DESTROY IT! For America to survive, some government agencies must GO! | Ep 671 - The Kyle Seraphin Show

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:11):
Take a look behind the curtain with a real whistle blower, an
American patriot. Prepare to embrace the
uncomfortable truth because thisprogram has no time for
comforting lies. Here is civil liberties
enthusiast. 2nd Amendment defender and recovering FBI
agent Kyle Seraphin. Well my friends, welcome to the

(00:39):
Kyle Serfin show for Thursday. It is November the 6th and
welcome to our program. We have some, I guess some
bittersweet news that we will start off the day with.
Nancy Pelosi has decided after 400 years she's no longer going

(00:59):
to seek re election. She's not going to try to be the
congressional representative outof California.
And so we'll have a moment of just sort of peaceful and
thankful quiet for her decision.She was actually, she was
actually asked yesterday whetheror not she was going to do this

(01:20):
and she said she came to this conclusion.
We don't even care whether or not we care.
And she doesn't remember saying it because she's 10,000 years
old. So some people will play things
like Ding Dong the witch is dead.
But no, it's really just a sad moment.

(01:41):
But what it did remind me of is the fact that this woman has
been there for 40 years, and she's been doing something
that's kind of interesting. She has been controlling off and
on for almost half the time. In the last 20, she's been
controlling the Praetorian Guardof the United States Congress.

(02:02):
Today we're going to talk about which government agencies really
cannot stand. And I think I've got a
constitutional answer to them. I've also got some examples of
people who don't know the Constitution but have huge
audiences that go out and speak about them, and they sound like
absolute fools, and they'll never be able to walk away from
that. If you're going to open your
mouth and assign certain things to certain documents that exist

(02:22):
in either our governmental structure or our American
history, maybe you should know what they were beforehand.
But as I found out, it doesn't actually matter if you know
anything. We've got some of the dumbest
people possible that are out running this country and
influenced in this country and talking about things as though
they're commentators with some sort of knowledge base and they
have none. It's probably because they've
never done anything of value. So we're going to go there and

(02:43):
I'm going to make a broad argument against women voting,
and I'm going to do it with women.
Ladies, many of you have made the argument that there is no
reason for women to vote. That doesn't mean that you
shouldn't vote until that goes away.
I think there's a pretty strong argument to be made that a lot
of the atrocious decisions that have been done and some of the

(03:05):
things that people fear, including women who listen to
this program, the things that you hate, would stop if women
couldn't vote. That's a really interesting
thought. The question is, is, you know,
how does the camel get its nose under the tent?
And I think women's suffrage wasone of them.
So for all of you that are readyto get riled up about that,

(03:27):
let's do that soon. We're going to do it in just one
second. Before we do, we will talk about
my friends over at Patriot Protect.
Let's talk about safety. Let's talk about your digital
safety. Let's talk about the ability to
find people. I found senior members of
executive agencies, including the people who are director
level. I found their home addresses in
about 90 seconds because I know how to do it.

(03:47):
If you don't want that stuff outthere on the web, if you don't
want your e-mail address, your phone number, your home address
and so on, if you don't want your family connections is
available to anybody on the databroker websites, you may want to
look into a service like PatriotProtect.
It's an awful lot harder to findmine and I'm pretty public
folks. Patriot Protect the website
ispatriot-protect.com slash Kyle.

(04:08):
They may prompt you for a promo code at the end.
Use my name Kyle. Save yourself 15% on an annual
subscription. Does this save you from every
type of scam? No.
What it's trying to do is make it harder for scammers and
criminals to look you up and make you the target because
inevitably they may catch you ata bad moment.
And that can happen to anybody. It's scary easy for criminals
and scammers and even the peoplewho are federal agents sitting

(04:30):
in their car, They don't have access to better databases to
find your personal information online.
And that means all the stuff we just talked about, it's a couple
of clicks away. It really does take only a few
seconds. And if somebody has decided to
target you, or if they're just looking for an easy target and
they're trying to find who's outthere, they can harvest this
personal information and use it against you.
They can pretend to be you or they can be pretend to be
someone who knows you from a company that you actually work

(04:52):
with. Get yourself cleaned up online.
Have someone like Patriot Protect scrub your digital
information and make it harder for these people to go out and
find you. It's really inexpensive.
This is like the the ounce of prevention versus the pound of
cure. We're talking less than 100
bucks a year to go out there anddo it.
I I've already forgotten what the dollar amount was because I
did at the beginning of the yearand it's just on renewal.

(05:13):
patriot-protect.com slash Kyle link in the show description.
We'll talk about cyber threats in the future as they come up.
They continue to exist and they will always be out there.
This is sort of like an arms race.
So get yourself armed up with some digital camouflage.
You don't want to go to battle without being covered up.
That's what we got. Let's get started.
Let's have some fun. Yeah, let's do that now.

(05:42):
So she's out, she says. There she is.
Look at that Lady. She's just a figure of reptilian
skinwalking demon status. Isn't she just stretching skin
over a body that shouldn't even be moving anymore and then also
strangely has augmented breasts?It seems like What a what a odd

(06:03):
lady. Nancy Pelosi.
She announces that she will no longer seek re election to
Congress after nearly 40 years in Washington, DC.
What she really said quietly wasshe was tired of putting in her
dentures and pretending she wasn't hammered.
Let's read the story from CNN Politics written in just a few

(06:24):
minutes ago. Nancy Pelosi, the first and only
female speaker of the House of Representatives.
Oh, that might be one of the reasons why I wanted to talk
about today. One of the most powerful figures
in Democrat politics for decadeshas announced that she will not
seek re election. Quote.
I say to my colleagues in the House all the time, no matter
what title they had bestowed upon me, Speaker, leader, whip,

(06:46):
there's been no greater honor than for me to stand up on the
House floor and say, I speak forthe people of California, speak
for the people of San Francisco.I've truly love serving as your
voice in Congress and I've always honored the song of Saint
Francis. Lord, make me an instrument of
thy peace, the anthem for our city, and that is why I want

(07:10):
you, my fellow San Franciscans, to be the first to know that I
will not be seeking re election to Congress, said Nancy Pelosi,
who is 85,000 years old. Wow, that is some truly poignant
stuff. She quoted Saint Francis of

(07:32):
Assisi, that's really nice. And she speaks for the people of
San Francisco. Well, as somebody who was born
in the Bay Area and grew up in the rest of America, like a real
American person, I got to just say gross. that Lady is awful.
And if that's what's the voice of San Francisco, it tells you
why I won't go back, and many ofyou never will either.

(07:54):
That's why it's covered in poop.Just like her ethics and her
nasty fake Catholicism that she's been out there like
floating around with a grateful heart.
I look forward to my final year of service as your proud
representative and what may be my final year on this planet as
I am ancient and the only thing holding me together is this
demonic interest in holding on to power.

(08:17):
This might be the end for me. She was first elected in 1987.
She made history when she got the first ever female speaker's
gavel in 2007. She remains the only woman to
have yielded the gavel to wielded the gavel because she
would never let it go from her freaking Bony little hands.
Nancy Pelosi, you horrible creature.

(08:39):
I'm serious. I, I've been saying this for so
many years and I don't, I don't think this is very nice, but I
can't help but look at it. Somebody said, you know, how,
how is she staying together? I how does she keep doing what
she does? And I'm like, that's not Nancy
Pelosi. Nancy was, you know, she was
replaced a long time ago. Obviously there's some sort of
skin walking demon that just bares her skin.
And at some point they're going to have to shed the body because

(09:02):
it is no longer possible to keepup the facade and collagen
injections and the hair and the dentures that is keeping that
thing alive. And so it'll have to shed that
skin and climb into something else.
Maybe it'll go into a younger model like an AOCI.
Don't know. It's not very nice for me to say
that, but I really, I really do not like that woman.

(09:22):
And I think she's done some truly horrifically awful things
in this country. She's taken the level of
discourse down. She's added levels of hypocrisy
that were previously unseen. And she was the first female
speaker. That says something about who
this country will put in that speakership role.
You know, she's not the only speaker of the House that I'm

(09:43):
not a big fan of. The woman who currently wields
the gavel is also not my favorite.
You guys may be aware of that. I'm going to talk a little bit
about government shutdowns and some of that stuff.
Let's first hear from Sean Hannity.
Let's hear from Sean Hannity, who is one of the most highly
paid news people or whatever it is that he does.
I don't know if it's news, news talkers, TV presenters in

(10:07):
America. And Sean Hannity is so highly
paid, in my opinion, because what he's able to do that no one
else can do is he can tell his guests what they think before
they even answer the question because his question is in fact
the answer and get them to agreewith it.
And that is a really special trait.

(10:28):
Forget the inquisitive mind, forget the Larry King.
I just want to ask people a question and speak less than 10%
of the time if possible. Sean Hannity is master the art
of saying 70% of what needs to be said and then just asking for
agreement. So that's my favorite.
And by the way, his style has been copied by brilliant
broadcasters like Megyn Kelly. I just watched a couple of

(10:48):
interviews that that Megan did with Alexis Wilkins.
This is Kash Patel's hold on. Let me say it right.
Country music sensation girlfriend who dropped another
lawsuit on another person yesterday.
Sean Hannity is a style that many people aspire to have.

(11:08):
When I find myself doing what I call the Hannity, I always kick
myself because I hate it. This is going to be fun though,
because this is a man agreeing with another man.
This is Smithers doing what he does best, which is kind of
simper and agree with a more powerful person and that more
powerful person. It kind of looks like John Kerr.

(11:30):
Have you guys noticed that some of these men, these, these like,
it doesn't matter what side of the aisle they're on, they end
up looking like Halloween masks.They remind me, hold on here,
I'm going to show you on the screen for those of you that are
not watching, you're missing out.
But up on the wall over here to my right, I have a a painting or
a canvas, whatever it is of the the jump scene from Point Break.

(11:52):
So it's Keanu Reeves and it's Patrick Swayze.
And so that's that's Johnny Utahand Bodie jumping out of the
plane doing the first skydive scene.
And they're holding arms and they grip and they get like,
they get like the the kind of the Arnold Schwarzenegger, like
80s, nineties, like, yeah, two Bros like grabbing arms and

(12:12):
yeah, they're just, where the hell was I going with this?
I just went off the rails. Let me play this clip and see if
the fuck comes back. That's terrible.
Between air traffic controllers.SNAP benefits our military.

(12:33):
At what point is there a breaking point?
And, and some people in that party wake up and understand
this is damaging and hurting a lot of a lot of Americans all
across the board. Yeah, exactly.
They care more about their own political careers and they care
about the people that they claimto represent.
And that's why you're seeing these broad demographic shifts

(12:54):
into the Republican Party. People are tired of this.
You know, the Democrats funded astudy that just came out a
couple weeks ago, and their own study identified Democrat Party
is said to be thought of as weakand woke and out of touch.
And they're proving that every day.
They just simply don't care about the people anymore.

(13:16):
I'm looking at the chat. I was like, guys, what the hell
was I talking about? Is the masks, they all end up
Sean Hannity, John Kerry, RonaldReagan.
Their face all ends up looking like Halloween masks from the
movie Point Break. I yeah, somebody said welcome to
old age. God, is this what it starts like
you just it it felt like I was holding on to something.
And then I looked away and I looked back and it was there was

(13:36):
nothing in my hands. It just was completely empty
handed. All right.
Yeah. So that's the kind of that's the
kind of serious people that we have.
We've got this simpering nonsense.
They're talking about governmentshutdown.
Why? Because the government still
shut down. We still have a government
that's not functioning. And yet all of you woke up.
And I'm going to keep saying it every day that you wake up and
you look around like my coffee pot spilled.

(13:57):
It smelled like coffee. And the water taps worked and
was able to run my water filtration.
I turn on the gas and all the normal things keep working.
What is not going to work? And I actually looked at taking
a flight because I thought maybeI should go look at Montana in
the winter. That seems like a good idea.
It's not really a great idea. And then I started thinking
like, that's not a good idea, especially when the FAA is
starting to cut flights. And these guys are starting to

(14:19):
talk about this a little bit more.
Sean Duffy apparently is going to cut 10% of the air traffic
control, which means they're going to cut 10% of the flights
in the amount that they can actually handle.
That's a good safety option. This is going to start pinching
some people. And I think we can be aware of
that. And I also think that this is
this is going to end up backfiring because the
Republicans didn't own it when they could.

(14:41):
I've I've poked this a lot. And I don't think that I'm
incorrect in assessing that. Eventually you can call it the
Schumer shut down. They're out there doing it.
I got one of of, you know, otherfolks talking about this is a
Democrat shutdown. They voted against it.
Yeah. At the end of the day, they're
going to look at you as being the power of the party in power.
And if you cannot look to yourself and say we take the

(15:02):
power, we take the responsibility.
Yes. We're not, we're not the the end
all be all. We don't have the ability to
unilaterally declare what is andwhat is not.
But if you don't own things, then you just wait and see if
the if people just push their opinion on you.
However, if you own it, then youcan shape why you did it.
And since we've already showed you polling yesterday that

(15:22):
Americans are starting to lean overwhelmingly, illogically or
otherwise, towards believing that the Republicans are the
ones who are responsible for shutdown.
And there are going to be some things that start touching
people, and the FAA is one of them.
What's funny is it actually makes the argument that those of
us who are constitutionalists, those of us who are
conservatives that really, actually believe in small
government that we've always made, and that is that less

(15:43):
things should be handled by the federal government.
I'm going to give you a broader,A broader thought.
If a federal budget is the thingthat keeps you from getting on
an airplane, let's say in Austin, TX.
So I'd drive 45 minutes down to the airport.
If I can't go down there and, and reasonably expect that my
dollars will be exchanged for a place on a plane that will fly

(16:04):
me to a place roughly the time that it's supposed to get there,
I need to go to Dulles. I need to go to Billings.
I know to go to San Francisco and go give Nancy Pelosi a high
five. If I can't reasonably expect to
go do that because the federal government in Washington, DC is
unable to pass a budget, isn't that the strongest possible
argument for divested and devolved local control, that it

(16:28):
shouldn't be a federal government question?
Shouldn't we just find out that,well, it looks like the air
traffic controllers in California are not getting paid
because California has no money?It shouldn't be that the federal
government says, well, we're notgoing to pass a budget about
anything. Yet another example of this, the
SNAP benefits thing that keep popping up that really I think,
'cause people to think, well, this is free and it is mine and

(16:52):
you've been giving it to me and therefore I should continue to
get it. The people that think that way.
Does it not bother you that thatmoney comes from the furthest
possible least accountable system to you, the person?
Shouldn't that be the shouldn't that be the answer?
Shouldn't that even be the answer for people who, generally

(17:12):
speaking, want government to solve their problems?
The people who have this attitude, at least this guy is
going to be the mayor, which is about as close to you as it gets
when it comes to I guess you could be a borough president in
in New York City, they have 5 borough presidents and then
they've got the mayor of New York.
You could at least get one step closer, but he's about as close
as most of us will ever see to local control.

(17:34):
Your mayor is usually the most close to your personage, senior
executive in an executive role in government that is
accountable, as close as it can be to you.
The odds of you running into your mayor wherever you live, no
matter the size of your city, are infinitely higher than
accidentally running into your congressman, your senator, your

(17:54):
governor, your president. These people want government be
the solution? Fine, let it be the closest
version they're in. We will prove.
That there is no problem too large for government to solve
and no concern too small for it to care about.
OK. And if that's the case and you

(18:15):
want to do it at the city level so that municipalities are the
ones that are funding your security, are funding your TSA,
are funding your air traffic control towers, then there will
just be some places we can't flyinto.
It's like, oh, there's a strike in San Francisco.
We're going to have to fly into Oakland.
We're going to have to fly into Sacramento.
There are other options in most places that you could fly into.

(18:36):
Smaller airports, regional airports, uncontrolled towers,
whatever. That would make an awful lot
more sense. Rather than finding out that the
FAA is going to cut flights, which the FAA doesn't
necessarily run flights. They run the sort of
infrastructure on the back end. And it's a federal problem,
which means it's a national problem, when in fact, it
shouldn't be at all. I think the argument that they
are actually showing and Republicans are missing this

(18:57):
opportunity to go out and say we're proving that government's
a bad answer by showing you thatwhen you shut down government,
things that are so close to you are affected by people who are
so far away from you not voting.That's the claim.
That's my take on this. And wouldn't it be nice if we
had real, actual conservatives that looked at that and said

(19:20):
this is a huge opportunity, not the Smithers that that wander
around on their belly and hope that Sean Hannity will tell them
the answer and then they can agree with it.
And they're not voting for this thing.
And we don't have snap. And this not this is this is the
same exact argument being made. Apparently this talking point
has been marched out. So we're supposed to all believe
it. But there's nothing conservative
about this. Hence my claim.

(19:41):
If you're a conservative and you're in the Republican Party,
you are the rhino. Something is not like the others
and it's you. When you put in communist and
yes, communist policies, that's what Zara Mamdani is talking
about, it never works, he says. He doesn't.
I can't tell what the difference.
Is well he can describe. What the difference is he can
describe the differences for you.
The socialism is not the same basis of communism in this

(20:02):
country. You know that quite well.
The man wants to create the man wants to create government run
grocery stores. He wants free transportation,
both of which are impossible to do because how is how is he a
trigger word to try to undermineall of his policies?
He's not a he says he I don't need to I don't need to
undermine his policies. His under his policies undermine
himself. Well, because they've never
worked. Here's all I want him to do.

(20:24):
Tell me where they've ever worked.
They've never worked. He knows that, I knows that.
But what he's trying to do is promise everybody something that
they can't have. And the truth is, there is no
free lunch, just like there's nofree bus because.
And you knows that, and I knows that, and we all knows that,
says Byron Donalds from Florida.Why does he care?
It's New York again. If New Yorkers want this, I

(20:46):
think it's great. I think New Yorkers should see
if it works. I'm going to show you some
evidence of the people who thinkthat it might and how deep their
thinking goes, which is very, very deep.
They know an awful lot. Isn't it interesting That was on
CNN. That woman pushed back and said,
you can't say communist. Why not like his ideas are
relatively communistic. He basically espouses the

(21:06):
communist ideas. Well, they're democratic
socialism. What's the difference?
What's the distinction? Why are you making claim about
that? But the but the key here is, and
I'm I'm totally OK with them doing it.
By the way, I'm, I'm excited forNew York.
That's why I woke up so gleefully yesterday.
Allow people at the lowest possible level to make whatever
dumb decisions they like and if you don't like it, get out.

(21:29):
You have an option. You can vote with your feet, you
can run. Does it suck?
Yes. I mean, you might even lose
money. You might drive down property
values and and not be able to get out for the money that you
had. So what?
You've been living there. The warning signs have been
there for decades. Knock yourself out or don't stay
around and see what happens. At least it's at the local level
and you have a congressman from Florida who's complaining about

(21:51):
it. I think it's really funny.
Meanwhile, they're going to makethe same argument that the
federal government, this is not a conservative position that the
federal government is going to is, is, is responsible for SNAP
benefits and should be responsible.
No one's even contesting that this, this plan, this program
that this that, this amount of money that we hand out to people
on a monthly basis, that 42 million people in this country

(22:15):
are reliant on the furthest possible government.
At least if they're trying to get free buses in their city,
they're going to have to figure it out.
And they're going to see that the rich people that are going
to have to pay for it are going to move.
They can watch that happen very,very quickly locally.
They'd be like, oh, all the all the penthouses are empty.
All the financial corporations pulled shocks and moved out
somewhere else like they did like some of them did from

(22:37):
Chicago and moved down to Florida.
People are going to pick their businesses up and they're going
to go where it makes sense. The market will dictate it, but
at least it's at a local level. You can't leave the United
States if you want to be AUS citizen.
I had a conversation yesterday with a friend of mine who's a
high net worth individual and he's like, I may have to move to
Russia. Do you know how crazy it is that
we're talking about that? I said, yeah, that is crazy.

(22:57):
It's crazy because you cannot escape national policies.
We cannot escape the idea that 42 million people that what is
it, one in eight people in this country are reliant on the
federal government for, for, fornutritional benefits.
That seems wild. So the same man that's just out
there from Florida attacking a New York mayor, which doesn't
affect him even a little bit unless I guess a bunch of the

(23:19):
New Yorkers come down there is also trying to say that this is
we should cry about this shutdown.
It's just it's wild to watch thetheatrical presentation.
How, How dare you, you know, elect a person that I don't
agree with in a place that has zero impact or effect on me.
Meanwhile, let me go out there and demonize my colleagues

(23:39):
because they're not paying for things that are the opposite of
what my party theoretically saysit stands for.
The truth is, Betty, that the fault is Chuck Schumer and the
Democrats, and here's why. They had an opportunity to vote
to keep the government open to pay SNAP benefits.
They have voted no not once, nottwice, but now 14 times.
We actually put on the floor of the Senate to pay our troops, to

(24:01):
pay air traffic control, to playborder agents, ICE agents,
etcetera. They voted no.
And why are they voting no? Because Chuck Schumer is it has
this assumption that the Democrats won the presidential
election and that they control both chambers of Congress.
That is a fallacy. And So what they're arguing for
is that we should ignore the results of last year's election

(24:23):
just to do what Chuck Schumer says.
In short, that Republicans should negotiate against
themselves. But the the fallacy though,
Congressman, you guys are in control.
You have the House, you've got the Senate, and you have the
White House. Don't you have more and more
than enough power? No, we don't.
And the reason why is because ofthe Senate filibuster.
Now, I'm on the record, I think the Senate filibuster is
actually destructive of real compromise.

(24:45):
We won't get rid of it. I believe we should get rid of
it because what it actually stops Republicans and Democrats
in the Senate from doing is finding solutions where both
parties could work together in order to get majority votes.
What happens now is you have theDemocrats who were hiding behind
the filibuster saying that they're not getting their way.
They've argued for four different things.
At one point they were arguing for funding for NPR.

(25:07):
Then they were arguing to undo some doge cuts.
Then they started arguing over Obamacare premiums.
Premiums by the way the Democrats put in place when they
were in charge of the trifecta. They did not make them
permanent. They made them sunset this year
on purpose because they were COVID era subsidies.
None of that matters. None of that is these are all

(25:30):
talking about symptoms and you're not talking about the
disease. Wouldn't it be interesting if
they just said, hey, we're not going to do ACR, we're going to
go line by line and we're going to appropriate.
Oh, there's almost like this. Like I feel like, I feel like
somebody said that that was going to be the way we did
business and I feel like they did it like two years ago,
committed to never being in thissituation again.

(25:51):
I'm done with short term CRS. We are, we're resolved.
So what that means is you're going to see in the beginning of
this next year, we'll be walkingand chewing gum at the same
time. We're going to get the
appropriations process running on time as it's supposed to be
under law. The Budget Control Act of 1974
has very specific provisions in there on how this is to be done.
Congress hasn't done that for aslong as we can remember, but
we're going to get back to that because that's good stewardship.

(26:13):
The American people deserve it and the debt situation we find
ourselves in necessitates that. So, OK, let's, well, let's do
that. Let's just write individual
appropriations and you can fund or not fund SNAP and you can
fund or not fund the air trafficcontrollers.
You could fund or not fund ICE. You can fund or not fund Border
Patrol. You can pay or not pay for the
FBI. You can bitch about Arctic Frost

(26:34):
and the fact that a bunch of people were quote UN quote
spying on you. And then you can go and give
them their entire budget becauseyou're going to do that anyway.
All of these clowns are going togo out there.
They talk out of both sides of their mouth and they don't even
hold themselves accountable to the thing they said less than
two years ago. Why would we take them
seriously? He's out there climbing that.
The filibuster is the issue, brother.
The issue predates our lifespan.It's the 17th amendment.

(26:56):
We actually should know that. And if you paid attention to
anything, you would understand. Our American system has been
broken for as long as we can think about.
Why is it broken? Because the upper house is not
an upper house. It's a representative house,
just like the lower house. So all the dysfunction that you
have where you get a simple majority passes is now in the
thing where you needed a super majority and it was meant to

(27:19):
represent the Super majority that exists because it
represents the state houses. The Senate was not meant to be a
representation of you directly as an individual voter.
Direct elections of Senate actually subverted the
capabilities of our government to function.
And everything that has happenedsince then has included
significant and crippling national debt, just a seating of

(27:41):
authority over to the executive branch.
It's so predictable that if you break the way that the system
works, something will compensate.
And the thing that is compensated is essentially ruled
by Fiat from the executive. And so we act like we're really
outraged when Barack Obama or Joe Biden does the thing and
Donald Trump will do the same thing because you've

(28:01):
strengthened the executive. It's not the fault of honestly
on the any of them. It actually goes back way before
they were even born. It predates their time on Earth
because this this actually came after us.
It came after it was it was it was obvious that it would follow
that way. And there are certain things

(28:22):
that when you break the way thatour constitutional restraints
were set up. And I'm going to give you guys
an example in the second-half ofthe show.
I would argue to you that the United States Capitol Police,
who we covered the other day doing headshots and shooting at
people in the crowd on January 6th, constitute a modern day
Praetorian Guard. We're going to talk about the

(28:43):
historical context of what that means and why it should not only
be abolished, but why I think it's not.
It's not even constitutional that it exists today, but the
historical ignorance that existson both sides of the aisle.
And maybe it's willful ignorance.
And that includes people that you might even like.
Some of you found my program. Because the people that I am
talking about right now, and they don't even seem to realize

(29:03):
that they are doing things that are expressly outside the bounds
of our Constitution. We have a separation of powers.
You hear Democrats cry about it when it benefits them.
You hear Republicans cry about it when it benefits them.
Does anybody do anything about it and actually recognize it?
It doesn't seem like they do. And another thing that's really
interesting right now as people are starting to find themselves
and they go, good God, I thoughtwe voted our way out of

(29:26):
problems. I was pretty confident that
Trump was going to solve all theissues.
Didn't he say he was going to shut down the IRS and then
replace it with tariffs? That only works if you get rid
of a significant amount of the things that we spend our federal
dollars on, some of which would include defense funding, like it
has to go away. We cannot spend the amount of
money that we do. I found this article from NBC

(29:47):
and I found it fascinating because it actually coincides
with the CBS piece that I read earlier saying that we are
essentially in what's called AK shaped economy right now.
And you can imagine the letter K, which has a, you know, North
and South vertical, but it basically has two legs that come
out. That's also the first letter my,
my, my name. So that's easy for me to
remember. One leg goes upward and the
other one slants downward. And basically it is AK that is

(30:09):
slanted higher up on the, the vertical shaft such that people
that are at the top end of our economy, the highest earners,
the highest income people, they are experiencing growth, stock
market growth. If you make more than $100,000 a
year, you're likely not in a much worse position that you
were in last year. Even though there's continuing
inflation and, and, and certain things have gone sort of

(30:31):
sideways for costs, you're actually more or less
compensated with it, especially if you have money in the market.
Then you got the people on the lower end of that, that that
bracket and the people in the lower end of that bracket
overwhelmingly are finding themselves in worse and worse
situations. Nobody is talking about the
cause of this situation and muchof it can be attributed to to

(30:52):
income households that are struggling to survive, multiple
jobs where people are doing everything they can.
A marriage rate that is topplingin this country because we've
gotten away from traditional values.
And so we have actually gotten in an arms rate of ourselves.
What you've done is you've pitted the top income earners
who can get away with one income.
Oh, the people that are willing to tighten their belts and live

(31:13):
on one income, they're much moreinsulated against some of these
problems because they can alwayshave somebody step out and grab
another job. And this is historically what
happened, by the way. This is what Elizabeth Warren
wrote in the Two Income Trap, that when you saddle yourself up
and you make 2 incomes necessaryfor household survival, you
screw over not just yourself, because you've now put yourself

(31:33):
with two points of failure on what used to be a single point
of failure problem. And you could actually come in
and and insulate it. You actually have created a
problem where you're now in an arms race financially with
everybody else for child care, for schooling, for for anything
associated with that, multiple family cars, bigger houses.
Anybody that wants to hold a family and have two incomes has

(31:56):
actually gotten themself into anarms race with their neighbor.
And you've screwed over the people that actually had single
incomes because now they're looking at it and they have to
make more to be able to compensate for the higher
housing bids, the higher cost ofof transportation and so on and
so forth that came from these other families that could afford
it. The market flexes upwards to
take that money. It doesn't just allow you to

(32:17):
live at a higher standard, just the normal standard ends up
being more expensive because people are competing for it.
And so this is a basic market principle.
And when you see that K shaped economy, you can imagine why a
lot of people on the lower half are saying, yeah, I'm now voting
for free stuff because I'm seeing that other people are not
suffering the way that I am. And people have this instinct
for fairness and and jealousy isanother piece of it.
That's what socialism's always been like.

(32:38):
So they're out there pushing this.
And some of this is because Trump has not solved the
problems. He came in and say, imagine if
you decrease the housing pressure by getting rid of the
millions that we claim we're going to get rid of.
We're getting rid of like thousands, and we should be
getting rid of hundreds of thousands when it comes to
illegal aliens in this country and pulling them off the rolls.
They haven't fixed the voting systems.
You can hear people crying aboutit.
There will be cries about whether or not the the the

(33:00):
election results were fair and free in places like New York and
Virginia and in New York and NewJersey.
You'll hear that come up, but a mass, mass majority of people to
the point where if you added allother candidates up together,
they voted for Mandami, They voted for a guy that was
promising free stuff because people they covet what what

(33:21):
their neighbor has. And that also is a problem and
it has been addressed biblically.
We've walked away from those values in this country.
So you're going to have a hard time.
And the other crazy thing is themoney that you make in New York
City that is break even would make you wealthy in another
place. To the point where I think in a
lot of in a lot of situations, we did an analysis with my
sister years ago. She was making like 150,000 or

(33:43):
$200,000 a year in New York Cityand she was living in like a
little one bedroom tiny apartment and she's putting
money away. But she's not like wealthy.
She's not jet setting around, right.
She doesn't have like a second property out in the Hamptons or
something. So she's, you know, like a
strong middle class, single earning household.
But if she made 60% of that and went to live in Kansas City, she

(34:05):
could live like a queen. And you know, and she got
married, she probably could liveany better.
She might actually be happy instead of being miserable
because she lives in New York City, which is awful.
So there's this this inability, there's a tax on people's
inability to actually just calculate cost of living and and
relative standard of life and happiness because we'd be happy.
A lot of people that are living in these urban areas think that

(34:26):
you need to be able to do stuff.My father-in-law made an
argument to me one time that whywould I live anywhere than than
New York City? Because at 2:00 AM or three AMI
can get a pizza delivered and I can get my dry cleaning and my
laundry. And the question is, is like,
well, fine, OK, How many times do you do that a year?
Seriously. And all it would take is a
little bit of planning and then you don't have to worry about
that. Like you can go live for half
the cost down in Florida. Why are you guess where he lives

(34:47):
now? Florida.
It's funny how people don't evenlook out for their own
self-interest and they always make the argument against
conservatives. Well, you guys don't vote for
government programs that would give you things.
Maybe because we can see the 2ndorder effects and the 3rd order
effects, we can also see that our country is being eroded
slowly into garbage. And some of that is because
there's a lot of interesting voters.
And I'm going to show you a couple of them.

(35:08):
Let's talk about my friends overat Patriot Supply for a second.
If you think things could get bad.
I think that's true. Ever since COVID, millions of
Americans have been buying preparedness supplies.
Are you one of them? Do you have things socked away?
I hear the the vocal ones say yes.
The ones who are quiet in the chat.
I always know that you guys don't.
Emergency food. That's a good idea.
It's a big mistake to wait for other people to save you.
If you were in a COVID or, or ina SNAP benefits crisis and you

(35:30):
had three months of emergency food put away, maybe you
actually wouldn't have such an emergency.
You could wait for the benefits to turn back on, which they
probably shouldn't anyway. All right.
The other thing people forget about is that once you get these
things, these supplies, do you have a way to cook it?
Do you have a way to heat it? Do you have a way to actually
keep things going in a relatively reasonable way?
A lot of folks have thought not that far, so our friends at My
Patriot Supply have created the Black Friday Survival Special.

(35:52):
It's four weeks of food that's just gets you through a tiny
little emergency. There's $150.00 worth of free
gifts in there, including thingsneeded to prepare those
emergency meals, a cook stove and fuel and fire starters and
water purification and a bug outbag and a bunch more stuff.
Check them out. This is an all in one type kit.
Everyone is starting to do theirNovember specials end of the
year, so they start putting out their best deals.

(36:13):
Go to mypatriotsupply.com slash Kyle mypatriotsupply.com/kyle.
If you're watching on ATV screenscreen or on a computer screen,
you can hold your phone up and actually scan that QR code that
you see on the screen. Go figure.
This is a great Christmas gift. It's a thing that can help you
feel a little bit more secure about weird stuff that's going
on. And there are weird things.
There is a link in the show description.

(36:33):
So let's talk about some of these voters.
What do these voters look like? People, you know, are they, are
they who we think they are? I think they might be.
Here is kind of a little montageof why I am concerned that
everybody gets a vote and these ladies get the same vote that I
do and that you do. Maybe they shouldn't.

(36:54):
Sharia law starts now. Absolutely.
So run with Donnie. Islamic Caliphate, our brother
in Islam. Islamic Caliphate of New York
starts today, baby. There's just something so
electric, so satisfying about knowing that my MAGA parents,
wherever they are, are probably having a horrible night tonight.

(37:16):
I literally just got goosebumps thinking about it like they are,
they are in such a bad mood. Probably about the fact that
Zoron just won and Prop 50 is going to pass.
Like wow God I'm sorry. It just makes me feel good that
my MAGA parents are probably upset right now.
When the day starts with Dick Cheney and being dead and ends
with Mom Donnie winning. Yes, I'm so happy.

(37:44):
Oh my God, I'm so happy. She does seem happy, kind of
like I think Nancy Pelosi experiences happiness.
That's hard to watch. That's hard to watch that there
are people out there. Again, how sad are those human
beings? I woke up and I found out that
Mandami 1 and I cracked up. I laughed.
Why? Because I don't live in New
York. And if you're one of the people

(38:04):
that's mad because a guy who doesn't govern the city that you
don't live in, like, why do you care?
We should look at it as a sort of an arbiter of like the bigger
problem. But the like, at the end of the
day, the people of New York havespoken and that's what they want
to try and listen. They listen to his ideas and
they feel great about them. I think this guy's name is Cam
Higgsby. He's he's out talking to ladies

(38:25):
on the street. Yes, it's more ladies.
And these are New York voters. They're feeling awesome because,
you know, Montami has energy andenthusiasm and youth, the things
that really solve problems. What the hell, You know, give it
a try. I don't know why anybody would
care. If you're a magnet parent and
you're mad because your kid voted for somebody that's not in
your city, like, take a deep breath.

(38:46):
It's going to be OK. They will find out.
That's the best part about it. Maybe it'll be awesome.
What do you think Zoran's best policy is?
I think affordable housing, smaller classrooms, free buses,
lower rents, freezing the rents for rent stabilized buildings
sounds great. How do you how do you achieve
that? I think that he has really high
hopes and I think that he has a lot of energy and achieve it

(39:08):
through hope. Or I think he's going to achieve
by really having a smart way of dealing with people and picking
the proper people to work with him.
What is that smart way of dealing with it?
I think that he has a good, I think he has a good sense of, of
people around him. I think he makes good choices
and I think he works well with other people.
Where does the money come from? He will figure it out.

(39:31):
Like I think that he's he hasn'tyet.
I think nobody knows where they're going to do it first.
I think they work it out as theygo along.
They don't have a a plan. It's like.
I agree that I agree there's no plan.
It's a process. I I certainly agree there's no
plan, that's for sure. Question What is Mom Donnie's
best policy? Child care for all.

(39:52):
What's he going to do for child care?
He's going to make it available for everyone.
How's he going to do that? He has a plan in terms of taxing
and and saving money. And I think it's a really will
help everyone. What is the plan though?
What is the plan? Yeah, you're out here
campaigning for him, right? What's the plan?

(40:12):
You mean how is he going to fundthat?
There will be child care for for.
But how? How do you?
How do you achieve that? How?
Do you? Well, we've achieved it for
pre-K, for threes and you just expanded so that it's how do you
expand it? You use the schools, you use
existing facilities, and you useexisting tax base and money
that's being wasted on consultants to pay for it.

(40:37):
I don't hate the idea of using money that's being wasted on
consultants going away. That's not a terrible thing.
She said one thing accidentally that was intelligent.
Let me tell you how you how you do it.
Because maybe they don't know. These ladies don't seem like
they understand policy. The way that you get quote UN
quote, government funded AKA free childcare for every child
anywhere is that you basically wage and slave young women and

(41:02):
you outsource the work of raising and rearing children to
women who are not their parents.That's how you do it.
You take women and you say, I know that you had this child and
you claim because it's socially the thing you must do that this
is the most important person in your life and reality
biologically that should be the case.

(41:23):
It's like spouse, like honest toGod, I honestly think that that
women probably look at their offspring and they this is my
most important thing. And if men are doing it right,
they look at their spouse and say this is the most important
thing. I protect my wife because my
wife is the person that helps mychildren.
This is the way I look at it at least, right?
I always tell my kids my number one is my wife.
That doesn't mean they're my #2 per SE.

(41:45):
They're like #1.3 or something. They're just below.
Because if without my wife, I don't know how I take care of my
children, I don't know how I do it, and it would be incredibly
awful. I've seen it done and the
results often times are at the very, at the very most generous
way. They're really challenging.
It's not easy. Men are not perfect at raising

(42:06):
children alone. I think that's probably one of
the worst ways that it could go.It's got to be tough and like
it's a sub optimal thing. And that's why the divorce rates
and the and the low marriage rates are really bad, it turns
out. But OK, the only way that you're
going to get universal health care, sorry, universal child
care, which means every child isable to be deposited in some

(42:27):
sort of government institution, is that you are going to take
women and pay them less money than the woman who is working.
Because that's why the woman hasto go there, right?
Otherwise she would raise her own children.
You would raise your own child, except you have something and
the opportunity cost of raising your child is too much.
You'd like to go make $150,000 ayear.

(42:48):
So we're going to pay a young lady $30,000 a year to take care
of your kids. And by the way, she's going to
take care of like 5 other 6 or 10 or 12 or 15 or 25 other kids
too. That's how we do it.
So it's like a pyramid scheme. And the hope is is that you get
old enough and get enough eitheraccess to a better job or you

(43:09):
marry well enough that you also can now afford to be one of the
ladies at the top of the scheme,making the the higher salary.
So you also can outsource raising your child.
And then you get an entire generation that is not raised by
their own parents, that is not raised with their own values,
that are actually raised by the state.
Does that seem like a working system?
And crazy enough, Liz Warren knew this in the early 2000s,

(43:31):
like 2002. She was like, yeah, in order to
do this thing where you make women work outside of the home,
it doesn't mean that women can'thave jobs.
It just means that you can't raise children simultaneous to
also holding a high paying job without enslaving other young
women because that's who does it.
Do you guys want to go check in?Do any of you want to go to a
daycare facility with your grandchildren or your children,
check them in and realize that it's a bunch of dudes who look

(43:53):
like this, like bearded men who are going to look after your
babies. You're like, no, I don't think
this is going to be for me. So it's going to be women.
That's who's going to get done. What is the plan?
How does it work? The best part of it is I'm not
sure mom Donnie knows either andthey're going to find out.

(44:15):
When you take a 33 year old guy that talks really good, but his
but his policy isn't there. Here's what he just released.
He said good morning, New York. We're going to wing.
It good morning New York City. Thank you.
Last night we made history and today we begin the work of
making a new administration. Welcome to the transition.

(44:36):
This is the period over the nextfew months rebuild.
A City Hall that delivers on thepromises of our campaign to make
New York City affordable and to make government accountable to
the people it serves. As we prepare to govern, we'll
start announcing the leaders whowill help implement our agenda.
People like deputy mayors who oversee entire areas of
government, and the commissioners who carry out the
critical work of city agencies. These appointments will be

(44:56):
driven by excellence, integrity and hunger to solve old problems
with new solutions, Talking to organizers on the front lines of
the fight to improve our city government, Veterans with proven
track records, policy experts from around the country and the
world, and working people who know better than anyone what our
neighborhoods deserve. And this will be a period like
the campaign we ran in the City Hall to come, defined by

(45:17):
transparency. Because New Yorkers deserve a
government they can trust. On January 1st, I will be your
mayor. New Year's Day and a new era for
this city. Oh, and yeah, go ahead.
One more thing. Kick in.
Can you kick in to help fund what we're doing during this
transition? Because there's no government
money behind it. We need your money.
That's how we run. Does anyone think that's going
to work? By the way, that guy sounds a

(45:39):
lot like a more polished versionof Cash Patel.
He's going to do the transparency routine.
We're going to have new solutions to old problems.
Listen, I found the cohort of guys that he's going to be
leaning on. So that's good news.
At least we can evaluate them based on their ideas and their
ability to implement. Remember, we're talking about
executing government power execution, the executive side of

(45:59):
government. That means you got to, you know,
wield authority. It's implied violence, almost.
So you need masculine and aggressive men.
Not the kind of men who would work at a daycare.
Men who are going to change the world with their votes like
this. I like it.

(46:44):
I assume this is like a New YorkGay men's fire.
Is that what's going on here? It translated into Korean.

(47:04):
OK, OK, there. What do you think, guys?
Well, first of all, I, I don't know what that is, but I found
it and I and I thought like, man, that's really good.
I think that is AI think that's like a New York gay men's choir.
But I don't know for a fact. I just, I'm looking at the the
men and they seem unattached to women, unattached to children
and relatively not that fat. So that seems accurate.

(47:27):
If you know what this is, pleaselet me know in the comments
below. Very much like they're still
going. If you're listening right now
and you're not watching, I just turned the volume down, but
they're still dancing. They're still doing whatever the
hell that was. They're going to vote.
They're going to solve the problem.
I have to believe that those aregay men because I've been around
straight men for a lot of my life, and I don't know any of
them that would sign up and be like, you know what?
Yeah, put me in the video with the guy with the shirtless Asian

(47:50):
who's got kind of like the popcorn muscles.
I want to be in that. I want to go do a Glee video
saying that we're going to bringin Mandami.
Those are the first guys thrown off the building, I think,
whenever they decide to do it. All of this goes to my argument.
OK. If that's what men look like,
then I can imagine why you mightbe frustrated.
And also, you can see the women that are screaming and they're

(48:12):
angry about about their MAGA parents.
That only exists because they haven't actually had men in
their lives. And if that's the man in their
life, then you can imagine, you know, yeah, they might be
pissed. This lady kind of sums it up.
I think it's really good. We're going to get to government
agencies that need to be disbanded.
I'll give you that in a second here.
But let's let's keep having a little bit of fun with it and a
little musical. The interlude is never bad, by

(48:32):
the way. They they had rhythm, they had
beautiful harmony. Their voices were raised.
Even if it was a lame gay, gay message from a gay choir.
It's nice. I'm not mad at them.
If they could keep it tuned, they sound better than some
country music sensations out there.
Honestly, and I'm probably goingto get eaten alive for saying
this, I feel like a lot of womenhave forgotten their place and

(48:55):
we live in this inverted world and we keep.
I feel we got stuck in this whole feminism thing.
Feminism is a scam and now it's like trying to do it is
feminism. I don't care what anybody says.
Yes, we are equal in value, but we are not equal in traits.
We are different. Men and women are different and
I'm so sick and tired. Why are we fighting to be
something that we're not? I am not a man.

(49:16):
I will never be a man. And for those of you that make
that decision, I love that period.
But there are certain things that are just, y'all are
stronger than we are. We are more detail oriented than
you are. There are certain traits that we
naturally got from God based on the gender that we are.
And it's all based on survival. It's all based on human nature.
And so I feel like women have a lot of women, Not all women, but

(49:38):
most women have forgotten their place within themselves, within
themselves, within the the orderof family, within the order even
even like with God, you know, ifyou just want to start
blanketing statements like now, this is the thing.
If you are a masculine woman, that's fine, But stop acting
like you're feminine. If you want to be a boss, babe,
I don't need no man. You go do you, Boo, But stop

(49:59):
teaching that. That's the answer because I'm
sick and tired of this divide ofthe family.
I'm sick and tired of now good men like, and I'm I'm listening
to like stories, right? Good men are getting lazy in
dating. They're getting lazy in the
pursuit because women are makingeither everything too easy or
they're too hands off. So now what's the point in even
trying to date a woman when you're the man that that you

(50:19):
want me to be? Whoa, why would you date someone
if you're the man that you want me to be?
Yeah. Also, I found this, which made
me laugh because women, I mean, you'll know if you don't have
something to put that instinct on, it ends up going into weird

(50:40):
places. This would almost be a pal
cleanser, but it's too short. This is my last piece of
evidence. And then I'm gonna let a man
make the argument too. And then we'll go and we'll do
government stuff. When if you're worried about
things that are so far away fromyou that you could never, you
could never touch them or influence them, perhaps, just
perhaps, your priorities are misaligned.

(51:02):
And I do think that that is the case.
I think there are a lot of people who are not bad people,
but their instincts are misaligned because they haven't
been able to apply the things that that they're built for is
that woman just said the things that matter.
Imagine caring so much about pigs having never met a pig that
you're making videos about it and hoping the Internet will fix
this problem. I just saw a video that said

(51:23):
that because of the way that pig's eyes are placed, they
can't see the sky. So if someone with a pig could
like lift them so they can see the sky just so that I can be
OK. I even know what the sound was
going to be. Don't put a pig's head up to the

(51:46):
sky. It's almost like you think that
you should be able to solve the problems in creation, or maybe
they were actually created that way.
Did you see how tearful that Lady was?
Though? It's not from a bad place.
That's probably a really nice person.
She's probably a sweetheart. She says she's just misapplied
her empathy and her emotionality.
And so that's the argument that this guy makes.
And I think it's a strong argument.

(52:07):
And it's like we're looking at the symptoms and everybody wants
to fix the symptoms, but the symptoms don't talk to the
disease. And when I say that the disease
goes back, we can look at the amendments that have caused
significant problems that undermined our system.
And the reason why we have a Nancy Pelosi doing the awful
things that Nancy Pelosi did andthe reason why we have executive
power that's out of this all goes back up like it's over 100

(52:29):
years now. 19, thirteen, 16th Amendment.
You gave the federal government power to take your money first.
So why would you not think that they would come and be the ones
that hand out food to people andthey are the ones that are going
to be able to decide whether or not you get to eat you.
You delegated this authority. We did as a country like 110

(52:49):
years ago. And then we also destroyed our
system where we don't have a Senate that works.
You want to talk about getting rid of the filibuster?
How about you get rid of the 17th Amendment?
How about you stop direct electing senators because this
is nonsense. That's not how it's supposed to
be. All right.
And so the argument goes back a long ways ago.
And while we're getting rid of amendments, they got rid of the

(53:10):
they got rid of the 18th. How about the 19th?
This guy makes the argument and I don't think he's wrong.
And this is not a listen, here'sThe funny thing.
People hear the opening of this and they'll be really pissed.
They'll be like, it's not because people don't love women.
It's because we do love women. And and women who look at this
like objectively, they go just like that Lady was talking about

(53:32):
how things have been subverted and femininity has been stolen
from women. It that's yes, you, you can
either be the man that you want a man to be, or you can let a
man be the man that you want himto be.
One of them is that they campaign for this thing and,
and, and the world is not much better because of it.
Costs are out of control. Our national debt is insane.

(53:52):
And a lot of these things come from that exact same era as my
dad used to call it good idea, bad execution.
Is it good that women can vote in America?
I don't think so. And here's why.
Nearly every legalized moral atrocity of the last 100 years
was made possible by the female vote.
Abortion and homosexuality wouldlikely still be illegal if not
for the female vote. Mass immigration in the welfare

(54:14):
state wrote on the backs of the female vote.
Nearly every modern Democrat, including Obama and Biden, were
elected because of the female vote.
Even last night, the new Muslim New York City Mayor Mondami won
specifically because of the female vote.
The 19th Amendment has been a moral and political tragedy for
America. But why?

(54:35):
And women were not made to lead,but to follow and to feel.
This is God's design, and it's good within the family, in the
household. But emotions cannot be what is
used to rule and govern a nation.
Statistically and generally speaking, women vote for
whatever feels most kind or peaceful or safe to their
emotions. Women crave security and comfort

(54:56):
in whoever promises those thingswins their loyalty.
The problem is evil. Men know this and they exploit
it. For example, women are twice as
likely to men to be seduced intoan affair.
They are 26% more likely to be financially scammed online.
They are three. Times more likely to fall prey
to psychics and tarot card readings and astrology and

(55:17):
mediums. The same emotional vulnerability
that shows up there also shows up in politics.
Many call it suicidal empathy. So I believe that we should
return to the household vote where women share their thoughts
with their fathers or their husbands, and the men in their
life make the final decision. Men are not perfect, but they
are far more fit to rule with logic and they are less likely

(55:41):
to be deceived in political matters.
So I don't believe that we should repeal the 19th Amendment
because I don't love women. I believe we should repeal the
19th Amendment because I love America and I love American
women enough to protect them andour nation from their political
exploitation. What do you think about that?

(56:01):
Because I think that's a pretty coherent argument.
And I also like the idea that it's almost built in the way our
Constitution was originally written.
And the, and the, and the, the organization structure that the
American founders came up with are it was brilliant.
There was always a filter for the emotionality of the mob.

(56:21):
There was a filter that was built in so that the masses
didn't just move on whim and emotion.
That's why the lower house represented the people and the
upper houses represented the states, which was a level of
filtration up in the same way that you could have a cent of it
in your household. And by the way, if you think
that you're home, if you're, youknow, the the man of your house,

(56:43):
if you think it's not shaped by the women in your house like
you're a nut, of course it is. That's the person you talk to.
That's the person that that you hear.
Those are the problems that you see that exist and they are the
ones who experience in the world.
And so you want things that are good for them.
If you're a, if you're a good man and you run your house
properly. And then also a little bit of

(57:03):
less emotionality. Great example of this in my own
household. My wife will take, come to me
and say this person is having a problem.
And I'll say, OK, tell me more. And so she'll tell me about this
person's problem and she'll makea very emotional case because
she's seen this person suffering.
And she says, look, you know, what can we do?
And then we get to do an assessment without the emotion.

(57:25):
This is my end of it, 'cause I don't know this person and I
don't necessarily care. I care that my wife cares, but I
don't care about that person individually because I don't
know them. And I said, well, here's the
financial abilities that we haveto do it.
Here's the problems I see that might come up by us funding
their bad decision theater. And so we're willing to do maybe
a grocery buy, but I'm not willing to send them a check for

(57:45):
money when I've seen that they spend their money on fill in the
blank things, which are really dumb.
They have a brand new car and they have tattoos and they can't
take care of their kids and theycan't feed them.
That's not good. But I will give food for their
kids, right? So there's a, there's a, a
balancing act that happens there.
She wanted to say, can we cut them a check and help them out?
They're having hard times. And I look at it from a, a
little different perspective. And this is actually the way

(58:05):
that our, our, our government was set up to do.
It really was set up so that themasses could come in, in the
House of Representatives and say, we want this thing, give it
to us. And then the states would go,
but this thing is not quite goodfor you.
And we've reflected upon it. And without a mass majority, we
are not going to be able to pushthis thing forward or everyone
says this is a great idea. There's a thing that the man

(58:26):
said in that video that was verypoignant and some of you
probably heard it and it didn't and it just went past you.
He used the word tragedy. One of the benefits I have of
the the education that I sometimes squandered and didn't
always show up for is that I went to some classes in the
classics. And the classical definition of
the word tragedy is really relevant.

(58:47):
And you probably heard this evenin high school, if you guys
think about it, tragedy was a Greek play and it was high drama
and it showed suffering and human misfortune.
And the reason why tragedy is soimpactful from us, the reason
why it actually affects us so much, is because all tragedies

(59:08):
had a possibility of incredible and brilliant success.
It also hinges around usually a tragic hero.
The tragic hero is some super creature that has great ideas
but a fatal flaw. And that fatal flaw ends up
being the undoing. And it can be things like pride
or or called hubris. It could be things like like

(59:30):
narcissism. It can always be some sort of
character defect that ends up bringing the person down South.
Great potential and everybody can see it, but also everybody
goes, oh, crap, it's going to gobadly because this is a person
trying to do something that theyare unable to reach to.
And that's how it ends up being tragic.
And that's why it is so familiarto us.

(59:51):
It's also familiar to us that wecan look outside from somebody
else's perspective. Somebody in it, they think
they're making their own best decisions.
And you can look from the outside and you'd be like, oh, I
don't think this is going to go well for you.
I encourage you, you do this as a parent, you do this as a
friend, you do this as a mentor.Like I can already see your
downfall. That's because you can see the
tragic flaw in the plan and often times you can't talk

(01:00:14):
people out of it, so they go outthere and do this thing.
Isn't that interesting? He said.
It was a tragedy very similar towhat my father says.
Good idea, bad execution. It comes from a good place.
The place is making sure women feel that they are valued and
they are important, that they are part of the system and so
on. But doing so in a way that is

(01:00:34):
inevitably going to lead to freaking Zoran Mandami running
the city of New York. And the federal government being
the one who decides whether or not people get to eat in this
country at the tune of 42,000,000.
And our debt being saddled with our kids because we're kicking
it down the line and we are irresponsibly spending in a way
that no business would be able to do and no previous government

(01:00:58):
did. All right, I'm going to share it
with you. My other secret dangerous idea,
which is that we have a current and modern day Praetorian Guard.
We're talking a little bit aboutclassics before we do.
You may hear a Spotify ad here and that is to say, if you're on
the audio channel, there may be a break and you may hear
something. Just want to give you the heads
up like we do here. Follow us at
kyleseraphinshow.com. If you're listening on audio

(01:01:18):
somewhere else, if you're watching on video, you can
support us in any number of ways.
You can do it on kyleseraphin.com, which is
locals. You can do it on Rumble, you can
do it on YouTube. Make sure you guys have hit a
like if you're listening, I willask for it again, subscribe to
the channel. We continue to grow there.
Really cool to see we are clearly suppressed over on
Rumble, but I'm watching slow and reasonable and organic and

(01:01:40):
less suppressed over on YouTube as we continue to to build that
Channel over there. So thanks for all you doing
that. All right, allow me to make a
historical argument here. Do you all know what the
Praetorian Guard was also known as?
What the what are they called the cohort Praetoria, the
Praetorian Guard? And I'm giving a summary here

(01:02:02):
was the elite group, the Imperial Guard, that was
basically taken in from militaryveterans and those who are loyal
to the emperor in the Roman Empire.
They stepped around and they created this impenetrable wall
of safety. And then they became an
investigative force and they became sort of spies in a secret
police force. And they also did something that
is inevitable when you have folks who have masculinity and

(01:02:25):
power and violence at their disposal and they are able to do
something because they have the authority of the supreme rule.
Remember, the supreme branch, the, the primary branch of our
government is meant to be the legislative branch.
I'm going to make you the argument that our current
Capitol Police, the same people that were out there doing

(01:02:47):
headshots with with less than lethal when when lethal force
was not authorized and was not appropriate in a riot
environment. Those people constitute
essentially a Praetorian guard for the members of Congress and
the people like Nancy Pelosi. So as much fun as I've had in
the middle here, kind of pointing some things out and
suggesting to you that our governmental structure is

(01:03:08):
weakening itself because it actually did have a plan.
This is yet another turning point, which was in what is this
the year that they created this thing, 1828, April 29th of 1828.
Not a date that I've ever put inmy in my list of problems when
America was subverted. But this is truly a dangerous

(01:03:29):
thing, and I think we can see the inevitable outgrowth of this
sort of cancer. The Praetorian Guard did things
like counterintelligence, they did things like crowd control,
they did military intelligence, and they made sure that threats
to the Emperor were contained. What they also did is they made
sure that threats to themselves were contained.

(01:03:52):
Rotorian Guard was known for also insulating itself by
building up blackmail material, by finding out whatever sort of
dirty little secrets may exist between the Emperor and the
Emperor's family and those in power, and then held on to those
things to be able to use them astrading, you know, coins of the
realm when needed. It'd be a real shame if
everybody learned about this scandal that happened, or we

(01:04:12):
learned that you were this person, or that you had these
particular sexual improprieties,or so on and so forth.
It'd be a real shame if that stuff went down.
And so therefore, you should definitely side in our favor.
And we're going to advise you todo this.
And it turns out that extortion and blackmail have been working
for a very, very, very, very long time.

(01:04:33):
Thousands of years of human experience says that the
Praetorian Guard is what my friend Steve Baker refers to the
Capitol Police as these days. And I'm going to make the
argument to you right now. And this is probably novel to
most people, and it's also kind of nuanced.
But I think it's really important.
If we're going to have a Donald Trump that goes out there and
tries to regain footing with young people, one of the things

(01:04:53):
he's have going to have to do ishave a functional legislature.
And I'm not sure you're going toget the 16th and the 17th
Amendment to go away. And I'm pretty confident you're
not going to be able to fund theAmerican system with tariffs.
So those might be lost causes. So what we could start doing is
dismantling some of these weaponsystems that exist and actually
just acknowledging that this particular joint resolution of
Congress, which took place in 1828 is unconstitutional.

(01:05:17):
And he could actually have the Attorney General start taking
real actions against things thatare dangerous within the
government. You want to talk about de
weaponization? How about we get rid of a group
of people that have wield ridiculously high amounts of
power and potential blackmail material over our congressmen?
Everyone always asks how it happens.

(01:05:37):
We've seen significant corruption in the Capitol Police
and I don't think anyone's ever evaluated them until January
6th. I don't think anybody has ever
taken a light and pointed in that corner and said what in the
actual hell is going on there? So here's the argument that I'm
going to make. There are two parts of police

(01:05:59):
power in this country. Police power is the ability to
define and project governmental power on you, the individual
citizen. Police powers are a part of a
functional government, and they come in a forked sort of a
format. Part 1 is the legislative part
of the police powers. That's the definitions and the
statutory requirements and the appropriations and fundings to

(01:06:22):
create whatever it is that they're doing.
And the second part of it is, isthe execution of that.
In America, the brilliance of our system is a separation of
powers. We take the legislature, the
people who decide what it is that we will do and how we will
do that and how we will fund it,and we make them separate from
the person that actually implements that thing.

(01:06:43):
That's what the executive and the legislature are constantly
in conflict with. And we have a judicial branch
that is meant to go out there and decide whether or not they
are within the bounds of the rules as decided by the like the
rules of the game, which is our constitution.
Here's where it gets really interesting.
This act, this joint resolution from 1828, established the

(01:07:08):
ability to protect the buildingsin the grounds of the US
Congress and provide security and so on for the care, the
preservation, the orderly keeping, the policing.
Uh oh, And those portions of theCapitol, they're exclusively
used by and the occupation of either House of Congress,
respectively. They created this thing called
the from the Committee of PublicBuildings and Grounds as they

(01:07:30):
moved the US Capitol and they took all these actions and the
Congress stopped meeting in Philadelphia and they moved into
Washington, DC. You got this strange little
animal that came up. And so you have an executive
agency in the Capitol Police, anexecutive agency that's
straightforward and, and with no, with no palms about it is
doing executive function. You have an executive agency

(01:07:52):
doing executive functions, policing, arresting, security.
What was the thing that we read about the Praetorian Guard,
counterintelligence, bodyguards,crowd control, threat
intelligence units. But they work under a
legislative organization. They are part of the legislature
and they cannot be. It cannot exist under the
separation of powers. And if you go back and read

(01:08:14):
Article 1 and Article 2, I actually pulled up the
Constitution here and I want to quote it specifically.
Article 1, all legislative powers here in granted shall be
vested in a Congress, the UnitedStates, which shall consist of a
Senate and a House of Representatives.
And it goes on to define what that is.
Article 2 says the executive power shall be invested in a

(01:08:34):
President of the United States of America and she, he shall
hold his office during a term offour years and together with the
Vice President, same chosen termelected as follows.
All executive power. You cannot have executive power
that is implemented underneath the legislature.
They can fund it, they can appropriate for it.
They can write single issue of bills instead of doing
continuing resolutions. Like Mike Johnson said, you

(01:08:56):
should not have executive function under the legislature.
And I'm going to give you an example of how we know that's
true. Consider the judiciary.
They're the third branch of government.
They're considered high value dignitaries for the United
States, for the United States government function, right?
SCOTUS, Supreme Court justices, US courthouses.
Who protects them? Have you ever been into one of
these places? They're protected by the United

(01:09:18):
States Marshall Service. So then you think, well, OK,
that's fine. But the marshals are part of
the, the DOJ. They're part of the, you know,
oh the wait. They're part of the Department
of Justice, which is run by the attorney general, which is
appointed by the president. Because the Marshall Service are
an executive agency. They provide security.
You guys heard about this specifically when you heard

(01:09:39):
about the Brett Kavanaugh wannabe assassin, right?
Found by protected by US Marshall Service.
The judiciary does not have its ability to call out its own
special bodyguards, its own praetorian.
It doesn't have that. It's not authorized to under the
Constitution. Article 3 does not allow it.

(01:10:01):
Article 2 powers are now being possessed by the Article 1
branches of government, and that's not acceptable.
And so when we have people that are completely ignorant of it
and we've started cutting apart,who's to say?
My friend Steve Baker has been very, very convincing to me that
the number of abuses that we saw, including things like

(01:10:22):
Lieutenant Michael Byrd shootingAshley Babbitt.
The reason that these people were still in that job is
because they were part of the dignitary protection unit.
They were part of the unit within that Capitol Police,
within that broader Praetorian Guard structure.
They were the inside circle. It doesn't mean that they're
elite. It means they're the people that
would be the closest to the people that make the bad
decisions. And so if you've been drunk with

(01:10:43):
a congressman and gotten away with it, even though you were
driving the government vehicle on duty, or you've written hot
checks and you've stolen from our government, but you didn't
ever lose your job over it, why would that be?
Unless you wielded some sort of dangerous power, which is
exactly what the Praetorian Guard used to do.
It starts off as an organizationmeant to protect the people that
are in power, and it ends up assuming its own power itself.

(01:11:07):
Now, they could write an appropriation and say that the
executive has to go out and hiresome contractors, and we're
going to pick our own contractors.
But at some point in time, the executive should be able to
decide whether or not it's goingto actually implement that.
Instead, what we have is a, an agency inside the Capitol Police
that is 100% accountable to the speaker of the House and the
Senate Majority Leader. They've got their own private

(01:11:30):
police force. Do you remember the outrage that
people had under Joe Biden when they were talking about
expanding that influence? By the way, the way that this
joint resolution is written, theway that this, this 1828
authorization goes down, it saysthat they have nationwide
protection capabilities for anywhere that there are Congress
people. They don't have that authority
under the, under the the Constitution to grant that.

(01:11:54):
So inevitably we're going to have problems and there's always
going to be the potential for corruption within the the
executive branch. But at least we know the powers
are meant to reside there. They have over 2000 employees.
Why would it be that they have something like four or five
times the number of the members that are actually even elected
into those offices? That's how many people they have

(01:12:15):
there to patrol and police the grounds and to do their stuff,
to do investigations and then togo out there and do arrests and
enforcement. I get a real problem with this.
I think this is a really ish like a big issue that we're
going to see. And as you wait, my friend Steve
Baker to reveal the things that he's going to reveal and the
identity of the pipe bomber, some of whom are accurately

(01:12:36):
being guest online. But the real question is who is
this person and what is the backstory there and why is it so
troubling and how was it allowedto happen?
And I'm going to argue that thisis the first branch or the first
government agency. That should be a easy, easy win.
It should not be allowed to exist.
And if it does exist, it needs to be brought underneath the

(01:12:56):
executive and taken control of by that because we should not be
able to have an executive function working against the
executive, which is what I thinkhappened on January 6th.
And the second problem it is, isthat because it is a government
agency like so many of them, youguys mentioned the CIA, you guys
mentioned the FBI, there's othergovernmental intelligence
agencies. They also have the ability with
the sort of long term actors there to look out for

(01:13:18):
themselves. And Hoover was a famous, you
know, for, for at least that's what we're told.
It was a lot of exploitation that the files built up by
Hoover and the blackmail capabilities there and
extortion, they were long running.
This is why we actually have term limits on that, on that
job. So somebody doesn't absorb it
for life and then just become more powerful than the
president's, which may have beenthe case with J Edgar Hoover.

(01:13:40):
It's, it's pretty crippling whenyou see that we had such a
brilliant system put together and then we go out there and we
have destroyed it ourselves. And it's almost always in the
name of safety and security. If you'll notice the votes for
Mondami, it's going to be about food security and it's going to
be about safety and the ability to move places and, and feeling
good and the emotionality of nothaving police officers being

(01:14:01):
mean. Because sometimes to be a man is
to be mean and to be harsh and to subdue the world around you.
And that's not nice. So wouldn't it be better if we
just had social workers and no NYPD?
There is a claim that that's what he that, that that's the
way to go about it. I think you guys will find out
that it's not good and it's not exclusive to our side that
people do not know that this system exists.
I'm just going to play this because it's really funny to me,

(01:14:22):
and then I'm going to go and critique it.
So for all of you that are listening to folks out there
that talk a big game and they look nice on TV and they have
words that feel good, this is Benny Johnson.
And I believe that he's at a turning point event.
Yeah, I'm, I'm a positive he's at a turning point event.
Benny Johnson had a turning point event and he makes a false

(01:14:43):
claim. But the words life, liberty and
the pursuit of happiness or property are somehow in the
United States Constitution, which of course they are not.
They're part of the preamble to the Declaration of Independence,
which is not a governmental document.
It has no standing. It's an aspirational document.
It's a mission statement, but itdoes not have legal power.
So that's absurd. And then he says that we're
going to we this administration as though he's part of the

(01:15:06):
executive. I guess he might be, he's
speaking on their behalf in someway is going to make housing
affordable. The federal government has no
business getting into housing. So these people that are out
there that are Republicans, it'sthe reason why I am not a
Republican is because they do not represent conservatives.
There's nothing conservative about this speech.
This is like populism and nonsense.

(01:15:28):
Final thing I'm going to say here is that in the
Constitution, it says life, liberty and the pursuit of
property in certain other instances, and that's something
that we've lost in this country.I'm particularly horrified that

(01:15:49):
the American dream of owning a home is so out of reach for all
of the young people here. If you are 35 and younger, home
ownership rates are at 30%. That's down by half from a
generation ago, and we need to fix that.
Who here wants to own a home oneday?

(01:16:10):
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, I'm not one to break news in front
of massive stadiums of people, but I want to announce right now
a massive interagency and instr inter institutional effort in
order to encourage and provide resources from a massive federal

(01:16:35):
level and a legislative level toensure that we reignite the
American Dream for first time young home buyers.
It will happen in this administration.
We are going to make the American Dream affordable again.
We are going to make owning a home great again, and we're

(01:16:58):
going to be able to raise our families, our Labradors, in
these beautiful houses with white picket fences.
We're going to live like our grandparents because you know
what? They had a lot of nice things
figured out. And you can sit on your front
porch here in Alabama with your shotgun, happy in your truck
home. What is that?

(01:17:24):
Who? Who's buying into that?
So the federal government's going to come in and mandate
that you have access to housing.I don't get it.
I love it when our our our chat fact checks me by the way chat
show me show me where that is inthe Constitution.
Allow me to read you the preamble, which is what people
think it's in we the people of the United States in order to

(01:17:48):
form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure
dramatic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote
the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to our
self and our posterity do ordainand establish this Constitution
the United States of America. So we have ignorant people out
there making non conservative claims.

(01:18:10):
And yes, affordability is an issue, but there's a systemic
problem, which is that you're just ignoring the role of the
federal government. There is nothing the federal
government should have to do with the cost of housing.
It's a local market problem and the only reason it's a problem
is because the federal government keeps getting
involved in these things. It's really gross to watch it

(01:18:31):
happen because you got standing ovation and cheers and it's the
same kind of cheering you'd havefor this lady who's finally out.
Nancy Pelosi, big news of the day.
Who's she going to turn over thereins to?
Who's going to pick it up? Who's going to be the next
person that makes all the same bad decisions?
Because I don't see a big difference on one side of the
aisle or the other. They just, they promise things

(01:18:53):
that are not within the scope ofwhat they're supposed to do.
And I don't want it. So I don't know where he's going
to go and I don't know what's going to happen next.
I'm going to try to come up withsome solutions for Donald Trump
and he won't hear them. But we can at least have the
ideas that when we go out and someone says, what are the
answers, we'll at least have some of these answers.
So I'm going to work on some of those for you as well.
I didn't want to miss this opportunity to tell you that our

(01:19:16):
jet did travel and it might be aa segment that we start doing
more frequently. There's a segment I'd like to do
and I'm going to probably try tointroduce it in the future, but
it's the something about Cash's travel, Kyle's, Kyle's jet
setting something. Someone made me some music for
it, so I'm going to play that for you right now.
If you guys want to send me bumper music for segments, I

(01:19:37):
will create a segment for it because it's something we're
going to do anyway and it's super catchy.
If you didn't hear this online, then now you have and we'll
start making it part of the gameevery movie makes.
And there it is on the screen Yesterday, sometime late last
night, our time, the FBI executive jet flew from just

(01:20:00):
outside of Tokyo over to Seoul. And he is now in South Korea.
And this is a super fun gym. I'll put this over for those of
you who want to be able to download it and make it your
ringtone. Nashville I.
See it? All it's not a petty crime yeah,
I'll put that over on on locals for you guys who want to hear it

(01:20:22):
because it made me laugh quite abit Somebody put some effort in
this. There's some really talented
people out there. So there you go folks.
We'll make a segment about this because I'm going to keep
following it. And since they're not going to
back down on this and they are going to keep abusing our stuff,
the other pregorian guard, the FBI, we should we should police
our own. And so so-called our team.

(01:20:43):
All right. That's pretty fun.
All right, that's it for today'sshow.
I hope you guys will follow us over on the places that you can.
You can support the program by hitting a like over on Rumble.
You can do the same thing on YouTube.
Those are free. You guys can subscribe to the
channels also free, easy to do. If you're on X, find us on one
of the monetized places and we'dappreciate that too.

(01:21:04):
If you're watching on replay. If you hadn't, check out
Spotify, you should be doing that.
It's Kyle serifandshow.com, kyleserifandshow.com to get to
the Spotify sort of cheat code. You'll be able to do audio and
video over there and I think it's the best user experience
after the fact. So check those out out like the
places where you can. We'll see you guys again
tomorrow. I feel like that was a kind of
our palate cleanse, if you will.And I look forward to seeing you

(01:21:26):
all again tomorrow with whateverthe hell is coming our way on
this Friday. Thanks for listening to the Kyle
Seraphin Show streamed live weekdays on rumble.com/kyle
Seraphin Follow. Kyle on Twitter, Truth Social
and Instagram at Kyle Seraphin.

All Episodes

DESTROY IT! For America to survive, some government agencies must GO! | Ep 671

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Ruthie's Table 4

The Joe Rogan Experience

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}DESTROY IT! For America to survive, some government agencies must GO! | Ep 671