Bernard Hudson: Cybertruck Explosion, New Orleans Attack, CIA Corruption, & Tulsi Gabbard

so you served in the CIA for how long 28. years 28 years you joined when 1989. January 1989 and what did you do roughly. speaking for CIA so I was a case officer. yes which means my job was I was focused. on you know foreign uh foreign. governments and foreign posts where. you're trained up given language skills. given set of skills to manage um manage. what we call tradecraft how to operate.

clandestinely and safely overseas and. then you're assigned undercover to an. embassy and that sort of becomes your. career with stint back in what we call. headquarters in Virginia. [Music]. [Applause]. [Music]. [Applause]. [Music].

what countries did you serve in so I. served throughout the entire Middle East. was in Iraq it was in Africa uh it was. in the Levant it was in Pakistan uh. where in the. Levant uh Jordan so interesting what was. Pakistan. like so Pasha. Pakistan P yeah before 911 was the most. alien place that I've ever gone I wasn't.

there permanently I was just I would go. in for business but that was an alien. place you think I was there two weeks. after 911 I've never seen anything like. that yeah it's it's even alien even. pakistanis who live in Islamabad or Ral. pindiy or Karachi when they go into Pasa. will remark this is a different country. this is really Afghanistan it just. happens to be inside Pakistan's borders. Town don't you think it is very if you. like that sort of man who would be king. Vibe The Flash man Hotel.

if you like if you like the Flashman. hotel if you like that sort of British. late Colonial Chic totally it's the. place to go the LA the last flag bearer. from The Retreat from kobell the last. the last guy who survived yeah rode in. in into the interesting okay so you you. served an interesting post doing the. kind of work that people associate with. the CIA not reading you know foreign. telegram posts back at back at. headquarters no I was thankfully spared. that uh I was able to actually serve.

again you know sort of undercover you. know working trying to record or recruit. what we call human sources and foreign. intelligence uh to go back to our. government um how did it change the. agency over the 28. years so there were three CIA that I. served in so there was the Cold War CIA. that I joined in. 1989 now I joined like only nine months. before the the Wall came down but the. ethos of that place up until say 91 it.

was always focused on Russia and the. Soviet Union Warsaw PCT and then it went. an I won't call it an identity crisis. but a certainly a change in its. character as the United States sort of. moved into the peace dividend era say. sort of 91 when the when the Soviet. Union is no more and NATO starts. expanding westward in that period you. know you had a lot. of basically a struggle to figure out. what is the agent really want to focus.

on and it never really came to a clear. answer until Tuesday Morning 11th. September and then it became the third. agency that I served in Where Were You. So that morning I uh I was at home I was. in an apartment getting ready to go to. an assignment overseas uh doing my final. preparations I saw that the news had. said a plane it just struck a building. in New York City I thought you know that. was pretty weird clear day you know. little.

suspicious um jump in my car to go to. CIA. headquarters on the radio I hear that. they had just hit the second tower and I. get into the parking lot and there's you. know a lot of things going on uh a woman. tells me I didn't know this person but. they said you know in the way things. that happened on that Tuesday people. would talk to you who didn't normally. talk to each other hey we somebody just. blew up the state department now that. was obviously a garble of the plane.

hitting the Pentagon so I went into the. building um went to the near East. section which was my home division your. home office is called the division in. those days and at that point there was a. report that there was a missing fourth. plane headed to Washington and the. director of CIA Pro probably smartly. decided to evacuate the building because. he didn't know where the target for the. fourth plane was going to. be but when you're young and aggressive. I decided I wanted to ignore that order.

and so sort of enlisted a friend of mine. who was you know as we were being told. by the they were called security. protective officers who are basically. the guard force and the security Force. inside the agency were telling everybody. to leave it was the first time I'd ever. directly disobeyed an order in CIA and. instead uh got a friend of mine to go. with me over to what was called the. counterterrorism center where uh a. friend of mine who I'd worked for before. was the director and said listen you.

know this is why I joined the CIA you. know I joined it to be ready to do. something for my country when that time. came and you never really know when that. time is and that for me and for. everybody else who was in the CIA in. those years that became the dominant. Mission you know prevent another 911 yes. figure out you know what the real threat. is find fix that threat and and then you. know do something to make sure it.

doesn't ever happen again so where did. you go from there so you you were on. your way somewhere did you change. destinations no I still went to the. Middle East uh to the Gulf region. perfect um and served there for a number. of years supporting operations in. Afghanistan and. Iraq what you learned in the early days. of the global war on terrorism is that. it really was a global effort you know. the United States in those days and it's. kind of hard to understand now had an.

enormous moral hand when it came to. trying to get other countries to enlist. with us to work against the. counterterrorism threat and a lot of. that I think was basically because a lot. of countries woke up and realized that. accommodating terrorists or turning a. blind eye to them was injurious to their. own fate and were eager to partner with. the United States in those. days in those days you think that's. changed well certainly I mean so you.

know you have the invasion of Iraq in. 2003 which unfortunately you know the. intelligence that led to the decision to. go in there was deeply flawed and that. had an enormous hit on the American. intelligence community's credibility and. US foreign policy credibility was there. soul searching within the. CIA a after. that I think there was I mean I think. what's. unclear and what probably has to happen.

when something that egregiously wrong. goes. occurs there's got to be a public facing. piece of this I think that was absent in. the post 2003 environment I I personally. believe that this was the greatest. intelligence failure of the American. Intel community in my certainly in my. time in government uh it well sure and a. million people died and it reset it. changed so much which that I don't.

understand why they couldn't find some. somebody to say we're going to punish. this person a guilty person one would. hope so what tends to happen in a modern. bureaucracy at least in the American. version of it is those type of mistakes. are considered I'm not saying this is. proper but this is sort of how they. approach it it's a systemic problem and. so we're going to take all these steps. to change the things that we think led.

to. this it is not including firing the. leaders of that system I notice that is. true in the 2003 example you know what. you don't have is what you might have in. say a private sector company where you. get something really really wrong it's. hard to compare you know the magnitude. of the 2003 mistake on Intel with. anything a private sector company would. do but you know you got bureaucratic. reform out of it but what you didn't get. and it's fair to say this is you didn't.

get say 20 identified people who were. told you know you have to leave now yeah. because I mean it's you made the point. by implication earlier that one of the. reasons countries participated in the. global warant Terror with the United. States helped the United States was. because they had the example of. countries that refused to participate or. who worked against our interests and. they got overthrown so there's something. sort of instructive about punishing. someone because it teaches everybody. else not to do that thing right well I.

think in the case of counterterrorism. and the cooperation we got after 2001 I. think the reason these countries. cooperated as their own fear that. radical Islamic terrorism was a threat. to them as well yes what I think. Disturbed them after 2003 wasn't that. anybody lamented the Saddam Hussein. regime going away it's here's the United. States the global remaining superpower. getting something so tragically wrong. where along the way many of the.

countries that are allies of the United. States were cautioning are you really. sure that you've got this story right I. think what happened what you start to. see the glimmers of in the aftermath of. the Iraq invasion is sort of that. deference to American foreign policy. begins to be questioned yes and I think. in the you know immediate years after. 2003 you know Russia and China are still. not peer Rivals of the United States at. that point.

uh but you know the repercussions the. ripples that came out of the Iraq. invasion in regards to American's. Alliance system and how countries view. it I think underwent another change. certainly by. 20156 with the rise of China's economy. and the return of sort of a more. confrontational Russian policy in in. Syria within CIA was was there anyone. who said you know wait a second we.

should figure out exactly how. this series of Intel assessments got to. the president and policy makers and like. how did we do this and anyone who. participated in it should be fired or. did anyone say that so certainly many. people said all of the points you made. up to firing people there were some. people who said that you know there. needs to be accountability personal. accountability to named. individuals the decision ision. essentially was that we would hold the.

system accountable and they introduced a. number of reforms one of them was to. create a Director of National. Intelligence uh which didn't exist. before yes uh 9911 I mean 911 is. actually when they created it but it was. empowered by what happened in 2003. so you know if you were looking for you. know a single event where somebody could. say you know these people are personally. held accountable that did not happen.

after the Iraq. invasion um and it's not it's not just. the wmd Intel that remained unpunished. it's like everything since then every. disaster since then has been without an. author I notice you know again the The. Way Way president was. set yeah so I mean again the way it. tends to work in an American bureaucracy. is you get sort of collective punishment. if you will or Collective change in it's. like systemic racism everyone's but no. one can quite describe what it is yes or.

or you know you don't point out a. particular individual right exactly so. uh the dni is one of. the uh one of the bureaucratic bolt-ons. one of the responses to the obvious. Intel failure in the runup to war in. irck what is war in 2001 actually so it. was the the it was 911 I'm sorry it's. 911 I beg your. pardon what exactly is it question so.

you know it's changed over time so. essentially the dni Director of National. Intelligence role is to make sure that. there's a single accountable person to. the president who is responsible for all. of the production and all of the. assessments that come out of the Intel. community so there are 18 agencies. including the Director of National. Intelligence as an office not a person. inside the US Intel Community before. there was a dni. the director of CIA had two hats hat one.

director of the CIA hat two director of. something called director of Central. Intelligence right which is essentially. the process by which the president and. the senior leadership get something. called the president's Daily Brief which. is called the pdb it's a classified. newspaper that speaks to you know issues. of Interest overseas to the American. government so the dni was created it was. given the authority to manage. that classified newspaper if you want to.

call that that was one of its duties. Duty two was you as the dni are. responsible for looking at how do we do. collection across the. board agency by agency which agency is. collecting what type of information is. there duplication is that duplication. necessary it also has you know sort of a. mundane but important role in. determining budgets uh and managing not. necessarily the execu of or not so much.

execution of budgets but pulling a. budget together for the IC and being. accountable to talking to Congress about. it as it is lived you know there are. issues that some people have and. questions people have raised over the. years about why does the dni need to be. as large as it does it doesn't. collect unique. information unique information is. collected by the 17 other agencies that. are out there it Cates it it collates it. the. one thing that some folks have talked.

about a role that the dni could do but. it hasn't to date is a more aggressive. assessment of how each of the agencies. really contribute to the overall IC. Mission essentially grading the homework. can can you list the 17 other members of. the intelligence Community for points I. guess I could probably do it so I nine. of them are within the Department of. Defense nine nine of them so Army. intelligence Marine Corps intelligence. Navy intelligence. uh Air Force intelligence don't forget.

the air force uh you have the National. Security Agency which is part of DOD the. national geospatial agency which is an. agency that looks at exploiting imagery. and making sense of pictures if you. think of the Cuba Missile Crisis and you. know the analysts who were looking at. crates and boxes to determine is that. just a crate or is that a crate carrying. a Russian missile that's the modern. version of where those people went it's. a very little known agency but it's.

actually has a really important Mission. uh the national reconnaissance office. which manages America satellite. system then you have uh seven agencies. that are part of other government uh. cabinets level uh agencies so for. example treasury's Intel section the. department of Energy's got an Intel. section the state department has. something called the intelligence and. research.

INR um you've got uh the Coast Guard and. you have Department of Homeland Security. why would the department of energy have. its own Intel component so unique to the. American Intel Community the department. of energy has got a bunch of authorities. dealing with nuclear weapons and the. design of nuclear weapons both you know. in the United States and what we need to. know about potential adversary or. partner countries that have nuclear. weapons. and so they have very small it's a very.

small office inside the department of. energy but it's a fair question people. will say you know why don't we just have. one agency that takes care of all of. this for so many different organizations. and I think over the years uh certainly. within DOD for the nine agencies they've. got they feel these are technical enough. and they need them focused particularly. on that particular service like the Air. Force has a particular set of things. that they need to carry out their. mission that are not necessarily the.

types of information the CIA might. collect some of the things CIA might. collect would be of use to the Air Force. but there's a lot of things that CIA. wouldn't collect that the Air Force for. example might need and that they prefer. to have their own unit it's mostly. analytical to uh to assess foreign. foreign air developments if you're still. using Verizon AT&T or T-Mobile obviously. are condolences but you're going to want. to hear this our cell phone company Pure. Talk gives us the exact same service. you're currently getting from those big.

companies but for half the cost not a. joke there's no reason to spend $85 or. $100 per month per person on your. wireless bill now you can get unlimited. talk taxed and 15 gigs of data with. Mobile Hotspots for just 35 bucks a. month you don't have to be a math major. the average family of force saves about. $11,000 a year with pure talk you enjoy. America's most Dependable 5G Network. support small businesses we would know. that because they are now powering dcn. it can probably save you money too so.

cut the fat out of your wireless bill. switch to P talk by going to Pur. talk.com Tucker you'll save an. additional 50% off your first month Pure. Talk America's Wireless company so the. Director of National Intelligence sits. in some way but not literally a top all. of these other agencies so they sit a. top it you know it gets a little. complicated when people think you know. is there a or chart that says the. Director of National can give an order.

that one of these other agencies have to. follow or could it cut their budget if. the Director of National Intelligence. wanted that becomes more of a political. issue and some of that has to do with. how money is allocated by Congress so we. talked about you know how nine of these. agencies are actually within the defense. department well that means their. ultimate boss is the Secretary of. Defense and the Secretary of Defense has. an enormous say in how those agencies. are are operated so really you know the.

dni's authorities are looking at how. these agencies really contribute to the. overall American collection and. exploitation of information effort. president Trump has nominated former. Hawaii congresswoman tulsey gabard to be. the Director of National Intelligence um. she's facing enormous resistance in. Washington most of it not public you. came out publicly in support of her why. did you do that so I've noticed her care. uh from early on when she was a.

congressman and myself and others you. know CIA officers and other people in. the government I think we're sort of. interested in hear somebody who has. served her country was still in fact I. believe she was a congressman and. serving as an army. reservist who actually raises some. thoughtful. questions about you know the purposes of. American foreign. policy and you know during her run for. president uh with the Democratic party.

you know her comments in some of the. debates I found to be extraordinarily. unusual for an American politician uh. you know in particular when she. challenged you know the front runner. Hillary Clinton on you know the effects. of some of her foreign policy decisions. uh I think in particular on Libya so I. thought you know tulsey gabard was a. solid choice to be the dni and I was. I've been a bit surprised by some of the.

vitriolic response to her nomination. because when you look it on paper you. know her background it's consistent with. other people who've had senior jobs in. the US Intel Community Mike. Pompeo John Ratcliffe in some ways AEL. Haynes who's now the current director of. National Intelligence you know some of. her background is not at all dissimilar. to some of them and in fact I don't. think tulsey Gabbert ever ran a. pornographic book store while ail Haynes. did I think in.

Baltimore I'm not aware of her. background on that yeah but I just for. the record I don't think that telsey gu. would ran a portra. bookstore I wouldn't think so it would. seem to be. inconsistent uh what was also sort of. interesting to me was you. know she took a lot of heat for you. being skeptical on things that I'm not. so sure it wasn't right to be skeptical. on such yes so in particular you know.

I've I am sympathetic to when she was a. congressman and went to Syria and you. know was essentially trying to do a fact. finding mission to figure out you know. what is US policy interest in. Syria and you know was also trying to. get to the bottom of I think in her mind. and I can't speak for her but you know. it's my outside assessment you know the. question about whether or not the Assad. regime used chemical weapons on its own. people.

now the Assad regime was brutal both the. father and the son ran one of the most. diabolically brutal regimes that they've. ever had in the Middle East however you. know what she was trying to look at was. had they escalated the use of chemical. weapons you know when you think about. all the people who were participating in. what we call the global war on terrorism. or the Iraq. veterans I wouldn't blame any of them. for being skeptical about what the us. intelligence Community might have said.

about another Arab State having a weapon. of mass destruction on the basis of of. no disclosed proof at all well the you. know I push the state department if this. is true like what do I know I was I'm. not there but where's the evidence n. well and and a lot of the Good Will and. Trust had been extinguished by what. happened in 2003 so you know again in my. view of t gabt and other Veterans of the.

Iraq War and occupation which was an. opposed occupation it was got fairly. bloody at times so if you're there in. that country serving and at some point. you Ponder you know how did we exactly. get here and somebody tells you well. it's you know the American Intel. Community you know assessed that there. was wmd here they got it wrong Flash. Forward now you're a congressman someone. is you know laying at yet another case. that there might have been chemical. weapons use. maybe you're concerned that is this a.

Prelude to not only just tagging and. assigning culpability to an evil regime. but some sort of opening move in a much. more aggressive us involvement in that. country so I on that you know just as a. as someone who myself was in Iraq um and. very familiar with other people whove. served there I don't blame any of them. for wanting to ask two three four. questions about. the existence of wmd in an Arab state in.

the first you know say decade after. after an incident like 200 picture I. never understood like when did Congress. pass the law requiring me to hate Assad. there are lots of brutal regimes in the. Middle East some of which we support I. would argue as brutal as Assad's regime. just my view but whatever but there are. other countries and but why was I. required I'm agnostic about Assad I. support him to the extent he protected. Christians that's my personal view but. when did it become like some requirement.

that you know all good people hate Assad. where did that come from I was just. confused by it well I mean you you get. sort of you know sometimes shifting. standards on what you know what. constitutes a threat yes I do believe. that probably by the end of his. administration even the Obama people had. come to the conclude that Syria was. probably not a direct actionable threat. to the United States. um now it's fair to say that during the.

occupation of Iraq that the Syrian. government knowingly allowed plenty of. people to cross that border um who are. going to you know attack US troops in. that. country but you know there are ways to. deal with that and I think again when. you you look at us policy towards Syria. it's always been fairly hostile you know. it's never outside of a very short. period of time in the first Gulf War. when Bashar Assad the father or uh H.

Assad the father had gone along with the. Americans to push back saddam's invasion. of Kuwait we've always had a bad. relationship with that regime so any. reason it was particularly brutal it was. also you know as a legacy of the Cold. War very close to the. Soviets. um they it's easy to forget now but the. Syrian regime under the Assad family. hosted a number of of terrorist. organizations that you know did attack.

American interests in Europe and other. places they hosted you know terrorist. groups uh they helped destabilize. Lebanon which was an important you know. small Ally of the United States at the. time in the 70s and 80s so I mean you. know that gets us back to sort of the. third world movement and Soviet. surrogates the non-aligned countries. non-aligned countries and then you add. on to that just sort of a uniquely. strange Cult of.

Personality where for example you know. in Iraq you know the name Assad also. means you know it's a lion in Arabic. people wouldn't want to use the word for. lion in Arabic because that would. require them to say the president's name. the name of the president's family the. the fear um that the average person had. in Syria was astounding I remember going. there on a on a trip at one point and. just it was it was saturated with secret.

police everywhere I would call it the. not so secret police because you'd be. walking around Damascus and you could. see clearly these guys. there and really their focus was. domestic repression you know it was. really not looking for foreigners so. it's not to say that you're absolutely. right there are many terrible regimes in. the world the assads you know were at. least noteworthy within the Arab context. interesting so she dared to go talk to.

Assad went to. Syria um telsey gabard um but you know. that was seven or eight years ago and. she never endorsed Assad or anything. like that she's got pretty conventional. views on most issues I would say um. foreign policy issues she's not like. anti-israel or she's you know she's. within the mainstream of most things. um but the resistance to her is very. very intense where do you think that. comes from I think some of it seems to.

come from a sense that she is not. deferential to the foreign policy. consensus and within Washington you know. there's there is a sense that there I. mean there clearly is a foreign policy. consensus you know and that's true of. almost any government you know any. government that has a foreign policy and. that has Security Services you know. there tends to be sort of a a world view. that's coalesced that generally coales.

is and is held by the majority of the. people who work there I think she's a. bit of a disruptor when it comes to that. and is willing to challenge. things I would agree with you that I. don't really understand sort of the. vitriol of some of this I don't think it. really is warranted are a traitor to her. country well this gets to the sort of. absurd lens that. um people have sometimes Fallen to about. trying to go after their domestic.

opponents I mean here we have somebody. who was and is a lieutenant colonel in. the US Army which means she has security. clearance probably top secret clearance. and you know making statements as. serving government officials or recently. you know retired government officials. that this person is probably a Russian. agent you know I I find it curious that. the same group of folks who might say. that you know the McCarthy era was. extreme well they've embraced it.

completely it's you know the McCarthy. era is not a how-to manual it was a. cautionary they I mean they got us into. a war with Russia from my perspective on. the basis of this hysteria it's um it's. beyond belief so here's my concern Trump. gets elected on the explicit promise to. end pointless Wars defend the United. States when necessary but we're not no. more Wars of choice they haven't helped. the foreign policy consensus moreover. isn't working obviously it's not helping. the United States in any measurable way.

and people are very sick of it and he. said that in 2016 got elected he said it. again in 2024 and got elected and yet. the overwhelming majority of the. nominees so far are well within the. foreign policy consensus they're Neo. cons and she's not and so don't you. think Trump voters deserve a an. appointee once in a while I guess that'd. be my view but that's like too much for. DC that this is my read they can't you. can't have anybody who disagrees with. Mike Pompeo like not out that.

seems pretty dysfunctional to me well I. don't get consulted on these sorts of. issues as an observer like what um so. you know part. of I think part of what you're seeing. here is you know that sort of. independent thinking and really. questioning in some ways what we got for. our efforts of the last 25 years you. know certainly since 2003 three uh you.

know to to essentially assess that. you've developed inside the United. States something I like to or something. I've heard people call militarism. without victory where you have the sort. of consistent push to the most. aggressive options on the table but. you're not Sparta you keep losing well. and we and we certainly you know we. don't gain much even from a you know. some of the ones that we've won on. that's right and so I I think. I'm not sure that a lot of the.

professional National Security. establishment has as a group really come. to that conclusion yet I think. individually you know when you talk to. folks who you know had careers whether. in the military the security services. State Department they'll privately admit. that you know if you name Libya. Iraq the certainly the occupation of. Afghanistan post the death of AMA bin. Laden. that it's really hard to say that we.

really got very much as a country out of. that but there certainly you know is you. know relevancy that you get as the. United States by being able to sort of. impose your will on situations and it's. important if you're going to be a. superpower to be able to impose your. will if you have to do. so what has changed I think over the. last 20 years is the threshold to want. to impose that will seems to have gotten.

down to a fairly hair trigger and so. things that I would think you know we. would have stayed out of uh when we had. a standoff with the Soviet Union or at. least thought twice. about people are now a little bit of a. knee-jerk reaction that you know let's. let's move this two steps up the. escalation. ladder not always warranted well and. Reckless because the consequences of. misjudging and you can only control side. of course yours well you know back to.

your you know gets to your question on. you know why tulsy Gabbert I I like. skepticism in senior Intelligence. Officers in my. experience you know being overly. credulous or or being willing to sort of. believe the most extreme version of an. event even if it later turns out to be. true certainly at the senior levels it's. well worth it to be to have some people. in the loop yes who are prepared to ask. some very hard questions and and to. suffer the consequences from asking.

those hard questions if you really want. to be an effective Director of National. Intelligence you probably have to go. into work every day with the expectation. that this might be my last day I might. be forced to say something or do. something that will be unpopular. unwelcome but I think it's necessary for. the system to have a couple of folks. around who are prepared to take that. risk and from what I saw of her career. and I don't know her personally she. seems like somebody who despite being on. the fast trck in the Democratic party.

she was the vice chair of the DNC a. presidential candidate was willing to. put. her personal ethics and personal views. you know on the table and say you know. for this I'm prepared to suffer and. that's and that's a good thing to have. for for the American Intel Enterprise in. my opinion it seems. vital um. so then the question arises like where's.

the oversight of these incredibly. powerful agencies which have you know by. definition the power to spy on people. and kill them and do someone from. outside should be making certain that. what they're doing was within the bounds. of the Constitution and just. decency um and I don't see anybody I see. the House and Senate Intel committees as. completely controlled by the IC I mean. I've seen it is that like what's the. view from within CIA on that. there's any like anybody in the House.

and Senate particularly the Senate who. will say you can't do that will pull. your budget if you do that so I think. there have been instances where you know. you've had that sort of oversight now. some of it you know goes back. historically so you know Church. committee so which is the you know long. years that's a long time ago that's sort. of the high Watermark of you know. oversight having a significant effect on. the IC you know since then and you know. in my experience was mostly you know. post 911 in dealing with Congress that.

there was fairly robust interest in what. the agency does to be fair there was a. lot of support you know for the IC in. the um in Congress historically It. generally is uh you know the CIA would. say that that's because you know they. try to be consistent with what they. think you know Congress will accept and. what the administration wants it's. always worth remembering that the IC in. the end works for the executive branch. and the president obviously their.

budgets uh and some of their authorities. are controlled by the laws that. congresses congress uh puts on. them your question is a really good one. on is in a low trust Society or a. society where trust is now at a premium. you know how do how does the IC. manage the suspicions of an increasingly. larger number of people in the American. population I'll just say is son of a. federal employee who spent most of his. life in DC I always wanted to trust the.

government and in fact did and it was um. you know learning that what government. was doing with my money and my name I. was so outraged by it I have no more. trust and so I I think that I mean. that's just my perspective I'm sure. everyone has a different perspective but. um I applied to CIA and uh didn't get in. but but that's a measure of of how much. I believed in the system and so from my. perspective it's low trust because they. violated our trust. and I think you know however we got.

here I think one of the things that I. would like to see the IC and those who. manage it accept is that we really are. here that this is you know a situation. where it's highly partisan atmosphere in. the United States uh not everybody's. going to reflexively trust the security. services and if they really want to be. able to perform their mission. appropriately and effectively they've. got to be in a place where the people. trust them but on whose behalf are they. perform it I mean they have no Authority. at all other than that conferred to them.

by the president of the United States. that's it period because his authority. comes from voters it's our system and he. confers that to the executive branch. agencies of which CIA is one and so if. he doesn't want them to do something. they have no moral or constitutional. right to do it period I I don't I don't. see another read con as a as a legal. measure you know if the president you. know as long as it's lawful exact gives. an order to the you know to the IC. especially the CIA which directly works. for the president doesn't even work you.

we talked about the nine other Intel. agencies they work for the Secretary of. Defense by extension the president of. course uh yes they you know they have to. obey lawful orders that are given to. them but they're not allowed to. freelance like by whose authority are. they doing that how can how can and not. just C I don't mean to pick on one the. most famous of all the federal agencies. but I mean there are many others maybe. all of them doing things the president. ran against. that he did not.

authorize which in other words they have. no legal or moral right to do but they. do it and no one's ever punished like on. whose authority do they think they're. acting again I think you know come 20. January you know we're going to once the. executive one presumes that there'll be. a number of executive orders that will. come out of the White House you know. that the president will be able to. lawfully. provide at that point you know if people. in the or the IC leadership is not. responsive you know there's plenty of.

mechanisms for a president and a White. House a national security adviser to. determine you know if they're you know. not in what they say in the in the IC. not aligned with what the president. wants them to do president and the. director of CIA have very broad. authority to remove people very broad we. did an interview with a woman called. Casey means she's a Stanford educated. surgeon and really one of the most. remarkable people I have ever met in the. interview she explained how the food.

that we eat produced by huge food. companies big food in conjunction with. Pharma is destroying our health making. this a weak and sick country the levels. of chronic disease are beyond belief. what Casey means who we've not stopped. thought thinking about ever since is the. co-founder of a healthcare technology. company called levels and we are proud. to announce today that we are partnering. with levels and by proud I mean. sincerely proud levels is a really.

interesting company and a great product. it gives you insight into what's going. on inside your body your metabolic. Health it helps you understand how the. food that you're eating the things that. you're doing every single day are. affecting your body in real time and you. don't think about it you have no idea. what you're putting in your mouth and. you have no idea what it's doing to your. body but over time you feel weak and. tired and Spacey and over an even longer. period of time you can get really sick. so it's wor knowing what the food you. eat is doing to you the levels app works.

with something called a continuous. glucose monitor a CGM you can get one as. part of the planner you can bring your. own it doesn't matter but the bottom. line is Big Tech big Pharma and big food. combined together to form an incredibly. malevolent Force pumping you full of. garbage unhealthy food with artificial. sugars and hurting you and hurting the. entire country so with levels you'll be. able to see immedi medely what all this. is doing to you you get access to.

realtime personalized data and that's a. critical step to changing your behavior. those of us who like Oreos can tell you. firsthand this isn't talking to your. doctor at annual physical looking. backwards about things you did in the. past this is up to the second. information on how your body is. responding to different foods and. activities the things that give you. stress your sleep etc etc it's easy to. use it gives you powerful personalized. health dat then you can make much better. choices about how you feel and over time.

it'll have a huge effect right now you. can get an additional two free months. when you go to levels. link Tucker. that's levels. link Tucker this is the. beginning of what we hope will be a long. and happy partnership with levels and Dr. Casey means I'm hardly an expert on CIA. I am an expert on elected officials in. DC and they're all afraid of getting. killed or blackmailed they think that. the intell agencies will kill them they. actually think that I don't know if. you're aware of that I'm aware of that. um so they think that why do you think.

they think. that you know that wasn't my experience. you know working with you know oversight. when I work with them um you. know I I've Sly just never heard anybody. say that to me I had a member of the an. Intel committee elected elected uh. official tell me um that and he was on. the oversight committee you know. overseeing the IC. um that they were spying on him that. they were reading his text and listening.

to his calls and there was nothing he. could do about it and I said why don't. you hold a press conference I mean. that's like so outrageous it's. illegal can't do that you saw the. chairman of the Senate Intel. committee violated. some agreement CIA thought that she had. with them and they spied on her they. they spied on Senate staff they got. caught and no one right so and actually. the Senate didn't do anything anything. about it they didn't say you know we're. going to expose your black budget or you.

know defund parts of you we're going to. fire you no one did anything so what. does that tell you if the agency can spy. on sitting Senators who are supposed to. be in charge of them or their budget. anyway what do that tell you about how. afraid people are so let me take this in. reverse order yes so you're talking. about the Feinstein that's exact. statement so as you know my. understanding of how that happened is. that they accused the agency of being.

able to look at the computers correct in. the. Senate that were in the CIA. building that the Senate staff had. access to and that they were government. computers with CIA information on it and. that all of those computers come with a. warning both written on the the uh uh on. the cover of the computer and when you. boot it up that this is a government. system and it's fully auditable so it's. my understanding that the computers in.

question you know that you know Senator. Feinstein said were improperly accessed. by the agency we're in fact you know CIA. computers that were made available to. them but with the clear warnings that. anything on this computer that you do. not some other computer that you would. be on not your personal handheld. device those computers are accessible by. CIA security just like every other. computer that the CIA buys and makes.

available for its own employees so that. there's an audit function on all of that. now I had never heard you know that the. allegations ever extended to other. computer systems that people in the. Senate were using that were not provided. by the CIA now again I'll caution that I. you know I'm not wasn't directly. involved in them pretty sure that. Senator Feinstein said and alleged that. CA was spying on her staff in order to. push back against her expected push back.

against them in other words to control. her I was aware she said that again you. know my understanding is the only you. know audits that were going on of any. computers were ones that were clearly. marked as this is computer owned by the. government subject to audit so I I can't. speak to you know what I can't speak to. is never in my career did anybody ever. approach me and say anything about. I spying on members of Congress never no.

one ever no one ever asked me to do it. no one I know ever told me that they. were involved in it and it's a fairly. small place right uh I'm not saying that. so if a member. of congressional Intel oversight. committee says I believe CIA or NSA is. spying on my personal Communications and. an effort to control me do you think. that's a crazy thing to. say I think it's troubling if any member. of Congress believes that you know not. only believed it well I think the person.

believed it told me in a restaurant um. but I said that's like completely. outrageous and actually you can't have a. democracy under those circumstances so. you should hold a press conference say I. can't do that so really to me it's. unprovable whether or not they were. spying on his phone maybe he's a. nutcase he's pretty famous person but. could be a nutcase but what I was struck. by was the fear like I can't do that and. that's I would say what you just told me. that would if I was still in government. that's the thing that would trouble me.

is that if if our relationship with our. oversight has reached this sort of a. level where they would entertain that. type of a where you're more where CIA is. more powerful than the people overseeing. CIA that's not good I mean again in all. my interactions when I would go down and. testify or provide you know background. briefings to Congress you know it was. always with the understanding you know. that the CIA has a office you know that. deals with collaboration and oversight. it was always like you've got to make. sure everything you say is accurate if.

you say something that's not accurate. you've got to come back and explain that. you got it wrong that you submitted. something that was you know in. error um it was always. differential in my level and with what I. experienced but if I had become aware. that you know a senior senator had said. something like that or a congressman at. any. level you I'd say we definitely have a. problem you know we need to reestablish. trust well I have however it has to. happen and if somebody had ever told me.

that we're spying on you know. Congressman you know I wouldn't have. followed an order like that and most of. my friends that I know who were there. wouldn't have followed an order like. that I just um I never believed any of. this stuff and then as the closer I got. to it the more I thought there's. something really wrong here and that the. almost without exception the members of. Congress who are the most vocal. cheerleaders for the IC are the ones. with the most hide in their personal. lives I've definitely noticed that theme.

definitely um and I feel like there's. probably a connection does that make. sense again I I never saw heard or even. you know got a whiff of anything like. that um you know Washington does play by. some pretty hard rules you know within. the political. world but you know again if I'd ever. been in a meeting you know where. somebody had said hey you know we're. going to you know dish some dirt on some.

Congressman it would have been utterly. shocking and appalling yes and I think. again most of the employees I know would. refuse to carry out an order like that. we would actually think this is some. sort of bizarre joke I just I just can't. see how you would easily be able to do. that without a the people knowing it's a. very gossipy place the CIA it's just. it's so striking to me that. um members of Congress who represent.

districts where just for example um you. know the overwhelming majority in. Republican districts the overwhelming. majority of their voters don't want to. send another $20 billion to Ukraine just. to give one among many. examples and then they show up they go. into the skiff they get the briefings. and they're in favor of doing something. that their own constituents. hate and so there's a control mechanism. in place obviously whether it's you know. as Sinister as you know whether it's.

Sinister or not I don't know but what is. that well I do think you know just like. any mature. bureaucracy you know the the Intel. Community any federal agency can make a. very good case for why they think. something needs to be done and I mean a. case on its merits you know so you know. Kissinger used to have an old joke that. he would get three types of briefings. you know one is or three types of. options total nuclear war abject. surrender and then something in the.

middle you know it it that's still a. fairly common play across the US. government so it is entirely possible. that you. know busy congressmen and Senators who. have an awful lot of things that they've. got to be focused on they come in to. deal with an agency that they have. oversight on generally speaking that. agency has an information advantage over. the them on you know details and can lay. out a very good case for what it is they.

want to do I'm not saying it's. necessarily A wise case but they can lay. out a compelling. case and there is a sense I did notice. in my career of a difference to well. these are the experts you know their. careerists who've been doing this for. all their life you know pushing back on. that could make you know it's a bit of a. lonely place to be so. I think you know in some ways you know. Senate and rep house staffs they don't.

have a lot of them you know they they. have a lot people think they do but when. you think about all the things that. they've got to. evaluate especially when they deal with. you know complex issues war in peace. National. Security there's an awful lot of. difference it does apply to the uh when. the agencies when Senator Chuck Schumer. had Democrat in the Senate says to. Rachel mattow man Trump made a huge. mistake messing around with the IC they. they'll screw you six ways to. Sunday yeah that's a hard one to.

square that's a you know I remember when. that statement was made. and again you know wasn't the part of. the CIA that I had any access to and I. but that's the side a statement that. doesn't. contribute in any positive way but does. it reflect. [Music]. reality it certainly didn't reflect a. reality that I was a part of you know I. retired in. 2017 clearly it's become fairly toxic.

you know um in Washington and you know. it's not unfair to say that some of that. toxicity does you know reach into you. know the government you know the federal. agencies but when people make statements. like that you know whether it's. bravado or you know they think it's true. it it fuels that. mistrust so one of the things that the.

Intel Community could do to restore. trust is declassify things that have no. legitimate reason to be secret like any. files pertaining to the Kennedy. assassination from 62 years ago and yet. they are ferocious the CIA in particular. ferocious opponent fact because I bumped. up against it myself ferocious opponents. of declassifying that information why do. you think that is. so there is a sort of a. reflexive circling of wagons when it.

comes to secrecy in the IC I think in. the case of the Kennedy assassination. and and probably things certainly dating. back maybe even less than that there's. an overwhelming public. benefit to sharing that data but in that. specific case it was so long ago so many. books been written about it it's it's a. cliche it's almost a parody at this. point the Kennedy assassination it's. like if you can't give an inch on that. and by the way as of two weeks ago I. happened to know they were still.

fighting it like ferociously no you. cannot appoint that person that person. might disclose those files what like. what is that so what I'll say next I'll. say as a as a person who spent my most. of my adult life you know in the Intel. Community I F I would be very curious as. to how somebody would try to justify. that I mean the only thing that I could. think of is that you know government. files would include theories of a crime.

or an event that later get to be. disproven so in the early days of you. know some kind of an event you know. you're going to have agencies and parts. of your agency generate. things but I think American democracy. can handle that and it demands it who's. the president of the United States well. I mean and I mean the president has. absolute declassification authorities. whereare so people can dislike it but if. the president says you will declassify.

everything related to subject. X his declassification authority is as. Broad and absolute as his pardon. power why would Pompeo fight so hard to. keep those files secret I don't I really. don't know it's it's a if the president. had said that they wanted something. Declassified I don't understand. understand why they would say that you. know they would push back on it do you.

think CIA had a role in the president's. murderer in 1963 I personally don't you. know if I had to guess you know could I. see a situation where dots didn't get. connected that should have been. connected you know things dropped off. the table somebody looked at a piece of. information and said well that's not. really all that. important. um that said you know I I have friends. of mine who are retired you know CIA. officers who who at least entertain the.

idea that the agency of 1962. 1963 you know it's possible I don't. personally see. that but this could all be cleared up if. they just put out whatever they. have yeah I mean it it seems very. unlikely to me after all these years. there could be anything in those files. which are of course physical files that. yes they're all paper yeah of course um.

you know really they're still there. sitting in a manila folder like telling. us who the Assassin was working for or. whatever telling us the truth I have a. lot of trouble believing they'd still be. there if they were ever. there the only reason that I'm focused. on it is because I know for a fact that. there are CIA employees I know this for. a fact dead certain fact I just was. hearing about it are trying to prevent. certain people from getting jobs on the. basis of their belief that those people. will push for. declassification I think it's crazy.

again. I for the people I knew when I was in. the agency and the people I know who. were still. there if I were still in I would reflect. my reflexive position would be okay. there's there's really no reason that. something's that long ago can't be. Declassified in Toto what about the 911. files so we're moving on you know we're. getting close to 25 years. later um all the governments in that. region are different from what they were.

Saudi governments completely different. um I don't understand and there are all. these theories about what actually. happened and it's clear that we don't. know the full story whether the full. story is Sinister or not you know I hope. not you know but I don't you would do a. lot to heal American society by putting. doubts to rest and if these really are. like dangerous conspiracy theories then. prove it like why wouldn't. they release all those files well I'll.

go on the record of saying you know I I. believe 911 was perpetrated by who we. said it was yes you know and some of. those people are still down in. Guantanamo Bay waiting for justice. others are dead. um I'm very confident the IC had nothing. to do you know there's no deep State. actors or you know putting demolitions. in the you know Towers in New York uh. there really was a plane that hit the. Pentagon I.

think I think you could make a good. case that there's no reason not to. declassify most of this stuff what I. what I would expect you know might be. Troublesome it's possible that you know. um you know some of the early documents. are wrong you know materially wrong you. you're when you're reporting on. contemporaneous events some of your. reports will be wrong I think people can. understand okay this is something that. came out you know a week after 911 it's.

incorrect it was proven it was a theory. of the crime that was. disproven um I personally believe if it. would Advance you know building more. trust with the government and the IC. which I think is absolutely critical to. having you know effective National. Security. defense I I personally don't think that. there's any reason you can't declassify. most of those things if not all of. them I agree with you on all counts it. is critical to National Security and. defense to have trust between the.

population and the government and. employes to protect it right so trust is. not just like this thing you wish you. had it's this thing you need in order. for the system to. continue so yeah and if people believe. that there wasn't a plane that flew into. the Pentagon or that the CIA or mad or. somebody else other than the 19. hijackers did this prove him wrong like. wouldn't that it would just be good for. everybody would it not yeah I mean you. know I remember years ago actually you.

know you know some people in Al qaa. discussing this you know weirdly that. you know they were upset that people. were trying to take their credit from. them for you know doing what they did on. 911 because you know for them it was an. important part of their uh you know of. their credibility with their own folks. that they were able to pull this off so. I I see no reason that they probably. can't it was 5 years ago this month that. people started to drop dead in the. central Chinese city of Wuhan 5 years. since the beginning of covid tens of.

millions dead societies reordered. completely economies destroyed and yet. for some reason we still don't know. answers to the most basic questions. where did this virus come from how did. it get here why did the government tell. us to do things they knew wouldn't work. none of those questions have been. adequately answered and one man knows. those answers his name is Dr Tony fouchy. until now nobody has really pressed and. now a documentary filmmaker called. Jenner first is out with a new film.

explaining exactly what happened the. film is called thank you Dr fouchi. Jenner first spent years trying to get. answers and in that time as he awaited. Dr fouche's response he went through. tens of thousands of pages of documents. and piece together the story which is. shocking we are proud to host that. documentary here on TCN from December. 20th to January 19th you will see it. exclusively here on TCN again it's. called thank you Dr fouchi and it's. worth.

it then why the effort and CIA has I. think it's been do well has been. document participated in this effort to. discredit people who ask questions or. who have alternate theories why not. prove them wrong rather than resort to. character assess Nation conspiracy. theorist Etc so again you know when I. was in the agency and what know me and. my colleagues did we were focused on. collecting foreign actionable foreign.

intelligence abroad you know if somebody. on the internet had something to say you. know that. was completely at odds with what we knew. to be the truth you just sort of baked. that in to how you did what you did it's. a political question it's really a White. House decision you know if the White. House had decided you know what it's in. our national interests. to put everything out on the table that. we have that's you're making a a fair.

point a true Point that's right and and. a president can make that happen just. like a president can pardon anybody a. president can bulk declassify data if. they want to and there's literally. nothing the uh Federal Workforce or the. agencies could do to push back on. that I'm praying for that to happen. because I think it's necessary for. healing sincerely um too much is. classified too much is Secret it's. unfair on its face but it's also. corrosive of trust I think that's my.

view um tell us about security. clearances security clearances let me. just sa for context as someone who lived. in DC um are held by a lot of people who. are not federal employees a lot of. contractors a lot of retired. people have security clearances and they. use those to make money uh in the. private sector or from government. working as contractors um and it seems. like people leave government service and. just continue on with their security. clearance which from. my perspective as a US citizen who's. paid his taxes for 55 years seems a.

little unfair like why should John. Brennan who's not a federal employee get. to see top secret information but I. can't like what he's not a federal. employee I don't really understand that. system so you know I'll caution this by. I'm not an expert on how they do what we. call Contractor clearances yeah but you. know in the years after. 911 the federal Workforce didn't grow as. much as the work grew and so what. happened was there was an increasing.

Reliance on private. companies to do and to augment the. federal intelligence. Community those companies would have to. hire people who would need to get. security clearances and those security. clearances have to be the equivalent of. the ones that a federal employee had to. do the same work so in many cases what. you had were federal employees who. reached the point of retirement. but let's say they're still relatively. young 50 52 and they go to work for.

these Contracting companies that have. contracts back in the government and in. that case they need to maintain their. clearance and can lawfully retain their. clearance because they're working on a. government contract through an approved. vendor. right now that you probably have a much. smaller number of instances where people. who don't fit into that. category might still be authorized to. have access to a security clearance and.

occasional briefings from the government. and what happens that's again a very. narrow number of folks usually cabinet. secretaries people who have um careers. where they're still you know engaged. with say you know foreign policy in the. private sector and the government deems. that it's advantageous to keep these. people updated on certain developments. usually they don't get access to the.

same information that a inservice. federal employee might get but they. might be given a briefing on you know. developments in a certain part of the. world because they travel there a lot uh. they are can still be an effective voice. for American policy if they're informed. but that's a very tiny so Tony blankin. for example is now the Secretary of. State he will be until January 20th God. willing. and um his views are completely at odds. with those of the incoming president.

completely at odds and he's working hard. to undermine the incoming Trump. Administration um in Ukraine pushing to. get Ukraine in NATO or some insane thing. like that um he plans to retain his. security clearance he's hired a lawyer. to argue the case if it comes to that I. happen to know why on what grounds could. Tony. blinkin even if you thought he did a. good job as Secretary of State which. which I want to say once again I. don't but like why does he have a right. to a security clearance when he leaves.

Federal Service as an appointee well. nobody has a right to it right and again. you know. the. dod and whatever the home agency is. where your clearance is quote being held. have an absolute right to Grant revoke. or not issue a clearance and certainly a. president if they if the president. decided this person does not need access. to classified information it would be. unusual for a president to sort of name.

somebody like that but it's within as. far as I understand it's well within his. authority to say this person doesn't. need a security. clearance and the person would have to. be able to articulate even if a. president wasn't involved in making a. decision like that the person. petitioning to get a clearance or to. keep. it would have to have an a reason that's. actionable and to the benefit of the. government to do so you know I'm not. aware of the specifics of of you know a. former cabinet level officer trying to.

keep a clearance I would imagine if the. new Administration said that they didn't. approve it or concur that it's. essentially an unreviewable. decision probably it's being Washington. you could probably find an attorney who. would take your case on but you know. presumably even if you had a clearance. they don't have to actually give you any. access to anything just because you have. a clearance it isn't a badge that allows. you to get into a physical place and. access data somebody still has to.

proactively check that you have a. clearance and then brief you right but. the reason I think that it's significant. is because it sets up legal penalties. for the transfer of classified. information to you if you don't possess. a clearance so in other words if you're. Tony blinkin and you leave January 20th. you want to continue to undermine the. administration which he. does you can remain in contact with your. former employees at state or throughout. the US government your allly. and receive classified information and. no one's breaking the law but if you. don't have a.

clearance you know then you could get. John kud for it so and again a you know. an Administration has broad authorities. about who can have a clearance and just. because a former official wants. one there's they don't have a a right to. keep. it what do you make of these apparent. Terror attacks in New Orleans um or the. attack in New Orleans and then the. exploding cyber truck in Las.

Vegas so you know it's early and one of. the things I learned you know in my time. dealing with terrorist actions and uh in. the Intel world is you know you want to. be careful about what you think you. believe you still get the story what we. know so far about New Orleans is it. looks. like other types of attacks we've seen. over the years sort of somebody becomes. self-. radicalized um and then carries out you. know an extreme act with little. preparation Time ahead of ahead of the. actual attack so often in these type of.

cases you know somebody may have been. thinking about doing some violent action. something happens in their life they see. think or believe something and they. simply are triggered yeah the you know. initial information you know from you. know that I was reading earlier today. was that the attack or whatever happened. you know the explosion in front of Trump. Hotel is not related to or they haven't. detected any connections with what.

happened in New Orleans now I think as a. if I was still in government and two. events happened on the same day or. within you know 24 hours of each. other that is sometimes been the. Hallmark of an organized terror attack. and it's a working Theory it's. worthwhile to at least look into it you. know however what little we know and we. don't know much about the attacker in um. Las Vegas he doesn't seem to be the same. political persuasion and we don't know a. lot yet of the attacker in New.

Orleans now you have two possibilities. here you know one they're connected. which means that there was an organized. effort and somebody missed it initial. indications are that's probably not the. case the other option is is that you've. got two independent attacks you know if. this is really an attack uh. if it's really political in um Vegas in.

Las. Vegas what that would tend to tell you. and especially when you add in the. attack or the murder of the uh United. Healthcare CEO which was you know. clearly in many ways Act of political. terrorism is something changing in the. political atmosphere which is already. toxic that is triggering a certain set. of our population to say you know what. whatever my personal beliefs. are they are so pushed to the edge that.

at this point I feel I've got to execute. or make some kind of a statement a. violent statement. um that I've been sitting on for quite. some period of time. so I think it's too early to tell you. know are we looking at might you know is. this sort of The New Normal where as. politics becomes more toxic in America. that people decide you know to take you. know take violent action on their own we. do know know that violent acts tend to. open the door to other violent acts you.

know people who are inclined to do these. type of things when they see a violent. political act will often you know see. that as like well you know that that. person can do it I can do it uh we just. simply don't know so there's no. indication that you've seen it's I mean. because everything you've said suggest. you you think this is just domestic. entirely there's no foreign actor I. don't I mean inspire. so the guy in New Orleans apparently you. know was consuming Isis type propaganda.

and you know according to the you know. what's in the papers or the you know the. news media had produced a couple of. videos in route to the attack site. making Pro Isis statements so in that. case yes he's um inspired by ISIS a. foreign terrorist group but it doesn't. sound like you know he was getting any. direction or had any help which is its. own troubling hypo terrorism when they. do this on their own and they don't. require a conspiracy it's very hard to.

catch them of course I mean there have. been an early report you know that the. vehicle involved to come across from. yeah uh Mexico y know that seems to. maybe not be true but it does bring up a. an interesting point which is and part. of the reason I think that had a lot of. currency it's very hard to have an. effective counterterrorism policy if you. don't have border control because. terrorism is about people it's people. who carry it out you know in the last.

four years we've had something like 9. million people show up at our borders. unannounced and have been allowed to. come in and. stay 9 million people if you aggregate. it out on a monthly basis is one US. Marine Corps worth of people every. single month for four. years it's impossible to vet or to know. anything meaningful about a marine. corps's worth of people coming into this.

country every month for four years as a. you know Former Intelligence official. myself somebody responsible for. counterterrorism operations in. intel if somebody had told me well we. need you to guarantee that you know. you've got a screening process where we. could look at who these people are so we. know who we're letting in that's. impossible you don't even know what. these people's real names are you don't. know anything about their. backgrounds uh it's an enormous black. hole of.

information. that there's no easy solution if you're. not going to have order controls that. are effective it's very hard to have an. effective CT policy counterterrorism. policy counterterrorism so um you know. you left in 2017 I think you said I did. um but you know your friends who stayed. who were in counterterrorism I mean they. must have looked on with horror at. this I think there have been you know I. don't I've never heard anybody tell me.

that if you don't have control of your. borders then you can have good. counterterrorism policy in fact I. remember when I was in service you know. like many of us I had a chance to. actually talk to people who'd been. terrorists you know honest to goodness. you know gun carrying terrorists and you. you ask them sort of okay of all the. things that governments do that make it. hard for you to do what you do as a bad. guy what are some of those.

things the top two were the number one. was getting across borders where they. ask a lot of questions they said that's. an extremely tough thing to get around. you know that's it's the single easiest. thing a government can. do to isolate itself from at least a big. element of terrorism which is. transational yeah I mean I'm not a. counterterrorism official but that was. obvious to me how could Biden.

Administration officials who abetted. this not know. that I can't think of any credible. counterterrorism official I know who if. asked the question can you guarantee. that you're able to. validate up to 200,000 people a month. who are coming through our. border that's on you know that's not. possible it's simply impossible to know. even what their real names.

are so I I I think the implication is. that you would not be surprised if we. see acts of terrorism in this country. accelerate no I mean without effective. border controls and in a world. where um you America America has. legitimate enemies it does you know you. may people may say well we shouldn't. have made that person or that country an. enemy but we live with the reality that. we. have you're it's a needless and.

avoidable. risk that we've taken that we could. easily do something to prevent and. tighten that up very quickly no it's an. act of hostility toward the United. States I would say to allow that what. are the things that we've done that have. engendered. hostility well so there's you know. there's two ways that you can engender. hostility one you know carrying out. something that's important to you that. you know in the course of events you. know you have to impose your will on a.

foreign country or a foreign. organization because it's in your. legitimate interest and people don't. like it yeah and they don't like it you. know and that's an awful lot of this you. know in other cases you know you. know you know some of the long. occupations that the United States has. some of its foreign policy decisions you. know which you know may or may not be. controversial with the American people. which maybe there's no consensus on will. tend to generate ill will with a certain. percentage of the world's population so.

when you were in all these countries and. I I led how you refer to the region not. the country um but I quite quite a few. countries it sounds like over 28 years. carrying out tasks that you were asked. to carry out um were you struck when you. came home about how little your fellow. Americans knew about how we were. projecting power. abroad so you know the thing about. narrative is that the people who tend to. buy the narrative the most are your own.

people and so what. I it's easy as an American not to really. understand how you are perceived in. another country yeah and you know you. part of what I liked about being in the. CIA was that it gave you an opportunity. to be able to go out and find out what. are these countries and interest groups. truly think about us yes exactly and you. know often you know people didn't want. to hear what you had to say because you.

know you want to believe that okay this. policy that we're pursuing is either at. least if not popular with country acts. is at least accepted by its leadership. and in many cases that's simply not true. now many times in these countries were. either powerless to do anything about it. you know it was something they disliked. but it wasn't going to have a negative. impact meaningful impact um on their. relationship with the United. States but generally speaking I would. say that.

Americans don't have a great. understanding of how the rest of the. world works I mean we're a huge country. you know you don't have to engage with. foreigners a lot you don't have to I. mean you can travel but it's touristic. if you don't speak the language there's. a lot of things you don't pick. up you know part of what and why having. a security service or an Intel service. is critical and in also a foreign. service state department that's good at. its job is you need people who know what.

the reality on the ground is in these. countries so that despite whatever the. popular narrative is that at least the. American leadership is. informed here's what these guys really. think about subject X and if we pursue. subject X further it's likely to have. results that we can't stop or we're. going to have to stop at a elevated cost. to our in our own. interests but you would bring that. information back and you would get.

supervisors just weren't not that. interested in hearing it so I would say. generally within the CIA you know you. got a fair hearing about what it is you. collected now whether or not the policy. makers who consume the information the. CIA produces whether or not they believe. it or they believe it's significant or. they believe it's outweighed or Not. outweighed by other information they. have access to that was really up to. them I'd say something that has changed.

in the last 20 years that makes this. much harder is the rise of instantaneous. information through the internet you. know the handheld uh device you know. that everybody's got were in the past. the security services I think even. globally the IC in the United States if. they didn't have a monopoly on foreign. information they certainly had a. large hardto.

challenge degree of access that nobody. else. did what often H I think happens now and. we've seen glimpses of this you know. even come out in the media is you have. senior leaders of countries senior. leaders in the US who yes they will. consume that President's Daily Brief. that's produced every morning but. they've also got contacts around the. world who send them an email or send. them a video that's right and I remember. several bizarre instances in the early.

days of the Ukraine. war where people were commenting on. videos reportedly coming out of Ukraine. that were actually clips from video. games yes and you know in some cases. these were you know senior people or. senior former people who um who just. didn't realize that you know this wasn't. what it purported to be and now that you. got well they're lying I mean I don't.

understand so Russia has a 100 million. more people than Ukraine in much deeper. industrial. capacity and and it's and and. nationalism which actually matters in. war and so like there was never a chance. I think any objective person would say. that Ukraine was going to like Crush. Russia which was I just don't think it. was going to happen and it hasn't. happened but you saw all these in. adjacent people or members of Congress. who've been briefed you know repeatedly. by the. IC say you know tell you that with a.

straight face and so like where's the. breakdown in information there well. members of Congress are getting honest. briefings they're going to have. a clearer sense of the reality than they. seem to have like what is. that so you know I. think I mean Ukraine's instructive on a. couple of levels you know one if you. think the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

was mishandled by the American Intel. community and it was you know the. information on that think about being. the intelligence guys who told Putin. that it would be a walkover to get into. Ukraine because you know all indications. are he was told we'll be in Kiev in a. week and you know we will be able to you. know within a few months be able to. reimpose some type of a government in. this country that's more to our liking. and clearly you know the ukrainians who. have their own nationalism and it's been.

I think deepened by you know the. violence of this War I mean they've you. know they've really pushed back and it's. bizarrely Vladimir Putin has helped. create more of a Ukrainian national. identity than almost any other Ukrainian. politician's ever done people can unite. against a common foe um you know as to. the long-term consequences wait can I. say sure but it's not I think I think. what you said is fair but it's only one. of the Intel failures if you're the.

Biden Administration and you send your. vice president over to Europe to. encourage in public zilinsky to join. NATO what happened to Bill Burns who. wrote the famous memo who now runs CIA. said if you do this Russia will go to. war I mean it's existential for them yep. you can't put NATO on their borders. where is the Intel briefer who puts that. in the pdb like don't do if you do this. you should know there's a nonzero risk. of nuclear war like where was that guy.

and and we certainly just we don't know. because you know you know currently the. I assume the current Administration is. not interested in you know providing a. what would they call it track B analysis. you know an alterntive analis casualty. numbers I can't find a member of. Congress most of whom you know probably. don't want to know but just give a. straight answer like how many ukrainians. have died oh we don't know that really. you get these briefs all the time in. your little Skiffs going through all. your little Kabuki and you. can't tell me how many ukrainians have. died you sent them to your desk with.

this money and you can't tell me how. many died no no one's ever mentioned. that like what is that yeah I mean it's. clearly a knowable fact well yeah and. you know whether or not you know they. were briefed on it you know they chose. not to talk about it or or they've never. been briefed on it I I personally don't. know I mean I I. think based on public comments from the. incoming Administration. you know I think they've got a very. different plan about how to try to bring. this terrible horrible conflict to some.

sort of a resolution I sure hope so I I. you know I hope so but I just think as. as you're Prosecuting the war and paying. for the war and your weapons and your. advisors are making the war possible. whatever you think of about the morality. of the war or its cause or whatever but. you're definitely driving the war one. side of it don't you have an obligation. to know how many of these people are. dying like I just don't understand that. I mean I I can only say that were I. advising somebody who was on you know. the oversight I would say that know you.

have. a a very broad RIT to be able to ask. anything that you want to ask and I. would think that you know nobody in the. IC if asked would say anything to them. other than okay here's what we know now. maybe they don't know or maybe they. haven't gone out and collected it but uh. in the case of you know you know. casualties in Ukraine I. I'd be surprised if a congressman really. wanted to know that that they couldn't. get that answer or Force the system to.

give it to them and if the system didn't. then that's a problem that's a problem I. just would think that would be like one. of those Baseline numbers like those one. of those Wikipedia numbers it's just. like these are like facts that you. should know like what are the casualty. numbers and and by the way everyone has. an incentive to lie about them always in. every conflict and both sides are lying. about them I get that but my impression. was the agencies are supposed to be like. purveyors of reliable information again. I I would imagine that they must have a.

pretty darn good idea do you know what. those numbers are I've heard various. ones I mean so you know I've. heard on the very low side I've heard. something like 50,000 Ukrainian dead I. don't believe that one I think it's. probably you know more like 120 to 150. dead I think Russian maybe half again. that if not double I think one of the. things that you know you you see when. you go to Ukraine is an astounding.

number of people with you know traumatic. amputations and you know Grievous. injuries. and those you know all these are. indicators of just how bad this conflict. really. is and how and how how it's ground up so. many young. lives yeah. yeah I don't I yeah I agree with that um. is the president's Daily Brief written.

in a way to influence the president one. way or the other it's not supposed to be. and it's supposed to be the job of. whoever is the Director of National. Intelligence to you know to the degree. you know humanly possible. to not put a heavy editorial slant on it. you know whether they achieve that in. everything you know it's a human. Enterprise I'm sure instances when it. doesn't but maybe that's why they don't. want telsey gab in.

there I I think there seem to be a lot. of reasons why they you know they're. uncomfortable with somebody who doesn't. accept the foreign policy consensus and. you know since I wrote that article um. endorsing her you know I've had you know. people I know people I like you know say. that you know why you know why her and. I've had a lot more actually also reach. out and say we agree with you you know. somebody who's going to be skeptical and. challenge the assumptions that we you. know we far or we too easily willing to.

continue to traffic in you know it's we. can afford to have a couple of Skeptics. around how many moments during your 28. year career did you have moral qualms. with what you were asked to do I did not. have a moral qualm with anything that I. was asked to do you know some of the. things you get asked to do are hard oh. yeah you know probably um. you know I'd say in a in a war situation. and I'll I'll expand this Beyond.

Myself you you could find yourself in. situations where you know you might be. supporting one side or another in a. conflict and it becomes the policy of. your country that it's no longer going. to support either side or it's going to. withdraw support you know that that can. be a very bad thing to experience where. you know you've got to deliver a message. that. says I know we were supporting you. before and we've been doing that for. some.

time priorities have changed and we're. not going to support you now that's. completely within the lawful authority. of the director of the CIA the National. Security Council and the president it. doesn't make it easy to do that um but. did I have you know you know was ever. asked to do anything where I said you. know that's completely outrageous they. immoral no but you know maybe maybe they. save those questions for somebody else.

yeah um but you know in my case you know. I I took a pretty aggressive St or view. towards what America's role in the world. should be you know uh like a lot of. other folks you know who went to war. zones you know now we don't equate what. we do to what combat soldiers do but you. know you've got to make decisions. sometimes that affect life and death I. think the first casualty in the war in. Afghanistan was a CI officer it was. Mike's span Mike's ban who was killed. you know early on so yes know him I did. not I did not I knew you know other.

members of his team and I remember the. night when he was killed in kalaj jongi. prison uh you know when a you know when. a prisoner Riot. happened yeah it's a job that has. elevated risk especially if you are. overseas you're in Conflict zones you. know sometimes you know it's hostile. action sometimes it's bad luck you know. you're you're just in the wrong place at. the wrong time. you know something falls out of the sky. and it gets too close to you and you're. you know you're injured or.

killed but it was a great career you. know for a young person who is. interested in the world who you know. sort of wants to challenge themselves. and is willing to make a sacrifice you. know if you can keep your ethics while. you're doing it you know there there's. nothing else like it in the world in my. experience I believe that a lot of. divorce I've known a lot of case. officers are almost all. divorced uh those type of careers sort. of like some of the is that a fair thing. to it's it's and you know it's heavily. skewed towards you know case officers.

and people who have multiple assignments. overseas yeah yeah I'm not talking about. the analysts at home uh yeah I'd say you. know similar to you know the joint. Special Operations Command jck uh which. are you know Delta Force Navy Seals uh. yeah you get you have enormous stresses. on families you you to do this type of. job and to really love it and to want to. do it. you really got to be willing to. sacrifice and that's something that they. don't they will tell you this when you. first.

join you know what's the old joke what. what do young people really know about. certain things you know and as you. matriculate through your career you'll. realize that okay you're going to need. to give this up and this thing might be. important to you personally you're maybe. you're not going to go to that. assignment that you wanted to go to. because they're redirecting you to some. other crisis that you know you were. never interested in having anything to. do. with but you you join to serve at the.

Leisure of your directors and your. bosses and I in my case I never turned. down an assignment you know even though. you know I remember I tallied it up once. of all the places I ever went I never. actually asked to go to any of them I. was just told like we know you put down. you wanted to go to some nice place in. Europe somebody will just tell you well. back to Sudan back to wherever you're. going again what's the worst post you. had so you know Sudan and Africa was.

pretty pretty dicey and you know a. pretty interesting place uh in the early. 90s no you know there's no cell phones. um it's you know it was a hot bed of bad. guy terrorism back in those days you. know Osama Bin Laden was literally. driving driving around cartoon and a. Toyota hux pickup truck um the. government of Sudan was highly.

radicalized and had literally an Open. Door um open door policy towards almost. every bad guy organization on planet. Earth um which were led to some very. peculiar situations where they would I. remember that one point they had a. meeting at the cartoon Hilton hotel. which is near the Nile River and it was. literally a conference. for every jihadist group on planet Earth. so the jihadis prefer Hilton is that.

what you're saying you know it seems. they had good discounts uh you they had. you know and if you're gonna have. non-alcoholic drinks you know super. sugary they had some pretty nice. offerings uh but you know you know it. was a different world on terrorism prior. to 911 I mean the the Sudanese. government in those days quite literally. and this is not an. exaggeration advertised a conf confence. I think it was in December of. 1993 come to carum we're going to be. hosting everybody at the cartoom Hilton.

bring if you want to bring Hamas bring. hasbalah bring Islamic Jihad bring the. irgc. bring farflung. Terror terrorist other groups that you. know almost no one else has ever heard. of and these people showed up for two. days you know to talk about you know. sort of the unfair American. hegemony that you know they felt had. been imposed upon the world did you go.

to the conference I did so what was it. was what did you put on your name badge. uh I should have put like Swiss. delegation or something but I actually I. remember I was sitting next to again the. government at the time in Sudan was. proud of this they thought it was. important it was their way to establish. a role for themselves. and you know I was a young guy I was. like 26 years old and I wound up in this.

conference Hall where the opening chant. is the army of the Prophet is against. the Jew so that goes on for a couple of. minutes to get the crowd going uh and. again you know I'm I'm there not to. advocate for what these people do I'm. there to try to figure out who they are. and what they're up to and if they want. to invite me to their extremist event. because they're proud why would they. they invite a lot of say CIA officers I. don't think didn't put that we didn't. put that on our name card but it was um.

they were okay with foreign embassies. that were accredited their country. showing up and so I remember I was. seeing she went as a US Embassy employee. I was the only US Embassy person dumb. enough to go to this thing and the guy. sitting beside me was the Swiss. charer and very nice guy Char ofer Char. number two guy number two guy in the. Swiss Embassy uh and Switzerland because. the Red Cross had a fairly big presence. there and when this number starts with.

the opening. chant we he and I have been sort of. small talking and he just said I never. forget this I'm sorry my dear boy I hope. you will understand I'm going to go away. from you now like that's all right you. know and that was because you know was. like you know death to America was. always the second chant yeah after that. and. Again The Peculiar thing about it was. despite all that hostility you'd. actually get Sudanese who are in.

congenitally very friendly people yes. even their kind of extremist government. it come up and ask you afterwards like. you know during a break are you having. an okay time you you're getting are you. getting you know a cool drink you know. it's a little hot even though it's. December I'm like I'm good so you know. it was it was a very different world on. terrorism yeah you know these groups. could operate fairly openly and you know. there just wasn't a western response. like there was after 911 and I know I've.

had friends of mine tell me like that. can't possibly be a true story I'm like. you can look it up on the internet you. know I not what I just said but that. they actually had a conference like. this you know they had even Sunni and. Shia groups at the. same at the same thing the same event. ecumenical terrorist group it was was. the most ecumenical group of bad guys. you'd ever meet. so what's the story with the drones over. the United States in December there were. hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of.

unconfirmed but citizen reports of. drones over New York New Jersey. midatlantic. Pennsylvania um at night with lights yep. so why would drones be flying with. lights at night so I think this is a I. think from what I've looked into and. what I've talked to people who I think. know something about this that there's. no foreign threat here this isn't any. kind of hostile action but it absolutely. points out some longer some immediate.

problems that the United States has que. begin with what it was so what what it. appears to be is you know people were re. saying that I'm seeing what I believe to. be a drone in the sky in the evening. hours. now what it appears to have been going. on is there was some fair amount of. misidentification of you know manned. aircraft or other things that people. would report hey I think this is a drone. in other cases you know the Federal. Aviation Administration which controls. the US.

airspace had in the last year I believe. changed the rules that said you could. Now operate a drone at night under. certain conditions if you put lights on. it so it appears that at least some of. what people were seeing were people who. were lawfully accessing the airspace. with their private drone most of time. are probably hobbyist drones um. that people are kind of seeing things up. in the sky that they wouldn't have seen. before what was really peculiar about.

this was the sort of fumbled response. from thetion you're saying it was. nothing I believe and I have no evidence. that this was an Iranian Mothership that. there were you know some kind of. government um sensitive government. operation or testing I mean the. government has plenty of other places to. test drones and if you're going to test. out military drones doing sensitive. missions you're not going to bother to. put lights on them well of course yeah.

and in Ukraine you know where they've. been using like a million literally a. million drones a year you know nobody. puts lights on their drones so if you're. a hostile actor you don't do that of. course not but what this has pointed out. is there's really not a unified plan in. the United States what well right and. you know the more paranoid Among Us like. me might say that like a unified PL you. know not all Unified plans are great but. can we just go back to just cause so you. think every you know the scores hundreds.

of videos of lighted drones or things. lights in the sky at low altitude. hovering those were all hobbyist drones. with lights on them I mean some of them. could be you know there are in the. commercial drone World there do are. drones that are you know that people use. for commercial purposes mostly. photography. um I would say that I have become become. suspicious over the last couple of years. in believing things that I see on videos. just because so many of them are you.

know you know you don't know the. provance of them I'm in the news. business I can promise you suspicion is. is warranted however there's so many of. them that I'm just I'm just I mean I. don't know what they were but I I. personally believe you know that these. were hobby drones or misidentification. of other types of aircraft planes planes. you know uh. helicopter hel you know something else. that's authorized to be there that's. flying but boy the government could have.

really made this much easier on. everybody if they just said we're going. to take three simple easy steps to. resolve this you know one will explain. who's actually responsible for the. airspace because there really isn't a an. easy to understand plan on that too they. could put up a few government drones of. their own to go look and try to see. who's up there third they have plenty of. detection gear that you could use in a. civilian area to determine if there's.

actually a drone up there because drones. have to have a radio connection between. the operator and the person flying it. yeah it's it's it's understandable and. well known what those frequencies are. that type of equipment is available to. the government they could have within a. few days available to the civilian and. it's available to civilians and you know. the government could have easily they. gotten you know made people could have. calm the situation down but they didn't. and it went on for over a month and the.

internet was just crowded with these. videos hysteria was rising and not only. did the government not make at all. levels the state of New Jersey state of. New York and then of course the the. Biden Administration made no effort to. calm people down at all and said. contradictory weird things some of which. were clearly untrue but it was unclear. what was. true I I mean it just seemed like if you. wanted to calm people down is the. opposite of what you would have done I. got the sense that they just didn't take. people's concerns.

seriously again but you know I work in. the Drone industry yes and so you know. from everybody I've talked to who I. think is you know credible and. thoughtful on this none of them believe. that this was some sort of Nefarious. thing that it was a government operation. that it was like you know that they were. looking what was one of the stories I. heard that they were looking for you. know lost nuclear materials Jersey you. know as a friend of mine said how could. you tell you know with everything else. in Jersey you know fair question uh but.

that's not really how you would look for. lost nuclear material anyway and I think. what happens in the absence of the. government providing some kind of an. answer the void has to be filled by. something I'm willing to I mean I don't. know the answer as I've said but um I'm. certainly willing to believe everything. that you have said what I am hung up on. is the government response because at. best it betray at worst it betrays some.

sort of sinister plan to make people. more paranoid which is not inconceivable. but at best it suggests that just don't. care at all what the public thinks about. anything and that's a very bad attitude. that should be punishable by jail time. in my opinion that's anti-democratic. like we don't care I I'll put it this. way you. know I and other folks I know in that. industry. are all a single mind that they could. you could easily know what this was and. you can make you know definitive. statements about it with a little bit of.

Investigation I think the I think they. just didn't take the concern. seriously and when they did try to look. into how to do this they realized that. they have a mishmash of authorities so. just as a very simple one people don't. realize that there's no legal authority. to knock a drone out of the. sky outside of a very few narrow use. cases that only the government has and. not all the government only I but I. didn't understand like as a bird Hunter.

I mean I would if a I would immediately. shoot a drone down over my house I. wouldn't even think about it why did. nobody do that what a nation of and. maybe it was because you know this is. maybe that's why we had the story in New. Jersey and not Texas uh that's right no. that fair. point I you know. I I remember when I understood that. there really is no Authority to knock a. drone out of the sky and in fact if. someone was to shotgun somebody's drone. out of the sky the FAA on paper could.

actually charge you with interfere. literally interfering with an aircraft. in Flight you know which is a rule that. was designed to keep manned aircraft and. you know crude aircraft safe but that. law still covers you know anything that. flies and so you know you are at some. legal Jeopardy you know if the. government chose to prosecute a person. for you know you know taking your. AR15 and you know knocking a drone out. that'd be a very good shot that would be. a very good shot maybe they have the.

lights on it makes it a little bit but. with a tightly choked 28 gauge you could. definitely bring it down so I was not. surprised when some idiot member of. Congress claimed it was from the Iranian. Mothership because they want to war with. Iran because they're paid to want to war. with Iran this is my. view um and they blame everything on. Iran which clearly doesn't want to war. with the United States but whatever but. it does raise the question could a. hostile. Park a ship offshore and attack us with. drones yes they could there's. currently very little defense in the.

United States against a deliberate use. of. drones against any major Target and. that's you know so we you know take a. look at the situation in Ukraine where. they've now literally I think last year. Ukraine used 1.4 million. drones that's the population that's. almost the population I think of like. San Antonio Texas one drone per person. but they used small attack drones 1.4. million of them that's not incl drones.

what are those drones capable of doing. what do they do so those drones would be. about as big as you know um two big. boilers that you might have in your. house could carry you know two maybe two. three pounds of explosives fly anywhere. from 8 to 15 20. kilomet uh 11 to 15 miles something like. that and be delivered precisely within. inches of what you're trying to hit so.

if you were to look at some of these. Ukraine war videos where people are. literally driving drones through the. hatch of a tank from miles. away that's absolutely happening right. now in addition to that you know people. have developed drones that can fly a. thousand kilometers and hit a Target. within inches. ukrainians have actually taken out very. expensive hard to replace Russian. strategic bombers that were on an.

Airfield that would be very hard to hit. in flight but they decided you know what. we're not going to wait for that. airplane to go into flight we're going. to hit it on the ground where it's. extremely. vulnerable that could easily happen in. the United States there is no. comprehensive protection against small. [Music]. drones the US air defense was created. around the concept that we're trying to. stop either scud missile type threats. yes or manned. aircraft I give you a a good you know.

fairly tight scenario so the Patriot. missile which is you know America's. preeminent you know air defense um. system that's deployed all over the. world it's got something like 36. missiles in. it it costs quite a bit of money to have. one of those. systems you could quite literally. overwhelm all of that all of its. defensive systems with 30 or 40 cheap. drones it would cost you less.

than. $100,000 and The Operators of. that defensive system would have to. expend all of their missiles because. they'd see this threat coming and they. shoot you know at least one rocket per. Target and then they're down to zero. that's sort of kind of what you've been. seeing on the Red Sea recently yes which. the US Navy and the Hy militant movement. where the US is spending millions of. dollars per missile strike to take out a.

$10,000 drone you know the the math is. unsustainable and so the US like most. countries in the west are very. vulnerable to this issue right now I. mean when when air power is no longer. tied to airfields and it doesn't need a. pilot you know you've democratized air. power in a way that's very discomforting. to Americans I mean I assume there are. drones with like big payload capacities.

now there are so you know when you think. about you know sort of the drones of the. global war on terrorism the Predators. the Reapers yeah these are proper. aircraft you know they're they're large. but they're also very easily seen on. radar and they're expensive you know. they can cost you know um tens of. millions of dollars to some of them you. know some of the big surveillance drones. are 100 dollar worth of electronics and. Equipment but we've reached a world. where I mean again for the back to the.

ukrainians you know they've been able to. knock out you know five you know two. million3 million do tanks with $11,000. drones because of the Precision and the. lack of defense that you know often the. Russians. have and then you add into you know. robotic what we call military robotics. drones at. Sea where you know it's increasingly. possible and the ukrainians have done. this as well to use a.

$250,000 drone boat to sink a 50 or 60. or hundred million. ship ukrainians have physically been. able to do that on the Black Sea you. know for a country like the United. States which really relies on a. Bluewater. Navy you know we are very likely to face. opponents who will be able to put up. hundreds if not thousands of drones at a. time that would easily overwhelm you. know the defense systems we've got so if.

you if you ever go online and look at I. would call something called Chinese. drone shows this is where you know. they'll have a Chinese company at some. China event in China or around the world. where they sort of uh rent out this. capability where they've got a dragon. flying in the air and maybe it's 4,000. drones or 5,000 drones that they've got. up in the air that they are controlling. all at one time in some of these bigger. shows four or 5,000 flying devices I've. seen.

them what if they put a pound of. explosive on each one of them and then. fire them over a city or fired them at. you know a sensitive military. facility that's well. within reality and it's only going to. get more acute in the coming years and. right now you know the United States is. still despite some efforts you know that. I'll give him some credit for on the. Biden Administration to try to look at. this we woefully behind the Ukraine has.

got a far more sophisticated drone. program than the US does right. now and so does. Russia I mean that just seems like. criminal. negligence you know I think a lot of it. was you know the global war on. terrorism favored very large aircraft. and so small drones were not really a. thing for the US military they were. first used in Warfare I think during. that Iraq and Afghanistan is that not.

right so at you know at scale small. drones no so I mean they just were not. you know they weren't Battlefield. significant for quite a period of time. but I'll you know quick fact you know I. looked this up up until about two years. ago I think 18 months ago no US. servicemen. no Army nobody in the Army had been. killed by an enemy air strike since. Korea when that drone strike took place.

on the Jordanian Syrian border against. US military base that I think killed. four or six US servicemen it's the first. time US servicemen. Army uh Army folks had been killed by. hostile air. action in. decades the 70 years years so I mean the. US which has long relied on the fact. that we completely dominate the. airspace any future marine or Army.

operation will have to factor in that. there are. cheap large numbers of surveillance and. strike aircraft that the enemy have. access. to that really change the calculus on. how much risk we're taking are micro. drones likely to play a role tiny swarms. of large swarms of tiny drones likely to. play a role in future warfare absolutely. I mean I would Define tiny as probably.

you know something that can carry about. a pound of explosives you know there's. really two two things you do with a. drone one you use it for surveillance. yes so you know where the enemy is uh. two you use it as a weapon and. absolutely there's no technical reason. that in the you know the next five or. seven years that an average you know. military unit might carry 10 or 15 small. drones on. it that don't cost an awful lot of money. but can go up and search out enemy.

Vehicles locations fortifications and. strike. them I I would also suggest that. probably on a civilian level and this is. this is my. speculation within 10 to 15 years your. first engagement with law enforcement a. traffic stop will be with a. drone that you know instead of being. pulled over over by a cop who gets out. and comes up and talks to you that I. suspect that it will be every cop car.

every police car will actually have a. small drone in it that they will be able. to sort of send forward once they've got. you in a stop they'll have a camera in. there they have ability to talk to you. through it and that will be your. encounter with law. enforcement and you already see that in. some ways with you know cops using small. drones to go into tactical situations. and take a look around before sending an. officer. in yeah I want to just give nuclear. weapons you know I mean right so people.

are not thinking through the effect I. mean when DOD started transferring. Hardware to police departments I'm as. pro cop as anybody but you could sort of. see the end of civil liberties right. there yeah I mean on this one you know I. mean I think you're talking about the I. think it was at the end of uh maybe the. Bush Administration where there was a. lot of former mil kit of course that was. made available yeah I mean yeah I mean. in this case you know I was just. thinking a civilian version of a police.

drone I mean your your civil liberties. question though. is appropriate because what drones will. allow someone to do is it extremely low. cost yes to put complete blanket. surveillance over any City they want to. well sure this is why they don't care so. to answer your question my question and. both of our questions like why didn't. they care that people were afraid you. know in the run up to Christmas in a. sacred time like people are are anxious. about these lights in the sky and no one.

in the government feels like I need to. calm people down and you know explain. this yeah because they they're looking. at a future where there's complete. control of the population through. technology that's exactly they don't. have to care and on this you know when. people talk about you know civil. liberties concerned this is an actual. one that I think techn Technologic Al. were already there they could do it if. they wanted to any country could you. could put a grid of drones over a major. city and do two things you could cover.

almost every square foot that's. available from you know line of. sight and you could record and keep and. store all that data for all time there. is no practical reason technical barrier. to put a drone up. over let's say you know down. Chicago and keep a drone on station. there day in and day out for years and. constantly.

build a body of video data on that. neighborhood that could be stored for. all time and would be available to the. government or whoever has access to it. that's that's something that probably. really does need to be addressed at some. point sure I mean it may sooner rather. than later there may come a point where. we sort of is I mean I hate crime and I. think criminals should be punished uh. but we may sort of Look Back wistfully. at a time when people were able to.

commit crimes because it's not possible. anymore only the government can commit. crimes sorry to get dark it's all right. yeah I mean you can build a time machine. in the sky with these systems and you. can store the data because it's super. cheap to store data now or getting. cheaper all the. time well you know imagine for example. you have a confirmation hearing 25 years. from now and for 15 of those 20 years.

we've been able to keep drones up over a. city and we've got 15 years of. data you know you know of people who. were just going about their daily lives. who later go on to you know go into. politics who has access to that data. this is why I quit. drinking it's why I never started. smart. um is anybody I mean you're obviously on. the Drone side of it do you work in the.

Drone industry but is anybody in on the. regulatory side thinking about how to. balance this technology and it's some. you know amazing possibilities with. people's right to be human and have. civil. liberties not you know there's a few. sort of lonely voices out there that are. trying to you know get some attention on. this issue. but there and there's some you know some. legal mind starting to think about. it but you know when you think about.

privacy and you know privacy in public. places which is what kind of we're. talking about with drone. data the regulation is not there yet you. know personally I would see that you. know at minimum you would want some type. of a warrant you know so even if you had. drones up over you know an area let's. say a high crime area at some point you. know as you store that data and people. want to re access it who are in. government they should get some type of.

a court order to allow them to go into. that sort of data got F of. court let me laughly maybe have a. different Court than maybe different. Court um and presumably I mean you know. taking video from the sky is not the. only thing they could do I mean they. could do thermal imaging I'm sure there. there's all kinds of audio recording. they could do. I mean you know you can collect you know. cell phone information you know from. this you know obviously from you know. from the sky but you can do that from.

the ground as well I mean frankly you. know if you're a if you're a government. you know Say in any country you know if. you want to you can access your own. telephone networks you know your own. country's telephone systems the the big. privacy change on drones is simply being. able to see privacy you know or pattern. of Life information and people going. about their daily. lives in all aspects when they're out of. doors and you can tell when they go home. you can tell when they go to work you.

can tell where they are you can tell as. they move around the city and again you. can store all that data so when they. tell us when the bid Administration. tells us they know nothing about the guy. who shot Trump at the rally in Butler. Pennsylvania in. July I'm just going to I'm just going to. be skeptical right. [Music]. there when that happened and I what I. couldn't understand and I still don't. diomatic you should be in the CIA what I. couldn't understand is with all the.

Drone Tech. available why doesn't the Secret Service. for all of its. protectees put a small number of drones. over all these events you know you can. put it up hours earlier you know just to. pick up pattern of life and determine. you know are there things that are going. on right now that would guys on roofs. with rifles and stuff you would think. yes I mean that's man with Rangefinder. at magnetometer that you know that I. have to say was among one of the more.

disturbing stories that I've ever. watched unfold you know even as a. private citizen because what was. that systemic incompetence the guy is 22. or whatever and he has no social media. profile I mean I I know less about his. backstory but but we know nothing about. him his motive. nothing you I'd say you know if you were. covering this your case officer in. another country Yeah country but not you.

know not not Sudan okay but like some. other place yeah a more developed. country with technology and a you know a. functioning government and they told you. that story head of state or the aspiring. the Challenger To The Head of State just. gets shot yep and we killed we killed. the per but we don't know anything about. him we don't know why he did it there's. no story whatsoever that would explain. this there are no relevant facts about. the guy what would your assessment be. you go back to your superiors you'd say. what they'd probably ask me to try.

harder if I came up with that answer but. that would that would raise suspicions. about the authorities telling you that. correct it would make you think that. like you know there's really you know. this really can't be your best effort. yeah there's something going on like. what I me. I you know like a lot of things that. happen you know things get memory hold. or you know forgotten about. um again you know I'm not a protective.

services guy but just. the you know the it was one of those. stories that every piece of new. information you get just makes it worse. and worse you know just about but the. failures intentional or not I'm not sure. it matters uh of Federal Protective. Services to protect Trump but I'm. talking about the guy the perpetrator. the man with the rifle who shot in the. head yeah and the fact that we know I. mean I mean you spent your entire life.

gathering information on people right. that was your job right gather. information you would think you could. get more information you think you could. know quite a bit about a person. especially a young person you can right. yeah I mean I I haven't looked into his. background no not him specifically but. yes there's anybody. born since 2000 you know certainly has. you know with the rarest of exceptions. you know they've got some sort of. footprint online you know they've got a. search history they've got uh you know.

telephone. usage it's very hard to not leave what. they call digital. dust in your wake about who you are and. where you've been and what you've. done I would think in a case where you. know a significant crime happens then it. would be in the interest of the. government to collect and make that. known you. know to somebody and in a case where. they don't think there's an ongoing. threat then I would think that there's. you know the bias should be to talk.

about what they. know that's what should. happen what does it make you think that. they haven't done that what's the. conclusion I don't have a great. conclusion on that one I mean is that. one of the weirdest things you've seen. in a. while I would say that if I came back to. my bosses and I was. overseas they would literally tell me. try harder that you can you can clearly. get more information than.

this well I hope somebody uh I hope. somebody tries harder I appreciate. you're taking all this time a pleasure. to be here thank you very much thank. [Music]. you so it turns out that YouTube is. suppressing our show I know shocking. that in an election year with everything. at stake Google would be putting its. thumb on the scale and preventing you. from hearing anything that the people in. charge don't want you to hear but it.

turns out it's happening so what can you. do about it well we could whine about it. that's a waste of time I'm not in charge. of Google or we could find a way around. it a way that you could actually get. information that's true it's not. intentionally deceptive and the way to. do that on YouTube we think is to. subscribe to our Channel subscribe and. you'll have a much higher chance of. hearing what we say and we hope you will.