Steve Baker & Steve Friend | Ep 150

Take a look. Behind the curtain, with a real whistleblower, 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 Serafin. Hello, my friends, and welcome to the Kyle Serafin Show. It's Friday. It is Friday. It's Friendly Friday, and it is October the 6th. We are going to be rolling today with not one Steve but two Steves.

And to make that even more complicated, they suggested being called Real Steve and something else. We're just going to call them by their last name so that we don't lose our minds. Folks, I'm going to have Steve Baker. I'm going to have Steve Friend on in just one second here. And we're going to be talking January 6th. We're going to be talking about how the feds are just kind of pulling the wool over people's eyes. But it is not working. There are some large holes in this story.

January 6th stuff and more coming up in just a few seconds here. Let's say thanks to our sponsor real quick and I want to say thanks to we may get them all out out right up in front. So let's say thanks to Catholic vote. Here they are Catholic vote. You guys know that I get this e-mail from them. They've actually got a great thing, a channel called edify. You can you can look them up on YouTube, EDIFY edify and you can

check out. They have a great video right now about if you're a dad and you take your kids to church, that is the highest predictor of your children staying in church when they're adults. I think that's actually worthwhile. If you want to get into the fight for faith, family and freedom, then you should check out what Catholic vote is up to. It doesn't matter if you're

Catholic in particular. You may follow a a different, a different denomination and you will still get plenty of value because they put out on an e-mail called The Loop. And the Loop. Today it's talking about Republicans backing Jim Jordan. I don't know about all that. They're talking about Biden saying that border walls won't work, but they will work, but they won't work. And we don't know who's in charge over there.

They're having some problems. We've got a British leader pushing back against the L, GB, TQIA plus, minus, ampersand, and so on agenda. That's all good stuff. Abortion in the military? Is it vital to national security? John Kirby's going on the line for that. Again, whole bunch of good stuff over on the loop to check them out. As you can see on their web page, you just punch in your e-mail address and you'll get it. It's really worth your time. They're not going to spam you.

You just get useful emails that tell you about what's happening in the world. And speaking about what's happening in the world. Let's bring on my two guys, Friend and Baker, the two Steves. Hello, gentlemen. Good morning. Good morning. So you've established what you're going to call us. What do we call you? I just go by Kyle. People used to call me that. And then if they're rowdy, then like any number of profanities are usually appropriate as well. I should have said to your face.

I've looked the director of the FBI is familiar with the name, so I think that we should just stick with that. Unfortunately I I. I'm included in that, that group. Yeah. The FBI director may know who you are, too. You've got some fun stuff. We're going to get all into that story. And for those of you who are wondering, does the microphone make the man? I just told Baker that is not the case.

He's working right off those ear pods that he's got on there and still sounds like a reedy bassie stud. I just want to say thanks to Eve TX who just became a monthly supporter of the channel. If you guys want to do that, you can follow the channel. We just hit 14,000 followers on our Rumble channel. So really appreciative of you guys following us on the video part. And if you hit the follower thing, then it lights up in a different color and it gives you an opportunity to subscribe.

I think it's like 5 bucks a month. You can support the channel that goes to us, helps keep the the lights going on here. We actually have lights here. Look at Steve. Check this out. Steve's, we can turn the lights on and off. This is what happens when you guys keep supporting the channel. We keep those lights on. That's that's what you want. So let's let's talk about it.

You started working with the Blaze Real recently, and I want to kind of as much as you want to talk about that, I'd love to hear how that kind of came about. Yeah, actually the all week I was actually in Dallas at the Blaze studios and I did all my remotes from their studio yesterday. So I relocated to my super secret to Louisiana underground bunker last night in the middle of the night. So that's why my voice is down here. It's because I haven't slept

yet. But no, actually I hadn't slept much this week at all. As you can imagine with this story that we broke, it's been been a lot of work to get it right, get it out. And and then backing up a a couple of months or a little bit further than that. I did receive a phone call from Blaze and they had been tracking my work. Some people had had turned them on to what I've been working on for, you know, for quite some time, not just January 6th, related.

And then one day I get a call from their new Editorinchief and. Matt Pearson Peterson. And he just introduced himself and said hey, you've been on a radar screen for a while or read all your stuff and we'd like to talk about you may be coming on board as a contributing you know, writer. So we went through, you know, a few weeks of of discussion about that and then lo and behold, I I get an e-mail address from them and you know, here I here we go.

That's outstanding. Now that's really good and and I'm happy to see them picking up on some of your work. I've enjoyed it since since we first talked and I think there's a lot of fans down here in my live chat that are saying the same thing, so thanks for what you continue to do. How? Thank you.

Do you want to tell people how you became like, so interested in and getting into the January 6th story, I know you were there, but like what is what has been the the reason that you just keep following that dog down the down the rabbit hole? Well the the first thing is, yeah, I I was there and there were things that I saw that I felt like weren't being covered accurately. And I and I don't go I'm not one of those guys that goes down that conspiracy hole.

You know, I I, I'm absolutely a guy who looked at that event and I saw bad people doing bad things. And I, you know, and I saw, I saw good people doing good things. I saw stupid people, you know, that were probably otherwise good people that got caught up in the moment, did some pretty stupid things.

And then when I came back home and started analyzing my own video, not, not anybody else's ideas about what was happening, I started seeing things that just made me ask questions, All right, We got bad people, got good people. We got stupid people. But who are those people? And so I I couldn't help but just my my normal curiosity.

Chase some of these things. And then as I begin to do that, all right, so there were some interesting and maybe otherwise colorful unidentified characters there. But were they bad people? Were they doing bad things? Are they doing nefarious things? And so I couldn't help but

follow those rabbits. And what ended up happening is about eight months later, I get a call from the FBI and they want to talk to me. And really and truly, there's no other way to say it. They weaponized me against them when they did that. Because if you're going to come after me, well, then I'm going to go after you as well. And that's just kind of always been my MO my entire life. And that's what. That's exactly what happened when they finally decided that they were going to charge me

with crime there. And they they still haven't. This was in. November of 21, I received or my attorney received an e-mail from Assistant US Attorney Anita Eve out of Philadelphia saying to my attorney that your client is going to be charged within the week, that client being me. And so that was a week before Thanksgiving of 21 and we went on a media press offensive at that time. And I think, I think we backed them off by doing that.

I mean, I know you guys are a big fan of taking it straight to them, and so that was just pure instinct on my part. I had. I didn't know either one of you guys yet, and so I I I went at them hard. We've made a big publicity splash out of this thing, and I the only thing I can think of is that Anita Eve took my file and put it to the bottom of her pile. But twenty months later, you know, they showed up again all of a sudden as we were getting close to breaking this big

story. And I was hearing rumbles from my sources at DOJ that they were aware of my story, that they were scared of what I was coming out with. And then all of a sudden I get a subpoena for our grand jury wanting all my January 6 videos 2 1/2 years later. And this is something that I had offered the FBI voluntarily twice in long before that, so. So that's where we sit today. So they really, they really ignited a passion in me that I

didn't have otherwise. I had curiosity, I had interest and I was writing stories and I was doing investigations. But when they came after me, I lit up, Ain't that funny, You know, it's also funny. And I didn't realize the timeline on this, but about the same probably the exact same time they said they were going to charge you is the exact same time that I was deciding that I'm not putting things up my nose for the FBI and probably about to break up.

You know, you have that moment when you're in a relationship that's toxic and you just suddenly know where that the threshold is. That's where my threshold was too. I got kicked out of the office in the on November 23rd of 2021. So literally the same week that you had that I'd already gone to Congress and all these kind of things. But you know sometimes I just

think the stars align. I think that God puts us in the place we're supposed to be. We meet the people we're supposed to. And the, you know, the timing of this thing I don't think is accidental. I think that it has put all of us mentally in the right place. Steve friend. And you're sitting over there kind of quietly watching that. I'm going to have to get better at that, aren't I? You're sitting over there, you, you've seen this from the outside.

You know, you've been watching some of this development. Obviously you were involved in it too. What was your timeline? Did your timeline line up at all with any of the Steve stuff? I'm just kind of curious if we

have any kind of overlaps here. I think that around the same time as you guys, that was when I got to my realization that my days with the FBI were likely numbered because of the The vaccine mandate came out and my wife and I had discussion and we were adamant that I wasn't going to get vaccinated. None of us and our family were going to and. That's when they started coming out with this.

I don't know the database that they were collecting of our requests for reasonable combination and it kept changing every couple of hours. And I was like, it's a registry, they're just gonna get a target list and start going after us. And that's really when I was like, okay. Either my days are numbered or I'm just going to be KMA as an

agent. And I'm only in for seven years, so I've got another decade and I have to go so, so Baker KMA is Bureau code for Kiss My Ass. It means you no longer care about doing your job. You just show up and get a paycheck. That's when the passion becomes a paycheck. Only kind of funny stuff. I I totally understand that idea. So we all ended up this look and there's going to be a couple stories I'm going to have pop up on here.

I think they're actually, they're not specifically related to what you've been uncovering, but they do tell a broader picture and we always try to give people kind of that context. So I want you to kind of break down what you've been exposing in the last couple days here. You spent probably dozens and dozens of hours sitting and staring at videotape. When we talked last, you said I know exactly what I'm looking for.

I know exactly what I'm going into the January 6th vault videos and maybe tell people what you went in looking for and then let them know how it how it kind of turns out. Well, it actually all began a year ago this month and it was during the first month, full month of the upkeepers trial, the first upkeepers trial October of last year And there were two major incidences and I'll I'll tell them as quickly as I can but in on October 3rd, a year ago this event happened

in the courtroom that really. Set my radar pinging and and what what it was was the lead US attorney Jeffrey Nassler. He came and approached the bench and he announced to the judge. Judge made-up that there was a rogue attorney that was about to release a couple of documents that were still under court seal and that this was highly, you know, irregular and was not favorable and that we needed to stop, that we needed to send a

warning to this guy and. Those documents you guys will appreciate that were two FBI3O twos, which of course is you know it's just the written recollection of of an FBI agent of the IT was not the recording. It's not the transcript, but it's the the statement by the agent of what the witness or the the person being interviewed relays to them. And this particular person was the Capitol Police officer that is basically known as the hero of the day, Harry Dunn.

Harry Dunn is the big 67300 pound gentle giant has he's been portrayed by the media and he had has been awarded A Congressional medal. He's been awarded a Presidential Medal medal. He's got his book coming out here at the end of this month. So there's been a lot of rewards and accolades and. Unlike all other United States Capitol police officers, he's been allowed almost carte blanche to have media and press interviews.

He's been able to say whatever he wants while while everyone else is under a, you know, gag order and NDA. So he's obviously been treated very differently than anyone else on that department. So that's kind of laying the groundwork for where this is headed. But the problem with those, with what happened in the court that day and what got my radar going, was when the judge looked at the

media. And and you know, he pointed at the cameras down to the media pool room, which was on the first floor of the of the courthouse. And he'd instructed the media to tweet out a warning to this particular attorney and tell him that if he published or released those 30 twos, he'd have his ass and hold him in contempt of court and and and the judge was saying that the the media was

required to do something. He was giving sort of an order from the bench unofficially that that they needed to go. Wasn't, you know, obviously it wasn't an order. Sure, he can't. He can't order the media to do anything, but he wasn't in a position of authority. He's sitting in a position of authority. He also knows that the press pool, particularly the legacy media, and there's 25 of them down there for this, this, in that, in that room, they know that.

The judge certainly knows that this press pool is the spokes people for the agenda for the administration for the spirit of the ages we see it today and so he he gave his instruction and they kind of giggled about it. I think they were taken aback themselves and then they immediately require you know went went at it you know the the keyboard started lighting up and and people tweeted out on their Twitter accounts and. Been warned Mr. Mosley, the attorney, that he better not put

out those three or twos. And so that was the first event. So obviously when that happened and I always sat in the back room, in the media room so I could watch what everybody else was doing. The half of my story was covering them, and so I. Immediately are like okay, Well, I gotta know what's in those documents, right? So I went through everything that I had to go through to eventually acquire them and learned that what was in those documents were contradictory statements.

In the first one, the officer had had relayed to the the two agents interviewing him a positive. And a good and helpful encounter with the four ofkeepers that lined up in front of him and kind of protected him and stood put a wall up between him and some of the more agitated protesters that day in the capitol. And then that was in May of 21 was the first FBI interview and then his second interview was in the August.

They actually replaced the original 2 agents, brought two other agents in for the second interview. And then when he went through that interview he completely flipped the story around 180 degrees and it was now a contentious interaction with those four ofkeepers.

And then in addition to the contentious, you know re remembrance of this event, they also added a second event so that they could kind of say okay, he misremembered there was something else happening in another part of the building and and I obviously I can't get into the. Explicit details about these 30 twos because they're still under court seal and I don't want to you know I don't want to spend 5 months and and no no, certainly not.

What I want to do is have Steve Friend kind of elaborate. Everyone is becoming experts on FBI documents now which is bizarre. We have people that are in Congress talking about, you know, FD1020 threes, which nobody would ever know about if it wasn't for Hunter Biden being Hunter Biden. And nobody would know what a 302 is unless there was a million sort of aggressive court cases coming after people that seem really unjust.

Steve, we give people some background on what that form is, how it's done, how you did yours, how other agents doing that kind of thing. Yeah, an FD302 is Federal document 302. It's a contemporaneous recollection of from the from the agent.

It's basically like a police report and you use it to document an interview that you do or even an arrest that you do, and when you go into the FBI software system, which is called Sentinel. You can auto populate even the language to do the introduction to it. So you could just click a couple of things so it kind of gets the idea of what the nature of your 302 is and it'll say you know on

such and such a date. Special agent friend interviewed so and so at certain location after advising him of his rights. Here is what this this individual provided and then it would just be a summary of this interview and and you have five days to to document it by policy. So if I interview somebody on Monday, as long as it's in by Friday. That is considered kosher. And the and the the problem is that there's actually no requirement to audio record.

I mean I I made a habit of doing that because I wanted to make sure that I protected the person and protected myself and make sure that everything was accurate. But as as James Comey recollected when he had his meeting with. Donald Trump or president-elect Donald Trump, he just documented everything from the meeting and then put it into a 302 contemporaneously and then that was used to push out the other Russia collusion hoax. Steve, you're reporting on all the stuff.

Would it surprise you that most FBI interviews are not recorded unless they are done in a very specific room with a very specific set of microphones wired in? It would not it would not surprise me at all because I mean that gives you a lot of wiggle room. There's there's that running joke.

I think Bill Burr does it where he's like if you have the transcript and you could read it differently and it'd be the same exact words, you know, or it's or my my favorite movie of all time is my cousin Vinny and where the sheriff is interviewing the guys in the beginning and he's like, when did you shoot the clerk? And he's like, I shot the clerk. I shot the clerk and then they go to court. He goes, I shot the clerk, I shot the clerk and when he reads

the transcript out. So there's a lot that gets lost in translation if you don't have the audio. And and obviously if the FBI is no longer worried with the process, which Bill Shipley has said, it should be the victory itself. The process is victory. But if you're worried about the wins and loss column, then then you ain't cheating. You ain't trying gross, Steve Baker. Does it surprise you that they don't record most of these things? I have a feeling they probably do.

I I mean, you guys know better than I do, I was told in my interview, and fortunately I've only had to do one in my lifetime. But I when I was told that I could not record it myself, they we actually had a a moment, a real moment of contention because. I was not going to do the interview unless I was allowed to record it. They said, well, you can't. And they started giving me all these reasons. Well, you know, we're undercover, we can't, you know.

And I said, okay, I said, I know it's going to be off. Sorry, that's too much for us. Just take a breather right there. I know they're definitely not undercover. This goes back to the thing that that friend and I always talk about. FBI agents have this mistaken belief because that everything that they're working on says secret on the document that they are in fact secret agents. Just because you over classify things does not make you a secret agent.

And you know, I've been, I've been chastised. In fact, the FBI wrote it up in their critique of me that I was exposing the identities of agents. These are people who are publicly knocking on doors with green cameras. And, you know, giving names and credentials and are required to identify themselves the way every police officer and every law enforcement does. And they act like this is a problem. I wanted to show you this, Baker.

This is, this is Kyle Serafin's recorder that I used while as an FBI agent. I bought it with Kyle Serafin's money, which I earned for my for my pay. You know, this is something I thought was a tool I needed and it is not common. It is absolutely not common. And Steve can tell you, you can get a Polaris Razor scooter at the end of the financial year, the fiscal year for the federal government easier than you can get a new set of recorders for the people that go out and conduct interviews.

We're, I mean it's a bass ackwards thing, but that's the that's the government for you. It's actually less common than you think to record it. Well, they actually, when we had our our disagreement at the beginning of the sit down, they pointed up at the wall, you know and they said that because there was an array of electronics in the wall. So this is all being recorded? It's not gonna be available to you anyway. Nope. Somebody back there doesn't know how to run that electronics I

promised. Somebody knows how to run it, man. Then most people don't. There's no training available to make you to make the recording room that has $1,000,000 worth of cameras and electronics to work. Nobody knows how to do it. And I told him, I said, look, I have no, I have no idea what you're going to do with this. I mean, good Lord, tapes, videos, everything are altered with regularity nowadays, and especially with AI. And so I said no, I'd rather

have my own recording. And I and they said and I said I won't publish it, I won't. I'll, I'll told them I'll write on your pad right now and I'll sign it. This is 100. My my video recording or or audio recording of this interview will be completely 100% off the record. It will never be used except

unless you guys. Present something like you said while ago Steve and you gave that example where where something can be easily misconstrued in writing and then they they said no we're not doing it. And my my attorney looked at me and he said does that mean you're not going to do the the interview And I and I, I said no I'm I'm going to do it. I just want to get this all on the record. It's so gross.

It's such a weird, it's such a weird idea that people who have an expectation now with all the technology that exists between body cams and police recorders that are running dash cams and, you know, recorded radio systems that come in as as cops queue up and do stuff, that the FBI is still operating in the 1930s, which is like, whatever I wrote is good, bro. Like, just trust me. Like I'm going to write down the right thing. It's so strange.

And I remember hearing it and people were really resistant to it. And initially, like, when you're at the Academy, you go like, oh, yeah, of course. Of course. I'm honorable and what I write down is good. Why would I want to be recorded? And then the minute that you go out there and start conducting interviews, one, your notes suck.

If you're really doing a good interview, as you well know, it's much easier to just put a recorder down and refer to it later and go, did I get that right or not? Your notes are going to be inferior to an actual audio to go back and listen through. I used to use exact quotes from people you know when I when I would quote them, I would want to quote the exact words they did. I would generate A transcript by listening over and over and over

and over the audio. You get that nuanced thing, you know, like every reporter has ever done as long as there's been tape, as like every single person who's serious in law enforcement would want to do. You go back and play back the tape and what does it say? What's the tapes? Let's go to the tape. They can't go to the tape in the FBI. They don't even pay for the recorder. It's bizarre. And my biggest problem is that I I type at an alarming 20 words

per hour. You know that's a blazing speed. Are you? Are you a hunting pecker? Are you like a finger poker? Oh God. I graduated from high school. I'm a lot older than you guys. I graduated from high school the year before we ever had our first computer lab. So this was. I did take one semester of a typing class, but that was on a Were all the pretty girls in that class? Is that how that used to work back then? Okay. Yeah, that's how it worked.

And so it's like I'm in here. Yeah, And then and then, you know, I can't read my own writing, so I have to record things if I'm going to get it right. And so that was the first thing that happened. In this trial was this episode with the 30 twos and I had to know what was in them. Now you Fast forward to the end of the month to October 31st, a year ago Halloween.

Then we had the testimonies that day of that particular officer, Harry Dunn, that I mentioned earlier and then immediately following him they the government brought in United States Capitol Police Special Agent. David Lazarus Now, I don't know really what you have to do in the Capitol Police a world to get the designation of Special Agent. But in his case he was dignitary

protection and that was his job. And as a matter of fact he held the position of the chief of Nancy Pelosi's security detail. So that was his job and he was in charge of her security and her staff and. I know that they have other special agent designees within the United States Capitol Police because they actually have liaisons between the FBI and and USCP and they they Capitol Police actually have people officing there in the Washington field office of the FBI that

work for them. Yeah, you've been kind of dealing with Capitol Police and other federal agencies for a little while now. You have an instinct about where Capitol Police rank in the hierarchy of capabilities and respect for federal law enforcement. I'm just curious. Yeah, and and one of the one of the reasons why I've been given as much access as I've been given as I've been very respectful to them. Yes, if you know what I mean. You had I've seen it and I think

that's fair. I don't, I don't think anybody needs to be you know Lampoon for having any job you're out and and that is a job. It's a required job. It needs to be done. But do you you have kind of a sense? But I have said, I said.

The the the the overriding perception is that they are glorified tour guides and most of them spend most of their career regardless of their training and regardless of what division of the Capitol Police. Then whether it's one of the more highly specialized divisions or not, they spend most of their career saying yes or the bathroom is that way. That's correct, yeah, the security guards and and tour

guides. And not to be disrespectful of them because that needs to be done in that building, there's no doubt about it. But they're not an investigative agency. Nobody goes to them and go, hey, we got this lead, can you run it down, you know, And then they go like, yeah, we're on it. Well, that's why Tara Reid couldn't really bring her allegation forward, because Capitol Police would have been responsible for investigating

sexual assault. There's just not a lot of crime that takes place in that building. I think the building keeps people from doing it, just the the location itself. Except, you know, except for a couple of famous days on the calendar. But that was most. Most of the time.

You're absolutely correct. So when when David Lazarus was brought a Special Agent, David Lazarus was brought to the stand, he was there specifically to validate, corroborate and to clean up the done inconsistencies between the 30 twos. Because even though those 30 twos were still not public, and they still aren't today, even though they've never been released from court seal.

There was enough discussion in in the Harry Dunn Cross Examination by the defense attorneys to that were referencing the content of the three, oh twos and you know. Officer done. We we we you know we honor and respect your service and and you know we're not wanting we're not here to to belittle you in any way.

But there is a problem between your two interviews with the FBI and your first one because there was a the the actual House Select Committee had released one paragraph from that first FBI302. Actually they hadn't released it but it was in there. It was in their documentation that was made public and that was the recounting of it. Being a positive interaction with those outkeepers. And then of course, the second one completely flipped that on

his head. And then the testimony subsequently supported his second, you know, FBI interview. And So what they needed to do is they needed somebody with a little bit more credibility in the department to come in and clean that up. And so they brought Agent Lazarus in, and he testified very simply. That he passed by the oathkeeper Harry Dunn. Interaction there in the capital three or four times. That's the quote from the trial three or four times.

And then this was happening while he was rescuing, quote UN quote, 11 or 12 of Pelosi's staffers out of a locked office. And he went into great detail about what he saw. And he said every single time that he passed that interaction between the Oathkeepers and Dunn that it was a. A highly contentious, antagonistic thing that was happening between them. And that was basically why Lazarus was brought in. And then I got access to the videos. All right.

So before we get to that, let me just let people know. There's some people that are just joining our stream right now. So it's kind of the fun thing about doing a live show. So we're talking to Steve Baker, who is the pragmatic Constitutionalist. You can find him on Twitter and you can find him on locals and you can see some of his independent reporting Now with The Blaze. We're also talking to Steve Friend. Just to make it more complicated, Double Steve Hour to Steve's in one show.

And Steve Friend is an FBI whistleblower and he is a author and he is a friend of mine that does our regular segment on Fridays called Friendly Friday. So he's kind of cohosting with me today and giving you guys some additional perspective on the way these things work. If you're just joining us and you haven't hit the like button on Rumble, please do that. And if you have seen it on Twitter, the other places, you can join us in the live chat on Rumble.

So we do appreciate all of you guys being part of all this. All right, Steve, I want to Steve friend, if you would, would you give some color on whether or not you've ever followed up with somebody who's given you a statement and then they wanted to amend their 302 statement? Is that common for you? Because I don't think I've ever done it, but you've done a lot more interviews with this kind

of stuff. I've done a few followups and it was normally when I got physical evidence that contradicted their first statement and I gave the man opportunity to confess to the crime. So I had a like an allegation of a sexual assault and the bad guy said, look, I never touched her. And then I got a DNA sample and lo and behold we found that his

DNA on the victim. So take that physical evidence back to the suspect and say, hey look, I've got physical evidence now do you want to amend what you said to me? Because I was hoping he would just give me a confession it would make. Prosecuting him that much easier, but you know physical evidence should you would think be enough to to win a trial. But you always want to make the path easier and smoother if possible.

All right? So it's something you could do, but only when you find inconsistencies. You ever done it to try to help somebody out and say, hey, you're my friend, I really want to make this easier on you. I don't want your. I don't want your lies to be exposed. No, no. The the the premise of an interview is you want certain information. You are. You're basically adversarial. You're not. You're not there because you're their buddy.

I don't. I don't want to just have a conversation with any random person alleged of committing a crime. I want them to confess to committing that crime. There's something in it for me. There's never a this is for your benefit. Now, look, that's a great and effective interrogation strategy. I used it all the time. Hey man, it's really in your interest if you confess to me and if I lay out the case for why it's in your interest to

confess to this crime. And it makes it more palatable to you then it's it's good, but it's good a good for me, not for you. You're the one that winds up in the the Gray bar in. Let me make let me make this scenario a little different for you though. Have you ever been given the opportunity to do a second interview with with a potential defendant or whatever you want? However you refer to the refer to them, and it is specifically for the purpose of flipping the story. 180 degrees.

And oh, by the way, the interviewee, his attorney that's sitting next to him is the guy that led the Clinton bimbo eruption team back in the early 90s. See, now you've brought in the fact that this witness has no credibility whatsoever. So I mean, you might want to actually do that so that you can dismiss anything this person says. And and and start from Ground Zero to eliminate them from the equations. Hey, look, he told me the sky was blue and the next time he

told me this guy was red. Everything. Ergo, we can't trust. It's almost like a Giglio issue. You would have like, say an agent has a history of lying on stand. Ergo that the FBI is not going to let him testify ever again. So that would be the only logic behind it disqualifying them. Yeah, as a disqualifier. But again, like I'm operating from is this a objectively good

organization. I think here it's clearly just to clean things up so that again, we're not focusing on the process, we're focusing on the outcome. So Baker, I want to give you kind of the perspective here. We, we do a couple different types of of interviews. And I want to say thanks to what was it, Mac buddy, that just threw that up there. Just saying true tellers out here, couple of other rumble rants coming in.

We do appreciate it, guys. So go ahead and hit that like button if you like it. So Baker, one of the things that we do is we do what we call witness interviews. Those are getting information about the actual thing that happened. We do subject interviews. That's the person we think did the thing that we're out there investigating. And then sometimes we'll do background interviews. It's like, oh, you work for this agency. You work for this organization.

You know, tell me about how your organization works so that when we're laying out the case, we could say this is an organization that does this and this and this, and here's the three or two of the founder of it, and this is what they actually set out to do. But here's a guy that works there and he actually just likes to touch kids and he's a bad dude. So that's why we're interested

in him. And and then we go and we actually talked to the guy and said he said he didn't touch kids, but then we have all this evidence that said he did and then he recanted and then he confessed. So those kind of three layouts, background witness and then subject. We're talking about a witness interview here that basically either makes or breaks the case because the initial thing he did was very exculpatory for the defendants, for the subjects of the investigation.

And then he's flipped it on his head. And then you've got like a cover witness that's come in and kind of like stitched up is what we're kind of laying out. So we've got Harry done, the gentle giant, enormous, you know, former football player who says initially I'm very friendly towards the oathkeepers. And they helped me out, and they were. And that's an exculpatory situation. It's Brady material. The fact that it wasn't even over is grounds for an appeal.

And then on top of that, you end up having this guy David Lazarus come in and he says, well, let me explain to you why this all works. He's smoothing out the edges of this like really ugly, sort of like frame up job that they're trying to do, it sounds like. All right, talk. So does that catch us up pretty close? Yeah, that. That's I mean that that that that kind of details it exactly and what what actually of course happened as we've begun to do the end of the investigation

into this. Is I am seeing what I believe and I'm I'm I'm announcing to the feds right now. I I mean they're watching. They they love all three of us. Yes, they do. We know we're here. Yeah, I I like to say, hey, Agent Noyas, Agent Das. See you guys again, I I give us a like, give us a like and leave a comment guys if you want to know. I've sent them links to this investigation and now here's what I'm doing, What are you doing?

And and So what I know. And what I'm putting together is I'm going to show where these pieces of the puzzle connect. And I believe there's no other way to say it. I, I, I it's a fun, it's a fun phrase to say. But there was a star chamber put together back in the middle of summer of 2021, in which they had decided that they were going to frame The Oathkeepers. And that they were going to make them the tip of the spear, the leading edge.

In fact, they they in in Jeffrey, Assistant US Attorney Jeffrey Nesler's opening argument in that trial on day one, he pointed at those five defendants and he told the jury these are the leaders of the insurrection. And you know, ironically, not one of those guys was even on the property. When the Capitol, well, we know that's how the leaders get done. That's what Enrique Otario did

too, right. So we of course they set, they set that the table and then they just started serving out these these sentences and serving out these these dishes. You know, revenge, it seems like. Yeah, a lot of that's exactly right. And so that's exactly what happened in this case. And I, we're putting together the names the places where. I mean, I'll tell you right now, I've, I've literally engaged private investigators to help me with this already.

I'm I'm I'm telling you and I'm telling them that you can either come to me and help me save this Republic or we're going to bring bring it to you and and how do they respond? I don't hear from them that checks, except when I get a grand jury supina for my videos, Creator 64 says. And now Eric has started a bidding war here. People are throwing rumble rants in, and they appreciate what you're saying, Mr. Baker. So when you go into an investigation, Steve, you've done investigative plans.

Do you want to kind of lay that out? And then I want to compare and see if Mr. Baker had the same sort of idea as laying out. Like, here's what I attempt to accomplish and then here's how I'm going to go about it. You want to tell people about an investigative plan?

Yeah, I mean you just you have this initial claim of a of a alleged crime and you just have to storyboard out the way you want to approach it. And and it is important the way you do that because you don't want to just go in and do things out of order sequentially. Like look if there's a a couple of bad guys who are looking at say it's a a gang that wants to rob a bank. Like you don't want to just go go on Monday and go talk to guy #1.

Because you know that then by the time Tuesday comes around like he'll have already talked to his his buddies and they're going to get their story straight. So you have to have a plan of attached. Back, for lack of a better term, and you would get your background, you would talk to your witnesses and then eventually it all typically culminates within a suspect interview when you have the all as much information as possible that you can confront them with it in the hopes that they will

come clear. OK, so that all makes sense at Mr. Baker, somebody's churning butter in the background for you, which is actually really funny for me. You got to make survival. I can't even hear it myself. It's OK. We got good years here. So, all right, What was your investigative plan? You had these 302 documents as you were sitting in the courtroom. You kind of understood what the game was looking like. And then how did you go about reviewing it? What was your order of work?

What was your priorities as you tried to kind of piece through that? Yeah. The first thing, obviously was just instinct and watching body language in the courtroom. And I have identified several incidences during that trial and I have them securely in my notes. Of when I saw what I felt like was a coordinated song and dance between the government

prosecutors and the judge. Obviously the judge is supposed to be independent of that, is not supposed to be coordinating, not supposed to be collaborating with the with the government on this. But I'm convinced beyond any shadow of a doubt of what I saw, and I saw that coordination and so this really, you know, set. Set me alight and and I've been obsessed with this thing for a solid year.

So in terms of process, it started with just instinct and then I had to do a couple of things that actually other journalists won't do and probably shouldn't do and maybe I shouldn't have done it. But I actually went and I approached one of the defense attorneys and I said I will sign the damn court protective order. I have to see these documents and that's a big risk because now. And he he, he was not happy or he wasn't going to allow me to

do that. And I I pressured and pressured and pressured and I said I I can't help you if you don't help me here. And so I finally was granted the right to sign the the protective order. And then once I signed it, I can see the stuff can't write about it. I can't publish it. I can't, you know, I can refer to it just as to the extent is that it was referred to in the courtroom. So I have that much latitude, but because I signed that I have to remember every single time I write an article.

Did the okay is this video that I've seen under the protective order. Is this document that I've seen in the protective order. And if I write about it then I'm in contempt of court. But my curiosity, you know, overwhelmed me, as it were. And I put myself in this position and and I I feel like that I had to do that in order

to to get to where we are today. Which ultimately led me to the place of being granted access to the the that you know 41,000 hours of video treasure trove at at the Capitol. So I I don't think, I don't think I have an organized process like you know guys that have been schooled to do this and have come through the Academy. I've been operating off of pure instinct and I, you know I have we've talked about this before Kyle.

But, you know, I do have some background going back quite quite a few decades in terms of doing investigative things, but not in a formal, you know, federally trained sense. Sure. And and people, I would highly encourage you to go back and look at our first interview that

we did with Mr. Baker here. And we went into Joe Rogan territory, going about 3 hours into the depth of it, cuz I've found it fascinating and that's probably why we get along cuz we've had we have a lot of. A lot of camaraderie, I think, in this, but will you get people kind of the bullet points? I know you did some really interesting work, sort of it during the Cold War, and people might find that interesting. And I know your dad was an investigator.

So we can kind of kind of touch the wave tops on here. Just kind of giving people like they've never heard of you before, like the credibility level of what we're talking about. You're not some random guy who just decided to show up and start digging into things and that got picked up by the Blaze. That doesn't exactly happen that way. Yeah, I had a a lifelong career in music. I I've been a music industry professional for 40 plus years. I'm, I'm a trumpet player,

singer. I've worked in the music business as a concert from. I've probably done over 1000 shows as a promoter and then also had managed some major label artists during that time. But I was 19 years old. I hated college. I was playing trumpet. I got recruited by a band that was touring all over the world. Turns out that this band was a front group for a ministry organization that was supporting dissidents behind the Iron Curtain. I and this I I joined this band.

I got a phone call on a Friday morning. They asked me if I could be in San Diego on Wednesday and and I said yeah, can I have the weekend to think about it. Monday morning they sent me a plane ticket. Wednesday, I I I'm picked up by a tour bus in San Diego. I'm 19 years old. Two weeks later I'm sitting in a recording studio in San Francisco recording the demo for what ended up being the theme song to the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow. So all of so I had.

I had no idea what I parachuted into. I can just as a as a, you know, naive 19 year old and then you know a year and a half later I'm touring the Soviet Union. We're smuggling in printing press parts, tape, duplicating machines. We're we're bringing in all kinds of equipment to these dissidents.

And then I started working for that organization independently and going into the Soviet Union by myself and setting up meetings for leadership between the underground dissidents and leadership coming in from the West. And so while all of that was happening, my dad was a private investigator. So whenever I was home from being on the road and from traveling, I would come home and work for him. And of course, I got all of the, you know, I got all the adultery cases.

So I had to sit and, you know, be in front of somebody's house for 12 hours. And just sat and watched. That's exactly what I did, you know, 100%, yeah. And over and over and over again. That's right, the bottle. The bottles have never tool. Yeah, there's only there's only three things you need to do surveillance. You need you need a radio so you can talk to your guys. You need a pee bottle and you need a cup of coffee. That's been my experience.

Those are the things. If you want to sit for eight hours and watch somebody, you need some caffeine, you need some optics, or you need a radio. And then you also need that pee bottle which I would always put out. By the way Baker, I would always put out my pee bottle whenever I was showing. FBI executives like all the really critical gear we had for

surveillance. I'd lay them out on the table and I'd always have, like a simply lemonade bottle sitting in the corner that I would never explain. I would just leave it there and my buddies would be like, do you leave your pee bottle out on the table? And I go, yeah, and they go, why I go critical gear.

They just want to see all the critical gear, one of the most critical pieces of gear for me. If you're sitting in a ghetto where you're the only white guys within like 6 square miles, you know you're the only guy there stepping out looking like this is not a good move for for keeping your. As you will know, I I wanted to touch those weight tops mostly because you've dealt with some government agencies.

We'll just leave it at that. You have a trained eye being in places that were questionable that we're doing some maybe high high consequence, high gravity events that you were involved in going through your youth. And so when you say I saw certain things and I was, you know, I keyed in on those, I want people to understand it's not like.

You watched a bunch of CSI, or you're big on MacGyver, or you saw Miami Vice and then now you're an investigator, you've got some, you've got some, some chops. And and to be honest with you, when you go through life as an entertainer, one of the things you have to learn how to do is work a crowd. And you can't work a crowd if you can't read the crowd. And that's part part of it. Steve, I wanted to ask you, so you were, you were at every day of the Oathkeeper trial, correct?

Yeah. And and this obviously jumped out to you enough to hone in on it through the video process. This wasn't the only thing though, right there. There's other items that are then on your list that you're going to try to back up, confirm or deny via the video.

Yeah, and when I went into the video room there at the Capitol for the first time and just give everybody just a super brief explanation of that, when Tucker Carlson was given access to that $41,000 of video, he wasn't given the video. What his team was given was access to three computer consoles in one of the office buildings there in the Capitol complex. And but then you got a few hours to sit down in front of those videos and it's overwhelming.

I mean, you know, 70 / 1700 cameras worth of data that day that 41,000 hours would take you over five years of continuous watching 24 hours a day without ever taking you know a break for sleep rest or the restaurant and and that and then the process is incredibly tedious because there's not 100% coverage of every square inch of the capital. Even with 1700 cameras, it would take more than 10,000 cameras to cover every square inch of that of that building.

And that's probably just the hallways, that's not including the interiors of the offices if they wanted to do that. So it's an incredibly tedious process to to work on it and it's one of the reasons why there really hasn't been any gigantic earth shaking or game changing reveals coming from the people who have had access so far. Now you know, Tucker's team found some things, but Tucker's

team also sought help. His two producers called me, two of his producers called me and said what do we need to be looking for? And and then some of the others that have have shown some really interesting things. They haven't been game changing, but you, because you have to know what to look for, where to start. And then the tedium begins, Because if you have a subject that you're tracking in the capital, he goes out of, he goes out of camera coverage, those CCT cameras.

And then you got to find it because there's there's a dozen places and a dozen hallways or stairwells or hidden passages, literally hidden passages that they could have gone down. And so then you have to pick them up and find them somewhere else. It may take you an hour to find them again of clicking through, you know, dozens of cameras in that zone. So it's it's a difficult

process. But fortunately when I went in and I knew what I was looking for and on the first story, which I haven't done yet, I've alluded to it, but I but I haven't done yet, we actually skipped to story #2 for this release. This week I went in there and I intended to spend one day on that story and I had on my notepad. There was about six or seven things that I was intending to spend time with, not realizing how arduous and how tedious this process was.

And so it ended up being. I spent all three of my first days in there working on this single story, and and it got bigger and bigger and bigger. It got much bigger than I thought it was, even though my instincts led me there. I remember texting with you while you were doing that.

You're sitting in the room there and I know that you had an organization, you had time stamps that you were going in and you were going to start scanning cameras to find like you went in there with a targeted hunt. Unlike maybe what Tucker Carlson's people did, who rolled in there and then went like 41,000 hours, a million different angles, I don't even know where to begin. Maybe we can find something of value.

And they ended up with like the Jacob Chansley's thing, which was basically a moot point because he was about to get released anyway. He'd already served all of his time. Couple days later, he was out. Everyone thought that was the reason why it was like no, it was the first step act. It reminds me of those lawsuits or where they one party will, they'll be a subpoena for document and they'll just give like a warehouse worth of forms of that are in boxes of all the paperwork.

And just here you go, good luck finding the one sheet of paper that you need because it will take you years and years and years. And then they're just betting on the odds that that just never happens before the trial date. Well, that's exactly what they've done in one of these, you know, these Trump trials, there's 12 million documents they have to go through and and and they're supposed to do that

in three months. You know, it's it's an impossibility and and so that that's exactly what you're up against when you're up against that that video. And by and by the way, I think, I think the most important thing that that Tucker showed was not the Q Anon Shaman thing. I thought it was Josh Halley running across. And let me tell you why that was important. You remember the mainstream media made him look like an idiot, like a coward in this process.

But what? But the mainstream media only showed that 3 second you know, or two second in slow motion where he came into camera frame and then he disappeared out of camera frame. And and yet what Tucker did is he showed the reality in full context of how the January 6th Committee was twisting the truth with a single moment on film, rather than providing the whole context.

Which is why I have this, this particular a new axiom since January 6th is I won't ever again believe anything that I see that I don't see with my own eyes, but then consult the videotape. Then I had to expand it after I got access to thousands of other cameras, and I had to say okay, you can't really trust even a single camera. You have to have the angles to pick up the full context of why those two seconds took place. Yeah. And let me let me flesh that out for people.

You see an angle of somebody running across and you go, oh, that person is running and you assigned some meaning to that running. You see the other angle and you see that there's a child in the street that he is running to grab and suddenly you go like, oh, he's not running because he's running away from something. He's running towards something and running away and running towards is a fundamental distinction. And then is the reason because of fear or because of altruism

or whatever else. So you start adding context the more angles you get. The question I have having. We've never seen this this camera room, but having seen camera rooms and also seeing government systems, which are usually the worst, I don't know if the Capitol Police has the same motto that the FBI does, but the FBI is in, what are they called IT, department. Their motto is yesterday's technology tomorrow because they have, they have the crappiest

computer. They have the slowest and most useless software that ever existed. Can you index multiple cameras where you bring them up and show in real time, where you're seeing like 10 different angles on on a Multiplex screen? Yes. So it's really actually, the software system is quite robust and it's rather fast. It moves quickly. It helps to have the people that are actually writing the check in the same building as you, perhaps probably so and so.

Yeah, we were able to bring up multiple and this was key to making this work. So as I'm tracking somebody and comparing it on a time code to somebody else, I can bring 468 different cameras up on the screen at the same time, hit one button, boom, they sync to the millisecond. That's awesome. Yeah, the FBI can't do that. For the record, wow. Wow. Well, they need to. Talk. I never saw that. I told you we. I told you we needed to show a little grace to the Capitol Police. But anyway.

They got good security cameras. That's not nothing, right. But see the but the problem with the with the cameras is that obviously they are being you know there's over 1700 in the entire complex so they're not all new state-of-the-art. So they there's older cameras in there. So it's it's grainy it's fuzzy. It's not you know that it doesn't have the you know the the definition that you want.

So you so when you zoom out you, you know you lose or zoom in you lose everything and then and then other parts of the building you've got newer cameras with you know much higher definition and higher quality. So. So you have there's there's that battle and they're they're replacing cameras as they as they can and someday maybe there will be 10,000 cameras there and they'll all be super high def

but as it is right now. So that's one of the one of the struggles we had when we were doing this. But the to to the point, there's not only how you present it. And I want to go back to that Josh Halley thing for just a moment because this was the most instructive moment of Tucker and nobody really dwelt on this or covered this very well, is what Tucker was pointing out when they showed the clip that the

January Select Committee showed. If you remember, everybody in the gallery there on this, you know, televised event busted out laughing at Josh Halley when he ran across that in that screen, the hallway. And then and then it was all over Twitter and social media and people were making fun of

him. What Tucker did was not just show it in context and show that he was part of a long list of representative senators, lawmakers and other staffers that were running towards their evacuation route, per the instruction of the Capitol police, by the way, but that he was also the trailing member. So he wasn't the one up in the front, you know, like, you know, George Costanza out of my way. Yeah, forget forget the women and children.

It's John hally out the front. No, he was the trailing guy. And and then and so they took it completely out of context, misrepresented it. And if they're willing to do that, now think about this. If they're willing to do that to one of their own, these were legislators who besmirched another legislature. Right. In theory, all of them in danger on that day. But they went after a hit job on it, right?

They did a hit job on him. If they're willing to do that in a two second video clip, what else are they doing with the truth in that committee meeting? It's so true. All right, I want to. We're coming up at the hour mark. I want to keep going. If you're. If you've still got time, Mr. Baker. We'll keep going, folks. If you're just joining us, we're talking to Steve Baker.

He's the pragmatic Constitutionalist now working with The Blaze has been uncovering and kind of dissecting some of the January 6th narrative. We're discussing right now what they were. To do with the January 6th Select Committee or some people like to call it the Unselect Committee. We've also got Steve Friend who is an author and former FBI agent, a buddy of mine who does our regular segment called Friendly Fridays. I see a lot of you are there.

If you gonna if you like what you're seeing and you're joining us on Rumble, please hit the the thumbs up and say that you do in fact like it. And we're really grateful for all these super chats or these rubble ranch you guys are throwing down the Pike including from our friends FBI Panty Raid and Critter 64. I also want to just throw this out there since we're sitting here. I'm actually wearing my Suspendables merch gear because I always wear this to. Support our buddy Garrett

O'boyle. You talk about disassembling the narrative. He's one of the guys that has been helping us do it. You can see I'm carrying the pin right now. You can find all these things on the merch store. I'm just going to pull it up real quick, if you guys don't mind. There it is right there. It's the dash. suspendables.com These are Ranger panties. If you've never worn Ranger panties you've never lived 2 layers of mesh between you and

the universe. If you're a man, live for once, stand out in a in a stiff breeze and wear yourself. Sarah, a pair of Ranger panties. If you're in the army, they're called that. If you're in the Marine Corps they call them Silky's. If you're in the Air Force, we call them Sophie's. I've been wearing them for a long time. He's got him in OD green and

black which is awesome. He's got him with the Betsy Ross kind of suspendables logo and also the upside down badge if you want to catch some eyes at your lower leg and not at your crotch. Where one of the. Suspendables Ranger panties instead of wearing the normal ones. Otherwise people will just be looking for the bowls and that is always a little bit awkward. But check out the Dash suspendables.com Outstanding website. It supports gear to Boyle promo

code. Kyle, he just made it up for the heck of it because. He's giving you a little discount just to track some where the the clicks are coming from. But promo code Kyle will save you 10%. So by all means and I just saw Joe Dirt just ask me. I wear a size 34 waist. Dude, get yourself some mediums. I wear some smalls, some smediums. You always want them a little bit tight. You want your range of panties to fit tightly. You don't want a loose pair of

Ranger panties. Steve friends going to be running around Florida in these things pretty soon and experiencing the freedom. OK, so that I don't know why I just thought that was the time to say it but that was the time to say it. If you haven't worn some Ranger pins. What to get some to Steve bake. Mr. Baker is also definitely a suspendable at heart. He's willing to go down the line and experience the FBI's lovely treatment, the soft treatment of of respect, right.

They love you and they respect you. And they've just been treating you so gently. They've been so helpful. They want to, they want to go ahead and protect your freedom. OK, so they're they're just, you're dismantling this, this narrative one at a time.

And part of these things are taking them brick by brick, just showing what it was they were pushing what it was that they're willing to, to push towards you like you said, going after a Josh Howley. Showing that they are trying to build up one guy even though he apparently lied. Do we think Harry Dunn straight up lied?

Is that what he did? I I I have only revealed this in one other broadcast thus far but I actually I did a four hour interview sit down private interview with Harry Dunn and this was 100% off the record. So I won't say and won't tell you anything that he told me, but I will tell you what I told him. I I told Harry that I had received a an advance copy of his forthcoming book. I told him obviously I have the trial transcripts from his testimonies and the various ofkeepers trials and such.

I have the transcripts from his congressional testimony. I have his, you know, transcript from his opening statement before the Select Committee and and I said Harry, I've also had access to this 41,000 hours worth of video. There's a lot that does not match up and that could be a problem for you. How did he receive that information? He's an interesting guy in that I understand why people like him.

I understand the lovable giant, you know, aspect of him, 6-7, three, £150, whatever big imposing figure. He does have a gentle spirit, but I I told him, and again, I'm I'm, I'm going to tell you what I told him, not what he said to me. It was off the record, is that I said, Harry, I think you were set up. I think you were taken advantage of.

I think that you're being used. I think much of what I've read in your book was scripted either by your ghostwriter or your publisher or somebody else behind the scenes. I don't think that they're your words. Let me help you, help me help you. Kind of like what friend was saying here a moment ago, that's a, you know, an interview technique to let me make this better for you because it's coming and those discrepancies

are coming out. I don't believe that Harry did this maliciously, but as I said before, there's a Star Chamber that was convened in 21 to take out the Oathkeepers. Now we can get into the bigger, you know, picture there. Yeah, I think we should, But how did he receive that information when you said help me, help me you and I think that what you're saying is false. At the again, I have to be really careful here because I can't.

I'm looking for body reactions. I don't need exact words like I'm more than comfortable, you know, respecting the privacy of the the on the off the record and I appreciate that you have the ethics to do that too. But there were people receive information a couple of pushbacks.

Yeah, there were a couple of pushbacks from him and but we never, you know, we we did 4 solid hours and we were very respectful to one another and it was, you know, and we could not be more polar opposites politically either and yet we had a respectful conversation. Oh yeah, hard left. And and his book is a is is 90% of his book is a hard leftist screed. Whoever wrote it for him, I assume is representing his politics and his mindset there.

But it's more of a of a leftist manifesto than it is a biography. Interesting. Steve, you you've been around a lot of cops but a lot of federal law enforcement. Sorry Steve. Friends, I got to get better. Still this is a new challenge. I love it though. Friend, you you meet a lot of people that are that are in the law enforcement realm that are that are leftist. Cuz I think this is kind of

interesting too. I think it's worth noting the types of people that are working at Capitol Police, but I'm curious if you think that's common either I I haven't. I really haven't. I mean, I always tend to say that law enforcement is gun culture. So it tends to attract people that are proponents of the Second Amendment and that correlates really high with more of a conservative or libertarian worldview. But that being said, there's there's also exceptions to the

rule here. And I think anybody who's and I can really always speak to the FBI, anybody who's joined the FBI now, it's kind of public knowledge of what's been going on. If you're going in with your eyes open on that, I think that you're you're a true believer on that you've drank the the Flavor Aid, not the kool-aid, by the way. It's the Flavor Aid. Yeah, it's not, it's not the brand name, it's the off brand. That's what the government's willing to spend on Steve Baker.

What is that? You've interviewed a bunch of these folks from Capitol Police. I just wanted to broader, just pull back the lens for just one second here. What do you think the overall political leanings are of these guys? If you could categorize it or if it's just across the board, it it's, it's, it is rather across the board. But I I agree. I agree with Steve Friend and that that culture does attract. Typically more libertarian is more conservative type leaning

type individuals. But particularly when we're talking about the DC law enforcement agency, they are also attracting from the local residency and that residency pool is largely leftist and of a Democrat voting pool. I mean, 92.5% of DC residents voted for Biden in the last election, so it gives you an idea of what they're pulling from. So you're going to have a much higher percentage of left-leaning Democrat voting law enforcement in that town than you are anywhere else in the

country. It's so yeah, that's such a relevant point too. All of DC is basically suckling at the tea. All of the the Maryland counties that's around it and all the Northern Virginia counties, you know, it's the bluest part of Virginia, which would otherwise be a pretty RedState minus Richmond. And and having lived there for five years, I I definitely agree with that. They're hiring from a certain

pool. That pool tends to be a certain thing and then you're looking at the prestige level, which you don't need to say, but I'll say it right now because I've worked there, I've worked with Capitol Police, I've worked with DC Metro, PD's, DC Metro is like the bottom of the barrel. If you have a felony, you can still work there. So that's pretty wild. And then above that might be Capitol Police. And then? Above that is like the ATF. So think about how much you love

the ATF. That's kind of where they're at. DEA maybe above there the FBI kind of thinks they're above that. You kind of move around inside the federal law enforcement tier. I think FBI is and the Secret Service tend to kind of have a similar tier but different types people who will do either you know protective or want to do more investigative, although you could be a protection guy and and have no cases if you want to

be in the FBI too. So kind of a fun little way to like the layer cake does have layers. There are tiers that they look at if you want to go out there and command A room. My bud Steve friend here has said that when you walk in the room and you're an FBI agent, people already think that you're the most interesting guy in the room. You know like it.

That's just the way it works. You walk in, they go like whoo because they think you're a secret agent as as Mr. Baker, it's just sort of alluded to their secret okay. So we've got this narrative, we're deconstructing it. You've you've had some time to talk about these guys. You know keep keep kind of laying it out for us if you would what what this revelation sort of means and then we may actually get into a broader picture. I'm more than happy for you to kind of expand out what you

think the overall. What the overall goal was if you have that sense now. Well let let. Yeah let's so let's let's switch back to Lazarus here because this gets to the big reveal this week. So as we set up earlier in the in the the broadcast here we are looking at an individual who was brought in to tighten up, button up and straighten out a conflicting narrative by this other officer, Harry Dunn. So they bring it. The guy, what's that? He's a fixer.

Yeah, right, right. And so he testifies that he saw this interaction between The Oathkeepers and Harry Dunn three or four times. That's from the trial transcript. And that every time he passed them, it was a contentious engagement.

And then there's a problem with that is that when you go look at the video, Special Agent David Lazarus was not only not there, not only did not pass them three or four times, not only did not see the interaction, regardless of what the nature of that interaction was between the other keepers and Harry Dunn. He was in another part of the entire complex, a half a mile away, when it began. Which you can prove we we have

it nailed. We have, I have I have the the videos in my computer right here and of course they're in the Blaze hard drives as well. We have them. Maybe Steve Friend could tell us what that would mean for this person, David Lazareth. I think he would have a Giglio issue, but we'll just say that you. Want to explain what that is for folks that are not?

You have to have it when, when you are a law enforcement officer who's going to testify, You have to have a clean record of being honest on the stand, you know, like you're supposed to be. But if you've been proven to have lied in in a court of law and perjure yourself, then you're no longer useful to your organization.

That's why as much as this Kyle hypes up the the surveillance gig, we always called it the Rubber Gun Squad because it was filled, populated by a lot of agents who had Giglio issues, had been proven to have lied before and and they wanted to keep them as agents, but in a way that they were never going to have to testify in court again. So it seems to me that this Special Agent Lazarus was lying

perjured himself. Committed a felony by doing that should probably be held accountable legally for that, but at the very least, anything he's ever said should be called into question. Anything he says going forward, he should be precluded from saying because of this, this one mega lie. Yeah, spot on the rubber gun squad, he's he's spot on. Although we had to carry the real guns because you're out in the public, but the idea that

you can't testify is legit. The rubber gun squad actually used to be a room of guys that would just sit and have the rubber guns and not do anything. They would just get paid until they retired. The DT instructors at Quantico. Yeah, they actually have rubber guns. The scary thing about it is for both of you guys is that when you're doing surveillance, like that is actually a thing that you would think that you might have to testify on.

It's like I saw hand to hand exchange happen between your client and the following person. That's why we know this. I took the photographs on this day. I was sitting in this location. I can show you. On the map, like, there's a lot of testimony that that could happen and yet it never happens. I totally agree with you that the surveillance squads were not special operations as they like to call themselves. They're actually special observations and sometimes they're just special.

They're just special with like the short bus needs for some of the I had guys on there that I could not believe got hired on, we call them 25 year mistake. So there's plenty of those. But that David Lazarus is cleaning this thing up, and in the in the process, it sounds like he's creating Giglia, which means one he's now imputing himself under oath 2. He potentially faces some perjury charges if he knows, and it would be hard for him to not know where he was and see

something that he didn't see. And and something else to add to is the prosecutor, the assistant news attorney, knowingly put him on there to do that? Yeah, Okay, true. Yeah, we're going to go there. But I have to. I have to tell you first of all that the first time somebody sent me a message comparing this as a Giglio issue, my, you know, my old eyes and my bad glasses, I I thought it said a gigolo issue and I'd lay them down and look, you know? That one means probably not the first.

Time. Yeah, you're not the first guy I thought. I thought my my investigation was going to get a lot more fun now and so. That would be a fun investigation. All right. But also about the gear you have for that, Kyle. Yeah, for the, for the. It's it's all sex toys all the way down. Yeah, the Gigolo gig is. It's always in the bottom right hand drawer of the night stand. Every search warrant I've ever been on. That's a totally different

scenario. Scarface, Scarface, DV D's posters, and lots of porn on every search warrant. Tons of it, Yeah. So what ended up happening is we went to where we knew that Lazarus was from a single still shot taken from a Capitol close circuit television camera. And then we had to start working backwards from there and we tracked him because this, again, this was instinct. I never believed his testimony. I did not believe he was there,

even from long range. Zoom across the Rotunda when he said he was there and they was passing through the crowd and that he was, he was, he was rescuing these staffers out of Pelosi's office. I just didn't buy it. And so when we found him from this steel shot, identified the camera, then we had to go through the tedium, as I described earlier, of working our way back and, you know, triangulating between where he went out of frame and where did

he show up the next time. And it took hours and hours and hours, but we ended up tracking him all the way back to the Senate tunnels. And this was what something that he himself gave away. And then this. He made a he made a key, very critical error in his trial testimony is I went when I went back and looked at the trial transcripts, and I, I, I, I'll be perfectly honest, I did not catch this myself in the trial. None of the other media did.

And none of the 8 defense attorneys in that trial caught this either. But on the stand, he was describing how this was during direct examination by the government, that he was describing how that he was escorting senators out of the building during the evacuation into the tunnels, down through the subway system to the Senate office buildings across the street. All right. And then he said he heard on his Capitol Police radio that shots had been fired.

Well, I have the transcripts. I have the radio transmissions. I've heard them. They're still under seal. But this is something else that I've I've acquired. And I went back and I listened to the transcript or listened to the radio transmission, read the transcript, confirmed, validated the exact quote he used in the trial. What he heard on the radio transmission happened at 2:44 PM. OK, that was not shots fired, but it was the shot that killed Ashley Babbitt.

And over the radio they said it was shots fired in the house chamber. He said that he and and he he he accurately remembered that exact phrasing even though it was inaccurate in the fog award in the heat of the moment. And what was, you know, the the panic that was being broadcast back and forth on those radio coms. And so I was able to identify the exact time as 244.

It's ironic, it's coincidental, It's whatever you want to however you want to put it. But guess what time the Harry Done and Ofkeeper interaction began? 244 of. Course exactly the same moment. It may be divine Providence. I I honestly, I'm, I'm telling you, I I think that God's hand is on all this stuff at some point. The reason why some of these things have to come out the way they do is only because. How else would you find them? How else would they would they

ever be revealed? And the truth wants to be revealed, which is, yeah, it's clawing its way out. It's clawing its way out. Two years later, I mean, we're still seeing it come out there, so, so we find him in the tunnels escorting senators out. We then we lose him as he goes deep into the subway system and then he exit and he's coming back out at like 248 1/2, you know 30 seconds some odd.

And he even passes an analog clock in the subway system that shows that it's almost 249 capturing freeze frame still shot. We got it. You know it's it's it's there. And then by 248 1/2 the the the Harry Dunn Oath Keeper thing only lasted about 5 or 6 minutes. That was that was, you know, this wasn't 1/2 hour, you know battle, you know.

Yeah, that's what didn't make sense to me that from the original testimony, like he passed by it three or four times, like on his way on this pretty, pretty long route. Like that would mean that that engagement would have had been

going on for like an hour. You would think so, and you would think so. And just for people to understand either one of you that's seen it, but probably probably Baker is the best here you can you describe what this interaction that we keep talking about Oathkeepers V Harry, Don, like what was that moment? What was the the context of it as you looked at it in the broader scope like what's going

on there in the hallway. Well, from open source video and photography we have the evidence of what really happened. Of course, that the government did everything they could to twist, suppress and and denigrate this evidence. Even though it was an attempt, the attempts were made by the defense teams to bring this into court.

But what happened in that meeting or in that interaction was at at that same moment in time, oakkeeper Ken Harrelson had wandered out of the Rotunda into this little area called

they. It's variously called either the many Rotunda, the Small Rotunda or the Speaker's Lobby and and and this is at the top of a staircase that comes up from down on the crypt level which is right below the the the great Rotunda. And and so, as Ken wanders into this little Speaker's lobby area at that exact moment in time, Harry Dunn comes up those steps and he's an absolute abject panic. He's carrying an M4 automatic

weapon. He is sweating, He's distressed, even his own trial testimony, he says he's afraid. What they didn't know was just one minute earlier he had lost his shit downstairs and was cussing out these protesters that were all the way across the room from him screaming four letter words. Get the hell out of here. You know worse words than that and and and you, you've got it.

You know you're killing us down here and all this and so much so that he had lost his ability or his training to to deescalate a bad situation that a another officer, Captain Ben Smith of the United States Capitol Police came over and put his hands on him. And it's like, calm down, Harry. And then about a minute later, Harry just snapped and ran up those stairs. So he's in this state of mind when Ken sees him now in full context.

And this is something people do not understand unless you've seen everything. Ken is inside the Capitol. He's never seen one second of violence. This is the oathkeeper that we're talking about. Again, this is Ken Harrelson. Ken Harrelson, OK, he's he's he's gone. He's now walked through the East Columbus doors. He's walked through the Rotunda. He's walked all the way to the other side now and to where this other, this little speaker's lobby, many Rotunda areas at the

top of that staircase. He's not seeing a second of violence all day. Yeah, let's, let's, let's pause on this just for one second because I want to reiterate that to people. And I think you're in such an interesting position to be able to tell people there was violence that happened outside. They were violence that happened

some parts of inside. They were people from the law enforcement end of it that were leaving certain areas where there was violence and going into areas where there was not violence. And so you have this mixture of people that are bringing sort of their their experience from somewhere else and they're cross pollinating the fear and the adrenaline and the fatigue and the sweat and the and the panic. And they're walking into new environments where they're expecting the same exact treatment.

But those people have not seen why anybody would be scared or freaked out or carrying a rifle or any of those things. That's the that's the melee and that's the sort of the fog of war that happened in on January 6th that that I think is. Is it's that's the context. I've never heard it said just that way, but that's the context that is missing for most people. We had law enforcement officers leaving conflict into non conflict and they brought conflict mindset into it. Is that? Yeah.

Is that accurate? That's. Toxic for the other guys who hadn't seen it because that you saw the look of fear in these guys eyes who hadn't even engaged in any sort of violence that day because it's it's like a game of telephone and they come in and say like hey man, it's really bad out there. And then the next thing you know, three guys later down the line, it's like with shots were

fired. And we're having guys get, you know, losing their lives out there because that's just the human nature is just to spin thing. There's only one way to spend things. It's it's up. Right, for energy and everything else. I want to say thanks to Kay Quiet for being a monthly supporter and just jumping on. We threw that on the screen. And also the desk 7790 for for the for the Rumble rant on there about the information. We're just going to keep doing it.

We're going to keep sharing it with you guys. I'm going to let Steve go again. Mr. Baker, continue on as you like. I I want to, I want to demonstrate how I can make a statement and this is not, this is not me saying, oh, Ken Harrelson testified that he had not seen any violence. This is not me taking his word for granted or or you know, gospel truth.

Ken Harrelson was sitting inside the VIP section at the Ellipse as President Trump spoke with inside the security, the secret services, you know, security secured area that these oathkeepers were allowed and invited to be there and then they were escorting their security detailees.

I think he was escorting Dr. Simone Gold and a couple of other people that were going to be speaking and scheduled to speak at licensed permitted by the Capitol Police events and stages actually on the Capitol grounds. All right. Don't hear a lot of that from the mainstream media. The fact that there were permitted events that were tolerated, that were expected, that were planned, that they had PA set up and things like that

because there was a reason. That people moved over to where the they went from the Ellipse, which is where President Trump was speaking to the Capitol, where they were supposed to be a bunch of other speeches and you know, the rest of the rally, if you will correct of course, that all fell apart when the Raiders of January 6th, you know, sent the whole thing into chaos.

So we have, we have Washington DC traffic cams of Ken Harrelson escorting his, you know, his protectees through down the streets over a mile that they're walking through the streets of DC. This is all captured from 1 camera to the next. And you can see him, he's he's, you know, he's he's actually trailing one of the keepers in front of them. He's behind them, they're marching them through thousands of people. And you can see him he's he's doing his job.

I mean he's he's situationally aware. He knows what's going on. And so then they finally get to the Capitol. By the time they get there, they had no idea that there had been multiple breaches already of the property. It's not like these guys are on police scanner radios or catching any of the frequencies coming out of there. So that's the thing that's also the lack of awareness is is so high at that point in a crowd. So they go to the section of the Capitol grounds where they

thought the stages were. In fact they almost all got it wrong. I don't know what their the breakdown there was in the information. So he gets there with his his protectees and he's standing around with a couple of the other Oakkeepers, he lights up a cigarette and he's and they're just kind of looking around.

Trying to figure out where they're supposed to be and all of a sudden you see him kind of look over and he has this weird look in his face and this is and this is all captured on capital closed circuit television from the outside.

So these are Dome cameras, capture capturing this entire event, really good cameras because we got, we got good detail on it. And so then he sees something happen and he's kind of looking like really weird and he all of a sudden he sees the crowd go through this bike rack barricade and then everybody's going up to the steps. Now you would think that that might be a signal, something untoward, something nefarious, something wrong is happening.

Except for that there were Flyers being passed around all over the Internet and publicly that there was going to be a rally on the steps. People were expecting the rally on the steps, so unless you were one of those people shaking that barricade and pushing it over, but if you were behind hundreds or thousands of people, you had no idea why that was suddenly released. It's also.

Yeah. It's also worth pointing out that so many people with this was their first time in Washington, DC ever and they've never seen these protests. I'm sure Steve is probably never seen these protestee friends, never been there and seen that. But what happens is you get speakers on the steps, you get the rally out in front of the steps. That's pretty common. That happens regularly. We've seen pictures of that. If you ever watch any of these members of Congress come out,

they'll give a press conference. They're standing on the steps. The press is either on the steps or below. But if you hear rally on the steps and you know nothing else, and you're from Iowa and you just came in to see your nation's capital and you're pissed off because of what's been going on. And the mindset then was obviously very. Very volatile. We're we're now seeing people March through.

I can see that, like, I mean that's how the government would do a leaflet drop in Vietnam. They would drop in and they would say exactly the thing they want you to do. There's a rally on the steps. You're going to go to the steps and try to be there. That's what you're trying to draw in. Not that I'm saying people are trying to be disingenuous when they were talking about this rally, but those words have meanings and it's just like the

transcript we talked about. Depending on the tone, depending on the context, depending on what lens you bring to it, you may have no idea. You have no idea what that means. That's exactly what happened. So he looks over and he sees that there's all of a sudden this surge of people rushing towards the steps and he's like, you know, he throws his cigarette down and and they walk over him and one of the Oath Keepers are caught on a camera.

They're calling him somebody's cell phone camera and and and and then one of these infamous comments that have you know former military person would say he goes well look at there they're storming the fucking capital la di da di da you know and and of course that is used against him right in in the trial but he's just making an observation for as a you know retired army Sergeant you know that that kind of thing and. He didn't say we, he said they they he's.

Just making an observation and he said la di da di da, you know. Which, which tells you that that the level of seriousness that he looked at it, it's the same thing as if you're watching on TV and you see someone tearing up like a downtown, but you live in the suburbs and you're going, oh, they're tearing up downtown again. Like, you know, I mean, that's the same kind of And that had just happened, by the way, for the full year before.

That's the other context. People have been crazy in DC, in Minneapolis, in Seattle, in Portland and so on. Like, we just saw a lot of St. violence, and I'm sure that storming the capital sounds terrible to be, but but it's like that's the next step of insanity in a country that was going nuts, right? I mean, didn't we all see that? We we all forget it because it's so easy? Yeah. And now he's he's a significant distance away so he doesn't see what's happening in those front

lines. So he finally there's this huge crowd up on the on the steps all the way to the top. And so he, you know and it's hard to I'm trying to try to figure out how to do this and demonstrate to everybody. So he, you know he starts walking up and he and a couple of the other oathkeepers, they they get halfway up the the deal. Now here's the platform up here with the doorway and there's people up here now attacking law enforcement. Right. Right. He's down here.

He has no eye shot up here whatsoever. He can't see it. He's way down below. His head is like, down here. And then that famous stack of of keepers arrived and they work their way up to the steps and join him And one of the other of keepers, it was already there. And as the stack gets there, they're just all celebrating and they're singing the national anthem. And Ken is like, I mean, he's pumped. He's into it, you know, rockets, red glare.

And he's just, he's letting it, he's letting it go. And it's a it's a huge celebratory moment. But while the national anthem is being sung at the Columbus door, are a couple of cops getting the hell beat out of them?

And he can't see it. Multiples, I mean, yeah, later on with all the cameras that we that we have there, we can see it. And they are getting drenched in all manner of OC spray while the peaceful people are down there, completely unaware and singing the national anthem and celebrating a bunch of, you know, Americans getting together and letting their voices be heard at the Capitol. So there's there's two possibilities for this though.

It's that there's a coordinated effort that we're going to do a distractive thing. We're going to sing the national anthem and we're going to not be an eyesight and then somebody else is going to beat the hell out of the team and we're going to. Move in or the thing that you and I have probably experienced. I know you've covered other protests and riots that have gone sideways and things like

that. And seeing crowds get out of hand that you are in a crowd and you are basically immediately focused on the things around you and you have no idea what's happening 20 feet away because that happens all the time. No chance. And not only not only 20 feet away, completely totally obscured sideline. By the by the curvature of of what's going on or the the

topography, the steps. Yeah, yeah and so, so finally after the national anthem has sung 180 to 100 protesters inside the capitol, the outside people never breached the Capitol. Even the guys with all the OC spray and beating the cops up and everything, they never breached the Capitol because you can't get in from the outside. It's impossible. And those doors don't open that way anyway. They open from the end side come

out. And So what it ended up happening is between 80 and 100 protesters that had already breached the West Side came through and started pressing against that door, ultimately forced it open. And then people started going inside. And then all of a sudden Ken Harrelson, you know, who was doing his protective detail, he looks over his shoulder and they start moving up with the crowd. They get to the top having never seen how or why those doors were opened.

There's just a big old gigantic famous Columbus doors on the east side of the Capitol and people are moving in by the hundreds and they joined that crowd and they went in. And so that was a long way of setting up and going back to his first meeting with Harry Dunn at 2:44 PM. So what ended up happened is he rounds the corner into that

speaker's lobby area. At the exact same time, this agitated cop with an automatic rifle arrives at the top and and Ken being an oathkeeper, he looks over at him out of concern. He's like, what's up and done again is screaming four letter words, he says. They're killing us down there. They're they're carrying us off on stretchers by the dozens. Now this is what he said about what's happening to law enforcement. They're carrying us off on stretchers by the dozens.

This is captured on video. On stretchers by the dozens. Yeah, you know how many law enforcement officers were carried off in a stretcher that day? I don't know if there were any. Were there zero? Yeah, I've never seen that video footage. I think that would. Here's the thing. This is how I know that the that the N word wasn't caught, you know, wasn't yelled at him over and over again because this was one of the most video days. They would have found that video

right away. They would have found stretchers and cops being carried off like it was a Vietnam, you know, mashed tent. And that would have been on constant replete for the last two years about how The Dirty, dirty, horrible Trump insurrectionists were going after us and they were killing cops or putting him in the hospital. And well, the way that they had the film production crew help with the January 6th Committee, I was kind of surprised that they didn't put that audio in

there. Well, you would think so. So if it existed, it would be there. It would be. That's right. So all of the sudden you have this oathkeeper, this distressed officer, who's telling him that his comrades, his colleagues are being carried off by the dozens on stretchers and Ken's only response was really? Right. Because he hasn't experienced any of it.

Yeah. And so he So Ken immediately goes and grabs three other Oathkeepers and says, hey guys, you got to come over here, you got to help us. And so they formed a line between Dunn and and this. And again, we have photography. We have photography of Ken with his arms outstretched, holding out agitated protesters from this agitated, distressed cop behind him with an M4 rifle. And. And the Oathkeepers form this line and deescalate like both sides of that situation.

Oh, they. Mean like they said they did, just exactly like they said they did. We show you know Kelly Megs is a big guy too and and he he there's another scene where he is interposing his big body in between and he's pushing a protesters back and Dunn is back here looking over Megs's shoulder. Megs isn't interacting with him. He's having no contentious, you know violent or otherwise interchange with Harry Dunn.

He's protecting Harry Dunn and he's protecting that crowd from Harry Dunn. And that's what really happened over the course of that next 5 or 6 minutes while Special Agent Lazarus was now working his way back from the Senate office buildings in the tunnels, working his way back to the building. And the long version short is, and this is detailed in my story, which obviously want everybody to go to The Blaze and read this story, yeah.

Let me make sure we get that pulled up in just a second here. That's the one thing I did not grab. So I'm going to do that while you're talking. What we want everyone to understand is that when Agent Lazarus, who testified that he saw this contentious interaction between the Oathkeepers and Harry Dunn three or four times, is that he did not arrive at those stairs until 3 1/2 minutes after all of Keepers were gone, and it's irrefutable.

It's 100% there is no mistake. Yeah, so here's the here's the piece folks. You can go see this at the Blaze. This is the the website is going to be. Let me just read it off to you. It is theblaze.com/columns. You can go look for Steve Baker and you'll find this from October 4th. It should be pretty easy for you guys to find. We'll throw it in the chat. If you're in the live chat right now, we really appreciate it. Make sure you're hitting the thumbs up if you like what you're hearing.

What I want to do is get a a broader context too. If you would. What? What does all this mean, Mr. Baker? Well, what it what it means is, is that our government itself has participated in the actual creation of a false narrative specifically to indict, charge, imprison innocent Americans for the purpose of establishing and preserving a political narrative. Is that not the scariest thing that we can imagine in in America that theoretically is home of the free and a Democratic Republic.

This is, this is an existential threat. I I told that to Glenn Beck on on the radio two days ago when we released this story. I said that's the overarching problem is that we're looking at here in the. And the most frightening aspect is that when you know I come from a libertarian background, to me the only moral function of any government agency is to protect its citizens from force

and fraud. But now it is government bringing force and fraud against its own citizens and there's no clearer example and we have them dead the rights. And that's why I was saying in the lead up when I was started, when I started teasing this story 2-3 months ago, I actually said on some interview, I don't remember which one it was. I said we have the kill shot and what I meant by that was you said that I had the yeah the absolute evidence of a federal agency bringing false evidence itself.

Is it this isn't this isn't an accident. This isn't a misremembering of of an event. This was a deliberate, purposeful sitting down, creating a narrative, writing a script. We got to clean this up and we need you to do this. And oh by the way, you're you're Pelosi's head of security, so we'll be able to protect you. Right. I want to have Mr. Friend reflect on that as my kind of cohost here who's just been passively observing. I know Steve is a very good listener and has an astute mind

that is clicking on this. I also want to say something that is I got me and Ryan kind of a Twitter on the background. We run the show. We do the show five days a week. We do this all the time. We have a production that we do. There's certain things that are our graphics and so on. Ryan, can you pull up the, the thumb up that just popped up the ghost thumb that that showed up on the screen that we don't understand where it came from. You have that. This just popped up on our screen.

There was a there was a ghost thumb that popped up while you were speaking. Steve Baker. I have no idea where that came from. Neither one of us has that graphic. Neither one of us has the ability to trigger that graphic. So that's really fun. Either Rumble wants you guys to say thumbs up as well and make sure you click that that like button and it says it shows green. Or we have additional participants in our stream, which is very interesting and they're favorable.

They also agree thumbs up. So that's that's one of the weirdest things I know. Halloween's coming up. That's a little spooky. It just made my skin crawl a little bit because we were both. He goes you're screwing with me. And I was like, no, I have no idea where that came from. He goes, I'm not buying it. I have no idea where that thumbs up came from, folks. Very, very weird. And if you watch our show, you've never seen that graphic before. What do you think? Right. That's bizarre, man.

I swear I thought that was you. I thought you were messing with me. I'm like, there's no way. I'm like, wow, Kyle's getting really good at throwing up these thumbs. I'm like, where did he make that at? I thought you were really getting, getting good at this. It is so, so strange, folks, If you missed out on on watching our rumble channel, you missed that, which was very odd. All right, let let me let me let Steve Friend respond to what you've been hearing and what it

kind of means. Your initial whistleblower allegations were problems with J6 enforcement actions. This kind of broadens out the scope in a big way, I think. It does. It does. I mean, I was talking last night. I view January 6. You have to view it through two separate lenses. Left of boom and right of boom. Left of boom would be like everything that led up to the day and actually the day itself, the boom. It's a being, like the explosion or the event.

And then Right of Boom would be the investigation, everything I sued. All of my concerns that I brought forward were right of Boom. It was the way that the FBI was manipulating its stats, the way that it was violating civil liberties and deny people their due process rights and then using heavy-handed tactics to bring them into custody. So everything that that happened was downstream of this day itself.

I'm mostly disturbed by what Steve Baker brought to the fold because he's he's laid out this plot that is completely reasonable. And it's it's not. You know, off off the wall or anything like that. You, you. And he has the goods. He has the receipts. And it involves people from the DOJ, from the United States Attorney's office, the FBI, the Capitol Police, the judge, federal defense attorneys that didn't just didn't catch these things.

All all different components of a system that is supposed to operate with Lady Justice. Blindfold over her eyes. So the scales are equal for everyone and instead they all coordinated their efforts to drive home and they just viewed innocent Americans as an opportunity or vulnerable that they could benefit from, be it financially, politically and and now that that happens, our social compact is completely

broken. My. My son, my oldest son is actually in the process of learning the Declaration of Independence, the actual preamble. So he he's being tested on it today. So he's got the first few sentences. We hold these truths to be self-evident. All men are created equal. They are endowed by the Creator with certain unalienable rights, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness. The next part of that is that we we institute government to protect these rights. That's the social compact.

And it's very clear to me that our government is willing and able to break that because it's not going to protect your life or your liberty or your pursuit of happiness. So that's really sobering. I had somebody on Twitter say that I've. I've seen a lot of what Kyle Seraphin says and I've never seen him out over his skis. And we try not to be the the wild voices. We try not to say things that we can't get behind and and

document. We try to say things that are sober, that are saying that are representing a balance. There's a nuanced perspective on the world. I don't know anything that's black or anything that's all white. It's always somewhere in the Gray. And we live that way. I'm actually wearing Gray today that's actually appropriate. Yet another one of those fun coincidences. And Steve Baker, one of the things that you're wearing Gray as well, you're a darker Gray. There's multiple Shades of Grey.

We got at least like 8 Shades of Grey on here. No big deal. And and let me throw this out there. Are we all wearing Gray? Is that really? That is so strange. All right, so there you go, It's. 244 Man 244. It's 244. All the things combined. Steve Baker, one of the first things that you said that I found, I I told you that my impression is that the January 6th and the way we view it in this country, we'll call it right of boom, as Steve said, is a American Rorschach test.

And it when you look at it, it tells you the way that you see the rest of the country going. You told me you thought it was the most successful political messaging campaign in American history. I'd like you to expound upon that based on what we're talking about right now because you obviously have more facts than you did then. Yeah, I I believe it more than when I said that to you the

first time. The going back to the House Select Committee and all of the celebrations and I shouldn't say celebrations, but remembrances and commemorations leading up to, for instance, the 1st anniversary of January 6th. Well Nancy Pelosi and the first week of January of 22, the one year after the event, she launched a series of events that way that week leading up to the the one year anniversary of the event. And these were commemorative

events. And when she opened the very first one, it was a discussion with some historians, you know Doris Kearns and a couple of other historians that were in this panel. And she opened that by saying the reason why we're having these events this week and ultimately the launching of the investigative Select Committee is, and this is an exact quote from Pelosi herself, she said this is to establish and preserve the narrative of January 6th, quote UN quote, anybody can Google it right now,

established. Right. Yes, they do, she said the quiet part out loud. And what ended up happening was she said that over and over that week. Many times she repeated that phrase. And So what we saw of course from the committee was exactly that. It was an establishment of a narrative, just even the little Josh Halle clip that was an establishment of a narrative. And what was captured though on January 6th.

Now this was you can call it the biggest mega mistake of you know of that whole era that we have lived through. You can you can call it whatever you want to. But the net result, whichever side of the boom that we're talking about here is, is that there was a capturing in the of a narrative that I. I believe was more significant to the development and direction of how this country was going to be steered by those in power, whether they created it or not.

It doesn't matter whether they created it. Turns out it's the same as the lab lake, right? Right, right. It doesn't. It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter. But what the point is, is that I go all the way back. I think if I go back to the Great Depression, all right, didn't matter whether the the Great Depression was a conspiracy and manipulated and and thrust upon the world or not. But as a result of that, what

did government do? It was able to take advantage and it was able to implement a social welfare state that was never intended for this particular country and and then that has grown into this leviathan that we, you know, that we see today and $33 trillion in debt, blah blah, blah. So, But that all happened as a result of the people saying we're starving. Help us. That's that's Cloward, Piven. That's what that is, the Cloward pivot strategy.

If you guys are not familiar, we talking on the show every once in a while, but it's essentially overwhelmed the local area overload some system. And then beg for federal assistance to come in and stop it. And So what we're talking about in this case is things are crazy. Someone's got to do something. The do something always ends up with federal government that never dies. It's eternal life on earth.

Yeah problem reaction solution scenario is what they you distill that down into and this is exactly what took place on January 6th. I think that those who did allow it to happen because let's make no mistake I'm I'm still I'm still not on team fed surrection okay. I am still on team as it developed. The people in the command center at the US Capitol with 1700 cameras watching everything as it developed.

And the people who on the other side of the boom three days before did not pass the intelligence up to Chief Sond? Yep, about what they knew was coming that day. You're saying you they saw an opportunity and they saw an opportunity and they allow it to take place?

You don't need to plan it, Ryan, if you'll permit me this for just a second, both you guys, gentlemen, the whole idea that whether it was a COVID Lab league or whether it was a planned event or, you know, virus released on the population

is sort of irrelevant. Because the way that the Chinese work is you have Plan A, BC&D and if it happens that something happens, you're like, oh, we didn't plan to let that out, but like let's go with Plan C, let all those people travel, you know, let all this thing go. Around lock down things internally. You can execute plan C without having planned the initial the initial event that initiated that plan. And in the same way I I am, I'm

more of that nuanced take. I don't think I know the FBI didn't plan it, at least not at the Washington field office because they were caught flatfooted and they weren't able to respond to it very well. And I didn't get a phone call saying you know they let me take leave on that day and I was out in Maryland and if they wanted people to go run down the bad guys, that's what my team did. We would have been the guys that would have been watching and we weren't on standby at all.

I was allowed to be away. So I know that they didn't have that planning, at least at the Washington field office. And I don't think the national assets were ready either. But it doesn't mean that they weren't ready to execute Plan B or C should something go wrong. And there was at least some probability, maybe a high probability, that something would go wrong. Obviously it did. So I think, I think that's the nuanced take on it.

I think it's important that we, you know, we're saying one thing without saying the other thing. You don't have to go all the way down the rabbit hole to know that something went wrong. And it was at least eight in the bed after it started going that way by a group that should have been otherwise inclined to stop it. Let me let me tell you how I know that it was in fact aided and vetted one of the videos that we discovered and I was actually there when it was

found. I was sitting next to Joe Hanneman from the Epic times. He was sitting in the console chair to my right on our first three days that we we we were actually there together and and he found a video because he was he was tracking Oathkeeper founder Stewart Rhodes through the crowd and at one point and this was a big moment in the

trial. One of the accusations that the FBI made in them is that they had a minute and a half phone call from Stuart Rhodes to Kelly Megs which in which they claim they have no recording of it. They just say they believe that the connection was made and that it was at that moment that Stuart Rhodes ordered Kelly Megs to lead the Oath Keepers in and to establish the stronghold storm, the capital stop the

election, etcetera, etcetera. Based on the fact that there was a signal, you know, that they captured in in this Geo fencing thing, although they have no recording of the call. So what ended up happening is Joe Hanneman found a place out on the Capitol Terrace because roads never went inside the building. And he's holding up. You know, like you do when you can't get a signal. We all kind of stupidly hold our phone up in the air.

If only you had two more feet of arm you could get that right. Exactly. We would have a signal And so he's trying and he and he can't you know he can't get keep or establish a signal, whatever. And at one point he wanders. Now he's being he's being seen from a capital closed circuit television camera. That's a fixed camera. This is not a remote control. There are some cameras.

They had remote control over both zoom and position and and so and so and when we're watching this, we can see what the capital command Center is looking at because we can see when they're zooming and when they're when they're zooming out and checking a circumstance out. At one point Stewart Rhodes walks out of the camera frame and then all of a sudden a gloved hand comes up on the camera and adjusts it over and puts roads back into the camera frame.

Somebody received a radio call from command and said follow push the camera over so we can watch what he's doing. That's wild. And how do you pick that guy out of? How do you pick that guy out of that crowd? That's big? That's big. That means. That means they were tracking him the entire time.

And more importantly, if they thought that the Oathkeepers were heavily armed and we're going to harm Congress members and we're going to stop the alleged the Electoral College certification and we're going to lead, as presented by the prosecution, an armed storming of the Capitol, why in the world were they allowed to even come across the river? Right. Stop and frisk.

Probable cause. Stop. Find out any reason for state police on the Virginia side or Metro PD to do a, you know, PC stop on them and and check the cars. All the kind of things could have done. There's a lot of things you can do proactively to stop and and here's the thing, this is another thing that lets me know that this is not necessarily an FBI op. I cannot imagine anyone in the FBI taking on the risk of people rolling armed. When we give people that are quote UN quote terrorist guns,

they're always disabled. They don't have a firing pin or the firing pin is sawed down to the point of non functionality. They're in their bombs like you get a button but the button doesn't blow anything up. It just gives you like it gives us the belief that you would would have pushed a button and you've been told that it was. That's that's how the Bureau runs. It's it of all the things that it is and it has some incompetencies and it obviously

has a leftist ideology slant. It is not reckless. It is not a reckless organization. Maybe See friend you would see otherwise, but I never saw it as being a completely reckless organization when it comes to arming and allowing people to do something dangerous. There are two things that I know were set ups that day. I know that the Capitol Police were set up themselves. They were set up to fail. I've written about that extensively. They can find that information

on my blog. That's that's not on play. Although we are going to do a recrafting of that series and release it on the place and the the the title of that of that series was called the Capitol Police for sacrificial pawns that day and I am convinced of that. The other setup I believe is was happening with guys like the Upkeepers and the Proud Boys. They were fully infiltrated and these things in these processes were in fact allowed to happen and they were tracking them the whole way.

I mean, look, a gloved hand going up and putting the guy back in frame is. I mean, it's irrefutable proof that he was being being followed. And there was someone that was in the position to move that camera, which is also kind of wild to me. Yeah, Can we get a radio? Get a radio. So that means that means probably, and I know his name, it was probably the special agent liaison between the USCP&FBI. That was probably what monitoring from the field office that day and was up in the

Capitol Police headquarters. That's that's wild. I want to hear what Steve Friends reflection on hearing some of these things. Well, I I I think that the the FBI is rather reckless. But like I said, we don't have to necessarily always agree on that. I didn't see it so. Tell me more. No, I mean, I I I think they're they're reckless because they're

mostly incompetent. But I think that this level of coordination that was required means that it was very sophisticated in in how it was carried out it it was well thought out. I don't think that there was like this. Star Chamber set up where they were eliminating any sort of communications.

That's where we need to have a reckoning from people with the authority to get the information out in an expedited fashion, like a congressional Select Committee that's supposed to be looking into government weaponization and specifically looking at the January 6th. You mean like a weaponization committee that actually looked into the actual weaponization that we're talking about? Yeah, yeah. I mean it shouldn't. I mean like look, Steve's done

yeoman's work here. He shouldn't have had to. That's that. I mean that's it basically. Like, I mean like we always say that the journalists are like the 4th branch of government because they're they're really like the accountability arm and we we need to have that. But this event is just shows a dereliction of duty by most of the media in the United States. That just went along with

narrative. And significant portions of our government leaders who don't either believe that it's beneficial to them to keep the narrative going or afraid of touching it because they think it's yucky and it has a scent of white trash on it, so it's not going to help my electoral prospect. So I just want to pretend it

didn't happen. They smell like Trump voters, like Peter Strucken Smell. Yeah, yeah, like, like Harry Reid used to complain about all the time about the American people walking through the Capitol in the summertime because he could smell the sweat on them. Yeah. God, the smelly people. Steve, I want to give you the opportunity if there's any additional piece of this. And then I want to broaden it

for a little bit. And we got a pretty good size audience that's still watching us live right now. And I think this is fascinating to folks and I want to continue to explore that as long as we can. Until we run out of material which probably could be like a week from now but we'll have like a real we'll have a real time limit on this. What I want to do is if there's an additional things you want to add that that gloved hand is certainly a bombshell drop from what I'm hearing.

Anything else that like that this is going to make people skin you know kind of the hair stand up on their skin let's let's hear what they. Yeah, I mean there there is more coming and we have to do the due diligence that we did in the in this first release. I mean, I I can't tell you how many weeks it took us just through that. You know, the the editorial process, the legal process to make sure that we had everything buttoned up, that we didn't put ourselves open ourselves to liability.

We put a lot of eyeballs on this video. There's a reason why we haven't released the video yet. Everybody's asking me that. And of course, on Twitter, you know, we already have people accusing me of being a liar myself because we didn't release the video with this. It's very simple. This has to go through the security review by both the Capitol Police and by Congress.

There are things, because we were able to access highly sensitive cameras and highly sensitive parts of the Capitol, that we're going to have to blur things out. We're going to have to blur people out in order to tell this story. And as you know, there was a big event that happened in Congress this week that has put the pause button literally the night we were finalizing the editing on the videos itself to submit to for congressional review, McCarthy was voted out of the speakership.

And that means very simply, there's nothing nefarious going on related to the video or to our interaction with Congress and the approval and the the review of this video. It's simply nobody's making a decision on Capitol Hill right now. Period. Full stop. They've got bigger things going on at the moment. Yeah, nothing, nothing wrong, you know. Yeah, I would, I would love to have dropped the video at the same time. But Blaze editors decided no, we kindliness is is, is, is still

important. Let's go ahead and drop the story. Let the controversy hit. Let people go. Nanananana, you don't really have the video. You're making this up. And then we'll hit it with him. We'll hit him a week later. All right. And you're and you're totally confident, I know you've been confident about this for a very long time as we've been talking kind of in the back channel.

So I appreciate that. I want to, I want to expand this thing out, Ryan. If you want to throw up a topic, one that the Newsweek article that came out today and so. This is the other piece of it. I feel like this is the other shoe you talked about the messaging campaign. Mr. Baker and a friend and I have talked about this as well on different shows. Donald Trump followers targeted

by FBI's 2024 election years. We hear about the the anti government anti authority violent extremist tag which we've known about for at least two years, maybe longer than that. You guys want to kind of maybe Steve give your your two cents and then I'd love to hear what the Mr. Baker has is kind of hearing this in the context of what he's looking at. Well, I'm. Of two, two minds on this one, One I I'm very glad that this

information came out. I'll be at 13 months after I came forward with these very concerns. It sort of it vindicates everything that I did and it's coming from obviously a left to center news source. So I think that bodes well in my favor because I've been accused of being this political hack grifter conspiracy theorist. And I I believe you talked about it yesterday. I think that this is, I agree with you. I think this is the the FBI trying to get out ahead of what

they know is coming. I think that these people were anonymous and but but approved to to talk to a friendly reporter from Newsweek about it because this will be yet another thing that Christopher Ray can go in and say, well, we've already addressed this, so we should just move on.

But if it isn't and we can hold out hope that maybe there are some, some people back on the inside that are the good men and women of the FBI, let me just say get that because I came out a year ago and lost my entire life and you guys couldn't have my back. And the reason that I expedited the process of actually coming forward and speaking to the media was because Kyle was alone. And I that doesn't that. I I you don't want us none.

Two is 1. So that's why I experted my process, because I knew that he stood for principle and needed to have somebody who's washing his back. Where were you? You all took the same oath as I did. You all took the same oath as Garrett and Kyle and any suspendable but you just sat back and collected a paycheck for a year and then decided that you were going to go to the media, which, if you took the same whistleblower training that I did, is not approved.

Right. It's, it's been well publicized. You could take this concern to Congress. There's an actually a weaponization committee that's been established over the last year. You could take it to the special counsel, the Inspector General. You can bring it to your chain of command, but instead you went to a friendly media source and did so and wouldn't even put your name on it. So get that. I dig it. What do you think, Mr. Baker? What do you think about this stuff?

You're getting reported now. Well, I'll tell you what. Have your guy throw that article back up on the screen again. The Newsweek article. I want to, I want to point something out to you. You see the the, the byline. William Arkin, he is a reliable voice shill leaker for decades for the intelligence community and military sources. And and what Steve said just a moment ago is that the FBI is wanting to get out ahead of this. When Arkin writes an article like this, that's exactly what

happened. You nailed it Steve. When Arkin he is, he is a reliable mouthpiece. He was the same guy that I think it was on January 3rd of 2022, the 1:00 during that one year anniversary week of January 6th that he was the same guy that published the article in Newsweek with the headline Secret Commandos with shoot to kill Orders. Yeah, I remember that. January 6th, that was. Remember that? And that was again a reason to get out in front of everything.

But who was your friendly neighborhood independent journalist who was the first person to release information about that secret organization in the crowd? And that was 1010 1/2 months before Newsweek did. So interesting that I didn't, I didn't realize that he was the same guy had written that. But that's why we have guests on that know what's going on that are tuned into some of these journalists that I'm I'm starting to turn and peek up.

I I was on Dan Bonginos radio show yesterday and we talked and he said, you know, it's my instinct that this article is actually a warning. It's a warning to all the people that are out there. And I said, Dan, I think it's a threat. There's a difference. You know one has intent. And I don't think they're trying to tell you that this is a warning. Like be careful. I think they're saying we're coming for you. You've been warned, Ryan.

I wonder, do you have the one minute teaser trailer of police state? Do you have that hanging or do you just have the three minute one? I probably got it somewhere. Give me a second. Yeah, if you'll pull up the one minute one I want to, I want to show people because one of the things that that we can all agree on and Steve and I got to work on this, this, this movie production. You can't make a movie overnight. Would you agree on that,

gentlemen? No. You don't get to do it like in response to a new story that was written on October 4th. I want people to listen to the language Okay because one of the things that's in that story that people found so amazing is that there's this new tag anti government, anti authority violent extremist that's being used this agave a GAAVE. And I want you to listen to the language of Nick Searcy, who's a friend of ours now and a really

good guy and a great actor. Just listen to this, this, this little promo real. This is the teaser trailer. You guys have seen it here if you watch our channel, But let's take a look at this real quick. We should listen to his words and what he says these people are. We honor you, Father, Chief Division, Council and DOJ have approved the no not breach. We want the subject to be on display doing the walk of shame, full visual impact. Any questions? Are we becoming a police state?

Government told American citizens they couldn't go to church on Sunday. For the first time in my life, I'll say to myself, am I going to get a knock at the door? Come to the door Now. The Patriot Act and FISA were used against Donald Trump. These individuals have commissioned the biggest propaganda play in U.S. history. They don't go after the people that rigged the election. They go after the people that want to find out what. The hell happens. We don't need to have a crime

what we need. Is a person to look at and then we go find out what crime you did. Our focus is shifting. Our main priority as a Bureau is going to be domestic terrorism. Really paints anybody who's right of center. If you're a pro-life, pro family Catholic, they define you as radically. These are anti government violent extremists and they must be dealt with. We can do anything we want. All right folks, if you want to find that movie, you can go to

policestatefilm.net. You can go and buy tickets. It's going to be on October 23rd and and 25th across the country. They're going to be showing in private screenings. So check that out. October 23rd and 25th, it's the new Dinesh D'souza. Dan Bongino, You heard the voice of Cash Patel in there. Jim Jordan, Julie Kelly's in there. Mark Out, who was raided by the FBI has been on our show. A whole bunch of these people that we talked to on a regular basis are exposing what the

police state looks like. And the police state is when the FBI and the federal government looks at weaponization and they decide that you are an antigovernment anti authority violent extremist. You believe that give me liberty or give me death is a thing that is reasonable to say and maybe was the founding principles of this country and then suddenly you're actually the problem. Our government's going to hunt you down. Many of you are pretty terrified. I know a lot of people get

really worried about that. You heard Nick seriously say it. The actual full line in there which was cut out. It's in the longer trailer. Anti government, anti authority, violent extremist. There's a reason why Steve and I knew to put that in the script. We help write the script for all the FBI dialogue and you guys are going to see a very realistic look at the scariest thing that we are moving towards. What do you have you seen that

trailer before, Mr. Baker? Yeah. I've seen it. I've seen the short version, the long version, and watched them multiple times. I'm really, I'm really fascinated by this opening part of the script that now the first time I realized that you guys wrote that. But it makes sense now that when Cersei says we want them to do you to we want the cameras there, we want to see the purple, we want to see the Walker. Shame is because.

One of one of the characters in the January 6th story that I've covered with took to a significant degree, is a guy by the name of JD Rivera out of Pensacola. He's a professional cinematographer, videographer, newscaster and he's independent. But he went to January 6th with all of his pro gear. I mean, he showed up with the expensive stuff and he ironically was the the very first person arrested in Florida.

Related to the January 6th, you know, January Florida has more arrestees than anybody else in it. You know any other state? It's weird that it's one of the reddest states in the country. Do you think that has anything to do with it? So, so he was the very first person arrested and the actual news agency who he was contracting with at 6:00 in the morning had their van parked across the street when they swatted him and by the way swatted him for misdemeanor. Offenses.

That seems like a problem to Steve friend types. Yeah. It is a problem, but you know the difference between a RAID and a routine search is just whether or not you call the media ahead of time. Wow, what what an ugly thing. I want to propose this to you guys as we kind of move towards the close of this and I appreciate all of you sticking with us for a long time.

We've had probably one of our biggest live chats and and joining us, I think people are fascinated by this topic and I've had a couple people say Mr. Baker, you are the best guest ever. So welcome to Kyle Serif and infamy on our show. We appreciate you joining us for all this. There's a topic that is not being discussed very much but Steve alluded to it just now. Steve Friend did talking about that.

There is a problem within the FBI because there is a libertarian sort of conservative mindset lower KC within people who carry a badge and a gun, and that includes the FBI. And how do you deal with these Trump voters, the Trump supporters that exist within an agency that's weaponized against a group like that? Ryan, if you pull up topic #2, I'm going to show people exactly how it gets done because this is going to be very troubling to you gentlemen.

This is an article that is written in Gov Exec. This is a fantastic source for management news and a bunch of like administrative garbage from from sort of the deep state operations. It says OPM announces expansion of, quote, UN quote, continuous vetting of security clearance

process for current feds. After a successful pilot, the federal government HR agencies, which is OPM and the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency, is going to create a goal of credentialing and enrolling all employees, even those in nonsensitive public trust positions. A nonsensitive public trust means you don't have a specific security clearance. They're going to put them into this pilot program looking for anomalies and a failure to have

loyalty. And so continuous vetting means that used to be that every five years you would get a polygraph, every five years you get a background check again and then you'd be able to continue with your security clearance, assuming that you're a good guy. This security clearance continuous vetting program allows them to call you in every single year, every six months, any anytime they want. Under continuous vetting. Some people will obviously be ignored. Some people will get a lot of

vetting. And my friends who work in the the polygraph offices and who work inside the FBI told me they were absolutely terrified this was going to be used to squeeze out the older, more conservative, more libertarian bet, more constitutional minded people from the FBI. This is what you would call a loyalty test. What are your thoughts on that guys? And I'm going to give you one more piece of thing to kind of reflect on after that. Go ahead, Steve.

But yeah, I I share your sentiment on this. This is going to be completely subjective the way that it's applied. Look how many people did you know who who didn't get their five year check Because everybody. Yeah. You know, one because like I never got mine. I never got mine and and. So definitely the fact that they're they're saying this, it sounds good on paper. Like, hey, look, we want to make sure that we're keeping people

on the straight and narrow. Well, maybe you should figure that out in the hiring process first. Like if you actually have legitimate security concerns about people that you need to continuously vet them, maybe they shouldn't have been hired, but it's going to be used subjectively and they're going to say it'll it'll be because somebody makes a complaint. Like, hey, they switched the the TV channel from CNN to Newsmax. So we need to have a continuous vetting of this person. I did that.

I did that. I got a complaint against me, the analyst who was, let's say, morbidly over be morbidly overweight, massively obese. Is there another kind? No, that's just, well, there's some analysts that are not that. They're like the young just got out of college, like pretty young females that also have no use. But this one in particular was Her name was Candy, which was a nauseating name. It's like a stripper name for a woman that weighs 350 pounds. That's kind of gross.

And that she was one of these people that complained about me because of my changing of the channel, 100%. She also thought that Kyle Rittenhouse deserved the death penalty after the acquittal because she's that kind of a person, you know, the Justice Department, as we like to say, sometimes, sometimes there's justice.

Often times it's just us. Sometimes it's just guys like me and Steve Friend, guys like Steve Baker out there who just want to know what the truth is and they don't really care where it leads you. That turns out to be less and less common. What do you think about the idea of continuous vetting there, Mr. Baker? Well, I think continuous vetting is going to be in real time now with AI. It's not going to be, it's not going to be five years, one year, one month.

It's going to be real time. They're going to monitor every interaction, every association we have. This was, you know, this is Stalin's wet dream. It is. You want to know something that's really funny. And I keep digging into the history of this stuff. Gentlemen, I'm going to introduce you to something you may not have seen historically.

I trace the origins of the socalled deep state, what I call the administrative state, back to 1946 in the Administrative Procedures Act, which was passed under President Harry Truman. Now, Truman doesn't really have a bad rap in the way that FDR does and bringing about communism and some of this kind of stuff. We don't really think of him as the guy that did it, but in many ways he was like the fourth

term. And So what I'd like you to do, Ryan, did you have that that tweet that I just showed you? I just sent it over in the in our chat and if you can bring it up what I want to know, I'm going to introduce you guys to something that was known as Executive Order 9835. This was affirmed by the Supreme Court, not picked up or adjudicated, but they basically ignored it and the appeals court out of the District of DC did not have any problem with it.

Executive Order 9835 Let me just tell you that the name of it prescribing procedures for the administration of an employee loyalty program in the executive branch of the government. Whereas each employee of the government of the United States is endowed with a measure of trusteeship over democratic processes which are the heart and sinew of the United States.

Whereas it's the vital important that this person employed by the federal service be of complete and unswerving loyalty to the United States. I bet you they would substitute that and just make it executive branch like you heard earlier. Whereas the although the loyalty of by far the overwhelming majority of government employees is beyond question, the presence within the government service of any disloyal or subversive persons constitutes a threat to our democratic process.

It goes on and on. It just says that they were actually instituting A loyalty test and it was never thrown out. It was rescinded before it was actually adjudicated to be unconstitutional. I would be shocked if this administration, which did Executive Order 14043 and said everybody must get a shot, which was in fact a loyalty test in many ways. They rooted out who was willing to stand on principle and didn't want to get it. This is probably in the works, a

9835 executive order. I tweeted this out on Twitter. It's got a little bit of coverage, but you want to know who the how you find them. You put in a loyalty test and you just make the language almost exactly what Truman has already done. It's already been done. And he was looking for communists. Obviously that was the difference there. But. Yeah, yeah. So that was my only thought there.

I mean that's that's a good sell at pull though, but again, like I've been saying for months now, so FBI is all about status quo. Preserve the status quo. Well, Truman didn't like communists. I think the BITE administration has a has the the warm feelings, the fuzzy go thrill going up their leg when they hear about American communists and they hate MAGA extremists. All right, gentlemen, any other kind of parting shots, Any alibis we have on this one?

And then I'm going to let you guys plug where you where. They can find you, man. I think we're good. I I just want to say that you know, first of all I I have. Thoroughly been blessed by my association with you guys. Being an honorary suspendable is one of the greatest honors of my life. And I will tell you that we have more coming this reveal about God. One for you. Thank you. You put on the hat or something. We, we we have more coming in

this story. We have more time in the video rooms there at the Capitol, things that we've not yet discussed and and and a broadening of this story as well. And and you know, I just invite everybody to tune in and and follow us as close as you can obviously. Even though I'm on the Blaze now, I'm still independent. I I'm not. I don't have a thumb on me telling me what I can. You can't say what I can and can't write about.

So they can follow all my additional material and locals or Twitter or Facebook and it's all the same. Handle TPC for USA. TPC for us at the number four USA. Yeah, find me everywhere that and you can find it on our Twitter show we tagged and also on True Social. She should be able to find Mr. Baker stuff there. Steve, any alibis? Any miss shots here? No, just going to throw out

tonight. I'm speaking at Lincoln Reagan Dinner in Leesburg, FL. Going to give Andy Biggs a fist bump for his fight in the speaker fight and follow me on Twitter at Real Steve Friend. At Truth, at Real under score Steve Friend. True Blue is still rocking and rolling. Hit the top ten this week of law enforcement memoirs. So really appreciate everybody's support on that and you can pick up a copy over at Amazon. It's been to the top of my social media profiles.

Have a great weekend, outstanding. So you guys can also follow Steve Baker's locals channel which people told me is the best 5 bucks a month they've ever spent outstanding reporting there and they and and high praise from some of our audience as well. So if you guys are not following that by all means.

Part of the way that you, you divorce yourself from watching mainstream media is supporting guys like Steve Baker, supporting guys like us, you know reading the books that are from first hand sources and we're out there trying to get it done for you. So we do appreciate all that and I got to say the live chat has been absolutely outstanding. Today we had a well over probably our highest audience that we've ever seen on a live show.

Some of that has to do with the topic and and the way and some of it just has to do with the content and some of it has to do with you guys sharing it. We're so grateful that you've shared it. All of the rumble rants have been coming in here. You know you don't need to to throw money at us in order for us to do the show. We're going to keep doing it that way. But the fact that you appreciate it and you put a dollar amount

to it warms my heart. Thanks for the new monthly subscribers and we want to thank you guys for leaving five star reviews. What you keep doing on Apple and on Spotify and iHeartRadio. We read the Apple ones because we could find them really easily. Want to throw up Today's just really appreciate it for this one. Can you blow that up just a little bit there, Mr. Ryan. There we go. So this one comes from Cugs 76 says, God Bless America and fast, please. Yeah, how about that?

He says. I'm a U.S. Marine veteran and I've served with a brotherhood of real men. I'm not disparaging my ring sisters. God knows they are more manly than most of these betas in the streets. That being said, it's so refreshing to have a few countrymen with the with the testicular fortitude not only to do what's right, but risk losing everything. And you and the other suspendables continue to give me hope.

I stand united with you. Thank you for upholding your oath to the Constitution. I'm happy to see your show doing so well. Your audience is getting the truth from a true patriot. And we all need the truth. Very, very kind words from our Marine Corps brothers. A box of crayons in the mail for you. I hope they're all Reds, as is your favorite crayons to chew on. Folks, We really do appreciate you guys watching the show. We really do. So if you want to follow it, share it.

If you like this episode, it's going to be extra long, but you got the whole weekend. You can find it on Apple, Spotify, iHeartRadio, all the different audio channels. We are continuing to grow from all the the sharing that you do and just again so grateful. I hope you have a wonderful weekend. I hope fall weather is coming in and not too cold and you get to enjoy that. Maybe it's jacket weather for you like it is here just getting there in Texas that means it's under 90 degrees.

So I can put on a a jacket and feel like I'm part of the rest of the country. We will see you again on Monday with an excellent interview from another suspendable We've got Colton Moore from the State Senate in Georgia talking about trying to defund Fonnie Willis, which is a very interesting chat. You guys are going to really appreciate that, that and wish Ryan Rock.

He's going to luck. Rather he's going to be taking a trip down to the Texas border because we are just we're we're being confronted on all fronts and the world is not safe. So we got to go out there and make sure that we're aware of it. God bless all of you. Have a wonderful weekend. We'll see you on Monday. Thanks for listening to the Kyle Seraphin Show streamed live Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays on rumble.com/kyle Seraphin. Follow Kyle on Twitter and True Social at Kyle Seraphin.