SLAVERY! "wHy dOn'T yOu eVeR tALk aBoUt iT?" | Ep 635

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. Got to hit the unmute button if you want to be able to talk to the folks out there. Thanks for joining us today For

today's program. Today is the Kyle Serif and Show brought to you by Patriot Protect and Patriot Coolers and it is August the 20th. It is a Wednesday. Today started off a little bit interesting for me. Usually when you get a phone call from Alex Jones before 7:00 AM, the day is going to be fun. I also got some text messages from former FBI agents showing the Predator.

You guys know the Predator? He's the the alien hunter character that has the dreadlocks and whatever and the little rocket blaster thing on his shoulder was hunting Arnold Schwarzenegger in the jungles and all that kind of thing. The Predator holding a human skull and examining it. And I went like, oh, well, what's going on out there? It turns out that CBS put out a piece yesterday that we're going to cover today, and the suspendables were prominently

mentioned. That's not surprising since I gave an interview about it. But I did want to make sure that I LED with that thought and I had to show it to my kids. And they're like, what is that? I said, well, that is a predator holding a skull. It is a recognition that that dad is out there taking scalps, which is not a nice thing to tell your kids. We're going to be covering sort of this inability of Democrats to message a very important

topic, law and order. We're also going to talk about sort of the strange narrative shift. And then I guess the main topic that it that bothers me is that people are starting to catch on that bitching about slavery. There's no other way to say it, using the word slavery, talking about racial grievances and trying to make something stick

in a historic setting. You're trying to talk about how there's a racial grievance in that it's justifiable in the year 2025 when we literally have museums dedicated to injustice, when we have memorials dedicated on federal space to the injustices that happened in slavery and the civil rights movement afterwards. If you try to make that stick, you're going to find out that you're all by yourself.

And I think that's what people on the hard left have have realized that this narrative that they've been able to push. And it did get picked up and it did get some traction. And it's been holding over people for slightly over a decade. That in the era of mass media, social media and the ability to communicate with real people, then you can debunk it really, really quickly.

And as you walk out there in the world, you just go, oh, you can talk about slavery, you can talk about racial injustices, but that's not real. That's why you're getting these so-called like black fatigue movements. That's why you're seeing people even on the on on the in black communities that are just going like, why are we lying about this? And so I found that very fascinating. It was a lead story over at MSNBC. It was a story from NBC. And so we're going to talk about that.

And then sort of just the uptick in trying to push any kind of psyop on the American people can be debunked so quickly that it's not actually effective. It can't be effective because the only way the psyop works is when you have very, very low information. We are slowly transitioning, I think out of an era of low information, quote UN quote,

experts. I'm going to talk about sort of the Dunning Kruger curve, if you guys are familiar with that and where that leaves us when these people are out there trying to push nonsense that you can't actually, you can't actually follow up with. So before we do, let's talk about the folks over at Patriot Protect. Suggest you guys, if you are not doing something about your digital data, you are basically asking for an eventual

disappointment. We use patriot-protect.com slash Kyle. That's the company Patriot Protect patriot-protect.com/kyle 15% off for the annual membership or the annual subscription if you use my name and make sure you're putting that name in so you don't lose any money on this. It comes down to a couple of dollars a day. And what are you trying to do?

You're trying to keep your emails, you're trying to keep your address, your phone number, you're trying to keep your personal information things people that you're connected to that you're related to out of the people search data broker websites that basically put it all up there to get clicks and sell advertising. And the product is your information. It may not be totally private information. It's just personal information. And when someone has that information, they can pretend to

be you. They can pretend that they are a company that does business with you and get things like your information on a, on a weak moment or you're driving, you're distracted, you're busy. We could all become victim of this. And statistically speaking, it's not really a an if you're going to be targeted at some point. The question is when. If you want to try to delay that as long as possible or take your name out of the stack, make

yourself a harder target. Go and check out my friends at patriot-protect.com slash Kyle. Again, it's pennies a day. It's dollars a month. It comes down to, I don't know, 80 or 90 bucks a year. It's a pretty easy thing. It's a 1 cup of coffee if you're a Starbucks type or if you're a Dunkin' Donuts or whatever it is or the other ones, Dutch Bros, something like that. If you spend coffee one time a month, you can basically not do that and keep your name out of

the pile up there. Check out my friends over there. So you guys, protect yourself. Don't make yourself a scam victim. What I don't want to see is people responding later and telling me, Oh yeah, I got scammed by something and here's what it was. And we do see that all the time, including in my own family. All right, let's get into today's program, see what we can talk about, and I'll show you some of the skulls that we

collected metaphorically. Metaphorically, of course, my friends, for those of you that are joining us in the chat, we really appreciate all of you being there. We have a vibrant and and sort of interactive program. You guys may not realize this, but the Kyle Serfin show is always done live. There's no tape delay here.

And so we've got people joining us in chat on both YouTube where you can come and find us without ads if you want to get it streamed right away or you can join us over on Rumble. Same story. If you watch the show live, you don't have to deal with that. If you watch us over on X, you can actually participate in the chat as well and it should actually bounce back and forth. So the folks over on YouTube

will see it as well. We're not able to integrate everything together only because Rumble is a slightly inferior platform. It may be where the base of our our audience is, but it is frustrating. So yesterday we talked a little bit about the Co directorship in the FBI and let me retouch that real quickly. I'd like you guys to have like a real strong sense. Let let me begin it with a question.

If you were doing your job well, that wherever it is that you do your job, if you were satisfying the requirements of your job description, if you were doing the work that was assigned to you in a satisfactory manner, would you ever expect to find someone sharing your job with you? Wouldn't that be a little bit demoralizing? Would it be a little bit concerning that somebody is now sharing the duties and responsibilities of the job that was meant for? One, that's Part 1.

The argument is, is that if you're doing the job well, then you don't need another person to do it. And if you're claiming the job is too big for you, then possibly you're not the right person for it. I had someone write me at 2:00 AM last night to let me know this is not the first time we've had a Co director of the FBI, a Co deputy director. In fact, in the 1980s we had three. We have 3 executive assistant directors. Who cares? Last year we had 6 executive assistant directors.

I'm correct in saying there's never been a code deputy director. There have never been two people filling the job of the deputy director. What you guys probably don't know is the FBI org chart, which I wouldn't expect you to. And this is only critical in so much as it touches on a few major topics. 1 Democrats inability to address crime and they're sort of soft on crime policies, which doesn't resonate with normal people, including

people on the left. People who live in high crime areas are not likely to go like, oh, the criminals have the same skin color as me, so I'm OK with them being criminals and killing someone in my family or stealing things out of my home or making it unsafe for my children. All right, so that's part one that doesn't make any bit of sense. Real Simply put, the FBI org chart looks like this.

It's a straight line down until you get to what used to be the executive assistant director level, but that's not there anymore. There's Cash Patel at the top, There's Dan Bongino directly below him. And below that is a guy named William Rivers. That's the 1-2 and the three in the Bureau. And theoretically Bongino handles sort of like operational side of of the FBI and Rivers handles the administrative side.

So they are there, you know, it's like #2 and #2.75, they're not really a true #3 because he does handle a lot of stuff. And be it used to be that you had all these branches and the branches were called executive assistant directors. To try to make a technicality out of this is silly.

It's very simple that a man who was the highest elected law enforcement officer in the state of Missouri has been tapped to come in and join the FBI to do the job with another guy who was already laid out as being competent. And he's only been there for six months. So the short version of it is I have no expectation of Dan Bongino sticking around. It might happen in the shortest

60 days. Supposedly, we're going to see the the attorney general step down on September the eighth, and then he's going to step into the FBI role. I cannot imagine if you're a Dan Bongino, both with the ego of Dan Bongino, but also with the frustration that he's living with right now. And he shared that very, very significantly. How do you go and and try to stay at an agency that has just said there needs to be another

person to do your job? I'm going to debunk some of the the maggot talking points for you in just a second as well. But first, I want to cover this other piece. This is going back about a couple weeks ago. This is what I believe spurred this action. Politics may have spurred the August purge of five veteran FBI agents. Now, this is a story that was written by Daniel Clayman at CBS, and I spoke with Dan last night for about half an hour, and he ended up quoting me in

this piece. I disagree with his use of the word purge, and you guys might know why. And the reason why is because the FBI already started doing purges, and they did so starting in in, let's call it September of 2021, potentially a little bit earlier than that.

The purge already happened inside the FBI, so you don't get to call a dropping of a of a few people that are in senior management a quote UN quote purge or dropping a couple of brick agents a purge when they already got rid of all the people that were unvaccinated Christians by default believing that they were Trump supporters. You can't go out and call that a purge when we had significant losses that happened underneath

the Biden administration. However, the story goes is that 5 veteran FBI agents were fired earlier this month. This was about two weeks ago by director Cash Patel offering no explanation. It's kind of funny because Dan goes on to actually list what the explanation was because some of them were actually explained. There's a despicable purge underway inside the senior underway of senior FBI officials says Mark Zaid. You guys know who Mark Zaid is?

He's a quote UN quote whistleblower attorney. If you, if you read people on the left, in reality, he's a very aggressive left wing partisan guy. He's part of law fair against Donald Trump. And more importantly, he's also part of a lawsuit that the FBI Agents Association has been pursuing against the FBI, trying to keep the names of January 6th prosecuting agents or January 6th investigators hidden. So he's operated on behalf of a previous set and he's clearly working in partisan means.

Unfortunately, what we basically traded is like our guys versus their guys when we should be looking for a non partisan agency. And I kind of thought that's what Caspatel was going to do. Where it gets kind of funny for me, they bring in the story of Bryan Driscoll, which we've covered here previously. Bryan Driscoll was a a hostage rescue team operator. He was a SWAT team member in New York. I have friends who worked directly with this man, Driscoll.

He's referred to as a highly decorated agent who took part in numerous counterterrorism operations, was a short stint acting director. So he was the number one in the FBI before Cash came in. And that was an accident and kind of a screw up, the classic governmental work and was believed to be kind of thought of as a swashbuckling tactical operator. He did have Cash Patel's trust. I know that because Cash Patel told me that directly, explicitly, and then he got knocked out.

It's my take that that Brian Driscoll was removed from the FBI in sort of collateral damage, doing the thing that you'd expect that a good manager might do, that a good officer would do if you were in the military, which is to say, when someone comes and asks you to do something illegal, immoral or unethical, you say no. And then if there's consequences, so be it. I think he'll end up being vindicated. They mentioned that in the story as well. So Driscoll's story, I think, is

actually the worst of them. It's one of the collateral damage. I have, like I said, friends who worked with him in multiple different arenas, both in New York and when he was at Hostage Rescue. What's fun is, is that the suspendables are prominently mentioned in this story. And it's not often that the mainstream media that I cover every morning actually talks about us. So here it is, the suspendables.

There are other factors that have led some sources close to the agents and lawyers representing them to question whether the abrupt removals were the result of outside political influence. Interesting to call me a political influence, but so be it. The question surrounds the role of a small band of right leaning former agents who clashed with the FBI under directors Comedy and Ray and have been vocal critics of the FBI that they believe is weaponized against them.

I'm going to actually push back just a little bit. I don't believe that the FBI is weaponized against Kyle Seraphin, nor is it just weaponized against Steve Friend or Garrett Boyle or Phil Kennedy or George Hill. I believe the FBI is weaponized against you, and by you, I mean all people in America who believe in the Bill of Rights. That's been my ongoing contention.

You guys can check the tape, take a little look and go back and listen to the first Dan Bongino episode that I ever appeared on, and that was in September of 2022. You can roll back three years. And in the three years that I've had a public face, I've always told you guys this is not about politics when it comes to the FBI.

It's about American liberty. And I've substantiated this by having people on the political left, I think they're sensible people on the left that will speak to me realize that one, I'm consistent. And two, that it actually isn't about politics. Because I can very easily tell you that the Bureau has gone after people on the left, your BLM type activist, your free speech folks, the Palestine

folks. And I will tell you that when they decide to use the influence, the power, the the the intelligence capabilities of our federal agencies against people simply for speaking their mind in the United States that have a right to do so, we got a real problem. We got a real serious issue. Here's the story going further. Among them is Kyle Serafin, one of several former FBI agents and whistleblowers who were suspended or had their security clearances revoked for alleged misconduct.

That's true. Former agents, including Seraphin to refer to themselves as the suspendables. You guys know what that is. This is the funniest part for me and I'm going to tell you from here on out, I may have to change my intro. Seraphin has been among the out most outspoken and affected members of this group. At times, he's been critical of Patel from not aggressively at swiftly cleaning house at the Bureau, but he's also had

Patel's ear. Sources say he exercises considerable influence from his social media perch on X and his podcast, The Kyle Seraphin Show. Ladies and gentlemen who are listening, welcome to the Perch. Here we are, the Kyle Seraphin Show Perch, where we exercise considerable influence over the FBII don't know that that's true, and neither do you, but that is very funny. That's a funny thing to find

out. And the reason why it's funny is because I'm not interested in trying to get specific outcomes. What I'm trying to prove to people. Most importantly, I'm trying to prove to our current president, the folks that he chose to run our agency, which has been weaponized against American liberties. They don't know what they're doing. You nominated two people who would probably be OK for

director. But the significant problem is that the person who was supposed to know the nuts and bolts, the internal structure, the way that the FBI actually works, doesn't actually understand how the FBI actually works. And it's fairly rare that I do an appearance on mainstream TV, whether it be the Newsmax, I don't much care for it. OANI do occasionally when they ask me, Fox, I'm not really interested anymore. A lot of these things are so

partisan. I want to give you guys a little taste of something that I shared. And and forgive me, the audio and video are out of sync On the OAN side, it's one of the worst things that they do. They have a studio that's like across the country. So they have these weird lags when it comes to audio and video. But I want to play for you what I shared with Chanel Rione on this night.

I want to show you the message that's going out, not just on this podcast, but that we're trying to put out to a broader audience simply to let people understand that we're pointing out that the current people in charge of the Bureau don't know what's going on in the Bureau. That dynamic of FBI director should run and give policy, and FBI deputy has to know how to make that policy happen and has to know the people he's asking about it. And that is currently not the

case. That's going to lead to where we're at with Andrew Bailey. We talked about it yesterday at the end of the show. I wanted to bring it to the beginning of the show today specifically to say I think Andrew Bailey is coming in to replace Cash Patel. I think Dan Bongino is a foregone conclusion. He already told us he was miserable. He already told us that he was, quote, UN quote, divorced from

his wife. For those of you who have ever been on a stint away from your spouse because of work, you don't use the word divorced. That's a real serious problem. And I don't wish anyone's marriage to fall apart. It certainly shouldn't fall apart over the FBI. So I hope Dan goes back and fixes things with his wife, Paula, who always seemed like relatively nice to me. I don't know her well. I hope that happens. I don't want that for anybody. I don't want that for America.

Like marriage is falling apart. It's one of the scourges of our community. And I think it's a foregone conclusion that Dan's gone. And I think that those of you who have been paying attention knew 1 he probably wouldn't last till Christmas anyway. And this Epstein fallout and sort of the the backlash that happened not because of what they put out, by the way, but because of the way that we received it as an audience when we were like, wait, what the

hell are you talking about? Didn't you say never let this go? Didn't you guys have Pam Bondi saying the files are on my desk? You're going to see horrific things. You're going to find out that these people abuse children. Alina Haba went out and did this. Like all this stuff can be re

adjudicated. And so the only question is why would you take somebody who's being very successful in Missouri, who stepped into the role of attorney general, following in the footsteps of Eric Schultz Schmidt, Sorry, Eric Schmidt who stepped into Congress. He's now a senator. You're in a job that leads you to a higher office and you're going to step into a non confirmed semi politically appointed place as the number 2 that you share at the FBIA sub agency underneath the cabinet

level position. I don't think Bailey, who does seem to be interested in politics and climbing, is going to step in to some half ass role as a Co deputy director. I think what we're seeing here is the beginning steps of watching Cash Patel have over. He's overplayed his hand. He's enjoyed the private jet. He's gotten to bring booze on. He's gotten to party, he's gotten to hang out in Las Vegas. He's gotten to try to hang out with the tactical cool guy operators. But what he what he did?

Was not do the simple thing that Donald Trump asked him to do to go out there and find the people that were weaponized. And if he doesn't know what's going on inside his own agency, he's in a real problem. And I think that's what we pointed out two weeks ago. I think that's the entire point of that article I was sharing with you. And again, I'll share with you what I said last night. I can't verify for certain that this is what drove it.

But the other day I put out some information which was news to people in the Trump administration. And I believe it was news to Cash Patel as well, that the case agent who handled the Mar A Lago classified document case was in fact, the person who was flying the plane around for the FBI director and was in close, you know, proximity and, and and personal contact with the current director.

Now, if you're going to go in and reform things, would you really take the guy that was responsible for the raid on Melani's panty drawer? Would you take that guy and immediately put him into a position where he's rubbing shoulders with the FBI director? I think what that actually ended up underscoring, and I didn't mean it to do that, was more pointing out that these guys are kind of in and over their heads. They don't know who is who in the FBI.

And so Andrew Bailey is not going to be the answer to that problem. But I actually think there's a longer strategy here and I'm happy to play it out for you. I think at the end of the day, we look at this. This is a soft exit for Dan Bongino. He kind of gave this ultimatum that either she goes or I go. There's not a lot of room in that. And we know that Donald Trump has the back of Pam Bondi. For better or for worse, that's the case.

And they've reaffirmed as much. So Bongino is looking for an exit and there's no such thing as a Co director or a Co deputy director in the FBI. We should just acknowledge that right up front. That's not a real position. That's never existed before. So naming it is what they used to call in the Army, a side saddling where two people take the same job. There's some on the job training, a little knowledge transfer and then somebody goes

home. And I think that's what we're going to see from Dan Bongino very soon. On top of that, I also suspect that we're going to see the same thing. Now, if you're in the MAGA world, what you don't want to hear is that the guy that got confirmed, the guy that you're quote UN quote friendly with, and the dude that has been hanging out on your podcast and doing things with you, that that guy is somehow now going to get edged out. And that person is Cash Patel.

The problem is Cash has pretty much proven himself incapable of doing the things that we hoped he would. And he's actually, he's more confused about what the role of the FBI is. And there's multiple articles that are going from the left and the right today. I want to just kind of share this from from Fox News and give a little bit of perspective. This was how it was covered, I

believe yesterday. This is a Fox News piece that went out saying Patel and Bondi tapped Missouri AG as an additional FBI Co deputy director alongside of Dan Bongino. Bailey will join the FBI. It's Co deputy director. There's some some useful information that you should have in back story on that. And specifically, it's not just me telling you that Bailey was the was the runner up choice for FBI director.

He was probably the leading choice without some significant sort of public push as I was led to believe. Cash was sort of the underdog version of this. And Steve Bannon, who for better or for worse, I'm not a big Steve Bannon fan. I never have been. I actually don't. I think he's a propagandist.

Anybody who makes their entire personality about one guy who's about to be out of the presidency, You know, this is like the entire quote, UN quote war room ideas that it's like, how much can we talk about how much of A genius Donald Trump is left and right? And I just find it kind of off putting. But he does have access and he does have knowledge and he's running around and hearing the same things that I obviously heard. He's taking some different opinions on it.

Here he is talking about Andrew Bailey real quick. OK, huge news, breaking news right now just coming across the wire. Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey has just become the Co deputy director of the FBI alongside a work alongside Deputy Director Dan Bongino.

For folks in the know and down in Mar a Lago, the FBI directorship essentially came down to Cash Patel and Andrew Bailey. So this is a huge augmentation of the force over there at the FBI think it's I think it's also showing, you know, cash and those guys need some backup. There's so much going on. So this is a huge announcement. He the the cover bid to actually get the directorship.

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey is now becoming the Co deputy director of the FBI who will work alongside deputy director Dan Bongino. So expects even more intense that you got another pair of hands and this guy's got big capability. So Andrew Bailey now at the FBI. Also, Fox News is reporting that the full story. All right, Yeah. So Fox News reported it again. There's the same headline you're seeing.

We're reading the same stuff. What's interesting is, is that the person who wrote that headline, or at least the person who wrote the story under the headline, is a lady named Brooke Singman. We should talk about that in one second here because that's also going to be relevant. Before we do, let's just talk about my buddies over at Patriot Coolers. I like to bring this thing up front. I'm I'm I'm using it today because I need it. I only got about 5 1/2 hours of

sleep last night. Patriot coolers.com. The promo code Kyle is how you guys get 10% off from my friends over there. They make great products. It doesn't matter what you get, you're not going to go wrong with it. Their water bottles are good. We've got their like half gallon water bottle. We've got their 50 liter cooler. We've got the 20 oz coffee cup here. We've got the 16 ounce coffee cup that's on the desk. We got the 30 oz behind me.

I've got a 40 oz that I carry with me when we go everywhere. Like I must have a dozen of their products. I bought them with my own cash. Like they don't send me stuff for free. I'm willing to invest in it. They're a good company. They're in Houston, TX. They warehouse all their stuff locally. They're sending it to you very, very quickly. Their stuff is patriotic and well thought out. It doesn't say Yeti doesn't say Stanley. What it says is you got 13 bars on the side of this.

It's probably a little bit white for you guys to be able to see, but there's 13 bars on the side of this cup. On the bottom are 50 stars. If they've thought about the stuff out there and said, hey, you know, what is it that Americans want to do? If you're actually proud of this country? And that's becoming harder and harder, I think every day. But if you want something that's going to keep your hot coffee hot, keep your brain engaged when you come out here and do something like this.

I heated it up. I drop it in. I could do that at 6:00 AM and it's still hot. It's now 9:00 here, 3 hours later and I still got a hot cup of coffee as I'm sitting here and talking to you. Check them out again, promo code Kyle. It's Patriot coolers.com. There is a link in the show description. They are quite easy to find and we'll make sure that that is properly updated. I want to read this story real quick. So first of all, this is what AG Andrew Bailey had to say to Missouri. Thank you.

My tenure as attorney general has been the honor of my professional career. What has made it truly meaningful is the opportunity to serve my home state. Together, we have defended the rule of law and safeguarded our freedoms. I'm forever grateful. He was doing the Missouri V. Biden case, which had some different names over the years. He was doing things like

fighting against robocalls. He was doing things like pushing back against Planned Parenthood and funding and trying to keep women safe in a way that actually keeps like women alive and babies alive. I think all that is pretty good. Got a little clip of that if you guys would like to hear it real quick. Let's do that. Actually, let's play a little quick thing about Planned Parenthood. Again, I think this is a decent guy. His values seem correct.

We've also seen him go on Sean Ryan show talking about weaponization, talking about how the Biden administration was abusing the auto pen. So all the things he's saying are great. There's only one little problem. And I'm going to play the clip from the Planned Parenthood call in that he did. The only thing that I see as a problem is he's still not a Bureau insider. I'll explain why that's an issue. And then I also think that's why he ends up as the director

shortly. Planned Parenthood is encouraging women to conceal having taken abortion drugs from emergency medical providers and that. That's wrong for two reasons. Number one, it puts the the patient, the woman at greater risk for life threatening complications, but #2 it, it hides the data about the danger of these drugs and perpetuates their deadly lives. Planned Parenthood is encouraging women to conceal having taken abortion drugs from emergency medical providers.

And that, let me let me say that slightly differently, 'cause I found these guys that were out there, they're actually engaging leftists who are celebrating Planned Parenthood in the same way that leftists would actually go after the pro lifers. This is kind of a taste of their own medicine. I think this is what Andrew Bailey's saying. Planned Parenthood's gay. Planned Parenthood sucks. That's enough. You're not gonna kill the babies. Bans off the children's bodies.

Can you please bans off the children's bodies? We feel uncomfortable. Can we get some space, please? No. Nope. Why not? You guys don't give the the unborn space. We are not engaging. We're just walking away. Yeah, that's right. Walk away. Get off the Capitol.

You guys aren't welcome here. I don't know why I like that, but this guy walks up, but he just acts like a jerk, you know, kind of like you see leftist do. There's this sort of this sort of moment where we're just too tired to see this crap anymore. It doesn't matter. You call us racist, you call us sexist, you call us misogynist. And it's just, it's not interesting. It's like, OK, no, we just care about babies. I think it's great.

I think I think Andrew Bailey making that claim that that they're going to go out and pick fights in the state of Missouri that matter. I think all of that is really good. So there's nothing wrong with any of those things. But what I don't see is a man stepping down from a position where he was doing real action. And I don't think Donald Trump plucked him from Missouri. I don't think Pam Bondi went down and plucked him from Missouri because they were like, oh, let's make him less

effective. I don't think that was happening. I also don't believe this lady. This is Julie Kelly. You guys know who Julie Kelly is? She's one of our favorites. Julie Kelly yesterday was lamenting that there's just no loyalty in this game, this game, this business, this politics or whatever it is. She's a propagandist just like Brooke Singman. Brooke Singman wrote the Fox article. Brooke Singman is also getting married to a Republican out of Pennsylvania.

She is the go to media outlet for the current administration when it comes to law enforcement stuff. So she is the soft source for for the FBI to give leaks and information in the same way that Ken Delanian is the soft source for people on the left. If you want to go to a favorable news outlet, Brooke Singman has published all of the FBI stories that we've seen. There are probably over a dozen significant quote UN quote breaking stories that she's covered. And here's another one.

Now this is the what I call unofficial mouthpiece of Dan Bongino. When you see Julie Kelly, this is an ex post from her yesterday. When you see Julie Kelly say sources tell me and she's referring to the FBI. Let's just cut to the to the straight part of it. Those sources are one person. And that one person is Dan Bongino directly telling her something that he wants pushed out.

Because with whatever Dan does, he cannot have it look like the thing that it actually is, which is him surrendering him, walking away from the FBI and doing so in failure. And then sort of like pretending that, you know, this guy's got it in hand. So I'm going to go back to what I do best. This is a mouthpiece of the Dan Bongino, you know, unable to say unvarnished things.

Sources tell me one reason why AG Andrew Bailey has been brought on as a Co deputy director of the FBI is his prosecutorial background that will come in handy as cases ramp up at the Bureau. All hands on deck scenario. I'm told Bailey officially steps down next month. He said it in another post that he was going to be stepping down in September on September 8th. All right, let's debunk a few

things. Also, by the way, what you're seeing on the screen out there are the the receipts that we dropped about a year ago now of Julie Kelly giving money.

I think it's like slightly, I think it's like 2000 or $2500 to the Biden administration campaign in 2019 in the middle of writing a Trump book, she was writing a book saying, oh, Donald Trump is has disloyal opposition in the Republican Party. Meanwhile, she's giving money to Joe Biden. Before that she gave money to Hillary. Before that she gave money to Obama. These are all easily publicly

searchable. All you need to go is to the FEC, the Federal Election Commission database and you can search for Julie Kelly. She lives in Orland Park. She publishes that online. That is not a docs that is saying things that this woman has publicly said about herself. And I can just tell you, you can go find out she gave money to Democrats as late as 20/22. She was giving money to Chicago Democrats who were going after, you know, conservatives in that area. So all of that's kind of funny,

but let's just debunk this. You're going to need someone with prosecutorial backgrounds to be able to fix the problems at the FBI. And Dan doesn't have that. Didn't we want to get Cash Patel, a former prosecutor and defense attorney, someone who's seen both sides of the coin, into the director chair? The problem Bailey will have is that he doesn't have institutional knowledge of the FBI. And that's really simple when you've worked at a company for a long time.

Think about any company you've ever worked at. You know who had a little spat five years ago? If you've been there, let's say you've been there for 20 something years. And a lot of the people that are in the management have been there for 20 something years. So that's kind of a different animal than most private

companies. But imagine that, you know all the dirt, you know who dodged an internal investigation, you know who got an HR allegation but was able to like pay off, you know, the, the, the accusation and that went away. There was some point of a settlement. You know who hitched their wagon to what other manager and what projects they sort of like fudged on and said that they were part of and were able to climb up the ladder with it.

The reason why you have institutional knowledge in the position of deputy director is because they need to know how to turn the screws to make the vision of the director happen. Bailey's not going to have that, folks. He's not going to have it because he hasn't been there. So he has no idea who the people are that he's going to be trying

to get to do stuff. But he might be the right guy in character in principle and in track record so far in politics to actually carry out the reforms that we've been hoping that we were going to see from Cash Patel. There is no chance that you need a prosecutorial background. Here it is again, a prosecutorial background to be the Co deputy director of the FBI because the FBI doesn't do prosecutions, period, period. It doesn't do prosecutions.

That's called the the, the Department of Justice. That's called the United States Attorneys Office. If you wanted to bring in someone with a prosecutable background because you thought he was going to be really, really good at putting together great cases, you would bring him over to DOJ. He would go work for Todd Blanche. Maybe he would replace Todd Blanche if that's what you thought was important. That's not what's happening here. It's very, very clear this is made-up.

This is spin. So all we're doing is we're trying to set up. And again, it's coming from someone who's basically been running propaganda for quite a while. I didn't realize how bad it was over at what is this real America's voice? I've I don't think I've been on there in a very long time. Rav is such AI don't know third or fourth rate power. This was Bannon in November of 2024 talking about Julie Kelly. I've never heard or actually referred to as St. Julie Kelly. Seriously.

He's actually saying it. Seriously, I don't think you get to sainthood by lying to the public. I want to go to Saint Julie Kelly. I I just want people to put in. Wait, what was that I want? To go to Saint Julie Kelly, I, I just want people to put in this perspective. When President Trump left the Whitehead, they all state power. They had the House against him, the Senate against him, Mitch McConnell dumping on him, all the Republican donors dumping on him.

You know, we had when they brought all the state power, just like the Nazis did, just like the Bolsheviks did. With the judges. And the courts and the lawyers and they investigate FBI, all of it the the American Gestapo, FBI. What did President Trump have? What did the forces of light have? We had a woman that's not a lawyer, that's Julie Kelly going into courts and seeing this J6 stuff and saying this is not

right. We had Mike Davis, one man who started group Article 3. We had Boris Epstein and Boris will tell you couldn't even get lawyers, the big law firms because the clients came to lawyer says you can't work with Trump and Bannon. OK, Julie Kelly, not a St. She's not a lawyer. She's never worked in law enforcement. She doesn't know what she's talking about. Let's say 6 times out of 10, which is far too many times for you to be quote UN quote A

reporter. She's absolutely atrocious to January Sixers who wanted to get their story out. She's gone and tried to physically threaten. She's like 5-9 and kind of Manish looking. She's tried to physically threaten people that are friends of this program like Steve Baker, which is really weird because at the end of the day, even if you look like a transgender person, it doesn't mean that you are actually a man abandoned talking about Mike Davis who's accomplished exactly

nothing. 0 things. What does the Article 3 project do with nothing? It's a cheerleader. It's a MAGA organization and he's saying something that I think is inherently dangerous. He called the folks that work around Donald Trump the forces of light and that we are fighting back against this Nazi sort of regime.

The fact the matter is, if you are going to make it so simple and so stupid that that that we're talking about good and evil with the FBI and assume that one group is going for Republicans and that makes them good and the other group is going for for Democrats and that makes them bad. It completely ignores the stupidity that the FBI serves the FBI. And I'm reading a piece here today which I wanted to cover. This is from Catalanian.

So we've gone to the sort of the other side of the Julie Kelly type, you know, grift soft thing. This is what Brooke Sigman does for the right, Tentalinian does for the left. He wrote an article that actually shows that neither side know what the hell they're damn talking about. And it's so tiring to watch. This is what I feel like we're trying to do. And This is why the suspendables draw fire from both sides. That's why I actually very much appreciate that that Mister

Clayman called us right leaning. That's accurate. We're right leaning. We're actually like far right compared to Trump and MAGA and most of the other things. Maybe the rest of you are as well. We're aggressively conservative, unapologetically so. That's not what's going and being attacked by the FBI. The FBI is serving the interest of the FBI. So let me read this real quickly. Trump is turning the FBI away, FBI away from investigating

terrorism and corruption. Sources say staffing cuts in a new focus on violent crime will leave fewer resources for the agency's other goals. Well, right away I can tell you that the quote UN quote other goals of the agency are almost exclusively against to the constitutional interests of Americans. That's that is going to be very easily shown. Now, what you're seeing on on this picture is also stupid. You have two federal agents wearing kit and gear. That doesn't make a lot of

sense. It's brand new. That is the brand new issued stuff that's only been out for like a year or two. They're carrying equipment in ways that they can't access. There's a tourniquet behind that guy's gun hand and I don't think you can probably reach back in and and activate it. I used to carry a tourniquet on the rear, but it was for, like, if I was face down somewhere, you'd carry a tourniquet on the front if you know what you're

doing. The FBI was once known for taking down gangsters like Bonnie and Clyde, but in recent years, its targets have been more like the Boston Marathon bombers, who, by the way, got away with the bombing.

You guys remember that, right? The FBI tries to tell you that tyranny is necessary, that all of these illicit sort of spying operations, that seven O2 is required, that they need to go out and run intelligence investigations where they can pull all of your data, They can pull your phone records, they can pull your financial transactions. And they need to do that in advance so they can prevent terrorism with no evidence that terrorism is being prevented.

Again, the Boston Marathon bombers got away with dropping explosive devices at a a major gathering in a left-leaning city, which does go to the less problem with enforcing crime. That's going to be covering a little bit later after the September 11th attacks. This is accurate. Then Director Robert Mueller recognized and reorganized the Bureau around national security and intelligence. I think that was the worst thing that ever happened.

It was the wrong lesson learned. The top priority was stopping another terrorist attack on American soil. That's not possible. You can't do that. That's a tyrannical mandate. We've covered that ad nauseam at this program. But if you're new here, I want you to understand that the minute that you say no American will die from terrorism is the mission of our national security

apparatus. That is the minute when you accept that your constitutional liberties, your right to speak freely, to practice your religion, to say things, to be a dissident, to gather and protest and, and to be able to, you know, petition for a redress of grievances, to be free from government searches and seizures without a warrant. Those all go away the minute that you accept that a mission of no American dies from terrorism on American soil.

And that is the lesson that our national security apparatus learned. And the FBI is a big problem that did it. Again, I don't think that Patel or Bongino or Bailey lack an understanding that that is problematic. But the means though of which you actually turn that animal around. You have to know who is inside the agency that you are working against. You're talking about 20 plus years of people who are entrenched in that idea.

That came up under Robert Mueller, that came up under Jim Comedy, that came up under Christopher Wray, none of whom varied the path. And now you have Cash Patel who's doing some clown like behavior and wearing a badge and flying around to Las Vegas and hanging with his girlfriend and going to USC and we're still back, baby, and all that

nonsense. But none of that addresses the underlying issue that the FBI is an investigative agency and you are still allowing intelligence investigations to happen. They actually touted that they have something like 800 Intel investigations going on right now this year. And they were super excited about it. Dan Von Gino went out and and touted it. And they're also telling you that that is their number one priority. Again, I played this yesterday.

I'm going to play it again. This is the priority. All of these things are national security concerns. This is what is flooding the zone in the director suite right now. And that is not what the FBI that you probably voted for a return to law enforcement should be doing to that too, because what the. Director's saying is right. You got to remember we come in in the morning, there's a portfolio of 100 level 10 items.

If it's a level 9, which is a pretty big freaking deal, someone else fixed it. The only thing that gets to my desk or his is a level 10. That's the entire day. Look at his schedule. Any given day. I'll show you the palm card I have. It is filled from 7:30 to he leaves seven at night, 6:30 at night. It it's filled all day. We just can't focus on one thing. You want New York to go boom, DC to go boom?

You want an OC organization to go hack into some cyber network and crack all of Fox News's holdings? One, I don't care what happens to Fox News. That's their job. They should do their own cybersecurity, hire some good people. But let's be really, really serious about what he said. Do you want New York to go boom? Somebody used those words and

said that to him. If you don't maintain the status quo, if you don't keep doing the things that we are doing, that we've been doing, then you're going to be the reason for the next 911. You're going to be the person who has to deal with this, who sets the priority of what's A9 or A10? They're already set by the FBI, right? Who set those meetings? If you're the deputy director of the FBI, you call meetings. You don't get called to meetings.

And yet these guys are being handled by the folks that do this professionally. And their entire career is already like, based on you have to continue what you're doing or you're going to be a failure, you're going to be removed. And what did he say? We can't just focus on one thing. Well, we actually only elected Donald Trump to come in regarding the FBI and the DOJ to do one thing to de weaponize this animal to defang the attack

dog. He just told you they can't do it and you're not going to get it from Patel. They've all been handled. They are being handled. I don't blame them because they don't know what they're looking at. They need someone inside the FBI or somebody with FBI knowledge. I saw our chat earlier said you're looking for a Unicorn. No, I'm not. I know people who can do this job. I'm not one of them, but I know how to assess what that person is and if we're being fair, so do these guys.

You need somebody with 20 years of experience who is retired and showed backbone against it. You probably need someone who's been removed for a whistleblower activity, who had 15 to to 25 years inside the FBI as an agent and worked in the major offices. They need to have time in either Washington Field, New York or Los Angeles. Maybe a side runner would be Miami. That's the the fourth biggest one. They need to have spent time in

the headquarters units. They need to have worked under and seen the people who are currently the section chiefs, the people that are the assistant section chiefs and the unit chiefs needs to know what an assistant director does. What the deputy director's job is, needs to have an opinion about the previous deputy directors.

I guarantee you if you took Dan Bongino before he started that job, he couldn't have named to you the last three or four FBI deputy directors off the top of his head because it's not his agency. And I don't blame the guy for it. But you put him in an unwinnable situation, so it's obvious he's going to leave. And you're now putting Bailey in the same exact unwinnable situation. He can't win because he doesn't know the things to win, but he might make a better director.

And I do think that's what's coming down because I don't think that they blew it. I don't think they did. I've already given names to people, including Cash Patel, including the Trump administration, who would be favorable choices, who would do this in a in a short period of time, 6 to 9 months. It could be almost done by now. And they would burn all the friendships they have in the prior FBI because they won't have any colleagues, because they would upset people on both sides.

You don't need a a conservative or a MAGA loyalist to come in and be the FBI deputy director. What do you need is a constitutionalist, somebody who understands what the left and the right boundaries are. And by the way, Kendalanian doesn't seem to get that, so neither does Cash Patel. They're both wrong from the left and the right. They're wrong. And this is the classic problem of standing in the middle saying, listen, I know more than

you do about this one thing. We're going to get to the end of that in a second here. Here's where it goes. Patel, who often refers to FBI agents as quote, UN quote, cops, a label they tend to shy away from. The reason they shy away from it, folks, is because they're not cops, which is why this picture you're seeing on the screen is ridiculous. Having FBI agents wearing body armor patrolling DC is a recipe for disaster.

They're not trained for that. I assure you that that dude wearing a Doo rag and that Lady wearing a baseball hat are not trained to be cops. And maybe one of the two of them at best is. But it's like less than 30% of the FBI comes in from a previous law enforcement role. They're taking steps to get the Bureau more involved in investigating violent crime. Investigating violent crime and patrolling the streets are not the same thing. He's carrying out a plan to dramatically slash the

workforce. He's also talked about rolling out Tasers. What that tells you is we are looking at people that have no business running this agency and they're putting out priorities that are not going to solve the problem. These are tourniquets. These are band aids. These are not addressing the actual, they're dealing with symptoms and not the disease. The disease is, we have intelligence apparatus agents running this group and they've turned it into an Intel agency.

And I made that very clear to CBS last night. Everybody wants to talk about a deep state. I'm like, no, what we have is an agency that's mission has gotten so sideways that it actually believes that its requirement is to violate the Constitution, the 1st and the 4th Amendment, plus others in order to accomplish something that they are not able

to accomplish. There's no evidence they've ever been able to do it. I thought Bongino understood that because we made a movie called Police Stay Together with Dinesh D'souza. I thought Patel and I thought Julie Kelly and Bannon, they were all interviewed for this. Peter Schweitzer, the same story. The solution is someone who actually knows how to do this thing. You have to put your investigators up front and let them manage. They're not going to want to do it.

You need reluctant leadership inside the FBI. And the figurehead is going to be less relevant than the person who understands the nuts and bolts of getting this thing done. It's pretty. It's pretty simple. Multiple current and former FBI officials say they've already seen what's happening over the last several months as agents have been diverted to immigration enforcement and veterans with years of experience have left the Bureau. Some of that's not bad.

But yeah, immigration enforcement is not what the FBI ought to be spending its time doing. But they're chasing stats because the FBI is still subservient to the old metric system that they were always subservient to, which is called integrated program management. Again, something that me and the guys have made Cash Patel aware of. If you don't get rid of IPN, then these guys are going to chase their bonuses.

If you don't understand that the people that are senior field agents, your special agents in charge of each field office are incentivized financially to the tune of five figures. Let's call it somewhere between like 20 and $60,000. It varies depending on the size of the office and decide any of the size of the year and and how senior. But these people will make like a significant chunk of their salary 10% or more in a bonus based on hitting numbers. And those numbers are include arrests.

So if they get a bunch of illegal aliens arrest, those are super easy to get. And it's better to do that than it is to go out there and do real investigations. Again, Federal Bureau of Investigations, the word is right there. The problem is, is you've got the NBC national security and law enforcement contributors. This is Rob D'amico. I don't know who he is, but doesn't matter. He said this is putting the

nation in jeopardy. They seem to be nation making national security threats secondary, correct? That's right, because you're not going to be able to stop national security threats. There's no evidence. You have. In fact, what there is evidence of, and we showed it in the movie Police State.

We showed it with guys like Dan Bongino and Julie Kelly contributing is that they go and they manufacture these things and they can manufacture it under the the title of January 6th and they can manufacture it under the title of BLM and they can manufacture it under the title of white supremacy. Wherever the money train is coming from out of Congress is where the FBI will chase the statistics and those statistics drive more funding and budget. And that's what government is.

Government is the ice cream cone that licks itself. All it needs to do is show you that it needs to exist, and it needs to exist because it's doing the thing that it does. What a stupid and recursive argument. Like why do you need it? Because we've always done it that way. Is the answer for the FBI you used to go after Bonnie and Clyde? Were Bonnie and Clyde St. level offenders?

No, they were multi state Interstate criminals that were fugitive from local law enforcement and the resources at the time did not allow for for for following someone from multiple jurisdictions locally. We don't actually have the same problem as the 1930s United States did. We have mutual aid, We have the NIM system, the National Incident Management system. We have the ability of integrated, you know, command. We have the ability to share warrants nationally. That is the FBI thing.

They share this, this NCIC system where you can actually send a warrant at a state level anywhere in the country and everybody can see so they don't have the problems that the Bonnie and Clyde thing does. You can't go back to Bonnie and Clyde. What you can do and what should be done is actually investigate corruption as it says here in

the title of this this article. And you should be doing long term complex investigations that nobody else has the time or the energy to do. And if you're not going to do that, if you're going to do these like stupid little sugar pop slam dunks where you're going to go after a bunch of like Midget illegal aliens that are working somewhere in a construction job and there's some low level MS13 or or ATDA member, then you're not serving a purpose either.

What you're doing is you're just doing PR. And the odds of this being turned back on something else that is politically expedient is 100% in the way that it's being run right now. We're wasting money, we're wasting time. And I'm hopeful that they say, OK, fine, we need someone that actually understands what's going on here. But all of this stuff.

Current and former FBI officials tell MSNBC that the changes are coming at the expense of the role of the FB is role in protecting the United States from terrorists. That can't be done hackers probably also can't be done spies. They're mediocre at that as well. The only way they catch spies is by letting people spy for a very long time and then finally turning on them as well as its traditional mission. And here's where it actually belongs, White collar fraud.

The FBI used to hire significant chunks of Cpas and attorneys. Why? Because you can go after that. Public corruption. They're outside of the public system locally. So they should be able to investigate that. That is a critical role. And child sex crimes, which they could basically turn the entire FBI into chasing child sex crimes. And they would never be out of work. And they would doing constant knocks on everybody's door. That would actually happen all the time.

There's a disgusting appetite in this country for that. That'd be amazing. They don't do that. If more agents are working on violent crime cases, then their total numbers are being reduced and there won't be manpower left to put the same level of resources towards national security and the other threats. I agree, and they shouldn't be because you cannot be an intelligence agency and a law enforcement agency at the same time. We have proven that. We've proven it to people on the

left. We've proven it to people on the right. We've proven that when you take national security tools and you apply them to American citizens, what you were going to do is violate American Civil Liberties. The end. That should be the mission set that the Trump administration should be going after. And by the way, Donald Trump himself and his family were all victims of this thing.

They should know about it. So the return to law and order, which is what's being covered over at NPR, should be a no brainer. And it is a place where Democrats are weak. This is an iron that you can strike on that actually goes bipartisan. You can share information by saying crime stats are bad. When people are not held accountable, they do bad things.

We are going to back up local law enforcement, put our funding there, get the FBI out of their way, stop trying to go after like this, like low hanging fruit, and really do long term complex investigations into huge criminal organizations which exist, including politicians. That's what we're interested in. We want to clean up corruption. We want to clean up fraud. We want to protect you from force and fraud. Oh yeah, The actual purpose of a Conservative government.

It's the only charter and mandate that it needs. And what we're not going to do is fall into the trap that the anti federalist saw starting at the founding of this country, because the original debate about whether or not we should have a strong central government hinged around a strong central government abusing its authority.

And there is nothing more abusive than a national security apparatus that doesn't have to obey pleas outside the boundaries using pre crime and other nonsense that doesn't actually work. People who go outside the boundaries of our Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights is only as good as the people who actually swear allegiance to it. And guess what? We found out that the FBI doesn't do it.

How do you know, Kyle? Oh, 'cause I was there and I saw a First Amendment caveat saying we're going to investigate people for their speech and their ideas and their politics. And I brought this to Congress. And the reason the FBI says it is we don't do this thing that we're about to go do. They actually launch a case saying we're not going to do this thing while they do this thing. Has the 1st Amendment caveat been removed from everything?

No, so I already know that things that could have been done day one, organizations within the Bureau that should have been disbanded. And I actually thought listening to people like Sean Ryan's show where Patel went on, listening to Glenn Beck, listening to Fox News where they invited this guy on, talking to Trey Gowdy or anyone else, Hannity, take your pick. Take your pick of your right wing hero. Patel went out and said he was going to do this stuff and he hasn't done it.

So maybe Bailey will again, you got a huge opportunity here. Here's CNN covering this. This is Chuck Todd and this is Scott Jennings talking about. There is a like people are not sad that they got Donald Trump. The people that are upset on the political right are sad that there's not enough of the things that Donald Trump said during the campaign that are being

carried out right away. And some of them can be carried out faster than they are and they should be because you've only got a limited amount of time. It's not punching at Trump to say the things you said. We want more and we want faster. And Democrats actually who crossed the aisle to be able to vote for him and put him in office kind of want those same things. That's my sense of it. Nobody wants to live in crime.

Scott Jennings. So that, yeah, no part of the Republican base is presently demoralized. Every single part of the Republican base that voted for Donald Trump. I'm just telling you, if I didn't, they are as happy as they could possibly be with him. And they will be that way come next year. This idea that there's division over this in the party. They're happy with Trump, trust me. No, I think what's a risk here is that Donald Trump has portrayed himself as a warrior against the elites.

What Jeffrey Epstein files present is a an alternative story that no, no, no, no, he's part of this elite group too. He's been with the elites. He's been in part of this. You know, there's the, you know, and I think that is what could be so damn that weirdly, that's the damage. It's not a specific allegation. Were you an inside or an outside? Are you? You think it's true to American voters or Republicans that he is

an elite person? No, no, no, of course he was a no, but no, he was the guy actually know that the New York elite didn't like that the political league didn't like that the Republican League. He built an entire brand on being the on grievance. So no, I think this is what's at

risk for him. What's really interesting is when you see Democrats like Chuck Todd go out there and make this messaging, what they do is they have to zoom into the timeline to the part that actually shows the thing that they want. And then they make that argument. What they can't do is zoom out wider and remember that Whoopi Goldberg used to embrace him, that Joy Behar gave him a kiss on the cheek, you know, when he came on the view and that kind of stuff.

So you have to look at a very micro space of this guy's almost 80 years on the planet. And then you go, yeah, see, look, he was, he was this outsider. It's like, yeah, he was an outsider when he changed his opinions or more importantly, his opinions continued to be sort of of like 90s Democrats, which is my argument. And the party that he was a part of, the Democrat Party, diverged. That's not the same thing as donating money to the actual Democrat who ends up doing the

J6 stuff. While you're saying that you're loyal to Donald Trump and you're you're bitching about people not being loyal. What am I referencing? Of course I'm referencing this woman, Julie Kelly. Let's take 2 seconds here for the folks over on Spotify. And if you're listening on the audio, you're going to hear a quick audio ad. So we'll do that right there. I want to continue on that vein of thought because this is where that Chuck Todd statement. It actually ends up abusing the

the authority. There are wins that happen. People do want to see this. Accountability is actually pretty good from all ends of it. To cry about certain people losing security clearances. Nobody cried when I lost mine. Nobody cried when Gerardo Boyle lost his. And by the way, he's still quote, UN quote, employed by the Trump administration as an FBI agent with no pay coming up on 1100 days. We're on the way to 1100 days. Almost 20% of this was actually under Donald Trump's leadership.

There are people that are getting the job done. It's pretty obvious to us. It looks like this. If you go to odni.gov, people who say, well, Tulsi, this is just your view or your interpretation.

No, it's all in hundreds of pages of documents that I've declassified and released that show point by point exactly what happened through this timeline that showed this very dangerous thing that occurred in the creation of Russia Gate, the creation of this manufactured intelligence assessment that essentially had the intent of undermining the voices and votes of the American people who elected Donald Trump. They were not happy with the outcome of that election.

And so they created this politicized, weaponized piece of fake intelligence that, as you mentioned, then went on to serve as a foundation for everything that came after the multiple investigations, the years long Mueller investigation. 2 Congressional impeachments, investigations in the raid at Mar a Lago, the list goes on and on. The list does go on and on. She's completely right about

that. Her group, the the Director's initiative group or the Director's Intelligence group that's working the DIG that's over at OD and I is doing that work. But let's be real clear about what's happening. It is being presented to you to say injustice happened but you are doing it in a non investigative role. Intelligence agencies don't have the ability to prosecute. Even the FBI can't prosecute. It can investigate and not and prosecute.

So you're seeing Tulsi Gabbard as the director of National Intelligence laying out a case that these are all the bad things that were done. She's not a prosecutor. It's not being done by Pam Bondi. It's not being done by Cash Patel. It's not being done by Dan Bongino. The reason is because they're not going to actually prosecute this stuff and they cannot. They can't. What they can remind you of is things were done very poorly. We have a problem in this country.

We saw politicization. The statute of limitation is broadly speaking, done. Some of the things they did, by the way, as much as you hate them, were legal. They were done under the authorization of the president or people who were delegated by the president to take such actions. So you're getting all you're going to get out of there. Let's accept that the best thing you can do is not point out how that weapon was was created or point out how the weapon works. The answer is dismantle the

weapon. So at the very best case scenario, they don't build it again, but in the worst case scenario, they have to reassemble the damn weapon to come back after you. And that should be something that people on the left and the right can agree on. Americans in general should say, hey, we sort of believe in due process. We believe in fundamental fairness. We believe that no one should be above the law. We believe that elite shouldn't

get a second tier justice. It's the reason why you saw such a major backlash against the Epstein story because it was played up. Whether it was real or not, whether there is actually anything there or not, and I don't know and neither do you. I heard people say things.

I heard people that are in positions that are in authorities like the attorney general, the United States said that there are significant numbers of victims, that there's all this sort of sexual abuse, that it was abuse of minors, right? We heard Alina Haba, who represents as a spokesperson for Trump, who's been this sort of like surrogate, was on the the campaign trail saying, I don't know how you would not be shocked to find out that all these elite people were involved in this evil.

She might have been talking out of her ass. It's totally possible, right? We can, we can agree on that, But they made promises. Americans on the political right and the left both agreed on the same thing for different reasons. People on the left are like, gotcha, Donald Trump is a bad guy. People on the right were like, you cannot have elite people get away. That's not what we campaign for.

That's not what we voted for. De weaponize, make the system of government more fair, and more importantly, pull this Intel apparatus out of it. We don't want blackmail operations going on. We don't want elite pedophiles running things. We don't want people who are involved in corruption having a say in what happens to regular people that don't have a voice big enough.

And that's the funniest maybe piece about this whole story that was put on by CBS, Kyle Seraphin influencing the FBI from his social media perch and his his podcast, The Kyle Seraphin Show. How funny is that? I'm just a guy sitting in a house in, in, in like the suburbs outside of Austin, TX. And we have 10s of thousands of people that listen to the show, which is not very big by the way. That's not very many people. The audience of our administration is in the

millions. The millions didn't have a voice. They were pissed off about it. The movement that people wanted to see was deweaponized as animal. And the reason why that has stuck and why I think it crossed the boundaries from left and right and everybody kind of looked at it and went like, man, can you just stop with this nonsense is because the left abused their position. They didn't do things that were reasonable. They acted in a way that's

inappropriate. They, they, they destroyed words like sexism and racism and misogyny. They abused it. They called Wolf so many times that we actually got buy in from people on the left that said, yeah, I don't, I don't see it. I'm sorry. I go out every day in my neighborhood and I see people of every skin color. There are Hispanic Americans, you know, they're Americans, but they have whatever Latin origins. There's black guys, there's black women, there's Indian people.

Some of them are just from India. Some of them have been here for a while. They talk like Cash Patel. What I don't see is regular increased systemic racism. It's not everywhere. It doesn't. It's not pervasive. And what I think they did, they being the left, they being the media organizations, is they pushed a narrative as long as they could and they actually found out where the end of that

rope looks like. And that's how you end up with a silly kind of story that was just put out about how the Smithsonian is. They're getting they're getting attacked for their their story on slavery. The story on slavery is the entire story.

It's like, no, it's hundreds of years old and we have moved on from it. The people who were actually quote UN quote suffering from the Jim Crow, they were more conservative than current today's society, Probably people on the right that are benefiting from all the policies that existed in America. Like they're like, we're all probably more left-leaning and more, less bigoted. They were more they were less bigoted than we are today.

I think I articulated that I'm going to play you this clip about how that got done. It got done by this repeating of the same phrases over and over again and putting it into places like the Smithsonian where it looks like it has some substance. The propaganda machine activates

to move forward, right? This is the this is the point that if you repeat a lie enough times, it becomes true to people right up until eventually they realize, like, you know what my personal experience jives with everything that you're saying. It just it, it, it, it jars my sensibilities to try to believe it. So I can't here's here's CNN having this discussion about like the trending of the words like white supremacy, by the way, FBI funding on that slavery. Same story.

These these ideas that there's racial grievances in the United States and that's what's dividing us. It's that's not your everyday experience. That only happens through algorithmic booths and it happens through media narrative. And here it is.

Starting around 2011, 2012, sociologists started to notice a shift in white liberal opinion polling to where white progressives became more extreme in their views on race than black and Hispanic Americans. And they called this, the sociologist did called it the Great Awakening. And when they postulated, where did this come from?

Why did white progressives suddenly start obsessing over race in a way that was actually far to the left of where Hispanic and Black Americans were on this issue? They found that the media had shifted radically how it talked about these issues. So for example, in 2010, the words white supremacy were mentioned 75 times in The Washington Post and The New York Times. But the media is different from museum.

In 2020, the words white supremacy were mentioned 700 times in The Washington Post and The New York Times and 2400 times in NPR. The word racism 4000 times in 2020, the words white and racial privilege from 2013 to 2019 grew by 1500% in the New York Times and the Washington Post, and the word slavery itself exponentially skyrocketed as a

percentage of words. I'm offering this only to suggest, to suggest that what do you think is the problem with talking about slavery, white supremacy, racism, etcetera? Yeah. The problem is, is STFU, shut your effing mouths about it, because nobody here on this planet lived through it. Nobody here is dealing with the direct implications of it. Nobody alive today in the United States, that's an American citizen. Now, maybe there's some people from like Africa that came in

you. You didn't own slaves in this, in this. And nobody here that we're dealing with was a slave, at least not in the chattel slavery sense of the African slave trade that they're crying about. It doesn't happen. It hasn't happened in so long that we are now making up fairy tales about it and you're pushing it. That is what the illusory truth is. By the way, folks, the the effect, we've done entire shows on this in the past. You can go back and look them up.

The illusory truth effect is repeat a lie enough times that people actually believe that it's true because they don't remember where they heard it. And what we deal with regularly now is this Dunning Kruger effect. I'm showing it on the screen right now. If you've never seen it, allow me to describe the graph. On the X axis, that's the up and down. It's confidence in what you know from low to high. And on the Y axis, is that right? No, no, no, sorry. The the Y axis is the up and

down. The X axis is left right. The X axis is knowledge in the field from low to high. So again, on the bottom, moving from left to right is how much you know, and going upward is your confidence in how much you know. It starts off with not knowing anything and then you learn just a little bit and you immediately skyrocket and most people self assessed to know everything. It is sometimes referred to as the peak of mount stupidity. It's I've read a couple of stories on PACER.

I don't know anything about law enforcement. I have no degree in this thing. I have no formal training. I have no personal experience for years in the field. I'm not an attorney, I'm not a paralegal. I haven't even watched a lot of court cases. But I know who Judge Judy is. I know everything. I'm going to go out and make an entire thing about this, AKA the Julie Kelly types, AKA the Candace Owens types. Know so little, learn tiny bit, think they know everything.

And what you learn is that the wisest people in the world who think like, who are very, very accurate in knowing a bunch of things about a very small topic because they spent their whole life on it. What do they find out? It's really complicated. I know enough to know that there is way more than I know. That's what this curve shows. There's a a moment of despair when you Start learning enough about something where you're like, I will never learn all of

this. I will never be able to because there's too much information. You know, Socrates talked about this people that were considered to be the fonts of of Western thought went out there and said like, you know, essentially, the more you learn, eventually learn that you just know nothing in comparison to what can be learned. We're surrounded by these sort of media influencer types that

are quote UN quote experts. To be an expert in today's day and age is to be at the top of that first peak. I know a little something about it. And so I'm going to go out there and I'm going to tell you it. I've had people hit me up in our comments and say, I agree with you about many things, Kyle, but what I don't agree with you about is Candace Owens. Candace Owens is a national treasure. She's brilliant, she's great. She knows what she's talking about.

Candace Owens is a dipshit. There is no question in my mind. I watch her say things that are the dumbest things that you could say. The base of knowledge that she should be operating from is too small to make the claims that she does. And I'm going to give you a couple examples if you guys are not following. I think his name is Nate Livingstone over on X. You're missing out on some of the funniest things that this

woman has said. The problem with saying a bunch of stuff is that eventually someone might play it back to you. And if you can't acknowledge like, hey, I'm dumb, I don't know what I'm talking about. I went over my skis on this thing and you're going to end up looking like this lady. Here's here's evidence. One of our experts are at the peak of Mount stupidity.

But I find myself not so shocked because I know the pieces of history that they are trying to hide and the lies that they're telling, kind of recasting people that have been terrible as victims. That's like one of the moves. And of course, the world is quite literally a stage. By the way. I always wonder where that expression comes from. Can you look it up, Skyler? The world is a stage. Where is that from? I actually don't know where that's from originally.

That would be interesting to see. 2 minutes later, Oh, it's Shakespearean, all the world's a stage. Interesting, very interesting. I might have more to say on that later. I might have more to say on the fact that all the world's a stage and we are but players on it, right? Like isn't that kind of the quote? You don't know that's Shakespearean. You don't know the basis of like Western culture from which you got like this expression, which is what, couple 100 years old now.

Are you going to be able to go out there and make comments on things when you haven't read sort of the basic understand you haven't read the building blocks. It's not good. It's like when I used to ask my sister something. My sister has a she has a master's degree. I think she's working on a PhD right now. We don't really talk that often. My sister couldn't tell me what decade, by the way, there are

two in the 20th century. What decade did the the war in Vietnam take place with the United States was involved in it? You had two options, right? 60s and 70s. You could have picked either one of them. You got a 2020% chance of getting it right if you were to just choose. And you should probably know that there are Vietnam Veterans who are alive, so that should limit it. Nope, couldn't do it. How about World War One? She couldn't do that. World War 2 couldn't do that.

How are you going to tell me that Hillary Clinton is the right answer for America today if you don't even know what America did in the last 100 years, let alone like Western history that led up to it and the ideas that are being espoused? If you don't know the philosophical roots of the arguments you're making? If you don't know that there's been literary discussions about why all the world is a stage or what he was saying or what the

context was even. You just heard a little like series of lines and then you just said it. Oh, very interesting. After I think about this, because I have no idea what the hell just happened to me. I just admitted to my audience that I don't know, like basic stuff. Embarrassing. This is the same woman out there telling us that she thinks the military secretly and quietly runs America.

I read yesterday that if you had the basic knowledge that many people used to have, this was the the upside of a decent high school education, which they've clearly taken away from the American populace. If you, if you had the basic knowledge that a High School graduate would have, let's say 50 years ago, then they wouldn't be able to sell you some of this crap. 95% of the so-called conspiracy theories could be

debunked. And then we could get to the real meat of the danger, which is really out there. It's like, OK, we articulate that the the noise is the noise. Let's hone in on the signal. The signal is that you are being sold a bill of goods and we can feel it. We can see what it is. We know that they're selling us something. Why do they keep measuring slavery? Oh, OK, What is that distracting us from? Oh, bad policies, a soft on

crime initiative. Is the answer going to be deputizing a federal law enforcement agency that does investigative work or God forbid, the Secret Service? No, that doesn't seem like it's good answer. There's actually some historical parallels for that going really, really poorly. Nobody needs a national police state in the United States. What have we done previously?

Let's try some of those ideas. If you don't know any of that stuff, then you're going to come up with things like the military is quietly running Donald Trump. But I find myself not so shocked because I know the pieces of history that they are trying to hide and the lies that they're telling, kind of recasting people that have been terrible as victims. That's like one of the moves. And of course, the world is quite literally a stage. By the way.

I always wonder where that expression comes from. Can you look it up, Skylar? The world is a stage. Where is that from? I actually don't know where that's from originally, but I find myself not so shocked because I I'm so disappointed in myself. I had two clips and I only grabbed 1. Stand by. I'll get you the other one. This one's actually quite fun too. I I'm, I'm constantly terrified when I realize that people are listening to folks that have no idea what's happening.

One man show. Sometimes you grab the wrong clip. Here's the right clip, Johan writes. Candace, do you think Trump told you to ease up a little because he knows Mccrone sells every important French industry to United States since 2014?

I've thought a lot about that. I kind of go back in my mind to that conversation and I find myself wondering whether or not Trump was being directed by somebody to give me a call and whether he was being honest with me, if it was really coming from him, if it was coming from higher up. You know, my general perspective is that we live in a a nation that is governed by the military. And I actually had to look up what that word was.

It's it's just stratocracy. And I think it's been that way for a long time, definitively since JFK was shot. And that's, I guess another broader way you could say that is the military industrial complex. So I don't necessarily believe that Trump is in control of things, right. Donald Trump answers to the military. So there's that.

Like I said, we're, we're dealing in a time when the quote, quote, UN quote, experts are at the top of the I know everything You guys will find regularly that if I don't know what I'm talking about, I'll just tell you like foreign policy, not Kyle's butt. I know that I don't care. I know that I'm America only. So that dictates what I feel about it. That doesn't mean that I understand the strategic importance of all these different moves. I don't, I don't want to.

I don't think Americans should have to worry about that. That's theoretically why we bring on people that do know about it. We try to stay in the lane here. One of the lanes is if our government is not serving us in a way that makes perfect sense, that we can actually just as regular people go, oh, yeah, that's what it's supposed to do. These entities aren't serving the purpose for which they were

created. Or maybe that purpose doesn't exist anymore and we should get rid of these agencies then. Then we got a problem. We got a serious, serious problem. The government has grown to a point where it is not. It's not something we can vote our way out of at this point. I don't see.

And for all of you that said Donald Trump was the solution, if you actually believed in that, then you should be having a moment right now where you're like, well, it's pretty clear that he was, he was a a better alternative than what we saw from the other side, but clearly not the solution. Let me give you one last little thing, because if Trump doesn't solve this problem, I don't think that forget about voting our way out of it or even trying to, you're not even going to

have the option. This is something I kind of teased out yesterday. He's, he's made this statement that there's going to be a, an executive order talking about mail in ballots. There's really, if we, we, we should get down to the brass tacks of what we need to see. This is one of the things that needs to happen 100% if it does

not happen. I think that not only are we cooked, which I think is probably the long term scenario, we're going to find out whatever the next iteration of America looks like, but we're cooked in the short term as well. Listen to this question that this journalist throws out. And, and by the way, they do it when they're trying to like derail him because he's talking to Zelinsky and he's trying to do the, the peace accord thing in Ukraine, which I could care

less about. But they, they want to know about mail in ballots and his statement about it, which I think was totally and utterly reasonable. You cannot go into a black box and then tell people with 0 transparency. This is the same problem as having an intelligence apparatus that's doing law enforcement. Law enforcement is supposed to be done in the in the sunlight, supposed to gather information publicly with warrants sworn out

sworn affidavits with your name. Donald Trump is saying the same kind of problem exists with our with our ballot system. And I do think that this is an existential crisis. There's only like 3 or 4 of them, immigration de weaponizing law enforcement, fixing the voting systems. If we had that, this would be a abject win. Forget whatever happens with comedy and Clapper and Ray and all these other clowns. Fix the existing problem. We'll worry about people paying for it later.

About doing away with mail in ballots and potentially electronic voting machines, can you expand on that and help? Well, that's a very off topic. Just really quickly. Mail in ballots are corrupt mail in ballots. You can never have a real democracy with mail in ballots. And we as a Republican Party are going to do everything possible that we get rid of mail in ballots.

We're going to start with an executive order that's being written right now by the best lawyers in the country to end mail in ballots because they're corrupt. And you know that we're the only country in the world, I believe I may be wrong, but just about the only country in the world that uses it because of what's happened. Massive fraud all over the place. The other thing we want change in the machines for all of the

money they spend. It's approximately 10 times more expensive than paper ballots, and paper ballots are very sophisticated with the watermark paper and everything else. We would get secure elections, We'd get much faster results. The machines, I mean, they say we're going to have the results in two weeks. With paper ballots, you have the results that night. Most people almost have, but most people, many countries use paper ballots.

It's the most secure form. So between paper ballots, very, very important paper ballots, and I think maybe even more important, the mail in voting, we're going to end mail in voting. It's a fraud if you have mail in vote. Even Jimmy Carter with this Commission, they set it up, he said. The one thing about mail in voting, you will never have an honest election if you have mail in it. And it's time that the Republicans get tough and stop it because the Democrats want it.

It's the only way they can get elected because with men and women's sports and with transgender for everybody and open borders and all of the horrible thing. And now the new thing is they love crime. They're fighting me on the fact that I've made Washington, DC safe. We're not going to get mugged, beaten up or killed like all the people you've been watching get so badly hurt. I'm glad. I hate to take your time with this, but I'm glad you asked me

that question. We're going to stop mail in ballots because it's corrupt. Did you see how quickly he gets derailed by all the the priorities out there because people want everything done at once? We have to really sort of have a stratosphere or a striation and tiered threats and the tiered threats, I think he nailed a couple of them. I don't think, you know, boys and and girls sports is a national level threat or anything else. And it definitely is

distractionary. It's a small percentage. It's a big deal for if you have kids that are in those sports, but it's not nearly as like a fatal to a nation as. Being able to do some of the wild stuff like subverting the election process and making people think something George Hill said to me. And I want you guys to walk away with this thought. The credibility of your government is integral to the legitimacy of your government. And that's where we're at right now.

With no credibility. We have people that say things that are obviously not true. You can see it with your own eyes. And it doesn't matter whether it's about Epstein or whether we're going to go fix the problems in DC, but we're going to do it with the federal police force. That's, that's illogical. The issue is that you have a corrupt and weak DC Metro PD, which is run by people who don't seem to do the real thing. If you don't have credibility in the space you're working in, you

don't have legitimacy. And when you don't, then you end up in a revolutionary time where people get really, really hurt. I think that's the biggest thing to, to focus in on. It's it, it, it concerns me that we constantly are distracted by that laser pointer. And I'm guilty as much as anybody else. If we don't hone in on those things of credibility and how do you do that? You get reasonable people voted in that we believe it.

The priorities, the American people are carried out in the with the tools that need to be done. National tools solve national problems. Local tools solve local problems. Federal agents don't solve local crime. That's the end of the day. All right, I saw the chat this morning. You guys were fun. I saw a lot of people with some disagreements on the various things. That's what we're trying to do. Let's think about it. You don't have to agree with

everything that Kyle has to say. I I hope you don't, it'd be weird if you actually agree with everything. If everything that comes out of my mouth is also your thoughts, you may need medication. That's all I'm going to say about that. We should have a healthy disagreements. We should all be able to kind of, I'm at it with a skeptical perspective. Don't just take anybody's word for it.

Speaking of that, Speaking of healthy disagreements, I'm going to be on with Alex Jones. I have absolutely no idea where that's going to go. But if you guys want to watch this afternoon, you can find that on Alex Jones on the the X stream at Real Alex Jones. You can find it on the Infowars stream and so on. And if you're listening to this after the fact, you might want to go back and look for that because those are always a good time.

My most intellectually demanding interviews are always with Alex Jones. I have absolutely no idea where he's going to take it. I have no idea what he's going to say and I'm probably not going to be able to cosign on all of his conclusions, but that's what makes it fun to people who don't necessarily agree on things that see some of the same stuff. Thanks for joining us today. I appreciate you guys. Thank you for your attention.

Thank you for caring about America enough to to look out there and try to be educated so you can make your own good decisions and not be at the top of that Mount stupidity. That is a real thing. Go look it up until tomorrow, which will be another opportunity for you guys to check out my buddies on the Amrat. Another perspective where we don't agree on everything.

We're going to sign off here from the Perch of social media and the Kyle Seraphin Show influencing the FBI direct by this microphone from Liberty Hill, TX. I hope you guys have a fantastic rest of your day and God bless you. We'll see you soon. Thanks for listening to the Kyle Seraphin Show, streamed live weekdays on rumble.com/kyle Seraphin. Follow Kyle on Twitter, Truth Social and Instagram at Kyle Seraphin.