CIA John Kiriakou New Posdcast

[00:00] Uh, first of all, I don't believe a word he says about uh being in contact with the CIA. If anybody at the CIA were in contact with him, they would have to report it immediately. You have 24 hours to report contact with an UN uh cleared person. So, I think he's making that up. When it comes to the FBI though, you know, any slob can roll out of bed and log on to fbi.gov and fill out a report that's going to be ignored for the next hundred years. I strongly suspect that he's inflating this to make it look like he's doing something or is somebody that

[00:32] he's not. And I'll I'll tell you exactly why. >> I uh I had knowledge of a major fraud involving more than $100 million. I literally could not get an appointment with the FBI. The reason I wanted to report it was because I stumbled into it and I didn't want to be involved with it. I couldn't get an appointment with the FBI. Finally, I contacted a former deputy director of the FBI to tell him he got me the appointment at the FBI. In the first 10 seconds that I was there, the FBI agent put up his hand and said, "Buddy, if this doesn't include the

[01:02] words terrorism, Russia, or China, we're not interested." And that was the end of the meeting. >> So, I mean, confidential informant is a term of art in the FBI. So, if the FBI calls him or calls anybody and and he answers their questions, he dishes out dirt. >> That's it. Is is he is he a confidential for informant or is he just an informant or is there a distinction that >> Yeah, he's a confidential informant which you and I I think would call a rat, right? >> If the FBI is looking for somebody just to rat people out, they'll call and say, "Hey, do you have anything for me?" And he says, "Oh, James O'Keefe, he's he's

[01:33] not a good guy. He's a bad guy. What can you give me on James O'Keefe?" "Oh, he overspent on Ubers." >> Right? >> So, he's acting as a that's a confidential >> enforcement. And and if he and if he embellishes to the FBI or uses hyperbole, he spent $2 million on private jets, which is untrue. That's he's still an informant. He's just informing >> and committing a felony, >> which is a crime to lie to the FBI. >> That's right. It's a crime to lie to the FBI. >> Um we have another clip here on the SDNY. This is this is I'm feeding the SDNY tons of [ __ ] Let's play this clip

[02:04] from >> I've got him right on so much fraud. I've already fed the Southern District tons of shell. I've got more. Yeah. >> And I'm one of I'm not special. I don't think I'm a little special. But he's a [ __ ] scumbag. >> That's why I fed the Southern District tons of [ __ ] to try. >> So the people ask questions right SDNY, which I interpret the SDNY, which is a very interesting Do you know anything about the SDNY? >> I do. >> It's it's called the Sovereign District of New York. People are asking questions about that. One of the questions I

[02:35] always have, are they referring to the prosecutors or the FBI in that district or both? both, I think, but a little more so the prosecutors. The Southern District of New York is where prosecutors, especially junior prosecutors, go to make a life for themselves. Every one of these guys sees himself one day as the US attorney, as a member of Congress, running for governor or in that corner office in an A-list uh law firm. They go there to make their bones so they can start making the big money or initiate a political career.

[03:05] >> So, it's ambition. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. And it's going to be on your back and my back and anybody else that they can destroy.

[04:58] The incentives are so reversed, aren't they? The incentives. We'll get to accountability in a bit. Um, one more clip here. This is this is a question we got asked a lot after we released the stories going viral as I sit here with you right now. millions of views, but everyone's asking me the same question, which is why would he do this or why does someone you say rat, I call I call it a rat as well. Why would someone do this? And and um we're going to play this clip and we're going to ask you what you think it means. This is guys clip 104. I had phone calls from DOJ

[05:29] sources telling us that telling me that I was on an enemy's list under the B administration. Last year ahead of the election I had phone calls from DOJ sources telling me that I was on a enemy's list that was going to get purple off. >> Is that like a threat or they were warning you? Like >> they were warning. I had a friend who happened to be at the DOJ at a deputy level >> who called me and said on a Friday night at midnight and said like, "Dude, you're on a [ __ ] list. You're going to get perval October." And it didn't happen because what happened in between then?

[06:02] So, one guess is they were likely coercing him to provide false statements similar to Michael Cohen. Just tell us your analysis of this statement he made. >> I don't believe him. Okay, James. I don't believe him. You know, I I watched this video very closely. This seems Well, I've come to a couple of conclusions. This seems like a guy who's intensely lonely. He's trying to win the affe the affections of an attractive woman. There's there's a fine line between love and hate. He hates you,

[06:34] >> but he loves me. >> But I think maybe he loves you, too. >> Have you come across characters like this? >> Oh, yeah. All the time. >> All the time. >> Yeah. And at the CIA, you're trained to exploit them. >> How so? How do you exploit them? >> I'll give you an example. I was instructed to recruit uh a senior Arab diplomat one time. I met him for coffee just to try to assess him. I immediately assessed that he was gay. I reported that to CIA headquarters. They told me to pretend that I was gay and to pick him up. >> How do you assess if someone is is homosexual? >> You you just kind of feel it in your

[07:05] gut. >> Okay. Yeah. >> Um so so he's so he's uh a fine line between love and hate. Um but a question and and we'll move on from this subject in a moment, but a question is >> this individual got close to a lot of people like he was on Tucker Carlson show. >> Yeah. >> Um >> you know 10 times or whatever it was. is I mean I I this is on Fox News and people like Charlie Kirk and myself personally were blacklisted from Fox News actually at the time funny enough separate story he got close to Steve Bannon at the war room he got close to he's on the board of all these different

[07:35] organizations and one of the questions and and maybe this is a question I should answer but you're you're a subject matter expert you watched a 30-minute video you kind of have a a character profile on the individual how is he able to weasle his way to the top of all these nos in the conservative sphere in your estimation? Yeah, I actually have to admit to some admiration for that. Uh this is a guy who is very arrogant. He is very uh much a believer in his own abilities even if he sort of believes too strongly in his

[08:07] abilities. But he obviously appears to be a guy who is good at stroking the right people. >> Okay. >> And I think that's how he did it. You know, it's it's not unusual, too, to encounter somebody who is on a lot of boards, is thrown off a lot of boards, and then goes on to a lot of new boards just because people get smart to him, and they realize he's not all that he's cracked up to be, >> and they find new institutions that are not wise to his shenanigans. That's exactly right. Yeah. There's a We've all encountered people. So, going back to what you did at the CIA, you you exploited in with the the ego and the

[08:38] arrogance of this type of profile. How did you do that? you you did it brilliantly in this by by putting an attractive woman in front of him. Sometimes it really is as simple as that. What you do there there's a there's a cycle. We call it the asset acquisition cycle of the CIA. Spot, assess, develop, recruit. >> So I spot this guy. >> Um I assess his access to information that I want. I develop him by making him think that we're great friends >> and I identify his vulnerabilities, his weaknesses. In this case, just in a quick 30 minute video, it's clear that

[09:08] he has a weakness for an attractive woman. >> I think we all do, right? Is that is that a commonality? >> People do. Yeah. Especially for for older men or men that might be a little overweight or losing their hair. Yes. >> Lonely, >> right? Lonely. And uh and then you move in for the kill. >> So, when you worked at the CI, I mean, I'm a I'm a journalist. So, my my objective is the public's right to know. Yes. We we we we we celebrate when we get the story that we think is important for the public. In your job, what was your objective? Broadly speaking, >> it was the White House's right to know.

[09:40] >> The White House my former deputy director, the guy that I worked for as executive assistant, he had this mantra and the mantra was the job of the CIA is to recruit spies to steal secrets and to analyze those secrets so that the president can make the best informed policy. It was as simple as that. working on behalf of the government, the executive branch of government, specifically the commander-in-chief. That's right. >> Um because I always I always thought that and I and I've and I have some training from people that did what you did. But it was very important for me to distinguish what I do from what you do

[10:11] because I'm not working on behalf of the state. That's right. >> Whereas whereas you you are. So in your case, you were just when when you say um what was that? Uh uh asset recruit. >> Yes. Uh spot, assess, develop, recruit. >> Spot, assess, develop, recruit. the asset acquisition cycle >> recruit either to get the the individual to betray their country or simply give you intel that you can relay. >> Oh, both. >> Or both. >> Both. Yeah. >> And in that case, were you able to get the guy to betray his >> We were always trained to not make the

[10:41] final pitch unless you were 100% certain they were going to say yes. And by then, you had already gotten them to sort of implicate%. >> 100%. I never I made nine recruitments over the course of my career >> and I never had anybody say no. >> You walk a fine line like in my business when I go get someone on tape, >> you know, the other thing that I don't do and this is a fine line is is blackmail because you have these people on tape. I do. And and you could be very evil with what I have. I don't I don't do that. >> No. No. >> But in your in your field, you probably it's part of being a spy. >> You'd be surprised. Uh the answer really

[11:13] is no because we have found over the years that people don't really react to that kind of coercion or pressure. You want them to genuinely like you. You want them to like you so much that they're willing to commit treason for you. >> Yeah. >> So you're seducing them. >> That's that's probably the best the best descriptive word. Yes. >> And and I I mentioned that book Master of Disguise by um I forgot the guy's name that that did the the movie all Argo or what? >> Yeah. Oh, it's >> Ben uh Ben Affleck played him in a movie Argo. >> Ben Affleck in Argo. >> And And you've worn disguises in your

[11:44] line of work. >> Yeah. Many times. Every time there was a walk-in to the American embassy, wherever I happen to be stationed, you have to wear disguises. >> What type of disguises? >> Usually it's as simple as a mustache, a fake mustache and a wig. Um, back then I didn't wear glasses, so I would put on glasses. They were just frames with clear glasses. But at one of my overseas posts, we experimented with the first ever bald head with a comb over. It took them six weeks to place each hair one by one by one and to get the the skin color a perfect match with my own skin.

[12:16] >> How how old are you? >> Uh 61 now. >> 61. And when did you start with the CIA? How old were you? >> I was 25.

[14:11] There are there are there's a ven diagram. I keep saying this between what I do and what you do, but they're not the same. And I'll go first. >> They're parallel. >> They're parallel. Well, there's there's some overlap. I mean, we use aliases, and I use disguises. People comment that my disguises are completely ridiculous, but they work a lot of the time. Is that because people are just so full of themselves? They're they're they're not One of the things I just I I find out in Washington DC, particularly DC, and I was in Davos for the World Economic Forum. >> They're they're stuck in their own little They're not really paying attention to me.

[14:42] >> They're they're having a they're confessing to the ether. >> Well, what is that? Why Why do people do that? >> That's arrogance. Arrogance. People love to hear their own voices. People love to sound not just to others but to themselves that they are the leading experts on an issue. They're insiders and they want to show they want to prove just how intelligent just how well-connected they are. >> And that's true for 90% of people. >> Yeah. Just about >> and in politics >> 100%. You have to be a sociopath or a

[15:13] narcissist to even want to enter elective policy. >> Or perhaps like people say, you know, like someone like, you know, an entrepreneur that that starts a company. Maybe they're a little on the spectrum. There's something off. But I mean that as a compliment. Yes. >> You have to either or you have to be motiv motivated by some extreme form of vengeance. Like there has to be something wrong about you to do to do this. >> That's right. Well, I've said many times on on podcasts that the CIA and I got this from a CIA psychiatrist. The CIA actively seeks to hire people with sociopathic tendencies. >> Sociopathic >> they they don't want to hire sociopaths

[15:44] because sociopaths have no conscience, no ability to feel remorse and they blow right through the polygraph because they don't feel regret. >> Wow. So what's a sociopathic tendency? >> The sociopathic tendency is somebody who is perfectly happy to operate in legal, moral or ethical gray areas because of the belief that we're the good guys. I'll give you an example. I was leaving Pakistan, my very last day in Pakistan, and I was so looking forward to meeting up with my fiance 24 hours later, and we were going to go on vacation to uh Santa Fe. 2 hours before I left the embassy, I

[16:16] got a cable saying, "Don't come home. We want you to go to this other country instead, and we want you to meet up with the team there. You're going to break into a house, and you're going to plant some hidden cameras." And I said, "Okay." And I did. >> You didn't object to this, or you just Well, you followed your orders. You you >> and I believed in the mission. We were the good guys. >> You were you have to believe you're the good guys to do this, which requires a little bit of sociopathic tendencies. >> That's right. >> You can't really question your your orders in the military in any event, right? You have to be trained. >> And if headquarters said that this was a

[16:47] bad person, a terrorist that we needed to collect intelligence on, I was all in. What's the difference between Hollywood's depiction again I'll go first here in answering my own question Hollywood's depiction like Jason Bourne and James Bond but that's kind of you know ridiculous but my my my perception of the big difference is the people people I get thousands of people oh I want to be an undercover for you the hardest part for me is just the torture of traveling I mean it is not fun to be on a airplane ac overseas and sleeping

[17:18] on the floor of a Portuguese airport on a Saturday and hotel rooms all alone. It's just hard work. That's the big difference for me between the glamour perception. But in your in your business, in your line of work, what was the difference between Hollywood's depiction and what you do? >> Hollywood's depiction. And I'll add by saying I was the script adviser on the Born Ultimatum. You were in addition to a bunch of other CIA movies and and two CIA related TV shows. Um we we try to make sure that the scripts are are true to life as best we can. But the the big difference is what you see in a Born movie is somebody's entire career packed

[17:52] into one hour operation. >> Two hours. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. There's a lot of hurry up and wait. Surveillance is is just >> soul crushing. >> I see. >> You sit there for hours, sometimes days, just sitting there >> and and peeing, urinating in a in a cup or whatever. That actually happens. >> Oh, yeah. You go to your bathroom, >> your fake mustache is starting to peel off >> and Yeah. You're tired of the guy that you're sitting with. That's a good point. >> I once I once sat >> on, you know, the the lid of a toilet for nine hours listening to a

[18:24] conversation in an adjoining room as a guy was being polygraphed. >> Listening how so through >> just just to see if he was going to lie to you. No, I I just just through the crack in the door just to see was he if he was going to lie to the poligrapher and the security officer that was in there with him. >> And you can't move on the toilet. You can't shimmy. I I thought I was going to faint after a while. >> I've I've been there. Not not that extreme, but I mean, this is a weird anecdote, but urinating in in I've had women in the in in the trunk of a car urinate a woman in a cup because we

[18:54] couldn't leave the car. >> And the right people are not going to complain about it. It's just part of the job. It's the mission, right? >> I I was being investigated for a security clearance once and the FBI agent that was investigating me said, "Uh, have you ever been um arrested?" And instinctively I said, "In the United States." And she says, "What's that supposed to mean?" And I said, "Oh, no, no, no, no, no. I've never been arrested." Thinking, "Oh, shit." >> Yeah. I can't talk about those other times. >> Yeah. So, you've been in foreign you've been in in jails and prisons overseas. You've been through a lot of stuff. >> Yeah. I've been through a lot of stuff. >> And you can't talk about everything

[19:25] you've been through, right? >> But it's rare that you you see I don't know how many of you there are out there, but you you you talk a lot. You're you're an outspoken person. Is Yeah. >> And that what what what >> how did it come about to be that way? You know, if you had Googled me before December the 11th, 2007, you would have found one entry and it was I sold one house and bought another house and it was in the Washington Post, you know, little >> public information thing. When I went public over the CIA's torture program, it exploded. And after the Obama

[19:56] administration prosecuted me, I decided that my mission in life was to tell the truth and to be as vocal as I possibly could be about government wrongdoing. Even my my ex said, "Man, if if they thought that arresting you was going to silence you, they didn't know you at all." >> And I've embraced it. >> That was over your whistleblowing on the on the torture. >> Yes. >> So So So take us back to that that moment. And this is important question because I ask everybody who blows whistles. >> What really what made you do that? You

[20:28] were indignant. Righteous indignation. Take us back. >> I wish I could tell you that, you know, I took a position and I stood up and I told them that wasn't it at all. >> Mhm. >> Um I didn't intend to blow the whistle, but I got a call from Brian Ross at ABC News in early December 2007. >> 2007. >> Yep. um saying that he had a source who said that I had tortured Abu Zuba. This was a man that we thought was the number three in al-Qaeda that I had led a raid in

[20:58] Pakistan and captured. I said that was absolutely untrue. I said I was the only person who was kind to Abu Zuba. I've never laid a hand on him or on any other prisoner. I said your source is either grossly mistaken or he's a liar. And Brian said I didn't know this was an old reporter's trick because I had never spoken to a reporter before. He said, "Well, you're welcome to come on the show and defend yourself." Well, a couple of days later, President Bush gave a press conference in which he looked directly into the camera and he said, "We do not torture."

[21:28] >> And I said to my wife, who was also a senior CIA officer, I said, "He's a bald-faced liar, >> looking the American people in the in the eye, and he's just lying to us." And then two days later, it was a Friday, Bush was walking out of the South Portico of the White House to the helicopter to fly to Camp David and a reporter shouted a question about torture and he stopped and he turned and he said, "Well, if there is torture, it's because of a rogue CIA officer." And I told my wife, >> Brian Ross' source is at the White House >> and they're going to try to pin this on

[21:58] me. I said, "I'm going to go public." >> So I I called Brian Ross and I said, "I'll give you your interview." >> Wow. >> And I decided just to tell the truth and let the cards fall. And we have the clip. Uh, Andrew, let's play the clip from what John is talking about. >> We had a group of folks at the agency who were trained in what have been reported in the press to be called enhanced techniques. These enhanced techniques included everything from what was called an attention shake where you grab the person by the lapels and shake them all the way up to the other end which was waterboarding. >> And that was one of the techniques.

[22:28] >> Waterboarding was one of the techniques. Yes. >> And was it used on Zeta? >> It was. >> Wow. Um, I mean, I I I find this fascinating because you you spoke out, you made this incredibly difficult decision. Was it was it because you wanted to write wrongs? You you wanted to correct the lies of the White House? I mean, what was it? >> You know, in my in my gut, I knew that this was illegal. We have a we have a law in this country called the Federal Torture Act of 1946, which specifically outlawed exactly the same techniques

[23:00] that the CIA was using. We executed Japanese soldiers in 1946 who had waterboarded American PS. And then in 1968, in January of 1968, there was a front page photograph uh on in the Washington Post of an American soldier waterboarding a Vietnamese North Vietnamese uh prisoner. >> The day that that photo was published, the Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamera, ordered an investigation. The soldier was arrested. He was convicted of torture and sent to to uh Levvenworth for 20 years. Well, then in 2002, like

[23:32] magic, it's all legal. Then the law never changed. Congress never never uh revoked it. They never amended it. We changed and we just pretended that the law didn't apply to us because we were the good guys. >> But most would Is it fair to say that most CIA officers wouldn't do what you did here? >> Most would not. >> Why not? Uh, you know, honestly, there were some true believers, but for most of the others, they just didn't want to rock the boat, jeopardize their pensions, you know, future promotions. >> But you were willing to do that.

[24:02] >> I was willing to do that. >> So, what made you different than all the others? >> I don't know. I was raised in a church going home, um, Catholic, >> uh, Orthodox, >> which is even more conservative than the Catholics. >> And, um, I don't know. Right and wrong was always clearly defined in my life. I see. I mean, that's really the issue at hand in our country, isn't it? >> Because a lot of people don't want to shake boats, rock the boat, lose their money, lose their job, lose their pension. No. And >> and you know, funny thing, if I could interrupt you for a second, was the the

[24:34] minute that we began to to torture Abu Zuba, I was the executive assistant to the CIA's deputy director for operations. So, I'm seeing the reporting come from the secret site, and there are doctors out there saying, "Whoa, I never signed on for this. I took an oath to do no harm. I'm coming home. I quit. I resign. A secretary fainted when she accidentally walked into the room while they were torturing Abu Zuba. So I was not the only person that was just repulsed by this. Like when the secretary fainted, what was was it like

[25:04] zero dark 30? That kind of thing. Was it worse? Was it What are we talking? >> Well, I always maintained that there were worse things than what what we saw in Zero Dark 30. Worse things than water boarding. There there were two there were two techniques that I always believed were worse. One was the cold cell, which is when we chill a cell down to 50° F. >> Um, you chain the prisoner to the ceiling with an eyebolt like this so he can't get comfortable. He can't lay down or kneel or sit and then he's naked and then every hour a CIA officer goes into

[25:34] the cell and throws a bucket of ice water on him >> every hour. >> And we killed two people with that technique. >> Hypothermia. >> And then you just bury him, you know, behind the building. And then the other one was uh sleep deprivation. Uh this leaked around 2005 2004 and Don Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense famously said he didn't believe there was such a thing as sleep deprivation because he had a stand-up desk in his office. He didn't even sit down and he would work 24 hours, 36 hours without stopping. But we know from the American Psychological Association

[26:06] that people begin to lose their minds at day seven with no sleep. They begin to die of organ failure at day nine. And the CIA was authorized to keep people awake for as long as 12 days. >> So it doesn't work. It's not pragmatic. Did any of these methods of torture, >> did they work? >> No. Not in terms of of allowing us to gather actionable intelligence. What worked was the FBI's practice of just engaging people in conversation. And um I mean you and I could talk for five hours. We've got it. We've got an hour

[26:36] left. Um so many directions to go in here with this line of questioning. um my mind goes to the place where if you or I are tortured, what techniques do they teach us? Because we all have a breaking point. Yeah. >> And I like to say my price is my life, right? You know, when they're, you know, I one of my jokes is >> I wish I had thought of it. >> One of my everyone has a price and if your price is your life, then that's your price. Um but one of my thoughts is well, I'm never going to tell you who my confidential sources. You'll have to waterboard. I always say that as a joke. You have to waterboard me. What do they teach you in your training if you're

[27:08] tortured to not give up information? It's the same thing that they taught John McCain back in the in the day in the 60s. Uh John McCain was being tortured mercilessly and uh he was being asked the names of uh the other men in his unit. It was kind of an entrylevel question >> and so he gave them the names of all of the members of the offensive line of the 1965 uh Green Bay Packers >> and they said, "Good, good. You see, you see how easy that was?" And then they gave him a little bit of food and they stopped torturing him. So listen,

[27:40] eventually the person that you're torturing is going to tell you what you want. >> That technique might not work today because they'll Google, >> right? They'll Google it. But but what happens is the prisoner will give you so much garbage >> in addition to the real information. You have to turn all of that over to an analyst or a team of analysts. It's going to take months for them to get through it and then by then the bomb's already gone. >> I see. That's interesting. Okay. So you you feed them a bunch of information to get a little food. You give them something. Even Khal Shake Muhammad confessed to killing Daniel Pearl. We knew for 100% certainty that he hadn't

[28:12] killed Daniel Pearl, >> but he confessed it just to get them to stop torturing him. >> Um, kind of going full circle because you you this was Brian Ross on ABC News. Yes. This is this is what 20 years ago? 19 years ago. >> Yeah. 19 years ago. >> Totally different. I guess >> we all grow older in life. Um, I I guess this it's what's fascinating to me and you're on a the show called the show is called The Price is My Life and I like to get your thoughts on this is that we need people to be willing to give up something and and and you you you gave up something. You went to you went to

[28:44] prison. >> I went to prison >> for how long? >> Uh 23 months >> where >> uh FCI Lorettto, Pennsylvania. >> And was it a highsecurity prison? >> It was a low security prison. At sentencing, my lawyers asked the judge to send me to a minimum security work camp. Uh there are no no locks on the doors, no bars on the windows. Most of the guys work in town. There's a little university there. Um the CIA was just apopleleic that I was being sent to a minimum security work camp. And so they secretly asked the Justice Department to bump me up. So I got to the prison. I

[29:15] got to the camp and they said, "Oh, you have to go across the street to the prison and then they'll process you and they'll walk you back over here." or so. I went over over to the prison and they cuffed me and started walking me around to the back of the prison. I said, "No, no, I'm supposed to be at the camp across the street and the guard kind of chroled and he says, "Not according to my paperwork. You're not." >> Took me four days to get access to a phone and I called my attorney finally and I said, "Hey, listen. They put me in the actual prison with the pedophiles and the mafia dons and the drug

[29:46] kingpins. What do I do?" >> And he said, "Oh my god." Well, he said, "We could file a a motion, but it'll be two years before we get a hearing. You'll be home by then. He said, "Buddy, I'm sorry. You're just going to have to tough it out." And so I decided, you know what? You've been in far worse places than FCI Lorettto, Pennsylvania. You're trained for this. And so I just set out to handle it. >> For how long? >> Two years. Two. >> Two years. >> Mhm. >> I didn't get one single day of halfway house time. The CIA ensured that I did as much time as I possibly could do.

[30:16] >> Did you encounter any violence in the prison? Did you did you >> only violence that I initiated? >> You initiated the violence. >> But you know, one of the things they taught us at the CIA was let others do your dirty work. And that's what I did. >> That's what you did. >> I never ever got my hands dirty. Never. >> Your your trade craft came in in handy >> or did it. I was repeatedly called to the lieutenant's office for investigation. And you know, rule number one at the CIA is admit nothing, deny everything, make counter accusations. >> That's kind of what reminds me a little bit of of Trump's lawyer and what was his name? Ray Ray Coin. Ray uh uh

[30:49] Raycoin Roy Con. Yeah, that's kind of rule one, two, and three. Ad meant nothing, did not always declare victory. Um so you were you were locked up and you you were, for lack of a better word, manipulating other folks to do your bidding so that you didn't have to get your hands dirty. >> That's exactly right. And I forged strategic alliances, which I began on my very first day there. So, uh, my my I was in prison for an hour and, uh, the only thing that the guard who processed me told me, the only the only words that he spoke directly to me were, "If anybody comes into your cell uninvited, that's an act of aggression." And I

[31:20] said, "Great. Thanks. I'm here 40 minutes and I'm going to get my ass kicked." >> So, sure enough, an hour later, this these two guys walked in. One had a swastika tattoo that took up his entire neck, went up onto his face. The other one had [ __ ] you tattooed on his eyelids. Mhm. >> And um and I jumped up and I put my fist up and I said, "What do you want?" And one of them said, "Are you the new guy?" I said, "Yeah." So he said, "Uh, are you a you a rat?" I said, "No, I'm not a rat." >> He said, "You a fag?" I said, "No, I'm not a [ __ ] >> Are you a cho?" And I'm standing there

[31:52] with my fist. I said, "I don't know what that word means." Okay. I don't know what that word. >> And he says, "Chomo, child molester." I said, "No, I'm not a child molester." And he says, "Okay, you can sit with the Aryans in the chow hall." And I'm like, "Oh." Oh, he's just going to take your word for these things. >> I know, right? You have to show paperwork, though. Eventually, you have like a week to show the paperwork. So, I'm like, "Okay, I guess I'm I'm with the Aryans now." And then, you know, I had similar experiences with the Nation of Islam because I had defended human rights and with the uh with the Mexicans cuz one Mexican asked me to write his appeal and I did and I didn't charge him anything. So, >> are you an attorney by trade?

[32:23] >> No, but I how how hard could it be? Right. So, I wrote the appeal and sent it in and he lost. He was guilty. >> So, so did they find out about your case eventually? Oh, this guy was a CIA case officer. They find all that out. >> It was before I got there. >> And what did they think about that? >> Well, it depended on what faction you were with. So, there was one guy, shout out to Mark Lanzelotti, one of the Italians, the Italians named Gambino, Genevese, Lucesi, etc. He he saw in the Sunday New York Times that I was going to report to the prison on Thursday and he took it upon himself to go to every

[32:53] one of the Italians and say, "Listen, there's a CIA guy coming here, but there's a big difference between the CIA and the FBI. the FBI is rats and cops and the CIA protected us from the Muslims. >> And so they welcomed me with open arms. They adopted me and I spent every waking moment. >> Give the audience some background. The CIA protected um them from the Muslims. >> Right. So in the in the post 911 world when you boiled when you boiled the CIA right down to its bare bones, it was it was working against Iraq, working

[33:24] against al-Qaeda, working against Afghanistan. And that was good enough for them. And then this rumor somehow got started among the Aryans that I had been a hitman for the CIA. And one of them finally came up to me, an Aryan Brotherhood guy, a dangerous guy, and he said, "Is it true that you were a hitman for the CIA?" And I was prepared for the question. So I said, "Look, it was wartime and we all did things we weren't proud of." >> And that just made everything in life easy. >> What did he say in response to that? >> That was perfectly good with him. >> He just accepted that. You kind of

[33:55] thought through in your mind whatever questions they would ask you. >> I did and I was prepared for it. >> Were you scared in >> the only thing I was worried about was the guards. The guard the guards are crooked and they're violent. They're corrupts. They're dangerous. >> Yeah. >> And is that's probably true. If it's true in your case, it's probably true in most cases. >> Yeah, I think so. >> Um, do you do you experience fear in the way that most people do? >> No. >> You don't experience There's a difference between fear and danger. You understand danger. >> Sure. one of one of the guys that I worked with uh when I resigned, I was

[34:26] leaving, they had a little going away party for me and um and he came up to me and he said, "I want to tell you how much I've admired you over these years." I said, "Oh, gez, thanks. It's such a pleasure to work with you." He said, "No, you're different than everybody else." He said, "You're not afraid of anything." And I said, "You know what? I never really thought about it, but that but that's true. I'm not. And I don't know why." >> That's highly unusual, isn't it? >> That's unusual. >> And so, a couple questions on the fear thing. Has society gotten more afraid? Are people more afraid than they were 30 years ago in your estimation?

[34:57] >> Oh, I think so. >> What caused that? >> I think in large part 9/11. I think in some part we've seen this political split in our society where we can't be friends anymore with people with whom we disagree politically. And that's nuts to me. It's nuts. But we're at the point where if you've got conservative friends or conservative relatives, oh my god, it's it's a a highway to, you know, militia membership or Antifa. I'll give you an example. I I've got a cousin, bonafideed war hero

[35:29] from the Vietnam War. Multiple bronze stars. He has the V for valor, purple heart, the whole nine yards. And I happen to be in Tampa uh to see him. And so I said, "Hey, let me take you to lunch." So I went picked him up at lunch. And he says, "Oh, wait a minute. before I could pull out. I forgot my gun. So, he gets out of the car, goes back to the garage, gets his 9mm, puts it in the glove compartment of my rental car. And I said I said, "Dude, what are you doing? I'm I'm a convicted felon. This is felon with a gun." And he says, "Yeah, well, you never know when we're going to run into Antifa." And he was

[36:01] completely serious. And I said, "Put the gun back in the garage. I can't take you to a restaurant with a gun." >> What felony did they get you on? >> Uh, I violated the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. got a crime for everything, don't they? Not espionage or anything like this. >> No, no, no. They charged me with three counts of espionage. I hadn't committed espionage. >> They charged you with espionage. And this is in the which district in Virginia. >> This is in the Eastern District of Virginia. The espionage court. >> And that's what I'm saying. You can't really get a fair judge there. In fact, I hired I hired O.J. Simpson's jury consultant. >> You did? >> He was the uncle of my best friend's

[36:33] wife, and he agreed to wave his $10,000 a day fee and just do it because he was a nice guy. So, so jury the jury pool or the judges are more unfair. >> The jury pool. Well, the judges the judges you're not going to get a fair trial. >> You're not going to get >> the judges are are No security defendant has ever won a case in the Eastern District of Virginia ever. >> Why are the judges unfair? >> Because literally all of them have been prosecutors. >> Literally all of them. >> All of the federal judges

[37:04] >> in the Eastern District of Virginia. Are they are the federal judges in the article 3 courts appointed regionally or did they get appointed from all over? They're all they're all prosecutors. >> Oh, they're all prosecutors. I think a study was done by ProPublica in 200 I'm going to say 11 in which they said something like 92% of federal judges had been prosecutors. >> Wow. In my case in EDVA, >> uh we had this jury consultant, you know, take a look at everything and he said, "Look, if we were in any other district in America, I would say let's go for it. we're going to win at trial.

[37:35] But your your jury is going to be people from the CIA or with relatives or friends at the CIA, the Defense Department, uh Department of Homeland Security, FBI, and Intelligence Community Contractor. >> The jury would make to be the And this is called Vadier. And and you're a criminal defendant. So you had 12 jurors instead of nine. I was a civil defendant three times and I've been in three jury trials, all civil. So I went through the voadier process a few times. I understand with that most people don't live through that. >> Yeah. >> So you did jury selection. In my case in DC, I had a case in DC in District of Columbia. You're in the you were in the

[38:06] Eastern District of Virginia. >> Yes. >> And in one of my cases, >> it's still going on. It's in the It's in the DC circuit court of appeals actually nine years later. But three years, four years ago, >> one of the jurors was asked by the federal judge, "Have you ever heard of James O'Keefe?" And he goes, "Oh, no. I've never seen that man before." Like obviously lying. And then he worked for the Hillary Clinton campaign. The case was about our investigation into Hillary Clinton. And as he gets off the bench, there's something called preempt

[38:37] preemptary strikes where you run out of them. So you can't cross-examine the juror. And the judge has to take the juror at his word. The juror walks, looks at me, and winks as if to say, "I lied and there's nothing you can do about it, James." >> Oh my god. >> And it was one of the most It was one of the most It was one of the darkest moments. What was jury selection like in your case? You said you consulted a jury. get that far. Um, I was facing 45 years in prison and they they held they held it at 45 years for 10 months. In fact, one of the assistant US attorneys

[39:09] who later became the assistant attorney general for the criminal division in the Biden administration, she said to me, "Take a deal and you might live to meet your grandchildren, Mr. Kuryaku." So, I said, "I'm not going to do 45 minutes." I told her. So, they they stuck to that for 10 months. Then they came down to 10 years. take a plea to an espionage charge, do 10 years. I said no. Then eight years, no. And then five years, no. And my lawyer, who was what the Washington Post called a legal titan, Plato Caceris, he said to me, you know,

[39:39] I've been a lawyer in this town for 50 years, and I've never seen them come down in time. Usually, if you say no to 10, they go to 12, 15, 20. I said, "Why are they coming down?" He said, "Because they have a [ __ ] case, and they know it's [ __ ] and that's why we're going to trial." >> So, finally, they came down to five. I said, "No." Then three and a half. and I said no. And then they said, "Best and final offer, three years." I stayed up all night with my wife. We talked about it literally all night and I said no. >> So the lawyers were very upset with me.

[40:09] They came to the house the next day. Plato was the first one in the house and he said, "You stupid son of a [ __ ] Take the deal." He said like that. The second, Bob Trout, lovely like southern gentleman, he said, "If you were my own brother, I would beg you to take the deal." And then the third attorney, the I had 11 attorneys. the the third of the big ones. Yeah, this was a big case. >> How did you afford 11 attorneys? >> I only paid six of them and I ended up well I ended up filing for bankruptcy because I owed them $1.15 million. >> Always the lawyers. I want to return to

[40:39] that. I want you to keep doing the story. But >> so Mark McDougall from Aken Gump and Strauss. He said to me, he pulled me aside and he said, "You know what your problem is? Your problem is you think this is about justice and it's not about justice. It's about mitigating damage. Take the deal." >> M. What does that mean mitigating damage? that if I screw around and go to trial, and this is what I asked him. I said, "Okay, I get it. But if I go to trial and I'm convicted, what am I seriously looking at?" And he said, "12 to 18 years. Take the deal." And so I took a deal for two and a half years. I did 23 months. I had five kids at home.

[41:11] >> You have five children. I wanted this to go at the time. >> Let me think. This was 14 years ago. So they were 1916 97 and one. >> Well, good good math. 19th you range the gamut. 1 7961 19 and and what are your ch what did your what did your what do your children think of all of this? >> To tell you the truth uh three of the five don't speak to me because of this.

[41:41] >> Which part? Which part? I'm I'm a criminal and having a a convicted felon as a father holds them back in their careers. I I have an unusual name. If you Google them, I pop up. >> I see. And so, you know, one is a bond trader in in uh Chicago and and one is a a an elementary school teacher in Raleigh, North Carolina. They're embarrassed by all this. >> They're ambitious people, >> and I stand in the way of that. >> Did they get that from their mother or from some other Okay. Okay. No, they got

[42:12] it from their >> um Well, in the O'Keefe family, I think that they they would see through that. I'm not a convicted felon. I'm a I'm a convicted misdemean. >> That's okay. >> That's a story. Wear it like a badge of honor. >> Wear it. I I think things have So, this was 19 years ago, right? Or >> 2007. No, no, I was prosecuted. Well, see, I blew the whistle during the Bush administration. >> But you But when was the sentence? >> It was the Obama administration that went after me. So, I was sentenced in in 20 January of 2013 and I went to prison in February of 2013. >> But the world has changed in 2025 and

[42:44] 26. It'd be a totally different dynamic for >> Oh my god. Listen, I always considered myself to be a part of what I called the libertarian left. Uh, and I've long been a strong believer that the ideological spectrum is not a straight line and these types of people. The ideological spectrum is a circle and it meets and with the advent of the MAGA movement, that's where I feel like I found an ideological home. >> Yes. Um, political realignment. >> Yes. >> You've you've had a political realignment. You you said you were third

[43:16] generation Democrat, >> but that you left the party and the actions by Obama and Brennan confirmed that decision. By the way, what was the guy? >> I want to go to this, but the the um your take on the uh not the guy, the the court cases involving Snowden. >> Yeah. >> And um >> Assange. >> Assange. Just what's your 30 secondond take on both of the >> I believe that Ed Snowden's a bonafide American hero. It is illegal. Not just illegal, it's a part of NSA's charter that it cannot spy on Americans. And in fact, most of what it does is to spy on

[43:48] Americans. We wouldn't know that had it not been for Ed Snowden. Uh Julian Assange. Julian's a a tough guy to like. Uh he's a guy who's, you know, publicly on the spectrum. Uh you just have to accept it. But what he did was very brave. The American people had the right to know what the likes of Hillary Clinton and uh and John Podesta were saying and planning and doing in the name of the American people. But did um and you you probably don't know the answer to this because you'd be making a

[44:19] speculation, but in the criminal affidavit or the uh indictment of Assange, they alleged that he cooperated with Manning or conspired with Manning to hack into the thing. And we don't know if he did or not. >> No, he didn't do that. You don't think he did? >> No, I don't think he did it. In fact, the only person who said that was a convicted Icelandic pedophile who had also been convicted of making false statements. He went to the FBI uh agent who was uh who was assigned to the American embassy in Reikuic and offered up all this false information in exchange for money and then had to

[44:50] retract all of it. >> Is that was that in the indictment that Icelandic >> Oh, yeah. That's that that's where that information came from. >> So, he didn't probably conspire with Assange. He played the role of a journalist receiving the information. >> That was exactly >> I think the I know this because it's very similar to my case with the FBI because they alleged I stole a diary. I never stole anything. But the Supreme Court cases Nikki vivabber 2001, a journalist can receive information that was stolen as long as journalist plays no part. So Assange in the indictment it said I think it said curious eyes don't

[45:21] run dry. He's telling Manning give feed me more stuff. >> Yeah. >> So that's a very fine line. >> It's a fine line. >> It is in >> but he never tasked Manning. >> He never tasked Manning. >> And that's what this Ziggy Thor Darson alleged. >> What was his name? >> Ziggy Thor Darson. Ziggy Thor Ziggy Thor Dawson worked worked with Assange in some capacity or >> he was in Assange's orbit for a year or two um in in the Iceland office of Wikileaks and then just decided hey I can make this work for myself. >> Um so so I mean and and uh Julian

[45:53] Assange has really paid a price. I mean away in a in a room in England for years >> multiple suicide attempts. Yeah, >> it was terrible. Um, and the guy, it was Brennan and Hayden, one of the clap clapper when asked under oath, "Do you spy?" And he did this whole thing, which for a spy to do, it's like the worst tell ever in Congress. You know the video I'm talking about. Oh, no, not wittingly. I mean, what type of spy behaves that way in a congressional hearing, I guess, when you're guilty. >> And you remember the question was was whether he spied on Americans,

[46:23] >> right? >> And then he said no. Which >> which is a crime? It was a lying. >> It was lying. Was he lying under oath? >> Lying under oath. But no but no one no one's held accountable. >> No. Okay, I want to go to your political realignment, but I'm jumping around here um because I'm there's so many things to ask you. Why is nobody held accountable?

[48:27] Yeah. You know, this is this is the Washington of of the 21st century. either you're in or you're not one of the one of the swells who's in. And the the the system, the swamp takes care of its own. That's why you have somebody like John Brennan who can commit felony after felony after felony and literally never pay a price. The swamp takes care of its own. Let's let's unpack that. >> Okay, so the Republicans have the the the White House. Trump's in there. I I

[48:58] support the president. I support what he's doing to clean up. Mhm. >> I support Doge. I support what Elon was doing. The swamp takes care of its own. But but but what happens? Like is it that they is it they get lobbyed by the bad guys? Do they take money legally? I mean, >> it's actually even more simple than that. >> Taking the CIA as an example because it's the example that I know the best. >> Presidents come and go every four years, every eight years. If you're at the CIA, especially if you're in the senior

[49:29] intelligence service, you're going to be there for 25, 30, 35 years. I worked with one guy, a national intelligence officer who was there for 42 years. >> And, you know, presidents come and go, and they're most likely not going to fire you. Even though at the CIA, we served at the at the pleasure of the president, we didn't have we didn't have the same protections from the Civil Service Act that everybody else in government did. But um if you don't like this president, you just don't ignore him. You ignore his orders. You know he's going to be gone in three or four

[50:00] years and then you just wait for the next guy. >> Mhm. >> So it's just the incentives. It's just that the the the incentives are I mean just walk me through this. >> Well, the biggest problem it's not just the incentives. The biggest problem is that there is really no congressional oversight. There's just none, especially in intelligence. the the intelligence committees are no more than cheerleaders for the CIA and the rest of the intelligence community. >> Well, I'll give you a real life example.

[50:31] When I got out of prison, I was invited to dinner at the Greek ambassador's residence and I went there and Senator Ron Weiden was one of the guests and he walked up to me and he said, "Hey, welcome home. We were really rooting for you. We were pulling for you." I said, "Come on, Senator." I said, "I expected more, especially from you." He got very angry and he says, "Look, it took everything I had just to not lose my security clearance." >> And I said, "Oh, you're afraid of them." >> Oh, >> that's what it is. You're afraid of them.

[51:01] >> Afraid of losing his clearance or afraid of what exactly? >> Oh, I think on the first level, afraid of losing his clearance. On the second level, afraid of them maybe turning on him and starting to look at him. And you know, listen, there's this book, there's this book called Three Felonies a Day by Dr. Harvey Silverglate. He's a professor of law at Harvard University. And he says that we are so overcriminalized, so overregulated in this country that the average American on the average day going about his or her normal business

[51:32] commits three felonies every single day. With the point being, if they want to get you, they're going to get you. >> Well, in my case, they made up felonies that I didn't even commit. See, and then there's that, >> which is a whole other dark. >> Yeah. >> So, you're you're you're in the what was the name of that congressman? >> That was Senator Ron White. >> Senator Ron Widen from is it is it Oregon? >> And and he got upset at you that you weren't more grateful to him. Yeah. >> For, you know, >> for what? I have no idea. >> Yeah. It's kind of strange. It it really is the the issue, I would say, of our

[52:04] time of today, of tomorrow, of this year. and every I'm an investigative reporter and I put out the stuff and people but nothing happens to these people. That's that's just how people feel which you know >> I I believe that exposure >> you know Benjamin Franklin said I'd rather have newspapers with no government than government with no newspapers. I believe exposure is the accountability that that people see the disinfectant that we need. >> It's the disinfectant. But what the hell is going on is the I don't know the answer to this. It's it's and I think you've answered it to a degree that the

[52:34] swamp takes care of its own that the administrative state is there for 42 years that that the senator is afraid of his security being taken away. I I think about this question and I to me it's almost like I I I don't know the the the incentives are completely off. Like in other words, my my hypothesis is if I hold a bad guy accountable >> in my life. >> Let's say I I c I hold people accountable every week. I catch people on tape. >> They admit to doing things they shouldn't be doing.

[53:05] >> They lose their contracts. They lose their job. They >> people get fired in my videos. >> So as a result of that, they sue me. >> Right. >> Now it's your fault. >> They Yeah. Now under a torsious theory of damage and blah blah blah. Now, that probably won't work in in a federal court if I litigate it to to summary judgement, >> but that's what they do. So, I I get >> I get pain inflicted upon me >> for for exposing them, for doing the right thing for reporting what they say, for revealing it to the American people.

[53:36] And you you you went through something similar. You went to prison with really bad ombres. >> Yeah. >> For speaking out against something that appears to be unconstitutional. Is that correct? >> I agree. So the people that tell the truth get punished. >> Yes. >> Um so my theory, tell me if this is right or wrong, is that the people in charge, the attorney general, the the powers that be, don't don't go after the bad guys because they will be punished if they do that. Is that is that correct? >> That's exactly what my belief is. That's my position. Yes.

[54:07] >> Tell us more about that. Like how does that like is it because they're going to take away a security clearance? They're going to you know not allow him run for re-election? like is is that what it's about? >> I think it's it's even not as straightforward as that. Um there's there's this fear that you're not going to be an insider anymore. You're not going to be a part of the the group, the click, you know, who gets all the the great secret inside information. There was this brief period from 1975 to 1982

[54:40] where the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence did honest to God oversight, right? Where the CIA, what years were those? >> 75 to 82, where the CIA had to operate within the confines of the law. And if you don't like that the law puts handcuffs on you, then change the law. >> Right? We can all agree to disagree. and if you disagree, sponsor legislation and we can have that that debate. But then starting around 1982 and and really

[55:10] culminating in around 1995, the oversight committees just decided to give up. And on the one hand, it's impossible for a staff of 60, 70, 80 people on Capitol Hill to oversee an intelligence community of what 60,000 70,000 people. It's just not possible. And so you pick and choose your battles until you can't even do that anymore. I think that's what we've seen binders of classified things. They they bring you into a skiff and you can't bring a phone and

[55:41] >> That's right. >> It's like you know thousand congressman was one congressman was telling me about that. I was like whoa. Yeah. >> And then hey what was what is that what is that word that one word for that secret operation and then they bring out another binder just for that one. >> Exactly. And then you have to sign a secrecy agreement to open that binder. >> That's insane. >> That's wild. >> Terrible. And do they get I mean the general public assumes that they get compromat they get compromising material on all these politicians. Is that does that happen? >> You know I've always been of the belief that yeah that was true uh at the FBI. That wasn't my experience at the CIA

[56:11] just because they don't have the wherewithal to do it domestically. I will say though that my first boss now this is dated >> but my first boss told me that his first job at the CIA was as an intern. He was a grad fellow in the um office of um what was it called? Um counter intelligence. >> And on his first day, he went in there and there was an entire wall just of file folders. And the secretary told him, "You might find yourself to be the only person in the office once or twice. Whatever you do, don't look at those

[56:42] files." And he said, "Well, of course, you know, the minute that he's the only person in the office, he went and looked at the files and every single one of those files was on an American citizen." >> Whoa. >> Mhm. >> That was in the CIA. Guys said that. That was a dumb thing for him to say. Don't look at that. Don't look at that. It's something that a spy shouldn't say. >> But yeah, to answer your question, I I believe that that compromat is something that the FBI and God knows the stories from Jay. Edgar Hoover, he was collecting that stuff from the 1920s. >> Yeah. I when I was raided by the FBI, I I'm I'm also don't consider myself a particularly fearful person. But what

[57:13] struck me when they raided me, this is in 2020, 2021, they got secret warrants against me to spy on my newsroom, which is its own constitutional crisis. the attorney general expressly forbids it, blah blah blah. The two two parts of fear struck me when they did that to me. Number one, it was like you said you you said um they enforced the law between 75 and 82. It was the breakdown of the law itself that there was no the concept of justice is proportional were all equal before the law. The law means something. But when words ceased to have meaning when when Merrick Garland can say you

[57:44] cannot raid a newsroom and then raid a newsroom. >> Yeah. >> It became like a animal farm. all all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others. That's when the fear set into me. I was like, whoa, >> this is a postconstitutional dynamic. And the second thing that really hit me hard, and again, I'm being very vulnerable for the audience to give them some background into what you're saying >> was after the raid, um, I had nothing in my apartment except books and clothes. They were looking for contraband, looking for weapons, and I was like, are they putting child porn in my drawer?

[58:16] Are they putting cocaine? and that my mind went to went to places I didn't I didn't want it to go. And I never felt that before. And I was I was totally I mean I mean this sincerely. I was totally overcome by a paralysis of fear. >> Oh my god. Yes. >> Have you ever been there? >> Yes. And I've actually written about exactly that. after my case, which Donald Trump's first US attorney in Utah called the Democratic Party's template for Lafair.

[58:46] Um, there was a a series of four or five whistleblower cases where, like magic, child pornography was found on every one of these computers. >> And I wrote this piece. I said, "Isn't that a strange coincidence that child porn is always on the whistleblowers uh computers?" And in fact, there was one whistleblower uh from the US Army who said, "I never had any child pornography on my computer." And then when the judge demanded to see the pornography that was

[59:17] pulled off the computer, the prosecution couldn't produce it. >> So yeah, that's a great fear of mine and I think it's something that all Americans should fear. again, if they want to get you, they're going to get you. Has that changed? Is the dynamic changed present day? And I and I've got about 15 minutes left with you. I want to go to Epstein. Has the dynamic changed in that the Elon Musk's purchase of X, the sort of populist social media movements that we're seeing >> that it's like, come on. It's like, remember the old 60 Minutes Mike Wallace question? Oh, come on. There's child

[59:48] porn on the journalist phone. Or is it still a huge threat? No, I think it's I think it's significantly better under Donald Trump. >> Yeah, significantly better. >> Let's talk about Jeff Epstein. And you've you've talked about this on so many podcasts. I'm going to try to ask you questions you haven't been asked. And I'm going to start by >> talking about Andrew, if we could pull up the clips >> specifically on the CIA. By the way, we have two pieces of footage from investigations that we've done from individuals who have claimed they work with or for the CI. >> I've seen them.

[1:00:18] >> You've seen the guy. Remember the guy that was fired and in Langley for saying he withheld information from Trump, which by the way, I went to Langley to do an on camera and people were >> Well, I was on the the the highway outside the building. I forget the name of the road. >> Yeah. Dolly Madison Highway. >> Yeah. That and I was standing as close as I could with the office. If you set foot two feet that way, we'll arrest you. And as people were driving out of of the building, they actually rolled down the keep going, O'Keefe. The FBI wouldn't do that. No, the FBI wouldn't do that.

[1:00:49] >> The FBI wouldn't do that. And and I think it was Congressman Nunez who said that, and this is a broad generalization, but I've heard this from a number of conservatives, that generally speaking, this is in 2023 and 24, that the FBI was more corrupt than this the CIA. That that's the that's the >> I always believed that. And in fact, since my conviction, um, I've received emails from three of the FBI agents involved in my case apologizing for targeting me and prosecuting me. They said that they were ordered to do so.

[1:01:19] >> Yeah. >> And there was nothing they could do. >> Following order. Well, there is something they could do. They could resign. >> They could resign, >> but they're not they don't choose to do that. >> See, again, it's the same at the CIA. You don't want to rock the boat. You don't want to jeopardize. >> By and large, the the the I hate to use this term. It's a it's a not a correct uh term of art, but the rank and file. >> Yes. of the CIA. I would generally good people. >> Yeah. >> 80% or whatever. >> Patriotic, smart, hardworking people who want to do nothing more than to serve the American people. >> So, let's go to this uh clip from this is Glenn Prager on an airplane. We

[1:01:50] recorded this earlier this year speaking about Epstein and he works with or for the FBI interviewing the Epstein victims. Glenn Prager, go ahead. A CIA. Go ahead. It's not talked about yet, but it soon come out that he was a CIA. >> He was a CIA. >> He was a CIA. I think he's protecting a lot of other people. It's not He's not protecting himself cuz there's nothing there, but he's protecting a lot of people because Trump's now saying it's a hoax of the case like a hoax or something. I mean, >> you know, it's not a hoax. He's been on the plane, you know, many times.

[1:02:21] >> It's just he was never on the plane with the kids. >> I've seen the itinerary and and I've interviewed all the victims. There's never been incidents where Trump was on a plane with these kids. >> Mhm. occurred. But that can't be said for Clinton and it can't be said for others while the Clintons. >> And we have another clip where Prager talks about Epstein being um was it was Israel something comment he made working with Israel working for Israel. Uh but in any event he talks about um I guess

[1:02:52] first your reaction to that just watching that this is a guy just some context. is Glenn Prager interviewed the victims in Palm Beach County uh for the Department of Justice. >> On what he thinks is the case. What's your perspective? >> Yeah, I I think that most Americans who have followed this story assumed that that was the case. And now that we've had this trunch of 3 million more documents, it's pretty well proven it. >> And and have you been going through those documents? any any highlights, any

[1:03:24] pullaways that you headlines that you've come across? >> There's something that's been very very intriguing to me. The former Obama White House counsel, Katherine Rumler, who's now the general counsel for Goldman Sachs, making probably more money than she can count, uh, repeatedly repeatedly tried to get, uh, CIA director John Brennan to have lunch with Jeffrey Epste. She and Epstein apparently were very close. That wasn't necessarily new, but uh there was one email that was new where she emailed Epstein and said, "CIA

[1:03:57] director John Brennan gave me the CIA's highest honor this morning." Pretty cool, huh? Or pretty neat, huh? And um and then when Epstein was going to be in Washington, she repeatedly went back to him saying, "Let me set up a lunch with John Brennan. You're going to like John Brennan. Let me set up this lunch with John Brennan." We don't know if they ended up having lunch, but she was working very hard to get John Brennan together with Jeffrey Epste. >> Why? >> Oh, I've gone through so many of these documents. It's it's it's

[1:04:28] 100% fact now that that Epstein was working for the Israelis, but he doesn't appear to just have been an Israeli access agent. It looks like he had sort of offered himself up to the CIA, to MI6, to MI5, to maybe the Germans. there there could have been other services as well. And then we learned what just a few days ago >> that his attorneys actually sought confirmation from the CIA and from the National Security Council that Epstein was acting as an informant.

[1:04:59] >> Access agent to the to the foreign interest. >> Yes. >> An epste is an informant and an access agent to the foreign interest the same thing or different. >> Uh there are minor differences. The the point that I've been making is that if you're a foreign intelligence service, let's say in this case you're the you're the Mossad, you're not going to recruit Bill Clinton or Prince Andrew, you're not going to recruit Bill Gates. So you do the next best thing. You recruit somebody who has access to them and who these guys trust. And then

[1:05:31] if you have a little compromise hanging over their heads at the same time, that's even better. >> So we we'll get to we'll get to the Israel thing in a minute because I mean I mean I'm I'm going to be honest with you. This is a this is a hot this is a hot button. This is a hot topic. Charlie Kirk, close friend. He was a friend with a lot of people, but >> I went to the Turning Point thing in in July and Tucker was on stage and said the thing and >> it really upset a lot of people. It upset a lot of donors to the conservative movement. And I'm I'm trying to be fair. I'm trying to be factual. So, how do you know with 100% certainty that Epste was MSAD as a fact? >> How do you know that? I think that the

[1:06:02] documents, there are too many documents talking about too many incidents of contact with senior Israeli military and intelligence leaders to come to any other conclusion. I happen to be on the Pierce Morgan show a couple of months ago. Uh I Scott Horton and I were on one side, Alan Dersowitz and Danny Ayalon were on the other side and um and I said factually the Israeli spy on the United States. >> It's a fact, right? Jonathan Pard was not an anomaly. The FBI will tell you that there are at least 187 undeclared

[1:06:35] Israeli intelligence officers spread all across the United States stealing our defense secrets, but they're Israelis and we're close to the Israelis and so we just pretend that that's not a problem. Durowitz practically had a stroke when I said it and said first that that Epstein was not uh an Israeli access agent. That if he had been he said I was his lawyer. If he had been working for the Israelis, I could have gone to the White House and I could have gotten him a more favorable sentence. >> There there are documents in this in this trunch of of three million uh

[1:07:07] emails or what what as specifically as you can. What what facts or documents or exhibits or that that that show that connection to Israel? I mean, this guy says it. Prager Prager in the video says it, but you know, it's it's hearsay. We don't know if it we I can't verify what the >> guy in the FBI is saying is true or false. But what documents have you seen? The documents I've seen are documents where he's telling, for example, um, Prime Minister Ahoud Barack, former Prime Minister Ahoud Barack, that he's secured documents from the likes of Peter Mandlesson, uh, and Prince Andrew.

[1:07:38] We just learned this what, yesterday, day before yesterday, Peter Mand, the former uh, former British ambassador of the United States that he has then sent to the Israelis. >> Um, I know I know we got to go, but I want to spend another I want to show the other two clips, Andrew, of the of the Epstein footage and get John's reaction. Uh, let's go to Attorney General Pam Bondi. Attorney General of the United States. This is this is footage that we broke in May of this year and it's been regoing viral now. So, if we could pull that clip up just for some context while we're getting that clip. The attorney general is in a restaurant. Pause the

[1:08:09] clip. The attorney general who's in a restaurant and I don't I don't send people out to do this. Sometimes people send me stuff. >> Oh, that's fun. >> Or they say, "Hey, I'm in a position where I can record this." >> Um, and I and this is a tough one for me because I don't want to You know, it's this is a tough one to to whether we publish this. And then Bondie went to the White House and said what she was caught on the video saying, "Play the footage in a restaurant in DC from May of 2025. >> Files are going to get released." >> Um, we hope soon.

[1:08:42] >> Okay. Any dates? >> No. You know what it is? There are tens of thousands of videos and it's all with little kids. So, they have to go through every one. There are tens of thousands of videos with little kids. Now, was it Cash or or Blanch or someone said recently, "Oh, there's no there's no there's no play the comparison. Play the other one of the other statement. I want to get John's reaction." This is the latest statement from Department. >> There are tens of thousands of videos

[1:09:14] with children or child porn. If there was a video of some guy committing felonies on an island and I'm in charge, don't you think you'd see it? >> All right. So, that was an interesting What are your thoughts on the child the children and the child porn and all that? >> First of all, there's no in my mind there's no more horrible crime that exists than a crime on a child. Um, I I would like to think that Pam Bondi was speaking off the cuff and was

[1:09:47] talking about what she expected to learn, expected to see. I'm trying to give her the benefit of the doubt here. Um, I really believe that Cash Patel is telling us the truth when he says >> if there was any evidence of a crime, by God, he would be the guy to demand that it be prosecuted. Um, that's why I celebrated his appointment as as FBI director because we we needed somebody who's going to tear the place down to the bare step and rebuild it. I think he's having a tough time. >> I think he's facing a lot of headwinds and I think that he would tell you that he has not accomplished what he thought he could accomplish.

[1:10:19] >> Is that due to the bureaucracy? I think so. Yeah. I I I say that if if you appointed Jesus Well, Jesus can walk on water, so maybe that's a bad metaphor, but it's tough. It's a tough job. >> It's a tough job. >> So, how do you think Pam Bondi is doing? I like Pam Bondi and I think she means well, but I don't think she's accomplished as much as most of us expected she would have accomplished by now. >> So she so she could have been speaking off the cuff like many subjects do. >> I really believe that >> it is a little the question is should the attorney general of the United States be

[1:10:50] >> sharing all this with a stranger in a in a in a coffee shop? is that that there are questions about the discernment and the judgment of the chief law enforcement officer of the Department of Justice there. And then uh do we have any other clips from from Epstein team? >> Schnit. One one more. One more. This is Schnit talking about um Gelain Maxwell and the deal or the alleged secret deal that she got. Let's play this guy who was fired from the Department of Justice after we recorded this. >> Yeah. and also indulge >> got transferred to a minimum security

[1:11:21] prison too recently >> which is against BP policy because she's she's a convicted sex >> and they're not supposed to get in security prison which is an interesting >> detail because she's getting a benefit which means >> they're offering her something to keep >> transfer to a minimum security prison in exchange for a deal. Your thoughts on the Maxwell dynamic? >> Yeah, I've written about this too. It is absolutely anathema to BOP uh regulation to allow a child sex offender to be

[1:11:51] anywhere near a minimum security prison. They can't be in maximum or medium because they'll be killed there. >> They can't be in minimum because they can just walk away >> and have access to a child again. They have to be in a low security prison, which is where she was >> until her transfer was ordered. Something I just have no understanding of. >> Do you believe that what that man said is probably true? >> Yeah. Yeah. To keep her mouth shut. >> I think it I think it is. >> And and and and again, I keep going keep going back to accountability, but people are demanding to know why weren't they arresting anybody as it pertains to

[1:12:23] Epstein. Why? >> You know, I hate to say it. It's it the simplest uh reason I think is the correct one. The statute of limitations on just about all of these crimes has expired or >> including against was it five years for rape? >> Five years. Five five unless you can you can prove an ongoing conspiracy in which case the statute of limitations would reset itself every day. >> Well, that's what the guy said in our video la last week. The FBI guess said they'll run the statute out. There'll be a different president. He was just being honest. >> Yeah, he was being honest. >> They fired him for being honest.

[1:12:56] >> There it is. That's Washington. This is >> Harry Truman said, "If you want a friend in Washington, buy a dog." >> I mean, it's almost true of human nature, isn't it? >> They fire you for being honest and the child rapists go free. That's right. >> And it's not necessarily, you know, I'm just, this is my commentary. I don't know if it's Cash's fault. I I I like Cash. I've met Cash. I don't think Bondie's a I I don't I don't actually can't make a comment on on her. I've met her once at a dinner. I I don't know if it's the individual. I think it's the nature of humanity, human nature. >> I I think you're right. >> Bureaucracy. >> I think you're right.

[1:13:26] >> So, in many ways, what you're fighting against and what I'm fighting against appears to be human nature itself. >> And that's why it's such a tough fight. >> It is. It is. It's It's a difficult fight. and and the American republic, the American experiment, we have a very unique framework because we have a by camera legislature and separation of powers. Um, this is a very big question I'm asking you, but are we at the end of the rope for the American experiment? You know what? As things stand today, I think actually that we

[1:13:56] are. I hate to say that, but there's going to have to be a major constitutional reset where the legislative and and judicial branches of government reassert their co-equal authorities. Otherwise, you know, we're we're kind of devolving into into chaos. >> Factions like like the Federalist Papers. I think is that what you mean? Like mobs? >> Yeah, I do. I think so. >> Like in the Minnesota you saw in the agitation and and and I hate to ask predict the future questions. I don't answer them. But I am going to ask you a

[1:14:26] predict the future question. Are we looking at like a few years? Is it the next election? Like what's going to happen? >> No, I think this is an incremental process. I really do. I I don't think it's going to be revolutionary in any way. I think it it'll be evolutionary. It'll continue to get worse, but it it's not just going to explode. I don't think we're seeing 1968, 1969 all over again, >> but I think we're getting there incrementally. Well, what strikes me is the political prosecutions because they go after all the Republicans and now Trump's kind of attempting with Lemon

[1:14:56] and these others, but I don't know if there I don't I don't know if those cases are going to are going to go anywhere and Biden raided my newsroom and that was dropped because that there wasn't even a colorable crime, right? But it is there going to be a dant like where both sides or is it just going to be like Brazil these guys get in power and they go to prison? What's your what's your prediction? >> We're going to have to back away from that. It's it's it's certain death for the system. It really is because it's only going to get worse unless the two sides back off. >> And we really have to be able to believe

[1:15:27] in the judiciary again. I >> I think we've lost faith in our institutions. Everyone asks which which party appointed the judge which is completely >> the first question >> and I mean I I reject the premise. I mean and and some article 3 courts are not corrupt. I I I federal judges is my opinion. probably the least corrupt thing I've seen I've seen a lot as of you. There's still is, for example, the First Amendment is still generally upheld in article 3 courts. They haven't taken that away yet. >> That's right. >> But you got to litigate. You know who stands to gain from all the political prosecutions is the lawyers. >> Yeah. >> They said 1.1 million.

[1:15:59] >> 1.15 million is what I still owe. >> You still owe that? >> Yeah. >> And in our case, yeah, it's 25% of our budget. The process is the punishment. >> Well, the process is the punishment. >> We're out of time and I could talk to you for five more hours. fun. Is there any closing comments you have about any of what we've talked about or anything you like? >> Well, like you and I were talking about just before we we started filming in our guts. We know what the right thing to do is. Always trust your gut. >> Trust your gut. >> Yeah. Your children are going to be proud of you and you'll be able to sleep at night. Sometimes it's hard. It's hard for even if we know the right thing to

[1:16:31] to How How do you trust How do you know what is your gut? How do you How do you know what that is? That sensation? You know, I I've I've always believed that that human nature is such that intellectually we know what the right thing to do is, even if we don't always do the right thing because because it's you maybe it's easier to do the wrong thing, maybe you get a temporary benefit. Uh but deep down we really know what the right thing to do is. And I think that even when it harms us personally, I've been ruined. I I went

[1:17:04] bankrupt. friends and family members walked away from me. I'm unemployable. I I have to work for myself essentially, but I like my life and I respect myself. And I think for all of us, that's really what it comes down to. >> Do you find that people just one follow question to that that people you're you hold a mirror up to the other guys who didn't make the difficult decisions that you made, therefore they kind of resent you or they hate you because you have the balls to do something they didn't. >> I get that. I the day after I blew the

[1:17:34] whistle, a a retired deputy director of the CIA emailed me and he said, "You've chosen a difficult road. I only wish I had had the guts to do it myself. >> I only wish." >> Mhm. >> Or people will say to you, "I can't do what you do." >> And your response is, "Yeah, you you could." >> Everybody could do what I did. >> Everybody could, but they choose >> you make a decision not to. >> I don't know if we can save the country unless people do what you do. >> Thank you. >> As hard as it is. you. >> It's, by the way, this is hard. >> It is hard.

[1:18:05] >> This is This is brutal. >> Mhm. >> Brutal. I don't mean to make a joke, but it's like Shakespeare said, "Put all the lawyers at the bottom of the ocean." I don't I mean, I'm I'm I'm sorry, but I'm not sorry. They profit off corruption and human suffering. >> And I'm trying to get lawyers hired here. And if you're watching and you want to work as a as a general counsel, I will pay we'll pay you a quart million dollars a year, $300,000 a year. But you're still going to have to take a pay cut from that $1,000 an hour. It's all about greed, isn't it? >> Yeah. >> And I could have had a life where I where I made a million dollars a year

[1:18:36] using my talents. It's it's it's it's the thing that gets me. It's the betrayal of the good people that do nothing. The good people that do nothing. All that is required for the triumph of evil is for good people. I'm not angry at the evil. I'm angry at the good who do nothing. That's right. Do you feel the same way? >> I do 100%. That's how I feel every