BREAKING: Kash Patel caught in SHOCK SCANDAL at FBI

This is Democracy Watch. Mark, we have a. brand-new scandal that surged into the. spotlight thanks to a whistleblower. account as it relates to Kash Patel, the. FBI director. Can you explain what just. happened? >> Yeah, it seems like Kash Patel can't. help but use the FBI as kind of like his. personal, you know, concierge service. You know, we remember a few months ago. there was the scandal about him, you. know, setting up a snorkeling. or scuba diving. exercise. in Hawaii. Well, now it looks like that.

was not a one-off. It looks like there. are new reports. of other instances in which the FBI is. essentially having to arrange special. perks and special treatment for him. >> And so, what does that include according. to the reporting? >> Yeah, look, this is stuff like jet skis, you know, jet ski excursions and. helicopter tours, right? This is not the. stuff that, you know, you might be like, "Okay, he's the FBI director, so we have. to make sure he gets like a good night's. sleep, so we get him a hotel room with. like a, you know, a private entrance or.

something, you know, for security and. and and discretion." This is literally. just like, you know, he's got his own. Club Med operation going on here at the. FBI. >> And I guess it's worth asking right at. the top, can you speak about the. legality of these moves? Like, I. understand that this might operate in. something of a gray area, but when you. have somebody kind of pilfering the. federal government to the extent that. Kash Patel is, and it's not just this. instance, this is kind of a recurring. theme, where does this land in terms of. being able to to profit off of the.

government and its legality? >> Uh I mean, first of all, let's be clear. I mean, this is a corrupt administration. top to bottom. I mean, if you want to. talk about profiting off of the. government, look no further than the. Oval Office and Donald Trump and his. family. But that said, look, there is. elementary 101 about the federal. government is that government resources. may not be used for anything other than. official purposes. The the there is a. restriction on appropriated funds funds.

that come from Congress only being used. for the appropriated purpose, right? So, So, you know, I I don't know how many of. you out there watching has ever had the. experience of visiting someone in a. government office, but for example, they. oftentimes can't even offer you a soft. drink. They can't offer you, you know, a. bottle of water because the government. can't pay for the soft drink or the. bottled water because it would be the. misuse of government resources for a. private benefit, right? Which is for to. drink a soft drink or water. And so,

oftentimes you know, you know, you read. these stories of you know, when they. have retirement parties, for example, the staff all kick in and you know, they. pay for it personally. This is This is. again because the government typically. is very restrictive on the use of. appropriated funds for anything other. than official purposes. And obviously, you know, the the the um making sure. that the FBI director gets the proper. tour of uh of a jet ski uh.

destination is is not an official. purpose. I mean, this this is the reason. why Remember those images and maybe. we'll put them up here of him, you know, guzzling beer in the. uh you know, after the men's hockey team. win. This is part of why it was such a. scandal because like he's not supposed. to be traveling on the government dime. to go watch a hockey game. I mean, like. he can pay personally to do this, but. you know, his argument was, "Well, I was. there in my official capacity and there. were official meetings of the FBI and.

this was uh Like it's all a bunch of. uh Brian, but the the the the. terrible thing is in an administration. which has got the president of the. United States and his family profiting. by issuing, you know, garbage crypto. coins, it's easy to just say, "Well, you. know, what's Why are we Why are we. harping on the FBI director, you know, getting, you know, private helicopter. tour or. or ride. Uh but it's still wrong and it. is certainly no example that someone.

who's supposed to be the chief law. enforcement officer of the United States. should be. >> You know, Mark, I'll often say that the. the preservation of our laws relies on. everybody's collective ability or. willingness to uphold them. And so, you. know, this is what the breakdown of of. law looks like of a. system of law and order looks like. But. in this scenario, like even if we come. back and Democrats take control of the. House, the Senate, and the White House, they're in charge of the DOJ, like do.

you think that we're going to be in a. world where this stuff is is then, you. know, that these people are held. accountable for what they're doing right. now? It feels like even if we triage. this stuff and go for the biggest fish. first in the blatant rampant corruption. that we're seeing right now, this is. still stuff that a lot of these. Republicans are going to get away with. And so, is there any downside for the. Kash Patels of the world to commit these. instances of smaller corruption knowing. that A, if the Democrats do get into power,

they're probably going to focus on the. bigger stuff first. And B, frankly, the. Democrats haven't even shown an appetite. to go after any abuses anyway. And so, how are you thinking about this in terms. of making an example out of people who. are engaged in so much corruption right. now? >> Look, I think that we have to have a. zero tolerance approach. And I think that when Democrats retake. power, they need to have a zero. tolerance approach. And I don't just. mean that in the midterms when, you. know, if Democrats retake House and. Senate and doing oversight and certainly. doing oversight of the FBI director and.

the the top law enforcement officials in. the in the Department of Justice would. not be going after petty graft or petty. petty wrongdoing, right? I mean, these. are these are serious people who should. be setting an example for the entire. federal workforce. But I'm talking about. when Democrats really retake power. You. know, if you have a Democratic president. and a Democratic Congress, and you know, we need to be able to have confidence. that that we're not going to let these. things slide. And I want to say that.

you've written an important book on this. topic about what it looks like when. Democrats retake power and how they have. to be fearless in using it. I have. written the forward to this book. I'm. very proud of uh your and my. collaboration in this series and. whatever inspiration that may have. offered for parts of it. I'm actually. going to be at. your book event uh in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday. Uh so, if you want to come. and watch Brian um be interviewed by Jim.

Acosta uh and really have a good time. and also maybe get a chance to meet me. uh because I'll be there cheering Brian. on. You know, show up. It is at 7:00. p.m. in Washington, D.C. at Sixth & I. There's a link in the description of. this episode for how you can buy. tickets. >> Awesome. Yes, and I'm going to put that. link in the post description. I'm going. to throw it right here on the screen as. well. Still tickets available for that. Tuesday, July 14th book tour uh as well. as the New York stop and the LA stop. So, I'm going to have all those links in. the post description of this video.

Mark, it's worth asking here as well. Um. can you talk a little bit about statute. of limitations for some of the the. corruption that we're seeing right now? Is this the kind of thing that the Trump. administration's able to wait out by. virtue of just kind of delaying any. prosecution, knowing full well that Todd. Blanche is not going to prosecute any of. this stuff? >> Look, there is in general a default. 5-year statute of limitations for. felonies in the United States. Now, there are some crimes [clears throat]. where the statute of limitations is. longer. There are a handful where it's.

shorter, but as a general rule of thumb, uh the statute of limitations uh in uh. the federal criminal system uh is 5. years. So, just for the math-challenged. members of the Trump administration. uh. That means that the things you are doing. today will still be subject to. prosecution if you have violated the. federal criminal laws. in 2031, which is years after Donald Trump will.

no longer be in office. So, look, you. may be counting on a pardon. You may. think that on the way out he'll take. care of you. Donald Trump doesn't take. care of anyone but himself. And for. everyone who thought that they were. getting a pardon after the first. administration, he didn't deliver. And I. promise you don't think that that you're. going to go out and break the law now. for this guy and he's going to have your. back. He won't and if you do so, let's. hope that the the proper impartial. administration of law and law.

enforcement in the next administration. looks at all this stuff seriously. >> And And I want to talk about what that. would look like in the next. administration, but I also want to let. people know that that kind of clear-eyed. analysis is what you can expect from. Democracy Docket, which is the news. outlet Mark founded to focus on. everything voting and elections. You should also know that Mark is. litigating more than 80 cases in the. courts right now and is in large part. the bullwark between what the Trump. administration is trying to do and. protecting your rights and protecting. voting rights, protecting democracy more. broadly. So, a small step that we can.

all take to support his work and his. team is to subscribe to Democracy. Docket. I'm going to put that link on. the screen and also in the post. description of this video. By the time. that this video ends, please make sure. to go in the post description and click. all those links and make sure to show. some support for the work that Mark and. his team is doing. But Mark, I wanted to ask because, you. know, I think about the Merrick. Garland's approach. And this is not to. beat up on Merrick Garland because I. know that we we speak about this. We've spoken about this at length, but I. think it's going to be instructive too.

because I believe Look, I wouldn't do. this and I'm sure you wouldn't do this. if you didn't have hope that Democrats. would retake control um, the House, the. Senate, and the White House come 2029, but I think it's going to be important. that we figure out what that's going to. look like. And so, for those. Democrats out there who are. kind of of this mind that if we just. engage in retribution back and forth, it's just going to send us down a. never-ending rabbit hole. And so, wouldn't it be better if we can just. kind of offer up some grace to the other.

side? What would you say to those people. who do want to espouse the Merrick. Garland approach to the DOJ? >> I mean, first of all, it didn't work. last time. But second of all, you know, you cannot have respect for the rule of. law if people are not held accountable. to the rule of law. This was your point. earlier. Like, we're we cannot expect. that Republicans are going to follow the. law if, in fact, when they don't follow. the law, there are no consequences. And. and that is the problem with that. approach. I'm not saying to to misuse. the Department of Justice to go after.

political enemies. That's what Donald. Trump does. I'm saying that that if. Democrats, when they are in power, do. not use the tools that have been. provided to them, uh, to ensure that. that, you know, the people who in this. administration did wrong are held to. account, then then, you know, we're not. going to survive as a democracy. I mean, you know, like, we we were fortunate. enough. for a period of time in Barack Obama's, uh, presidency to have a full trifecta.

And. he used it. to, among other things, pass meaningful. healthcare reform, Obamacare, the. Affordable Care Act. You don't get those. moments that often. And we had, again, the opportunity when. Joe Biden was in office. And to be. honest with you, we could have. prioritized voting rights, and had that. been the signature first issue. >> Yeah. >> And we didn't, right? We He prioritized. a bunch of other things, and I. understand why, but like, history is not. going to look back and say, "Well, I'm.

glad that the Biden administration. sought to do more bipartisan legislation. early on with, you know, the uh. >> infrastructure bill and gun safety law. >> Yeah. And and but the fact is that isn't. how that isn't how things are going to. be remembered. So, if Democrats get this. chance again, if if we are fortunate. enough that in 2029 we have this chance. again, Democrats need to take advantage. of it. >> Yeah, I completely agree. And look, I. think you and I are aligned in a little. bit different from from most people, I. think, who are focused on on.

cost-of-living issues as their number. one issue. Um you know, democracy, I. think, is is a foundational issue. Um I. know that that's that's why you do the. work that you do. So, again, I would. just reiterate for for folks who. understand that nothing can be done on. healthcare, on restoring food. assistance, on um eliminating child. poverty, on making sure that climate is. climate change is combated, on all of. the issues that plague this country. right now, nothing can be done unless these. structural issues are taken care of. first. And that's the the that that.

underscores the importance of the work. that Mark and his team are doing right. now in the court. So, again, if you're. not yet subscribed to democracydocket, please make sure to subscribe. That link. is in the post description of this. video. And if you'd like to pre-order my. book and join me on my book tour, there. are still tickets available and still. books available. So, please grab a copy. of that, too, and tickets, as well. I'm. Brian Tyler Cohen. >> I'm Mark Elias. >> This is Democracy Watch. >> [music].