Biden’s exit, tech chaos, and security lapses rock the nation!

It's time to unleash yourself from the tyrants of media propaganda on the America Out Loud Talk radio network.

This is Unleashed, the Political News Hour.

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, you're listening to Unleashed, the Political News Hour, a part of America Out Loud Talk Radio. You can find more about me and follow me on X Facebook. getter gab by going to my handle at Nate Cain for WV. That is the at symbol Nate Cain, N-A-T-E-C-A-I-N, the number 4 WV.

Tonight we have quite a bit of interesting topics. when you take a look at all that has gone on over the last week and a half. It has been quite something. First, of course, with the assassination attempt on Donald Trump, and then now we are learning that there's been all kinds of interesting updates to that, and we are going to get into some of the testimony that has happened today. But before we do, there's more recent news that broke about Joe Biden dropping out of the Democrat primary after he had made multiple promises that he was in it to win it and was going to stay in.

Now, there's been a lot of interesting conversations surrounding why Joe Biden has decided to drop out now, why didn't he drop out earlier. He was in an interview earlier this week talking about the only way that he would drop out is if there was some medical reason, and then, lo and behold, all of a sudden he comes down with COVID, he has then moved around, and we have not seen him since. So then it comes out through social media that he is dropping out of the race. Not an in-person video, not a press conference, no, he decides to drop out of the race and let people know by social media, which is very suspicious. So many people have been asking, where is Biden?

Why have we not seen him? Where is the proof of life? And of course, there has been an endorsement of Kamala Harris, his vice president, to take over in that role for this campaign. The question is, are the Democrats going to allow that? While there are certainly some elites at the top that have been endorsing Kamala Harris and saying that they're going to ensure that she is the new person running for president, I think there's also a lot of evidence that she does not stand a chance against Trump.

And so there have been rumors and a lot of people saying that, for example, that Obama himself has not endorsed Kamala Harris. There's also talk that there will be a push for an open convention and that Hillary Clinton is going to step in and try to try to get in there, although Hillary Clinton has endorsed Kamala Harris. So it's really interesting. And I'm very curious how this thing's going to turn out. You know, a lot of people are wondering, has this ever happened before?

You know, what? what is the precedent for this? Well, it has. LBJ, of course, he was one who had stepped away. And, you know, of course, his presidency was destroyed by the conflict in Vietnam.

There was growing unrest at home. There was. he ended up taking to the airwaves and telling the nation that he was going to drop out and not run for reelection. You know, his presidency ultimately was destroyed by pretty much everything. Joe Biden, you know, he's pretty much looking very much the same.

You know, we've got all kinds of problems that are going on in this country and everything is pointing to him. And I think there is a need for a fresh start for the Democrat Party. So, regardless of whether Joe Biden is really sick or not, I'm curious as to whether he actually has stepped down, because my understanding is that the signature that was placed on the letter doesn't even match his signature. And again, where is Joe Biden? That is the question.

And who is running the country at this moment? So there is a lot of this talk about these kinds of things. And what is happening right now, we can look around and we can see that we are seeing some market moving. You know, we've seen that the poly market price on Biden to drop out. Yes, was going down.

And then his campaign chair was saying that Biden was staying in the race. on mourning. Joe. You had multiple people that were stepping up and saying, oh, hey, no, no, we're going to support Joe Biden to the end. And then this social media post comes out.

So how is this affecting things? Well, I think we are going to see, you know, some. there have been some changes to the market, although it hasn't been terribly bad. I think. if anything, I think we're.

we're beginning to see more and more that it's likely going to be a Trump win. And I think the Democrats can see that. So the question is, is what are they really up to? Why, at this late stage, make the change? It's not likely to help anything.

There's already talk by Donald Trump. He's calling for the next presidential debate to be held on Fox News. I would love to see Donald Trump go up against Kamala Harris. Kamala Harris did not even do that well in the presidential primary. If you'll remember, it was shortly after the, the primary for VPs, I should say, where, or I should say it was the presidential primary when she ran in in 2020..

And if you remember, it was right after that that she basically dropped out because she had the worst ratings from that debate. That was the debate where she tried to attack Joe Biden as being a racist old man. It was also the debate where she got destroyed on stage by some of her opponents. And so I don't really think that she has a very good shot at debating Donald Trump. So I'll be curious to see if she will accept that and decide to do that.

There's also been, you know, what does that mean, you know, that Biden has stepped, you know, he's stepping down, you know, what does it mean? So,

you know, I think one of the reasons why they decided to go with Kamala Harris is because any other candidate, I think, there would have been a problem with money. All this money that has flown has gone into the Biden campaign because Kamala is on the ticket. There has been some talk that that money will be able to be transferred over to a campaign that she is part of already. However, there are still some questions as to even how that works. If they went with somebody else, then that money would not be so easily transferred to another campaign because of the limitations on, you know, money transfers between campaigns.

So they could, you know, send the money back to the donors and then the donors could reissue that money out to other campaigns. But I think that's highly unlikely. So the question is, is Kamala Harris going to, who's she going to pick as her vice presidential pick? Or will she even make it through the Democratic National Convention? Because that is where there have been rumors, like I said, of Hillary Clinton possibly stepping up and being appointed.

Remember, you had Bernie Sanders who had won the primary, but because he had won the popular vote in the primary, but because of the Democrats having basically the super electors where they were able to have more votes than your regular electors, they were able to essentially assure a win for Hillary Clinton. And it's my understanding that the Democrats are already going through and making changes to the rules. So it seems to me that it's not a hundred percent certain that Kamala is going to be the presidential candidate now that Biden has stepped down.

There's also some other questions. So, you know, while Harris is racking up endorsements from, you, know, those on the left, those many of the same people, had previously endorsed Joe Biden. So does that really mean anything? It is interesting, though, that Joe Biden's brother had said that Biden's declining health was a key factor for why he was stepping down. And he had said that he was hoping to be able to spend what little time that he had left with his brother.

And so there's a lot of people that are wondering if that is an indication that Joe Biden's health is in much worse shape than what the media had been reporting previously. So this will be interesting to see how this all plays out. I do think that Kamala is a terrible choice for the Democrat Party. Remember, she was the very first person to drop out of the Democrat primary in 2020.. And she was also, I think, had the lowest scores, in terms of lowest likability, of any vice president in American history.

So this will be quite something. I don't know really what their plan is, because it certainly can't be to win with Kamala Harris. So do they have somebody that they're going to place in there as her vice president? that would be a better candidate, somebody that is more liked? Who will that be?

Will that be Hillary Clinton? Or would that be California Governor Gavin Newsom? Or could it possibly be Obama? That's another possibility. Just because there are term limits for president doesn't mean that Barack Obama, who was quite popular, couldn't run as vice president and really be the one pulling the strings.

That would be an interesting case, especially if something happened to Kamala Harris, like, say, she were to step down after winning the presidency, then what would happen? So this is a fascinating situation, and we won't know until the Democratic National Convention how this is all going to play out. But I look forward to any debates that are going to be coming up. I look forward to the great commercials that are likely going to come out of this by the Republicans. They certainly have plenty to talk about.

Let's not forget that Kamala Harris was made the border czar, and she refused to even go down there or even address the issue. And the border is probably one of the biggest issues right now for most Americans. This is something that I think people are very concerned about, and the fact that she's done nothing as the border czar is going to be something that, of course, plagues her campaign. So I look forward to seeing how this all plays out, and I hope that you do too. Stay tuned while we cut to a break, and we will be right back.

Again, this is Unleashed, the political news hour.

Got gastrointestinal issues? We created a three-step, doctor-formulated, completely natural gut reboot system that takes less than two minutes a day to start working for you. Step one, gut detox formula, a gentle way to clean the intestines and balance the body. Step two, nano silver solution, a safe way to restore gut bacteria balance and protect us from pathogens. Step three, green 85 juice formula, a simple way to replace the 85% of nutrition farmed out of our soil so our body can repair itself and increase energy levels.

Go to chemicalfreebody.

com forward. slash out loud today, get the Malcolm Healthy Gut Bundle, reboot your gut and your energy, and save 20% on your first order.

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death and disability. Today's high stress on-the-go lifestyle makes it hard to stay heart healthy. Lifestyle changes like exercise and diet are critical, but you can also support your heart with concentrated nutrients. Healthy Cell created heart and vascular health to support three aspects of heart health, cholesterol, blood pressure, and triglycerides with CoQ10, vitamin K2, resveratrol, and soluble fiber. And Healthy Cell's not a pill, it's a patent-pending gel you swallow with ultra absorption of science-backed ingredients.

You would need to take 13 pills to get the same amount of nutrients in each gel pack, and these great tasting gels come in a small packet. Tear off the top, shoot it down, or mix it in water. Get heart healthy. Go to healthycell.com and use code OUTLOUD for 25% off your first order. Healthycell.com, code OUTLOUD for 25% off.

You are listening to Unleash the Political News Hour. This is Nate Kane, your host.

Interestingly, there is this major case of cyber attack, cyber warfare, cyber incident, whatever you want to call it. I will tell you one thing, what it is not. It is not just a mistaken case of a bad piece of software that got pushed out by CrownStrike. Listen, folks, I've been in cybersecurity for 27 years. I've worked on just about every aspect of cybersecurity that you can work on, including DevSecOps, including software deployment, and this is the big question that I have.

Of course, this. last week on Friday, interesting timing, right during Donald Trump's speech during the RNC conference, you had a little piece of software. It was actually just a simple driver that got pushed out to computers worldwide by a company called CrownStrike. Now, CrownStrike has a market cap right now of about $74 billion. They are certainly a very, very successful and large cybersecurity company, but what their software does, the irony of this, is their software runs as a service on your computer.

So it's an agent-based software, and it runs and looks for malware in order to detect malicious activity on a computer early on.

Now, here's the problem, folks. As you know, governments tend to find software that they like, they contract what they call an off-the-shelf vendor, such as CrownStrike, for their software, and then they deploy that software to all of their systems. And that's exactly what has happened here, and CrownStrike has become very much connected with pretty much all federal agencies, as well as hospitals, airlines, and several other big corporations. Now, the average user for your personal PC was not affected by this. No, this primarily affected government agencies and big corporations.

Microsoft was affected, Oracle was affected, because they use CrownStrike because of the agent-based software that is utilized through this company.

And what happened was they had made a push for a software update, really, it's just upgrading a driver. All that needed to happen was a driver needed to be deleted, and then you reboot the computer and everything's fine. It was that simple. But why this became such a problem was most government agencies have their computers, and primarily I'm talking about laptops here. Those systems are locked down, okay?

They're locked down with something called BitLocker, which is an encryption tool, so that way, if you have a laptop working with the government and your laptop gets stolen, somebody can't just log into your computer and get sensitive information. It's encrypted. What they call data at rest is encrypted. And I can speak to this in my own personal experience. I have a company, Kain & Associates, which does cybersecurity work, and I have a contract with a federal agency.

And so what happened in my case was I logged on Friday morning and I could not even get my computer to start up. It got to a blue screen where it told me that there was a page fault error, basically an error in memory, and it could not even get to the startup screen. And so it just kept causing me to have to reboot my computer over and over and over and over again.

Ironically, my wife, who's not a technical genius when it comes to computers, she did have something to say that was quite funny. She looked at me and she goes, hey, is this what they meant by the great reset? Because I kept having to reset my computer. But no, I had to inform her, no, honey, that's not what the great reset means. But it is interesting that in this case, what the software made you do is have to keep rebooting your computer and you could not even get to a log on screen.

So this encryption software actually caused a problem for multiple federal agencies as well as big corporations, because they don't want the average user to just be able to get into their system and start mucking around with the BIOS or start mucking around with the system settings and things like that. And so what it meant was, in my case, is that there's hundreds of thousands of employees with this federal agency that all have government issued laptops. And so, literally, they had to go to each and every single person who had to either bring their laptop in, or, if they worked remotely, they had to be given their BitLocker activation key over the phone so that they could log in and then be stepped through the process of what file to remove and so on and so forth. Well, I got on the phone on Friday and I was on hold with our help desk for about approximately four hours. I got on this morning, or I got on a Monday morning and I was on for about another four hours before I finally got through to a tech who gave me the activation key and I was able to get on.

And they've brought in people from other teams to help and assist with this, because it's such a massive undertaking. So, if that's going on in one federal agency that I work with, I can only imagine this is going on all across the globe. This impacted, of course, New Zealand, it impacted Australia, it impacted the US, of course, the UK, Canada, essentially all of the Five Eyes nations who utilize that software. But this took down massive amounts of flights that were canceled all the way, even up into Monday. And so when you think about the amount of money that has been lost because of this, it's pretty significant.

And, as you can imagine, CrowdStrike's stock lost about 30%. And it remains to be seen whether the affected companies are going to sue them with lawsuits. Now, the CEO of CrowdStrike got up on, did several, you know, showed his face on several news stations to talk about this, put out a statement saying that this was not a cyber attack, this was not a cyber incident, but this was just some faulty software. I beg to differ. This may not have been an intentional cyber attack, but it certainly was a cyber incident.

And in a way, it's kind of like a Trojan horse, because this is trusted software that was widely distributed with many agencies and many, many corporations. And because this software was so widely distributed and trusted, and that's really the key word here, the patches and updates just were, you know, automatically done. And so when people got on this morning, they couldn't get into their systems, or got on on Friday morning, and they could not get into their systems, there was really nothing that could be done very easily or quickly, even though the fix was quite, quite simple. It just, you know, basically called for you going into your Windows System 32 drivers and in removing a CrowdStrike driver that had been pushed. So,

the, like. I said, the hospitals were affected. You had more planes that were downed than we've seen since 9-11.. And we remember what the financial costs of the airlines were from. that, was.

you had multiple airlines that had to be bailed out by the federal government. So, in this case, this is all due to a company. And so the question is, is, are these, you know, is this company, CrowdStrike, going to get sued? There were also financial, you had stock trading and stuff like that. People were unable to get in and make, you know, trades.

You had people that could not trade their stock. And that includes those that maybe wanted to sell their stock in CrowdStrike after this. So, you know, how much money was lost through stock trades. that could not happen? There were hospitals that were downed.

Has anybody been reported, you know, as having died because of, you know, equipment that could not run? This will be interesting to see, you know, how this all ends up playing out in the end. But it's still ongoing right now, folks. This is the largest distributed denial of service attack, if you want to call it that. And that's really the way I would look at it.

Whether or not it was an intentional one, it certainly was one. When you have an outage, an IT outage to this scale, like nothing we've ever seen in the world of cybersecurity, I think that it's fair to call it a cyber incident. This is certainly going to damage their reputation. But right now, or I should say as of Monday morning, so I don't know what it is now, but as of Monday morning, the costs from the global outage had already topped $1 billion.

But the question of who's going to pay the bill is harder to understand. So that's where I think there's a couple of things that need to come into play here. One, like I mentioned, I've worked in all areas of cybersecurity. And one thing I know is that software doesn't just get deployed to production environments. It goes through rigorous testing, and they test that software against multiple.

versions of operating systems. And then they tell you, you know, in their release notes, what they've tested it against, what's not supported. So the fact that they released this driver, it caused these massive problems, can only mean one of two things, or maybe one of three things. And so I don't believe we're hearing the full story as of right now. It is either indicative of a total breakdown in the software development life cycle of CrowdStrike.

So in other words, negligence on their part, total negligence, because it means that they pushed out a piece of software that was not tested. That is a possibility. And if that possibility comes out, they're 100% liable for that. That is on them. The other options could be a disgruntled employee that decided to harm the company by pushing out software with bad code, or by, you know, bypassing their quality assurance.

Or it could be that maybe, you know, somewhere along the lines, the process broke down. It's also possible that, you know, somebody made some alteration to Microsoft. And so we don't know fully yet, but this only affected Microsoft. And my understanding is it really only affected, I think, Microsoft Windows 11.. So the question is, was there some sort of software update, you know, to Microsoft Windows 11, you know, that could have been affected by this that they hadn't tested against?

We don't really know. But of course, they're denying responsibility. They're saying this was just a simple software, you know, push, and they already had a fix for it. But again, they're not taking into account all of the impact of this on business operations, on national security operations. And what this really showed was this showed that we learned absolutely nothing, absolutely nothing, from the SolarWinds hack.

Now, SolarWinds was another trusted piece of software that our government deployed. And this was software that was supposed to be monitoring logs and things like that. And SolarWinds turned out had been was a backdoor for some of our enemies to be able to look into our systems. So that became a big scandal. And you would think that there would be a lot more carefulness and, you know, in the selection of what software that we use.

But there's another problem here. And there's another portion of this that does fall somewhat on the responsibility of the, you know, these federal agencies and corporations as well. And that is this that when you are deploying software, it's a bad idea to deploy software without testing it in a test environment before you release it to your production environment. Again, the problem is, though, is that, then it relies on human beings to make sure that they then go and push it out to your production environment. And what has happened is it's become so costly to, you know, to have hardware or to stand up, you know, these, what they call sandbox environments, because you have to basically duplicate everything in your network.

Now, it's a lot cheaper today than it was, say, you know, a couple decades ago, when they didn't have the virtualized environments that they have today. But nowadays, you can stand up a virtualized environment for a pretty reasonable price. And what they should have been doing is testing it in those environments first. It removes the automated updates feature, because now you have to manually update. But if they had been doing that, that certainly would have prevented this.

So, you know, there's blame, I guess you could say all the way around. What concerns me most about this, though, is that something, ironically, that is meant to detect malware, shut down, you know, government systems, national security systems, banking systems, hospital systems, transportation systems, all around the globe, far better than any malware could have ever done, because it was trusted. So this shows a major weakness on the part of how we do cybersecurity. And it showed a major weakness, obviously, that our enemies could take advantage of. All they need to do, they don't need to infiltrate our federal agencies, they don't need to infiltrate our airlines, they don't need to infiltrate our national critical infrastructure.

All they need to do is infiltrate a company that does business with those agencies. In fact, folks, this is exactly why they started a new program with DCSA, which is Defense Counterintelligence Security Agency. Part of their job is to look at things like our cleared contractors, because what they found was that our enemies didn't need to hack into government computers, they could hack into the computers of our contractors and find out what they needed to find out by looking at our contractors. This is largely how they stole a lot of the plans and things like that. for, you know, for our, some of our latest fighter jet, you know, fighter jet architecture, things like that.

This is how they've done, they've been doing this type of thing for a long time. They find other weaknesses. And again, they take somebody that's trusted, either a company that develops software or software that's used within these federal agencies, or they utilize a contractor. And they get into their systems because they're not as maybe carefully watched. And they find their way, you know, to getting to documents through them.

So it's, this is this, you know, typical Trojan horse. Remember, the Battle of Troy, you know, they sent in the gift of, you know, this, this horse that had the enemy secretly hiding inside of it. This is a massive problem also, too, for supply chain, and supply chain doesn't just include microprocessors and things like that, but it includes software. This is one of the reasons why, right now, it is illegal for any agency to, or any company that sells its software or its hardware to, federal agencies that utilize that hardware, and software in national critical infrastructure is the reason why they cannot sell that if it has supply chain, meaning software development code or hardware components that are made in five countries that are considered hostile, adversarial countries. And, of course, one of those is China.

So this is something that I think we have to be concerned about. And I think that we're going to have to do a much better job. This is certainly going to cause a lot of additional scrutiny for people like myself in the cybersecurity industry. And I'm sure we will be taking lessons learned from this for some time. Again, my name is Nate Kane.

This is Unleashed, the political news hour, and we will be back after these messages.

When God, through his grace and mercy, gave us free will, the will of the people was to live freely. To that end, we fight for the liberty of all at a time when global tyranny threatens us as never before in mankind's history. This vision is manifest at americaoutloud.news, a site for all who cherish free will and freedom.

Now is our time, my fellow Americans. America, Out Loud talk, radio. Liberty and justice for all.

And his team at the wellness company launched the one wellness membership to provide free monthly supplements and unlimited telemedicine access with doctors that share your values. The wellness company's chief medical board designed every supplement and medical protocol with your health in mind, from groundbreaking supplements like the spike support formula to unique care like freedom from Big Pharma. Join a health care system that puts your health and well-being above the interest of Big Pharma's bottom line. It's the way health care should be with a company that shares your values. Go to outloudcare.com today and use code OUTLOUD for 25% off your first month of one wellness.

Lean, pure, with premium ingredients. Global Healing's Pure Plant Protein offers 20 grams of protein per scoop, and it's the perfect way to maintain and build lean muscle while indulging yourself. It combines enzymes and probiotics to maximize nutrient absorption, improving digestion and your gut health. Available in vanilla and chocolate flavors. Elevate your protein consumption while supporting your overall wellness with Pure Plant Protein.

Go to americaoutloud.

shop and get 15% off using the code OUTLOUD. Global Healing, giving you the power to take control of your health naturally.

So there has been so many new bits and pieces of information that have come out about the assassination attempt on Donald Trump. I had a chance to watch some of the hearing on Monday, where they talked about where they were. they were interviewing the director of the Secret Service to find out from her how this complete breakdown and failure of the Secret Service occurred. And there were a lot of questions that were asked. One of the things that to me was just blatantly obvious and I'm sure to everybody else that you know have been following this story is how did they not have this building, which had high ground and had line of sight to the podium?

How did they not have eyes on that? How did they not have, you know, somebody guarding that to make sure that nobody was on the roof or could get onto the roof? How did the 20 year old kid get up on this roof and bear crawl and then take off? I think it's now you know. they're saying that there were 11 shots made.

So these are all questions that need to be answered. And I'm going to level with you folks. I don't trust the FBI to get a straight answer from. So they have said that this was a lone gunman. Where have we heard that before?

Do we need to remember JFK? Which took several decades for us to get to the truth of it and come to find out that the man they named as the gunman,

Lee Harvey Oswald, was, of course, working for the CIA. So what about this 20 year old? Is it going to take another 50, 60 years for us to find out the truth about him? To find out the truth about there being possibly another shooter? Are we going to find out 50,, 60, 70 years from now that this kid was brainwashed or was brought in by the deep state?

And look, this may sound like the thing of conspiracy theory and tinfoil hats, but you know, the past has already proven that this could very well be a possibility. There was an interesting analysis that had been done by several. actually on the audio of the shooting. And in one particular video that I saw, which was a video that was taken from a phone that was nearby where the shooter was at, you could clearly hear a distinct difference between two, if not three, different weapons. It was so clear.

Now this is not how it sounded, though near the podium. Near the podium, you couldn't tell that distinction between, you know, between weapons. But nearby, where the shooter was at, the first, three shots were muted, meaning it did not echo off of anything nearby. Then there was a barrage of shots that were fired, and those sounded like it was echoing off of the tin roof that he was laying on. So the question is, is it possible that there was another shooter somewhere inside that building shooting from inside?

One of the reasons that leads me to suspect this is that Dan Bongino, who was a Secret Service member and has many friends still in the Secret Service, he came forward and broke a story. And this was something that, you know, he does not go and say things that he has not verified. He's very careful about that. That's one of the things that's kind of, you know, his thing. He always says, you know, he's got the 24-hour rule.

But one of the things that he brought up was that in the original plan, there was a plan for there to be a sniper team on that roof, the same roof where the shooter was at. But they decided instead to set up inside the building, basically, you know, outside the window or inside, but, you know, able to shoot outside the window. So my question is, is who are these people? You know, are we ever going to find out, you know, was this team authorized? Was this team where they were supposed to be?

If the team had been on the roof, obviously, that would not have happened. Now, of course, the director for the Secret Service came out and said, oh, you know, we couldn't have them on the roof because of the slope. Give me a break. We have images of a far more sloped roof where you had two snipers, you know, basically on top of, which was behind where Trump was at. And so I think there's a lot to this that really does not make sense at all.

There were some great comments that were made. Representative Nancy Mace, in the hearing, she ended the career of disgraced Secret Service director Chytil on live TV, where she said, this is bull crap. I'm using the less expletive form of it. You are full of crap.

And she got Chytil to admit her colossal failure and that Trump's assassination was preventable. So it's interesting. I think there was also another congressman, Pat Fallon, a Republican of Texas. He also destroyed the Secret Service director, Kimberly Chytil, and said that you should be fired immediately and go back to guarding Doritos. So there was no pulling punches in this interview, as there shouldn't be, because, let's face it, are we going to, how does somebody who's in charge of the agency that has the mission of protecting the commander in chief of our nation, how does somebody who allows for a colossal failure like that keep their job?

I don't know how. So if there was anybody who deserved an impeachment, I would say this director of the Secret Service absolutely should be impeached. If the president himself does not remove her, the Congress should.

Because clearly there were failures that went way beyond just a simple oopsie. This was not a, oh, they didn't have enough manpower. This was not a situation that was not able to be controlled. I mean, you only had a few buildings from where a shot could be taken. This was out in a very rural area.

I've actually been to that same place in 2022.

. I went to a rally that was held there. And so I think that the fact that this could even take place, there's no excuse for it. And absolutely, this director needs to be removed.

One of the things that was kind of interesting was, during this interview,

the director Cheadle had made the comment, well, when asked about what they found out, she said, well, I want to remind you that it's only been nine days. Nine days, as if they don't know that already.

And of course, these directors love to use the, oh, it's an ongoing investigation, we can't talk about it.

Now, here's why I don't believe that we're going to find out anything. And I'm going to tell you guys something that I don't think I've ever spoken about publicly before, except for, I think, on another show this week, I made mention of it very shortly.

During the time that I was working for the FBI, and for those of you that are listening that don't know about my background, I'll give you a real quick summary. I worked for the FBI as a contractor, in fact, as a cybersecurity subject matter expert, between the years of 2016 and 2018.. And while I was there, I ended up becoming a FBI whistleblower, leaving the FBI and reporting by taking classified documents to the Inspector General Horowitz. I walked out with 458 classified documents that proved that the FBI knew that Hillary Clinton had a very high likelihood of being involved in money laundering, public corruption, securities and exchange fraud, and terrorism financing. I've talked about this story multiple times on other interviews, so I'm not going to get too much into the details of this.

But just to give you a little background on my level of access and whatnot. I was the first person ever to go through the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act with the Department of Justice Inspector General. And ultimately, my whistleblowing case brought me before both the House and the Senate Intel Committees, to where I was able to hand off that information to both of them. I was able to maintain my anonymity. And even in that, in maintaining my anonymity, ultimately, four months after I completed my disclosure, the FBI raided my home and put us through a horrendous experience that to this day, there are still consequences of.

I was never charged. I never committed a crime. I was ultimately exonerated. But there was never anything done with the information that I turned over. So it turned out, unfortunately, the House changed places and you ended up with the Democrats in control.

And of course, there was nothing done. And they buried the evidence that I turned over. And so nothing was done, except for me being retributed against. But I say all that to say this, that while I was there, I was there at the FBI during the time of the largest mass shooting in American history, at the Las Vegas shooting. And I was following all of the evidence as it was coming in and being looked at.

And the way that they were doing it, because it was such a high profile case, they were basically, they had multiple field offices working on it. So they were dumping it all into the same repository. So I was reading the 302s. I was also looking at the evidence that they were collecting. I had access, so I was curious and just following it.

I'd see the media report on one thing, and then I'd see what was really going on. But I never really talked about it, because it was an ongoing investigation, of course. But one thing that I noticed, and this was surprising to me, you would think that if the FBI is investigating something, they would want to get their hands on every bit of video footage that came from people's phones, from every angle, because it might reveal something that they had not seen in another piece of footage. And I had been following all of this on Twitter at the time and looking at all the videos that were being posted. And there were a couple of videos that had been posted that showed what appeared to be muzzle flashes that were coming from the third or fourth floor up from the ground of this building where the shooter was ultimately shot and killed.

And that was near the top floor. So there was what appeared to be muzzle flashes coming, and they seemed to coincide with the shooting, the sound of the shooting. So you would see the lights flashing, and then, all of a sudden, you would hear the bullets, you would hear the gunshots. So this was seen, and yet none of those videos were in the FBI's evidence. Not one.

They had all the other videos that they had, but they did not have those videos. And again, here you had rumors and conspiracy theories and stuff like that, that there was more than one shooter. But it was like the FBI was like, no, we're not even going to look at that, we're not even going to consider that. Again, just like they did with JFK. So when I saw what was going on here with this case, I felt it to be, you know, another incident where it doesn't look like they're even considering the possibility of a second or possibly third shooter.

And here's the problem, is that they might have gotten away with that stuff back in the 1950s or 1960s. They can't get away with that stuff today. Everybody has a camera. And some of these cameras on our phones are better than professional cameras. So the quality of these cameras is quite good.

But everybody has cameras, and it's able to pick up the audio, it's able to pick up video.

And because of, thank God, free speech, and because of Elon Musk allowing, you know, returning Twitter by changing it to X and doing what he's done with the company is allowed for free speech. And so people are posting their videos, and they can't hide this stuff. There's now come out video that looks like clearly like there was somebody up on the water tower, you know, off in the distance, and you know, at a very high elevation. It looks like that, you know, that there's somebody walking around on that tower. Now, maybe it's nothing, maybe it's innocent, maybe they had somebody post up there.

But if so, then why not clear it up?

Like I said, there's audio files that are, you know, there's video that basically has audio on it. that's right from near the building where the shooter is at that. clearly, you can discern that there is more than one weapon being used. And, as far as we know, the shooter Crooks only had, like an AR style weapon 223.. So, you know, what's going on here?

Why aren't they clearing that up? I don't expect the FBI to clear up anything. And if they, if they don't clear up anything, then I'm going to know that this is just another cover up of another shooting or another assassination attempt, just like they did with JFK. And like they likely did with the shooter in Las Vegas. So, you know, I've had a little bit of firsthand experience with some of this stuff.

I had a really interesting, you know, guest on another show that I was on, who was the former lover of of Oswald. And, and she shared some interesting things about that case. And but the bottom line is, folks, we do have a deep state and they do perpetrate things, including assassinations. That is historical fact. Whether or not it turns out that it was just some 20 year old who really had no experience, but yet had overseas accounts and bank accounts, and.

encrypted email accounts and another phone and got some, you know, package in the mail, suspicious package in the mail just days before, who never had indicated anything about, you know, hating Donald Trump. This sounds identical, by the way, to the Las Vegas shooter, who had no motive either. So none of this makes any sense. And I want to know, those are the kinds of questions that I want to hear being answered by the FBI director. Yes, I want to hear why the Secret Service failed.

I would like, you know, Dan Bongino had recommended that they that they ask for and they subpoena certain forms that are done ahead of time, that basically show where the snipers are supposed to be set up. And he had recommended that to them on air. This was, I want to say, it was on Saturday, I think. So, you know, I don't know if those subpoenas have been put out there or not. Representative Ana Paulina Luna,

she basically said that the Secret Service director, she basically left the Secret Service, disgraced Secret Service director shaking and in silence after catching her in perjury and a lie, when she basically told her, you have perjured yourself. I ask that we bring perjury charges against the director. And I hope they do. The problem is, is that they're going to have to submit any of those referrals to an FBI whose director, Director Wray, is part of the deep state, without any doubt in my mind. Somebody who has not done anything to stop the corruption and the abuse of power by our FBI.

And, you know, in the violation of American citizens, Fourth and Fifth Amendments, with the abuses of power related to Section 702 and spying on Americans. So I have no trust in our FBI. I have no trust in our Secret Service. I don't expect that we're going to find out anything from these guys. And our only hope that I see is for Donald Trump to get elected, to fire every single one of these bureaucrats.

that includes all of these directors, including the SCSs, which are your senior executive service members. That's really who the bureaucracy, that is the deep state, by the way, that is the administrative state. They all need to be fired. And then, once they're fired and trusted people are put in place, then they need to go through. They need to find the evidence.

And it's not enough to just find the evidence, but they need to expose the truth to the American people and bring justice. And I think there needs to be accountability, which includes prosecuting some of the people involved in this. This is Nate Kane. It's been a wonderful hour going over all of this with you. Again, this has unleashed the political news hour.