about certain picks? And yet they've got no problem hiring people that don't know anything about aircrafts, that don't know anything about the administration of air flights, which I thought that's what the FAA did. Again, they don't have any ideological standards. They don't have any scruples. They have sort of progress. They have a technique that they want, which is to put certain people, whether they are capable or otherwise, in space as long as they all agree and are in lockstep.
Mr. Washington, can you quickly tell me what airspace requires an ADSB transponder? Not sure I can answer that question right now. That's. That's OK. We'll just keep going. So that's a that's a pretty in important part. So what are the six types of special use airspace that protect this national security that appear on FAA charts? Sorry, Senator, I cannot answer that question. So what are the operational limitations of a pilot flying under Basic Med? Senator, I'm not a pilot, so.
Obviously you'd ever see that Federal Aviation Administration. So any idea what those restrictions are under Basic Med quickly? Well, some of the restrictions I think would be high blood pressure, some of them would be. It's more like how many passengers per airplane, how many pounds in different categories and what what altitude you can find or so and and then amount of knots. It's under 250 knots. So it's not having had anything
to do with blood pressure. So can you tell me what causes an aircraft to spin or to stall? Again, Senator, I'm not a pilot. Yeah, You're not a pilot and you don't know. And so listen, that's Keith Washington. He's the acting FAA chief of staff. I don't think there was a congressional hearing to confirm him. Or if there was, he wasn't confirmed. But he stays in that space. And then you read, it's like, well, he's what are what are his qualifications? His qualifications are that he's
visited 7 continents. Congratulations. Maybe he's also sailed the, what, 7 seas? He's a native Washingtonian. He went to public schools in DC, he went to American University. He has a master of Public Administration and a political science degree. Those do not necessarily make a good FAA chief, but what they do is they give somebody that believes in government if you've grown up and you believe that government is a solution.
So he's on team left and he's worked in a number of places, including human resources, security, acquisitions and grants, transportation facilities. I'm just reading his bio here. And space management, which is real estate. He was a director of the department, Office of Human Resources at HRO like he was. He was in charge of working at Department of Transportation in an acting secretary role. He was working at the
administration. He was an associate administrator for the administration. He was in Maritime Administration, the deputy director, LA. The guy's been all over the place. He knows nothing about aircrafts per SE, and the things that keep us flying. One seems kind of important. So it just just goes to show you the left does not actually care about people's qualifications unless they threaten to disrupt the status quo.
The thing you've seen so much that is that is upsetting folks about Pete Hegseth is that he actually has talked to real soldiers, like real grown men. You've seen him on places like Sean Ryan, which has an almost exclusively military focus, right? And he said that women don't belong in combat, which is upset Tammy Ducksworth in a big way. Is it Duckworth or Ducksworth? It's Duckworth. She's very, very wrong saying that women don't belong in
combat roles. I think a lot of us don't want our daughters in combat roles, though. Is that crazy? It seems like it's just a real simple thing to be able to grasp. They don't belong in special operations, at least not in the current way. There are plenty of examples of folks that have spent time overseas. I've got friends who are Green Berets. I've got friends who are infantry officers. I've got friends that are infantry men. They're just not a one to one comparison.
And you can't hold women to the same physical standards. She was a helicopter pilot, for what it's worth, and was, you know, dramatically wounded. But should she even have been there? And the other thing we're talking about are trans people in the military right now, undeployable human beings that step in basically to be on the
government teat. Because they have so many medical problems that are self induced because they have a mental problem that they are trying to remake their physical bodies with either hormones or surgeries and they can't get out there and do the thing they're supposed to do. So they can't deploy. The only purpose of being in the military. If you are signing up to be a non deployable troop, why the hell are Americans paying for
you? Go to jail and go get your sex change surgery since that's something that they were they were supporting. I just don't get it. And then you've got these sort of false, these false analogies. This is Mark Miley talking about getting shot. That it doesn't. The bullet doesn't care. Yeah, we we agree with the bullet not caring who it hits. What about doing the flipping job? Your job is not to get shot. This is a truly interesting. Again, they take you to an emotionally distracting
argument. Again, it makes me know that the people that they're most upset about are the ones that are going to upset the status quo and that generally speaking, there are plenty of them that put together this big tent that we're not going to like. So you have to take them both anyway. Here's here's Miley talking about it because is it Millie? It's Millie. Don't lecture me about women in combat.
Women have been in combat. And it doesn't matter if that 762 hit you in the chest, no one gives. If it's a woman or a guy who pulled that trigger, you're still dead. So if you meet the standards, our military must be and always should be a standards based, merit based military, period. Full stop. It doesn't matter if you're white, if you're black, if you're a man, if you're a woman, if you're a Catholic and you're a Protestant. None of those identification things matter. What matters?
Or standards, readiness standards. Do you meet the standard or not? If yes, Pasco Collect 200, join the infantry. Right, right. What if the standards are different from men and women? This is the absurdity that exists over at the FBI Academy. I know it existed when I was in the Air Force because I saw the fitness standards for my fellow Airmen and Air women, which is a weird thing to say. They're not the same. How many people could do the physical standards that I was
held to? We had a three mile run. 24 minutes was the thing. If you didn't do it under 21 minutes, you were wasting time of everybody because you weren't fast enough to be there unless you were like 6 foot 8 and 300 lbs. How many push ups did you have to do? Not the Air Force fitness I'm talking about the one that I had to go through. We had to do 75 push ups. Might have been 7075 sit ups in
2 minutes. 12 to to 24 pull ups. 12 was like the lowest possible #16 was considered a respectable score. How many women could do 16 pull ups? And then how many of the women that can do those 16 pull ups according to fitness standards are going to show up and want to be part of that team? Or are they going to want to be professional athletes somewhere? Are they going to be playing water polo for like the US Pan Am Games? The standards are not the standards when the standards are
different. There are different standards for female FBI agents and for male FBI agents. Why? Domestically, the role is the same, the paycheck is the same. Why do you have to do less? And that's not to discredit women. It's just saying either the standards make sense or they don't. I actually think that there's probably not a need for the physical standards. The FBI did, and there are some jobs that require lower physical
standards. But when it comes to combat, does it seem like being able to do a deadlift of £140.00 is enough? If there's a guy like Gerardo Boyle who weighs 275 lbs on without his kit, you got to deadlift that guy off the ground and pull him. Can you do that? Can you pull that kind of weight up to waist level and drag it backwards to get him out of a a spot where he's going to be killed or you going to have to
write a letter to his family? The standard is the standard, except when the standard doesn't line up. I went to airborne school with the Army. It was a joke. Women's standards and men's standards, not the same. Either make them meet the standard and let them have respect for doing it, or don't because they're not going to do it.
And don't say that it's discriminatory to have different standards for men and women while you're same time making the argument like this top this top general who might as well be wearing clown makeup and making false arguments. Anyway. I've got this little article here from Tammy Duckworth or about Tammy Duckworth talking about Pete Eggseth because I think it's interesting our whim, our military could not go to war without women who wear the uniform. You know what's so funny about
that? We did a couple of world wars without women in uniform. It's certainly not in any kind of a combat roles. It turns out the United States has been just fine in plenty of conflicts, and we could hit our recruiting numbers. If you didn't focus on trying to get that Lady in to a helicopter spot and you were going after men who looked like my friend's sons, this question is like, it's just basic human understanding.
And then the fact that the left has decided to do is ignore both biology and history for all of humankind. It's truly sad. She was deployed in 2004 as a Black Hawk helicopter pilot, sustained severe injuries when a helicopter was hit by an RPG. We'll give her the credit that she went through the thing that she did, but she's out there calling this guy out, saying that he wasn't a commander, that he was never in charge of anything, that he's in orderly
unqualified for the position. I mean, what qualified her to be in charge of a Senate seat? Anything. I've listened to her speak. She said there's 220,000 plus women who serve in uniform. I don't get it. I don't get the need for that. And like I said, in my lifetime, it has not been necessary. It's not a requirement to be able to have US readiness. What's the requirement is readiness. And then you feel the people who actually meet those standards that do it.
It just seems so pathetically stupid. Again, we don't have to agree with all the choices, but I know when they're upset about certain ones, it makes me happy. The biggest thing that I see going on right now too, is the defense of government in its own as a as a unique good. So there's more about this department of government efficiency. This one is pretty funny.
Imagine a fight that the money that you spend on federal employees who telework and don't actually work that that you'd see the leftist media pick up that banner and try to stop it. Because they want what teleworking. They want their government to not do much. It just gives away the game that is a federal jobs program talking about Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, who are on the screen right there determined to force federal employees to return to the office. This seems like a no brainer.
As Americans, we're already paying for the office space and we've covered it on this program before. Something like 25% of the government buildings are actually occupied. We are paying for the heating, the cooling, the physical real estate space, all of the the chairs and all of the the requirements that real estate has to be able to put these things in to make them usable spaces. And then they're not being used. They're just laying empty. So get back to work.
For the longest time, what we found is that people could not in fact do their job remotely because of the nature of government work. Suddenly they discovered during the pandemic that everybody could go home, which kind of gave away the game, didn't it? It explained to us that this was just a welfare situation, that these people didn't actually have a functional job. The jobs they did were not necessary. Again, nothing made me happier
than government shutdowns. When you find out that the quote UN quote non essential employees didn't show, it made Washington DC tolerable to be in and then you realize that the federal government doesn't make that much difference. The bigger picture that I'm going to make to you is, is that many of these cabinet level positions, as much as they are prestigious and as much as they have theoretically broad sweeping policies, they don't actually affect your life.
Because when the federal government shuts down, it doesn't actually affect much of your life. That's my personal experience, but it's probably yours as well. Because how many of you can say, if it wasn't for this fill in the blank government agency, I would not exist. Maybe some of you have a very, very narrow circumstances where one or two government agencies directly impact your safety, your health, your ability to carry on. Maybe the VA is a really big deal or Doug Collins was just
nominated. Maybe you get healthcare that
keeps you alive there. But most of you that work in a job or that have retired from a job did not interact with government except in a negative way when it comes to things like regulations, things that we see that Lee Zeldin might be cutting down on. So as you guys consider the bigger tent and as you consider all these pics coming in, he hasn't even gotten into office yet, there's something bigger and scarier I think that's going on, which is to say that we are
in the last kind of period that's last little critical space where the swamp is going to get to fight and potentially put us on a bad footing. Here's one of those kind of creatures, his name is James Lankford. He comes from Oklahoma, and it's a reminder that the Senate was never to represent the people. And they kind of don't think of themselves as representatives of the people. They represent the status quo. They represent some sort of
elitism. And here is kind of an elite little taste of hating on Tulsi Gabbard. He's saying it in an utterly he looks like a Saturday Night Live character, doesn't he? I can't remember who the guy is that plays the Saturday Night Live characters that looks just like this. But this is Lankford on CNN talking about his issues with Tulsi Gabbard. Again, another disruptive candidate, so you're going to hear them scream about it. Wasn't she just a Democrat 15
minutes ago? Didn't she run for president as a Democrat in 2020? Big tent stuff. Does anything about her concern you? Well, we'll have lots of questions. She met with Bashar Assad. We'll want to know what the purpose was and what the direction for that was as a member of Congress. Want to get a chance to talk about past comments that she's made and get them into full context. So sure, there there's there's comments that are floating out there, but we want to be able to
know the rest of the story. OK, I'm going to turn it to Cash Patel to answer why this is such a dangerous time. Because while we're focusing all this and Trump's putting together his tent and the bingo card is getting checked off and everyone's getting upset or not upset about various different cabinet members that do or do not fit their ideology, which again, is not the point. That's not what's going on here.
This is a A1 man show with a lot of different tentacles of different agreements and and things that don't even agree with themselves. We often see Donald Trump not agree with himself, right? He does Operation war speed and says the greatest thing ever that he also talks about how we should have autonomy, that he's the most pro-life president ever. But then he also doesn't really know what's going on with Amendment 4 in Florida.
There's a lot of examples where Donald Trump is not even in agreement with Donald Trump on any given day. He just sort of goes like I didn't know, but he is the personality that holds this together. Here is Cash Patel telling us what's truly dangerous and I guess the moratorium on him being able to speak, He's out talking again. Again, we're an only Cash for FBI director. I'm going to talk about this. The left is also really scared that they're going to see him
step into this disruptive role. And from what I hear, Cash gets along really well with Pam Bondi. So I don't know Pam Bondi's position on a lot of things. She sort of had some kind of non conservative positions about guns and it's upset people about her positions on red flags. Those are not things that the DOJ gets to enforce, by the way. The DOJ doesn't need to get to like write outlaws about red
flag laws. So as long as she is constrained, it's OK. Especially if she gets along with a guy like Cash and it puts him into the position where he needs to be. Listen to why it's so dangerous right now. Yeah, right now is, I think in my opinion, the most dangerous time, the sort of lame duck period where the president is not acting in the capability that needs to defend this nation.
And what what we need to do is have our leaders of the agencies and departments that were confirmed by the Senate show up and do their job and tell the Senate and the House of Representatives, these are our failures, These are our weaknesses. We need help. We need you to respond in this time of need. And those guys not showing up to the Hill and just deflecting their responsibilities shows us how much more danger we are in.
We know what President Trump's going to do, but he's 54 days away from taking the oath of office right now. We need the United States of America to remind those agencies and department leaders that they work for us.
And the mandate that President Trump was given was to protect our borders, to make sure CCP fentanyl doesn't kill our children, children to end the forever wars, to return our hostages and make sure American global diplomacy is in great hands when President Trump has sent the Oval Office on January 20th. And we must respect the will and power of Congress. I cannot stress that enough. The. Yeah, that's what's that's what's critical right now. It's super easy.
There's also an argument being made by Senator Eric Schmidt. There are people basically in the Senate on our side and on not our side. Again, this is all by design. The Senate is actually not supposed to represent you, but it does bother us. There's an article that's going on. Where is this at? NBC looks like. I'm just judging by the way it looks. Yeah. NBC News talking about how Eric Schmidt, you'll remember him. He started the Missouri versus Missouri V Biden case and then
he was elected as a senator. So it's been taken over by Andrew Bailey. Eric Schmidt suggested that one of his first priorities should be to fire any Justice Department staff that worked on cases that involve Donald Trump. There's a a bigger thing that's going on to a discussion of January 6th, but there's no question that the people that investigated Donald Trump are problematic. At the very least, you can't have snakes within the big tent that are trying to bite everyone.
You can have disagreement, but what you can't have are people that have used weaponized government. So I'm behind that. The second thing is, is that there's this argument about whether or not, and, and which senator is this one. This is Bill Haggerty talking about whether or not the FBI should actually be doing the background checks for the Trump cabinet. We talked about this the other day. But it's also critical to say Americans, yes, they don't care.
They really don't. There's no constitutional requirement that the FBI do background checks. And we have ideologically compromised people in the DOJ and in the FBI and they think that's their kind of Trump card. They're going to be able to deny clearances and keep people out of office. Those people work for the executive. Their job is to do a job, and the president can honor it or not. But the president can also offer a clearance to anyone because he's the final authority on this.
Fairly interesting. They do think they're going to be able to use this stuff. I think there's a big argument to be made that anybody that's involved in these prosecutions should be tossed. And the second thing is it's more broad. There's been this ongoing sort of social media debate. Some of you guys may have strong opinions about it. I have one as well. I've watched people in the influencer space, the the folks that think that they have some vested interest in January 6th.
Most of them don't know what the hell they're talking about. Why is that? Because they actually, for all they're following of the cases, they don't understand the mechanics of it. Let's talk about why people like Steve Baker have convinced me that a blanket pardon for people who were violent or nonviolent. Now I get it in a unique way.
The idea that you should pardon all of them, a blanket pardon, is not because the people who were violent offenders on January 6th deserve it. And that's the critical piece. If you were to say that every whistleblower that brought out allegations against the federal government should be reinstated with back pay and settled with and made whole.
There are plenty of them that only came forward after doing things that were evil, that did things that were bad, right up until the point where their hand got snapped in the cookie jar and then they finally had a conscience and when they finally did, they got crushed. Those people should be made whole as well. And that is kind of a slap in the face to me and my family and Garrett O'boyle's family and Steve Friend's family and Marcus Allen's family.
It is a slap because we are not equivalent people. They did it when they had no other choice. We did it when it was right and we knew what was right. But in the same way, the January 6th nonviolent and violent offenders have experienced one thing and that is a weaponized government. A government that took sides and decided to come after people when it had no business doing so, it weighed down on the scales of justice, and they
abused the process. And when the government abused the process, the tie needs to go to the citizens. So I don't think that a Sean Wittmann is equivalent to a Jake Lang who tried to hit cops or did hit cops with a baseball bat. And yet, even though it'll upset a Sean Wittmann, I've made the argument to people like him that this is really important. Not because of the people who did bad things deserve it, but the government did bad things and those bad things need to be punished.
And that's the same reason why we need to see people tossed out of the DOJ that have done things that they ought not to have done. They should have known better. It's going to be a slap in the face of the government and it doesn't have to do with the people. And then I think the the other last answer is that we obviously saw that they were playing favorites by not doing the same thing to the people in the political left. Many of them got settlements, didn't they?
The rioters that were in Portland, Seattle and Minneapolis and New York and Washington DC, those people actually got paid out when they were violent. The government has to be operating in a in a system of fairness and be able to make that thing look fair. You're going to have to be able to make these other people whole. And here's the other thing that
I'll tell you. When people are violent, antisocial, scumbag types and they're going to do bad things on a January 6th, the odds are one of two things. One, they were caught off guard and they were moved by the crowd. That's a possibility. The other thing is, is that they're violent, antisocial idiots anyway and they will do something else.
It'll probably cost us something, but in the same way that we let rapist go on a technicality because we have due process, you have to let people go when the technicality is the government weighed in unfairly and withheld evidence and did not do the thing properly. So violent and nonviolent need to be taken and made whole. That's hard to deal with. It's not very fun because we do want to be a law and order
party. But again, we have to be able to kind of hold just the way that Donald Trump is holding together this coalition. 2 conflicting ideas are personal offense, but also the sense that the right thing has to be done even when we don't like it. I'm going to play a Kip just because I saw it today and it made me kind of laugh about people that can understand reality and people that can't. And it's those that have the facts about reality.
It goes back to our little thing about truth and the idea that Catherine Mayer wants to try to keep you from truth. Why does she want to do that? She's, by the way, she's the CEO of NPR. If you don't know that she has a say in what the news is, the reason they want to do that is because when you are confronted by the objective reality of it, it's pretty hard to argue against real facts. This is why guys like our cabinet. Let me throw it back up on here again.
Chris Wright, you're seeing him, Secretary of energy, a secretary of transportation, understand things. This is where it kind of meets the road. When reality hits you in the face, there is no argument. This is coming from ATV show with Billy Bob Thornton. That's called Landsman, which is talking about oil and gas in West TX, which is the business out there. This is just a really fun thing to watch because sometimes it's nice to hear Texans say things like Texans.
I mean, may not be a Texan, but he's playing a Texan. And this is some real honest, obvious answers that when you get away from the kind of position statements, you're just going to get actual honesty. So let's try this out. Have any idea how much diesel they have to burn to mix that much concrete? Or make that steel and haul this shit out here and put it together with a 450 foot crane?
You want to guess how much oil it takes to lubricate that fucking thing or winterize it in its twenty year lifespan, it won't offset the carbon footprint of making it. And don't get me started on solar panels and the lithium in your Tesla battery. He's talking about windmills. And never mind the fact that if the whole world decided to go electric tomorrow, we don't have the transmission lines to get the electricity to the cities. It'd take 30 years if we started
tomorrow. And unfortunately for your grandkids, we have 120 year petroleum based infrastructure. Our whole lives depend on it. And hell, it's in everything. That road we came in on the wheels on every car ever made, including yours. Send tennis rackets and lipstick and refrigerators and antihistamines. Pretty much anything plastic. Your cell phone case, artificial heart valves. Any kind of clothing that's not made with animal or plant fibers.
Soap, fucking hand lotion. Garbage bags, fishing boats, you name it. Every fucking thing. And you know what the kicker is? We're going to run out of it before we find its replacement. It's the thing that's going to kill us all. Yeah, it's the thing that's going to kill us all. Except that it's not. He just laid out all the things and all you got are talking points. And that's where the left lives on this thing. Again, they don't.
We don't all have to agree with things inside the big tent. It doesn't all have to make sense to everybody at all times. But we do have to agree on concrete realities. And that's one of those things where the rubber meets the road. So it'll be nice to see what what do we want mean? Tweets and cheap gas, OK. Those are going to be the single biggest things that change the way that your life works.
It's going to change prices. It's going to be, you know, the kind of change that matters the most. And then who the hell the secretary of Agriculture is? It's probably going to have a little bit less to do with how your world works, for whatever it's worth. Anyhow, let's see where this week goes. I think it's going to be interesting. I got kind of a funny palate cleanse for you today. There's AI got two of them. We're only going to play one. I'll play the other one tomorrow.
This is Donald Trump doing Seinfeld. This is the reason why Donald Trump won. As well as that people kind of remember sometimes he just says things because he feels like it and they don't always make the most sense. But this one seems to the show about nothing. You guys remember that we did used to have a simpler time. It felt like things were easier in the 90s. So maybe that's why we have so much nostalgia. Donald Trump talking about straws. They want to ban straws.
Has anybody ever tried those paper straws? They're not working super right. Has anybody ever tried seriously, the new store, it's made out of paper, right? It disintegrates as you're drinking. If you have a nice tie like this time, this would have no chance. By the time you get finished, the straw is totally disintegrated. Does anybody walk around with a plastic straw? Because it's not bad, You know, You whip it out, boom, boom. You never had to do that.
So they want to ban straws, They said, oh, really? What about the cart? What about the plate? What about the knives and the spoons and the plastic? Well, they're OK, but the straws we got to ban? The music makes it, doesn't it? I don't know why just listening to that music throws us back to a little bit of a simpler time. And also it also points out the illogic theological way. Yeah. What about the rest of those things? By the way? Those are all made with petroleum products, aren't they?
Again, common sense to save the day. Let's see it. Let's see where this week goes. I know it's Thanksgiving, so we'll have kind of a shorter week. We'll be doing today, tomorrow and Wednesday. We're going to take off Thursday and Friday to say thanks. And I hope you guys do the same. God bless all of you. Look forward to seeing you again in the morning and have a fantastic start to this week.