Prepared to hear the truth from a real whistle blower and American patriot? Here's civil liberties enthusiast, Second Amendment defender, and indefinitely suspended FBI agent Kyle Serafin. Hello my friends and welcome to the Kyle Serafin show for Friday March 24th 2023. I cannot believe we are almost at the end of March already and I cannot believe that government overreach. Is just a thing that we deal with on a daily basis. It's become a standard.
It used to be so rare there was a. Time when government overreach would have been front page news in all mainstream media outlets. People would have been appalled, they would have been incensed. People on the left, people on the right, everybody should have been upset about it. And yet that is not the case anymore.
We're going to cover three stories today, all three of them about federal law enforcement doing apparently what it does best at this point, which is shred the Constitution and just stomp all over the expectations that we have as Americans of the government staying out of our basic business.
Pretty incredible. So some of the questions that we should be asking are how does the political left continue to justify support for the DOJ, the Department of Justice activities, and obviously the FBI being a big part of that at this moment. And then the other kind of question is, is how do they deal with the cognitive dissonance that has to exist when you have these defund the police?
Types. Who are now cheerleading an FBI and a DOJ that are acting like a pit bull for one political side, but they haven't exactly stopped going after the other side. We're going to talk about a story where the left was targeted pretty aggressively and things that I'm not necessarily a big fan of, but I still defend the right of them to do so. Things like racial justice protests, which I think are nonsensical, but in America you have the right to do that.
And it's very important that we continue to defend that right. We're going to talk about how they managed to deal with these things. And I'm going to show you an example of somebody who is definitely not on the right that is pointing out this obvious error. And I don't hear it being covered by the mainstream media. Yeah, before we do that quick little discussion about our sponsor this month, you've been hearing me talk about Patriot
Coolers for the last two weeks. They are fantastic company, Patriot coolers.com. You can go to their website and find any of the things you might like there and add promo code Kyle Kyle and get 10% off into their wonderful products. So. What kind of products they got, they've got things like. My coffee mug that I've been running around with, it's got a bunch of stripes on there, 13 stripes for the 13 that are on our American flag.
It's got 50 stars on the bottom. It keeps your beverage hot or cold. It's got a spill resistant or a spill proof, depending on which one you buy, because you can get both and, and they have different functionalities that the ones that are still resistant, you can put a big straw in And the ones that are still proof, you could probably drop them. Probably not me because I dropped them from like a run or other dumb things.
But normal people probably could drop them or knock them over on a desk and, you know, save some, some technology from failing on you. Great gifts. If you need a thank you gift or a house warming gift, if you need something that you need to show a friend some appreciation, you know, pick one up for yourself as well and get that free shipping over $50. Definitely a good way to go. And it's a good, it's a good company because they're also
sponsoring disabled vets. They do this annual donation to a number of different vets and and denominations, 50 and $60,000 at a time to help retrofit their homes and make it a little bit more comfortable and livable after sustaining disabilities in our armed forces. So great cause for that one. Check out their stuff, whether it's a hot cold or a hot cold Tumblr or a soft sided or a hard
sided cooler. All kinds of stuff coming up, whether it be spring sports, you know, getting into the water, things like that, or you're going to be doing some hunting over the and fishing as the fall comes in. Great reason to have a good cooler if you need to replace one. If it's time, check out Patriot Coolers for a good deal. And we appreciate you supporting our sponsors because they are supporting us. Let's dive right into a little bit of some of the horribleness
that's going on this week. It has been just a wacky week. I'm going to share with you this first story coming from our friend who this is at Uncover DC. This is going to be Wendy Mahoney's story, and Wendy is writing for Uncover DC. There it is right there. Let's pull the sucker up. There's a good picture of, I guess, Proud Boys. Oh, there he is. That's Zachary Real, who's on trial right now and getting some pretty nasty treatment, I would say.
So this article is entitled Government Misleading Court. About informants in Proud Boys trial. I'm also going to share with you some conversations I had on the back end with a couple of federal agents that have recently retired, have a lot of time in both of them two plus decades and they are actually appalled by this as well, so. This is not standard fare or normal in any way, shape or form. And if you go to uncoverdc.com, what you'll see is they are promoting the Kyle's Hairpin
show. What a great thing. All right, so let's go. The government in the Proud Boys J6 trial seems to be misleading the defense and the court about the existence of informants or confidential human sources. So in the FBI, for most of the DOJ, they refer to CHS or confidential human form, confidential human sources rather, when you hear about them, you know, snitches or CIS and and other sort of law enforcement entities, same thing. It's just somebody who's an
informant. The new emergency motion from the defense counsel. In Zachary Reel's case states that the government waited until March 22nd. That's Wednesday of this week. 2 days ago to tell the court that one of the defense witnesses has been ACHSA source quote since April 2021. That was just a couple of months after January 6th through at least January 2023, or since the beginning of the trial. That's pretty staggering.
March 22nd also happens to be the day before this particular source was scheduled to testify for the defense. This was a defense witness on the list. And according to reports from Julie Kelly, which we're going to pull up her Twitter feed in a second here and read some of the documents that she shared, she's been doing really, really good work on this. Says, quote, prosecutors knew back in December that the defense plan to call this person
as a witness. So they've known for, you know, four months and the individual continued to work as an informant spying on the defense during trial prep. It's it's totally. Appalling, and we're going to get into why in just a second here. The revelation prompted the Proud Boys public defender, whose name is Carmen Jimenez, to file an emergency motion requiring that the government disclose all of the reports and recordings related to individuals who may be FBI
informants. Pretty sure they're supposed to do that anyway. Four of the Proud Boys defendants, This is going to be Ethan Nordine. Joseph Biggs, Enrique Tario, the leader of the Proud Boys or whatever the lead guy is, and then Dominic Pezzola, they're all sort of joined in this request. They Co signed on this emergency motion asking for this disclosure. I'm going to transfer over here to Julie Kelly's Twitter feed. This might be a little bit
small. If you're reading even on Rumble, you have to go full screen, Probably won't work on your phone. But it's Julie Kelly's thing from the 22nd. So this goes back two days saying breaking news. Just when you think the DOJ can't get any dirtier, this new motion filed. By defense is accusing DOJ of using an FBI informant to spy on and infiltrate the defense team. I actually want to read a little bit of the demotion because I think it's worth reading.
So this is a little bit bigger. Might be easier for you to see. This is the case of the United States versus Zachary Real, who's the defendant. Defendants corrected motion to compel disclosure of all FBI interview reports and all DOJ memos relating to the recording and reporting.
Of the defense team now, you may recall that we talked about how they had access to jail calls and the way they got around that was this like terms of service agreement saying that if you want to talk to your client, and obviously a defense counsel needs to do that because of the COVID restrictions, These are all unvaccinated people. So they have special rules and the rules are nobody can see them.
They have to use the phone. But to use the phone you surrender your right to attorney-client privilege, which is insane. That is the most insane and egregious thing. Until you start putting sources into the the camp of the Defense Council. So here's what it says Defendant Zachariel, through counsel and pursuant to the due process clause of the 5th Amendment, the 6th Amendment and the Court's supervisory power respectfully moves this court for an order compelling the government to
disclose to the defense. All Report e.g. FBI3O2 reports These are going to be testimonial documents. They really need to actually, yeah, they said all reports. So FBI three O twos are going to be interviews, specifically testimonial interviews. They actually need all the source reporting out of DD is the the system that the FBI uses to. Catalog all source interactions. There's some different forms that are filed actually when you do a source debrief and they want.
Recordings that have been prepared in this case related to any person, including but not limited to humans, confidential human sources, and any other witnesses that the FBI communicated with regarding the possibility of any recordings or reports that it may have regarding the defense team.
They're literally asking the court, pursuant to the 5th and 6th Amendment and the court's ability to, to compel it to please have the FBI expose all of the things that they have been doing to spy on the defense. It's so it is so. Wildly insane and I thought maybe I was acting out of line so I asked a couple of other federal agents. I'll read you what I got response wise from my text messages. Needless to say, they agree. What else does it say on here?
Mr. Reel is filing this motion on his own behalf on behalf of the other defendants with the consent of their counsel. OK. And they are looking for all. Yeah, Anything that the United States Attorney's office and and the Department of Justice attorney's relating to reporting and recording of the defense counsel.
So if this person is an informant and was supposed to be a witness, you're going to find out a little bit more egregiously, I think, in a second here because we're going to run down to the second motion. It says that the the CHS. Was like intimately involved in a bunch of stuff, says governmental misconduct. Surrounding the surreptitious invasion and interference into the defense team by the government through a confidential human source at the government's behest.
This instant motion is based on a disclosure made to defense counsel today, March 22nd. So 2 days ago, at the end of the court's proceeding, where in the government stated that one of its witnesses who was disclosed to the United States and the court as directed by the court in December 2022, who's scheduled to appear in the defense's case the following
day. Has been serving as ACHS, A confidential human source, since April 2021, at least through January of this year, and during that period the CHS has been in contact. Here we go via telephone, text message and other electronic means with one or more of the counsel for the defense. So dealing with the public defender and at least. One of the defendants in this case. During this period, the CHS participated in prayer meetings with members of one or more of
the defendants families. The CHS is also engaged in discussion with one of the family members about replacing one of the defense counsel. This stuff is crazy. Why is it so crazy? I'm going to read to you what a former FBI agent and an attorney shared with me, someone who has more than two decades of experience in this, it's said. There are certain. And massive 6th Amendment rights to counsel concerns as well as attorney-client privilege issues. If this allegation is true, it's
yet another sacred. Tenant of the American legal system that is being assailed and torn down in the name of. Quote UN quote, blind justice going after these J6 defendants in 32 years of being an attorney and FBI agent combined, I've never seen such a concerted attack on the constitutional rights in the name of such perverted justice.
That's a friend of mine. There was he was in the FBI and then another friend who was in the ATF spent over 22, maybe 24 years as an ATF agent, which means you can't trust them because they're in the ATF. And I remind him of that every time I talk to him. But he's a pretty good guy and we've done some fun times out. We did some hunting together. He also mentioned that it is just incredible.
And I think that he brought up that I, I think is worth noting is that once somebody is represented by counsel, when they have a, they have a right to an attorney and they invoke that right, we now consider them to be represented by counsel. And for all intents and purposes, those people are off limits to questions and interrogations without the attorney being present and it being an open forum.
So the second thing we've talked about on the show even before is that when you have a inability to go directly to a person because they're represented by counsel. You can't have somebody else go to that person. What the government cannot do in person, they cannot have an agent acting on their behalf to. And it's the same reason why we can't set people up for entrapment with a confidential human source if we couldn't do it as an agent.
If you're not allowed to do so as a government agent, you can't have someone act on your behalf to do the same thing. This should be pretty straightforward. Stuff. But this is what we're talking about, and this is what my buddy Mick brought up. We may bring him on the show in the future to have some some background. He does a lot of drugs and gangs and now he's actually working on the criminal defense side of the kick it. That's kind of the way it works.
A lot of people that spend a bunch of time, you know, building expertise on one side of the coin as a prosecutor will end up becoming well paid in the defense counsel and the same thing for investigators, investigators that make, you know, a pension. Doing 20 plus years of law enforcement make really good investigators on the background.
When they flip over to work for a defense and that's a lot what a lot of people do in retirement and it's what makes doing right now so. He's going to got a. Really neat perspective. Our system is adversarial and everybody is entitled to a reasonable defense. So it's worth noting that, and I guess that's probably a good time to bring up that both sides of the coin are are fair game. We're supposed to have a fair process where everybody is allowed to. Have their day in court and have
Lady Justice be blind. But that is not what we keep seeing. And lest you think that it is a political. Issue on one side or the other, I'm going to bring up a case here written by Trevor Aronson. Now, Trevor Aronson is by no means a right wing guy. He and I've had a couple of conversations. We text back and forth fairly frequently sharing information. One of the things that he's interested in is a jihadi case that I worked down in Tampa in 2020, which I have some serious
misgivings about. Sounds like the guy just pled guilty and is going to go do 18 years in federal prison. I'm very hopeful that the the individual that was just sentenced to 18 years will get mental health services while he's in prison because he really does need it. He's a schizophrenic and has significant delusions as well as, you know, swearing allegiance to ISIS and doing some wild stuff, but was not someone who I think was a threat in and of itself, but he definitely needed.
Some help so he's he doesn't need to be on the streets and and Aaronson and I have talked about that you know I may end up talking to their defense counsel probably doesn't matter at this point if the guy is already played out but. One of the things that he's really focused on, and he's been doing this for quite a while, he's actually got the 10 year anniversary of his book coming out and I think they have a 10 year anniversary edition of the book.
It's called the Terror Factory. Inside the FB is manufactured war on terrorism. And the gist of what? Aaronson has to say, which has been validated by my own personal experience and a number of FBI agents who have worked in the counterterrorism space, Is that the Bureau? I dealt with something that I handled in a, in a very short podcast, I think it was only 20 minutes long that I called Mission creep. You can go back in there.
You can see I'm literally just sitting at a table with a microphone setting before I got into the gear and I really got kind of rolled up into this but. Mission creep is what happens to all government agencies and law enforcement entities when they've run out of the primary purpose for which they exist. And I'm going to do you a like maybe a 3 minute version of the
20 minute version I did before. And so I won't be nearly as in depth, but I think you'll get the point in the case of counterterrorism resources, what I believe. Happened and I think there's ample evidence to to suggest this the FBI. We got the charter of No American dies from terrorism on our soil. We heard that as The Changing definition of national security by George Hill. I think he was spot on. I think it was the most articulate thing. I keep taking these like pearls from people.
I took another thing from Bill Shipley about how the government's only interest should be in. The proper process and so when you take these things, you talk to people that are knowledgeable in their own sphere and they give you really, really specialized background. I try to distill it. So that's the thing that I'm going to repeat you over and over again.
And so 911 change the definition of national security and the the American war footing that started on September 12th, sent Special forces troops into Afghanistan, eventually resulted in US going into Iraq as well. Yeah, we we got into this like prolonged 20 plus year conflict, OEF and OIF. OK, fine. The American military is incredibly effective at hurting feelings and breaking things overseas. It's what it does best. It doesn't do transgender surgeries and it doesn't do woke
ideology. It takes young men and women that have a fighting spirit and puts them in the place where they go occupy our enemies attention so they don't come and bother us here incredibly effectively. Whether there may be some ulterior motives of politicians is sort of irrelevant to the like the actual capabilities that we project down rage through our Army, our Navy, our Marine Corps, our Coast Guard, our Air Force, like the individuals that work in these services are very, very good.
At doing one one thing, and that is just tying up the enemy's attention and making it worth their time. To get the hell out. And that's what they did, starting in in 2001. Moving forward and the domestic mission which saw the advent of the Department of Homeland Security, which has not been around forever. For those of you who are younger, it's not a thing that existed when I was growing up and certainly not a thing that some of our older listeners have have grown up with.
We actually just had a woman tell me in a text message or in AI. Don't know, Like a true social response. 6 She was a Gen. X female and and she wasn't sure if this was a space where she was going to be, you know, getting information she liked. And so we have people that are older than me and, you know, significantly older as well. DHS is a new entity. I mean, it's only 20 years old. And what did it do? But it was developed to keep terrorists out of the homeland. So, OK, fine.
So we've got the military overseas doing its job. We've got DHS, the FBI, we've got the intelligence community focused on keeping terrorists out of the domestic side. And they did that. They went after it. And between the two entities overseas and and domestic, we knocked out a big, big chunk of what the FBI refers to as international terrorism or Itos. International Terrorist Operations Section is the actual group that's tasked with it.
And there's a ton of money. I mean, there's hundreds of millions of dollars in funding that goes just to the FBI. And the FBI is, you know, an $11 billion industry or a $11 billion agency this year. DHS is like $120 billion. So you can imagine the amount of money and resources that get focused on international terrorism. OK, good. So we more or less handle that business. There's not a big chunk. At least before the Afghanistan withdrawal, there wasn't.
A big chunk. Of international terrorism coming into this country after a couple of years and they did a great job doing that. So then they started looking at a thing and this is where Aaronson picks up on a thing that's called home grown violent extremists, or HV ES. Now, I always heard about HV ES when I was in the Bureau, and it wasn't really clear to me until I like nailed down one of the analysts who does counterterrorism.
And I was like. Define HVE for me because I don't get it. Like what's the difference between a home grown violent extremist and a domestic violent extremist? And I'm going to tell you right now so you understand the terminology when you hear it being talked about and sometimes inaccurately on news media broadcast and things like that. And if you're. Listening to fox or something Newsmax or you know, OAN and and and real America's voice, like all these things.
They they don't always have people that know what these these terms mean. A home grown violent extremist HVE and we're going in order from IT to HVEHVES. Are people that are born in America or live in America for a period of time. Often times they are like first generation American, second generation Americans, but they have sympathies with overseas. Terrorism. So they are not coming from overseas into the United States
to cause problems. They are already in the United States and they decide they are going to align themselves with an overseas problem and they decide to pick up the ideology of ISIS, of al Qaeda, of al Shabaab. Take your back. There's a whole bunch of these things. I'm not an expert on all the different factions and some of them are sub factionalized, but HVES align with some foreign terrorist influence. But they're here. And so the Bureau went after
them in true fashion. They exterminated this problem in a really big way. They made it very difficult to be that thing. And there's still an HVE threat there always probably will be from people who self radicalize and find something overseas they're into. But for the most. Part. It's gotten really, really tamped down. Well, there's money to be made looking domestically and keeping
these cases going. And there's money to be made for FBI special agents in charge, who get bonuses based on the number of. Cases and disruptions. I want you to think about this, the FBI claimed. And there's some. Twitter. You know, if you follow my Twitter, you've probably seen me retweet this from some people. Garreto Boyle, our buddy, one of the fellow suspendables called this out showed that the FBI predicted they would have 600 counter terrorist disruptions. In 2022. And they fell.
Short, they only had 397 counterterrorism disruptions, so they had 397 more than one terrorist disruption per day that they. Logged in order to try to meet this metric of 600. I just want any of you to think about whether or not you have heard of a single legitimate terrorist disruption. Some sort of plot or entity that was going to happen and it was disrupted. In your world, wouldn't the FBI be crowing about that? Wouldn't that be front page news?
Every single day we stop this terrorist cell from doing a thing. And, and the problem is, it's because words don't mean what words mean. Because disruption doesn't mean they stopped a terrorist plot. It means that they found some statistical way to be able to account for articulating a disruption. That doesn't mean what it means to you and me. It doesn't mean they disrupted a terrorist plot. It means that they got a disruption, which is its own thing and it doesn't have a real meaning.
It's a government word. And it's one of those things that just it gets thrown out the window. It's garbage. It means nothing 'cause there's no chance that the FBI interrupted a single terrorist plot every single day and twice on Sundays for the whole year. No way. Just didn't happen. But that's the way they're arguing. And like I said, they're incentivized by significant bonuses like 5 figure bonuses to the special agents in charge of
the different field offices. The SES class get incentivized based on this performances. So that's why they're trying. To do that. All right, but the mission creep happened from international terrorism, finding all the HVES, these home grown violent extremists, eliminating them. And then they were like, well, we're already looking around at things domestically. We might as well look for more
problems. And that's how we had all the cases probably after about 2010 on white supremacists, what they'll know as racially motivated violent extremists. By the way, there's not very many cases on like black supremacists, but they do exist. It was, we all probably know there's not very many cases on people that are bombing what are they called, pregnancy centers, crisis pregnancy centers. But we do have an entire category of domestic violent extremists that are called anti abortion.
I would know them as pro-life people, but anti abortion violent extremists and the ones that are getting arrested right now have basically been involved in praying. And a couple of them, like chain themselves to some doors. Now, chaining yourself to a door is in fact, probably a violation of the FACE Act, which says you have to have free access to the clinic. So if you actually hinder real patients going in, you're probably in violation of federal law. And you know, that's a civil
disobedience issue. This is not a violent extremist group. Chaining yourself to a door is, generally speaking, not very violent. And it's something that I used to see in DC all the time. They would change themselves to the Supreme Court doors. They would chain themselves to each other. I was driving one time trying to just fill up my my, my Bureau vehicle with gas and I was driving by and like 18 people chain linked themselves and, and handcuffed themselves to each
other. Like blocking a street next to a Whole Foods because Annie wasn't getting overtime. I mean, it was something really, really dumb like that. It literally was a sign that they held up. It's just. Like Annie's not getting overtime and she's a legal immigrant. Or whatever and you just go like really? And you know, and then they handcuff themselves to each other. So they're not violent extremists. But if you do it to an abortion clinic, you are so be it. Maybe you'll have babies.
There's some other ones out there that are pretty wild and anti government, anti authority violent extremists, which is also a really troubling label. As I've said on this podcast before, like pretty sure the founding fathers of this country would have been considered that thing. But. The FBI has got to categorize what it's got to categorize because it's a government agency, and government agencies always creep in their mission to be able to generate more revenue, more mission
responsibilities. They don't ever want to be less of an agency. They always want to be more than an agency, so they continue to grow, which is why the FBI has the largest budget it's ever had this year in 2023. All right, all that is a setup to talk about Trevor Aronson's story right here, which I found. Both hilarious and troubling and we'll bring it up. This is called the Honey trap.
This is a series that he's writing about the FB is involvement and the DOJ basically coming in and doing the standard counterterrorism playbook on racial justice protesters, BLM types in Colorado Springs, Denver. I think Aurora was involved as well. So if you're looking at the rumble thing, this is just an awesome photograph of looks like some rioting going on. There's some smoke grenades and something like that.
It's a really good picture. And the subtitle of The Honey Trap, again, this is in The Intercept by Trevor Aronson, says the FBI used an undercover cop with pink hair to spy on activists and manufacture crimes. If there wasn't a more succinct way of saying it. Well, who is this? Lady with pink hair. And this is where it gets really fun. So this was written on the 21st of this week, so that would have been Tuesday. Very still very current article.
This is narrative form. I'm going to skip through a lot of it because he writes in a way that's kind of like reading a book, and I very much enjoy reading Trevor Aaronson's stuff. But reading it all to you would be sort of ridiculous. It's like, like I said, it's like reading a narrative. But some of these things are just too funny not to share. So the young woman with long pink hair claimed to be from
Washington state. One day during the summer of 2020, she walked in the Chinook Center, a community space for left wing activists in Colorado Springs, Co, and offered to volunteer. Here's where we get really fun. She dressed in a way that was sort of noticeable, said Samantha Christensen, who is the Co founder. But no one took to note that like they're, you know, lefties. The pink haired woman said her name was Chelsea and she dropped regular hints about her chosen profession.
This is why it's when I when I was texting with Trevor about this, he said. What's more juvenile. Than this, and I'll tell you why the pink haired woman said her name was Jesse. Yeah, she implied over the course of getting to know her that she was a sex worker, said John Christensen. That's Samantha's husband. I think somebody else told me that and I was like, oh, OK, that makes sense. I never questioned it, said
another activist in the area. But Chelsea Chelsea's identity was as fake as her long pink hair. The young woman, whose real name is April Rogers, was a detective with the Colorado Springs Police Department and on loan to the FBI, who enlisted her to infiltrate and spy on the racial justice groups during the summer of 2020. If you're on our rumble. Page. You can see right now that April Rogers is the woman wearing a bandana over her hair. She has dyed pink blonde hair.
She's wearing a red midriff shirt, and she has significantly large breasts, which is going to play into this later. So as Trevor was texting me, he goes, how juvenile is this? They just looked at her and said she's got big boobs. Let's say she was a hooker. That's what I mean. And that's what they did. Some of you have seen this on Twitter already and you've commented. I had somebody comment said any halfway decent looking woman in a in a left wing protest as a fed.
That's funny. I don't know if that's true or not. That doesn't sound accurate to my life, but but you know. Pretty, pretty amusing stuff. So Roger's work or Chelsea's work was a drift offshoot of the FBI summer investigation into what was going on in Denver in 2020, where Mickey Wendecker, which was a paid FBI informant who drove a Silverhurst and came in and tried to encourage the racial justice movement to become violent. He's Aaronson has dropped, documented this stuff.
So this is not like Willy nilly. He's read source documents, he's gotten stuff from trials. He's been pulling in a FOIA request. He has investigative documents. Body Cam footage from the local police departments he's getting he's. AI mean he's a good reporter and his his stuff is very well documented. His book the terror factory, which I said is coming up on the 10 year anniversary right now was listed as required reading by my friends, including our producer Phil, who's not with me
at the moment. But Phil recommended it as a required thing to understand how counterterrorism. Cases work in the FBI and since we were on a surveillance team that did a significant amount of counterterrorist work both in DC and then also just all around the United States. I mean, even my first two weeks on I flew to Alaska and jumped into. These like white supremacy cases, He's like, you have to understand how they do them.
And there's a reason why Aronson talks about the manufactured War on Terror. And it's because the Bureau is incentivized to have these cases come out. And what they do is they do this, they send in this April Rogers type to to lure people and claim to be a prostitute or win their their favor. And then, you know, they rile people up and they introduce them to other people that are other undercovers. And we'll kind of kick in this kind of the the. What they they set up here.
So Rogers gained trust amongst the activists. She, I'm skipping a couple of pieces here, just said she worked with the JTTF, the Joint Terrorism Task Force and some other stuff. So she gained trust among the activists. She tried to set up at least two young men in a gun running conspiracy. Her tactics mirror those of Windecker. This is the guy that was in Denver who tried to entrap 2 Denver racial justice advocates in crimes including an FBI
engineer. Plot to assassinate Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser. That went nowhere. To reveal what happened in Colorado Springs, I obtained search warrant applications. And so this is where this is the documents that that Trevor actually got. And we'll probably jump back to that in a second here. But he got body camera footage from local police officers that were investigating and and working on behalf of the FBI or
with the FBI. So when when a task force officer joins and works with the FBI, they're still subject to whatever their protocols are and. That's like a real tricky and sticky spot for the Bureau because the Bureau hasn't traditionally ever used things like body Cam footage. We don't even record half of our interviews even though we were supposed to. It just doesn't happen. And so hold on here, Actually, I don't know if I showed this before.
This is my personal recorder. That I bought with my money because I wanted to be able to record interviews with subjects because I don't like. Taking notes and then relying on my notes and then scanning that. In fact, I often took no notes. I simply would record the actual thing that the person said. And then I would give it to our secretary, who was really helpful and very kind, and she would burn it onto ACD and she would burn a copy for me. She'd burn a copy for the
assistant US attorney. She would burn a copy for the master copy, and then she would burn a copy for the defense in discovery. We would always get 4 copies of every recording, and then I would just put them on the file. And whenever Discovery came up, you could just set it off. And whenever the United States Attorney wanted to hear the interview, you just send it over the copy. And then we had a master copy that went off to what's called
Elsher Electronic evidence. And then the last one was mine to use for for working copies. It's really straightforward, but that's not what the Bureau does and the Bureau doesn't. Know how to deal with. Body cams, it's like a new, it's always a new kind of game. It's like, OK, they're, they're out there. So how do you handle yourself?
I've had people tell me like, hey guys, like be careful because we're going to be out there with fill in the blank, DC Metro PD, Las Cruces Police Department, Sheriff's Department, you name it, you know, whatever other entity that had body cams. And it's like, you know, watch what you say because you're going to be on body Cam. OK, I guess. It's interesting because it does give you some light into things that are going on. And, you know, cops that wear them every single day have
learned to just live with them. They're still kind of novel to federal agents who don't basically have most of their life on tape. And and so you get weird disclosures that happened from cops on it. And in this case, one of the things that he mentioned that they saw is they reviewed 100 pages, hundreds of pages of
internal FBI records from. And if you listen to our podcast, you know social media exploitation, also known as Somax. Which is a, a thing that the Bureau does, every field office has some ability to do so. And it's usually an intelligence analyst piece where they go and gather information from people's social media. Now, you probably don't have a, a reasonable expectation of privacy on most of your social media. You know, you might have a little.
Bit for your DMS and they may have to go get a little bit more but not if not if the company who owns them is willing to give them over. But this so Max type stuff. Can be used to do a very light touch. So my understanding is if somebody were to go to say like a LinkedIn page, and I don't have LinkedIn, so I'm sorry I can't testify this is true, But my understanding is if you go to a LinkedIn page, it'll tell you who's been in contact.
With your page. Some of these Somax tools that we have that the Bureau has and that other law enforcement entities have can basically crawl across your page and grab the information without alerting you to this. So a very what they would call like a light touch. And, you know, that's what this guy is basically saying. So Aronson's saying that, you know, the cops pulled the stuff down. They're reviewing on body Cam footage the the actual documents that the Bureau gave them on
some of the. Activists they were dealing with. So that's kind of interesting. Rogers wouldn't, wouldn't speak, she said. She was. Told by the. Justice Department not to testify or say anything, so she's declined to be part of the comments. The FBI refuses to answer anything in writing. Colorado Springs Police Department not going to do anything, refers everything to the FBI. So nobody in law enforcement made any comments to this story. Still pretty fun, pretty interesting.
Let's see here we've got the senator from he's a Democrat senator from Oregon. Looks like says it's disturbing but not surprising to learn the FB is reported targeting of racial justice activists in 2020 wasn't limited to Denver alone. It's a clear abuse of the authority of the FBI to use undercover agents, informants. And the local law enforcement to spy on and entrap people engaged in peaceful First Amendment protected activities without any evidence of criminal activity or
violent intent. I hope that Ron Wyden is willing to come forward and say that about all the things. This should also be the issue with January 6th protesters. There are plenty of. People that were not involved in anything particularly violent and their. Pre conversations to the day of January 6th should be First Amendment protected activities because there was no violence and nothing was indicated until maybe. After the fact, but it's just like.
It's really dangerous stuff. We're dealing with a time when this overreach is so strong and so it's ubiquitous, and it doesn't matter if it's on the left or the right. So this should be a bipartisan issue, and we keep seeing that it is not. Over and over and over again the. If you're looking on the. Page. Let's let's flip it over here
and show this page. So here's a. Page of some people getting in the face of they've got Tamir Rice, they've got Trayvon Martin, they've got Philando Castillo. These are totally different cases that have nothing to do with each other. Eric Garner, Michael Brown, you've got a a white guy wearing a mask and khaki shorts and like some, some KED's or something. And it's like. The there's a black guy is yelling at 2 cops standing in the rain.
I'm just describing it for if you're, if you're watching, if you're listening to this thing, but they're showing this great picture. I mean, it's like a great picture of people protesting. And here's the deal. I don't agree with what the racial justice, the quote, UN quote racial justice profile or protesters were involved in, but like that's their right. That's the whole thing. Like you got to let them. Do their thing, even if they're
being jerks. Now, if they start getting into violence, then it's a different animal, but that's not what's going on here. This guy basically. And if they are blocking streets, then maybe we have some civil infractions. But this, you know, you don't set them up with gun cases. This is bizarre. All right, so there's another little thing underneath here.
I'm scrolling past it, but there's like, you know, three people protesting in the street, which is they have some really good pictures on The Intercept. If you're not regularly viewingtheintercept.com. It's fairly left-leaning. It has some pretty. Aggressive leftist stuff. But at the same time, the recording, you know the reporting, at least Trevor's reporting has been very good. Glenn Greenwald does a really good job in general of curating
a pretty interesting online. Newspaper, So I recommend it even if it doesn't fit your general political lean. See what see what's out there. That's that's kind of what I like doing sometimes. I'm going to do a Revolver news piece next and then we'll talk about that. And I think they're also interesting, maybe a little bit more on the on the Fringy type stuff, but but still good reporting and strong riding. So they talk about the murder of George Floyd. I don't know if he was murdered.
I know he was convicted of the Derek Shelvin was, but it didn't feel like a murderer to me. So be it. Jury of his of his peers, allegedly, you know, came out there. This whole last couple years has been pretty gross watching some of this stuff just as somebody working in law enforcement, It's really troubling to watch.
It says activists there were not only angered by George Floyd's death, but the killing of a local man, a guy named Devon Bailey, who was shot in the back by police officers in 2019. Getting shot in the back is a pretty bad news thing. There's only a few situations where that makes sense. I was just reading about one where it's like some guy got shot in the back of the head and you're like, oh, well, that's pretty cut and dry. And then you're like, oh,
Benjamin Crump is involved. This, this attorney. So I bet you there's more to the story. And it turns out the guy got shot in the back of the head 'cause he was in his car and he was reversing into police officers and he hit like 7 cops with his car when they were shooting at him, probably to defend their lives. The whole story is always a little bit more.
All right, So this guy, Devon Bailey, I don't know his story and I don't want to click through it at the moment to talk about it. So we're going to talk about it in 2020. These racial justice demonstration roiling the nation, including Colorado Springs activists organizing protests outside the home. Of Alan Vanzant Lant, who is one of the. Officers involved in in this gentleman Bailey's death, they're calling him a murderer. They're yelling stuff on the bullhorn. It's tough.
You know, doing things outside of people's houses is definitely you're on the line of sketchiness. But that's the local issue. That's definitely not an FBI issue and you're dealing with some, you know, the the free speech issue over like maybe the invasion of the the threatening of of somebody's personal property. Whether you can or cannot parade or have a picket in front of houses in neighborhoods, I mean. It's a local police issue. This is not an FBI issue. Anyway, they blocked the roads
to the neighborhood. Protests escalated. Drivers tried to get through. They got into verbal altercations with people, some black activists and college student named Charles Johnson. Argument goes on. Supposedly a phone gets swatted out. This is like really minor. This is local problems.
It says other. Demonstrators recorded the encounter and the footage from this protest circulated among far right media assets as an example of apparent dangers of racial justice and anti fascist activists. And then this conspiracy theorist, who are they calling this? Oh this is not so. Michelle Malkin, AKA conspiracy theorist who lives in Colorado Springs tweeted out. Nowhere is safe, so there you go. Like you say, you got to lean here. It is what it is.
The protesters mostly were wearing face masks during the pandemic, making it difficult for police to identify them. But I, I know I'm not, you know, there's actually mask laws in most places, which we apparently abandoned in 2020. But most places, if you are committing a crime and you're wearing a mask, that in and of itself the mask in order to conceal your identity is actually a crime. It's definitely the case in DC 'cause I used to deal with this
all the time. Anyway, FBI had a source that thought on the inside, this woman Rogers, this young detective who had suggested she was a sex worker. Once again, she was going by the name Chelsea. And there's all kinds of stuff you go on, you learn a little bit about her day-to-day and what she was doing and that she was basically rifling through their files.
And they gave access to, you know, letting her run around in their, their kind of their shop, the Chinook Center for they have an office and there was, you know, organizations and activist stuff. And so she's like cycling through their stuff. I guess that they gave her permission, but they didn't give her permission based on what
they're knowing. So I don't know how that works under the 4th Amendment. That seems like, you know, if they had given it to her, it's very different than her going and rifling through it when they're not in there. It sounds like she was like rolling through there when nobody was looking and then feeding it to the FBI. Pretty bizarre. Definitely, definitely interesting. Here's a picture of some of the Somec stuff. So you can see.
These are print offs from social media captured on the body Cam footage of a guy named Scott Alamo. Scott Alamo says some pretty funny stuff during that thing he's talking about. Well, they get paid to sit and wait and do surveillance. That's what surveillance is. You get paid to sit and wait. So there's nothing really crazy
about that. But the fact that he's running through mug shots, not mug shots rather, but people's Facebook, their LinkedIn, their Instagram profiles, social media messages, things like that are in printed documents that he's sitting there reading through while they're on surveillance.
Kind of interesting. And then he makes some like very derogatory and probably off putting things statements about, you know what, what he thinks about the different people, including this guy John Christensen, who apparently was a college professor. And he was like, yeah, that guy gets a boot to the face. And then at some point in time they actually boot him in the face.
That's never really good. It's never good that you have a. Plan to go and beat somebody up and then actually go do it later on. That being said, this guy Alamo, who they got some body Cam footage of is pretty funny. He he in in my little Twitter post about it. There's a couple other kind of cool pictures. There's a picture of some kind of activist.
Who was masked up and wearing a oh, I'm not showing it, am I there It is masked up and and was like having a cop come up at them and like threw the bike down in front of them. I mean these this is all locally local stuff. Aggravated attempted assault for throwing for throwing a bicycle down at a cop, Like local problems, local issues. Not, not my kind of world. What's really wild is that this woman, Rogers, apparently invited two young male activists to her apartment to hang out with.
And she's like, you know, attractive enough, I guess. And she's she has like very distracting large bosoms. That's just such a funny thing that they, they decided to like, try and do this. And this is where it gets kind of sketchy, I think for most people. This is the honeypot. So Rogers, meanwhile, began to invite young male activists to our apartment. In recording that Aronson got, the FBI agent in Colorado Springs confirmed that the meetings between Rogers and at
least two activists occurred. Although the possibility of a sexual encounter appeared to be implicit in the invitations, the meetings always took an unexpected turn. When she would invite people over, there were two guys sitting there and the guys were apparently undercovers. And they we're like interested in buying guns or selling guns to people, it says. So there's two guys sitting there. And the activist who didn't want to be identified said, you know, Rodgers asked if he could buy,
could find illegal guns for her. And and then the guy says, no, I'm not going to sell you an illegal gun. Because he was a firearms enthusiast and gun people. Many of you who watch the show probably have the same feeling. We don't easily get ensnared in illegal gun law problems because we kind of have a pretty good idea what's in and out of
bounds. I, I did several 100 private firearms transactions in the state of Texas using a service called Texas gun trader and then arms list when it was still free. Once you know how those things going to work, you kind of have your own protocol like what you do, you know, you write up a bill of sale. So all right, let me just stop that right there. If you've never bought or sold a gun outside of a gun store. In many states, it doesn't require any paperwork.
I would say the vast majority of states, you don't have to do anything special. You don't need a background check. You just have to have no particular reason to believe that the person that you're selling is a prohibited person that's going to be a felon or somebody who's involved in domestic violence. And and then there's. Kind of like best practices that some people like to do, like they'll do a driver's license number or they'll fill out a bill of sale with the driver's
license number. They'll take a picture of the person's ID and kind of check it out, make sure they're the right age, all that kind of stuff. None of that's required of you in most places. You just have to have a reasonable belief that there's no reason to believe the person is prohibited. And I kind of had my own little thing. I generally like to do business with people who had concealed handgun permits.
And if they did have that, that means that they had gone through a background and usually some degree of trainings, particularly in the state of Texas, there's like a class and you kind of know who takes that class. And the people take the class are gun people or people that want to be gun people. And they're not a problem. And they can buy guns because they can actually go to a gun store and present that and not have to even go through the 4473. They can skip the background
check, if memory serves. I'm pretty sure that's the case. So all that being said is that gun people tend not to get ensnared in this kind of stuff. And in this case, they have a cop who's trying to ask this guy to get a gun illegally, whatever that was going to look like, and he's like, no, I'm not going to do that. This is Colorado, so they got some screwy gun laws from what I remember.
I'm not totally up on Colorado laws, but I know that it's a blue enough state that it's not a place where the Seraphin family is going to ever live. So there it is, another time apparently. She brought some people over and there were two dudes there, one named Mike and one named Omar.
When this guy, Gabriel Palczyk was invited over and Mike was missing a left leg from the knee down and Omar was kind of a Middle Eastern looking guy with a big beard, this is what he's telling Aaronson. Both had tattoos. And they were very buff, they claimed to be truckers who traffic and illegal weapons and said they could get grenades, TNT and AK-40 sevens and then asked him if he wanted to buy anything. If anybody offers you to sell
you explosives. Or. Like silencers for guns without a tax stamp. That's a fed. I'm just going to go out there on a limb and just let you know, as listeners of the Kyle Seraphin show, you don't need to be hanging out with those people. Those are not people you want to be dealing with. Anybody that tells you they're going to hook you up with that, you know, you might want to report them to local law enforcement and burn that cover.
But that is a just a terribly stupid federal operation going on right there. So anyway, apparently this dude was intrigued with them, hung out with them. He said he never saw any of the things. They showed him an AK47. They claimed it was fully automatic, but he had no way to test it. Of course, he's not going to let go, blast it into a door.
But these guys were, you know, buying him meals and drinks and giving him cigars and, like, pumping him full of drinks and trying to, you know, give him 16 year old Scotch. I've never seen 16 year old Scotch. I've seen 12 and I've seen 18. Maybe you guys will put that in the comments. Is there 16 year old? Scotch. Is that a thing? Do they do those kind of years? I guess they probably could do all of them. So let me know what's what's a good 16 year old Scotch in the comments?
I would love to know. Not that I'm a big Scotch guy, but I am curious. Anyway, he never bought any weapons from these people. So these two like apparent attempted setups. What happened? He's never been charged with a crime, didn't want to deal with it, but was obviously showing up in these public court documents.
Here's what's really funny. So this guy, Scott Alamo police officer, the one that was looking at the Somics reports he is. He's on the body Cam, and it says Alamo's body Cam captured something else that day. In the recording, he mentioned that they were police officers secretly among the protesters at the housing March. This is another, you know, protest that's going on. He said there were two undercover cops and and plain and four plainclothes officers. And then he looked at a photo on
his phone. A picture of April with her giant boobs. Palamo says and laughed, apparently referring to one of the other colors in the crowd. The activists at the Chinook Center watch that video, and at the time they didn't know who April Roger Rogers was, but it was pretty easy process of elimination. Eventually they were able to triangulate that April Rogers was in fact Chelsea, and that's when they figured out who this lady was who's running around because this guy added her
because of her biological build. They go on. And on this is a very long article. This is the the kind of stuff that Trevor Aaronson writes. I think they're really good. Here's another picture of April Rogers with her pink hair. If you're looking on the rumble thing. I'll pull it back up. I'll scroll through to try and find a couple of the pictures. You know, I don't know that she looks very cop like, so I guess that's a convincing undercover. But for whatever reason, this is
what they chose to use. This is the kind of move where you're trying to build a crime where it doesn't exist. And people should have a real problem with that. They should have an issue with your government trying to come after. You that way. I'm going to read one more story here and then we'll talk quickly about the Trump thing. I think this one is just also we found out about some other Brady material that's not going out.
Apparently, federal judges are not being versed in what Brady is. The Biden appointee didn't know what Brady material was. For those of you that have been following attention, you know, paying attention to what's going on in all these different trials. Brady material comes from the 1963 Supreme Court decision Brady V. Maryland.
And it is a requirement for for the prosecuting office, whether it be federal or state, they have to provide the defense with all exculpatory evidence that they're knowledgeable. Of and here's another one of these cases. This one is coming from Revolver News and let's see who has the byline here. Not sure it says. So I'm going to assume that it's all Darren Beatty. It says breaking the Doug Mackey. Now, this is the case we talked about earlier this week.
Douglas Mackey, the the attorney for him accused the DOJ of withholding exculpatory information and has demanded a mistrial in this critical one, a quote UN quote meme trial.
That's the thing here. So in a remarkable new development in the Douglas Mackey meme trial, his lawyers are calling for a mistrial on the base of the government failing to disclose potentially exculpatory information to Mackey, as they are required to do by law under Brady V Maryland. Mackey's attorney wrote a letter that suggests that the exculpatory information pertains to DOJ interviews with Hillary Clinton. It's not stated, but Hillary Clinton campaign staffers that
were made. Available to Mackey's defense mid trial. So they didn't tell him before the thing happens. And here's the actual motion, which is what I actually want to read. We'll leave the rest of the article out here. So let's read the motions. Pull this thing up on the screen. Here's what it says to the to the judge, the Honorable Anne Donnelly.
This is being handled right now in the Eastern District of New York for your awareness, which is not the most favorable place for this to happen for this guy, Dear Judge Donnelly, This is kind of funny because you usually don't see a dear Judge. That's not usually the way the motions are done.
But anyway, yesterday morning, shortly before court convened for the second day of testimony at trial in the above referenced case, the government handed me two FBI 3O2 interview reports of Amy Carr. These are FD3O2.
That's the file who worked for the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton in 2016. Although I had not had sufficient time fully to consider all of the ramifications of the government's mid trial disclosure, I immediately moved for a mistrial because the disclosure of the reports appeared to include information which the government has been required to disclose prior to the trial beginning or before trial pursuant to Brady. View Maryland. Which again decided 1963.
At yesterday's lunch break, after the revelations of the report of Miss Carr, I requested that the government produce FBI. Three O twos up, all interviewed views of people who worked for the Hillary Clinton campaign. The government produced an additional 16 interviews. So that's 18 total interviews that were not made available to the defense and are made available mid trial. This is incredible stuff though, and I don't know if it's incompetence or malfeasance.
I just don't know. It's it's like it continues to happen. It just feels like the DOJ is marching out a playbook of just trying to railroad these things, and all of them have significant political ramifications because they are politically charged. Prosecutions in so many ways. A cursory review of these reports establishes that they also include material that should have been produced before trial pursued into Brady View, Maryland.
I did not publicly file the reports here with to afford the government an opportunity to redact telephone numbers and other personal information, but I have been courted incorporated them them all by. Reference herein. It's kind of stilted language here. Sorry. Since court adjourned yesterday afternoon, I've been preoccupied with preparing Mr. Mackey for his expected testimony. So this is what the attorney
supposed to be doing. They're supposed to be like prepping the client to do testimony and getting this other stuff done. They're not supposed to be like expecting new things and disclosures mid trial, at least not the way I understand it. And this would have been things that were available. The FBI would have included this in discovery. When you click Discovery, Export. So here's a Inside baseball. The FBI runs everything on a system called Sentinel.
And Sentinel, when you run it is pretty easy to handle. It is a, it's, it's like a, it's like a file sharing program. And when you click discovery export, it literally exports everything that is appropriate for discovery that's outside of whatever you're not supposed to. There's some things like grand jury and there's some other things like source documents that don't go. But generally speaking, all of your FT3O twos, which are basically they are just
interview summaries. The FBI agent goes and does an interview. They write it up in a three O 2. The three O 2, you know, the, the arrest is actually documented in a three O 2. Search warrants are documented. Once you serve them in a three O 2, it's just, it's just a testimonial document says what happened and, and that's it. Then you then they go over on ACD and I don't know that you can leave them out. So the fact that they were not
picked is, is totally bizarre. And it's really, you know, it's a problem. It's a serious problem. I would say that that's the case. So in any case we can read. Just a little. Bit more here. It says the court adjourned. Yeah. I haven't had ample time to review it because they were doing stuff in the trial and evaluation options. For this reason, I respectfully request an adjournment of the trial for at least another day.
To afford Mr. Mack gave me an opportunity to evaluate the new information and what our options are and that this application is denied, then I respectfully request time to review and a renewed motion for a mistrial. So that's the the mistrial motion in the case of Mackey. Mr. Mackey here. And you know, these are Brady violations.
This is like basic stuff. These are basic procedural problems that we should not be seeing in a in a DOJ that does this for a living in an FBI that does this for a living. Like they're the ones that are supposed to be the experts. And as we mentioned, I said, there's kind of two Nuggets that I keep taking away from people. One of them is the change of national security that happened from George Hill.
The other one is what Bill Shipley said, also known as shipwreck crew, who's on on Twitter and, you know, used to write for Red State. And he said something the other day that I just keep repeating over and over again. But it's so true. The government doesn't have a vested interest in the outcome of criminal prosecutions, nor in the a vested interest in the outcome of an investigation.
Like you want to get bad guys if they're bad, but your job should be to try to find exculpatory information if it exists. If there's something out there that disproves your case, you should be looking for that equally hard. That's like just, that's just the simple idea of a fairness. And so the government doesn't have an interest in the outcome. They only are interested in a fair process. But that is not the government we're seeing.
What we're seeing is this massive overreach, this massive attempt to continue to quote, UN quote. Win and the story of of of Doug Mackey's, which is probably one of the worst stories there is, is that these are memes from 2016 that started getting prosecuted under Biden's administration only in 2021. That should chill your blood. As I said last last episode, it really should.
Put the fear of God into you. That protected free speech, and that's what the most of. This is is a First Amendment trial that is on trial and they're acting like it's something else, like he somehow deprived people of their ability to vote. This guy posted memes on social media and was arrested five years later. That is truly, truly abhorrent. To the American sensibilities.
And it should be every bit as important that we've got, you know, former or current cops working as undercovers, trying to sell guns to people that have no interest and trying to solicit guns from people that have no interest because there's no allegation that they're involved in the gun. Trafficking or doing anything illegal like that. This is the government trying to set cases up and it doesn't matter if you're on the left or the right.
This is a non partisan issue. I'm just going to keep saying it. It is not a partisan issue. The fact that the House Democrats are not willing to play ball with the weaponization committee and root out the things that are going after their constituents, too, it shows you some really nasty political angling. I guess I don't even know what you call that. Like, it's just, it's just bad. It's bad politics and it's not smart. It's really not smart on so many
levels. All right, folks, that's as much as we can handle for this week. I want to let you know in advance that I've already done an interview with Steve Baker. He was on the Tucker Carlson show this week. I did the interview earlier today and we'll be showing it on Monday. I might even put out a Twitter poll because we went for over 3 hours and I didn't want to stop it at any point. I wanted to just keep hearing what he had to say. He's a brilliant speaker.
He has a very good analysis. He's right down the middle of the road as far as the kind of people I like to talk to. He mentioned he's doesn't care about one side or the other. They were clearly people that he saw January 6th that were protesters that were involved in violence. And he said that they were clearly to blame for the violence, that they instigated it and they began it.
And there were more cops that were also involved in doing things that were very, very interesting and I've not heard described the way that it has. He had access to not just the tapes that Tucker Carlson had, but he also had access to radio transmissions that were being sent and recorded on the. Day of January 6th by the Capitol Police and he's talked to different capital police whistleblowers. Seriously interesting man to speak to.
I very much enjoyed it. He and I ended up talking for another 30 or 40 minutes after we got off. I spoke to him for about four hours today. So I'm debating breaking this up into a couple of bite sized pieces because 3 1/2 hours is, you know, 3 hours and 15 minutes is Joe Rogan territory. As he mentioned. I don't want to do that necessarily to anybody, but.
I keep a lookout and see we may, like I said, we may have a poll on this to kind of decide whether it's the right thing to do. And I'll let you guys decide if you want to see something a little break in format. We haven't been doing our format too long, but I think it's a it might be worth it. Ladies and gentlemen, you have been listening to the Kyle Seraphin show. As you probably know, I am Kyle Seraph and I do really
appreciate you listening. I would hope that you consider subscribing to any of the channels where you are listening to our our podcast. If you're watching it, I'll rumble. Please check that out. Drop us a comment. They actually run the algorithms that says comments are like an interaction. And that means that you're you're thing is more interesting
and it promotes it more. So if you don't mind giving us a comment, something that's interesting, a question or an answer to what kind of Scotch is out there doesn't make a difference to me. Something on there? Would be great. And then Apple, Spotify, iHeartRadio, wherever you're listening to things, things like Pod Bean, you can listen to the audio and you can download that. If you want to set us up for automatic downloads.
You always have us in the car whenever you're driving through somewhere without good cell service or without a good radio station to listen to. And we'd love it for you to give us a listen on those things. If you like what you hear, share with a friend, let them know that we're out here doing this thing. We do it three times a week and today, Friday being the last one. Mondays are our long form interviews. It's where the most of you are coming and tuning in.
And I think you're going to find out that this Monday is going to be really, really interesting to you. So check that thing out. We'll give you access to a bunch of interesting people, first hand sources of information, people who or there or have had government malfeasance executed against them. Worth your time. We appreciate your feedback. If you got a five star review, you can leave on Apple podcast. So I always put the link in the
bottom of the show notes. Feel free to click through on that, give us a review or read some on the show. I don't have one easily available to me, but I will make up for it soon and I'll do another one for you guys. Thanks so much for listening and I do, like I said, really appreciate it. I will look forward to seeing you on Monday for our interview of Steve Baker and definitely. Bookmark it to come back for that one.
You're going to enjoy it. Thanks for listening to the Kyle Seraphin Show. Be sure to follow him on Twitter and Truth at Kyle Seraphin.