SOCIALISM was Already HERE: Federal Judge Orders Trump to Pay SNAP without Funding | Ep 672 - 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, Second Amendment defender, and recovering FBI
agent Kyle Seraphin. Well, hello my friends, welcome

(00:39):
today's Kyle Seraphin show, a little bit behind the 8 ball
here. We did our call in show last
night, which was a lot of fun, but then I forgot to put the
proper stream key in so we streamed to the wrong stuff.
So here we go. We're going to be talking today
about American socialism and ourinstinct as conservatives to to
be repelled and disgusted and hateful of socialism or

(01:01):
communism or whatever it is thatyou choose to call it.
And the fact the matter is it's been here for a really long
time. And I think that we're actually,
I think we're, we're seeing moreand more evidence of that.
And we're also seeing evidence that the people that are
so-called on our side, the conservative ish people, you
know, they look like us, They sound like us.
They got kids like us. They go to church.
They don't have a problem with socialism either.

(01:22):
And they haven't, which is why we have it, which is why it is
pervasive. And there's nothing that
illustrates it more than SNAP benefits and a federal judge
going out and telling people specifically in the Trump
administration that I don't carewhether you have a federal
budget or not, you will fund this entitlement program that
exists for people. And those people are one in

(01:43):
eight, and they are your neighbors.
And if you get into the broader category of government
assistance at the federal level,much more broadly, it's almost
one in three people in America are reliant.
And that means for every you andyour neighbor that go to work,
that means there's a third person that is going to have to
benefit from your laborers. And that's socialism.
I don't care what you call it. It might be percentage

(02:07):
penetration, it may not be 100% complete confiscation of
everything and then redistribution.
But doggone it, it's really awfully close.
That's hard to do. I'll tell you what we don't do
here is we don't do anything forfree, but we also provide you a
free product in so much as we can have your attention span.
We're going to get into today's program with a bunch of fun
stuff. I think going to be tongue in
cheek. I think we're going to be a

(02:27):
little bit clever about it, but I also think it's a bit sobering
to remember that the people thatyou thought were going to vote
your way out of this, it didn't work.
And before we do all that, let'stalk about things that are
actually capitalistic in nature and that's self-interest and
your interest in having, I don'tknow, comfortable undies and
spending your own money on them.I have this little deal.
Maybe you guys have the same thing.
When I have something that I really like to wear, I make it

(02:50):
something that I hold onto and Idon't wear it as frequently in
some ways because I'm like, I want to save it's weariedness.
I may be the only one who does this, but one of my best buddies
told me he does it with a jacket.
So I get that this may be a realthing.
Let's talk about my friends overat Undertac.
The website is Undertac UNDER tac.com.
Right now you can use the promo code Kyle Wynn.

(03:10):
It's 7 letters KYLEWIN. What if we told you that by
using that code you could win $100,000 in gold bars or
$100,000 check that's hand delivered to your door.
Undertac is the most comfortabletactical underwear and they've
teamed up. The group called Shared Sweeps
to give you a shot at a truly life changing prize, but the
clock is ticking. Your chance to enter will end on

(03:32):
December the 2nd. That means you basically have
this month and once it's over and that's it.
How it works is every dollar youspend at undertac.com with our
promo code is going to give you entries.
Some will give you 2X, some willgive you 3X, some will give you
5X the entries and you can stackup to 75 total entries into this
contest. The more gear you buy, the
better your odds will be and thecode is Kyle win.

(03:55):
It will save you 10% off the sticker price there and it
automatically locks in your entries.
Their gear you've built performance so you're going to
be able to get outstanding undies that are super
comfortable. They've got American made socks,
they've got hoodies and T-shirtsand so on.
They're going to outlast the competition.
They're very comfortable stuff. I've been wearing their T-shirt
to the gym quite a bit as well. undertac.com.
That's undertac.com. There's a link in the show

(04:16):
description including the terms and conditions and use that
promo code Kyle win. It's a little bit longer than
our normal for 10% off instantlyand you're shot at $100,000 in
gold. That that can be pretty cool.
I, I don't hate that at all. Let's get in today's program.
Let's talk about socialism, which is about the opposite of
somebody handing you gold bars. It's them taking the gold bars
and give them somebody else. So let's go ahead and do that

(04:38):
starting right now. I want to lead off with a
question and the question has todo with an interesting little
thing that just happened, which is that we announced it
yesterday. Nancy Pelosi is going to retire
right after 40 years. It seems coincidental that that

(05:00):
also happened during a time whenSteve Baker said that he might
be announcing a pipe bomber. We're going to talk about that
too, in just a second here. But I feel like we should, I
feel like we should feel like weshould bring on that one guy.
Hey, it's Steve, friend. What's going on there?

(05:21):
Amateur hobbyist podcaster. Hello my friend just here
hanging out with my buddy. I am indeed a hobbyist podcaster
under no circumstances representing any particular
armed department, agency or Bureau of the federal
government, United States of America.
Hanging out with my buddy, making sure that he's not paying
me any money for my time. But what I make up for it was
with pearls of wisdom, and from you some Tomahawks.

(05:45):
Hold on, let's go full screen. There you have it.
You have the full screen. What do you got there, Steve?
What's going on over there So. You know, I earlier this week I
received a package and you said that it was a subpoena, which
got me. Nervous.
Hold on. I said this people should.
I saw that it was delivered, so I sent Steve a thing and said,

(06:06):
did you get the package? I think you've got a subpoena at
your door. And equally surprising, but way
more awesome, was the fact that you sent me a matching set of
Tomahawks. Look.
At those. Because these are solid.
Now, as a take away from this, my wife probably would have been

(06:26):
happier if it had been a subpoena, but my boys, because
they are boys, thought it was awesome, as did the other people
who are texted pictures of it. And you know, folks should know
there's a principle in law enforcement, military, one is
none and two is 1. So Kyle fully embraced that and
he felt necessary to send me notone, but two.

(06:49):
Dumb. Let's go full with that.
Look, it's just listen, here's the deal.
It's a reminder that the war continues and regardless of what
what sort of slight wins we've had, there's a possibility that
at some point we run out of ammoand we're going to be in close
quarter. So that's what I was thinking
about. And yeah, and, and our buddy
Garrett has a set as well 'causethat's the.
Right thing to do. I do need to add to.

(07:10):
I mean, I think Madam Friend might have been displeased with
you, but she gave away the game earlier today because she is a
secret Serafinista, a fan of a Kyle Serafin show, because we we
got into one of these just I don't even remember the topic.
Little squabble squabble Maritalarguments that.
Discussion. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Polite. Discussion.

(07:30):
And I won man. I won the argument.
OK, what was the argument though?
We've been talking about women. I did my apology, to which she
quickly and adequately replied. I already said I'm sorry.
Oh, that's a really good one. That's a, that's a, that's a man
tactic. Actually, I'm not sure if we
should be giving that secret away.

(07:50):
Trade secrets. Yeah, yeah.
Ladies, if you don't know, a really good tactic that men may
use is that if they have not apologized and they don't intend
to, but they want to claim ownership of the apology,
they'll just simply say I said I'm sorry.
To which point now you're on your back foot because you
apparently didn't acknowledge the apology.
My buddy used to do this with me.
He would do, he would do something and I'd be like, bro,

(08:10):
I can't believe you did this andthis and this this.
And he's like, yo, I said I'm sorry.
And I'm like, oh, my bad. And then I went like, wait a
minute. No, you didn't a hole.
You never said you're smart. You're just, you just claimed
that you said you're sorry to put me on my back feet.
It's a good tactic in in a in a male female argument for sure.
It's ingenious, but I also have to go back to the the disdain of
the Tomahawks. It's probably a reason why we do

(08:32):
need to actually get rid of the the women's suffrage movement.
Yeah, they've suffered long enough. 19th Amendment.
She didn't understand why you got them or why they were cool,
is what it sounded like. Precisely.
I mean the fact that you don't know why this is awesome and
probably necessary, and the factthat we have two now because one
is none and two is 1. And you could, if you've been

(08:53):
nice about it, I could have offered you one, but now it's
just double amount of axing power from me.
Right. All right.
I'm going to work on kydex, kydex carriers so we can attach
them to body armor. And I'm just saying we may run
out of ammo at some point in time.
What we will not run out of ammoon Steve is this one guy who
just keeps doing this thing. It's a this is a moment called

(09:17):
Cash Me in the Jet. And what you're seeing on the
screen right there, if you guys are listening, you're missing
out on a wonderful map of South Korea and Beijing, China.
To put this down quietly in the background.
This song is super catchy. Last night I got notification as

(09:37):
I was texting Steve Baker and checking in on our friend and
making sure that he was OK and not being killed by spies that
the federal government employeesand got notification.
Hey, the jet, the FBI jet is wheels up and it left South
Korea, Seoul and it headed in and they lost contact and
transponders near the Beijing, China region.

(09:59):
And then it set down and then the plane returned back onto the
ADSB transponder website and landed it back again in Seoul.
So it sounds like it was a drop off.
I was actually really curious how that would work.
I didn't understand how they didthat.
But what they do is they put thejet down, they drop the director
off with detail and then the jetreturns to safe territory in
South Korea. So that actually is not the
dumbest thing I've ever heard. It just means that we paid twice

(10:22):
as much to be able to put in there.
It's going to be 4 flights for him to visit China from Seoul as
opposed to two. What's money anyway though in
this point? How much of the data is getting
hoovered up while he's there? But I mean, I guess it doesn't
really matter. I hope they have just burner
phones that they they ditch him.But remember, the whole reason
that he needs a private jet is so that he could be in constant
communication at any moment. And he needs skipped up comms

(10:46):
with the with the Federal Bureauof Investigation back in the
United States where his actual job is as he hangs out in
Chinese. So I don't know what's going on
over there, but I thought I would let people know that we're
not done with it. We're not done talking about it.
And we are going to continue on pointing out what I would say is
hypocrisy. By the way, the government still
shut down. And you know, what's also going
on is we've talked about dropping off a little bit of
information on a pipe bomber. Yes.

(11:09):
Yes, yeah, a little bit's been sneaking out in across the
social medias and hopefully we get some formal reporting from
some big J journalists soon. But while that's happening, it's
also notable that the guy who theoretically would have the
agency that's responsible for finding this thing has been
putting out a $500,000 reward for the last four straight
years. He's notably absent as this is

(11:30):
all burning. I'm going to play a Glenn Beck
clip and then we're going to talk about it, you and I,
because we know a little bit about this thing.
So let's do that real quick. I think it is the biggest
scandal of my lifetime. There is a major development in
the January 6th pipe bomber investigation.
Blaze News has the exclusive. Its lead suspect is at the
highest levels of government. And Steve joins me now.

(11:52):
How long have you been working on this story?
I've been pulling the threads onthis for exactly 4 years.
If anybody I never wondered why they made such a big deal out of
arresting Steve. This is why I was so shocked by
what I saw. I immediately took it to a
source in one of the most important highest level

(12:13):
investigative federal agencies in the country and I said you
have to see this. After they looked at it for
about two hours, the response that I got back was only F.
He's one of us. And when you find out the
position, this now will implicate so many people at the

(12:35):
highest levels. What's your confidence level in
this story? I can give you forensic
estimates. The analysis of the hoodie
bomber on the evening of November 5th compared to the
gate analysis of this individualin private life and at work.
The actual software hit at a 94%accuracy.

(12:55):
Then human analysis from the experts in intelligence is much
higher. They looked at it and went, my
God, that's it. You've got it.
In a world not gone mad, this would be a best selling book and
a major blockbuster movie. When it all comes out.
This going to involve everybody.I mean, this is really bad,

(13:17):
really, really bad. This apparently just has to be
done right because of national security, I'm gathering.
Is that right? And so they've got to take care
of things they've got to take care of.
Then the story will be released.Just so you guys know, when he
talks about Steve Baker being arrested, let's not forget

(13:38):
there's my friend on the screen right there that Steve Baker
being walked out by two FBI agents.
I don't know what the odds are, Steve, Steve friend, that if you
were to pick two agents at random from the Dallas field
office that they would both be black.
But I think it's pretty low. So we've got this kind of really
nice optic from the Biden era time.
You've got this thing going on where you've you've taken him

(14:01):
out in handcuffs, which is totally unnecessary.
And they went ahead and tossed him in the car just like that.
Steve has not forgotten that moment.
As you can imagine, many people probably have moved on from it
because it's not it's not in their their, their face every
single day. We kind of move on with the new
cycle. But having your government throw
handcuffs on you and March you into a car and then put a belly
band on you and leaving in a prison cell for a couple hours

(14:23):
with meth heads, that doesn't tend to go away.
And that's why I think he's beenso diligent on this thing.
He certainly has. I mean you're talking about five
year close to investigation if you go back to when the origin
time was and that. Yeah, I keep making the mistake
it 20/20/21 January 2021 to 26. Will that make it 5 years?
That will be 5 years. Yeah.

(14:43):
So over 4 years he's been doing this particular story, but five
years in general that this has been going on for sure.
It's just nothing but really shoe leather.
He he got a little bit of I guess privilege because he got
access to the closed circuit TV of the capital that Mike Johnson
assured that we were all going to get.
Or was that Kevin McCarthy, one of the two, maybe both of them

(15:04):
sort of indiscernible. Whoever you put in the speakers
here, you get the same 1, you get John Boehner, right?
That would be a friends law 101,and we didn't get that, but
Steve was one of the few journalists who did get access
to it. He doesn't have subpoena power
though, doesn't have search warrants.
I mean, he's just doing nothing but good old fashioned
investigation, grinding, workingsources, pulling on threads, I

(15:24):
think is the way he explains it.And it takes a long time, and
he's been able to put together this entire thing and it's
gotten to the ear of one of the most prominent radio show TV
personalities, his ultimate employer, Glenn Beck, who felt
comfortable enough with platforming him, Not necessarily
just just at The Blaze in general, in light of how he was
persecuted by the federal government as a misdemeanor

(15:46):
terrorist, but now has stood by him and platformed him a couple
days ago to promote the story. I think it's probably
legitimate. OK, so I've done enough
listening to what Steve has to say and I can't speak about it
on the record, but he's explained to me the logic and
the the investigative path and all of it is very, very sound.

(16:06):
And what they did in order to come up with the answer, the
name of this woman is out there.So people will find it on social
media. And if you think you found it,
you did because he did it on purpose.
He put it out there. So if you think you're some,
like, sleuth who read through the lines and you somehow are
going to scoop the man on the story that he's been working on
for four years, you're a fool. And I see a lot of these social
media personalities going, I named it look like, look what

(16:27):
I've got. It's like, yeah, but you don't
have any. You don't have any proof.
That's just you saying I read what Steve Baker did.
So shame on these people that are out there trying to click
bait their way to it. The story is, is that the
connection that this person had,the person that this person
worked for specifics, not like generally the agency.
And then even more specifically what she does now and why she's

(16:47):
a current national security threat.
That's the craziest part of all of this stuff.
And it's going to confirm what alot of people have thought about
January 6th, but not the way that they thought.
So let me just right up front tell people this is not someone
who works for the FBI. And so it does actually affirm
what you and I have been talkingabout for a while that the FBI
most likely was a compartmented part and the cover up.

(17:09):
But do you think that the FBI isincompetent enough?
And you and I have a lot of like, let's say what, what do we
have between US15 plus years total and different different
different disciplines, differentfield offices.
Do you think that our former colleagues were incompetent in
so much as they would not be able to identify somebody in a

(17:30):
video that used a phone that walked around and also happened
to be a government employee at the time?
Do you think we could have missed that as a during our time
there? No, I, I think that there's a
certainly enough people there and enough capability there that
they'll be able to ascertain that fairly quickly in light of
the fact that it was presented as a national emergency

(17:51):
exigency. Just think about it as a simple
A weapon of mass destruction investigation.
If there is a bomb, there's an exigent circumstance attached to
that bomb and then also the possibility of future bombs.
You need to exhaust all potential resources at your
fingertips in order to do that. I think they would have used

(18:12):
that. Now I'm on record.
I think I started doing it with you and Jesse Kelly once we were
on his show together. And I brought the how there's
never ever been an evidentiary connection between the events of
the capital and the pipe bombs. I mean, it's easy to conflate
them. They're in Washington, DC,
they're in political locations and, and, but I use the example,

(18:35):
I bet there was a carjacking in Southwest DC that same day.
It's a violent crime. Is there a connection there to
the Capitol? Well, no, there's never ever
been that connection. And yet, and this brings in the
FBI, my concern about their compartmentalization or at least
role in it. That pipe bomb was used on
documents by the DOJ, but they drafted by the FBI in order to

(18:57):
get sentencing enhancements for people tied to the January 6th
capital incident. So now it's no different than
saying, well, there was a carjacking in Southwest DC, so
we should have a sentencing enhancement on somebody who
walked into the capital. That's nonsensical, as is the
pipe bomb and the FBI's. If they in fact had the
capability of locating the person, identifying the person,

(19:18):
and they looked away or even maybe ran cover, or when they
released information, it was manipulated so that nobody can
make progress on those Internet slews.
Or they put out a fake $500,000 reward to say we're really
trying. If that in fact is true, well,
now you've got them doing the Nancy Pelosi of preserving the
narrative in order to put peopleinto cages for longer than was

(19:40):
actually necessary. Let me add to this and I almost
wish I had my I've been looking for my clips somewhere.
I have the Alex Jones going breaking exclusive.
You could do good enough on it. Breaking exclusive folks, I will
definitively tell you right now that the FBI interviewed this
woman and has a a record of talking to her in the FB is

(20:06):
record keeping system known as Sentinel.
Whether they ever considered herto be a subject of this
investigation will be the determining factor on whether or
not this agency, at least a a piece of what they do should
exist. But I'll absolutely tell you
that Steve Baker's work established the link, Mr.
Friend, between the events. And that is really with a

(20:29):
groundbreaking piece because, asyou said, things happened in DC
on that day that would be bad and generally speaking are
federally, you know, criminal activity, but they weren't
necessarily related to January 6th.
So actually tying the pipe bombsto what happened to January 6th
was the real work it has been done.
I'm very confident based on whatI've seen that that's the case.

(20:50):
And I know for a fact that the FBI has actually interviewed
this woman. And the craziest piece of it is,
is because she's been a witness for federal crimes.
All of that goes to show you that the work that he's done out
there should bring down federal agencies.
Yesterday's episode was entitledDestroy It because I think that
there's a strong argument that the Capitol Police, the

(21:12):
Praetorian Guard that goes out there and protects our, you
know, our legislature should be gone.
Even as a constitutional organization.
I've never understood this. And I think you and I actually
may have talked about it the first time it occurred to me,
how on earth do you have executive authority underneath
the legislative branch? I went back and read the
Constitution again yesterday. I do that sometimes.
I don't know where you can see it.

(21:32):
All executive authority must layin the Article 2 powers of the
president. That means you, you can't have
them at the legislature. Do you see any other?
Do you see any like holes in thelogic that I'm pointing out
there? No, because of the fact that
we're supposed to have separation of powers and, and
that's the beauty of the system that we've created where you
have a legislative branch which drafts the the laws that are

(21:56):
then implemented and executed byan executive branch.
You can't have an executive function who is answerable to a
legislative branch because that creates, I think as you probably
had to quickly put it up for touring.
Guard what? It's a secret police force which
is answerable to them but then can turn right around and
blackmail them. That's right.

(22:16):
And that's I think the biggest piece.
And I think that's something that Steve Baker has been more
or less coming to the conclusionand our private conversations.
I'll let him flesh it out. But essentially there is a
dignitary protection group, which is the sort of elite group
of, of Praetorian Guard within the broader context of the
Capitol Police. And they get away with murder.
I don't know that they've murdered anybody yet, but I, I'm

(22:37):
confident they could, if somebody could get away with
murder, it would come out of that organization.
They've done check cashing fraud.
They've done drunk driving whileon duty.
They've had weapons mishaps, a loss of weapons, other
criminality and not lost their jobs.
And then by the way, he was telling me this the other day
and this, I don't know if this is an on or off record thing,
but generally speaking, I think I can talk about this.

(22:58):
When he went through and evaluated the Office of
Professional Responsibility investigations into malfeasance
in the Capitol Police, there aremissing files.
In other words, they are serialized in in order.
So you have the investigation #245246247248IS missing, 249 is
missing, 250 pops up. So there are actually files

(23:18):
missing from internal reviews and, and sort of like internal
affairs investigations that justdon't show up.
And it turns out the people theywere into were Capitol Police
officers in this group. I think you can argue they do
get away with murder because he had Lieutenant Michael Byrd
smoke Ashley Babbitt, then get on the radio and say he was
taking fire. That's right, that's post
meditated murder. What's funny is that the the

(23:40):
chat is actually calling that out at exact the same time.
Yeah. So these there, you know, the,
the crazy thing about when you spend this much time away from
it is that many of us have actually forgotten as much as we
recall about these things. But collectively, and this is
the upside of having sort of a Crowdsource investigation,
collectively, there's a lot of information out here that will
make it. I, I talked to Enrique Tario
yesterday and he's like, I've smoked 2 packs of cigarettes

(24:01):
today on the anxiety of what's coming out.
Because remember, people who weren't even at the Capitol
were, were given terrorist sentencing enhancements based on
the idea that terrorist activityhappened.
And if you guys want clear evidence that the FBI was
involved in the cover up, which has been my point since the
beginning, the reason we know the FBI was involved in the
cover up is because they did notconstantly repetitively and

(24:25):
desperately seek somebody dropping pipe bombs in our
nation's capital like it was an existential threat to anybody
who lived in that area. They just somehow knew that it
was over on that day. And the only way you could know
that is if you actually had a little bit of information.
I can't think, imagine a child was kidnapped in your in, in
your area of responsibility in, in Omaha, for example.

(24:45):
And then it was like a couple ofdays later and no other children
had conduct, you know, would youjust go on like the like the
first 48 on A&E to be like, well, that's some old shit.
We're going to just do somethingelse today, man.
Steve, what about that kidnappedkid?
I don't know man. Something new just came across
my. Desk something new prioritize
that it's UN it's unbelievably ridiculous and nobody should
should actually believe that andI don't think anybody does and
so. And the delay now, which is

(25:07):
disappointing to me with the formal revelation, I mean,
you're going to have a million people on social media who who
are watermarking things and claiming credit for this because
they read an article that's opensource.
I mean, that's right. But the delay concerns me
because you're theoretically going to have members of
Congress who might be implicatedvoting to fund agencies of the
government, which might be implicated when they reopen the

(25:29):
government at Biden level spending.
And that's the conservative position.
And actually doing that might suck the oxygen away from this
story entirely, let alone how you're going to be funding your
own demise. That's right, a government
opening right now will suck someof the the oxygen out of the
fire of the story, which should burn down several government

(25:49):
agencies, including some that you guys actually think should
probably be going away. The FBI is not the least of
them, and pieces of the FBI at the very minimum should be
completely destroyed because of this.
Because a lot of people kind of been complicit and they had to
at least look the other way whenthey were told how you can't
look into that any further. And they didn't raise the alarm
when weird things happened that were completely illogical.

(26:10):
And I got a big, big problem with that.
Let me do a sponsor read and then we're going to talk
government shutdown stuff because I've got some really
good evidence that for all the people crying about New York and
Mondami and the idea that socialism is coming to New York,
I think I said it last night on our call in Show, Steve, the
difference between Cuomo and Mondami running towards
socialism was the difference between you being on a dirt bike

(26:32):
that's not street legal and the difference of you being on a
street bike, which is like a like a drag racer.
OK, They're all going the same direction.
They all had the same plan. It's not like you were going to
get the alternative. You weren't going to get like a
conservative New York out of Cuomo.
And the fact that Donald Trump jumped behind it, kind of
sickening, kind of weird, kind of gross.
Let's do a quick ad read real quick here, folks.
If you don't trust the government the way that I don't
trust the government, if you don't want government agents to

(26:53):
be able to look you up while they're sitting in their cars,
why don't you check out my friends at Patriot Protect?
And I say that as someone who used to look up people from my
car as a government agent. patriot-protect.com slash Kyle.
There are many open source data brokers that have access to your
information and they can be usedby any number of people,
criminals, scammers, federal agents who are just sitting out
there doing surveillance. We want to know about your

(27:14):
personal business and may want to know who's walking in and out
of your house, home address, phone number, workplace, family
members, etcetera. They're all exploitable and
exposed with just a few clicks. Data breaches are part of it.
That could be the sensitive information, but if you want to
stay away from the people who can just pretend to be you or
pretend to know you, you may want to have a service that's
scraping the web the way that Patriot Protect does.
They're constantly clearing personal information out of the

(27:36):
Internet, removing it from Google searches from 100
different data brokers. And I've done the same thing.
If you don't want stalkers and harassment and scammers and
worse coming your way, this is the way you can avoid it.
It's inexpensive. It's a one time thing you do
once a year. patriot-protect.comslash Kyle.
You'll save 15% off on their annual subscription and they're
working 24/7. Obviously they feed it into
their machines which are lookingto scrape it out.

(27:57):
So even as these people continueto put your information up and
new data broker sites pop up everyday, they're constantly
going out there scraping and removing it to keep you off the
radar. It cost pennies on the dollar
for thieves and scammers and so on to find you.
If you guys don't want to be scammed for hundreds or
thousands or hundreds of thousands, like some of my
family members have told me they've got contacts doing, you

(28:19):
may want to make sure that you are protected.
We use the same thing. My wife and I have it.
I think my parents do the same thing. patriot-protect.com slash
Kyle. It's like less than 100 bucks a
year with the with the promo code.
And and lastly speaking, I'll just tell you, if you did get
scammed out of something like that, I can assure you right now
the FBI will not think it's a big enough scam for them to
investigate. I think Steve and I can actually
say that pretty definitively. There are always limits and the

(28:41):
limits are more than you got scammed for.
It turns out that's just what are we paying for here?
Declinations, unless you hit thethreshold that's necessary for
that federal prosecutor to get their white shoe law firm gig.
All right, I've got shut down. I think socialism has been here.
I think they're actually trying to fund our general levels of
socialism in this country. I think many people realized

(29:03):
there's a couple of arguments that are made.
I want to make them to you real quick, Steve.
They are going to cancel a significant number of of flights
that actually just happened. So if you guys are at the
airport, you're like, why the hell am I sitting at the
airport? Listen to Seraphin.
I thought I was going to be airborne by now.
I'm sorry that you are not. Cancellations are coming in the
wake of an FAA order to reduce the total number of flights.
American Airlines said it was going to cancel 22120 of their

(29:25):
6000 departures this morning. And across, across the entire
spectrum, it sounds like everybody is reducing their
flights by several 100 to mean that there are several thousand
across the country that have been canceled because of air
traffic control shortages. And people are having a hard
time. This is a tough time to go
without a paycheck. You've done it, I've done it.
We have a little bit more sympathy and or empathy for

(29:46):
these people. And at the same time, I'm pretty
sure that you've worked through government shutdowns where you
just kept doing your job and youdidn't call in sick because you
didn't like that you were getting paid.
Tell me if I'm wrong. I may be wrong about that, but
that doesn't seem like the SteveI know.
Theoretically, we have a constitutional amendment against
working for no money. So there is a constitutional
concern there. But at the same time, this is

(30:07):
very predictable. You know, that the end of the
year comes. You know, this is something that
the Congress has continued to punt down the road over and over
again, despite Mike Johnson's ofreassurances over and over how
we're going to have line by lineappropriations.
This is something you should plan for.
I think I saw how one in six federal workers are taking in a
level of income from their job that is beneath the median

(30:29):
income for America, which I say that means five and six federal
workers make more than the median income.
I think you should have a rainy day fund set aside.
I think that's in your own personal financial best
interest. That's in the interest of
national security. I mean, one of the concerns for
having a security clearance, financial concerns, adjudicative
guideline F now you're vulnerable.

(30:51):
You are going to have your car possessed because you missed one
paycheck. I think you're living on the
edge. So I do have a certain modicum
of sympathy for people who are having to work and not get paid.
But at the same time, I have an expectation for people who want
to be civil servants, civil servants, that they should have
set that aside. And I want to say one thing back
to you, even maybe reframe the the, your idea, your proffering

(31:15):
idea that the Republicans shouldown the shutdown.
I think it might be too late forthat.
Oh. I think it is too, yeah.
At this point it's, it's obviously too late.
They've committed so. What my question to the people
who are the Fox News watching? I mean, I guess I could say
boomers, but then boomers get angry.
And I always say like, well, my name is Steve and Steve Dantuano
did some bad things. I don't get offended if you

(31:35):
insult him. But some people are saying this
is the Schumer shutdown. Why do you want the government
opened? Articulate for me why you want
the government opened if you're a small government person.
That's the question and let me just prove to you they're not
small government people. That's how I know they're all
lying to us. Allow this.
This is Smithers who decides he's going to do not just the

(31:57):
Schumer shutdown, he's going to call it the Seinfeld shutdown,
which I absolutely adore. I love it when one cartoon
character calls out a 90s sitcom, both of which came to
prominence about the same time. So here he is making a totally
relatable. This is why he's just like us,
Steve. He just sees things and he just
calls it how he sees it. This is the sniveling assistant

(32:18):
to Mr. Burns doing a CNBC hit and letting you know this is
really a shutdown about nothing.The Democrats have painted
themselves into a corner, Joe, as we've discussed before,
because this really was, and some people say the Seinfeld
shutdown, it's a shutdown about nothing that there was, there
was no fight. There was no skirmish between
the parties. When we passed back on September

(32:38):
19th, the clean continuing resolution, it was nonpartisan.
You know, it's 24 pages in length, bare bones, just to keep
the lights on. And this is an important.
Point The whole reason for that is because the Republicans and
the Democrats who are appropriators got together and
said we're running out of. Time to do the normal process,
the regular order of funding thegovernment.
We need about 7 more weeks, so let's just extend it to November

(33:01):
21 and we'll all get our work done.
Committed to never being in thissituation again.
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 ofthis next year, we'll be walking

(33:24):
and 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 as
long as we can remember, but we're going to get back to that
because that's good stewardship.The American people deserve it,
and the debt situation we find ourselves in necessitates that
so. There you go.

(33:45):
What do you think? Were you taken in by the speaker
who was wearing an American flag, Ukrainian flag lapel pin
on his discussion about how he was going to be a good steward
of the American people's money? Shame on you if you were listen,
he went on to talk about how badthe Democrats are again, I do.
I agree with you. Like, even though that was the
original best idea, own it. Say we're a small government

(34:07):
people. We don't want to fund big
government and we're not going to.
That'd be brilliant. That would have been a great
move. They couldn't do that.
They had to do this other thing.So now they're stuck trying to
talk about money that people came and asked for.
The problem is, is that, quote UN quote, our side keeps doing
the same thing. They keep asking for money for
things that generally speaking, I think they're voting base
goes, hey, man, this is not a conservative position.

(34:29):
It's not a Republican position and it hasn't been for 40 years.
But when we say the 1.5 trillionthat is the actual counter offer
that they put on paper and filedin the Senate, it is still
sitting over there as their counter proposal, 1.5 trillion
in new spending. On on A7 week stopgap funding
measure. I mean, it's just madness.

(34:49):
And included in that, yes, go read the the bill.
They they want almost $200 billion to be returned to.
Healthcare benefits for illegal aliens, they want to send all
these billions of dollars back over to foreign countries for
social spending in other countries.
They, they wanted to restore half a billion to the
Corporation of Public Broadcasting, all these things.
And in that proposal, amazingly,shockingly to us, they put it on

(35:12):
paper. They want to repeal the $50
billion rural hospital fund thatRepublicans work so hard to get
signed into law July 4th. So it's just a mishmash of
priorities and, and, and things that different Democrats are
claiming. That illustrates the very point.
This was never about one particular issue.
They just wanted to show a fight.
They wanted to look tough to theMarxist rise in their party.

(35:35):
And, and, and remember this, Chuck Schumer and Hakeem
Jeffries are both New Yorkers, right?
We all just saw what happened inNew York City.
Oh, it's New York City. It's the, it's the, it's the
Marxist rise. Meanwhile, look at the debt
numbers right here. It looks like the federal debt,
the American National debt, was $33.8 trillion on October 25th,

(35:57):
2023. And as of this Tuesday morning,
it was 38 trillion. So just some quick math there.
We're looking at what, like an increase of 4 1/2 plus almost $5
trillion under his speakership. So, you know, God forbid we do
Marxism as they borrow from the future government, they borrow

(36:17):
from children who are not even born yet at this point.
And the the. Theater of him talking about how
the Democrats are all doing theater.
He's out there doing a poll tested Seinfeld shutdown because
I guess Schumer shutdown might have been played out.
So he's got to go try this new one out there.
Check it out. Ready.

(36:43):
I I really did like that bass line.
It was really catchy and it was a really good transition as
bumper music going in and out ofdifferent scenes.
Yeah, like, as you said, pole tested.
And look, you know how you know they're marching at the same
thing? Because they keep saying the
same thing. They've all gotten themself on
their marching orders. This is Byron Donald's doing the
same thing. We played it yesterday all
talking about, oh, it's shoe where it's his fault.
And then I'm going to play you some Josh Halley.

(37:03):
And I don't know if you've seen this yet, but yesterday he said
a thing that is exactly why we lose.
We we people who don't want a big government and we who don't
want to spend a bunch of money on stuff we should.
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, not

(37:24):
twice, but now 14 times. We actually put on the floor of
the Senate to pay our troops, topay air traffic control, to play
border agents, ICE agents, etcetera.
They voted no and why? Let me show you what they will
vote YES on. Though you're ready.
Did you see this yesterday? What?
What Senator? What's his name?
Hallie from Missouri said no. It'll be something that's

(37:45):
communist though. He's all in for that.
What's funny is that people always get mad at me.
When I pronounce his name and I call and I call him Hallie
because that's how it's spelled Haw Hallie.
And they're like it's Hallie or something like that.
You say he's from. Missouri instead of Missouri?
Yeah, I don't know and I don't care.
It's like, look, there is no onethat is more disappointing then

(38:05):
someone that I reached out to you and said, hey, why don't we
fix this problem with this jet. And so he made a big deal about
it, quoted my letter directly tothe former FBI director and
hasn't set up peep about the current, you know, cash me in
the jet scenario. Anyway, here he is telling you
that this is the most conservative position,
compassion shutdown HCMT and in my state, I could just tell you

(38:26):
it is really hurting real people.
This is why I've offered a bill to pay those SNAP benefits
because people need the assistance, 42 million people.
I mean, this is becoming a humanitarian crisis and I, I
think we have got to end this ASAP.
Do we? Do we got to end this?
Is that what needs to happen? The humanitarian.

(38:46):
Crisis would be how one in six, one in eight Americans are
relying on the federal government to give them money to
buy food that's not within its constitutional mandate.
And he has to solve it in his state so that we give federal
dollars to people so that they can shop at Walmart.
So the federal government is stepping up and assisting

(39:09):
Walmart in its bottom line. And I want to show you they're
going to put. Money and borrow money.
Against our kids and our grandkids, so that they inflate
the dollar and the dollar that you and I have saved and all the
federal workers who should have saved in our bank accounts in
preparation for some austerity that becomes worth less until it

(39:29):
becomes worthless. And then it increases the number
of people on the rolls of the SNAP benefits and the government
benefits. It's almost like it's a dog
chasing its tail. It's a dead spiral.
And it's a system that government created a problem for
itself to solve. Well, imagine.
If you could find what the face of that sympathetic snap user

(39:49):
was local news, try that in New York City, a place that has just
voted for their own democratic socialist.
We covered him a couple times today.
I don't need to show any more ofhis videos, but this video was
telling to me. I don't feel no sympathy for
these people, but I also feel a little bit of you've been making
bad life decisions for a really long time.
And I can tell just by looking at the size of your dinner plate

(40:12):
face and that is not. That is not something that you
don't have control over. And every time that we say this
like that, that heavy people or people that are like I get
putting on weight and I've put on some weight.
I've never put on weight to the point where my head went from
shaped like an almond to shaped like a bowling ball.
That's not a possibility where Icould get that far along.
And I don't know what it would take to do that.

(40:33):
But this is a now this is a lifelong problem for this person
and it adds all kinds of other complications because now we
have to pay for hypertension treatment and diabetes.
And, and maybe that's why DonaldTrump's out there signing deals
with Eli Lilly to reduce the cost of Ozempic so we can have
people's hearts fail because we apparently like that.
I've got some fun, some of this.But this is the face of sympathy
that was trotted out by local news in New York.

(40:55):
I think this woman's in the Bronx.
I'm going to play the clip as far as it goes.
It's pretty bad. Danielle Grant is starving.
What does he like, get some food?
Because we literally don't have anything to eat today or
tomorrow. So we're going to try to make
this meat and we can desperate for food nowhere.
To go, Grant and many others gotto the Hope line today just to

(41:18):
make an appointment to come backlater in the week for food.
Resources are slim. Leaving. 40% of Bronx sites
without money to feed themselves, some still in shock.
You heard things before. It's like.
That's not, they're not going tolet people starve.
That's ridiculous, you know? But it's like, no, no, that's
literally like what's happening.We hope the food punch is

(41:38):
maintain open because if they don't stay open, I really don't
know what we're going to do. Next, we asked people their
reaction to. Hearing that the Trump
administration will partially fund the SNAP program, people
say it's not going to do much. They have families to feed and
already struggled at the end of every month when they were
receiving the full amount. Wow, not enough.

(42:00):
At least there's something to hold on.
But I think everybody's going tohave to get a second job.
It doesn't really last the wholemonth, you know, probably like
two or three weeks. And then about last week you got
a scramble to find, you know, things.
This couple has four kids. The mom says pantries aren't
always reliable. They have limited supplier.
By the time we get to the front of the line, then there's really

(42:21):
nothing there. So.
It's, it's hard. She says she's holding on to
faith. Meanwhile, others are worried
hunger will drive crime rates up.
We don't know how much money will be reloaded onto people's
cards and when that will be In Longwood.
Lindsay Tanney News I'm just going to let you.
React. OK, I've got a couple points.
Here, probably the most disturbing thing at was at the

(42:43):
end, but before that I didn't notice anybody who was not
overweight to morbidly obese in the entire thing.
So just let's just clear that for those who are only
listening. Secondly, she's going to hold on
to faith. Faith in the government.
Yes, that that's your God. Your God is government.
She already told you. She said there's no way they
would. Let people start.
By the way, do you know the numbers in this country that

(43:04):
somewhere between 20 and 30 people in a country of 350
million actually starved to death in this country on on an
annual basis? Are they probably drug addicts?
Who? Forgot to eat.
It's possible. Yeah.
I don't know the. I don't.
Know the circumstances but the numbers are in the double
digits. They are under triple digits
across a country that is in the.What is it 7899 to 10 figure

(43:27):
range? Is it 9 figure range?
I think, yeah. So almost nobody, statistically
nobody starves in this country. that Lady is not in danger of
starving for a very long time. The one that we showed, she also
had hair extensions, which are not inexpensive.
Everyone there, I saw a lady in a in a fur coat.
I don't know if you saw that as well, but if you were listening
and you didn't see that there was a fur coat in the in the

(43:48):
line, everybody there seemed well dressed, clean.
They'd they'd been able to bathethemselves.
They're not homeless people thatare sitting there without any
means. It's pretty impressive.
It's pretty impressive that they're starving.
And then you had a skinny prettywhite lady talking about.
I thought that was the contrast.That was a nice that was a nice
move and send the skinny white girl into the.
Bronx and go ask. People, if they're starving,

(44:09):
good move. I mean, I got to summon my inner
Garrett. O'boyle at GOB actual here and
go a little bit biblical. I think there is nothing new
under the sun and that there's atale of the Israelites wandering
through the desert complaining about the handouts they were
getting from the Lord Almighty because they were tired of manna
from heaven. They wanted meat, so God gave
him a whole bunch of quail and said eat it until it comes out

(44:31):
of your ears. Because God doesn't just punish
people, he gives them exactly what they wanted in abundance
until it punishes them. And these people have been are
going to be punished in New Yorkbecause they voted for this snap
mechanism amplified with their new mayor, and we're going to
make New York communist now. I don't want people to think
that I'm. Just poking in on heavyset

(44:53):
people or people that are obese or morbidly obese or completely
overweight. Wait.
There's actually a lot of evidence that I've been able to
find that these people actually have taken that on as identity.
I saw a couple of videos yesterday of young women that
were saying this is peak female physical form. 26 years old,
easily 100 lbs overweight. I don't know what makes me

(45:13):
capable of assessing that other than I have done those
assessments in the emergency medical field.
And when you go find people who are morbidly obese, they have
difficulty breathing, they have difficulty moving fluids, they
often time have problems with their sugar, their body and
their hormones are all out of whack.
There's all kinds of additional problems that come in.
It turns out weight is really, if nothing else, you are putting
such an incredible burden on your heart because you are now

(45:35):
putting vascular sugar through another 100 lbs of living tissue
that you are not just carrying around, but you also have to
keep alive, which is not easy. This lady actually breaks down
the categories. The other day I used the word
super fat and for anyone who thinks that I came up with that,
I did not. Super fat is not a Kyle Seraphin
show construction. I don't want to take ownership
of it, although I will use it. I took it from a woman who

(45:56):
defined the terms of what levelsof fat exists and how we use
them. So I'm going to instruct my
audience and also educate them. That's what we do here.
Enjoy a little commentary about privilege and fat and the levels
of fatness. Question.
Can you tell me what category offat I fit in?
So it's based on your shirt size, so.
If you are a one or two X you are small fat, 3 to 4X you are

(46:17):
mid fat 5 to 6 X you are super fat is based on what level
privilege you have in the world.So someone in a.
Small fat category may not struggle getting on an airplane,
but someone in a mid fat or super fat may not be able to use
even the airplane extender. So that's where that comes in.
And like the privilege levels oflike what fat means to different

(46:39):
people. That almost is a standing
standing argument against the 19th amendment in and of itself.
That level of empathy and and suicidal empathy is pretty
impressive. It also is self defeating and.
It's a left. It's intersectionality is a
leftist idea, so it's going to conflict with itself.
That's definitionally everythingthat's leftist.
But the principle of intersectionality is that you

(47:01):
have more immutable characteristics that are in the
minority than other people. Ergo, you're more put upon, so
you should be higher up on the ladder.
But what if it's not immutable? It's totally.
Not immutable within your own control.
Wait, you're telling me I get toclimb the ladder by eating more
Doritos? All right.
It's an interesting choice that you could choose to be more less

(47:24):
privileged and therefore more loved by a leftist hierarchy.
I I, I don't know, I'm just all of that was really difficult.
What what actually the most astounding thing in that entire
little video clip, because I actually did some things.
I learned some things I do tongue in cheek and I'm teaching
you guys as a joke. Some things I learned that I
didn't know. I didn't know that there were
five and six XL clothing sizes. Don't you just.

(47:47):
I have no idea. I.
Honestly had no idea. You're the person who's
attached. To the couch so much that the
fiber is actually fused with your skin and we have to RIP out
your roof with that's happened, pull you out with an excavator.
Yeah, that's a real thing. Yeah.
I don't, I don't know what to think about any of that.
It's it's unsettling. Let me break away and tell
people that if you're not watching, you may want to be
watching our program starting ina few seconds.

(48:07):
So if you have the ability, you can actually click the video
button over on Spotify if you are watching on the Spotify app.
I don't get any money from Spotify.
I just actually think it's a better way to watch it.
Check out Spotify, Kyle serifandshow.com.
You can also support the programhere.
And what we do, the humor and the goofiness.
And I also post a bunch of stuffover resources after the fact.
Kyle seraphin.com. Lastly, if you're watching on

(48:28):
YouTube, if you're watching on X, if you're watching us live
over on Rumble, we're we still appreciate you give us a like
make sure you subscribe to the program.
It does help us out. It does boost the algorithm as
much as we're being, you know, sort of crushed down on that.
I'm going to give Steve friend amoment.
Steve, did you have breakfast this morning?
I'm guessing not. No, no, I don't.
Don't partake. You're going to be I'm in a lot.
It won't hit until this evening.You're going to be safe.

(48:51):
From this clip this is this is just gross.
I imagine this lady gets snap benefit I'm I'm guessing she
does based on what I've seen thesnap benefits crowd in those
lines look like. But she does TikTok which is not
a an income they have to declare.
We're finding out. Enjoy this.
I don't know what Chris and Eddie's is.
It looks good. So do you already know that I'm

(49:11):
a fat girl who loves to so come with me at Chris and Eddie's?
I started off with a vanilla shake and it was really good.
My friend Ashley got a strawberry shake and she was in
love. And my friend Skyler got a
chocolate shake and well, it wasa 10 out of 10.
But now it's time to get into the delicious food.
I got some yummy loaded cheese fries and it was so delectable.

(49:36):
Then I like to put pepper geniesin the sauce and put it on my
burger. I got my first burger Eddie's
way and I got the buns flipped and this was so good and my
second slider was Chris's way and this was my personal
favorite because they had tomatoand onion and I'm just so
petite. Sorry Eddie, but honestly you
guys have to try Chris and Eddies interesting entonement

(50:02):
She. Went from the Valley Girl to
Megatron. But I mean, there's a lid for
every pot. I've been assured by my great
grandmother. Somebody into that.
Somebody into that? And the person who's?
Into it is named Skylar. And he was in the clip and he
also is super fast. Or is he medium?
Fat. I think he was mid Fat.
Yeah, he looked like he was. Less fat than whoever the girl

(50:23):
was that was saying that and shelooked like she probably wasn't
like a 5 or 6 XL. I feel bad for the people who
used to wear. Husky clothes like that was an
actual word, right? That was yeah.
And it was tough when you were akid and you wore.
Husky because you had like a, you know, a waistline that was
bigger than your peers because, you know, you were in between
growing taller or something likethat.
Husky was like a it's kind of a nasty.

(50:43):
It was like them trying to be nice about calling you a chubby
kid for now, even though most ofthose kids end up growing.
Yeah, you were chunk. You were just getting.
A little bit heavy as you were getting ready to just go through
that growth spurt. We need to have that a little
bit bigger waistband for you with the shorter legs.
But I knew a guy in 3rd grade. His name was Blair.
Baldwin, I don't know why I remember his name, but he had a
superhero type name and he was kind of, he was a Husky kid.
And I remember he got ribbed about that.

(51:04):
And I remember thinking after a couple years later, I'm like, I
bet Blair's like 65 and I bet he's like a regular dude now.
You know, he may have played football, maybe he's got a belly
or something. But I don't think that Blair is
still a Husky in so much as America's.
He's probably actually Henry Cavill.
Yeah, he's just jacked. He's just jacked and leaned out.
I don't know. I just the argument for for this

(51:25):
whole idea that we're going to continue to fund this.
We're going to fund people that do this.
We're we're a nation of such abundance.
That bothers me that we have people crying about starvation
when they are clearly so far overweight that they are
unhealthy and they are a burden.I've got a video that kind of
says something about that. But first I wanted to read you
an opinion piece that came out in December of last year.
So it's not quite a year old. It was written by a sophomore in

(51:46):
college who's a journalism student, which does tell you a
lot about the types of people inthis country, country that that
have these opinions and why theypropagate.
It's also from the Minnesota Daily, which is amazing because
it's been around for over 100 years.
And clearly they're willing to hire children to give people a
fair and balanced understanding about the free market and
government intervention. Steve, America is already

(52:09):
socialist, she says. This is written by Jasmine
Shackelford. Despite the name, she is a white
girl with red hair, just lest anybody want to know what she
looks like. And again, she was a sophomore
when she wrote this in college. the United States is
traditionally considered the antithesis of socialism.
And this is my argument that thethat the America that people
think that they lived in actually was dead before they
ever even inherited it. That would be my claim.

(52:31):
For decades our country has represented free market
capitalism at its brightest, starkly contrasting with our
perceptions of communism and socialism.
And yet, by most definitions, the US is technically a
partially socialist state already.
And I think the argument could be made that is actually more
socialist than most people even believe.
This professor of music and comparative literature who
specializes in Marxism, whose name is Sumamath Goopinath said

(52:56):
that socialism is an economic system that blends capitalism
and communist ideas. I like that she had to go to a
professor of music to get a definition of socialism.
There's something really specialabout this entire article.
I will post it over on all the places there.
You'll find it at kyleseraphim.com so you can read
it yourself. And then also, I don't know,
smirk and be sad quote. Some people call it a mixed
economy, says Goopanath or Gopanath.

(53:19):
I don't know. There's some amount of state or
social control by the means of production from anything like a
strong welfare state to the entirety of the economy being
controlled by the state. There are lots of different
positions on these things. Many people will split hairs
defining socialism but ultimately it encompasses
several ideas. Many social studies textbooks,

(53:41):
she went right back to middle school provide similarities when
comparing socialism and communism and capitalism because
capitalism is based on free market with private ownership of
companies and liberty governmentintervention.
Communism is the complete opposite.
That's why there's so many summaries and similarities.
Like can we stop with these people who don't know anything

(54:03):
being the source of information for folks?
Social studies, I'm already donewith you.
If you went to a music professorto find out about Marxism, we're
done. I think we're done here.
We could shut it down. Well, I mean, we first need to.
Put a pin that this person didn't write this chachi BT did.
That's why it's likely quoting music professors in middle
school books. But if she in fact did write

(54:25):
this essay, her entire world experience was living in a
socialist confines of a household where she didn't have
to work, and mom and dad provided for her from each
according to his ability, each court into his deeds.
Because communism slash socialism works within a
household. It does, and outside.

(54:47):
Of that wells. Beer was in student government
in fifth grade where she tried to run for the student council
by saying I'm going to give everybody candy machines and no
homework on Friday. And that's promises of things
that don't have nobody has to pay for.
So she probably thinks that socialism works the.
The It's so goofy. You can transform these people's

(55:12):
attitudes, giving them a real paycheck and make them pay taxes
as soon as they realize what FICA.
Is they will become like to the right of a till of the hunt that
that was the radicalizing principle.
That that took my wife from a woman who was raised by a
essentially A Marxist and or communist type guy.
You know, he's a nice man. He just has like these crazy
ideas, having lived in New York,having lived the opposite of the

(55:35):
ideas that he has. My father-in-law has these crazy
thoughts about whether or not you should own private property
and that the government should take care of people and all this
other stuff that they shouldn't actually be private ownership of
individual space. And then turned around and made
his living as a real estate professional, renting out and
selling private property. Wild, wild positions to hold,

(55:55):
right. And so my wife comes out of that
sort of background. And when I met her, essentially
she was very hard to the left. And the radicalizing part for
her was when she realized that basically $0.50 out of every
dollar that her mother was earning in New York or in
Connecticut was being taken in by the federal government.
She was like, why doesn't everyone just pay the same
percentage of their income? And I'm like, oh, a flat tax.
You're the furthest right personin this room right now.

(56:17):
How do you feel about that? That turns out to be pretty
radicalizing. The minute you start realizing
what you're taking out of your salary and where it goes and
what do you get for it, you could shock a lot of people.
Into conservative line of economic thinking, if you just
got rid of withholdings on theirpaychecks and made them cut the
check in a It's radicalized the hell out of me, Steve.

(56:37):
Ever. Like I, I just assumed that that
a third of my paycheck had to goaway When you write the, the,
the thing and you see, oh, I earned this much money this year
and now I have to go write a 5 figure check to the federal
government, which equates to however many months of your
actual earnings that it was. And you're basically like, OK,
that's cool. January, February and March.
I just worked for the governmentand I got nothing from it.

(56:59):
Basically nothing, including thefact that they're canceling
airline flights right now. So the only thing I would get,
and the second fun thing is, is when the the federal
government's representative and the the FBI director's
girlfriend sues you and you got to write another check, that's
also two or three months of yoursalary.
My family is going to live on half of what we made this year
because of a basically a lawyer tax because a rich girl who only

(57:21):
sings the national anthem. And by the way, I don't know how
many national anthems you have to sing to make $5,000,000, but
I bet it's a lot. That's going to also eat up a
big chunk of it. You don't have to be a preschool
teacher, a middle school teacher, a social studies
teacher, a sophomore in college.You could just be a regular dad
dude and know what why the problem exists.
And I've got a great video of this guy breaking it down.
I gave you a little tease of it before we started, folks.

(57:43):
This is what happens when, like,I don't know, the Gray beards,
this guy's probably in around my, my, my age bracket.
Guys who are right at the age oflike, popping on reading glasses
for the first time and they go out there and try and explain it
to their kids. This is why you don't vote for
the stupidity. It's already here.
We're not going to get rid of itanytime soon, I don't think so.
We might as well just accept that there's two ways forward,

(58:05):
more Marxism or no government atsome point and it gets more and
more localized. This dude lays it out real
simply. And this is the same thing.
You see, if you work in these industries, you can get a
plumber to your house in the middle of the night within an
hour, but if you go to the ER, you could wait six hours.
Why? The federal government never
tried to make plumbing affordable and accessible.

(58:26):
You can buy an 85 inch television for $1000, but a
dialysis machine cost $30,000. Why the federal government never
tried to make televisions affordable and accessible?
You can get LASIK surgery done for $1500 because it's not
covered by Medicare and Medicaidbecause it's elective.

(58:48):
But if you get a major surgery it could cost you $100,000.
Why the federal government nevertried to make LASIK affordable
and accessible. Socialism is killing every
industry it touches. Please debunk if you will.
It's impossible. He.
Makes an articulate fact driven case and you reference your

(59:10):
wife's being a proponent of the flat tax.
I kind of teased mine early on. I got to give her credit for we
recently got our property tax bill because we're financially
independent. That's one of the reasons why
the FBI said, Are you sure you want to give this up three years
ago and I was like 321. I'm debt free, so you can't hold
the golden eagle crapping in my bank account every two weeks

(59:31):
over my head. We haven't paid for a house, but
we get the property tax bill once a year.
So you actually see that it's not built into your mortgage
payment. And my wife saw it and
immediately, and I live in Florida, which has arguably the
most conservative governor in the country.
And she immediately was basically MF ING our governor
for not getting rid of property taxes.

(59:52):
Yeah, I mean, it's that visceral.
When people actually have to seethe amount and cut that check,
it hurts. Wait, I have to pay money for
something I already bought? Or wait, I let's think through a
sales tax. Wait, I earn this money, you tax
me on it and I can have it, but if I want to spend it, I got to
spend extra in taxes for you taxations theft. 100.

(01:00:15):
Percent that there's actually another piece that actually goes
into what this guy was talking about South for people who don't
understand the mechanics when hesays that the government got
involved in it. That's actually not the entirety
of the explanation when the government got involved in,
let's call it whatever elective,you know, non elective surgery,
mandatory surgeries, and you start seeing these costs go up.
It goes to a concept that's referred to as induced demand

(01:00:37):
modeling. And I'm going to give it to you
in a way that I heard it interesting enough from my
self-proclaimed sort of semi communist father-in-law in
regards to traffic patterns whenthey were discussing what would
happen on some of the bridges inNew York.
And the issue was they had done modeling over many, many years
about what happens when you expand the capabilities of a
bridge or you expand the roadways wider and wider to

(01:01:00):
accommodate because you have bottlenecks and traffic jams and
people are having longer and longer commutes.
And so the question always was, how do we get people to not have
such long commutes? What if we were to widen the
roadways? That's what you would do in your
body, right? You would dilate an artery, you
would dilate a blood vessel and you'd allow more blood flow to
get through. And what we have in this thing
that's called induced modeling. And they've done it all across

(01:01:21):
the way. They've done it in California,
they've done it in New York, they've done it in other places
as well. But it actually applies across
the broad spectrum because this concept holds that when you
increase the capacity for something, the demand for it
fills that capacity that you've increased.
So they found within less than like a couple of years, it might
even be less than might be less than five years.

(01:01:42):
But inevitably the minute that you expand those roadways within
the amount of time before you even paid off the, the cost of
expanding the roadway, that capacity is already filled to
the level that previously was at.
You've induced a demand by allowing for that room.
Now what happens in the the caseof medicine or in the case of
other places where the government jumps in is the

(01:02:02):
government says we're willing toreimburse your surgery to the
tune of $30,000. And so guess what?
That surgery costs $30,000. There's.
No real. There's no real mystery.
Here, and I know this from working on an ambulance when we
would actually bill people. I'm an ALS provider at that
time, so I was a advanced life support technician, A paramedic,

(01:02:23):
and that's a level of care that is significantly higher than an
EMSA basic life support technician.
You've probably worked with SWATguys who are BLS.
They couldn't save your life if they wanted to.
Paramedic has a lot more skills,all right, and a lot more
training. It's like 10X plus the training
and the schooling and the numberof drugs and the liability and
so on that goes with it. So whenever we would transport
somebody, BLS, if I was an ALS provider, they were getting an

(01:02:44):
ALS technician just giving BLS skills.
But we would only be able to bill for ABLS transportation,
and that might be $600.00. So they would bill $600.00.
And that's how much the ambulance ride costs.
But if they could bill $2500 because I did one ALS procedure,
let's say I put on some a monitor and I checked their, you
know, their heart rate and I andI did like a quick EKG on them.

(01:03:07):
Now we're providing ALS. And so you're incentivized to do
that. And guess what?
We're going to build that $2500,same ride, same people in it,
same equipment, same transportation distance, same
patient, depending on what we can bill for, we are going to
bill for it. And so that means we are going
to run that dollar amount up. That's what the company did.
I despised that model. I really, really, really hated

(01:03:30):
it. But that's why everything costs
the way that it does. When the government gets
involved, it sets an upper limitby the way it can print the
money. So it doesn't care.
It's not like it's trying to negotiate the best deal.
That's defriend might when he's buying the house.
This is why everybody. Who got hit by a car but also
had coronavirus, was billed as acoronavirus death because the

(01:03:50):
reimbursement was higher. This is also the reason why
student loans when they were federalized, created a crisis.
Now to the tone of what, $2 trillion, whatever it is, 2
billion, and we are continuing to give the loans.
What's happened? Well, the federal governments
guaranteed the loans because thegovernment doesn't care.
They can just print the money topay off the universities.

(01:04:10):
The universities have raised thetuition costs as high as they
can possibly take them, that they know the federal government
will back and that we message itas we have to expand college
education. So now you have record number of
people who are going to college and we've effectively made a
college degree the equivalent ofa high school degree that was
say 40 years ago. And it's backed and subsidized
by federal. Money and you can get federal

(01:04:31):
loans to go do it and you can dothat as much as you want and
they'll underwrite the loans which means it's going to cost
exactly as much as you can take out the loans.
That's how much money your college is going to cost
whatever is being willing to fund.
Let me read you this thing that talks about SNAP benefits and my
argument here continues that we've left the constitutional
system in any way shape or form.I don't care whether we have a
Praetorian Guard that doesn't that operates completely outside

(01:04:52):
the Constitution that has since 1828 or you have a federal judge
that is telling the the the executive you must pay benefits
out despite there being a government shutdown and they're
not actually being a budget during this time period.
There's no discretion allowed and and and that's what the
executive job is in this case. So this story was what actually
got me triggered this morning orsent me down the this little

(01:05:14):
rabbit hole. The judge ordered the Trump
administration to fully fund SNAP benefits by Friday.
That's today and rebukes the Trump administration.
I'm going to tell you some of the things that this judge said,
what you love. His name is John J McConnell
Junior, the federal District Court judge.
He said on Thursday the Trump administration must make
payments to fully fund the supplemental nutritional
assistance program. I hear supplemental in there.

(01:05:35):
And I think that it is not necessarily a critical feature
that people probably won't die, but maybe they won't thrive.
Call me crazy. Those people like we saw in the
in the video earlier weren't going to they have to fund it by
the end of the of this Friday coming up.
He said, quote, people have gonewithout for too long.
Steve, what day of the month is it?
7th? That's too long, OK.

(01:05:56):
Not making payments to them, even another.
Day is simply unacceptable. I hear a strong legal argument
there. Can you tell me what law he was
citing? You think it's a good and plenty
clause the back of the declaration?
The good and plenty clause is sogood.
That's not the first time Steve has.
Quoted the good and plenty clause.
In fact, the day before compliance was ordered, the
president stated his intent to defy the court's order.

(01:06:17):
SNAP benefits will be only givenwhen the government opens.
And so since the government, since the Trump administration
said we're going to just abide by what this looks like and what
it's supposed to be, that makes him the bad guy, it's gone on
for long enough. These people have suffered for
far too long. As you can tell from the videos
we showed. This was the judge who was also
on the board of. A nonprofit that received in the

(01:06:39):
hundreds of millions of dollars of government funding from both
the federal and state and then said when the feds came in under
the Donald Trump Part 2 administration and started to
cut that spending, that they hadto continue to spend it.
So, you know, lining his own back pockets with it.
And now we have AI think that probably an adequate analogy

(01:06:59):
would be a guy who is, say, divorced and is paying child
support, right? This was always my problem with
the Child Support warrant. The guy was behind on child
support. Let's just say like he got laid
off, He doesn't have the money. So we're going to put him in
jail. How is he going to get the
money? He how is he going to go to
work? We're going to put him in jail

(01:07:19):
and take him off the job site where he's trying to get the
money. I mean, I'm not saying there's
not deadbeats out there, but I it's not an insignificant amount
of times that I encountered thatit's a pretty, it's impressive
that the the concept of a debtor's prison.
Ever survived like the first brush at logic?
Because the immediate second order of the 1st order effect is
that the guy is no longer going to be able to earn any more

(01:07:40):
money. So the second order effect is
that he will not be able to pay that money and he will also lose
his opportunity to lose to earn any future monies as well.
Yeah, I mean it's, it's a failure to think through 2nd and
3rd order consequences. That's right, but we have to use
emergency funds, which to me emergency would be G gets a
happy trigger finger and the tanks got to roll and the planes

(01:08:00):
got to fly. So we need to use it because
it's an emergency, but instead, because it's the day seven of
the month for people who are morbidly obese, super obese, or
just plain Husky can't get theirsupplemental Nutrition
Assistance. Meanwhile they're complaining
that it only provides for them for two to three weeks a month.
Well, if that's true, then you should be fine because it only

(01:08:23):
gave you 2. It's only one week into the
month. You shouldn't be hurting that
badly right now. Well, Steve, I'm going to
correct what you previously saidjust a little.
Bit because what you meant to say was small fat that's a
that's we're not using Husky. We're using small fat.
I don't think you vote your way out of this because the kind of
people that are being supported by this administration,
including guys like Lindsey Graham, are saying some of the
nastiest things out there in theworld.

(01:08:43):
Apparently, one of my former colleagues took issue with the
way that I didn't like Mark Levin, who seems like an
absolute, like, uttered piece ofgarbage.
And his brother, his brother Lindsay, is equally good
speaking at the same conference.I just got to play Tucker
Carlson. Love him or hate him, he's very
bright. He says some things that people
don't like. His laugh is sort of cartoonish
and silly, and I don't know why he's has that affectation.

(01:09:07):
But this is a little clip I saw yesterday that I could not say.
I can't poke a hole in it. And it says what a disgusting
group of people we send out there to represent us and how
fake it is. And then I'm going to play you
Ron Johnson, who people, generally speaking, kind of like
and think he does a good job, just like they think that
Senator Holly out of out of Missouri does a good job.

(01:09:27):
And so none of these people are going to help us vote our way
out of it. Here's Tucker's take on what you
just said there as far as the happy trigger finger.
I feel good about the RepublicanParty.
We're killing all the right people and we're cutting your
taxes. Cutting your taxes and killing
all the right people. That really is the crispest way
to describe the marriage of libertarian economics and neo

(01:09:50):
con foreign policy. Cutting taxes and killing.
And if you think about it, who'dwant to be associated with that?
Cutting taxes itself is hardly avirtue.
It's a contextual matter. Sometimes it is, sometimes it
is. It totally depends.
But in Lindsey Graham's simplistic but heartfelt
formulation, cutting taxes is just a positive, but always.
And so it's killing people. Killing the right people.
No, they got to be the right people.

(01:10:11):
But killing people, killing people is just it's just good
thing. Like, it's one thing you don't
need to describe. It's like sex with your wife.
Just good. Have you killed someone today?
Oh, good, you have. OK, good.
That's how he thinks of it. You're a sick fuck if you say
something like that, much less if you.
Believe it killing people. And if you're gleefully in front
of an audience applauding like seals bragging.
About the killing that you were doing, that's really evil.

(01:10:32):
I think he's got a fair couple points there.
I I think the premise. Of cutting taxes I knew you
would get it for sending it as Iwant to add a boy and a helmet
sticker for taking less of your money this is hold on let me
just stop you Steve because Thisis why we're.

(01:10:54):
Friends, because I didn't show you that clip before we went and
I and I didn't discuss it with you, but I also honed in on the
one week as part of cut Tucker'sargument in there and you're
hitting it right now. The idea that they are entitled
to your money in the 1st place and he doesn't seem to call that
out. I've just go on, carry on.
That was great. He even kind of throws it away.

(01:11:15):
He's like, well, it just is or it isn't, I mean.
We can take the money whatever we want and we want to use it
for what we want to use it for. So I, I think that there's a
fundamental problem from both sides of this argument, because
they both seem to be the mind that they're entitled to our
money that's not really ours that they we whenever they
bequeath to us to use, we shouldsay, oh, thank you.
Can you give us a little bit more of my money?

(01:11:37):
But then on the subject of killing people, how are you
gonna do that? How you gonna fund it?
You've just already allowed me to keep more of my money, So
you're just gonna print more money and make the money that
you allowed me to keep worth less.
So you're not really giving me my money back, you're just
making the money I have worth less.
And even in the extended clip onthere which we played either
yesterday or the day. Before it's really nauseating

(01:11:57):
because his argument is that under Donald Trump for the first
time, we've run out of bombs. We didn't even run out of bombs
during World War 2, but we that seems like an emergency and
we're not even at war. That seems truly disgusting, but
I think it is. It's right in line and and I
don't like being a person that George Hill called me an
acceleration list again this morning.

(01:12:18):
He said he's like you're an acceleration list, like let's
get it done. George wants to fight before he
doesn't have any fight left in him.
And I don't wreck. I don't I don't actually hate
that idea either. But I think you and I have come
to the conclusion, and this may be sad because a lot of what we
talk about is national news, butall it's all it's convincing me
of and I'm I'm hoping that somebody pulls me back from the
brink here. What it's convincing me of is
that there's absolutely no solution at the federal level.

(01:12:39):
And so I sort of had that instinct anyway.
But let me play you this piece of Ron Johnson.
And then you tell me, one, should any whistleblower from
whatever your relationship is with the FBI and my former
relationship with the FBI, should any whistleblower from
that organization come forward to help Ron Johnson?
And two, is Ron Johnson going towrite the check to continue

(01:13:00):
funding it despite this like impassioned plea?
This may be the most black Pilling thing that you can
listen to and we're going to do it for you because that's what
we do here. And so I, I am calling on and I
appreciate all the members of the Judiciary Committee.
We need to get to the bottom of this.
We need to do everything we can to assist Director Patel and AG

(01:13:21):
Bondi in, in making sure that they have the staff to take
control of these agencies, that they're the heads of them.
I don't think they have the control.
I think they're being sabotaged within.
But the American people need to understand exactly what.
Happened. And again, I'm calling on
members of Judiciary Committee to help Sandra Grassi and myself
get to the bottom of this so we can expose this so this doesn't

(01:13:45):
happen again in America. This has to end.
I have had communications with Senator.
Johnson's staff, I've never actually spoken to the senator.
I'm waiting for him to actually issued the cry that he's always
doing that. They need more whistleblowers.
But to your question, what did it, what was the end result of

(01:14:08):
what you did, what Garrett did, what George Hill did, what I
did, what any of the number of the suspendables did?
I mean, we raised awareness to acertain extent, but you had
Garrett. Of.
Out of pay for 1100 days you youwent over a year without it I'm
still sitting home with a hobbyist podcast just talking to

(01:14:29):
my buddy not representing a particular agency department
armed or Bureau of the federal government United States.
So we we brought information forward, it was exploited for
political gain and it didn't achieve what we'd hoped.
Which. Was a.
Modicum of accountability, whichwould be the the wrong people
having to face justice, what they did.
And then the correction, the corrective action for what we

(01:14:52):
were identifying were problems that didn't happen.
So for somebody who's thinking about coming forward, I think it
would probably be in their best interest to say, hey, look, I'm,
I'm affiliated with an organization that doesn't
reflect my values, my morals, myethos.
So I'm just going to leave. I'm just going to leave and not
ruin my professional prospects in the future and just say, hey,
look, this organization, it wasn't a good fit for me.

(01:15:12):
I'm going to go on and I'm not going to give those goodies to
the elected officials who were do nothing with it other than
stand up at the lectern and pound it and say we need to get
to the bottom of this, which will necessitate some oversight
hearings and then some strongly worded letters.
And then maybe Sean Hannity can have me on tonight.
And make sure you chip in $5.00 because it is the end of the
quarter. I see Ron.

(01:15:36):
Johnson's statement there is thesame thing as I see Howie's
statement going out and saying we're going to fund Snap.
It sounds good. It feels compassionate.
Cash Patel is being subverted bypeople within them.
What is he doing in Chinese right now?
Why is he in Chinese and not desperately working to fix his
agency? I had a call yesterday with a
mainstream news outlet, relatively conservative ish now

(01:15:58):
outlet, but very mainstream. And when I spoke, the reporter
said, you know a lot about this.And I went, yeah, I've been
studying this problem for literally years.
And I know more than the FBI director and the deputy director
because not only did I study it from the outside like I'm doing
now and you and I are talking about, but I also worked on it

(01:16:21):
from the inside. So I have the ability to
actually query sources and know whether or not something I'm
reading is true or false. And that's why journalists
continue to reach out to us. They beg for more people to talk
to them because the ability to give that insight, it doesn't
exist in the media. It doesn't exist in a place
where people are not going to get fired for it.
If a people are like, can you, can you connect me with an FBI

(01:16:41):
agent who will tell me that I gono, nor would I, you idiot.
You would get them fired. We know for a fact that
currently the FBI director is out there like he's he's
polygraphing people to find out if somebody talked to me.
So I don't talk to my friends about stuff.
I only talk through intermediaries now I have to
take all my sources like secondhand so they don't get
fired because they don't have transparency because they want

(01:17:03):
to expose this nonsense and it and they don't they want to fund
it. They're going to write a check.
They're going to find out that the pipe bomber was interviewed
by the FBI and not investigated and not arrested.
And that the single most terroristic thing that happened,
which set up Donald Trump and all of his supporters to go down
for terroristic charges and put Enrique Tario in jail for 20

(01:17:23):
plus years. And thank God he's out and run
around having 2 packs a day. I'm so glad that he can have a
cigarette on his own time with his own money because he doesn't
sit in a prison cell right now. And that all happened because
the agencies that they funded are going to get funded again.
There's no change in them. None.
It's just not there. Transparency.
Right. That's just things we like.
We're being transparent. The transparency is not coming

(01:17:46):
from the inside. The reporting that Steve Baker's
going to put out is coming from the outside.
I mean, his sources were on the inside, but it didn't come
through the protocols that you would want where somebody says,
hey, what we did here was illegal and moral, unethical,
unconstitutional. I'm going to bring that concern
forward to people who have, likeme, been vetted as having

(01:18:06):
fidelity to our oath of office, bravery to step up and say that
what we're doing is wrong and wemight be the bad guys.
And the integrity to actually doit.
And maybe bring it to the elected officials who
theoretically have the power of the purse to rein that in.
As opposed to just rubber stamping and allowing the
agencies to just continue to exist at the current funding

(01:18:26):
levels. Because they're big C
conservative Republicans who believe that the starting point
of a budget negotiation is Joe Biden level spending.
That's right, I'm going to show you something.
That, I think is maybe peak irony, and it's highly amusing
to me. Not that somebody suffered
something that looks not great as somebody who's treated folks
like this, but is the ironic visual that goes on here.

(01:18:49):
There are so many things that show us exactly what's wrong in
these two video clips back-to-back.
The first one is Donald Trump announcing that Ozympic has been
negotiated by the federal government to have a lower rate.
So that's amazing to me. There are significant amounts of
side effects. There's a $2 billion lawsuit
against these people that is going on right now.
I wonder if they get any sort ofprotection with this agreement.
And there's a possibility of that too.

(01:19:10):
But like, more importantly, rather than solve the problem of
obese Americans, which is what Iheard was going to happen, we're
going to give them a freaking pill.
I got to imagine that RFK juniorlike goes goes back home at the
end of the day and barfs and he's disgusted by the fact that
he signed up on this. The Make America Healthy
movement is not going to we're going to have better food.
It's that we're going to give people a shot so they don't

(01:19:32):
absorb the crap food that they eat.
So here's Trump signing it. And then as if, as if God's
sense of humor is happening in real time right now, a real
provincial, you know, providential moment happens.
The dude blacks out on his feet in the middle of the White House
discussion of this. And then in peak America right

(01:19:52):
now, the people who respond to it are a bunch of women.
OK. So I don't know how you can make
it more ironic and amusing to the stuff I've been talking
about. President has terrible ass idea.
That is not the solution that wevoted for.
It's like, yeah, are we going tomass to poor people?
Yes. And also we're going to give you
fat pills, which he calls them fat pills and he makes sure he
knows he calls them fat pills. Then the guy who makes the fat

(01:20:14):
pills passes out in the middle of it, probably stroked out from
a freaking COVID from a COVID clot, and he hits the ground.
They claimed he just fainted, but nobody's seen him, so
whatever. And then women step up to to
take control of the room like it's perfect in every way.
Clip #1 Donald Trump is giving you lower cost doze epic.
I can't see how this could go wrong.
So today I'm thrilled to announce that the two world's

(01:20:37):
widest pharmaceutical manufacturers, Eli Lilly and
Novo Nordis, have agreed to offer their most popular GLP 1
weight loss drug. I call it the factor.
Remember, at drastic discounts, they're very effective drugs.
So, so far, I've never heard anything bad about them.

(01:20:59):
I only you're good about them. It's pretty.
Is there anything bad about them, Bob?
Someday maybe it'll come out, which will notify you
immediately. Someday we'll find out that.
Something will come out, Steve. We'll notify you immediately.
Are you ready for God's sense ofhumor?
Send for nearly 150 years. My company, Eli Lilly.

(01:21:22):
Has been investing in America, we've been advancing science and
creating high value jobs. But today we are you OK, Gordon?
You OK? First of all, I noticed the

(01:21:57):
Secret Service lady who's a pretty black woman standing in a
very clean suit looks and goes like, I don't know what happens
next. One hand goes up, another hand
goes up. I'm going to do traffic guard
here and just stand still and she locks down. 3 blonde white
ladies step up and start moving the press out because they're
really proactive. And Donald Trump just looks
there like F that guy. That guy was Gordon Finley.

(01:22:18):
He is the he's an executive fromNovo Nordisk.
And yeah, he just hit the deck right there on on live
television while they were doingthis press conference about how
great their companies are, how many jobs they're creating.
I think there's another. Job just opened up what was.
That what just happened. Look, I mean the Ozempic is

(01:22:40):
necessary. To shrink the hearts of
Americans that were already enlarged by the gene juice that
we were forced to inject into our arms.
Right. And the myocarditis, we create a
problem for ourselves to solve and Eli Lilly had to hire lots
of people in order to do that. I am a little bit noting how
just about every guy there, I mean, for all the talk about how

(01:23:01):
men are kind of our default predisposition is to be a little
bit more assertive in those situations, all of them went
code black, which is a concern. Tell people what code black is
for. Everybody who doesn't know, I
mean, it's, it's a Lieutenant Grossman type of.
Philosophy of like what sort of mentality that you're in, like

(01:23:21):
some people are existing in the white and they're blissfully
ignorant. And then if you're existing in
the yellow, you're kind of like operating but aware, having good
situational awareness and eventually goes to red if things
are getting more heated. Black is when you're completely
overwhelmed by your situation. These are the stories that we
saw where people were you had a 747 hit the World Trade Center
and then they like walked back to their cubicle and tried to

(01:23:43):
like power down their computer as opposed to just yeah,
evacuating. So these are these are they're
often referred to the color codes of awareness.
This is something. That Jeff Cooper used to talk
about, he was a famous SF gunfighter and kind of like the
father of modern pistol fighting.
And of course Grossman talks about it as well as like what
people do, but we can't sometimes call it vapor locked.
I want to just tell people. So if you never heard it and you
ever hear about like guys like me or Steve talking about what

(01:24:05):
code color you are, if you're code white, that means you're
walking around in the world, you're a sheep and you're
waiting to be eaten by the by the wolves.
You didn't even know there was aproblem, and so it's just you're
dead if something bad happens. Code Yellow is that you're
situationally aware, but you don't feel like there's imminent
danger around you. So you're, you know, you're
walking around, but you can still enjoy your life.
Code Orange is like, you know, there's a specific threat, but
it's not accurate, it's not actionable yet.

(01:24:27):
So you're kind of waiting for something to happen that you
have a feeling of of bad. And then red is like you're in
the fight. Like when you're in code red,
like it's game on. But code black means you're in
the fight and you no longer see anything.
Everything just gets dark. You've just gone fight, flight
or freeze. I've seen it written.
In in documents when they would like kick somebody out of.
Training, they would call it, overwhelmed by circumstances

(01:24:48):
where people just stop making decisions and they just start
reacting to whatever the most immediate stimuli is.
Like, you know, if you gave thema magazine, they'd put it in the
magazine. Well, if you gave them a
spoonful of sugar, they would take the medicine go down.
Like, they just don't know what's happening anymore and
just whatever the immediate stimuli is what they react to.
So yeah, Trump kind of just stands up and just kind of like,
he just that was it. That was the end of whatever he
was doing. He was like, I was talking and

(01:25:10):
now I'm not talking. What a bummer.
I mean, he's like, who's that guy?
If he. You get this guy, he's on my
side and went to. Work on him like a medic, That
would be awesome. Yeah, and somebody asked what is
Code Brown. Code Brown is when you need.
To change your pants. Everyone knows that.
That's not even a question. 25% of people in combat.
All right, so we've shown some. Gross fat people we've.

(01:25:30):
Shown a bunch of snappies and SNAP benefits.
I think that the problem that continues to exist is this
ongoing sort of disgust that we have with we're paying for all
this stuff. We've created a problem that we
knew was going to be a problem. We, you know, this is
inevitable. The only answer seems to be is
stop apologizing for seeing the solution.
Stop playing the game that people are playing.

(01:25:50):
And I don't know, I just do you remember the the Sidney Sweeney
controversy the other day? Vaguely enough to have asked my
wife, who is. Sidney Sweeney Yeah, Allow me to
try to figure out if I can put this on the screen here.
So, you know, filibuster for 10 seconds, Steve, and I'll put I
will find you Sidney Sweeney. I think I've got a thing for
her. I mean, we had to have the

(01:26:11):
national discussion. I saw the name percolating.
I know she's a famous person. Is she famous for being famous?
And I asked my wife because she's the person that would know
like the more Entertainment Tonight sort of things and she
had no idea who Sydney Sweeney was.
I think we have now crossed the threshold as being too old, no
awareness of really like what pop culture is.
We're fully engrossed in just whatever the kids are saying.

(01:26:33):
And we know what 6-7 is, but notnecessarily who the the models
are who are walking around wearing jeans.
What is 6/7? See, you're further along than
me. Bro I don't know.
Here look this is the. Cindy Sweeney controversy She
was alleged to be a. White supremacist because she
wore jeans and she's pretty and she has like a like a nice body.
Did American Eagle just run an ad for eugenics?
Jeans are passed down from parents to offspring, often

(01:26:56):
determining traits like hair color, personality, and even eye
color. My jeans are blue.
Sidney Sweeney, Hasbury Keynes. Totally just talking about
denim, right? No, they totally were just
talking about denim. It's a tug in cheek way of
saying that when pretty people are pretty, it might be because

(01:27:16):
of the genetic composition that they have.
That was a that was a scandal, actually an appeal to people who
are above room temperature IQ. To make that connection, that's
a double entendre. Yeah.
It really hurt that lady's feelings because she looked like
she was not. Dragging men in with her looks.
OK, so here's the best thing. There's nothing we hate more
than like the leftist crazy lunatic women.

(01:27:36):
This will be sort of the palate cleanse, I think for the because
this is This is just nice. I didn't actually have a thought
about Cindy Sweeney one way or another.
Is that fair? I just don't like I'm as you.
I don't know what 6-7 is. I'm either too old or I'm not
the demographic. I'm not buying American Eagle
jeans anymore. Not like I'm not swayed by
pretty girls with, you know, cars.
She sat down for an interview with GQ with maybe the worst,

(01:28:01):
second only to the red headed girl that wrote the article
about socialism that quoted social studies textbooks.
This woman is the worst probablyinterviewer and the fact that
they decided to videotape it is atrocious.
I've seen shorter clips. This is the longer version of
it. So people can see in this clip a
woman who is clearly a lefty loony GQ, whatever we call them

(01:28:23):
propagandists, is looking to solicit an apology from Sidney
Sweeney for being pretty and fordoing advertisements.
She's literally a person who takes pictures for a living of
her body to sell products. She's a model.
Like she's a model of a person. How?
We'd like to look and often times we attribute models less.

(01:28:45):
Intellect, even though they're attractive, we think they may
not have all that much going on upstairs.
She without saying very much andI don't know that she's
brilliant and I still don't knowthat, but I I like her a lot
more because she apologizes not a little bit is essentially
asked a covert question. Will you disavow white
supremacy? See if you can hear it.

(01:29:06):
And her answer actually gives mesome hope.
So I hate ending a Friday on a bad thing.
And I hate ending it with like, ugly fat people that are eating
cheeseburgers or like, shovelingdown, you know, SNAP benefits.
So this is a Pretty Woman dominating a gross woman.
All of them have horrible voices, by the way.
So we're just going to endure the fact that they all have the
vocal fry up talk thing. But maybe this is a moment of

(01:29:29):
hope. And also, like, the pretty girl
wins. So that seems like an 80s movie
to me. Here we go.
I'm literally in jeans and AT shirt like every day of my life.
Jeans are uncontroversial. Jeans are awesome.
You look great in your jeans. I think I know how you're going
to answer this, but I'm going toask anyway.
I mean, the president tweeted about the jeans ad or truth

(01:29:49):
socialed about the jeans ad and that just seems to me.
Like a very crazy moment for anyone and I wondered what that
was like. It was surreal.
It was surreal and it would be totally human.

(01:30:10):
I would probably feel like thankful that somebody had my
back in public. You.
Know and conveniently some very powerful people had my back in
public and I wondered if if you felt that way.
I don't think. I don't think that it's not that

(01:30:34):
that feeling didn't, I didn't have that feeling, but I I
wasn't thinking of it like that or like of any of it.
I kind of just put my phone away.
I was filming every day. I'm filming for you.
So I'm working like 16 hour daysand I don't really bring my
phone on set. So I work and then I go home and
I go to sleep. So I didn't really.

(01:30:57):
I don't really see a lot of it. You've made a really good case
for keeping your thoughts and your life.
Separate from. That work, but the risk is that,
you know, there's a chance that somebody will get some idea
about what you think about certain issues and feel like I

(01:31:18):
don't want to see Christy because of that.
Like do you worry about that? No, no, the criticism of the
content, which was basically that.
Maybe specifically in this political climate.
Like white people shouldn't jokeabout genetic superiority.
Like that was kind of like the criticism, broadly speaking.
And since you are talking about this, I just wanted to give you

(01:31:40):
an opportunity to talk about that specifically.
I think that when I have an issue that I want to speak
about, people will hear. She doesn't even have to be
smart to destroy this girl. No, she just says nothing.

(01:32:02):
She's like, did you feel this way?
No, does not. Care.
She doesn't even care enough to pull her hair out of from
underneath. The jacket that she's wearing
right yes, she the subversion ofexpectations is one of my
favorite uses of of comedic effect right.
So if you know, if you said to me.
Steve, I'm I'm a. MAGA podcaster, how many great
things do you think Donald Trumpdid yesterday?

(01:32:23):
And I would respond back to you unless he did more than
35,000,000. I'm going to be disappointed.
Like the subversion of expectations is very funny to
me. And she completely did that to
this woman who even relied on the people are saying not me,
not me, because I want you to get along with me and I want to
listen to the response. And she just said, you know, I
don't care. Just the Elon Musk, I don't

(01:32:46):
care, destroyed that one. I wasn't a fan.
I don't like to. I don't want to hear her talk
ever. But.
If there's going to be an opportunity where I have to hear
her talk, I want her to do that.I want to hear her do that.
So I don't hate the idea that she's doing a movie and there
there takes a certain amount of awareness not to fall into that
that bait. And maybe it's just because

(01:33:07):
she's been pretty her whole lifeand she's she's realized that
she says less, she wins. She she dominated that idiot.
Like, why did they film that? Why?
Did they release? That that's the other crazy
thing. This is GQ.
So this is a magazine, the Gentleman's Quarterly using the
female. Yeah.
And why is Gentleman's Quarterly?
Hiring. The quote UN quote, journalist
lady they had who was like everysingle FBI intelligence analyst

(01:33:32):
I've ever worked with. I think she actually is an FBI
intelligence analyst. I'm going to just go ahead and
say that that's what her previous job was.
I don't know. I loved it.
I love Say Less. Let them hang themselves with
their own Sean Hannity. So freaking funny.
Do you want to apologize for white supremacy?
I think when I want to do something, I'll do it.
That's a great, great answer. So there you go, folks.

(01:33:55):
It's not all bad out there. Sidney Sweeney's still got good
genes, and she dominated this tart.
That's the strongest case that she could have made that she
should. Retain her right to vote.
Yeah, Yeah, I think she would also be.
OK with not voting. I don't know why I think that.
I just feel like she probably doesn't care.
I don't think she cares. No, I think she's she's going to
be finding her job. She's very well.

(01:34:17):
Siloed into what her industry isand if it's posing for pictures,
wearing jeans or filming whatever she's filming, if it's
a movie or TV show, she's just interested in doing that.
And I don't have that. The the great, the great gotcha
would have been, you said. You wear jeans every single day
and you're always in jeans and AT shirt, but here you are in a
skirt and boots. Would you care to address the

(01:34:37):
inconsistency in your statement?That's what somebody who was
really trying to do. Gotcha.
Instead they got a retard that wanted to get her to cry out
about white supremacy. Anyway, that's all I got for
today. I just, I just thought that was
nice. That was just a nice little,
that was a nice little chat between 2 girls, 1 of whom was
really dumb and the other one who might be dumb but she's
smarter than the other dumb, so she looks brilliant.
There you go. Good for her.
Lady goes tallest Midget and theskinniest kid and fat kid.

(01:35:00):
That's right. That's the one eyed man in the
eye of the blind. All right, so in the land of the
blind, Steve friend, what do yougot coming up for the American
radicals? Are you doing the American
radicals? Do you have a job?
Like what do you do these days? Look, I just do a hobbyist
podcast. That's really what my focus is
on. Right now I was assessing my
voice throughout today. I think I might give it the old
college try. The Saturday Grab Bag might

(01:35:21):
return tomorrow on rumble.com/AMRad Pod and on the YouTube The
American Radicals Podcast. Saturday, Grab Bag, just going
to be looking at how the New York Times is arguing that we
need to rethink the Holocaust because it might, might have
actually been a good thing. And there was a legal alien
elected mayor somewhere. And we're cutting off primary

(01:35:41):
care to people in Maine because we want to kill lots of babies.
So it should be an interesting time and an interesting
discussion. Join us tomorrow, Saturday 10:30
Eastern Time, the Marxist and orsocialist States of America
that's. What we got for here, just two
Bros having a conversation aboutthings that they would say if
you were listening or if you weren't listening.
And since you are, thanks so much for listening.

(01:36:01):
Thanks, Steve, for joining me. And I hope they pulled the
entire transcript when they decide to come and try to hit
you over the head with this. God forbid you talk to Kyle
Seraphin. As long as you don't pay me, pay
me in Tomahawks, I pay you only in.
Tomahawks have a great weekend, my friend.
Ladies and gentlemen support theprogram.
Give us a like give us a subscribe over on rumble on
YouTube. You can follow me over on X as
well at 227,000 and counting suppressed beyond all belief.

(01:36:25):
I'll show you guys a graph of that later on over on locals.
If you guys want to see what it looks like to make a hit on the
FBI director and then and then get stomped on by Elon's
company, I'll show you what it looks like.
It's really, really obvious on the graphical representation.
Follow us over on locals. We appreciate that and you can
also support us by going to Spotify.
If you're listening to the repayand you're not listening on
Spotify, what the heck you doing?
It's it's the best platform and everybody says it in the

(01:36:47):
comments over and over again. And it's because it gives you
audio and video and you have control.
Check us out there. Kyle serafinshow.com link in the
show description for that. Also, you can find us on locals
if you want any of these extra things.
Kyle serafin.com and again, one more, one more request.
Hit the like button on there. Those of you on YouTube are the
best at it. By the way, per capita, YouTube
crushes likes way better than Rumble does.

(01:37:10):
Take that for whatever it's worth.
Rumble people, I think you guys could do better.
If you're listening on a TVI don't know, maybe you can figure
it out. Maybe you can do it on your
phone. Thanks so much.
God bless you all. Have a fantastic weekend.
Support our sponsors, and yeah, we'll see you on the other side
of whatever's coming out here. Hopefully Steve Baker destroys
the pipe bomb narrative forthwith.
I'm going to call him right now.Thanks for listening to the Kyle

(01:37:31):
Serafin Show, streamed live weekdays on rumble.com/kyle
Serafin. Follow Kyle on Twitter, Truth
Social and Instagram at Kyle Serafin.

All Episodes

SOCIALISM was Already HERE: Federal Judge Orders Trump to Pay SNAP without Funding | Ep 672

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;}SOCIALISM was Already HERE: Federal Judge Orders Trump to Pay SNAP without Funding | Ep 672