All Episodes
Previous Next
July 22, 2024 - Viva & Barnes
01:06:54
ABJECT CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE! Summary of Kim Cheatle Congressional Hearing! Viva Frei Vlawg
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
It was outside of our secure perimeter, yes.
Now, that building was, I believe, 500.
How far away was that building from the president?
It was approximately 200 yards.
200 yards.
AR-15 has a range of about 400 to 600 yards.
My question...
Why is the Secret Service protective perimeter shorter than one of the most popular semi-automatic weapons in the United States?
There are a number of weapons out there with a number of ranges.
Again, an advance was completed.
The determination of the perimeter, I'm not going to speak to specifics, but there are a number of factors that are taken.
When we determine our perimeter, some of it has to do with terrain, some of it has to do with buildings, some of it has to do with assets and resources that are available.
And so what I'm hearing is that a perimeter was not established outdoors in an outdoor venue that would prevent an AR-15, which is one of the most common weapons used in mass shootings, from being able to be within the range of Secret Service protection.
A perimeter was established, and even though there were buildings that were outside of that perimeter, it wasn't just that building.
There were a number of buildings in the area, and there was overwatch that was created to help mitigate some of those buildings.
Overwatch. Interesting.
It appears that they had overwatch of the building from which the would-be assassin, I guess he is an assassin, he killed somebody who just wasn't the president.
Fired his shots.
What do they say that he fired?
I think he fired six or five or six shots.
Holy hell, people.
Never did I think there'd be a day where AOC actually asked a poignant question and got the subject to make a radically damning admission.
Let me just bring this out here.
I was going to do this live, and then I forgot I had to take a kid to camp.
And it wasn't going to work, so I spent the entire drive listening to this live, taking notes, and making sure that I would do a summary of this.
Debacle of a congressional hearing of the Director of Secret Service, Kimberly Cheadle.
Noman S. Omen, people, I've made the joke a couple of times.
Her name is Cheadle.
You know, as in, we're going to cheat a little.
Cheadle. Cheat the election a little bit, you know, by...
Allowing for the elimination of our political rival.
The hearing was an abject disaster.
I think it's over now.
I just want to make sure that it's in fact over and not on pause.
The hearing was such an abject disaster, by the way, that...
Listen to this.
I don't know if anybody caught the hot mic at the end.
Listen to this.
Is this the one here?
Listen to this.
This is when the hearing came to an end.
Listen to the hot mic or the guy, I don't know, in the crowd who may or may not know that he's...
Perfectly audible for the world to hear.
Listen to this.
With that, without objection, all members have five legislative days within which to submit materials and additional written questions for the witness, which will be forwarded to the witness.
If there's no further business, without objection, the committee stands adjourned.
Right now, listen.
That is what you call a smackdown.
Listen. Here.
That's what we call a smackdown.
That's what we call a smackdown.
It's not good either.
You can't be happy about it.
It's not good.
You can't be happy about that.
It's sad.
That's what you call a smackdown.
We're living in a world where the director of Secret Service gives what can only be described as the most horrendous.
It's not just horrendous.
It's not just embarrassing.
It's culpable.
Gives the most culpable congressional hearing you can possibly imagine.
There are a few things that are disgusting about this, and we're going to get to all of them one after another.
Sorry for the short notice, people, but life is what it is, and we make the time when we can find the time.
I haven't gotten through the entire hearing because I was listening at one and a half, so I know that I missed the closing statement of that guy.
But I got enough.
I think I'm like four hours into this.
It's an abject, not just a debacle, not just a disaster, not just a failure.
It's culpable negligence.
Her resignation is the tip of the iceberg for consequences going forward.
We're going to go through it.
One by one here.
Let's just make sure that we are live across all of the interwebs.
I'm going to be live with Richard Surrett this afternoon talking about the other big news of the day.
Joe Biden stepping out of the race, which we talked about at length last night, so no need to go over that in greater detail today.
We are live on Rumble.
Viva Fry on Rumble.
We are live on Commitube.
We should be live on vivabarneslaw.locals.com.
Let me open that up and just make sure that we are live there and good to go.
And we should be live on Twitter.
For those of you who are new to the channel, where have you been?
I don't think there's very many new people to the channel, although I have been noticing a bit of an uptick in subscriber subscriptions across all the platforms.
Make sure that you are subscribed and you have your notifications turned on.
We're live at vivabarnslaw.locals.com, the bestest, most above-average law community out there.
Kim Cheadle, Director of the Secret Service.
A woman.
Not that that matters.
Except for the fact that that woman, Kim Cheadle, made DEI-type quotas integral part of Secret Service.
They want to have 30% female employees by 2030.
Forget just having the most talented people, the most skilled people, the people who can do their job properly, like scout out the buildings that are going to be the most prime location to carry out an assassination.
Have the most apt people who can identify A person of interest.
Identify a suspicious person.
Identify a threat.
Secure the locations.
They keep talking about the perimeter.
And I now know that Awaken with JP made the same joke, but I'm sitting having lunch with people today, listening to this, and I keep hearing them say, was the building within the perimeter?
The building was within the perimeter.
No! No, sorry.
She says, the building was outside of the perimeter.
Because the perimeter didn't include the building that is danger does not mean that the building was outside the perimeter.
It means that you didn't establish a proper perimeter.
It means that the building was inside the perimeter, but that your perimeter was within the actual perimeter of what you needed to secure to make sure that a 20-year-old Looney Tune...
Couldn't climb onto a building with a scope, a rangefinder, a gun, after having been identified as a suspicious person an hour earlier, get on that building, and fire off six, seven rounds before getting taken out by a sniper.
If you think that that building was beyond the perimeter, a building that was 150 yards from the president that allowed for a perfect kill shot on the president, if you don't think that that was within the perimeter, you screwed up on your perimeter, dumbass.
And I said that to my friend.
He's like, yeah, Waken with J.P. Or he said, the guy with the red hair made the exact same joke.
And I'm like, great minds think alike.
And fools seldom differ.
The perimeter that needs to be established is the perimeter that is required to secure the area.
If the building that was risky, that was the prime point from which to have a perfect shot, was beyond the perimeter, you didn't have the proper perimeter in the first place, you moron, Kim Cheadle.
Of course, she doesn't know.
Because she wouldn't answer any...
You won't know what she knows.
She doesn't know.
She saw the security detail for that particular day.
She couldn't answer a damn question.
We're nine days out of the attempted assassination.
She couldn't answer a damn question.
Or I should say she should be able to answer the questions, but she won't answer the questions.
Okay, let's just make sure.
Now that we're live across all platforms, people, I pulled out the highlights as I was driving, and I'm going to go through some of these, and we're going to talk about this all.
Before we do that, hold on, before we do that, and it's a very apropos sponsor for today's show.
You'll notice, because I just checked the box, that this stream says it contains a paid promotion.
We're going to touch on a little bit of the old constitutional discussion about the Second Amendment, the First Amendment, the Constitution at large.
What was ultimately repulsive about this hearing?
Never let a good tragedy go to waste.
It wasn't all the Democrats that did it, but my goodness, they all had that talking point that they had to sneak in here.
This hearing on how it came to be that a 20-year-old nutjob managed to show up at a political rally with a rangefinder, was identified as a person of interest, nonetheless...
Was identified as a suspicious person, was later identified as a threat minutes or an hour before the shooting, and yet somehow they let the president come out onto that stage where the would-be sniper assassin had a 130-yard kill shot.
How the botched security allowed for that to happen.
While that should have been the object of the hearing, never let a good crisis go to waste.
You had your sleazebag, Jamie Raskin.
Turning this into a debate on gun control, a debate on AR-15s.
It wasn't just a hearing on how in the name of sweet holy hell could the director of secret service have allowed for something like this to happen.
They got to use it to push their agenda for gun control, their war on AR-15s, because this is just one of many mass shootings that has occurred in America.
And if people didn't have AR-15s, well, this guy surely wouldn't have done what he did and therefore turn it into...
The prolonged gun debate as opposed to a hearing on how such an abject security disaster could have occurred.
So, repulsive, opportunistic, but it's par for the course when it comes to Rask and AL.
But when it comes to the Second Amendment and your knowledge of the Constitution, you might want to think about visiting our sponsor of the day, Hillsdale College.
It's an amazing thing.
Knowledge is the gift that can never be taken back.
A day in which you have gathered knowledge is not a wasted day.
The only wasted day is the day in which you learnt nothing.
And that's why I'm excited that Hillsdale College is offering more than 40 free online courses in the most important and enduring subjects, the Constitution being one of them.
You can learn about the works of C.S. Lewis, who has the greatest quote on tyranny of all time.
You can read the book of Genesis, because I looked it up, by the way.
The shot was fired at 6.11.
And that was the Bible verse, 611, about the armor of God.
Admittedly, you know, it could have been at 612, there would have been another verse in the Bible that would have been applicable.
But you can read about the Bible and why that story will forever injure humanity because it is the story of humanity.
You can learn about the U.S. Constitution, the rise and fall of the Roman Republic, and the history of the ancient Christian church with Hillsdale College's online courses, all available for free.
Yes, free.
Free knowledge is the greatest thing on earth.
I personally recommend you sign up for Constitution 101, the meaning and history of the U.S. Constitution, and you might understand the meaning, import, impact of the Second Amendment.
In this 12-lecture course, you'll explore the design and the purpose of the Constitution, the challenges it faced leading up to the Civil War, and how it has been undermined for more than a century by progressivism and liberalism, most of which was on display today during this congressional hearing.
The course is self-paced so you can start and stop whenever you want.
Enroll now, Constitution 101.
Our country needs more Americans who understand the Constitution and maybe one...
Semi-relevant Canadian who understands the Constitution as well.
Who can defend freedom for the American people against the encroachments of an increasingly large and unaccountable government.
Go to hillsdale.edu forward slash viva.
No cost.
Easy to get started.
hillsdale.edu forward slash viva.
The description.
The link is in the description.
Yeah. An increasingly encroaching progressive government that is ultimately unaccountable.
As we are witnessing right now.
Now, by the way, I've got a hard out at 4, let's say 4.13, so I can go do the interview with Richard Surrett, make sure the audio is working, etc., etc.
All right, people.
So we had the hearing today.
Kimberly Chidi, Chidi, Freudian slip there.
Kimberly Cheadle, the director of Secret Service, nine days after the shooting, and I know it's been nine days since the shooting, because Kimberly Cheadle must have said it.
With every answer that she provided, well, thank you very much for your questions.
And we are now nine days out from this horrible, horrible incident.
And I don't want to provide inaccurate information.
I'm not familiar with the timeline.
She couldn't answer a bloody question.
How did this happen?
We're still conducting an investigation.
What time was the first shot fired?
6-11.
How long had he been identified as a...
I'm still gathering information on the timeline, and I'm not sure.
When was he identified as a suspicious person?
I'm still like, was it an hour before?
I'll play one highlight, which I think is the best summary.
It's the best highlight from the entire hearing, unless someone in the portion that I have not yet heard was even better than Pat Fallon.
Representative Pat Fallon out of Texas had, without a doubt, the absolute...
Best summary, the best five minutes, and it was a five minutes that highlighted that not only does Kim Cheadle need to step down or be fired, it is culpable criminal negligence at best, and with the refusal to answer straightforward questions that the information is out there.
There's a six-minute video that puts everything together in a timeline that maybe Kim Cheadle wants to watch.
Her refusal, not inability, her refusal to answer the questions indicates that this might have been more than culpable negligence and might have been premeditated, let it happen on purpose, and today the discussion had this plan gone according to plan would have been, oh, it's a horrible tragedy that toxic Trump is out forever.
It's a horrible tragedy.
And now let's go examine all of the layers of failures of intelligence, failures of security.
Oh, we all feel so bad.
We must come together.
Can you imagine what would have happened if it had happened?
It's an amazing thing.
It was Pat Fallon.
We'll get there.
He's fired his AR-15 one time years ago.
The day that this happened or the day after, he went and tried to recreate it.
He fired his AR-15 using a laser scope and an enhanced scope.
I don't know the difference.
He fired on a target from 130 or 150 yards away.
Eight shots with one scope and eight shots with another scope because he didn't know what scope the would-be assassin used.
And he said he made 15 of 16 kill shots at that range.
Him, an absolute amateur at best marksman.
It is an absolute freaking miracle.
Whether or not you think there was another shooter, whether or not you think there was another sniper who fired the shot and Crooks was the patsy, doesn't matter.
Even if, and I'm still on the more simple version, yeah, I believe that this kid was probably known to intelligence, was probably known to the FBI.
They probably had this kid on their radar because he had been looking up things in the weeks leading up to this.
That would indicate that he's clearly mentally unwell.
Apparently now it's known that he had had mental issues.
So whether or not there was a...
Suspicious meeting between a dude in a suit and some 20-year-old disheveled whoever the hell that kid was.
Or whether or not they just had this kid on their radar and they said, let's let it happen.
Let's let this kid show up at the site with a drone days earlier.
Scope it out.
Even he knew that this unsecured roof was the best place to do it from.
So whether or not there was a second shooter, I'm still on that.
I'll go with the lone gunman for now.
I'm open to things definitively.
But even if it was only the shooter, only this unhinged kid, I believe he was on the radar, on the watch list, on the horizon of an FBI, CIA secret service that knew this kid was unhinged, let him roam free to get whatever shots off, and this kid who was a better marksman than Pat Fallon, missed by the grace of God and he killed another man there.
There's tragedy and then there is...
Societal collapsing tragedy.
Had Trump been killed, I believe we would now be in day nine of World War III.
We would certainly be in day nine of violent upheaval in America.
They let this happen, and my goodness, the fact that she refuses to answer even the most basic questions is sure as hell going to confirm what people already think.
But the Democrats never waste an opportunity.
To weaponize, to politicize, to politically exploit.
Their own failure, by the way.
I mean, imagine this.
Rep Raskin and the other Demets.
Is his name Raskin?
Raskin. Rascal Raskin.
It's amazing.
You got Cheetle, Cheety Cheetle, Rascal Raskin, weaponizing their own failure to take the rights away of law-abiding citizens.
Because understand, that's exactly what they're doing.
Let me see if we can play a little bit of Raskin's opening statements here.
Our job in Congress is not simply to marvel at miracles or count on good luck, but to act as public policy legislators to do whatever we can to prevent future political violence, attempted assassination.
See, right up then, I thought, Raskin, it was going to be bipartisan.
He said it was a miracle.
Whether or not you think it was a miracle or something else, divine intervention or just a cosmic fluke.
I thought we were on the same page right now.
Oh, Raskin has finally come out to say we all need to say this is unacceptable and this catastrophic security failure needs to be accounted for.
But then...
The chairman and I are thus determined to get to the bottom of the stunning security failures that enabled this 20-year-old lone gunman who borrowed his father's AR-15 to perpetrate a mass shooting and assassination attempt at an event protected by the Secret Service.
as well as state and local police.
AR-15, mass shooting, you knew it was going to get political.
We'll ask hard questions of Director Cheadle today in order to identify and understand the shocking security failures that occurred and to help transform the operations of the Secret Service to prevent anything like this from happening again.
We can't let ourselves off the hook either, dear colleagues.
What happened in Butler, Pennsylvania was a double failure.
The failure by the Secret Service to properly protect former President Trump and the failure of Congress to properly protect our people from criminal gun violence.
Can you imagine that this is where he wants to take it right now?
I mean, hey, it's a shame from Rep Raskin's point of view.
I mean, look, had this been even worse, he would have been able to make an even stronger argument for gun control.
It's an amazing thing.
At Uvalde, the cops, what was it, 100?
How many of them?
100 plus cops?
For what?
An hour and 15 minutes?
No, it was 300 cops.
I'm getting mistaken on the numbers.
How many cops was it at Uvalde?
Standing back, standing down, doing nothing for an hour and 14 minutes while an armed gunman goes on a massacre.
My goodness.
And then they use that as an excuse to say, even the good guys with the guns aren't going to save you, so we've got to take away everybody's guns.
They exploit the lack of security at Sandy Hook to say it's the guns, not the crazy person, not the lack of security that should have been implemented at Sandy Hook.
They go after the cowardice or the political corruption of whatever appears to be a stand-down order at Uvalde to go after law-abiding gun ownership.
Oh, look at that.
Security failure at Sandy Hook because we didn't do what we were supposed to do.
Security failure at Uvalde because 300 cops stacked there for an hour and a quarter while the massacre occurred.
And that's why it was as horrendous as it was.
Well, given their incompetence, given the corruption...
We need to take away your rights, your Second Amendment rights under the Constitution.
And here, relying on the abject incompetence at best or criminal culpability at middle ground or active willful involvement at worst of Kim Cheadle, appointed by Biden at the insistence of his family.
They say, look at this incompetence.
Take away the guns.
Take away the guns because Secret Service allowed a 20-year-old nutbag to fly a drone over a location.
Show up with a rangefinder, identify him as a suspicious person, not intercept him, get him on a roof for minutes known as a threat, allow Trump to come out, notwithstanding all of that, get shot, as did Corey Campatore behind them, and then they say, we've got to take the guns away.
He couldn't wait through his opening statement, and this was a leitmotif, a recurring theme throughout this entire hearing.
AR-15, gun control, gun control, and it's a terrible tragedy.
The only one who made a lot of sense today that typically doesn't was AOC.
And the reason why?
These people are all politicians.
They know damn well this could have been any one of them who could have been killed because of the grotesque incompetence or culpable negligence or active participation through passivity of Kim Cheadle.
We must therefore also ask hard questions about whether our laws are making it too easy for potential assassins to obtain firearms generally in the AR-15s.
They better make sure that the Iranian threats abide by gun control.
They better make sure that the gun control laws apply to Iranian government who wanted to carry out this assassination.
I won't go through all of it because it's quite enraging.
You could predict.
It's predictive yet again, but this time was a little bit more, I would say, more unanimous.
There was a sense of bipartisan support in the admonishment of Kim Cheadle.
The irony, though, is that the Democrats, they asked this question, I would say, at least 40 times before they finally got the answer they wanted.
Do more guns on the street make it more difficult, Ms. Cheadle, for you as Secret Service to do your job?
And she...
It was like the only not evasive answer that I approved of.
It wasn't an evasive answer.
She doesn't want to say more guns would not make our job more dangerous or would not make our job more difficult because our job is always difficult.
With Ronald Reagan, it wasn't the prolific amount of AR-15s on the street that made that situation come to be because it was a handgun, I'm pretty sure, that shot Ronald Reagan.
But it wasn't AR-15s.
You know, the prolific rate of AR-15 gun ownership that led to JFK's assassination, RFK's assassination, Martin Luther King's assassination.
But now they want to make that the issue, not the grotesque, deliberate, in my view, failure to protect Donald Trump.
Let me see here.
Ronald Reagan assassination attempt gun.
I believe it was a handgun.
Attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan.
Well, I'll leave it to the chat, who knows better.
It was a Rome RG revolver.
Okay. So they politicized it right from the get-go, but they asked her, I forget who it was, repeatedly, more guns on the street, does it make your job as Secret Service more difficult?
And she refused to answer it right up until the end.
If everyone on the street had machine guns, would that make your job more difficult?
And she said yes.
And so they finally, yes, thank you, we finally got our argument.
More guns on the street, if they're machine guns, make the Secret Service's job more difficult.
But more guns doesn't change what they have to do because the would-be assassin, the would-be terrorist, is not really going to care about the gun laws.
And as we are now witnessing in Canada, you can have the strictest gun laws on earth and yet somehow gun violence keeps going up.
Because the gun crime that's committed in Canada is committed with black market, unlawfully procured firearms, as is, from my understanding, the majority of gun crime in the United States.
All right.
Now, the highlights of the hearing today.
Let me just go through my Twitter timeline, which serves as my diary of the world.
Oh, let's go down to the beginning right here.
Oh yeah, look at this one here.
Let's bring this one up here.
Okay, here we go.
This is highlight number one.
Don't worry.
Yeah, look at this.
This was...
Let's see who was asking the questions here.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Director, were you guessing or lying?
Listen to this.
The day after President Trump is shot, Secret Service spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said, quote, the assertion that a member of the former president's security team requested additional security resources The point here is that...
On multiple occasions, Trump had requested additional Secret Service detail that was denied.
And they were asked this question, and they gave differing answers.
And listen to the grilling that Jim Jordan gives Kim Cheadle on this question.
Five days later, the Washington Post said this.
Top officials repeatedly rejected requests from Donald Trump security detail for more personnel.
The next day, the New York Times said this.
Mr. Guglielmi acknowledged that the Secret Service had turned down some requests for additional federal security assets for Mr.
Trump's detail.
So which is it?
Because both statements can't be true.
Listen to the answer here.
Neither, sir.
And I appreciate the question.
I appreciate the question.
If you had a shot, if you took a shot for every time she's a shot of alcohol, if you drank a beer.
For every time she said, I appreciate the question, you would have been unconscious after 10 minutes.
I appreciate the question.
Who gives a crap what you appreciate by way of question?
I appreciate the question.
What does she think that that does?
And she said it so many times, it's enraging.
I appreciate the question.
I'm so polite.
And, oh, I'm the victim in all of this.
What were you doing?
Because those statements don't jive.
So what I can tell you is that...
For the event.
So what I can tell you.
So I personally believe that U.S. Americans can't find countries on a map because some of them don't have maps.
So listen to the amount of times she also started her answers with.
So, which is an indication to me, you're about to get deceived.
In Butler, there were no requests that were denied.
As far as requests...
In Butler, there were no requests that were denied.
Maybe they stopped asking.
I'm tired of asking.
Maybe you turned them down so darn much they said, not worth asking.
How many times did you turn them down ahead of that?
Listen to this.
I think that it is important to distinguish.
Not an answer.
How many times did you turn them down before that?
I think it's important to distinguish.
Distinguish between what some people may view as a denial of an asset or a request.
Well, is Mr. Gugliami your spokesperson?
Yes, he is.
He said he acknowledged the Secret Service had turned down some requests.
I'm asking how many?
A denial of a request does not equal a vulnerability.
She can't answer the question.
Didn't ask if it was a vulnerability.
How many requests were denied?
Well, we did it a lot, but it doesn't mean vulnerability.
Horse crap and just answer the question.
They denied requests in the past because she determined it wasn't a vulnerability.
Hmm. Well, she's got a great assessment of what's a vulnerability, leaving the roof at 130 yards.
Plain open for an assassin to climb up on.
Yeah, maybe I don't trust her assessment of what's a vulnerability, and I just want to know how many she denied.
But let's see if she answers the question.
Well, tell me what it is.
There are a number of ways that threats and risks can be mitigated with a number of different assets, whether that be through personnel.
How many times did you turn them down when they asked for increased security?
Whether that be through technology.
Technology that they didn't have at the Pennsylvania rally.
Apparently they didn't have drones in the sky.
The committee, which it was.
They asked for additional help in some form or another.
You told them no.
How many times did you tell them no and what did you tell them no to?
Again, I cannot speak to specific incidents, but I can tell you in general terms, the Secret Service is judicious with their resources.
Judicious with their resources.
Judicious, I don't know if that's the word she meant to use.
If she meant tactical or wise or cheap and trying to save money.
That's what judicious means.
I want to be cost effective.
We're cost effective with our resources.
And we saw what that played out like nine days ago.
But for the grace of God.
Based on what does some requests mean?
How many times?
Some indicate requests is plural.
So more than once they ask for additional help and you turned them down.
What they asked for and how many times did you turn them down?
Pretty basic questions.
Yeah, don't expect an answer.
So again, without having all of the details in front of me, sir, what I can tell you...
She was subpoenaed to testify because she wouldn't voluntarily testify.
Nine days after the hearing, she comes up and says, I can't testify to timeline.
I don't have all the details.
Go ask the FBI.
I'm not revealing that information.
You didn't get briefed on how many times you turned down the Trump detail?
When they ask for additional help?
I'm sorry.
You didn't get briefed on that before you came to this hearing, knowing you were going to get asked that question?
What I can tell you is that in generic terms, when details make a request, there are times that there are alternate ways to cover off on that threat.
So the answer is yes.
That's not what he said.
He said they were denied certain requests.
Some requests.
This is your spokesperson, not me talking.
This is the Secret Service talking.
And what a change from absolutely false, unequivocally false to, oh, by the way, there were some times where- But it wasn't a risk.
I've assessed in my great judgment, apparently, that it wasn't a risk when we denied them their request.
We didn't give them what they wanted.
That's a huge change in five days.
And the fact that you can't answer how many times you did that- Jail.
That's pretty darn frustrating, not just for me, but for the country.
I hear your frustration.
Let me ask you- I hear your frustration.
The president just took a bullet to the head.
But for the grace of God, I still can't get over it.
And I do believe it was a genuine act of divine intervention.
The president just took a bullet to the head.
And this, I'm trying not to use inflammatory insulting language.
This incompetent nincompoop says, I understand your frustration or I hear your frustration.
I hear your frustration.
I hear your frustration.
Trump's brains could have been on spectators behind him, and this woman has the audacity to come up before Congress and say, I hear your frustration.
I mean, that's obviously fired, and obviously charges for criminal negligence.
If she wanted to let this happen on purpose, what would she have done differently?
If she culpably, negligently, voluntarily, she decided she aligns with Iran and she's going to let this happen, what would she have done differently?
Jail. Let me ask you this.
Were any of those requests denied to President Trump's detail after you knew about the Iranian threat?
After the Iranian threat.
Wait for the answer.
What I can tell you, again, I don't know the specifics, is that there are times when we can fill a request.
It doesn't necessarily have to be with a Secret Service asset or resource.
We can fill that request with locally available assets Have you talked to anyone at the White House since July 13th?
Yes, I have.
Who'd you talk to?
I have briefed the President and the Vice President.
Talked to the First Lady?
No, I have not.
Talked to the White House staff?
Anyone in the White House Communications?
Hold on a second.
Oh, the First Lady.
No, I have not.
Have you talked to the counter-sniper who took the shot that took out the bad guy?
Yes, I have.
And can you tell us about that conversation?
No. I would not want to reveal conversations that I've had with my employees.
But that's exactly the kind of information the American people want to know.
American people who pay your salary.
I understand.
This is an ongoing investigation.
Who's all doing the investigating at Secret Service?
I know the Inspector General, but is there also an internal investigation in addition to the Inspector General?
We are conducting a mission assurance investigation internally, yes.
They're investigating themselves.
She says, I'll accept accountability for this.
There will be accountability for this.
Do you think her investigation is going to show that she was criminally culpable for what occurred?
I don't think so.
You know what it looks like, Director?
It looks like you won't answer some pretty basic questions.
It looks like you got a 9% raise and you cut corners when it came to protecting one of the most important individuals, most well-known individuals on the planet.
A former president.
Likely the guy's going to be the next president.
Looks like you guys were cutting corners.
That's what it looks like to me.
Is that true?
I am here today because I want to answer questions, but I also want to reply.
You might want to, but you haven't answered.
I don't think you've answered one question from the chairman, the ranking member, or me.
We've got a lot of other people asking.
We'll see if your record improves, but right now you haven't answered, I don't think, any questions.
I yield back.
I mean, I like Jim Jordan, but I'm getting a little fed up of the performative act with no consequences.
They talked about this actually today as well.
We do these congressional hearings.
Everybody promises investigations.
It was actually AOC that said this in her five minutes.
She says, this woman there, Kim Cheadle, says, I'm going to prepare a report.
You're going to have a report within 60 days.
It's the presidential election cycle right now.
And I want to highlight what another guy said, which I think is forecasting or telegraphing the deep state's next move.
It's the election cycle now.
As another guy said, I don't remember what his name is, but I'll get there in a second.
You've got now the first black woman.
Running for president.
I mean, I still object to the fact that people are calling Kamala Harris the first black woman to run for president.
She's half Indian, half black, and the Jamaican side of the black part that people seem to think that just gets priority.
Her dad's black, therefore she's black.
Set that aside.
Identity politics is an ideological cancer.
Her father's side, as her father admitted in an interview, actually goes back to slave owners in Jamaica.
Set that aside.
One guy said, I forget what his name was, We got the first black female presidential candidate.
That seems like they might be telegraphing something.
If this idiot, incompetent SOB POS is still in power, and something happens to Kamala Harris, and then they conveniently get to blame it on reprisals from the far right because they're angry over the failed assassination attempt against Donald Trump, this woman is still in charge, Kim Cheadle.
She's still the director of Secret Service.
It's absolutely atrocious.
So Jim Jordan did good, but like AOC says, we'll get a report in 60 days.
Nothing's going to happen.
And this woman still insists on keeping her job.
She didn't screw up that badly.
At one point during the testimony, Kim Cheadle confirmed, I didn't have the exact video part, but she confirmed that carrying a range finder I mean, general area of a presidential rally, that's not a prohibited item.
Thanks, Kim Cheadle, for putting on blast exactly what you might not want to put on blast.
she spent...
85% of this hearing is saying what she can't answer.
I don't want to disclose names.
I don't want to disclose ongoing investigation.
But I'll disclose the fact that you can bring, or maybe they're going to change protocol now, you could bring a range finder within the vicinity of a presidential rally and it's not a prohibited item.
Thank you.
I mean, I'm sure there would be terrorists, would be assassins up there, Kim Cheetle.
Thank you for the clarification and the information.
Who do we have next here?
AOC. Let's bring AOC's back up because she actually did good.
And we'll highlight this.
You established earlier that the building upon which the shooter operated from was outside of that established perimeter, correct, for the Butler Pennsylvania event?
It was outside of our secure perimeter, yes.
Well, your secure perimeter wasn't a very secure perimeter.
Hey, hey, Kim, Kim, jackpot.
I think we identified the problem.
You screwed up in securing your secure perimeter.
Yeah, well, our perimeter was three hula hoops around the president.
Well, no, the sniper wasn't within the three hula hoops around the president.
He wasn't within our secure perimeter.
You screwed up on your secure perimeter.
End of story.
Hey, there we have it, by the way.
If you want to go with the simplest explanation, forget a second gunman in the window of the building.
Forget a second gunman on the water tower in the back.
Right there.
I think we have a good idea as to where you screwed up.
And when she was asked if she had viewed the security plan for the Pennsylvania rally, and she says, I don't review security plans for rallies, was not the question.
I think we figured out where things went wrong.
You did not include in the secure perimeter the building from which the sniper shot fired at best.
If you're lucky, all you get is fired.
If you're not so lucky, maybe you actually face some judicial consequences.
Now, that...
That building was, I believe, 500 feet.
How far away was that building from the president?
It was approximately 200 yards.
200 yards.
AR-15 has a range of about 400 to 600 yards.
My question is, why is the Secret Service protective perimeter shorter?
than one of the most popular semi-automatic weapons in the United States.
Let me pause it there because there is a conceptual good answer to this question.
Why would the perimeter be shorter than the range of one of the most popular firearms in America?
I'll bring this up for a second.
Let's just simplify it.
At the reductio ad absurdum.
Reduce it to an absurdity.
Let's say that Trump is in a tower that is...
Five stories tall and 140 yards, pi times the diameter equals the circumference of the circle, the radius.
What's the diameter?
The line going across the circle?
Whatever. Let's just say Trump is in the center of a tower that's five stories tall and it's 150 yards from side to side.
Well, then you have a barrier to anything that would be beyond...
The 150 yards.
And you wouldn't need to secure a 400-yard perimeter because it would be physically impossible to get a shot to hit the president when he's surrounded by a tower that is five stories high, 150 yards wide.
There you could think.
Geographically, topology, by topology, you could imagine a terrain in which you don't need to secure a 400-yard perimeter because there might be natural obstructions, unnatural obstructions, man-made obstructions that would prevent a shot.
From beyond 150 yards.
Not the situation in Pennsylvania.
We've seen the aerial.
Why wasn't that building included in the perimeter, in the secure perimeter?
Do you think we're going to get a good answer?
Nope. Let's hear it.
There are a number of weapons out there with a number of range of popular semi-automatic weapons in the United States.
The Secret Service protective perimeter, shorter.
than one of the most popular semi-automatic weapons in the United States.
Why was the perimeter shorter than the most popular semi-automatic rifles in America?
Her answer?
There are other weapons that have longer ranges.
There are a number of weapons out there with a number of ranges.
There's intercontinental ballistic missiles.
There's ICBMs.
Kim Cheadle, you sneaky scoundrel.
There are ICBMs with a range of 3,000 miles.
You don't need to secure a 3,000-mile perimeter for fear of other weapons that have a longer range than an AR-15.
You don't need to worry about missiles.
You maybe want to worry about RPGs.
For example, if you have a plane taking off, you don't want it to be within the vicinity of RPGs or within the range of an RPG, a rocket-propelled grenade.
You don't really need to be worrying about RPGs.
Which might have a longer than 400-yard range, which would be harder to conceal, harder to acquire, and harder to use accurately from a half a kilometer away.
Her answer is absolute malicious deceit.
Period. No other way to describe it.
Well, there are other weapons, so that's why.
Because there are other weapons that have a bigger range than 150 yards is why we didn't secure that rooftop, which gave a clean, straight shot on the president from 120 yards.
It's criminal culpability, what we're listening to right now.
I'm glad I wasn't doing this live.
I would not have been able to control myself.
Again, an advance was completed.
The determination of the perimeter, I'm not going to speak to specifics, but...
Why not?
That's what you're there for.
Specifically speaking, why was that building excluded from the security perimeter at that rally?
Tell me why.
If your goal was to not have Trump assassinated, why did you leave that building?
Beyond the secure perimeter, 120 yards with a clean shot on the president as he's speaking from an elevated position, unsecured, unmanned, set aside all of the other nonsense about not having identified this guy, stopped him, let Trump come on when a threat was there.
We're witnessing criminal admissions in real time.
There are a number of factors that are taken into account when we determine our perimeter.
Some of it has to do with terrain, some of it has to do with buildings, some of it has to do with assets and resources.
Assets and resources.
Why was that building left unsecured?
Why was that building beyond the secure perimeter?
Because quite clearly, that secure perimeter was a negligent perimeter.
Criminally negligent perimeter.
That are available.
What I'm hearing is that a perimeter was not established outdoors in an outdoor venue that would prevent an AR-15, which is one of the most common weapons used in mass shootings, from being able to be within the range of Secret Service protection.
A perimeter was established, and even though there were buildings that were outside of that perimeter, it wasn't just that building.
There were a number of buildings in the area.
There were other vantage points, maybe not quite as good as that one.
We left other buildings open as well.
And there was overwatch that was created to help mitigate some of those buildings.
So there was overwatch of that building.
Interesting. They were overwatching the building from which the sniper took his shots.
The assassin took his shots.
That's an interesting potential Freudian slip-up.
And then some people are saying, well, AOC finally had a moment of clarity.
And I'm like, yeah, it's easy to have the moment of clarity when you can very easily imagine yourself being in the shoes of the other person.
That's typically when people become empathetic.
When they truly appreciate that, but for the grace of God, they could have been in the shoes of the other person, then they can become as empathetic as they want.
The trick is to become empathetic before.
You are exposed to directly or indirectly or through, what's the word?
Osmosis. The risk.
They're all nervous about this because they have all been the ones ratcheting up the political rhetoric, talking about eliminating Trump, getting in the faces of them, harassing them, make them unwelcome.
They've been the ones raising money to bail out criminals from jail.
And now they realize, holy crap, if this is the level of security...
They provide, or lack thereof, to the president, former president, soon to be, touch wood, future president.
What the hell?
We're sitting ducks out here, is what they're saying.
So yeah, she had her moment of clarity, only realizing that she could be the one next time who's there.
Listen, we're going to go to Pat Fallon because he was absolutely...
This is, if anybody had any doubts, if anybody was still on the fence as to whether or not this was criminal culpability, listen to this.
Lay it out in detail.
We'll break it down.
Chair now recognizes Mr. Fallon from Texas.
How did a 20-year-old loner with a week's notice pick the absolute best location to assassinate President Trump when the entire Secret Service missed it?
The absolute best location if one were to try to assassinate Donald.
You look at that map and you say, which building would I like?
Maybe there might have been one or two closer.
I think she actually says that at one point.
Maybe there was a better building that was at 80 yards.
You know, maybe...
Someone could have gotten on a stepladder right in the center of the podium.
Maybe someone could have been behind the teleprompter.
I guess that would have been the better spot.
Someone could have hidden behind the teleprompter.
How did you not notice the guy with the firearm behind the teleprompter and you let President Trump out?
Well, so I don't want to go into any...
Okay, fine.
I won't be too hyperbolic.
Let's go.
Director Cheadle, in your leadership, your agency got outsmarted and outmaneuvered by a 20-year-old.
How can we have any confidence that you could stop a trained professionals from a nefarious nation-state?
Let me stop you there.
Let's just get real tinfoil hattie.
What if Kim Cheadle or the powers that be, the deep state, their goal in all of this was specifically to show terrorists just how easy it is to do something in America despite the security?
Hey, look, if I wanted to show vulnerability to my foreign enemies, to terrorist entities, to criminals, to gangs, if I wanted to show how vulnerable it is, how the illusion of security is just that, only an illusion?
What would I do differently than letting something like this happen?
At the very, very most charitable, it's culpable negligence that shows criminal terrorist organizations just how easy it is to do it.
Some borderline autistic 20-year-old kid who on a whim decides to fly a drone, that kid can pull this off.
If they didn't do it on purpose, they did it by accident.
And what could be more devastating and damaging for national security than an incompetent Kim Cheadle showing terrorists and criminals just how easy it is?
It's my first day.
We left the rooftop unsupervised.
Those are absolutely questions.
Those are absolutely questions.
Write it down on a mug, people.
Kim Cheadle's words of wisdom.
Those are absolutely questions.
I personally believe...
That U.S. Americans...
You could stop a trained professionals from a nefarious nation.
Those are absolutely questions.
Those are absolutely questions that we need to have answers to.
I know they're questions, but the fact of the matter is we can't have that confidence.
We need to have answers to them.
Director, do you have the ability personally, do you have the authority to beef up security of any of your protectives?
Yes, I do.
Okay. So were you also aware there was a terrible threat?
Do you have the ability to beef up security for your protectives?
Not, yes, we do.
Yes, I do.
Look. I used to work in shoe sales, sports experts.
I used to work at a bike store, Martin Swiss.
I used to work at a rock climbing store, Black's Camping.
It was the best place ever.
I loathe when people say I when they're talking about the enterprise for which they work.
It's we and us.
Kim Cheadle is, by all accounts, an incompetent narcissist.
Yes, I do.
I have that power.
Not we.
Not the secret.
Yes, we have that.
Okay, fine.
You have it, Kim Cheadle.
You. It's your power to use or not use.
You have the power to beef it up if you so choose, if there's a risk.
All right.
Yeah, I have that.
You knew that Trump was under threat of assassination, allegedly, from Iran days before the event, and you left the rooftop unsecured.
President Trump was facing a heightened security threat to a foreign adversary?
Yes. Okay.
So given that there was an increased threat to President Trump's life, was he provided a full security compliment akin to what a sitting U.S. president would receive?
The answer is no, by the way.
But she's a goddamn liar.
Sorry for using the Lord's name.
She's a gosh-forsaken liar.
And she doesn't want to say that answer because she knows the chewing-up that she'll get after.
Listen to the question again and listen to the pause.
And you know that what you're going to get is evasion.
So given that there was an increased threat to President Trump's life, Was he provided a full security complement akin to what a city U.S. president would receive?
No, but why?
He was provided a full complement of security based on the threat that they had in the venue.
An assassination from Iranians and they left the rooftop open.
If that's criminal negligence, fine.
Charge her and jail her for that.
Or convict her first.
That sounds like a lot more than negligence.
They knew that there was a credible threat of assassination from Iran, allegedly, for having killed Soleimani, whatever that guy's name was, and they left a rooftop open.
If it wasn't an Iranian that was going to find that roof, it was going to be some 20-year-old dipstick.
President, would he have had the same security he had on July 13th or would have been beefed up?
There is a difference between the city president.
So your answer is he didn't.
And continuity of government and the responsibility that we have.
So he did not.
Okay, there wasn't a cat team, a full cat team on site.
There wasn't counter surveillance teams on site.
But this is the thing.
You just said you had the ability to beef up the security.
You knew about the threat, and you didn't.
And that's as telling as it is chilling.
Yes. They knew about the threat from Iran.
They knew that Trump is...
Among the loony-left public enemy number one, and not only did they not beef up his security, they left the rooftop open.
They did not stop that suspicious person.
They did not stop that threat.
They let Trump come out when they knew there was a threat because they didn't communicate properly.
...
images from the Butler Fairgrounds.
Have you visited the site?
No, I have not.
Have you visited the site nine days out?
No, I have not.
You're fired!
In what world?
Is someone going to conduct an investigation, the director of secret service, going to conduct an investigation into the attempted assassination of Trump, and she hasn't visited the gosh-forsaken site nine days out?
You're fired.
Nine days and you have not visited the site?
You should have been there that night.
Did you talk to, that evening, did you talk to the team, the heroes that surrounded the president?
Did you call them that night?
They were still operational work.
No, just say no.
I didn't.
Yes, I spoke with you.
You called them the very next day.
Nope. Not the day of.
Or was it 72 hours after?
I don't know the timeline, but I don't know the timeline.
I think it was 72 hours after you waited three days.
She didn't visit the site.
She didn't speak with them the day of, the day after, but three days later.
She doesn't know jack squat, and she's the sacrificial lamb to be sent out to take the fall for this orchestrated plot that goes far beyond her.
Completely clear is that there are a number of structures that need to be secured.
Of these, director, other than the first, you know, immediate four, what's the most dangerous site?
That should have been secured.
Because, you know, Security 101, you've got to mitigate the high ground.
Yes. Okay.
Do you know what the next most dangerous site, what was the closest structure to the president, other than the four immediate ones that you had your counter-sniper teams on?
There are a number of structures.
There are a number.
Yes, there are a number.
The shooter knew.
The shooter has visited the site two more times than you have.
And he had a drone, and he picked the AGR building.
So you said, do you remember in an ABC interview you did that you didn't have people on the roof of the AGR building because you were worried about safety because of the slope?
Listen to this.
I recall that statement.
Okay. She made a statement.
It was a sloped roof.
It was a security hazard.
And he asked the question, is there a protocol within the Secret Service about sloped rooftops?
It's amazing.
Pat Fallon, well done, sir.
Does the Secret Service have written policy you can share with us about sloped roofs?
No. Then what did you base that statement on, Kim?
What did you say to that guy?
It wasn't George Stephanopoulos.
Based on what did you make that statement if there's no written policy about the gradient of sloped roofs that become a risk for secret service sniper protection?
Just pull it out of your ass because you thought it would sound smart?
It was a security hazard to have someone on a sloped roof.
Oh, but there's a problem with that theory and I called it out the day out.
So why'd you act like there was one?
Because isn't your practice the comment on enormous...
Events of enormous national implications when you're ignorant of the facts.
That's rhetorical.
So here's the thing with the slopes.
You go all up to like 1812.
You can go to 112, which is about as flat as you can get without it being completely flat.
And you're saying that there was a danger, safety concern there.
But the problem is, Director, you put your counter snipers on a 312 roof, which is steeper than the 112.
And by the way, the 112 is ADA compliant.
You can build a...
A ramp for a wheelchair.
Americans with Disabilities Act compliant.
That's how flat...
I don't know these terms of 212.
I guess it's like the amount of...
I guess it may be the amount it rises over a foot.
Like maybe it rises two inches over 12 inches.
On a 112 roof.
112. So these are nothing but pathetic excuses and they make no sense and they're a bunch of cow dung.
All the law enforcement I've spoken with over the last nine days are amazed that the AGR rooftop was not secure.
You want to know why?
Because it's dangerous.
I have never had any long gun training in my life.
Listen to this.
I own an AR-15, and last time I shot it, I shot it one time my whole life.
It was six years ago.
That is until Saturday, where we recreated the events in Savoy, Texas.
We recreated what happened to Butler.
I was lying prone on a sloped roof at 130 yards at 630 at night.
And I knew that he had a scope.
I didn't know what kind, red dot, or magnified.
So I shot eight rounds from both.
You know what the result was?
15 out of 16 kill shots!
Look at what I missed!
Would have hit the president's ear.
Look at the back.
You got 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. Let's see the next one.
That's a 94% success rate.
And that shooter was a better shot than me.
It is a miracle President Trump wasn't killed.
Absolutely. It's beyond.
It's beyond a miracle.
It's almost inexplicable.
Comparatory's life is over because that damn shooter made it on the roof.
And it wasn't the roof that was dangerous.
It was a nut job on top of the roof.
You know what else is dangerous?
I believe your horrifying ineptitude and your lack of skilled leadership is a disgrace.
Your obvious skating today is shameful.
And you should be fired immediately and go back to guarding Doritos.
Mr. Chairman, I'll yield back.
Go back to guarding Doritos.
And he's 1,000% right.
Okay, so those are the highlights, people.
It's just inexcusable, inexplicable.
Except it's able to be explained.
And the way it gets explained is very, very dark and sinister in my view.
Kamala is to the border, as Kim Cheadle is to the assassination attempt.
Both didn't visit their areas of responsibility.
Harris Cheadle, 2024.
Then we got...
I would trust Kim Chi more than Kim Cheadle to protect me.
Change my mind.
That's from Rumble.
then we got in Viva Barnes, law.locals.com S senior secret service director Cheadle kept answering questions in the most dismissive, evasive, even arrogant way.
She acted in a way as if she was an under directive to do so by people higher up the chain of command alphabet soup.
Intel seems to have its dirty fingerprints all over this.
I do not disagree with any of that.
I also say that this is her third act of provocation.
To try to piss somebody off so much to do something stupid.
Don't do it and don't succumb to it, period.
But there's really no other way to explain away how badly and how...
It's antagonism.
Now, where was this guy right here?
Hold on.
I got another one.
Talking about the deep state's dirty fingerprints, and I believe they might be telegraphing their next move with this, which is why I say anybody calling for violence, reprisals, Fed or Fed adjacent, stay the hell away from them and don't do anything stupid.
Listen to this.
So I think this shows an issue.
I want to know, Madam Director, what you intend to do to fix that, not in 60 days, but now.
We're in the middle of a presidential election, obviously a former president who had an assassination attempt, another rally-goer who was killed due to this gun violence.
We now have a presumptive nominee in the Democratic Party, who's also historic, first black woman to be running for president.
And so I am worried about everybody's life.
What do you all intend to do to fix this?
He's putting that juju out in the universe.
You got a wildly unpopular person who has been anointed to replace the demented person who stole 14 million votes in the primaries.
And now you got this guy out there saying, hey, you were so incompetent with Trump, and you're probably equally as incompetent with now the first black presidential nominee or a candidate.
Every fear hides a wish.
And this to me sounds like this man setting out the deep state's next move in all of this in order to do what they wanted to have happened after their now failed assassination attempt against Donald Trump.
What was her answer?
And making sure that you actually take what local law enforcement, local folks are saying more seriously.
We take what local law enforcement...
Relays to us seriously.
Let me just be clear on that.
As far as the communication.
But not this time.
We always trust our law enforcement partners.
Did you see that arrogant smirk on her face?
Look at that smirk.
You've answered this book.
Why? Or you haven't answered this.
Why wasn't the event with a lot of folks and locals who could have been taken?
Look at her face.
So I think this shows an issue.
that not in 60 days, but now we're in the middle of a presidential election.
Obviously, a former president who had an attorney with enforcement partners and have a great relationship with them.
Right now, listen to her.
Look at her face.
We are looking at whether or not there was a communication breakdown.
If that was the case, we will take steps to ensure...
That we correct that.
...
to be running for president.
And so I am worried about everybody's life.
What do you all intend to do to fix this communication breakdown?
Watch your face.
And making sure that you actually take what local law enforcement, local folks are saying more seriously.
We take what local law enforcement relays to us seriously.
She knows she didn't listen to local law enforcement this time.
Or they didn't hear it.
Look at her face.
But not this time.
We always trust our law enforcement partners and have a great relationship with them.
Well, you just almost got the president killed because of your lack of communication with them.
So don't tell us you always trust them and you have a great relationship with them.
Abject incompetence.
But it's not that.
It's something far worse.
Kamala is to the border.
I would trust Kim Chi.
Let me see what we got in our VivaBarnesLaw.locals.com community.
That's the highlight, people.
That's as much as we need to know.
Tip questions.
The SS director does need to resign.
What I fear is everyone focus on her.
She takes the fall for the incident and it ends there.
She gets a golden parachute on the back end to keep quiet, says Michigan Winter Days.
And then Rustang said SS director Cheadle kept answering questions in the most dismissive, condescending way possible.
I agree.
And now because I've got five minutes left before I go do the live with Richard Surrett on Saga Talk 990.
Let me go see what's going on in the chat.
She looks like the Grinch, says DZ Nux.
Is it me, or does she look like Jim Carrey's The Grinch?
Okay, that was funny.
Those are two in a row.
Ugly thoughts are reflected in your face, says the done guy.
Looking to see if there was a communication breakdown?
She's an effing jackal, says Justice7777.
She will not resign.
Oh, we got King of Biltong in the house.
Came in in the nick of time, King of Biltong.
How goes the battle, sir?
Look at that crazy face.
There we go.
No. Pause the word.
That's better.
All right.
King of Biltong says, good afternoon from Anton's.
Free shipping for your Biltong using code Viva on www.biltongusa.com.
www.antonusa.com.
We want to thank everyone for your support.
Still fighting the city.
We will move the store.
That really sucks because Anton was getting a bit of the old.
The old bureaucratic harassment by the town of Roanoke who does not appreciate the tax dollars, tourism, and business that their small businesses bring in to their beautiful town.
Let me see what else is going on here.
Chat in Commitube is going rather fast.
Grassy and old CIA.
Mayorkas is like her Sith Lord.
It says, damn ham.
And let's go to vivabarneslaw.local.
Marjorie Taylor Greene ended her question with, was there a stand-down order?
Was there a conspiracy to kill President Trump?
Marjorie Taylor Greene was great.
There was another one also who said, that's bullshit.
I mean, she called it, this is shit.
Bullshit or horse shit?
She said shit twice, and then it triggered a moral indignation from the other people in the crowd.
Let me see here.
Sve Hanses says, what can be what has been?
I think that's a meme for...
The Coast to Coast guy, Mr. Mike, Richard Sorrette, Saga Radio, The Conspiracy Theorist.
Oh, and by the way, I'm also going to be on with Neil Oliver.
So I don't know if it's live, so I don't want to say if it's live or not.
But I'll be on with Neil Oliver, the Coast guy from Scotland.
And that's going to be fantastic as well.
Anne Lynn in our local community says, trusting local law enforcement wasn't the question.
The locals didn't do anything wrong, but she keeps trying to imply it's on them.
Zvi Hansen says, I agree there's too much attention to the SS Secret Service actions.
What does it say?
Sorry, Kimmel.
Kimmy. I get my baloney from Oscar Mayer.
That's Piran.
Marjorie Taylor Greene.
That was from Judy Hodgkins.
We got Hodgkiss.
She's not incompetent because she's a woman.
She's just incompetent.
I think she's criminally culpable.
So that's it.
The problem is that the people asking weren't prepared for someone.
This evasive.
She needed to be grilled by a lawyer, says Brad 864.
No. There's no way to get around the evasiveness of, I don't want to provide false information.
I'll get back to you when we have a full report in 60 days, and I'll be doing the investigation of my own incompetence, my own criminal corruption.
It's absolutely wild.
Have you tipped?
Okay, we're good here, and I'll just get some more questions, and then we're going to call it quits.
Oh, I got two minutes.
Okay, I got to go.
I liked Lisa McClain best.
Are you sure of anything?
Yes, she did a good job.
Cool, Viva Frye.
I like it.
I like it when Richard fills in for George Nury.
Yeah, I didn't know how...
I didn't know of Richard Surratt's amazing and highly accomplished past.
He's an amazing person.
You can't cuss in Congress?
Time to tar and feather instead, says Switz guy.
Okay, we got Finboy Slick with a nice meme there.
They should have demanded one week.
She's been investigating for nine days.
She doesn't know what the timeline is yet.
It's outrageous.
That was from Boopsie.
Recortes says, one of my uncles said, watch out for women whose corners of their mouths turn down.
I think they call it fish mouth.
Record us.
All right.
So we're going to end it.
A short one today.
It's an hour and five minutes.
That's the highlight.
That's the summary of the hearing.
You don't need to watch it.
It was five plus hours long.
And I hope I did it justice.
I think I got the highlights.
Even the Democrats did a decent job today, but they had to find a way to weaponize it to push their anti-gun agenda as if this should be defined as a mass shooting and not more aptly a failed assassination plot against the president.
That seems to have been greenlit or at least got the kiss of death from the Secret Service that was supposed to be protecting the president, former president, soon to be future president, Donald Trump.
I'll say thank God again for that act of divine intervention we all saw.
The world will be on fire right now.
It would be even more on fire than it already is, and I think we are now headed in the right direction.
There's been a shift in the cosmos.
There's been a shift in the zeitgeist.
A millimeter away from World War III, Franz Ferdinand 2.0.
All right, go.
Enjoy the day, and I will see you all tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection