PBD Podcast - FBI Whistleblowers Tell All! | Ep. 276 | Part 1

Episode Date: June 2, 2023

In this episode, Patrick Bet-David and FBI Whistleblowers discuss: Road to becoming whistleblower Political Bias in the FBI Domestic terrorism Chris Wray Public Trust in the government FaceTime or Ask Patrick any questions on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://minnect.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Want to get clear on your next 5 business moves? ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://valuetainment.com/academy/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Join the channel to get exclusive access to perks:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://bit.ly/3Q9rSQL⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Download the podcasts on all your favorite platforms⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://bit.ly/3sFAW4N⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/pbdpodcast/support

I know this life meant for me. Yeah, why would you plan on the life when we got fed David? Value payment, giving values, contagious, this world, our entrepreneurs, we can't no value that hate it. I be running home, you look what I become. I'm the one. Okay, so today's podcast is a special one. Obviously, if you've turned on the TV or you watched clips on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube,

you have seen these faces of these two gentlemen who are going through an interesting phase right now as they're coming out as FBI whistleblowers against a lot of different things that's going on. And so let me properly introduce them and we'll go into them sharing their experiences and we'll go into a bunch of different topics. First we have Steve Friend, who is not the actor from a few good men. Steve Friend is an FBI agent since 2014 and recent whistleblower. He grew up in Savannah, Georgia. He graduated from University of Notre Dame with a bachelor's in accounting. He transitioned from business to career and law enforcement in 2009.

He was sworn a sworn police officer in Savannah and puller Georgia for four years before joining the FBI in 2014. He spent seven years in the FBI investigating violent crime and major offenses occurring on Indian reservations in Northeast Nebraska. Friend was also a member of the FBI Omaha SWAT team for five years. He transferred to Daytona Beach in 2021 to investigate child exploitation, human trafficking and child sexual abuse. Material friend was reassigned to domestic terrorism case work in October 2021.

And he was indefinitely suspended as an FBI special agent following his whistleblower disclosures in September 2022 and we'll get into that and then we have Garrett Boyle with one of the best hairdo's out there got a game credit for that hair oil oil oil oil oil yes Garrett oil boyle he is a Christian a a father, indefinitely suspended FBI agent, former police officer, infantry veteran of Iraq in Afghanistan, truth seeker. He is a special agent was given a news Simon in September of 2022 in Virginia.

He was stationed in Wichita, Kansas at the time. So he and his wife sold their home in August, lived in Airbnb for a few weeks. During the time the baby was born, then in an RV for six weeks, before rental property in which to live, Garrett then reported to his new assignment in Virginia on September 26, 2022. The FBI waited until the time to suspend them. He was escorted out and suspended without pay. They intended to close on a home shortly after, which of course fell through as well because Garrett is still an

employee of the FBI and they have prohibited him from earning wages that are more than $7,500 per year. I mean, even Bernie Sanders will be pissed off at you. That doesn't make any sense. They did not allow him to get everything they owned out of storage in Virginia for six weeks. Garrett's family now with four young daughters were living out of suitcases for those six weeks without proper clothing for the weather or even toys for their children. Gentlemen, thank you so much for being a guest here on P.B.D. podcast. Thanks for having us. So first of all, if you don't mind taking a moment and kind of walking through the process of You kind of sitting there like do we really want to go through this or not? Do we really want to do this? I feel like the phase you're going through is when you want to become a whistleblower

And there's talks that these guys may be coming on and they may be sharing stuff. They first have to Defund you in a way where you don't have any money. Let's get these guys to be broke number two They have to discredit you. They don't know what they're talking about you're not true whistleblowers then phase three is demonize you i don't know if demonizing faces even here yet i don't know what's to come next to you guys gonna be very ugly with you guys and at the end if you're right and your testimony or arguments and people fighting on your side then there's vindication right i think you're

right now in the discredit that demonizing phase that you are but people fighting on your side, then there's vindication, right? I think you're right now in the discredited, demonizing phase that you are, but what was the process you guys went through and saying, look, do we want to do this or not? And I know there's a George Hill, there's a Gary shapely, and there's a few other folks there as well. But maybe walk us through what made you guys say,

you know what, I'm doing this, I'm not holding back anymore. Go ahead, Garrett. For me, it got to a point where there had been numerous things in the FBI that I saw over just the short time I had been in it. And it boiled down to a conversation I ended up having with my wife. And I think it was roughly October of 2021. And I said, you know, this agency truly isn't, they truly don't care about doing the right thing. I know that is the main talking point of the FBI and they drill into your head,

fidelity, bravery, and integrity from day one, and we see it on TV shows and everything. We're all led to believe that this institution is beyond reproach and it's not, it's as simple as that. It's not above reproach. They are sinful human beings just like me, just like every other. But then there is malice or hubris or a goal to strive

to promote and those things aren't often aligned with the constitution, with the oath we took. It's not aligned with how law enforcement is supposed to properly function in this nation. And when you start seeing those things, at first for me, it was like, maybe that's just a personality quirk of that person or that supervisor.

But then over time, it's repetitive. Maybe different instances, different things that occur, but it starts to build. And then there's a mountain of evidence where there's a lot of wrongdoing going on. And so I had this conversation with my wife and I said, you know, I don't think they want someone like me. They don't want someone who's willing to point out

the errors of the agency because I had initially, this is one of the smears that they tried at the hearing where they said, oh, well, you never went to your chain of command. That's or actually that was in my deposition, but that's false. It started with them and I made numerous complaints to them even bringing up Supreme Court case law, bringing up federal statutes, even just simple morality, and it was always like, hey, yeah, maybe that's a good point, but nothing ever happened. And so I talked to my wife and I said, I think I'm gonna go to Congress with some of my concerns. And I did in November of 2021, is when I first did that.

And then every time after that, whenever another instance of malfeasance or areas that I had a reasonable belief of wrongdoing was occurring, I would re-contact Congress and say, hey, this is a, here's another example. Here's another example of what's going wrong in the FBI. And I think Congressman Jordan nailed it on the head at the hearing when he said something to the effect of they became aware of my whistle blowing activity in regards to the school board fat tag. And they said, we got him right where we want him.

He's in the middle of this transfer. If we can get this guy, then nobody else is coming forward. And I truly think that that is what happened. Of course, I don't know for sure. I'll probably never know because the FBI won't release any of the information about why I, regarding their investigation into me. So they're making an example out of you, is that what you're saying?

I believe that's the case, yeah. I have a follow up, but I want to hear yours as well, and then I got a couple questions for you, go for it. Well, I never really had the thought of I'm going to become a whistleblower. I've always just prided myself on being a professional and going about my job the right way and my motto is paint the fence. And I kind of view the mission of the FBI as a giant fence.

And if everybody paints a section of the fence, it's in their yard, this whole fence is going to get painted. So I'm going to focus on what's in front of me control the controllables. And the FBI gives you specific training on you go to the Holocaust Memorial Museum, you go to the MLK Memorial. And the point of that is it's drilled into your head that these type of atrocities and civil rights violations only happen when law enforcement is out of control. It becomes a weaponized aparatic of a politicized arm

of the government. Or when good people do nothing. Correct. Correct. And I had concerns once I was ruled from child pornography investigations into domestic terrorism because that initial phone call, I overheard my manager talking to the higher ups

and they said child pornography was not going to be resourced anymore. And I know that's a significant violation, but again, paying defense, I'm a team guy, I'm going to roll into that. And it was a very apparent early on once that happened that there was just not a lot of work to do. And eventually when things came to a head and we were going to be making these arrests on subjects, I had two concerns. One was the FBI was departing from the rules. And as a professional, when I go to trial, I want to make sure my case is buttoned up. I was taking it on good faith that those were righteous prosecutions. I hadn't had a chance to work them.

They'd been sort of worked before my time. And I didn't want to be in a position on the stand where I was unprepared. And I don't care about the other cases, they've been successful, so you should be successful too. I'm patent the fence. I want to make sure I'm buttoned up. There's some exculpatory evidence. We need to hand it over to the fence

because that's the right way. And secondarily, we were going to be using a SWAT team or a large-scale arrest operations with lots of dozens of agents. And it was for people who were either accused of misdemeanor crimes, or even if they were accused of felonies, that they had pledged to be cooperative

with law enforcement. And I just put myself in the position of, it's easy to Monday morning quarterback, Waco, or Ruby Ridge, and say, well, I would have said, hey, guys, this is a mistake. I felt like I was that guy in that situation. And I said, look, this is gonna happen

and we have been lucky so far that nothing has transpired where there's a risk to our personal safety or to the subject's personal safety. We can just call this guy on the phone and brought that to my supervisors and immediately became apparent that I was in over my head because the response that I got from three levels of management was you have a really great reputation

and great career ahead of you. Are you sure you wanna do this? Wow. So, you know, it's interesting. I remember being in the army and I'm looking at everybody at the unit I was at to see where politically they're at and you're kinda like, okay, cool. And I was the guy that followed politics. Well, I'm like, okay, see where politically they're at and you're kind of like

Okay, cool and I wasn't a guy that followed politics. Well, I'm like, okay, that's where they're at I don't even say anything I'm just gonna do my job. I'm good to go. I'm at the hunter first as well and hey This is what I'm gonna be doing. I'm good to go all right then you get out of the army and you're working at a Environment where in the company. I was a part of Nearly 50% of guys I work with were LDS. So there were Mormons and I'm learning about, hey, Gordon B. Hinckley and these are virtues and this is this. And here's what's going on in Utah and I'm, cool,

like respect, this is what these guys are doing, no problem. I go to Harvard for a business program and it was at the same time when Hillary Clinton and Clinton and Trump had their first debate and the one where you'd be in jail. I don't know whichever one's either the first or second. I don't know which one it was because you'd be in jail, right? We're watching this at the Chow Hall. Chow Hall is not the military chow hall because that's what I thought it was spelled. Chow Hall is a man's name called Chow and Hall.

So I was so confused. You understand what I'm saying? Mr. Chow Hall, right? Literally go Harvard Chow Hall. You understand what I'm saying? Because the child, right? You literally go harbor, you'll see it's a guy that's a very, can you Google or harbor, chow hall, please? It's a very wealthy man and harbor,

the building is called the chow hall. So all the military guys were like, waiting for some, you know, ghetto food with whatever, but no, it's actually fantastic. So we're watching the debate, and I'm sitting quietly on the sideline, this is eight years ago. And I'm watching, I'm so excited. So we're watching the debate, and I'm sitting quietly on the sideline. This is eight years ago. And I'm watching, I'm like, every,

when I tell you, 99% of the people were rooting for Hillary, at Harvard, which is a institution of thinking. And you know, it's advancement, and you got critical thinking. Nope, 99% and every time Trump got her, boo, boo, boo, and I'm like, wow. Yeah, this is pretty ridiculous.

I like a good debate. You guys are all on one side. This is not a university. This is a shit show you're right. So, but eventually, you do one of two things when you're in an environment like that. You either sit there and you say, well, I better not say anything

because I know where these guys stand. Or you sit in your risk saying something, and if you do, you're gonna create a lot of enemies. Did you both have a moment like that where you're sitting there saying, well, I kinda know every one of these guys are the hate to Trump, every one of these guys can't stand Republicans,

every one of these guys, I better not say anything and try to be as level headed as possible in my argument. Oh, you were like, no, everybody knew what we stood and I still gave my argument. What was it like? For me, where I was in Wichita, I'd say most of the people there, we were reasonably minded people, but it boiled down to, so there's a passage in the Bible in Ephesians where it talks about the armor of God and a key theme of that is standing firm and that means standing firm in your faith against the schemes of the devil and standing firm for the truth and

You mentioned it's not easy. It has not been easy. Only imagine and it I'm sure it will get hard again. I'm sure Imagine and it it I'm sure it will get hard again. I'm sure The spiritual forces at work are mounting an attack and I'm certain the FBI is mounting some type of attack on me and Steve and others for speaking out because the like you said about Harvard the institutional rot it is it's it's everywhere It has been infiltrated everywhere and so I wouldn't say it was like a watershed moment of like, not this is the hill. You know, I think the hill is picked for us, and we just have to obey the Supreme Commander Christ. And if we don't do that, then we will have to account for that at the end.

And so it was more, for me, it was more of that aspect. And then locally in Wichita, it was, I would bet most of the people there agree with me about most of these things. For instance, the school board threat tag, my boss himself when that threat tag came out, came to my squad because I worked JTTF. So, and it was a criminal and a CTD,

criminal terrorism division threat tag. He straight up said to us, we will not be going to school board meetings on the squad. Now, we never got tasked with actually having to do that. So my question is, if the pressure came from above, because in the FBI, that's my stance,

is that HQ level, senior staff, executive staff level, that is where the institutional rot is the worst, and the headquarters level, that's where it's the worst. So if that pressure came down from above, would he have stood firm on that belief that we wouldn't go to those school board meetings? I don't know, because I'm pretty sure Steve was one of the agents who was ordered to go to one of those school board meetings. Yeah, we actually surveilled a subject, a January 6 subject.

We were told that he was going to be going to a school board meeting that was going to be expected to be kind of rowdy. There was some pornographic material that was discovered in the school library, so a lot of parents were going to it. And it was sort of clear to me at that point that there was an attempt to marry January 6th domestic terrorism to school boards. We wound up going to the parking lot and watching this guy and we were attempting to document anybody who he was meeting with to get their license plates.

And that's just another downstream collateral damage effect of this growing domestic intelligence agency that the FBI has sort of evolved into. But to the original question for me, just sitting in the room with these people, I felt like I had conviction about what I believed. And no man can serve two masters. They were attempting to please their higher ups because their ambition and their passion for the FBI is to promote. That's really what it is.

Once you get into those management, not leadership, management ranks within the FBI. Promote from within your system. Promote, and it's a very systematic process where it's every 18 months you need to be filling out your resume and doing it in a certain way, pleasing the right people to go to the next role. So they're never actually doing the job they want to do.

Their job in their mind is get to the next role. So they're never actually doing the job they want to do. Their job in their mind is get to the next job. So they just didn't have the conviction that I had where I say, this is not an easy decision, but it's simple. And when I was bringing my concerns to them, some of them were genuinely perplexed that I would put this out there to them when I could just simply do what I was told.

And there were some true believers, my special agent in charge. She certainly used some choice words with me. She called me a conspiracy theorist and she said that I represented a fringe belief and that I couldn't possibly understand anything that happened on January 6th because I wasn't there, but she was there on the seventh floor,

which is FBI internal code speak. If you say the seventh floor, that means the FBI director. It means you're an important person by proxy. So she says, I was on the seventh floor that day that those people tried to seize our democracy. And that phrase, that language choice to me says that she's really a true believer. And that was in keeping with things that she had done.

We're now in the blessed month of June here. And she put up a gay pride flag display in our office in Jacksonville. And after the the dobs decision was rendered, she put an email out talking about women's rights potentially being lost. So definitely was not hiding her her left politics. Um, first of all, I want to thank both you guys for your service. Both law enforcement and military me and Pat are both veterans. And I saw the entire hearing last night we flew in from Texas and it was not only embarrassing, it was disgusting just to see how, from everything you guys have done, it takes one second. I think it was you, Gary.

You said that you swore, you didn't swore an oath to the FBI. You guys swore an oath to the Constitution, the United States, with states, all enemies foreign and domestic. This is the domestic, that's them. That's the domestic. So I wanna ask you guys a question. In regards to January 6th,

I think I read something that they didn't wanna lump everybody in just as one case. They did it individually. So these people, when they went home, they could go after them in all these states to make it seem like white supremacy and this terrorism was widespread is that one of the directives that they told you guys that that's my whistleblower complaint that's it right there yeah they said you let them go home and then we'll get them individually so we can make this whole January 6th it's not just it wasn't just this one event it was

across the nation yeah it's the the that the FBI rule book says is, if the offense occurs in a location, you're supposed to open it in that location and investigate it, you can do what they did, which was they open a separate case for every single person, assign them to the areas where they lived for logistical purposes. However, once that decision is made,

and it's very dubious that they made that decision, it's very clear that they're jukeying the stats. Of course. But it's still dubious that they made a decision. It's very clear that they're juicing the stats. Of course. But it's still allowable where they then departed from the rules. It's definitely a departure is they stood up a task force in Washington, D.C., which was giving directives to the agents in the field who on paper were supposed to be in charge of those cases.

So there was a situation and I expressed this to my bosses. I could go on the stand and a defense attorney will say, agent friend, did you do anything in your case? Did you make any decisions? And I would have to honestly say, no, I didn't. And then that puts the federal prosecutor position where he has to impeach me. And we could be in trouble. And we could have a guy who was doing something

legitimately wrong, walk on that. And has nothing to do with January 6th. It has something to do with the process. And then this just represented the largest, most egregious example of what the FBI does with statistics pertaining to domestic terrorism and all across the board. I mean, it's all a numbers game.

And I'm sure you'll appreciate this. This is something that's been around for 10 years. It's called Integrated Program Management. This is a metric system. Think of it as the traffic cops got to write it's tick-a-quota. The FBI implemented about a decade ago, no surprised, domestic terrorism numbers have quadrupled in 10 years.

It is not only tied to funding requests from Congress for the agency, it is tied to executive compensation. Senior executive service members get somewhere between 30 and 50 thousand dollars because their subordinates are able to open up a certain number of cases, you certain tools, so Garrett can speak to this. You're pressured to open up a wiretap.

The most invasive investigative tool, legitimate tool, but you're pressured to because we have to have at least one wiretap this year, so boss can get his bonus. Does Pfizer-Worns fall into that too? They do Pfizer-Worns under that. Like if you put a warn on somebody, they're like, you get a bonus. Like, is that insane? So a Title III wiretapping of Pfizer are what the FBI considers sophisticated techniques. It's part of this IPM structure that Steve was talking about. And it's part of the metrics

that they have to meet. Every field office has to meet. And it's, it's basically a track mark system. Red, bad. You didn't meet the standard green. You met what you set has to meet. And it's basically a check mark system, red, bad. You didn't meet the standard. Green, you met what you set out to do, gold you exceeded. So say for any given year, the Kansas City field office says, hey, we need to get three wiretaps of either sort.

Fies of or title three. So of course, that pressure is going to then trickle down onto the people doing the actual work because the boss wants to get that gold check mark so you get that bonus. And it's especially in law enforcement in the alleged land of the free. You have a system in place where you're giving

a monetary bonus for law enforcement work. That is not how these scales of justice are supposed to tip because in law enforcement you seek the facts. You find as many facts as you can, because that is going to get you as close to the truth as possible. With any given case, you may not ever know the entire full truth, but you can get close enough.

And well, that's why we have a court system. And a different standards of, you know, you have reasonable suspicion and probable cause and beyond a reasonable doubt in all these things, different standards of, you know, you have reasonable suspicion and probable cause and beyond a reasonable doubt and all these things because you may never get 100% of the truth. But when you have the highest ranking member in any field office, really in the forefront of their mind, think, a man, I know I have a really nice SES salary, but I can get that bonus, pumped up even more if we can get a lot of these sophisticated

techniques or numbers of arrests or whatever. And it's like, that's not how law enforcement is supposed to work. That sales works. Because sales team is like, who determines that complaint? Who created that complaint 10 years ago? The federal government. Oh, the IPM structure, I'm not sure. But there is a federal statute across all federal government for all SES employees.

Who created that content incentive? Who led it? It's FBI, it's all across FBI. It's all across the board. All across every federal government institution. It was like, it had to be the government. It was an outside consulting. I don't know if it was McKinsey or somebody like that

that they brought in. I believe it was actually multiple consulting companies kind of came up on this system. And it's not even just opening up at a certain number of cases, in using certain number of tools. And then you start playing the sales game of, I've had situations where I was told, hey, we already hit our numbers for this year. We don't want to exceed them too much because then we're going to have to hit higher numbers next year. Can you delay in dieting that case for a couple of months? Well, new fiscal year. And by the way,

I can see that happening because in sales, it's called sandbagging. So what that means is say you have ended a month, you already beat everybody, but you got 28 deals, you can wait and hang on to for five days to report on the first of the next month to start off strong and you've already hit your bonuses for the month so you sandbag. But that's in business and sales.

If there's any word there shouldn't be sandbagging is the FBI well you're putting the public at risk of fraud and force and and I think it would be interesting and I've never done this but now that you've mentioned that maybe do a statistical analysis of how many cases get brought in the first week of October interesting yeah that's because that's two two fours what you're saying that's that's fiscal year rules over September 30th October one is a new fiscal year. Yeah, I wonder how many search warrants get loaded up on October 1st, 2nd and 3rd, just because those squads are saying who are holding this back and then at the first boss moment

because at their core, they're still cops. They want to go get the bad guy. And then they just unleash at that point. That's actually a great point. I doubt the FBI would ever release that information, but I'm sure Steve can attest to that. Well, anybody who's worked in government at the end of the fiscal year, what happens?

Hey, we got this much money left. We got to spend it, spend it, spend it, spend it, spend it. Or we're not gonna get it next year. There's a few things I would wanna know, and Adam, I'm gonna say this and then I'm gonna come to because I think I wanna say something. There's a few things I wanna know. You know the data that shows for every conservative professor,

there's 11 to 13 liberals in college university. It's great. It's good for us to know that. And then the stat that says for every, you know, out of 100 teachers, K through 12 in public schools, 97 of them in English teachers, 97 out of 100 teachers gave to Democratic Party three-gay to Republican.

And they go to health teachers K through 12. It's 98 to 2. And if you do math and science, it's 87 to 13, right? Where we know, at least math and science, 87 are Democrats, 13 are Republicans, conservatives great. What percentage of FBI, as as a whole would you say our democrats or republicans or independence that's a tough one to put as a whole because there's some great divisions within

the f b i so there's about forty thousand employees in the f b i only fourteen thousand are are special agents so the majority of the population is support staff. It's different culturally for support staff. I think they tended to lean. And especially in the intelligence analysis field, they tend to lean left. Those are the people that are writing, essentially, their profession is writing college term papers. And they're very overeducated college mindset. So that you've seen like that Richmond field office radical traditional Catholic memo came out from an intelligence analyst definitely only using left wing sources on that.

As far as the administrative staff goes, I'd never really dug into politics with too many of them. I think from the agent population then you also have to split between the rank and file boots on the ground guys that just want to be cops. And they tend to be moderate to conservative. I think that that's, it's gun culture. I mean, obviously the second amendment comes in and that's going to be a good guide, a plumb line for politics. And if you're comfortable carrying a gun, you're probably support second amendment, you're probably conservative.

But the management structure is left leading. And I attribute that to the way that that process works, it's very self-selecting. Because in order to become a manager in the FBI, you have to be one to be willing to go back and forth to Washington, DC all the time. Family roots aren't there. Secondly, you have to initiate something

that is new and novel, do something with a splash to put on your resume. And the nature of a conservative person is what's the waste, fraud, and abuse that I can cut? do and novel, do something with a splash to put on your resume. And the nature of a conservative person is, what's the waste, fraud, and abuse that I can cut and just do the job? The person who's left leaning is not opposed to a new initiative.

And that's where, I made the comparison to the movie Jurassic World where Vincent de Nafrio's character wants to use the Velociraptors to go after terrorists. And it's funny, but it's true because it briefs well. You put it on a PowerPoint. We don't need a drone strike. We've done that. I can't promote off a drone strike or send an Enseal team.

I'll use Velociraptors. And that's how somebody would promote within the military and within the FBI. Is it a similar structure like when you're in the, by the way, if you're watching this and you're enjoying and you want more, you want to hear more from what these gentlemen have to say in a long form podcast where they can talk freely. It's about them today and it's not about us.

If you give it a thumbs up, subscribe to the channel and share it so other people can see it as well. We've grown quickly to 10,000 people live watching it right now. I think more and more people need to hear what these gentlemen have to say. In the military, you know how HHC or headquarters would look at field, that would look at grunts, like you're dumb, you just carry a gun,

and I'm an officer, my boots are always shining clean. Look how dirty your boots are, I've got my stuff from quartermasters, I I got my crease, everything. You look like dirt, you don't look good. You don't do this. There was a certain, like, I'm smarter than you, I'm better than you. And then when you would say, yes sir, to enlist it,

they're like, hey, don't tell me that. I work for living. Is it that kind of a mindset where the guys at that level thing, you guys are just, just listen, go do the work, but we don't tell you what to do. Is it kind of like that kind of a culture? Yeah, okay.

Because I can speak to the Army side of things to a very similar experience. I had a couple really good officers, but by and large, that type of hubris, it has infected the FBI at the senior management levels. Yeah, that's a problem when that happens because when it's a top-down and the guys are doing the work and by the way you both worked under Komi and you worked under Ray, right? I was just under

Ray. You were just under Ray. Okay, so you got involved with you. When 2018 I got hired. 2018. So he's 2017 August I think is when he came in and right before that was Komi for whatever four years he was in. How different was it, was there an immediate feel of a different in culture under Komi or Ray or no you don't feel nothing goes the same thing? Well, I didn't really feel it. I was in a small office. But I do think that there was a cultural change that happened

and we were talking about this actually earlier after September 11th when Bob Mueller became the FBI director and the transition to the intelligence agency that you now see through its full fruition began. And the people that came in under Mueller in the early days, they're now in a position of leadership in the FBI. So they came in, it's their Patriot Act, Neocon mindset, that maybe inspired them to join. Then, Komi comes in and he brought in the, I'm ethical beyond all reproach. And on ethical?

I am ethical. Ethical, got it. And I think the story is that his lieutenants and the folks that were around him and are now ascending these very high levels, they were called the College of Cardinals because they are true believers and they're utmost morality.

You cannot question, they've never sat, looked in the mirror and said, am I the bad guy? And now they are the executive assistant director. What an arrogant way of doing that. Oh my God, that's disgusting. I've been around people like that. I've never made anybody that's, you know, there's people like that in church,

there's people like that in schools, there's people like that everywhere, and they're very annoying to work for and work with And there's there's a big gap also in their experience on On the ground with people so take Jennifer Moore She's just about to retire the executive assistant director She's been the FBI since the mid 90s She came in before her time. She was not an agent. She was a support staff

And then eventually became an agent. She worked FBI cases from 1999 to 2005. In a 30-year career, six of them were spent actually doing the investigative work that she is now having this managerial responsibility of overseeing, and I think that that just leads to a tremendous disconnect between the management class and the rank at file. I want to get back to this concept of being a whistleblower. So the definition of whistleblower is a whistleblower protection act of 1989.

The law protects federal employees who disclose evidence of waste, fraud, or abuse, which you guys are doing. All right, under this act, federal employees are protected from retaliation when they disclose information that they are reasonably believe shows evidence of wrongdoing. All right, cool. So when I think of the concept of whistleblower

in simple terms, it's almost like a referee. Like the referee in sports, I'm a big sports guy. Your job is not to root from one particular team. Your job is to basically call balls and strikes. Blow the whistle when you see a foul and let the game be played out. So the nature of the job of the FBI is to what, investigate crimes, defend the homeland,

defend against national security threats, right? Not supposed to be apolitical, no ideology whatsoever. Just blow the whistle, balls and strikes, be the referee. So when you think of whistleblowers over the last decade or so, who comes to mind Edward Snowden, he blew the whistle on the overreach after the Patriot Act, and basically the mass national surveillance that was going on on a global scale,

everything would Julia Sange, WikiLeaks, Chelsea Manning, everything happened with that. I mean, the most famous whistleblower was deep throat, right, with Mark Esper with the Nixon, the Watergate situation. So in simple terms, I'm just kind of framing this for you guys in simple terms when they look back at what you guys have done, when people tell your story, what are you blowing the whistle on exactly? So there's been a handful of things for me. One of the main ones that I like to talk about, we touch on a little bit is the stat padding.

So, because Steve said in the last decade, domestic terrorism stats have gone up 400%. Well, I have an example proving just that. So I had a case, it was technically one case, but the FBI had me open up four cases because there were four individuals involved who were all part of the same group. So if you multiply that across all field offices, you know, in my individual example, it's a 400% increase, but multiply that across. And it's like, it shows this picture to America that there's this huge domestic terrorism problem.

The January 6 example that Steve has is another example of that because then every field office is opening all these separate cases. And then the FBI can say, look, we really do have this huge domestic terrorism problem. When in actuality, it's not really showing the whole truth or the real facts of what's going on. We talked about the school board threat tag. That was another one for me that I blew the whistle on. And then another threat tag. It was threats to SCOTUS 2022. That was shortly after the Hobbes decision came down, reversing row, which in that instance,

the left were the ones who were up in arms protesting outside of Supreme Court Justice's homes, which is a federal crime, which to my knowledge, even to right now, no one has been charged with that. But when the FBI sent out that threat tag, part of the information was to focus on people who have a pro-life ideology. And again, my boss was the one who brought this threat tag to my attention. And he said, you know, part of the guy and says to dig into pro-life people, why would we do that? They are going to be happy about this.

They're not going to be attacking anybody. And this threat tag is supposed to be about protecting Supreme Court justices not about some fire bombingombing attack on an abortion clinic, which also, if you're pro-life, you're not going to attack at that moment because you're counting that as a win. And then what multiplied that for me, which is why I blew the whistle on it, is that I got tasked with questioning a CHS of mine, which is what the FBI calls a confidential human source.

So that's in common parlance, it's a CI, a confidential informant. And so, and that one, I was like, okay, we just got this threat tag. Now I just get this tasking to go talk to this guy. And even him, when I asked him these questions, he was like, why are you, is this just like a yearly check-in or what? And I'm like, well, now I was tasked to ask you these. And I know they don't make sense because in the light of the Hobbes decision, you're probably happy, right?

And so all of that combined. And then I had a January 6th one where the FBI was trying to get me to serve a federal grand jury subpoena when I had to know indicia of evidence to do so and then on top of that during that lead that I got that I also had a facial recognition match. They claimed it was a facial recognition match. They used driver's license photo from about 25 years prior to say here's your facial recognition match. And that's inappropriate law enforcement activity. And even when I was pushing back on that,

I still had a guy saying, you have a match. And I was like, but I don't, because here's the current driver's license photo, and the guy looks way different. He's bald. He's 150 pounds heavier than the match. And it's like, this is wrong. There's no due process here. And then that one was also based off

of an anonymous tip, which holds very little weight. Nava Repvers California is a Supreme Court log that gets into anonymous tips and law enforcement. I'm trying to think what else I can talk about. Cause there's been a number of things. But you said padding the stats. You also mentioned that. Is that exactly what you're blowing the whistle on?

Yeah, that was that. And then the concern for public safety, where they were going to be using the SWAT for a guy who said, I'll cooperate. So I thought put him at risk. And then the ensuing time since my suspension, I think we're both kind of become whistleblowers, at least, in the public sphere, or recently for Garrett, about how the law you're citing is not being respected

or adhered to by the FBI as far as we're experiencing tremendous retaliation, and the FBI has found a hack to circumvent that law, and they use the security clearance suspension process to do that. And Steve, you were going after child exploitation, human trafficking, child sexual abuse. They take you off of that to put you on. We got to make sure these people get in deep, deep trouble for January 6th. That was what you were actually doing, like real work, real change, and they take you off to do.

Yeah. real work, real change, and they take you off to do. Yeah, and then to elaborate on that, just quickly, I was on those cases, I was told that, hey, just make yourself available for these terrorist cases, because it's really not a lot of work to do. So for actually, I was told to commit essentially time card fraud, which is a felony. And on my time card, I was saying, I am a domestic terrorist agent, and I wasn a domestic terrorist agent,

and I wasn't really doing anything because those cases had been already worked. They were sitting in DC waiting for them to tell us what to do. And the meantime, I kept working my child porn cases to the point where I got an award about six weeks before I was suspended for my work on child porn cases which I wasn't supposed to be doing.

Wow. Guys, you guys both the question. All we keep hearing from the left is with Biden, all these, it's like, every day it's the same BS that the biggest threat to this nation is white supremacy and domestic terrorism. Age, I'm pretty sure I know the answer. Do you guys believe in that?

And if you had to pick one, that obviously is not that, what would it be? The biggest threat to us as Americans. So I was a domestic terrorist agent. That was, that was what I was assigned to. And I'm not saying it isn't a threat and that there are threats in that realm, but white supremacy, I didn't see it. Domestic terrorism as the biggest threat. I didn't see it. It's just the boogie man for today. And I put it like this, go back through the FBI's history.

1920, we had the Palmer raids, which FBI rounded up a bunch of communists and deported a bunch of them. Without due process, there was like one in the 100 who got charged with anything, fast forward to the 30s. The FBI rounds up Japanese in this country and puts them in internment camps, fast forward a little bit more. FBI tries to get Martin Luther King Jr. to commit suicide fast forward a little bit more it's a weather underground in the 80s fast forward to the 90s it's domestic

terrorism like wake go and Ruby Ridge and all that 2000 Patriot Act which by the way would be Hoover's wet dream because because he was big on he was big on intelligence to Patriot act opened the floodgates for the FBI together intelligence on everyone. And Patriot supposedly was for international threats. It has been not so now we fast forward after the Muslim extremist threat is over. Now it's turned inward domestically. And so it's just the current boogie man, his speech that he gave at that college is. It's absolutely ridiculous.

Right. So if you had to pick, and I want to ask you to see, what would you say? Is it still just actual outside terrorism? That's the like the number one threat to the American public? I think the number one threat to the American public is a government weaponized against its people. I was going to say that myself. There's an article here that was written, why the FBI and Democrats are attacking whistleblowers

by Alex Kutentag and Michael Schellenberg. I don't know if you guys have read this or not. You mentioned the CHS's, the whole, what do you call them, the Confidential Human Resources, right? So in this article, it says, core documents indicate that there were at least eight FBI informants known as CHS's, four confidential human informants in the Proud Boys, which was one of the groups that organized

de-generalized six protests. There's evidence that FBI also had CHS and oath keepers, another January six activist group, and former FBI supervisor intelligence analyst, George Hill told a subcommittee that the Boston Office asked for video footage from the six protests. The Washington Field Office said they could not give access

to the 11,000 hours of video footage available because there may be UCs under cover officers or CHSs which will be just topic confidential human sources on those videos whose identity we need to protect. And it wasn't just the FBI that undercover on informants and agents in the crowd. There were undercover agents and informants from other law enforcement agencies, including the Washington DC Metro police, who were acting like Trump supporters. Indeed, there may have been hundreds of undercover government agents and informants, both local and federal in the crowd on January 6th.

Some even said there were 100 to 200 secret service agents alone at the Capitol Hill before, enduring the breach of the police, barriers, one court filing alleges that there were at least 20 FBI assets at the Capitol. So when you see stuff like this, and you're one that's on the other side, and we watched the last 10 years, eight years, 15, 16.

So what, eight years since seven years since 16? Russia, collusion, Trump. Oh, man, why did you do it? You know, so even the average person that's kind of sitting there saying, oh my God, the guy I voted for is doing this, you got to be kidding me, right? Democrats obviously ran with it, you know, all these guys. Oh, we have 100% evidence of what happened here. And like, ah, that wasn't right.

Oh, you guys just a Durham report. Ah, it's not a big deal. Let's just move on, you know, you know, the dossier was paid for our Hillary Clinton. They let's just move on to the next. And so, and so Obama was what Obama knew all along while they were investigating Trump. Yeah, but you know, everybody knows,

because he's the president. And so Mar-a-Lago, let's go do this. Yeah, because he has these documents. You know, January 6th, look what he did, it's terrible. The more and more and more, they try to spin this. And then it comes out two, three years later as being bad. The credibility keeps taking a hit to the point where now they're talking about, you know,

people are running for president, talking about getting rid of the FBI, because it's messing up the nation and dividing us, right? How much of what Alex and Michael wrote were you guys aware of, where they are saying, hey, we want you guys to go there undercover and join these organizations to kind of work like, you know, what our friend did with the mob

back in the days in the 80s, what's his name? That the movie came out donny brosco yelling under cover joe puston you know like he was six years he was under cover five years and ten months how much of that was happened with january six and the trump organization i think i'm a tremendous amount of that was going on and and let's just we can remove the january six aspect to it let's take another case that's a little smaller scale let's take the gretchen witmer

uh... wolverine washman, which I actually had involvement in. The governor of Michigan, you're saying this, the Plotter. The homegrown terrorists were going to kidnap that story. Kidnap that story. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. So the demand for domestic terrorism in this country is from the political elite and the people standing at the lectern, it vastly outstrips the supply that actually exists. And the nature of the FBI that has now evolved from law enforcement to domestic intelligence collection, our friend Kyle Seraphins puts us really well. Criminal investigations are linear.

Beginning, crime happens, middle investigate, and there's a conviction. Intelligence operations are circular. You open an investigation up to get more intelligence. Where does that get you? More intelligence. Where does that get you? The ability to spend other investigations that are more intelligence. So because there's a demand for domestic terrorism and then there's these intelligence operations that go on, you infiltrate these groups that are deemed to be problematic or they could

be a threat. They could be a domestic terror group. So you take this group of guys in Michigan who is not predisposed to doing this, but you infiltrate it with undercover's and informants. And the thing about informants are, they know they're an informant, nobody else does. They don't know, if Garrett and I

have both infiltrated the Wolverine Watchman as informants, we wouldn't know that. So then you get a situation where they're in the room and I'm like trying to be report back to my guy so I can get paid. Hey, you know what'd be a good idea? We should maybe come up with a plot here to do something and then he's got to want up me

because he wants to be report back to his handler and he get paid and that's how the thing can snowball out of control and that's why you see these situations like it on January 6th or back to Whitmer where these guys were not predisposed to engaging in something that was going to be violent or anything that could be construed as terrorism. And in fact, at one point in that case, the group was breaking down and the agents were

telling their informants hold it together, which is not in keeping with the tradition of law enforcement. If there's a plot to rob a bank and in a way, one guy's like, guy's like nah let's better that's not you don't arrest him for robbing the bank now on january six there i i i'm very confident that there was infiltration from informants and undercover's on not just the fby who gets painted with the brush of being federal law enforcement everything the department of home and security has ten x the budget of the fby and has a nexus to terrorism and national security so see we saw that guy uh... the department of Homeland Security has 10X the budget of the FBI and has a nexus to

terrorism and national security. So see, we saw that guy, Ray Epps, which he was all over the internet. All we kept seeing is this guy who looked like a carbon cutout of a freaking agent, mega hat, grace, khakis. He was verbally on camera saying, we need to go, we need to attack the Capitol. If that's not inciting violence, apparently they interviewed him and then they let him go.

Everybody else that was just on a bus showing up was arrested, FBI went after them. Do you guys have any idea who that guy is? What agency he might have worked for? Because it looks pretty apparent to people like us who that type of guy is. Did you track on his responses to the questions? I saw, I saw, I did see him messaging his, uh,

his nephew or something. I forgot. What was he saying? He's like, I started it. I started it. So how does the FBI not go after that guy yet? They're going after people that barely did. They were just there.

You know what I mean? Yeah. So I think it's clear to anybody paying attention. Yeah. The only answer is that he's working with the government to some degree because now I don't I don't have any personal knowledge of that, but it doesn't take a suspended FBI agent to see that information and be like, oh yeah, he's he's got to be involved somehow because and there's video of him like pushing gates and saying go go go and the night before saying we're storming the capital and the tax is nephew

but he's not charged instead he gets a puff piece on sixty minutes a few weeks back with especially when we know the media is controlled by the government and the left and we're we're finding out in the twitter files and things that continue to come out that the media that the cia has involvement with our own media. So it seems very clear to anybody who's been paying just even a small amount of attention that he's got to be.

His answers, too, were very lawyerly. He always says, I didn't work for the FBI. The question should be, have you ever worked for the government? True. Well, and this. So, as agents, when we have a CHS, when we talk to them, we have to, and I think this actually came out of the church committee hearings in the 70s, because back then, because some of the informants back then testified publicly, and the way they responded was, I was working for the FBI. I was working for the FBI. I was working with the FBI. We have to explicitly tell the CHS is now, you can't claim that you work for or with the FBI.

Like, it's not a job. We have to tell them that. So when someone answers, I've not worked for the FBI. He's remembering what he was told by his handlers, potentially. Yeah. For you guys, take off your FBI hats for a second and just be regular good ol' Americans.

All right. We're talking about January 6th for a second. How do you process what actually happened that day? And what do you think the FBI did right? And what do you think they definitely did wrong? What do you think? I think that it was not, this wasn't a perfect puzzle piece that went all together.

I think that President Trump's ascendancy brought a lot of people who were novice and new to the political process. He got a lot of people very excited voting for the first time, engaged in politics, coupled that with the 2020 shutdowns where essentially politics became sports and entertainment for a lot of people. And I think that there was genuine belief by a lot of people that they were going there to exercise their first amendment and that they had the opportunity to pause this transfer of power, this certification of the election, because they just wanted to stop the steel.

Stop the steel. And there was questions that were never really answered after the election. There was definitely some questionable things that happened and nobody ever got a satisfactory answer to that and I can understand them being upset. I think that there were people there that did for that purpose. I think that there were some groups there like the proud boys who after 2020 watching City's Burn

said, I think Antifa needs to get a butt kicking and they went there prepared to get in a fight with Antifa because they were just penned up rage at that point and that has now been weaponized against some of these prosecutions that they were there for violent purposes. And then I think there was also a government infiltration aspect to it because they had these groups infiltrated, they had under covers there and might not necessarily have been saying, hey, we're going to plan to start an incident that's going to allow us to investigate thousands of Americans and initiate a seditious conspiracy charge against a candidate for presidency.

I don't think there was a master plot in the back, smoke-filled room with a guy with a cat. But you're thinking of Dr. Evil right now. Okay. And then to the FBI's involvement in this, what do you think they did right and what did they do wrong? Oh, yeah, that's hard to get one right. And it's kind of hard.

The FBI didn't do anything right. I don't think that's true. Because it's hard for me to remove that FBI agent hat. I know. because of how because I have now I have knowledge, you know, and I have lots of video that I watch when we're getting those leads. And so there were people that they who absolutely should have been arrested. There were people that they who were fighting with cops or pushing through or whatever, but then there were people who walk into the Capitol and there's no fracas going on.

And I know of one case that I don't know where the guy came from or where he went. I think he's even like a marine veteran. He walks in and you see on video, he talks with a Capitol police officer and according to him, the Capitol police officer told him he had to leave. And so he left.

And he got charged. That was the video I believe Tucker played. And he got charged. Why is that guy getting believe Tucker played. Yeah. And he got charged. Right. Why is that guy getting charged? So you're saying it's important to delineate between who was actually doing criminal activity, fighting with cops, really doing certain stuff versus a guy who just kind of was there at the end.

Raising through the Capitol. Right. Or we've seen the pictures of the people basically in the line, like they're at the Capitol for a tour. And sure, misdemeanor trespass, maybe at the most for a lot of those people, but is the FBI really and the DOJ really going to be doing a full court press on all those people? Well, they are, but why? Because they're actually altering the way they're perceiving. And there were conversations that I was told about that happened where they said, stop the

steel is going to be a predicated domestic terrorism ideology. And oh, let's put a pin in this case right now. Let's go back through the codebook and see if we can find anything else to charge him with. That's fine, me and man, I'll find you the crime. And now the whole, if you went into the four walls of the capital, you were going to get this four pack of charges, one of which is an N-ron case, so you cry, I'm like ridiculous. But now they say they're going to charge anybody that was on the lawn on the outside because

the lawn is going to be in retroactively made a restricted area. Gotcha. Well, to use an analogy, you brought up the COVID riots, George Floyd protests, everything like that. It'd be like going to one of the protests and just holding up a sign, free speech, whatever it is, hands up, don't shoot, whatever it is, versus actually being one of the arsonist blowing up buildings.

Right, correct. There's a big difference there. Yeah, correct. One is legal and within your right and one is highly illegal. Is that essentially what you're trying to delineate between January 6th? If you're walking through the Capitol peacefully, all right, cool, your road testing versus someone who's actively has weapons on them fighting with cops, what have you?

Is that essentially your point? It is. And especially for the people who were there, but didn't go in the Capitol or just in the area, what are they getting investigated for? So those people are being investigated. Yes. And that's what you're blowing the whistle. in the area, what are they getting investigated for? So those people are being investigated. And that's what you're blowing the whistle. That's essentially patting the stats for domestic terrorists, domestic extremists.

It is, yeah. And your point about 2020, I think is a point in the example of how the FBI got January 6th wrong, because none of what we have seen with January 6th happened in 2020. And I know the nasaers would say, yeah, well, because those protests didn't happen in the seat of power of this nation. I say as a law enforcement officer, that doesn't matter because there were people traveling to those protests in Portland and Minneapolis or wherever. So when you travel, when you're not from there, that's an interstate crime. If you engage in criminal activity, that makes it a federal crime. But we didn't have these massive, you know, task force set up to try

to get all the people who were burning down police stations. But for January six, it's go arrest every single person who was even on the lawn. You know, my family was on the lawn the night of the day after the night of the hearing. And we kind of jumped about it and it's like, oh, it's the FBI is going to be coming for them just because we were here. And I think that's a general sentiment

that a lot of Americans have right now. Like the FBI is the actual boogie man, not this trumped up idea of domestic error. And to go deeper on those riots, for example, even when George Floyd was killed, the whole narrative was like, listen, not all cops are bad. These are a few bad apples, the whole bad apple thing. Hey, and all these teachers aren't indoctrinating.

Kids are a few bad apples. All these athletes aren't beating their wives. There's a few bad apples. This whole concept of being a bad apple. But sometimes, the apple is actually rotten to the core. So you hear the concepts that the FBI is being the politicization of the FBI or the weaponization of the FBI. So regarding the FBI, are there just a few bad apples and bad actors or is the FBI rotten to the core at this point? And what would you say?

I'm back to the disconnect between the rank and file and the management class. The fact that those guys have to go back and forth to DC all the time and their priorities are within self-promotion and not for the good of the American people, they're not about the case work. I think there are people that do genuinely good work in the FBI. I think that that work can be done by other people just as effectively. So if you asked me, you made me king for a day, the FBI wouldn't exist anymore. And I'm not a defund the police guy.

I think that you can empower local law enforcement in a way that you deputize locals and make them give them federal authority. And there's a whole thing we can get into with that. But I think as far as from the leadership standpoint, for that you can't just take out Christopher Reyn, expect it all to get better. Now Christopher Reyn needs to go and just quick math on him,

$9 million salary the year before he became the FBI director. Gave that up to become the FBI director for 10 years. So he essentially gave $90 million up to become the FBI director. Is that what the tenure is for 10 years It's a 10 year I'm wondering why Biden didn't fire him because Trump hired him in 17 good question Right, so you would think that Trump appointed him. Yeah, yeah He's he's acceptable and I think that he sacrificed $90 million for the cause And that's why he got in a in to an interview

He was with an interview with Red Bear and he was asked very directly what about the FBI's negative image and he said well we have a record number of applicants so it's all good and guy it's it's a down economy and inflation is through the roof and you're bragging about your number of applicants for a job where people can make six figures to do if they were a cop they'd be getting paid a third of of that. So I'd like to ask you guys a question. So as far as back, I'm going to go back to where Pat sent 2016 from the Hillary obstruction to crossfire her to all the fake collusion, like every couple of months, it's just FBI messing up, messing up, messing up, messing up, messing up, messing up. What is it going to take?

I know it's an upper echelon of the managerial, But what is it going to take to change that? Like what needs to happen to make that grasp on it, like break up and be more, like less biased. Because that's all we're seeing with bias with Peter's truck with all these, it's like they're embedded in there. What's it going to take? They are embedded.

I think at a minimum, you have to clear house. All of headquarters, definitely the seventh floor, probably all of headquarters, you have to clean it, all of headquarters, definitely the seventh floor, probably all of headquarters, you have to clean it out and start from scratch. But a lot of the people, like Steve talked about earlier, who get attracted to the managerial positions in the FBI, they're that type of person who likes the DC life and the notoriety or whatever. There's this talk of the FBI getting a new headquarters building. They shouldn't get one. That part of their budget should be scrapped until

the FBI is fixed. If they ever are allowed to have a new headquarters, it shouldn't be in DC because it's attracting too many people who care too much about the politics. I mean, look what they did with the Russia collusion. And nobody is paying for it. No, no accountability at all. The Dormaor basically said Obama, Biden, the AG, FBI, CIA, everybody colluded to try to cheat the real cheating of an elected and zero accountability. Nobody's going to see. I was telling Pat before he walked in there to all the young people out there that are want to, they're in crime.

You want to steal, you want to be corrupt, you want to don't do it. If you want to get away with it become a Democrat, be it leftist, you could do all that shit and never go to prison. You're right. So that, I mean, that's a coup. That's a bloodless coup. And I know people, that's extreme. Read the Durham report. Look at the facts. The FBI offered Christopher steel a million dollars as a CHS payment. If he could corroborate that dossier and he wasn't able to do it and the FBI still went straight ahead and opened a full investigation on then a presidential candidate and then kept it going on as on a sitting president. That's is in that tree's it like are they that's ridiculous the hell would the hell would the elect that's the election was really but then we get accused of treason exactly for

the bad guys. Yeah that's all the how much of what they're saying. For us, the bad guys. Yeah, that's all we need. How much of what they're saying as far as the seventh floor is reminiscent of the book, the barbarians, the bureaucrats? I mean, that's what it is though. That's what I'm asking you. The market is filled with bureaucrats and aristocrats. So go back and you said something about 9 million, 10 years, 90 million.

So why did Trump appoint him 2007, August? Exactly. So what point were you trying to make about christ rade i i think that he who gives up and by the way just just for the audience that's watching is if you can go put uh... uh... christ ray nine million he was with the law from king and spalding okay he made nine point two million dollars working as an attorney for the law from king and spalding and then he chose to become a

f.p.i. director so go ahead well i think there's obviously a steam attached that he would probably argue that it was a a financial sacrifice on his part and for his family because he wanted to serve america but what he won't tell you is he gets to live the life of a billionaire now flying a private jet all over the place

uh... for the price of a the lowest, flying a private jet all over the place for the price of the lowest Southwest ticket that one of his staffers can find for him. He gets that ability. So he gets to have the esteem of being the FBI director. But if you just go to the simple dollars and cents, I think that that sacrifice on his part represents conviction when it comes to seeing the full weaponization of the FBI come to fruition underneath his tutelage. It's something that, well, give me the ring of power and I'll make sure that it goes for

good or for what I deem to be good. And he's a Republican. He was, so he was appointed by a Republican president. He was recommended to Donald Trump by Chris Christie because he helped Chris Christie fix the bridge gate case. He's a fixer. And in my conversations with folks who I worked with now, who worked with Department of Justice, he's not an intellectual titan. He's just got a really nice haircut.

And we'll do... You don't make 9.2 million just with a nice haircut. If that was a case, I like fifty friends i'm telling you they should be getting paid way more than they're making right now because that nice or her i think i should be to yeah you definitely need to be your your billionaire look right