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 Seraphim. Hello my friends, welcome to the Kyle Seraphin Show. It is Friday, May the 19th.
We are live on Rumble right now. It's a little bit after 8:30 in Texas America. Folks down there in the chat, if you'll give me a thumbs up telling me that you can hear us just fine and I will look forward to bringing on our guest today. We've got George Hill. He was not testifying in person yesterday in front of Congress and yet he was testifying in front of Congress whether he liked it or not. He had some some video footage that was shown. I think some of the stuff is
going to be kind of eye opening. I'm going to bring him on to discuss it. We're going to give our reactions to what we saw in the weaponization committee. If you still watch Fox News, you would have seen him on Laura Ingraham last night, I believe. And we've got a couple things that we're going to get into with him. So I think that's going to be very enjoyable. I think folks, if you have questions, go ahead and post
them in the chat. If you want to do one of the Rumble rants, those are much easier for me to find and, and I we had some of those yesterday, which was awesome. I think we had almost 45,000 total views of the live stream we did which is out of the park. Awesome for a small little channel that is growing like we are. Before we get into bringing George on, I want to say a quick thank you to our sponsors of which we have two and they are
both fantastic. Let me lead off with the well known Patriot Coolers and Patriot coolers.com. These are our friends over there. They are out of Houston, TX. They make a fantastic product. You're seeing right there. They're soft sided 10/10. What is it can cooler? I think you can put 7 bottles in. I got 7 yinglings in mine when I did it. They're excellent. They're lightweight, they're flexible.
You can strap them down to like a kayak There an outdoor tool that you're going to use for all kinds of different cool stuff. Check out Patriot coolers.com. Very easy to remember just the way you think. And here's my Patriot Tumblr right now. This is going to be the original one point O this. There it is. There's my suspendables logo right on top of it. And I had this thing since 2017. I've used it in so many
different places. I've been one of my surveillance buddies, one of my essential tools. I used to say that the the three most important things for surveillance where you need a radio, you need a pee bottle, and you need a cup of coffee. Other than that, everything else is negotiable. Binoculars are nice, but you don't need them. This is something that's
critical. This was a critical piece of gear for me. Patriot coolers.com use promo code Kyle Kyle, again, promo code Kyle Kyle and that will get you 10% off plus it'll get you a free shipping if you spend more than 50 bucks. Buy one for you. Buy one for a friend. I see all the regulars sitting there in the live chat this morning. Thanks so much for joining us, folks. I also want to say thanks to our other sponsor. This is our sustaining sponsor. We've talked about a little bit.
We're going to bring up more and more up about them. This is the catholicvote.org. catholicvote.org has an excellent newsletter called The Loop. You can just fill in the subscription there. You can see it's the right part of their, the main part of their screen when you log in. catholicvote.org is an advocacy group. They're A5O1C3 that you can donate if you want to help sue the FBI because they're going after Christians, especially Catholics in the Richmond Field
office. They are suing for all the documents related to religious freedom and they are America's top Catholic advocacy group. The word Catholic does in fact mean universal, which is to say all Christians can benefit from the advocacy they're doing. They believe in faith, freedom and family. Maybe not in that order. More importantly, that's the same sort of things that many of us do. If you happen to be a Catholic,
great. And if you're not, you can still get a lot of value out of their newsletter, which is sharing this kind of stuff all the time. Check out catholicvote.org. And they are honestly keeping the lights on here at the Seraphin House as well. Really appreciate them. All right, without too much further ado, I want to bring in the man, the myth, the legend, George Hill. He jumped onto a Twitter space yesterday. And when he did so, he just went kind of wild and just started
talking. And nobody knew who he was, who he was, per SE. He just launched into it like people know just because he is a pretty familiar face to many of you. If you are following our show, George Hill, welcome to the program my friend. Thank you, it's great to be here. Long day yesterday. I believe that actually. Let me let me switch to this one here. I got a different view camera. There we go.
All right, so there's George. He's sitting in his undisclosed bunker location surrounded by ammunition and, you know, food stuffs, Stay Puff, marshmallows, things like that. And George, yesterday you got an unexpected sort of cameo. Did you know that they were going to be playing those videos? Did they give you that heads up? No heads up, but I assumed as much. I seem to have become one of their favorite boogeyman and I lost you for one second so. I lost you for one second there
because that was my mistake. I got to add a different audio. Bear with me. Sorry about this, folks. I'm doing things on the fly because Tracy Beans asked me to be on her podcast and so I did. And when you, when you do things like that, then you end up being kind of a bonehead who misses out on one of the most important things, which is the video. Let's put that up real quick. The folks that are going to be listening to the the audio stream on there we go.
All right, sorry, my friends. They said, Kyle, you're muted. The sound just went away. Yes, of course it did because I I'm a fool. I'm trying to build this airplane on the fly again. All right, George, you were in front of Congress without knowing it. I'll just going to double back to that. You didn't know that they were going to start playing those videos and let's fire away. No, they, they, they like
punching on me and that's fine. I don't know who's taking their cue from who, whether Congress has taken their cue from Rolling Stone magazine or vice versa. It's kind of hard to pull them apart and see who's calling the shots there. But yeah, I watched the the the testimony yesterday from beginning to end and wasn't surprised to see come up there to Congress made a pretty lame attempt. But they keep on forgetting one key aspect that they love my
Twitter post. And thank you for, for for U.S. Congress for following me on Twitter. But they keep on forgetting those posts were made after I left the FBI. So they they seem to have a lot of issues beyond the Second Amendment. They seem to have an issue as evidenced with their crucifixion of Matt Taibbi and the other gentleman whose name I'm blanking on right now. I apologize to Schellenberger.
Schellenberger. Yeah. And but they seem to have a problem with the expression of free speech, and they don't seem to understand hashtags. And as evidenced by that one congresswoman, I think she was from Texas, railing on Marcus. They don't understand how Twitter works either, apparently, I think. She was from California. I think that was Representative Sanchez with the OK. Yeah, it was definitely Sanchez. I couldn't remember what what state she was from. What? A goofball, right?
Like have you, you've been in some interrogations, right? That that. That's part. That's part part of your life experience. You ever been in an interrogation where you had some bad background information and when you bring it up like it completely falls flat and then you just decided to stick with it? Is that a thing you've ever done? You know, I, I do believe in the old adage, if you're in too deep, go in deeper.
But I mean, at at some point you just need to recognize you're making a fool out of yourself and just, you know, it's like, all right, you know, maybe have another question in the holster to be able to pull out and use. But no, she just kept right on digging. And I don't think they care of of of their own optic and how they look because they live in such a a well insulated echo chamber.
They they don't care. I, I, I honestly think that they don't and they're immune to well, they got, you know, slander walls and things of that nature. That's exactly. Do whatever they want to do You're. Right, I'm going to sit back just a little bit 'cause this is getting intense in my mind. Did you ever go through airborne training? Was that something you did in your military career? I went through the civilian side of the house. It was on a dare for my son. So I I got qualified and you
know this. Was was this like a freefall skydive kind of thing or this was? Yeah. And after like your first or second freefall on your own, it's kind of boring. It's some people, absolutely. Love it. No, I don't love it. I, I just, some people actually do so, so military freefall and even civilian freefall. Different animal than static line. And so this lady reminded me of a static line.
You go through the army. So as you can imagine, you go through the army and things are dumb a lot of times. It's one of the dumbest courses that I've ever been through. I know people get excited about it 'cause you get a badge out of it, but end of the day, there's nothing brilliant about falling out of the back. It's like AC130 comes and cracks you out the back of it and then you just end up wherever you go
with minimal steerability. And you know, there's an expression they use there and they do it all the time. Airborne school is all about rote knowledge. They're all about slapping the side of their thing and pointing you out and the knife hand and and giving you that sort of
instruction. Classic, you know, military culture that they built up. But one of the funniest things is they will always tell you once something happens, once you get to a certain point in the fall and you kind of assess that's treetops. When you're at Fort Benning, you got to hold what you got. That's what they say it over and every got hold what you got airborne. And even before you jump, they call you airborne. So hold what you got airborne is kind of a thing.
And at some point in time when you're falling down there and you just see people and they're just, you know, I was laying on my back and I look up, 'cause I did it right, 'cause I'm not a dummy, I guess. But I look over and I just see guys just going off into the trees, you know, and you go like, oh shit, that's going to really hurt. That just looks bad. That looks like that's going to be tough. And you just see him, you know, just taking tree branches to the face.
You got to hold what you got. You got to put yourself in the craft position to do it. Or you see the guy that's flying down into the LZ, which is 2000 meters long, you know, and maybe 5 or 600, maybe even 1000 meters wide. And he hits the only Humvee that's in the middle of the the LZ and he comes in flying, you know, with some some tailwind and smash. And he just goes right into the side of a Humvee and flips over it. And, you know, at some point you just hold what you got.
That's because the alternative is you break your legs if you don't land correctly. But maybe the the side note is that you just get, you know, bruised ribs and, you know, a new nose. So hold what you got is what this lady seemed like. She goes, she goes, hey, are you Marcus A96756453? And he's like, I don't know who that is. She's like, right. But that account retweeted this thing. And he was like, congratulations to that account. I don't know who you're talking about.
And she just could not get out of it. So I think she was down below the tree line. She had just tucked in and she was holding what she got and she hit the Jeep. But you know what, to her credit, you know, to her credit, she didn't switch tactics and and fail something else. She just failed at one thing.
Maybe there's a benefit there? Yeah, I mean, you know, before you go into an interrogation, whether it's on the battlefield or strategic interrogations, say behind the wire or in Gitmo, you have an interrogation plan. And the I went through Namitzi Navy Marine Corps Intelligence Training Center before I
deployed as an interrogator. And a friend of it was after Abu Ghraib, a buddy of mine who went through the same school, which was quite frankly, the one of the hardest schools I've ever been in, not just physically, but, but mentally as well. I mean, never got more to two or three hours sleep at night for, for over 3 weeks. But he said that the Army managed to condense a three-week class into 3 1/2 months.
So, but you you write your interrogation plan, you know, and it's it in without a healthy training in the Mitzi, it's very vague. But you recruit and train people that can adjust as the interrogation evolves, not the Army and clearly not this congresswoman. She could not make the adjustment rather than just, you know, she she was, she was just a dumb bomb. She was going to hit the ground at what? And just for the record, I did not call her dumb.
I just said she was a dumb bomb as opposed to a smart bomb, which is a guided munition. Yeah. Unguided munition. She had a payload. She delivered the payload. It didn't matter where it went. If it falls on a school, it falls out of school. If it falls on a on an airway, it falls on an airway. American gorilla in the chat just mentioned airborne is only an infill message method and that's correct. Yeah. So I agreement it is just how you get to work. It's not the work you end up
doing. That being said, this woman never made it to work, as you mentioned, not not guided, just delivered payload that was completely off target. And yet, you know, they're not accountable for any of the rounds as you mentioned that it doesn't matter what they say, it doesn't matter how they say it. They just push things incorrectly and no one holds accountable. The funny thing is this, and I mentioned this on Dan Bongino's radio the other day, she had five minutes.
You know, this is a timed exercise that they've created this theatrical production of being in Congress. One of the reasons that I'm glad I wasn't there, I'm sort of glad you weren't there either because I know the kind of guys that we
are, that we might be combative. I know you had a scheduling conflict, so we can kind of tell people what that look like, but end of the day, they have to get their 5 minutes in and they were doing everything they can to get a sound bite on, you know, CNN or MSNBC or whatever, which you and I have seen this kind of thing. We know how they do it. If they don't get that, then you know they've wasted their, their appointment on this subcommittee. That's the only purpose that they're there.
They don't care about truth, they don't care about information, they don't care about uncovering or, or you know, interrogating the witness for accuracy. They didn't question the methods or the OR the message even. They just went after the messengers, which we saw I I know you had a schedule conflict. You were, you were teaching college. It was yesterday, right? That was yesterday. I. Teach on Wednesday evenings and Saturday mornings. So there's no way I could have
taught on Wednesday night. And you know, Mr. Scott wasn't working. He could not beam me down to DC for an appearance on Thursday. So. And I realized I don't know who's in the chat here or the age group, but they might not know who Mr. Scott is, but he was the original engineer, chief engineer, whatever on the original Star Trek series, right? So. For the young members, if you've heard Scotty beam me up, that's who Mr. Scott was.
Scott was. He was the engineer that ran the the teleporter that he rented everything. Yeah, he said. Yeah, actually he did. He ran the warp drives and everything, right? Yeah. The only thing I never saw on Star Trek, I think was a cha hall. They that's the only thing I think they didn't have. Well, I didn't see any passageways secured for field day. I didn't see any of that either. So. You know what they did do in the
next generation, though? When they came up, they realized they needed to have a chow hall of some kind or a dining facility. So they started having, they started beaming food in. They had like one of the what the heck was it called? There was a machine that you could, they'd go computer tea, Earl Grey hot. He ordered it like a military tag so he would comma. Tea. Comma, Yeah, Earl Grey, comma. And then like hot or cold, right. So that was that was the famous Jean Luc Picard.
He would go, you know, computer tea, Earl Grey hot. And then he would go, it would beam down with some kind of, it was a reconstructor. And anyhow, so there it is. Cookie is very disappointed by the way that Cookie is in the chat. He's one of our buddies that we see in all the Twitter spaces. And, and he was very upset that you did not make it down there from the teleporter. He's upset with Mr. Scott, not with you. So. Thank you SO.
You saw some of the testimony, you got to to reflect on it. What was your big takeaways? Were there any things that you thought were bombshell from the guys or was there anything new that you hadn't heard before, 'cause I know, you know, we all kind of talk in a circle here, but sometimes these guys drop new stuff on us. In terms of of, of tangible information that came forward on the testimony, which almost never happens in these things that they're all rehearsed.
Everyone knows what they're going to talk about going in there, except for the poor men and women who have to sit opposite the dais and be berated. My biggest take away was how shameless the Democrats were in attacking their their patriotism, their commitment to the rule of law and the US Constitution. They were just absolutely shameless. And you know, that tells me there's there's no interest in at least half the Congress that's. Right. To try to identify where these
failings are taking place. They don't want to hear it and they just want to attack the messenger, discredit the message, and if possible, dirty them up personally so much that they become NPG non persona, non grata. Yeah, PN. GNPC is a different thing. That's the the non player characters, which is to say what they are actually the the people that sort of are automatons and simply don't make any sense. It it is that's. Just really, really they did the same thing with you.
I, I can't imagine how those, those patriots felt sitting there. And hopefully I'll have a chance to talk to, to each of them and find out to be personally attacked like that. I was attacked just in Rolling Stones, CNN and New York Times and I don't have any feelings. I've been married more than once. My I have no feelings, no self esteem. I I have grown children. You enlisted. Yeah. It's just, it's over. And and I was upset by what I saw in print.
I, I, you know, I can't imagine how they felt. Somebody was. Attacked by the. Eternity in my testimony, but not like they were. I was going to say because they, they did come after you. All right, folks, I, I realized that I, I did a, I did a good introduction for you last night when you popped into a Twitter space and started rolling. I didn't do as good of an introduction today. So those of you who have not seen George Hill, and many of you probably do recognize him.
George is an FBI whistleblower. He came out of retirement to get into the fight with us with the suspendables. He has been in this for quite a while with us now. He has been on at least two of our good podcasts. You can go look those up if you want to hear his back story in
long form. But quite quickly he was on one side working for the military and did military intelligence for the United States Marine Corps for about 13 years and then another thirteen years or so for the United States Navy, retired as a senior chief. And then also on the civilian side, had worked for the NSA for about five years or so, if my
memory serves. And then did about another 11 years of federal service working for the FBI as a senior intelligence analyst, which is to say an intelligence, sorry, a supervisory intelligence analyst, which makes him the guy that would approve documents and sort of foster the culture within the Intel folks in the Boston field office, including running the Boston Marathon task force, the the bombing task force, which we've talked about South.
Some of you will, like I said, will be familiar with him. You'll be familiar with the story. We actually did a, an interview about the Boston Marathon bombing again. And then I, I managed to not tape any of the sound. So I'm not sure how good an interview it was. It was both of me struggling and probably about like we were today. But this is this is, I think a good timely time to bring you in and kind of have that discussion about what, oh, we lost him.
We're going to reconnect with George here. We'll just keep talking about it. At the end of the day, George has been able to expose a bunch of things from his position within the FBI that many people did not have access to. They did not, they didn't see the same things. The supervisor see things in a broader scope. And they are able to, you know, personally take responsibility for certain things. But they also are able to sit back further and have a a little bit more. There he is.
Where's that George? There he is. Can you hear me now, bud? Oh, you're muted. Loud and clear. Sorry. There he is. So, you know, George worked in in Boston. And what he saw was something that wouldn't probably go to frontline agents. And the conversations that he was party to were a little bit different than most people would would be able to hear. And one of those was that they they. Played your, your video testimony about it. This was about the Bank of America information.
Do you mind kind of setting up what that was and why that was such a big deal? Why they wanted to drop it in the into the the testimony yesterday 'cause I think they were trying to make a bigger point that about weaponization. So I'll, I'll just assume that not everyone in the chat or everyone who watches this video or listens to the podcast knows
what happened. So on or about January 8th or 7th, Bank of America took it upon themselves to data mine their customer base and they pulled from that any BOA customer who used ABOA product, whether that be a debit card or credit card either in Washington DC or in Nova, the Northern Virginia area. And they date ranged it between on the front end 5 January, on the back end 7 January. So that was a date range. The data came from the customer
base. If you had purchased a hot dog from a street vendor and use a credit card or a ball cap from the Smithsonian Institution and use your BOA credit card, you were on that list and just. To be clear, are those allegations or information that you may have been involved in a federal crime or that's just a completely arbitrary date and time range that was around that event?
BOA took it upon themselves. So one of the things that I, I, I, I want to get back to it, but I think this is an important point and, and I keep, I fail to make it almost every time. BOA and the FBI, the FBI maintains that the Bank of America did it of their own volition. And if someone, quote, gives us something, we're going to ingest it, which the FBI did. They wrote an EC and electronic communication, uploaded it to Sentinel, which is the system of record. But here's some key questions
that Congress needs to get into. Who at the Bank of America said, hey, we're going to do this because we've already seen IC influence throughout Silicon Valley, right? Was it's just some Uber patriot at at Bank of America said, hey, we wanted, we want to help. Or was it a retired DOJ or FBI or CIA person that said, hey, you need to do this, you know, because at, at that level they're not doing keystrokes and, and, you know, doing data polls, right?
That's a that's a policy decision that goes down to some people that are doing the marching. Or did this happen you know, bro to bro hey Kyle, hey bro need to do something for me. You know we're not going to do an NSL. We're not going to do you know any official documentation just pull it. We need it right away. Have. You ever dealt, have you ever dealt with Bank Secrecy Act? Is that something you're familiar with at all? Not that much. I only my last two years were
gangs and drugs. That doesn't, right? But you know what I mean. So I yeah. I like, I like the idea that your last two years in the government were gangs and drugs. That's, that's actually some people's experience. We got to get Phil on to talk about it at some point too, because my understanding was Bank Secrecy Act, the Bank Privacy Secrecy Act stuff actually prohibits the, the free handing over without legal process. I'm not 100% sure that they were
supposed to be able to do that. That may have been actually a violation of federal law. And, and the only because I know that that that was a common understanding that people had that if you wanted to come get something, you had to produce a subpoena or the NSL or they weren't even allowed to give it
to you. And and that's partially to protect the bank from that bro to bro interaction, which could compromise their fiduciary duty to privacy and stuff because bank records are some of the more private things that people have, you know, telephone records. There is a, there is an expectation that those are not
going to be made public. So it's kind of interesting that they decided to go. I mean, there is that expectation, obviously you and I both have that whether Bank of America does or not is another animal. Right. So continuing on, so a congressman brought that up some some BOA misbehaviors, I forget his name, I apologize, but he's clearly a defender of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
So I apologize. I don't remember his name, but you know, he said very articulately and clearly that there are a lot of other issues pending before various committees in Congress of BOA misbehavior. So anyhow, back to the original monologue. They did that data poll and then they looked even further. So if you, when you showed up on that list, if you had ever in your entire history with Bank of America, used ABOA product to
purchase a firearm. So if you purchased a shotgun at Walmart to go pheasant hunting in South Dakota, you're going to move to the top of that list. So there were two lists essentially they, they filtered the, the list of all the people that were in DC that they were able to get a credit card transaction or any other BOA product that were used.
January, you said 5th to 8th, 5 to 7. OK. So during the the the days on either side of January 6th, they grabbed that and then they filtered that against people who bought firearms. Right. So they basically just stacked it. So they got those people. They. Sorted it like. Cream, you know, in in milk before pasteurization. It rose to the top and then that you're on the list.
And what did that Also on that list is anybody who bought a ticket, and I forget the date range on that talking over three years ago, anyone who bought a ticket to fly to any one of the three DC airports, Dulles, BWI or Reagan, right. And that had a larger time frame because just in case they, you know, bought the ticket for a flight that goes out on January 5th, but they didn't use her BOA card. They want to make sure that they captured that person in the data
poll as well. Right, because that's really important that they tell that information. Now, does this remind you, did you see this thing we did with Sony La Bosca about the the air marshals following people during those days? Yes, I. Did. Yes, I did. And so. This is a concerted effort, not just from the federal government to do this in multiple agencies, but now we're talking about adding like some of the biggest commercial banks in this country.
And, and you guys had some pushback there. So I, I know that we should give credit where it's due to the people that did the right thing when it was the right thing to do it. The FBI in Boston, which was your office pushed back. But the pushback actually came with sort of a revelation. I think that's what Thomas Massie was getting to in his playing of that video yesterday.
Do you mind kind of laying out the pushback and then sort of why you guys couldn't open a case and some of the rationale and what it means? So I want to give a a background. I want to kind of preempt, you know, someone else watching this video and writing another hit piece. I was responsible for two intelligence analysts in my last two years in the Bureau. So I had the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area for six states
that I was responsible for. And then I also had two embedded analysts, one at the Commonwealth Fusion Center, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and the other at the Boston Regional Intelligence Center, the Brick, as it's referred to. OK. So I would work with the SSA Supervisory special agent in charge of, you know, he had the domestic terrorism threat and I talk to him every day, every
day. And I, when I went in for my ONDCP meetings, Office of National Drug Control Policy, when I went in for those weekly meetings, I would meet with the SSAI would also meet with my supervisor face to face, because there's no, you know, telephone and, and this sort of medium is fine, but there's nothing better than face to face. Yes, I would meet with this gentleman and we would discuss, you know, various cases, various, you know, threats that
may be metastasizing out there. And certainly January 6th was one of them. And he said, look at, you know, look at this lead that that we got sent from, from WFO Washington field office. And in that lead, and I don't remember, I'm kind of settling on the middle number, I'm just going to say 7 individuals that were on that original Bank of America list were listed on the EC that came to Boston and said you need to open up cases on these people.
And instead of so staying with my preemption of a hit piece to come out probably over the weekend or tomorrow, I saw the names. I went to my own computer, saw the original EC, but could not open the big BOA spreadsheet because you can do that in Sentinel. You can restrict certain aspects of what people can see. Because I, my squad was not set the lead, right. I, I am an intelligence squad leader, not an investigative
squad leader. So the the SSA said, you know, based on what and WFO said, well, these people were in the Washington area during this, you know, one or around January 6. So you need to open up at least a API preliminary investigation on these individuals. And, the SSA said, not without predication. And, and so people understand the predication for a preliminary investigation. A lot of this actually goes to what we saw in the Durham
report. So some of this, some of FB is kind of internal policy is becoming more and more popular with people in the world because they didn't have an understanding of it. They didn't have a, a need to understand it. The Pi, the, the preliminary investigation, the, the predicate is that there has to be an allegation of information. It doesn't have to be credible yet. That's what the Pi can, can ascertain. But there has to be information that somebody did something. It's a federal crime.
So you can't just say I'm going to open it. And then there's a lower burden. That's known as the assessment. And that just is an authorized law enforcement purpose, which might be to say to obtain information that if people did something and then you could try to figure out who those people were. So theoretically, they could have gotten this information through an assessment. They might have been able to authorize it.
Regardless, API would not have been appropriate because there was no information that these people were involved in a federal crime. This was just a Bank of America surrender for no reason. Right. So I'm, I'm paraphrasing a conversation that just placed three years ago. So you know, the the gentleman in question, who in Full disclosure is a friend of mine, we've been hiking together, camping together, tried to kill ourselves on a couple mountains together.
He's a friend of mine. I'm not going to try and hide that, but he may have a different recollection than I do of the exact wording. But that is the the gist in terms of accuracy of what happened, which was pressure to open up cases or at least API on these seven people. To which this gentleman, former law enforcement officer, former
Marine Corps military policeman. And you know who, who really believes in his heart in in what the original mission of the FBI is and is a strong advocate of, of the Constitution, Bill of Rights. And I'm not saying that because he's my friend, but because I've seen it in evidence over years. As are many people. Do this, as are many.
People I think that you and I have come across in the FBI, even if they tend to be a dying breed at this point, I think it's worth noting there's some really decent human beings that have worked in the FBI. And it's sad that it takes such strength of character to continue doing your job, but yet keep those constitutional boundaries in place against pressure, whether that be promotion or, or, you know, maybe some, some goodies like ATDY somewhere.
It shouldn't be like that to to be a man or woman of integrity. But nonetheless, it does require strength to do it. So he flexed his, you know, character muscles and said, no, we're not doing this. To which WFO said, well, we're going to call your ASAC. And, and I'm again, I'm paraphrasing a conversation that took place three years ago. Fine, call my ASAC. Who is another Iraqi war veteran? Former F18 pilot, Annapolis graduate ball and strike umpire. Constitutional Constitution
Conservative the. The kind of people that you want running law enforcement. That right knows what the guardrails look like. And the SAC gave, I don't know who the SA or I'm sorry, the ASAC assistant special agent in charge, I don't know who they spoke to at WFO, what that person's pay grade or position was, I don't know. But the outcome was the same. No, we're not doing it.
And then it was elevated up to the SAC and now Jill Sanborn testified Underoath. No, I did not speak with the SAC, so I don't know who the SAC spoke to because that's what she said, but the SAC spoke at least hope that she. Was not lying in front of Congress when she testified. Yeah, so I don't know who the SAC spoke to. The SAC didn't come and give me a down brief, you know, a debrief on it. That's not the way the the world works. But the outcome was the same.
You know, we're not we're not doing this. So at the end of the day, nothing happened. But there's some other questions that Congress should be asking going forward. Did Washington Field office or any other office open up a preliminary investigation on these seven? Like there's there doesn't seem to be an iterative process to what Congress is doing, right? It's one step and we're done. One step and we're done.
You're never going to get to true reform or true action in terms of oversight without asking those follow on questions. There's something about so when I used to work surveillance, we used to laugh about the way and the inefficiency of the system and and I used to always tell people that are unofficial model was full blast, half assed, right. And that seems like the way that Congress is going at some of these things, like they're really excited about sharing information.
They're really excited about going out there and being loud about it, but it's full blast and half assed. Steve friend gave me a great example and and I know that you guys all kind of experience different levels of this, but he gave me a call and he goes, I got a call from my hotel in DC from somebody who's in Congress that was going to be at the the testimony the next day. And it's in the evening.
It's like 8:00 at night. And they said, Hey, can you grab us a copy of every single one of the awards that you've ever gotten while you, you know, worked in military law enforcement service? And it's like, dude, I'm in a hotel in DCI, don't have my records, like, I don't know, but full blast, half assed. They're really, really excited about doing something, but they're not organized in the way
that people might expect. And so, you know, there's this this understanding of the word investigation. You can do investigations in many ways. Congress is doing them full blast, half assed in so much as they're interested, they're getting information from you all, but they're not organized in a way that we would logically conduct an organization or an what do you call it, an
investigation? Yeah. It's just not, there's no, there's no one that's quarterbacking this thing that has a a background in it. It seems like from my end and and maybe from yours as well. No, my time on Capitol Hill. God, I felt like Methuselah walking down the hallway. With the exception of Dianne Feinstein and a few other people, I don't think anybody was any older than me. I mean, it's, it was all, you know, 20 somethings, maybe some 30 somethings, right?
Minimal life experience. We're not making fun of you for being 20, but. No, but you got to, You got. To earn those creases on your face, you got to earn the Gray hairs in your beard. That's how it works. Or if you're a lady who puts in purple in your hair, you just have to make an appointment, I guess. You don't have to know anything. That's a prerequisite. That is a prerequisite. So that's challenging, though. That's a challenging thing to look at because there was there
is a way to conduct this thing. It's not being done. And the expectation that the American people have is that they're trying to come to answers. And I think a lot of it is they are also trying to do a competing interest, which is that they're trying to get good sound bites. And those are not necessarily the same thing as you and I both know.
Like, you know, when you do an investigation, your job almost, if you want to do it honestly, is to try to disprove your original supposition the the same way the scientific method works out. It's like, I think this happened. Is there any evidence to prove it otherwise? Is there evidence that proves that this is the case? You know, you, you, you don't have a stake in whether it's true or false. You just have to go and find out the answer.
Can I hit the pause button on just on that point for just a second? I want to just sharpen that, sharpen it intelligence supervisor. So only like in my last two years at the Bureau, when we were writing intelligence products, did intelligence analysts have to write what's called a competing hypothesis. And brother, let me tell you, you could have written them in crayon that, you know, it would have been so weak.
So essentially what Marcus was doing in his job, one of the whistleblowers, in case people are just tuning in, was offering a competing line of thought. And as we've seen with the interactions with Silicon Valley, with the previous testimony on Capitol Hill, with the so-called journalist, that competing ideas are not acceptable. We, we must have safe spaces. We must have censorship.
We must have, you know, information, disinformation police that people have grown so weak that they're not willing to listen to a contrary hypothesis or some contrary train of thought is really sad. And a civilized society cannot function without competition of thoughts and, and, and, and some, and I'm not talking violence, just to be clear, whoever watches this, but some degree of conflict, conflict in terms of, of verbal conflict and talking things out and having
discussions. If, if, if you're not uncomfortable at least once or twice a day, then you're, you're living in a, you're living in a bubble, right? If all you hear is music to your ears and there's not a sour note in there at some point in time, you're, you're missing out on really, truly life's Joyce. Because how can you appreciate anything if if you're not, you know, challenged on one or two things a day? So. The Durham report mentions the FBI lacked analytical rigor.
And they're, they're dealing with crossfire. What he's talking about. And and that's that's what I wanted to kind of hone in on the point. This is not a universe or this is not a sorry a unique feature to Crossfire Hurricane or headquarters based investigations. It is it's now pervasive, I think in the at least the FB is version of the Intel world.
And so when you don't have, when you don't have that analytical rigor, which is to stay vigorous debate on competing hypotheses as you mentioned, and you have it written in crayon, then you don't get to the exculpatory information that you want to have because nobody wants to bring a bad case, at least not an honest operator. And I think many people do actually operate honestly. But if the culture and the rules are not set up in favor, then you get a problem with that.
It may not be related, but I'm curious, did you feel any kind of kinship watching Marcus go up there? Obviously he was in sort of a, he was in an SOS role as opposed to the IA role, but also a Marine, you know, kind of, I thought he represented himself very, very well. Is not someone who's done public speaking, you know, didn't obviously look for that spotlight. Did you you feel any kinship seeing that guy up there getting getting hammered? And this is not criticism of
Marcus by any means. It was painful to watch the way to watch a brother Marine was was treated someone who signed a blank check and said, Hey, I'm I'm willing to give up my life for for this country. It was just it was horrible. I'm sorry, after six years of college, I can't come up with any better wording that, but it was just horrible. It was offensive. It just it was cringe worthy to
say the least. And when he very emotionally warned the dangers of being a whistleblower going forward, if someone listening to that wasn't moved, they're heartless. And I'm about as close to heartless as you want to get. And that was tough to watch. When you texted me last night, you said, you know, delete this on read. But but it moved me. That's what you meant. I I was like something like what moved? And then I went, oh, like it was an emotional movie moment.
I think that was the case for for everybody who watched it. A lot of people felt the same way about Garrett's testimony and, you know, knowing what happened to his family. But what happened to this? You know, nobody has heard Mark as a story. He's very, very humble and quiet about it. And I reached out to him last night and I just said, you know, how you doing, buddy? Like we've never talked, but we're brothers in this in this
fight. And and as you know, like you, when you experience the same conflict, sometimes you don't have to have anything except the same background and experiences to immediately connect to human beings like that. So I right away felt like I was talking to to someone that I've known for a long time because he did the right thing in the right way. And that makes him, you know, that makes him one of one of me. I'm going to throw this up there. I just threw it on the screen.
You can't see it, but I put up the, the gifts and go that we have folks, we're raising money for Garrett and for Marcus. We've had well over a quarter million views of this on the, on the Twitter that has been pushed out there. I have, I can't see how many on, on true social, but some of you have been incredibly generous. I've seen donations 5, you know, $600,000, awesome, awesome, incredible.
I think I'm going to tell you the thing I'm going to play a quick little clip from Garrett. I think you should be able to hear this too. This is just kind of his opening statement and then I'm going to let you know just because Garrett's such a good dude. So bear with me for a second here, George. We'll see if this YouTube does it. I'm.
Sad. I'm disappointed and I'm angry that I have to be here to testify about the weaponization of the FBI and DOJ, weaponization against not only its own employees, but against those institutions and individuals that are supposed to protect the American people. I'm here today because even though I'm wrongfully suspended from the FBI, I remain duty bound to the American people to play my small role in rectifying these issues. After all, I never swore an oath to the FBI.
I swore an oath to the Constitution. I'm. Going to cut it right there. There's 5 minutes of that folks. It's on the give send go page. It's give send go.com/kyle Serafin. I saw the chair and put in the chat. Thanks so much, Sharon. I appreciate that folks. That's Garrett O'boyle. He is a friend. He is a suspendable. He is a very, very good man. And here's something else that you'll know about Garrett. Garrett also has not been paid in almost 300 days.
Marcus has not been paid in over 400 days. And so when I connected with Garrett last night and I connected with Marcus, my first question was, is like, hey, how are you guys doing financially? You know, where should we focus our resources? Where can we direct our fire? And the thing that Garrett told me was is look, I'm not going to lose my house and I'm not going to go hungry. Help out Marcus. So I mentioned on the page that we're going to be helping both of their families.
It's not going to be 5050 split. Garrett told me, give everything we make right now for the first month or so and let's dig Marcus out of the hole. Marcus told me that he was 90 to 120 days away from just selling, you know, selling his house. And he said, well, what would you do if you did that? He goes, I don't know, be a gypsy, live in a, you know, live in an RV. He's got little kids, you know, he's married and he's been doing this thing alone for over a
year. And for me, that's the big tragedy of it because I've been trying to connect people. You know, it's one thing to go through hell. As long as you have your brothers with you, it's not nearly the same hell as going through it alone. And I think that we all kind of know how that feels. He's been on his own, he's connected now. I told him whether he likes it or not, he's a suspendable, He doesn't get a choice. We've adopted him.
We're taking him under. And right now it looks like the give send go. And if you folks will bear with me, I'm going to pull up the dashboard here. I just want to show you because I, I'm all about 100% transparency when it comes to this kind of stuff.
I want you to understand exactly what we're talking about, George. You won't see it, but the campaign dashboard right here, it shows that in the last 24 hours, because this thing didn't have any donations during the week prior to this hearing, the last 24 hours we've had 600, sorry, 762 donations and that's put us at $55,000. That's going to be in that pot, $55,000 in 24 hours. That's an incredible outpouring of generosity for people.
We're going to pull this guy. I'm not going to be able to fill in the hole that he's that he's lost for the last year. I'm sure of that. I know he made more money than that, but we're going to try to replenish it so that they are not thinking about selling a house. I don't want him to have to worry about that at all. And as we mentioned about, I think I did this on Tracy Bean's podcast, but we talked about Cash Patel supporting these
guys. Any chance you, you're a retired guy, you're a retired federal employee. You made a decent salary. Any chance that you'd want to change your federal salary and the, and the possibility of, of being able to retire for like, you know, 3 or $4000 from a guy named Cash Patel? Would that, would that do it for you? Would that make you just sacrifice your whole career? Yeah, I mean, I'm a Marine, so I'm not very good at math, so, but I can even figure that one out. Yeah, No, it's.
So sad. That's the talking point that we're seeing on some of these very disingenuous leftist media. They're like, oh, he's paid by, you know, a Trump associate. Well, first of all, he's paid by a charity that a Trump associate created because he's a decent dude and he went through the whole Russiagate thing. We've got maybe a couple more minutes. I want to, I want to see if you wouldn't mind giving me your rundown. Have you read the Durham report, or at least some of the
highlights out of it? I've read about, I've read the executive summary and I'm about 1/3 through the the entire report, OK. What's, let's just ask this because this is going to be interesting to people. You don't work for the FBI anymore. You don't have to read any of this stuff. Why are you reading the Durham report, a 300 page, you know, findings report from a special counsel?
Well, some of it actually captures my life experience with the Bureau and I'll get into that in a in a second. But I think anyone who cares about this country and cares about their children and their grandchildren, it's not going to just, it's not going to fix itself.
So Durham, I think, from what I've read, does a very good job of calling out malpractice of federal law enforcement and the Department of Justice. And unfortunately, because Lyndon Johnson ended civics courses and I think in 1965, a lot of people don't understand just how this constitutional Republic works. They, you know, even some people in our sphere adopt the mantra of democracy. They don't understand representative democracy. They don't understand proportional representation.
They understand very little. And so the Dorm report to someone, and it's not a pejorative term, it just means that they lack knowledge. But if someone is ignorant of how our constitutional Republic is supposed to work, the dorm report may have well been written in Swahili. It it makes no sense to them. That's right, they don't care. And it's not because they're heartless and they don't care. It's just they don't understand it.
I think you're correct. Somebody mentioned in the chat that this is just light reading for you. And in some ways it probably is 'cause I know the density of the kind of things you had to consume in your previous your previous experience. But it, it's, it's showing that constitutional crisis that we have when one supposedly a political executive agency, which is really hard for me to grasp. And I feel like they may even be
executive agencies in general. They're supposed to be more beholden to Congress so that there is a balance on it. And they're not right now because of the Administrative Procedures Act and the fact that a lot of the stuff has been subbed out and Congress has sort of given away their authorities
for the last 70 years. They these these agencies can't act the way that they're supposed to because they are now instead of having 2 minders, 2 guardrails, a left and a right, they really only have the guardrail on the left. And they are pushing off into the right space right now, at least today. But historically they've done the same thing on the opposite side. I mean, we know the FBI has gone after the left in no uncertain terms. So it it just doesn't have that.
True left and right boundary to keep it from from getting into the dangerous sort of secret police range, which is where we're dealing with right now, which is what these guys are doing, crafting elections like that. Yeah, I'm but back-to-back onto the Durham report. So one of the the instances that he talks about in the report is the reopening of the Clinton Foundation and how that was shuttered. The investigation into the Clinton Foundation. Yes.
So that was being run by the US Attorney's office out in Utah. Why they chose Utah I don't remember, but there were Bureau wide emails going out looking for SOS staff, operations specialists and intelligence analysts to assist with the investigation. They could either go TDY to Utah or they could work from their, their Home Office and they were looking for specific skill sets, people with, you know, banking experience, monitoring money laundering, forensic accounting,
those kinds of things. And over the months I did what any good interrogator would do. I established rapport with the SIA who was organizing that and was basically, for lack of a better word, collecting just how the well the investigation was going. So recognizing that I have non disclosure agreements, the investigation was going quite well and then like someone defined. Quite well as in they were. They were getting the information that they were believing was.
There, Yeah, they they had them, to use an artillery term, They had the Clinton Foundation bracketed. They were ready to fire for effect. Do people know what that means? Folks in the chat? Do you know what it means to have something bracketed? They've got, they've got the, you know, they know where the target is because they've hit all the spots that are not the target but are around the target.
Fire for a fact means they're actually going to try to actually make an impact on the defined target. Now that they've found where the target is not sort of thing is that is that. Just up to that point and someone, I don't know who, I'm not going to speculate, pull the plug, that's it. And. The Durham report says that as much. Yes, yeah. So I've watched it happen in real time. So that's what I was talking about regarding the Durham report.
And then the other thing that's not captured in the Durham report that I'm, I'm sure the people in the chat will appreciate. But the anniversary just passed for the takedown of the Bin Laden compound and there was an IC wide e-mail that went out looking for intelligence analysts to get down to NCTC and and basically down to the DC area, people with language abilities to exploit all this is, it's called pocket litter for lack of a better term, but
it's electronic media. And we're talking electronic media. We're talking cell phones, thumb drives, laptops, desktops, the whole gambit. So they took the treasure trove? Yeah. This is the sensitive exploitation stuff. This is the s s, ES and then NTSC. That's the National Terrorist Screening Center, correct? Which is in Northern Virginia, right? OK, For three to four weeks they were clamoring. Send us people. Send us people. And then it just stopped. Has anybody seen?
I know I that was a long time ago that bin Laden was taken down. I never saw one intelligence product at any classification level from all the stuff they pulled out of there. So, and I was the national security supervisor for the FBII had the counterterrorism program amongst, you know, between and cyber and CI as well as the Boston Marathon bombing task force. So I would have had a pretty good optic on if there was any reporting that came out of that up to the TSSCI level.
Never saw anything. Who pulled the plug on that? Why do they? Yeah. Why do you attribute that to? Because here's the thing, we're we're in a speculative role right now. So you're not going to be disclosing anything that you shouldn't. This is just two guys talking about what we think may have happened. What do you believe led to that? That sort of information blackout even at the TSSCI level?
Evidence of bad policy decisions, countries that we partnered with that we shouldn't have partnered with. And I'm not going in there because I actually do have first hand knowledge of that at working at the other place. But we we got in bed with some people that we should that from a political standpoint would not bode well for any administration that. Makes sense so. I it's in my estimation, that's all it is. I don't have first hand knowledge.
I'm not giving anything away in my estimation. It's an educated guess. That's all it is, is that it's politically unpalatable to have continued exploiting that captured material. So, so crazy. I like the term pocket litter. That's a, that's a basic law enforcement thing that I think the military adopted when they started exploiting locations. Folks, pocket litter was like literally, it used to be what was in your pockets.
They'd turn it out and they'd find like, oh, he has a bus ticket here and you know, it's not lint, but it's, you know, he's got some coins and he's got a token from this machine. So you could actually find out a lot of things about people back in the day before everybody carried everything on the cell phone. But what they carried in their pockets, they had a key to a safety deposit box around their neck and they had, you know, little receipts and things like
that. So that used to be the story. It's funny how some of the words that actually, they don't have any basis in our modern society anymore, but we still use them like receipts, you know, like, did you bring the receipts? It's like, well, we used to actually have to go get receipts to find out whether or not there wasn't like an electronic record. Either there was paper or it was gone. Let's go to the videotape. Nobody's videoing anything anymore. Nobody. Is videoing anything at all?
It actually has a meaning. It's very funny. Yeah. And and we're going to tape an interview is the other kind of like there's a lot of vestiges of the analog society that continues to go on. I feel very blessed to live in the time frame that I did and it gives me the ability to connect and talk to guys like you because I know what you're talking about. I, I lived it as a child up until I was probably about 20. And then a lot of people that are younger right now, you teach
college. How weird is that? Do they? They don't want to have any experience, but they still use words. They don't even know what. They mean sometimes I have to translate just a real funny story because I I think it is. It captures it well. So a gentleman I served with in my reserve unit was getting his PhD from MIT. So he wasn't very bright, but none the less he was struggling and getting through. I'm being facetious. And he was teaching class and he made-up Monty Python and Holy
Grail reference. And this is in the early 2000s. And the class looked at him like, what? And he said, I'm not that much older than you. And that was required viewing when I was at MIT. Yeah. So it's just it's funny how things move in and out of current vernacular, but some things remain. And I'd have to say that I think, you know, there's sometimes I have to educate my
students. So when I tell them when they're writing to just Joe Friday it I have to go to YouTube, Thank you, YouTube or Rumble. And I can bring up old dragnet clips and just, you know, put up Joe Friday up there. Just the facts, ma'am, Just the facts. So, people. Don't have a concept of it even though they use things like this. I love it when I hear someone use a expression from a movie and then you mention what movie it's from and they didn't know
it was from a movie. So they'll do the Monty Python thing where they'll go like run away, run away and you're like oh that's the Knights who say knee and they go the what? And I go it's Monty Python and the holy. You're literally quoting a movie that is quite famous for a scene where the Knights yell run away and you don't even know it. My buddy used to always do the holy hand grenade.
Do you remember that one? Remember, take us thou, take us, thou Holy Hand Grenade. Oh Lord, bless this, thy holy Hand Grenade. May it blow thine enemies to small, small bits. And all of the following. He used to do that all the time, and I didn't know what it was and I had to go watch it. And so every once in a while, whenever I think about my buddy Nate, I'll go watch the Holy Hand Grenade. And I'm like, why did Nathan of all people? Because he's the most nonviolent
person you've ever met. He's the nicest human being. He's the sweetest man in my life, has always been. I told his wife when they got married, This is a weird thing to tell somebody's wife. I said, if Nate had been a girl and even an ugly one, I probably would have married him. She's like, what do I do with that? I'm like, nothing. You haven't just told you. He's my best buddy. He's just, he's an incredibly
good human being. And he loved the Holy Hand grenade, maybe because it made fun of the idea of blowing enemies to small, small bits. I think that was the bit that made him, you know, cut a go. In a holy and pious manner though, so it's OK. Correct. Yes, it was a it was a weapon that was, it was still, it was a dumb bomb, but it was a dumb bomb that was blessed by the Lord. And there you go. To get rid of the whole, the enemies of the, of the almighty.
Pretty silly stuff, folks. We're right up on the line here. So we've made it through an hour. I, I hope we've shared some information with you. Some of this stuff is going to be government overreach, which George is always a good sort of source. On I'm I'm 2 minutes late for another Skype call. Well, is that because we're going to go talk to our friend Emerald? Yeah. They'll wait for us. They know.
I told them she couldn't figure out she was struggling with the numbers that we were talking about. So we're going to be all right. You're late because I'm late. And they I told them that they were not going to get us right at the moment of thanks for sharing your expertise. The thing I love about George people and you, you can tell this from talk, listening to him talk. He's incredibly organized and he's going to like he stays on task and topic and me, I'm like chasing cats.
My brain is constantly and it whatever is interesting to me is where I go. It makes this podcast fun when I have people that that lock in on something very easy. We're going to do a quick little read of a five star review because you are listening to this show here, George. I'm going to switch back to my main camera. You've been listening to the Kyle Seraphin show. You can find us on Apple, as many of you know, you can find
us on Spotify on iHeartRadio. You can always find us on Rumble when we are doing it live, which we may have to do something kind of funky in the next couple days because I'm going to be going to hang out with Steve Friend in person and we're probably going to do some tape interviews. We're going to be spending our days working on a movie set, which will be in a new experience probably for him and kind of a fun experience for me. Again, it's been a while since I worked at Warner Brothers.
If you want to leave us a five star review and you enjoy it, here's one that you can try to emulate. We're at 459. Let's see if we can get that thing up to 500 maybe by the the end. The end of the month would be amazing. You all are doing a great job putting them up here. So this is from Steve K not K9. K 09. Put it in the other day said would this pass as a movie script? I found you by way of your first long form interview on Dan Von Gino's podcast.
I have no background in law, however I've always wanted to know the stories. Beg the question, Sorry, know the stories. I have no idea what he wrote there. Beg the stories. You're killing me, Steve, you got a you got a Proofread your comments, y'all that says what you share every week and rages and encourages me to know that our government, moreover, their bureaucracy would manipulate laws.
Scary. And at the same time, there are many voices that are more prominent than my own, taking steps to explain and expose the malfeasance. So I applaud you. To be honest, many of the stories in the interviews and scripts are many interviews sound like movie scripts that would get passed on by studios. So much hold my beer that the common men like myself would never admit to trying shaking my head.
There is a lot of awful stuff that goes on the government with the hold my beer attitude that says keep up the good work. Someday there will be a suspendable film celebrating all the achievements of this amazing group. We're going to have a a George Clooney play, George Hill, no doubt about it. That's who has to come in and make that happen. He always tells me he's got the face for radio, or maybe not even. And that's why we're going to have to get a salty, you know,
distinguished muzzle. We have to dress things up for the film. I want Bradley Cooper to play me. We've already decided this, folks. Thanks so much for tuning in for our live stream. Thanks. For those of you who have been in the chat, someone mentioned to me that replicator, the food replicator is what they used on the Star Trek Enterprise to get the food.
That's why you're there. You guys are there at the Fact Check me and help me understand the things that I forget from great pop culture 'cause my brain is like a bag of cats at the moment. We will see you again on Monday. I'm working on setting up a long form interview. It may be a little bit late on Monday 'cause I think it might be with Steve friend. We're going to be hanging out together. Also a couple of Project Veritas whistleblower is going to be in the area and we may be doing it
with them. So don't be surprised if we see some new voices in here, folks that I've hung out with and I think you're going to really appreciate it. See you soon, folks. Have a wonderful weekend and thank you for all the wonderful support you've been showing the suspendables, especially Garrett and our new friend Marcus Allen. Thanks for listening to the Kyle Seraphin show. Be sure to follow him on Twitter and Truth at Kyle Seraphin.