Title: Ex-CIA John Kiriakou: Israel CONSTANTLY Spies on Americans
Show: Mitha Intel
Date: 2026-06-08
URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dof3OWLXbRU
Duration: 0:36:00

---

[00:05] John Kuryaku recently sat down with Theo Vaughn, major podcaster in the game, and they had a conversation about his background, how he got into the Central Intelligence Agency, his whistleblowing action. This is on the advanced interrogation program, his experiences, uh, counterterrorism, and then of course we get into the current event situation with Iran, Israel, and I want to break it down because what Theo Vaughn has been doing within, let's just say, the past year has been quite extraordinary. He's been meeting with people on the

[00:37] left and the right, but a lot of people who are just prominent in the space of politics and they're revealing a lot of information like a John Kiryaku. If you don't know who John Kuryaku is, he's been all over the place. Now, I do have some criticism of John Kiryaku. Most recently, he has decided to work with an agency. This agency has basically co-opted a lot of his projects. I'm sure there's an agreement that was made and for example, he had Deep Focus with John Kiryaku that has since been branded off to a different entity. Uh, now it does

[01:08] appear that John is working on a new podcast that's going to come out in the summer, maybe a month from now. So, I am somewhat hopeful and optimistic about John and the future, what it may hold. But he didn't really communicate with his audience. Uh, he got busy. He started to go on the podcast show Circuit and he pulled back from what he was doing best, which is communicating with people one- on-one, going over stories. Sometimes he would interview someone, and you would have a more in-depth look at who John is, what he

[01:38] believes in, his opinion about the current unfolding situations. And of course there was a a separate uh show that he did with uh Ted Wall I want to say and this is where they did almost like a daily Monday Monday through Friday uh geopolitical news show and he stopped doing that as well. So I am apprehensive with John. I do like that he whistleblow. He exposed the advanced interrogation program. This was the torture program with the CIA and most likely Dick Cheney had signed off on it claiming that the president at the time George Bush had signed off on it and

[02:09] there was no accountability as an example uh which occurs in perpetuity even with this current administration no accountability with the prior administration the Biden Harrison administration no accountability it's only when there's a lot of backlash so for example with the Biden Harris administration you had the creation of the disinformation board this is effectively the federal government which is supposed to protect your individual rights within the bill of rights. The number one item there's it's a fivepart series which is assembly petition redress grievances expression religion

[02:42] speech is primary within that and they created a disinformation board to censor Americans. Now it's still occurring behind the scenes. Make no mistake it has gotten slightly better with the Trump administration although that was more so uh transitory. We don't know what the future will be like in 5 10 years with upcoming censorship, let's just say around anti-semitism, but there was no accountability. It was only the disinformation board being disbanded because there was so much backlash and the White House was potentially afraid of what that backlash

[03:14] may look like. And so they scaled back. But if interests and power, centralized interests, can get away with their policy adjustments, whether or not it's constitutional or even lawful, they will pursue that. So, let's get into this uh breakdown. I'm going to go over, you know, I had generic notes, but then I created specific notes as I watched and listened to the podcast, the prime items that I think are most pertinent to individuals. And excuse me, I am a little bit under the weather. So, hopefully we can get through this whole thing without any hiccups. Okay, so

[03:46] let's first start with John Kiryaku. the reason why he's successful in terms of media not as a CIA officer which he was an analyst first then he was upgraded to a CIA officer I believe he went to George Washington University there he had a professor that professor recruited him to be part of CIA so that was also a CIA asset which I don't believe at this current period of time although one can make the case that they still do this but at least on record uh they don't do that anymore where you're a CIA asset but you're also or maybe even an officer

[04:17] but you're working in a public university. Actually, uh, George Washington, I don't know if that's private or public, but regardless, I don't believe that they have dual roles for assets in that capacity, at least not from, you know, you're a CIA asset, but you're also working at a public university. But putting that aside, the reason why John Kiryaku is everywhere. And the reason why he's successful in media is because he is an absolutely great storyteller. He knows how to tell stories. Now, I've been following him for a long period of time. He's been telling the same, if not similar

[04:47] stories. I mean, I'm not saying he's uh making anything up, but he's been telling the same stories, and every time he tells them, he has a certain passion about them. There's a certain chronological order. He knows when to hook you in. He knows when to have a pause. He's very good at that. I don't know if he's Now, of course, you learn some training within CIA, but a lot of this is genetic aptitude. Like, you can put a bunch of people in CIA training, which is manipulation. Uh, I mean, that's the biggest thing, right? Manipulation. So, as an example, one test they may put you through is you're

[05:19] trying to become part of the CIA. You must go to a coffee shop, maybe across the the street, and you have to convince someone within maybe a period of 60, 90, 180 seconds while you're in line for coffee to purchase a coffee for you. So, you have to get to know that person. You have to make a connection. You have to resonate with them. You have to find something that's relevant to them. You have to do something that captivates their interest where now they feel like they want to do something for you, right? This now gets the brain working.

[05:49] But John Kiryaku, I would say, has a genetic aptitude in terms of how he tells you information, making that information relevant to you, making it feel like you're immersed, like you're actually there. Uh, so I will give an applause, and I think a lot of people would give an applause to John Kiryaku for that. This is why he's making the moves. This is why he's on all these shows. He's able to tell a story. And that is a skill set. The reason why, I mean, look at movies, TV shows, they're telling you a story. The best shows, the best movies tell the best story. And you

[06:22] really had to put a lot more effort into storytelling, you know, going back in time with older shows, older movies, uh, before computerenerated imagery. Now, we have artificial intelligence, of course. But if you go back in time, like I remember watching as a kid, and maybe I was a weird kid. I would watch these maybe 1930s, 1940s Sherlock Holmes movies. They were in black and white. There was no audio. They had to really tell a story because they can't verbally tell you a dialogue. You're watching it's it's still uh moving picture, right? So, it's a motion picture,

[06:53] meaning it's video. It's still video, so you can see what's going on, but there's no audio. So, you have to be really damn good at telling a story so that when something happens, uh, you know, 30 minutes into the movie and it's connected to something that happens 50 minutes into the movie, 20 minutes later, you're able to connect the two and it makes sense to you. Okay. Okay. So, uh, and this is going to be kind of random. I mean, it's chronological based off how I was listening to the podcast, uh, but it may seem random. John Kiyaku doesn't think

[07:25] Israel was involved with 911, but he does believe that Israel knew the Saudis were going to participate in 911 and they withheld that information from let's just say FBI, CIA, NSA. And that is his take right now because of the agency that he has decided to work with. I don't know if he's had to compromise on certain principles, values, ideas, or concepts. Now, maybe John himself would say he hasn't and he's already paid the price, which is true. And perhaps that

[07:57] is incentive enough at this point in time for John to say, "Look, I have a family. I'm in debt. Uh I'm just I'm going to be working for the rest of my life to pay off these legal bills." And so, I can't put myself in a risky situation. I know where the power lies. I can criticize it up until the threshold, but I can't go beyond that. So now we do have evidence that Israel, whether it's the high-fiving Israelis, a lot of people, the colloquial way of perceiving that is the dancing Israelis, but the documents show that it was the high-fiving Israelis and then a woman

[08:28] paying attention to that, calling the cops. This is suspicious activity. They were in New Jersey. They were looking at the towers going down. They were filming it. Uh cops come in. They detain them. FBI holds them for a period of time. They return to Israel. They get to Israel, so they're not prosecuted in American uh courts. they get to Israel, they go on Israeli TV and they admit they knew about the event and they were there to document the event. Okay? So now that doesn't necessarily mean that Israel was directly involved, but that

[08:58] does provide circumstantial evidence to show that they were indirectly involved at at least from the documentation point of view. Now keep in mind with 9/11 there were different interests. If you just break it down at the core based off what happened afterwards, of course we're in 2026. So when you evaluate Iraq, Afghanistan, oil, poppy, you know, opiates, um, who who were the beneficiaries for this? So the beneficiaries for this, well, this is we went to the Middle East, we destabilize the nations, of course, Iraq, Syria,

[09:30] Libya, these are the primary ones. Um, Jordan, Egypt, they play nice. We give them foreign aid. at a certain point in time 67 1967 1973 so the six- day war the yamapore war you know they were trying to go at Israel and America defended Israel that's why Israel exists to this point so destabiliz destabilizing the Middle East to ensure that the countries nearby are defanked for Israel well that worked out in their favor oil okay big oil now benefits because we have Hallebertton Exon Mobile etc going to these countries extracting

[10:01] their resources bringing it back home same thing with poppy fields if you look at the poppy fields in Afghanistan before the US government went in, 10% of Afghanistan, sorry, let me rephrase that. 10% of where the poppy came from for opiates derived from Afghanistan after operation enduring freedom when the US military was protecting these poppy fields. 90% of all the opiates derived from Afghanistani poppy fields. So that is a clear unequivocal

[10:32] distinction that there was a type of benefit there whatever the agreement was between big pharma and the US government. So these are the interests that we're evaluating here. Uh I won't spend too much time on 911. I think a lot of people already have made sound conclusions uh with their opinion. Uh let's move on to more current events. So John Kiryaku and Theuvon discuss how Israel spies on America but America doesn't spy on Israel but America spies on all the other countries. So the question now becomes and and this was

[11:02] you know they were largely in alignment here with the Oban and John Kuryaku if Israel spies on America why doesn't America decide to spy on Israel? John Kuryaku replied, "It has been long-standing CIA CIA policy that you know through discrimination we decide to not spy on Israel. In fact, it's so bad when John Kiryaku was part of the CIA. Now, he hasn't been in CIA for maybe well definitely let's let's just say 10 plus years, right? More than that, 15 plus years.

[11:34] He was uh not a memo, but he was advised, you do not accept any gifts from the Israelis when they come in with Mossad and you can no longer meet at CIA buildings. You have to meet through uh a separate third party commonplace meeting board. And that is because when they come in, they bring gifts, but these gifts are riddled with listening devices. They're notorious for doing that. And it's not like a haphazard like one time thing. This is consistent. There are other examples, other reports,

[12:05] uh, you know, take this from for what it's worth. This is an alleged report when, uh, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was meeting with the UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson. This is going back in time. He asked to use Boris Johnson's private toilet restroom. This is like within his office. When Boris Johnson checked after the fact, he found a listening device in that room. So it appears that Benjamin Netanyahu himself, the prime minister of Israel, is planting listening devices in foruh foreign dignitaries own personal spaces

[12:36] or even office spaces, political spaces. So why America decides to if you're going to spy on us and it's not like we don't share intel with Israel. We do like 95% of information we share with them, but we keep 5% for ourselves because it's proprietary or it could be used against us and it may it may be uh too detrimental. There could be a domino effect if it's leaked. And by the way, Israel has taken US intel and given it to the Soviets at a point in time. So they have leaked our own intel. Jonathan Pard is an example of this civilian

[13:07] naval intelligence asset for the United States, taking items, giving it to Israel, and then Israel is disseminating it to our on paper enemies. Um, this now poses a serious problem. You have another example of this that John Kiryaku brought out. We have the F-35, right? Right. So, we have F-15, F-22, F-35. F-35 is our stealthy. It's supposed to be our stealthiest fighter jet. It's not our best in terms of dog fighting. That's the F-22. But F-35 is supposed to be you can't see us on radar systems. It I mean, it's extremely

[13:38] difficult. Now, the Iranians have proven that to be wrong or incorrect. They used a heat-seeking missile. it was able to go in an 8 figureure uh uh type of circulation and that bypassed the detection system of the F-35 at least in the uh immediate there was a flare deployed. This is going off the circumstantial evidence of reports that we have and then the shock wave of the flare interacting with the heatseeking missile that caused damage perhaps shrapnel hitting the back of the F-35. So it has now shown at least in this point of time with this war that

[14:09] our F-35s are not so impervious. But putting that aside, we create something called the F-35E. Um, this is like a uh, so they have avionics within the F-35. These are downgraded avionics just in case the F-35 goes down and that technology can't be utilized by our foreign adversaries. So the UAE, United Arab Emirates came in. They purchased a lot of these F-35E. They're okay with that. Israel, what they did is they purchased the F-35Es, but they were upset at the United States of America. They didn't want the downgraded version.

[14:39] They wanted the one one. So the one one, we can't have that because even though we work closely with Israel and on paper we trust them. If they lose an F-35 and China or Russia gets their hands on it, well, they now have our proprietary technology. So what Israel did is they received the F-35E or their version of they hired a specialist in avionics and they re-upgraded the avionics. So they're countering what we give them. This is not only disrespectful, but I'm

[15:12] sure somewhere it's a violation of commerce, international trade, and at at that point in time, we need to start withdrawing the shared intelligence and shared military equipment because you're not playing by the rules. You want to be exempt from the rules. And we have rules for a reason. We're not going to give you everything one to one. For example, the United States of America hosts the B2 Spirit South bomber. We have that proprietary proprietary technology. Now, there's a national defense authorization. Uh well,

[15:42] it's a new new bill that's being introduced. It hasn't passed yet. And this is to merge Israeli and American technology in our militaries. Now, what is the downstream effect of that? Effectively, all of our American tech will be Israeli tech and vice versa. I mean, Israel should be giving us their tech regardless because we primarily fund it. I mean the only reason why they exist, the only reason why they have funding. And by the way, a lot of the uh uh academia like academic research that they receive comes from US universities. So they should be giving us the tech.

[16:13] It's really deriving from the United States. But it's a it's going to be a one-way street here. They're going to receive our technology, our information even more so than they already do. And it's already posing a problem when they're trying to spy on us. If you're allies with one another, you don't spy on each other, right? Let's see what else we have here. Kuryaku states, "Israel doesn't control us, but they have disproportionate influence." So, there are different ways to classify this. Now, [sighs and gasps] a lot of people will say they don't have influence. A lot of people say they do

[16:44] have influence, but it's moderate. A lot of people say they have the utmost influence and they basically control us, they control Donald Trump, etc. It's going to be vary based on the context. If you look at the domestic and foreign policy actions of the United States, it aligns with Israeli foreign and domestic policy or rather their foreign policy period, right? Their for their foreign policy is we want to co-opt the American military. So you attack our enemies. You destabilize the regions that we want to destabilize. You eventually uh disrupt the pipelines, the oil infrastructure so

[17:15] we can capture it. You disrupt the tourism that is taking place in the Middle East so we can capture it. And then domestically, we need people on our side. So we need you to pass laws that protect Israel. So you can't criticize Israel, you can't boycott, you can't sanction, you can't divest, you can't even read scripture that is Christian in nature because subjectively that can be seen as anti-semitic even though 60 to 80% of Ashkenazi Jews survey as being secular meaning they don't even believe in God. Right now a lot of the customs

[17:47] and traditions they'll believe in. The ones who are religious, they're considered orthodox or hyidic. Now, it is clear at this point that there is disproportionate influence in America from Israel. If you look at the hall of the US capital, rather the halls, it's a big place. The members of Congress have the US flag, but they don't have the Russian flag, they don't have the Chinese flag, they have the Israeli flag. So, next to the American flag, they have the Israeli flag. Now we can claim that Qar and all these other

[18:18] countries are influencing our universities and our colleges. But who's controlling the power structure? The legislative branch and also the executive branch in America. It's only one country. It's a subversive foreign actor. Now, uh there's a guy, it's on Netflix. I I always forget this guy's name. U his name starts with a Y, right? And I think his last name starts with a B. But regardless, he talked about how the USSR and the KGB have cultural influence on really about Marxism and socialism, but

[18:51] also manipulation and distortion within our US schools and campuses. Now, this is decades ago. I'm sure it's still occurring to some degree. Uh I would say that China has taken that role. So, we know that there's subversion by other countries. But the whole idea at this point in time is that Israel is controlling where the power lies. Yes, these kids are going to grow up over time and they're going to have this Qatari, Russian, Chinese influence, which is not that great. Like

[19:22] if you go to any university in the United States of America, the affinity for China, Russia or Qatar is not that high. But the affinity for Israel is pretty damn high because it's media, it's financial services, it's uh of course our political system. There are a lot more institutions as well, but you have an entire infrastructure that is built around protecting the country of Israel, which is fine. The problem is you cannot have a foreign subversive actor influencing domestic policy. If it is people from within the United States,

[19:53] that's fine. That's separate. That's lawful. That's constitutional. If it is coming from a foreign institution or a foreign entity, that is when you violate the US Constitution. And we don't really have much enforcement against that. I mean, our Department of Justice is supposed to protect us against that foreign influence. But here we are, they're actually protecting people co-conspirators with Jeffrey Epstein. That's a significant problem. Okay, let's see what else we have here. >> [snorts]

[20:23] >> Both Yovon and John claimed what Israel is doing is a genocide. Um yeah, so the UN Security Council didn't acknowledge or intervene, but the General Assembly ruled it as a genocide. So there are international bodies, the United Nations, who have claimed what we're seeing is not just disproportionate conflict, but it is unequivocally meeting the rules and parameters of what a genocide is. So the Security Council is when you would have actual intervention, but let's be honest, the United States controls the Security Council, but the General Assembly are all the other countries

[20:55] coming together to unequivocally make a vote on what we're determining to be true or not. Like they're coming up with a conclusion. So this is where you have the International Court of Justice, which they really handle like uh civil disputes. This is part of the UN system. You have the ICC, International Criminal Court. Uh both of these are in uh the HEG in in the uh in the Netherlands. Uh but there was a Rome statute Rome treaty that created the ICC. So it's separate from the UN but they don't really have the enforcement power. I mean they have the courts to enforce criminal prosecution but it's

[21:27] really relying upon uh major countries like the US to go after bad actors who have participated in crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, crimes against aggression. But when the US is supporting Israel blindly, you're not going to have any of that. Okay, let's [snorts] see how far we can get before I uh completely pass out. Uh Theo asks, "Why isn't there a law that bars funding a group committing genocide?" Well, funny enough, you don't actually need a law to bar funding for a group that is committing genocide. You

[21:58] actually have to have something that's better. So, we have two items here. The Foreign Assistance Act. There have been a few amendments to the Foreign Assistance Act, uh which is a law. And then you have the Nuclear Non-prololiferation treaty. So the nuclear non-prololiferation treaty you must be a signatory to if you and you have to abide by the rules of the NPT uh if you want to be part of the foreign assistance act. Okay. So the foreign assistance act is basically we'll give foreign aid to countries based off of XY andZ. The NPT is uh you cannot have

[22:29] nuclear proliferation. You can't help other countries have nuclear proliferation. You can't be part of that process. We're trying to scale down. uh now famously uh India, Pakistan and Israel have received aid even though they're not signitories to the NPT but uh the scaling the amounts that we've given to Pakistan and India have gone down dramatically it's still within the tens to hundreds of millions uh but Israel is a big player here they receive the utmost amount of US foreign aid so not only are they not a signatory to NPT

[23:00] which is a requirement but they have a policy of nuclear ambiguity meaning they don't disclose whether or not they have nuclear armament And they do that on purpose because if they were to state that they have nuclear arms, it makes a direct a direct link to you're violating the MPT, which they're already violating. But it's really our politicians who are violating this law. If you are voting, like I'll make this argument, if you're a member of Congress and you vote yay on sending uh military armaments, which is a form of foreign aid, or money to Israel, even

[23:30] if they're going to spend that money, they're required to spend that money on our military contractors. You're violating US law. and the Justice Department needs to imprison you. So, you're voting yay on it. You're violating prior US law. This new new vote that you're voting on doesn't supersede the prior law. Now, that's not going to happen because our Justice Department is obviously uh corrupted and co-opted, but this is the situation you have. You don't need to be committing a genocide. We already have laws on the books that bar Israel from being funded.

[24:01] But here we are still funding them. So it's actually the executive branch. Uh they deacto have the utmost power from a pragmatic point of view, a practical point of view. Uh yes, there's a a a spot for the legislature, there's a spot for judicial review, but the executive branch, they get to decide to enforce or not enforce. They have the for uh they have the enforcement power, right? Force is the ultimate authority. So Theo is asking a good question, but even if you had an answer to that, which we kind of already do, nothing is solved. Having a law on the books doesn't mean anything

[24:32] unless people enforce the law or they decide the law is unconstitutional. We're not going to enforce it. And even then, it is upon the people of the United States to push the Department of Justice to go after bad actors. So, you can blame Israel for subverting our country, but I would argue you should be blaming our bureaucracy, elected and unelected, even more so than Israel because they have a duty to America. Israel only has a duty to Israel. So yeah, you can blame them and you can prosecute them if they come onto US

[25:03] land, but it's really our own politicians who need to go to prison for this. I mean, a lot of them are committing committing treason at this point. Okay, [snorts] I know this congestion is probably terrible for uh people listening. So uh there is an NSA charter to not spy on US citizens. So the NSA is the National Security Administration. Um, their charter is we're here to collect data for national security purposes. This data cannot be our own demographic.

[25:35] It has to be data that is coming from criminals. It has to be data that is really coming from foreign adversaries like it's external data. Now Snowden, Ed Snowden who has fled to Russia and has a life in Russia. He was working with NSA and he was also a CIA contractor and he exposed that not only it it was the the I want to say the prism uh project or prism operation. So prism is basically at that point in time and it's obviously more advanced now. You can put in

[26:06] information and you can find metadata about X, Y, and Z. And this metadata, you don't need a warrant. You don't need anything. You can find the information without having to go through a judge. This violates the Fourth Amendment. Obviously, now in today's day and age, we have that on steroids. We have large AI data centers, but we have carriers. So, everyone uses a carrier, whether it's home internet or mobile internet, T-Mobile. I don't know if Sprint still exists. I don't think so. AT&T, Verizon,

[26:37] and then they all have subsidiaries, right? Cricket Wireless, BM mobile, etc. So, they're they're licensing uh from the larger carriers. So, you go in with the national security letter, I mean the federal government, national security letter, you send it to a carrier. The carrier then gives your data and information to the federal government. No warrant required. I mean, you do need a warrant, but they have all the power. Then you also have large artificial intelligence data centers. This is being created um almost at scale at this point. They're utilizing a whole bunch of energy. Eventually, this is going to

[27:07] be subsidized by the US taxpayer, which if you want to build all these mechanisms, you need to cover the costs. If we have to pay for it, we should be getting equity in it. But of course, that's not going to happen. These large AI data centers, well, you have different companies that are uh leasing, they're like it's a third party creating the data centers. And [snorts] then companies like a Google, etc., they will come in and they will uh you know they'll lease them for servers and data etc. Now the federal government can come in and they could just say here's a

[27:37] national security letter we need information on x y andz and all your information is exposed. So it's now not only that there are databases with metadata that can be collected on you metadata is like a you know you make a phone call at 3 p.m. to this phone number and they're connected your your cell phones are connected to the cell tower. We can see you were roughly in this location. Obviously, the metadata is a lot more precise and accurate now than it was when Ed Snowden was working for the government. But you were over here in location A. You were calling

[28:08] someone in location B. Uh that can be that can be pinpointed or connected to other crimes. I mean, whatever they're investigating, whatever the federal government is investigating, and be used against you. And there's no warrant required. I mean, on paper, a warrant is required, but from a practical point of view, they can bypass all that. These are the loopholes, illegal loopholes that they fall under. So technically, everyone could be politically prosecuted. Like they don't like your skin color, they don't like what you say, they don't like who you associate with. They don't like your family member. A lot of people may think this is radical, but let's take the most

[28:40] radical regime that currently exists. You don't have to guess. You don't have to estimate because it exists. North Korea, the hermit kingdom. You will be punished. You will be dragged off. You're not doing anything wrong. And you won't be told why you're being dragged off. But it could be because your uncle decided to commit a crime, what was perceived as a crime. Maybe he uh took a picture of Kim Jong-un in a statue and he cut off part of his head. So now that's a serious crime in North Korea, right? Or you have a Bible that was sent from South Korea.

[29:10] You found it. You don't know what it is. You put it in your house. It was found out. So now you are paying the penalty along with your uncle. But because of your uncle, you, your sister, your brother, all gone. You're going to a labor camp. Okay, let's see what else here. I might have to cut this early because uh I hate being sick, which never happens actually. [sighs] Uh John Kiryaku applied for a presidential pardon. He uh went through the proper channels. Um

[29:41] he mentioned that he talked to Tulsi Gabbard. Uh you know, Tulsi Gabbard is leaving the office of the director of national intelligence. Uh the on record reporting is because her husband has a rare bone cancer. Uh but I do hope that John Kyaku gets a pardon because I suppose the major obviously you can't own a firearm if you're a felon. That's a law. Um although the second amendment doesn't state that. And that's kind of why the second amendment was created in the first place to be absolute. the government could put on a fabricated,

[30:13] manipulated charge, call you a felon, and now you can't defend yourself or, you know, the primary reason for the Second Amendment is not really to defend yourself, uh, at least not from other people, but to defend yourself and act as a act act as a deterrent from the US government. That's one of the reasons they were trying to make Trump a felon, which I guess on paper he is uh class E felony, make you a felon so that there are certain stipulations that now restrict you from federal office as an example, which um they were trying to play this game, but it didn't really

[30:43] work out obviously. So the major thing for the pardon is that John Kuryaku would receive his pension. uh he would receive the money that is you know he worked for a period of time for the US government and with that comes a pension and I don't know how much percentage of their original salary they would pay you but that's probably something that he could use right now having to go with legal fees etc. he was facing a huge amount of time in prison. He took a plea deal, 23 months, uh made it through and uh it's not like the government, they're

[31:14] not going to give you money uh to compensate you for any of that obviously and uh you would need a pardon. It's there was a miscarriage of justice and now certain items are restored. You can now you're no longer a felon, right? It's expuned. You can carry, you can vote, um you can have access to your pension, right? it'll help a little bit and then he can he can tell his story even more so. Hey, I was pardoned, right? I'm not an actual criminal, right? Okay, let's see here. Uh they did talk about Bernie Sanders uh and other populist

[31:45] individuals part of the Democrat National Convention. So, as an example, uh you know, Bernie Sanders was he was a popular candidate, a populist candidate, uh and then Hillary Clinton took his spot and the DNC really decided, we're going to go with Clinton over Bernie, even though Bernie has more momentum. And Bernie kind of submitted to it. I guess he had no choice. He's older. He's not going to fight back. He's not that ambitious. And uh he didn't do he didn't do anything with his momentum. He still had fans. He still had people who supported him, but he kind of just bent

[32:16] the knee, gave it to Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton obviously lost to Donald Trump, but that's a major thing with these platforms, RNC and the DNC. We think that we have our choice of presidential candidates, but what we really see over time is we're just being offered two options at the end of the day. And it's not like we really have much choice. I mean, sure, in the Republican primaries or the Democrat primaries, you have a certain amount of choice, but then they're kind

[32:47] of all the same. I mean, it's not like you're getting anyone from the Libertarian party, which, you know, they're also kind of weird, a lot a lot of them right now, or the Green Party. You don't really have that many good options. Uh, because most people don't want to be the president. I mean, idealistically, yes. But everyone knows that the people who control the presidency are behind the scenes. These are the donors, the special interests. This is where all of the influence lies. And so being president, you're kind of like a puppet. You're just there with these conventions

[33:18] for the special interests. You have certain talking points and that's kind of what Bernie Sanders fell into. And Hillary Clinton has been playing the game for a long time. And that's what she wanted. And she didn't make it. You know, her dream was to be the president not because she wanted to change anything, but because she is narcissistic like many of the people are who run for president. They don't actually want to change anything. They don't actually have a plan. They just want to be in the spotlight. That's what they care about. Let's see what else we have here. Um,

[33:50] you know, there's other mention of uh Abu Zabeda. [snorts] This is uh when Kiryaku was chief of counterterrorism in Pakistan, he was doing operations against Abu Zabeda or rather capture capturing Abu Zabeda. Uh let's see what else I have here. [sighs] I mean the big thing is torture enhanced interrogation program conceived approved October 2001. Kiryaku involved in early discussions two contract uh psychologists Mitchell and Jessen

[34:22] developed techniques techniques paid $108 million. By the way, whenever you run advanced interrogation on people and you get a confession that now becomes inadmissible in court. So you want to engage in advanced terrorism, advanced interroation for terrorism because you want to see these people behind bars. I mean that's kind of the idea. But then when you get a confession out of them, when you get information out of them, that can't be used against them in court. So they can't be prosecuted for that. So, and by the way, a lot of

[34:53] people will just say whatever they need to say to get out of the torture because it's so painful. They'll say whatever. So, you're really not going to get the best out of someone. You're not going to get what you need out of someone just by pure torture. That is the major misconception that a lot of people have. Day one of CIA security warrants of Israel intel presence. FBI identified 187 undeclared Israeli spies plus declared stealing US defense secrets and tech.

[35:24] Um, that's something that Kiryaku talked about when he was part of the CIA. Okay, let's end it there cuz I got to take a break. Like, share, subscribe.
