➡ Wayne Barnes, the author of a book about Robert Hansen, a former FBI agent who spied for the Soviet Union, shares his insights in an interview. Hansen, who was arrested in 2001 after selling secrets for many years, spent 22 years in prison before dying in 2023. Barnes explains that Hansen was a complex individual who always believed he was the smartest person in the room. Despite the damage he caused, Hansen viewed his actions as a white-collar crime and expected lenient treatment if caught.
➡ A former KGB agent defected from Russia in the 1990s, bringing with him internal FBI memos, suggesting a breach in U.S. intelligence. This led to an investigation, codenamed “Gray Suit,” which aimed to identify the mole by tracing who had access to the leaked memos. However, the process was complicated and didn’t yield straightforward results. The investigator, who had previously worked on compromising Eastern European intelligence services, applied similar tactics to this case, using both deductive and inductive reasoning to solve it.
➡ The text discusses the speaker’s experiences in counterintelligence, focusing on identifying and recruiting potential informants within foreign embassies and preventing American defense contractors from selling secrets. The speaker also talks about the creation of a Personnel Security Interview process to vet potential hires, especially those from foreign countries. The speaker then shares a personal story about moving to San Diego for his daughter’s medical treatment. Finally, the speaker is given a mission to identify a traitor within the FBI by attending a film festival and recruiting a Russian who can identify the traitor.
➡ The text discusses the author’s transition from counterintelligence to healthcare fraud due to personal circumstances. It also delves into the complexities of international intelligence work, including the roles of the FBI and CIA, and the challenges of tracking down a potential traitor. The author also shares some insights into the world of espionage, such as the use of coded language and surveillance techniques.
➡ The text is about an agent’s experience working in the FBI, focusing on Eastern European languages. He was considered a high-risk agent who needed a long leash. He discusses the changes in intelligence gathering, moving from human intelligence to more computer-based methods. He also shares his post-FBI career as a private investigator specializing in art theft recovery, and his unique investigative approach.
➡ The speaker, a retired law enforcement officer, discusses the evolution of crime from his early days dealing with mobsters to the present day’s cybercrime. He emphasizes the importance of understanding the motivations and personalities of criminals, whether they’re traditional or cyber. He also highlights the dangers of hacking and the importance of cybersecurity, sharing stories of people who have lost significant amounts of money due to cybercrime. Lastly, he discusses the importance of understanding the human aspect of crime, as it’s often a person with a motive and access who commits the crime.
➡ The text discusses the challenges faced by the author in publishing a book about his experiences with the FBI. The author had to fight for the right to use certain questions he created, as the bureau claimed ownership. The book was heavily redacted during review, with only a joke left untouched. The author also had to get permission from everyone mentioned in the book, which was a difficult task due to some being hard to find.
➡ The book “A Traitor in the FBI” by Wayne Barnes, which tells a fascinating true story about catching spies, has been released and is available at various retailers like Amazon and Barnes and Noble. The book quickly became a bestseller, selling out on Amazon on its first day. There’s speculation that the story could be turned into a movie. The text also mentions the importance of individual worth and dignity, and encourages sharing information to expose hidden truths.

Foreign. Joining us now, this is going to be a very interesting interview. It’s a spy versus spy type of thing. It’s called a traitor in the FBI. The true story of finding Robert Hansen. As many people have said, perhaps the most damaging spy or double agent. I mean, this is. We can talk about what it was that he did and what it took to find him and how there was a cover up in the FBI. As a matter of fact, our guest today is Wayne Barnes and it took him seven years to get the FBI to approve the release of this manuscript.

So this is something we’re starting to see a lot of problems within the bureaucracy, aren’t we? Joining us now again is Wayne Barnes. Thank you so much for joining us, sir. My pleasure to be here. Thank you very much. This is an amazing story. And again, when we look at this, a lot of people are familiar with Jonathan Pollard. How does Robert Hanson figure into this? Except, I mean, Jonathan Pollard was sending information to, to another country, which then used that to send it to Israel, which then used it to get the release of prisoners from the Soviet Union.

But this is a guy who was working for the FBI and he sought out the Soviet Union so he could make money selling secrets. And he went on for quite a long time, didn’t he? He did, he did. He was arrested in 2001 and spent the rest of his life in prison. But the irony is that he spent 22 years in prison, which is almost the identical number of years he spent working as a spy against the FBI. Wow. It’s irony, it’s sad. But he died in June of 2023 in supermax prison in Colorado. Wow. Wow.

How much time? So he spent 22 years in prison, Right? He was in for life, but. So he died in. If you’re in a solitary confinement 23 hours a day, never have physical contact with anybody when he was being debriefed after he was arrested. Well, the moment he was arrested, the first thing he said is, what took you guys so long? Which tells you, tells you his attitude. That was to the SWAT team, which is, you know, does this for a living. My book is the Hunt. In, in most cases you have the hunt, the kill and the feast, right? People celebrate things.

My brain gets to the kill and a SWAT team does that. I go back, I’m on the next hunt. I’m an investigator, I do the hunt for a living. The rest of it is up to the other bureaucrats. That’s amazing. But of course, I guess he would have that kind of an attitude because he sought out the Soviet Union. So he figures, I’m so smart, so much smarter than these guys, they’ll never catch me. That’s the attitude of a lot of criminals, isn’t it? And so he was the one who sought them out. And this went on for quite some time.

You were part of a joint investigation of the CIA and the FBI. They weren’t sure. Sure, I guess, whether this is a guy who was in the CIA or the FBI. Right. Initially that was the case. One of the questions is how we knew that there was a penetration of US Intelligence and most defectors, whether they’re from Romania or Czech intelligence during the Cold War, the first thing they’d say is, you know, we have you penetrated. And then finally, in 1978, General Pacepa from Romania, he was the director of the Foreign Service. He defected to the west.

And that was bad for Nikolae Ceausescu, the president. He was like the number two man. But we asked him about that and he said, now we tell him that in training, nobody has you penetrated. Not the checks, nothing, Gary. We just say that to scare them so they won’t work with you. Yeah, but in this situation, we had some cases that were collapsing for no apparent reason in the 80s, and I was part of some of them, but no one really suspected any one person was doing this. It almost seemed unheard of, which may have been us naive to a certain extent, but there was no.

We have, you know, tests to get in and, you know, sincerity things and patriotism, a lot of things going on. But as it turns out, Hansen was. He had a different kind of personality. There was a. David Charney was one of the psychiatrists, psychologists who was able to interview him for weeks after he was arrested. And his bottom line came out to be a certain level of compartmentation. Hansen would go to mass every morning at 6am he went into the bureau to go to his desk and did things. But behind his eyeballs, in his brain, he was not just controversial, he was a traitor, flat out.

And as he sat down the hallway, he had disregard and disrespect for almost everybody. But you can’t present it that way, but the way a lot of bureaucrats have to operate within bureaucracy, you do what it takes to get the job done, or you just deal with everybody as you can. But even in the hallways of FBI headquarters, they called him the undertaker because he had that black suit and just was a straight face guy, no fun whatsoever. He was compartmentalizing things in his mind, which is a problem. Even when he sat in his jail cell for the like 22 years or so.

He always thought he was the smartest person in the room, even when he was in solitary confinement. It tells you a lot. I guess that is true. If you’re in solitary confinement, you are the smartest and the dumbest. See now you’re logical, you’re a sensible person. His brain, it was like, no matter who’s here, I’m still if someone. Anyway, that was his, his mindset. And one of the interesting things, when he was being debriefed after his, his arrest for, for weeks at a time, he said that all the other espionage people he was familiar with, no one had done the great damage that he had done.

There was other things for shorter lengths of time and whatever. But he saw this as more of a white collar offense. So he felt that if he did get arrested, he would just go to one of those jails which is for like the, the Wall street guys who are doing Ponzi things or whatever where it would be like a country club. That’s what he expected. Or Ghislaine Maxwell. Right? Yeah, right. He got the worst of the worst. Right. Which was appropriate. But he. So he missed that part entirely. And you’re talking about white collar crimes. Now you mention in your book that there was somebody that was an agent, a double agent I guess is the right term.

Somebody that was working for the Soviets and he was actually informing to the FBI, somebody that you were familiar with that was executed based on what he had done. So this is not simply a white collar crime? Oh no, no, not at all. Because I can’t tell you what went through Hanssen’s mind. But there are just as a slight parentheses, there were some Russians who, after the Berlin Wall came down, sort of when the Cold War was essentially over, who wrote books, who had been assigned to the Soviet embassy in Washington. And they like when the book cover, one fellow wrote, you know, I was the one who recruited Aldrich James and Robert Hanson.

But nobody recruited Robert Hanson. He did this on his own. He made his own personal contact. They didn’t even know who he was. They didn’t have a name. They had no way to reach him except for how he decided to. So that’s a problem with now mine is written as nonfiction. It was the first non fiction counter intelligence book ever submitted to the FBI pre publication review. Maybe it’s a kind of a ballsy thing to do, but no one would even dream of it and everything. You just wouldn’t do it. That’s not something that Bureau agents do.

You can write about one big drug case you have in Des Moines or Detroit or one kidnapping case in Tampa. Have at it. But you want to write about something which used to be classified. It takes a long, long time to get through. It wasn’t much that they didn’t want me to write it, but they weren’t sure. I don’t think had it not giving the any credence for the bureaucracy who, who lead such things. They didn’t how to deal with it. It was like a whole different thing for them. And what was and wasn’t classified. So that’s a.

We could get into that. But it wasn’t as much. They didn’t want it published, but they never had it placed. It was a case of first impression as lawyers might say. No one, no one had had this happen to them before and they were stuck with it. Wow. So they have 30 to 45 days to review a book. And you’re right about poetry, fly fishing in West Virginia. Or you want to write about those criminal cases. They want to see them all have at it. But this one, from the start to finish it was locked in as what had been classified secret, very secret, most, most sensitive we had because it was a penetration of US intelligence.

So anyway, the point was we had some cases that were falling apart but that really wasn’t sufficient to lead us to. To go on and one of the witch hunt but just an investigation to try to figure what. Because there’s no lead. My supervisors have described me and I’ve always said that if there’s no lead you just take the. Take whatever you’re doing and splash up the stream turning over rocks until you find something which is a lead to try to make any case work even if all the leads seem gone. That was. The book was almost called Splashing Up Dream to Catch a Spy but too many people didn’t understand the term so I just left it as it was.

Well explain that to us a little bit. So at first you’re not really even sure that this is an individual, you know, one person that doing it or it’s just a. A couple of things that happened. So how did you get involved in this and, and how did you begin? What were the rocks that you first started turning over? Well let. So let’s just go back a step in the. Sometime in the 1990s there was a. A defector from Russia again. They became Russia again after the wall came down, but that was it. I wouldn’t want to try to do the lines in history with what they were and what they weren’t.

At times, when the Soviet republics are pulling away and which ones stayed close and the Warsaw Pact, what happened to them? But what happened was someone defected who had been in the kgb and where we always heard that they said, whether it was the Russians or the Romanians or the Hungarians, that we were penetrated, meaning U.S. intelligence and some would say the FBI. There was just no. No information to go on to show that was so. But this fellow came out, he had been in the kgb, and he not only came out, but he had brought documents with him.

And some of the documents were internal FBI memos. So you may be in the FBI, you may be able to get State Department documents, if your liaison from there or something from a sensitive committee on Capitol Hill, which go spread far and wide to many places. And even in the CIA, there are certain documents which get spread around. But internal FBI memos, nah. There’s only one way you can get that. So let’s assume there were like five or seven memos which came out. So the defector comes out, he says, you’re penetrated, and here is information to show who you are.

So then you have to take it not just seriously. You have to put together a force. And they called the case Gray Suit. And all the other tangents from the Gray Suit were connected to that main case of where penetrated. So if you take each memo and you figure, who saw that in the FBI, if it came in through the New York office or for the Washington office, who saw it at headquarters? And if you go back to the Venn diagram concept, draw a circle around that memoir and everybody who saw it in the chain of command, figure those names, and then you go to the next memo, which is a completely different topic and whatever, and draw a circle around there with everybody who saw it, and then the next one.

And finally, when you put it all together, should be one ellipse in the middle, which has got one person’s name on it. That’s the theory, but it didn’t work that way. For instance, you’re reading the memo on your desk, and you go get some coffee, and the guy in the desk next to you, he looks over and sees what’s on your desk. He takes it, photocopies it, quickly puts it back, and he’s not. His name’s not on the list, so you don’t know that he saw it. I’m not painting it harder than it was, but you can tell from that.

This is a tough one. Yeah, yeah. How long did you work on this? Case. Well, I had been assigned to the Washington field office for 18 years. I had been to. Oh, I had Spanish in high school, French in college. The Bureau gives you a language aptitude test. Because I had romance languages in my head. I scored well in that test. And I was in New York in 1973, and they said, you have the next high school in the language aptitude test. Go to Monterey, California, for nine months and learn Romanian. So I went out there nine months.

I learned it, which meant I was destined to work in the Washington office, which is the home of catching spies in America. Not New York, not anyplace else. New York. So Washington was the place to be. I was on the block squad, which handled Romanians, Czechs, Polish, Hungarians, and the Bulgarians. There were 39 agents in the squad, which was the largest squad in the FBI. And that began my career. We have great mentors. But the interesting thing is the fellows working down the hallway catching bank robbers, they knew nothing about what we were doing on the counterintelligence squads.

They knew as little as Ma and PA Kettle walking down the street on Pennsylvania Avenue, coming in from Kansas knew. I mean, it didn’t go anyplace outside of our doors. So if you had a success, you celebrated within the group. And that was a small group. Wow. Anyway, so. So that. That was. So the. My involvement became. We were very successful at compromising Eastern European intelligence services. We had recruited intelligence officers in Romania, Czechs, Hungarians, Poles, I think a Bulgarian or two, which was extraordinary work by a very special set of people. I mean, it’s psychology.

It’s. It’s chutzpah. It’s you turning over all the rocks. And then at one point, I was transferred to work Soviet cases on the KGB squad that deals with political line. Those are the ones who, on Capitol Hill, meet legislative assistance. So that was when I first started working Russians, which was, I guess, 1981. So that was. But you’re applying the same tactics you had done against the Romanians. It just was against the Russians. But it was the same thing. And the reason is because everybody has foibles in their life. I had done some work with John Douglas.

You would know John Douglas as the mind hunter. He was the show Criminal Minds was based on him. And he was in the Netflix series. I think there’s two seasons out of Mindhunter. He was the first one who went to prisons to interview serial murderers. What was going through the mind when they did this, how they picked these people and, you know, what was your gratis and all that Gratification, etc. So he, he put together how you can solve cases inductively. Deductive is when you have fingerprints and epithelials at the crime scene. You follow certain things.

Someone saw a license plate, but his was inductively, what is the kind of person who would do this kind of offense? And then he went backwards to get to have the two try to meet. And a good example was arsonists. Mr. Hoover always wanted to have the FBI not just be appreciated by law enforcement, but to help law enforcement any way we could. When you see TV shows like a Law and Order sort of a show, they want conflict, but they don’t want conflict among the squad. So they’re bringing in the FBI to national security, steal the case.

And so that’s the conflict. But actually the local law enforcement likes the FBI a lot. We usually bring the money. We have money for title threes, wiretaps and just more sophistication with the like in. In Phoenix, where they should have brought the FBI in and the Guthrie kidnapping much, much sooner. They just had better, better ability to do such things. So anyway, so our case was with arson for. For the example. There are certain personalities in arson. Usually the person who sets that. Not this isn’t one to burn down a building for insurance, but just the person who’s an arsonist.

They’ll set the fire and then they’ll run out, and then they’ll go inside and rescue somebody. Now that the hero, many times a firefighter who does that. But there’s other ones to do strange things. Almost always when you get to a fire scene, you try taking a picture of everybody who’s watching. Because the guy set the fire, is watching the fire. He’s almost always in a picture of everybody who’s watching the fire. You just have to find it. So those were the kind of things that’s inductive, right? That’s interesting. You know, let me just interject here.

We used to help people that did the puppy raising program for guiding eyes for the blind. And if the puppy would fail for the blind, they would give them to the bomb squad or the arson squad or something like that. And that’s what they told us. They said we would always take the dogs back and let them sniff the crowd because usually there was some kind of accelerant or something on their shoes because they had set the fire. And that’s how we’d find a lot of them that way. See, that’s very good of you. That’s the behind the scenes view of understanding these things.

And it’s not that the public isn’t. Isn’t smart. They’re just not cognizant of the pieces of the puzzle that have to go together, which is, you know, I don’t be too graphic. But many times when you’re looking for the serial arsonist and you’re pretty sure this MO Is the same person, whoever it is they’ll find him with, the crowd is here and the bush over here, and he’s standing behind the bush masturbating while he’s watching the fire. And you can catch them doing that because you understand the personnel. Anyway, John Douglas did those kinds of things.

Then we came down to working counterintelligence. How can we apply this? While he has many books out and he’s very, very skilled at this, he does the criminal field, and I was doing counterintelligence. And it started with two concepts. One is, who in the embassy? Let’s call it the Soviet Embassy at the time. What is their personality, which would enable us to try to recruit someone. They’d work for us. Now, bear in mind, there were two superpowers, and it was the Soviet Union and the US Of A. And they thought that belonged to the best superpower.

So why would they want to talk to me? That was a problem. And the other one was, who would be an American who has clearances working for, say, a defense contractor, maybe Boeing, and doing the design for the new B2 bomber wing? What would make him all of a sudden decide to be a traitor and start selling secrets? And the answer was simple. Many problems, once they’re solved, the simple answers was a crisis in their life. And we had one of the intelligence officers, he had a child born. Women have to go home with eight months of pregnancy, but if you have a premature baby, the clock calendars out the window.

So what child was born premature and was in the hospital and needed heart surgery? And the. The intelligence officer knew that if I go home, that kid’s gonna die. They can’t do this over there. So we knew this. So we found the best doctor in the world for this particular thing, and he was the one did the surgery. And the. And the. The. The AD diplomat knew what we had done, and that helped us to recruit him because he saw like this wouldn’t happen in his homeland, but it did happen here, even though we had a greater view of not exactly leverage, but that’s the kind of people we are.

We did that. And then that’s the kind of thing that makes them begin to help you at the same time. The fellow who works for the defense contractor, he would have a crisis in his life, like he has a child who needs surgery. Not a baby, but just someone. He goes to his employer, tries to get money out of his retirement fund or insurance companies, and everybody rejects it. So he realized, I have the keys to the kingdom in my head. So one day he goes to the Soviet embassy, follows a Russian home, and he puts a letter underneath the fellow’s windshield wiper, and it says, I have secrets to sell you.

Meet me on this park bench on Saturday at 6 o’. Clock. And the Russians always have to show up, even though it could be a scam, but they have to show up and he’ll start selling secrets. But the problem for that man is he said, I need $10,000. So the meat on the park bench, and he says, I need the money. And they say, listen, I just pick up these things. I’m the tradecraft guy. We got a guy in the embassy, has to read them to see if they’re real, right? Which is appropriate. But the American doesn’t have any idea that’s coming.

So they agreed to meet in another week or two. And the Russian comes back and he says, I have $5,000 for you. The American says, I need 10. He says, well, what you gave me wasn’t worth 10, it’s worth five. Go get some more and bring it back. Then he’s on the hook. Yeah, but he had a crisis in his life, so either side with a crisis, we’ll have things like that happen. We never would have done it on your own, but circumstances, you know, So I. I worked counterintelligence for 18 years in Washington, and I was a security officer for the field office, which is a fairly big position.

There was an interview program where we’d interview people coming in as language specialists, and we do backgrounds on people. If you, you know, you’re out of college, out of law school, you have a neighborhood, you have friends who recommend you, social acquaintances, you do neighborhood background investigation, you name it. But when a fellow comes in, say, from Afghanistan, and he speaks to either Pashtu or Urdu, and he did, as a linguist, to translate things, you know, there is no background, no place to go. So I started the interview process with. They later called the Personnel Security Interview psi.

And it was a way to conduct interviews. So it’s almost like a verbal polygraph. You start with various categories in their life. Their education, their family, the jobs they’ve had, places they’ve traveled, whatever, and followed along with members of their family, et cetera and you could have someone in American who has maybe traveled abroad for a few months and comes back. They will now get this PSI personal security interview that was, this was 1986. And they’re using that same interview process today, 40, almost 40 years later. So it’s, it’s all over the bureau. There’s people in the bureau who hate me because they hate to do these interviews take two to three hours and you have to get inside someone’s brain.

But nevertheless, that’s a good product. I have a website, waynebarneswriting.com and in there in the press section there’s a 13 minute talk I gave on the origins of the personal security interview. Someone wants to know about how to interview people, how the FBI does it. That’s, that’s, that’s the nature. Anyway, getting back to this, at the 1989, I had a daughter who was born with spina bifida. She would need lower leg braces in a wheelchair. And that was in Washington. And all the surgeons we talked to said the best orthopedic surgeons in the world are in San Diego.

Go there. So I was able to secure a transfer, which was another piece of magic. Can’t do that very often. And so I had. Well, now I have five children. But. So we moved to San Diego and the doctors worked their magic on Natalia. Every other summer she had more surgeries and she walks. I walked her down the aisle. They said she wouldn’t live and wouldn’t walk. And I walked it down the aisle last year. That was tremendous. But it put me in San Diego, Diego in 1990. So the bad guy, whoever the unknown subject we call Mun Sub was, he was still active in the early 1990s.

So if you have a person who’s you think can identify who the, the unknown subject is and you have to pick an FBI agent to approach him. You don’t want to pick the guy who is the spy to approach the man. That’s a bad thing. And all the agents in Washington, how could you vet them without polygraphing everybody and giving away what you knew? So I had left in 1990, so I wasn’t the bad guy. So one Sunday morning in February 1998, I got a call from a dear friend, Gene McClellan. I worked for the years in Washington.

And he said, Mike and Dave and I are coming out on Tuesday. Don’t tell anybody we’re coming. And no one in the counterintelligence squad. I was working healthcare at the time. Not much counterintelligence work in San Diego. Compared to other things. He said, don’t tell anyone we’re coming. Not your wife, not your friends, not your supervisor, nobody. That’s. We call it undercover of darkness. So three senior agents from this area flew out to San Diego. We met, and they got right down to business. They said there’s a spy in the FBI. And we know that there’s a man coming to a film festival in Santa Monica in two months.

And we know he’s one of the Russians who was assigned to the US in 85 or so. And he knows the identity. He knows what the face of this man looks like. So I want you to go to the film festival, get some kind of backstopping cover that would be appropriate to be at a film festival. Go to the festival, find him, meet him, befriend him, recruit him, then show him a dozen pictures of senior FBI agents, all of whom we suspect might be the traitor in the FBI. And then have him point out a photo.

And that was my mission possible. And that’s. That’s. That’s what the book is about. That’s very beginning of the book. You have to understand that again, superpowers. And who would. Who would do what? But goes back to John Douglas and getting personality. John invented profiling. So he was good. But it helped all of us with what we were doing. But what would make. What makes the man tick? Would he be a traitor to his country? The Berlin Wall came down. It’s now Russia, not the Soviet Union. What kind of allegiances are in your mind? That kind of thing.

And then how to go to a film festival as John Q. Public instead of a movie producer or director or writer. But so the case was set. That was my part of the. It was. How did I get involved? I had a daughter born with a disability. I had a transfer to Sandy. I thought I left my counterintelligence life completely behind. Like that was gone. I was working health care fraud because I was one of the prime people to begin working health care fraud because of not just my five children, whether I understand health insurance, but with her disabilities, I really understood health insurance.

So if you take a new age and you say 26 years old, never been married, has no kids, compared to what I knew about in health insurance, I was. I was right to be the guy to do that. So we had some great cases and. But so no one on the squad, I felt so bad. My supervisor on the health care squad, they had what we call paper. The verb to paper. That is if I. If I flew to someplace else in the country. I flew to Europe. If I went to Los Angeles for a week or two, you know, how.

What, what did I go on? It couldn’t be a health care case. We couldn’t write down a counterintelligence case because the bad guy at headquarters. At this point, computers had become in season. You could search the FBI’s computer system to see if there was a case mounted against him. That’s right. Wow, that’s interesting. So how long did it take you to start to narrow this down? Did that break it when you found this guy at the film festival and turned him. No. Again, it’s like I say, more than a memo. There were other leads being covered with other people.

There were other Russians who they believed knew the identity of the man, whether it was a picture, a voice, or whatever it was. So the things happening all around the country, all around the world, actually. Europe and other places. So if someone. Someone went to London, for instance, a Russian, who we believe was on our list of people who would know the identity. So maybe work counterintelligence in the embassy, they’ve had access to doing a dead drop with somebody, maybe seeing them. If it was a dead drop is where you’re dropping a rock in the woods and it’s got secrets inside of it.

Instructions for the next meet, that kind of thing. Could be in a park, under a bridge. You know, the classic Russian looking things. You know, the bridge of spies, all that stuff. So I wasn’t the only lead, but I was a very good lead because we knew this guy knew what we knew he knew. So other things were happening massively. And when you say other things are happening, you had. The CIA was involved in this as well, Right. Wasn’t this a joint thing between the CIA and the FBI? Well, it. It started that way. But when.

Not to be redundant, when documents showed up, which were FBI documents, we, the Bureau. I say we. I’ve been out for 26 years, but my brain still says we. I apologize for that. It’s like a. Like my son who roots for the University of Miami, and he keeps saying we, which is good. But he’s not on the field. I love him dearly. That shows what kind of spirit he has. So the Bureau produces what’s called a letterhead memorandum. Letterhead. And then it’s just a narrative. Whatever the debriefing was from whoever it may have been, that’s a story.

Okay? We disseminate that on a counterintelligence basis to other agencies, NSA and CIA and State, whatever, in the criminal world. Is a prosecutorial report which is go to an AOSA Assistant U.S. attorney to prosecute. Other than that, we don’t give stuff away. So if somebody has an internal memo from the FBI, you didn’t see it on somebody’s desk at Langley. I was just wondering if the CIA, you’re talking about other, you know, in other countries and that type of thing, is that something be investigated then by the FBI, or is it the CIA that would start trying to make contact with these other people in other countries? Oh, if, if it happens in the U.S.

the FBI has got primary jurisdiction. If it happens abroad, if you want to approach a Russian, for instance, who’s going to, to London, you can’t do that without coordination with the CIA. They, they own the world outside of the US on an intelligence basis. It’s the same way if I need to cover a lead in Oklahoma City and I’m in San Diego, you have to tell the special agent in charge and the appropriate squad there what’s coming. Like, I have to interview this guy in person. I’ve interviewed these 15 people and I can’t ask you to do those interviews or read them and get it.

Well, I’ve got to come personally and do that. You have to notify the territory you’re going. Whereas in the international basis, if you go to London, CIA isn’t just there, they’re running the show. So that’s important now. Once you found the sky, you start narrowing it down. I think you said that the CIA had their own suspect that they wanted to follow. And you ran into some problems with the upper levels of the FBI, didn’t you? For a while. I don’t want to make this personal and I appreciate you having me on your show. I was when I was first working counterintelligence in the Bureau on a working Romanian intelligence.

But on the squad we all had checks, polls, Hungarians, the other. We all worked all of it big show closely, worked it. If there was a embassy reception at the Czech embassy, this was in 1977 or 8, the Bureau Radios were not yet encrypted. So on top of the Soviet embassy, there was a one antenna with the three prongs coming down. And that was the one that listened to the FBI radio channel. That was the one which specifically listened to what in Washington was called KGB770. We gave the call letters. You have call letters for your stations.

We have call letters and our call letters for the Washington field. Some humorous genius decided we should be KGB. So we’re KGB 770. And in Russia, they don’t even like to say the letters. And the guys listening to the FBI channel keeps hearing kgb and they cringe because that’s a bad thing for them. So we would do surveillance. So if there was a Czech embassy reception, you want to know where license plates, where they’re coming from. It’s not against Americans. It’s trying to find who the contacts are and follow those leads to see what the nature of the business, whether they’re buying grain or selling something, whatever it might be.

So if we had an embassy like the Czech Embassy, where there was a reception, some kind of gathering, a gala occasion, wonder who was there. You didn’t want to go in the air as Americans speak in English, and you didn’t want to have the guys who were Czechs, so they would solicit four or five Asians who spoke Romanian, and we would do the surveillance at night and calling out numbers, whatever, in Romanian. So the Russians listening to it, think something going on with Romanians who actually doing surveillance from the Czech Embassy. Now, when I looked up Robert Hansen, one of the things I said was he.

He exposed to the Russians the fact that the FBI had put an eavesdropping tunnel under the Russian Embassy. Yeah, tell us a little bit about that. That was a case for Monopoly, which was very, very sensitive. I didn’t know anything about it at the time, and that was devastating. So, you know, it’s spy versus Spy. I mean, the idea, well, if I was going to call this book the Last Spy Theory, is he was the last spy from, quote, the Cold War. But they’re always spies. Yeah, that’s it. Oh, yeah. So you don’t have to have a Cold war or even hot war.

It’s just they always. You see a weakness someplace or someone that might be able to help you, someone who’s getting the surgery. I don’t want to sound too, you know, harsh about it, but you use the tools you’re given to your best ability. So my original supervisor in Washington was a guy named Don Grunsel, and he was famous, but he had 39 agents on the squad. Your span of controls managers, 15 humans. And he was the only one could have possibly run this show. And there were six or seven agents who spoke languages of Eastern Europe.

Czech, Romanians, Poles, Hungarians, Bulgarians. All of us spoke a language of Eastern Europe, whether we learned at the Monterey Language School where you were immigrate, your parents learned it through there. And it was like a mini un, except we all got along, unlike the un so the Gruntle he stood beside me one day and he said, you see that agent over there? He’s doing work at his desk. He’s, you know, decent, neat person. He said he’s a, he’s a low risk agent and he has a, you know, he does well with a short leash. And he looked at me and he said, you’re what I call a high risk agent and you need a long leash.

And he said, I forgot I got to keep that leash tight because you keep running it long. Okay. Supervisor said that to me. And that’s pretty much, Pretty much was my career. I was happy to have the career I did. It was most extraordinary. And I’m happy that I was able to write this book and get it through pre publication. Like I say, after seven years. But it really deserves to be seen. It’s part of US Intelligence history. FBI intelligence. Yeah. And of course, what you’re doing, there’s a lot of human intelligence in that, a lot of psychological profiling.

As a matter of fact, you know, you’re saying that the system that you came up with was kind of like a psychological lie detector test. I thought it’s probably a lot more successful than a lie detector test is because they’ve got their issues as well. But it’s very different now, isn’t it? You, you talk about the fact that, you know, the FBI’s wiretap network has just been hacked. So now things have moved a lot more towards computer hacking and things like that, haven’t they? Or have they? Well, I left before there was a significant effort with cyberspace in the 90s.

I was using a. At the film festival, for instance, in the evening. Am I answering your question? But to have this setup for it, sure. After I would meet with the Russian Ivan, I would go back to my house. This is in Los Angeles now, in Santa Monica. I would go back to my computer on my laptop, Toshiba, and I would type a memo. I would print it out in the Holiday Inn Business center and then make sure there was nothing left in the barrel, no other information. And I can print out. And then I take it to a FedEx.

I fed, exited to my con, my colleague Gene McClellan in Alexandria, Virginia. He’d get it overnight and take into the office to work in their skiff, which is the secured facility room where they were working because we couldn’t put any paper in the system. So everything came hard copy for me. So that’s another example of the uniqueness of this particular case. And that was remained in the skiff and they Couldn’t even scan it in. I mean, I would. They could have sent it from Los Angeles division or San Diego, but it would be in the systems.

Even back there. They couldn’t. So this one in my case went on for nine months until we came to a certain kind of conclusion, but which I’m happy to have people read about because it is an extraordinary circumstance. But. So when the case was over, I think those memos all still sat on the table in the corner, and they never got scanned. And so I did a Freedom of Information act request for this case. I have a pretty good memory, and I remember an awful lot, but I wanted to have, like, a memo to look at.

And I sent the information act request in and six months later came back, said, we got nothing like that. We don’t have it. So I. It never got scanned in, as far as I know. Because again, you can’t have the bad guy search the records for him. Sure. Yeah. Well, you know, that. That brings up the. The issue of the FBI documents of the Epstein case, as everybody’s wondering about this and, you know, what is your take on that? It’s. You think those things will ever be found or have they been destroyed a long time ago, if they ever had custody? I retired in 2000, so I’ve been out for 26 years.

Sure, yeah. Think of what you were doing 26 years ago and what you’re doing now. That’s a far cry. I don’t know what happened, but I know that I now as an investigator. I’m a private investigator licensed in Florida. I live in Fort Lauderdale, and I’ve done a lot of art theft recovery, stolen Impressionist paintings. And when insurance company AIG and Lloyd’s of London, they’ll work on something for two or three or four years, and finally someone will say, hey, how about that FBI guy? He got painting stores. I’ve traveled abroad with Bob Wittman. He was head of the art theft team in Philadelphia in the 90s, and he wrote a book called Priceless, about recovering art and stolen Rodin sculpture and that kind of thing was the bestseller in 2010.

Priceless. We were at places like Romania looking for stolen Chagall paintings. But the idea is how well you investigate and you see things others don’t necessarily see. For one, one particular case, there was a Chagall aboard a man from New Jersey, a big yacht, like a steamboat. It was being refurbished, and the gentleman died. His son took over, said, I don’t want any paintings. Like, get rid of all the art. Not an art guy. And so they sent a transparency, which would be like a slide, to the Chagall Committee in Paris, where two or three of his granddaughters were Chagall’s granddaughters.

They would authenticate paintings. And it went on six months. They got no response. And they called the committee and said, what happened? They said, well, we don’t know what you have, but two weeks ago, the guy who had the original painting came in. We authenticated the painting. So whatever you got as a forgery, right, that’s a bad thing. Anyway, for years, interviewing every. All the security people, the fiction people, turned out someone took a photo of them over the master bed, and then they had someone forge it. And then they put it in a box to look like a sink replacement and bring it in and switch the paintings out and take the box out with the original.

And you don’t know it’s a forgery until the Chicago committee tells you. That went on for seven or eight years. So around 2000, eight or nine, somebody called me, and I had done some previous recoveries, and I went through 10 banker boxes of information, all the investigations in, you know, French and Italian and whatever. And so I called the Chagall Committee on a. Almost on a lark. And. And I said, when someone authenticates a painting, do you like. Does you charge for that? And they said, yeah, €500. So I said, well, the guy had the painting authenticated, did he? You charge him? And they said, yes.

I said, how did he pay you, assuming he gave them euros on the barrel head? So we gave us a check. I said, do you have copies front and back? I said, yeah, we do. So they gave us a check, and there was a guy’s name and his account number in Romania. Fortunately, I speak Romania, so that was handy. But. So that’s turning over the rocks in the stream. There was no lead. That wasn’t a lead. Wow. It was a dead case for seven or eight years. So Bob Whitman and I, we went to Romania to find the guy who stole the Chicago.

We had driver license photo. He had gone to one art store gallery in, I think, Marseille to try to sell it, but it was asking to sell it for, like, one third of the value. They thought it was suspicious, you know, so somebody had seen him, and his driver license photo matched that guy. So there was other assistance with other agencies, like, you know, the police. But. So that’s walking upstream, turning over all the rocks, and when there are no rocks, they keep turning over the rocks. So that’s investigative philosophy. Well, truly, it’s fascinating, this FBI wiretap network that was hacked.

Tell us a little bit about that. Is that like all of the records in a central location about everything that all the people that they’re investigating at some point in time? That’s one of the things when I look at what is happening, we see everybody getting hacked. I mean the CIA gets hacked. They get their Vault 7 software. That is their software they use to hack other people and to pretend that they’re different. You know, they’re speaking a different language or whatever. Their tools got hacked. It’s not just them getting hacked, but their tools, their hacking tools got hacked.

And so we see this everywhere. It seems like everybody’s putting everything now on these centralized databases. Is that why the FBI wiretap network is really about. Well, I’m not in the cyber world. I mean I do what I need to do for my work and for the investigations. But all that started after I retired in 2000. In my bureau there was no politics. I knew the guy when I was a brand new age. In 71 I met the guys who were involved in Mob Barker and Babyface Nelson. That was the old timers then and then when I retired.

Now I’m the, I’m the cold warrior. I’m the old timer. Yeah. So the new cyber people are doing it today. My sons are involved with technical things and computer matters in a very, very big way. Mechanical engineers and people work involved in the security systems. I know some people are among the best in America doing certain things like if you want to get into the cell phone, which they wanted to get in for the case and I think Riverside, California, where the either Apple, whoever it was, wouldn’t help them break into the phone because they don’t make it look like they’re helping.

But it’s law enforcement you find you’re going to get your murderer. Excuse me, this is a normal case, but anyway, so how you get into these things is difficult. I understand they may have gone to the Israelis who helped with that. But it’s a shame when the US intelligence which actually has a not just good intentions, the only intentions keep our survival going. Well, you need to get certain information. Someone’s giving away secrets. You need to find out who they are and whoever it might take. But you just have to have your best and brightest be better than their best and brightest.

And the hackers, I wish you know the people who are doing this for a living, the hacking, whether they’re calling you and getting your mother’s or like the movie the Beekeeper with Jason, what’s his Name where the older lady has a fund that she’s holding $2 million as a part of a church something, and it gets hacked and stolen. She kills herself. So Jason goes off as a, you know, retribution. People would do much better if they did positive things instead of stealing money from people, they could other things with their computer knowledge. The same way with current circumstance you like to have, you know, like take a baseball bat to some of the people who are doing this, because they could be doing other things.

Sure. But it’s an easy way of life. I think they’re raised with no principles. I think they were raised the wrong way. I was raised inner city Philadelphia, and boy, I could have taken left turns, right turns, off the beaten path all the time. I’m happy my parents raised me the way they did. So it’s turned out as it has. Yeah. Yeah. Well, you know, I just look at this and it’s like we want to put all of our eggs in one basket. And then that creates this target for the bad guys to go after. And I’ve talked to a friend of mine that does cybersecurity stuff and everything.

And there’s always. From his perspective, he’s like a white hat hacker. People hire him to find vulnerabilities in their system and then let them know about it. Frequently he got fed up with it because he said, I’d go to all this trouble, I’d find the vulnerability and I’d tell them about. They’d do nothing at all about it. And so from his perspective, the more he looks at it from a technical standpoint, the more he sees the human aspect of it. And that’s the issue, I think, because it’s always going to go back to a human good or bad that’s going to be pulling this kind of stuff.

So he looks at it and the first thing he starts to do is to look at who’s got a motive. He does the same kind of stuff that you would do. Right. Who’s got a motive to do this? Yeah. Is this an inside job or something like that? And I guess that’s the question. I mean, when you look at a situation like a hack of the FBI or the CIA or something like that, is that, of course you’re not on the inside now and you don’t know that, but I mean, would that be. The way that you look at this is like, let’s rule out an inside job.

You know, that’s. That’s putting that in there. They can’t preclude it. They can only preclude it. And my understanding with what happened with the, the FBI recently, it wasn’t the FBI. It was a third party that had access to, to the FBI computer and that went in through there. The original movie where Rami Malik was in, which was on a Netflix type series, he was, he was a hacker who did such things. And their, their situation was that they knew a guy in the company they wanted to hack into. He was a certain kind of music fan.

So they created a disc which would be new songs to the kind he liked, and they gave it to him, like on the street, just the performers. And he stuck it in his computer. In there was the bug, was the Trojan horse, which is going to infect everything and, and get what they needed their back door in. It happens all the time. It’s just really a shame. Oh, yeah. In the last two weeks, I’ve had two situations where people I personally know have called me and said, you know, I, I should, I should have called you sooner, but I, I think I’ve lost a lot of money.

Well, how much do you think you’ve lost? Well, probably a million dollars. Whoa. And someone calling and saying, I’m in the FBI, we have a case, we’re working and we need your help. That’s not how the FBI works. So you hate, you see it all the time, and it’s just so, so sad. Yeah, yeah. If I lost a million dollars, I’d be on the phone to you right away if I knew you. So. Yeah, and I’m happy to help. I mean, that’s what I do for a living. Yeah, well, you know, like you’re talking about this contractor that’s there.

One of the things that my friend said is that he said there’s so many back doors to everything. You know, the developers have usually got a backdoor. Usually the owner of the company’s got a backdoor. The government frequently insists on a backdoor. There’s all these different backdoors. It’s usually somebody who’s got some standard motive like you’re talking about, they need money, they want revenge or whatever it is, and they’ve got a backdoor access to it. So he says that’s where he always starts. Who’s got the back doors to this instead of who’s got some kind of exploit that’s going to come at it from a software standpoint.

So sometimes, usually it’s the simplest, most direct route is just somebody with a motive and a back door. Right, that’s, that’s a tangent. That’s not almost like the inductive investigation, find some individual. I mean, I was involved in recruiting several, I’m very proud and happy to say several intelligence officers from different countries. And each time it’s, it’s what makes them tick. So just as a last example regarding what you mentioned about the delay from pre publication review in, in 1977 or eight in the Washington office, we had some undercover cases. We had voluminous information about our targets, who we’re in contact with.

But once you get a lot, which is the goal, getting a personality, what do you do with it? I mean, how does that help you? So I, I said I. We didn’t know three things about these people. What makes them laugh, what makes them cry. And does he love his wife? And if you talk to somebody. I was with a Russian who was driving a car, plain old embassy car was in his passenger seat. And I asked him, I said, like, what would really make you happy? I mean, just happy. We had a son, he had a family.

And he stared straight ahead, not seeing the road, and he grabbed the steering wheel and he says, and Mercedes Benz. He was in a mechanical engineer. He wanted him. That was it. That would be his goal. What makes him laugh. Right. And things will make you cry. That’s, you know, sadness in your life. But the, the interesting wing with. And do you love your wife? You’ll find a person who you may meet at a bar every Tuesday night for after work, and he thinks you’re a lobbyist or he thinks you’re a political act, something, something else.

And they’ll have a. We’ll have a friendly conversation in a cover position. And he’ll say, for instance, you know, my uncle, my, my wife’s uncle died and oh, it’s a shame, you know, back in Moscow. And he’ll say, that’s one less person I have to worry about. You don’t do this for a living. But picture this for a second. Why would you think that? Yeah. Because someday you might plan to defect. Who will be harmed if you defect? Well, people who are left behind. That’s why they want to have many relatives, which is leverage to keep you.

But that means in his mind, he already thought about leaving. Yeah, everything is defecting. If you say, that’s one less I have to worry about, that’s a big deal. Is that where they. Do you love your wife? Is that where that comes in? Because if, you know, are they going to be willing to leave their wife when they defect? Is that so? It works two ways. One of the. This is covered in Part of the chapter in the book where you’re reflecting on females involved with Russians. And, and one of the issues is if you love your wife and you can’t defect without her, your two kids and all her parents.

My parents are dead, but her, her parents, that’s fine. If you love your wife, then you have to figure how you get them out, how they get to visit to Norway or something. Okay. However, there are people who have defected where the defection was their de facto divorce. And they hated the woman. They had to get rid of her. How you work the case, that’s entirely different thing. Yeah. Does he love his wife? So those two questions were important. Just to add this. And if you don’t see the humor in this, I’d be surprised. But when I was.

When after, after three years of the pre publication review, having had the book to review again, they get 45 days. After three years, he finally sent it back to me. And every, every line. A felt tip went through every line. Not like a computer program that zapped through them. Wow. And it was one half of one page they didn’t declare classified, but all the entire rest of the book. And it was a joke. So I was at lunch with a Russian. He told a Russian joke about Russians in a negative way, humorously. So I told a lawyer joke.

I was supposed to be a lawyer. I went to Villanova Law. I passed a New Jersey bar. I was in California and San Diego 25 years later, 96. I passed the California bar. Ask some lawyers if they’d like to take the California bar after they’ve been out of law school 25 years and see what they say. So I was back and I was a lawyer. So I told a lawyer joke. You know, Hindu, a Jew and a lawyer driving down the road, car breaks down. I mean, like civil lawyers walk into a bar, one of those.

It was a funny joke. But the bureau decided it wasn’t classified. It was funny. That’s the only thing they let fly in the whole book. How did you get past that then to get the book published? And that’s halfway up. I flew up there three times in the next four years. I argued with him. And one lady, a nice, nice blind lady, headquarters. She was in charge of a dozen people sitting around a conference room table, which was like 12 against Wayne, which wasn’t good. And, and she said, like these questions, like, like, you can’t put those questions, those three questions.

In 1977, I made up those questions. How to assess people with how much information we had. When you had it. And she said like, you can’t say those questions. So like, why is that? She said, because the bureau owns those questions. I guess psychologically that’s how we assess people. So I said like, I have a son worked for Lockheed Martin and on the exoskeleton project, I see he’s got 11 patents. He said patents are in his name. But Lockheed Martin knows those patents because he’s, you know, the guy there. It’s not the same thing. Like you can, you can hire a guy to teach you how to pick up girls in a bar.

And that’s psychology 101. That’s, that’s what I would do. You can’t have three questions be classified. I said, I, I can learn this. You know, you can’t do that. So finally they, they, they, they didn’t like it, but they had to agree. But it was like they had De Beer had a patent on those questions. Wow. Wow. So that, that’s the reason. It just took a long time. But they had never had this. I’ll give him, I’ll give him some, some leeway because no one had ever had the audacity to send. And you can send a fiction FBI counterintelligence tale, but if you send in something which fiction like hey, that didn’t happen, but you can write something which is real and change the names and make it fiction.

But here, because this is part of FBI history, this, this particular case is so, was so extraordinary I had to write it. And I guess one of the last things they said is we need permission of everybody who’s still alive. A lot of people died right. Who are alive in the book. We needed to get permission to use their names. That’s not a thing. So I found them all and some of them were really off the grid. And the interesting thing was all the people who had doing surveillance on the, on the aspect in Los Angeles watch when I wasn’t around watching Ivan to see who he had contact with and what else happens.

The whole coverage that was, you know, it was an unheard of thing to happen because they didn’t know that we’re watching this Russian because he knew the identity of a spy in the FBI. They knew there was just another Russian were surveillance. They’d done that during the Cold War. They do doing it there. Yeah. Nobody knew that the ultimate motive was for this case. Yeah. Except a very small group of people. Yeah. That was even tough. Well, you know, it’s kind of interesting. This is a fascinating book. And if this gets picked up and turned Into a movie.

They’ll fictionalize all this stuff, right? That’s what we always see with a true story. It’s like it’s based on true story, but all the names are fictionalized or whatever. So they’ll go back and do their version of redaction. I guess. I don’t, I don’t have a big ego. I’m proud of what I’ve done and the book. You know, I had a dear friend, he said he really liked the book. And he said, and you even came off as humble. I thought that was a nice thing to say. Well, things happen. You try to get the job done.

Isn’t like someone like I need. Like I say I do the hunt, do the kill, and I never do the feast, ever. The feast is for the egomaniacs. Right. I don’t do that. I go back and do more hunt, which is. Which is the deal. So to have the book have some success would be really good. But enough people have read it and they always say like who will. The first question, who will play you in the movie? That. That’s a lot of steps beyond you have a book, it’s like it has to be successful, has to be interested in by somebody in Hollywood.

They have to get far. And I said, well, you tell me like I’m From Philadelphia, I’m 6 1. I was 50 years old at the time. And how many people fit that? Well, Bradley Cooper is the only one off and fits that. And they said that’s, that’s it. So but it wasn’t a younger person. And the Russian couldn’t have dealt with someone who was an Asian who was 35 or 28. I mean he. And with his age had to be in the bracket. We had to be have the mindset. And we had an expression ID TS fao, which is I do this for a living.

I mean this is what you do. If you really do it, people wouldn’t understand it. It’s a small set of people who comprehend all of what’s going on here. And hopefully this book is a window to other people to see. And the last objection I knew running out of time. The last objection that the pre publication people had again, not knocking them. They had a job to do. I understand that. But they were. Had parameters that they couldn’t, they couldn’t fix or move back. What did they say? They wanted me to get permission from everybody to, to give it.

And well, well yeah, I gotta say that for it to go for seven years for you to get it back at about the Halfway mark at three and some. It’s three years plus and everything is redacted except one joke. I don’t think somebody that doesn’t have the kind of tenacity that you have as an investigator would ever be able to get this thing published in the first place. So that’s kind of. My girlfriend calls us Dogmatic persistence. Yeah, that’s right. Absolutely. Bulldog. One of the last things they said. Again I have to say that with humility.

Gene McClellan was my main contact. I worked with him for years in Washington on the kind of intelligence squads and he was still. He still had clearances in Washington after this thing was all over. So they went to him and they said we don’t want Wayne giving the KGB or the S. FSB the svr, whatever they’re being called today. Internal extra Russian intelligence. We’d want Wayne giving a manual to the FBI about how the. To the KGB about how the FBI catches spies. That was the thing. So I will forever be indebted to Gene. He said this isn’t how the FBI catches spice.

This is how Wayne catches spice. So. But that’s. But it was a very special case that needed things way outside the parameters. I felt so bad for my supervisor. I mean he was a nice guy but you know I did all this stuff with the healthcare squad. I had great cases in case when the court doctors went to jail and the 800 pound gorilla is over here invisible in the corner that no one else knows is there? Yeah. So that was a special. That’s a fascinating story. Interesting. I think everybody be interested to read this. Is this something that you sell directly or people pick this up at Amazon? Oh it goes well.

It’s a traitor in the FBI. The hunt for a Russian mole. I know there no one else is on video but you can see it, right. The traitor in the FBI. The hunt for a Russian molecule. And it came out April 7. There had been pre order where pre publication orders were available before then. But it’s available on Amazon, Barnes and Noble, target Simon and Schuster, the ultimate publishers. Republic Book Publishers is my publishing house and Alfred Regnery is the president and I happened to meet him and that helped along to get the. The book published.

So right now it’s on the afternoon it first opened which was last Tuesday. That’s one week ago it shot to number one in the new releases. I bet any kind of book which was a big deal and then they sold out by 3 o’ clock at Amazon. Wow. Amazon doesn’t. Amazon doesn’t sell out. Oh yeah, yeah. It’s a fascinating book. And of course, I always ask in case somebody is selling something directly, but you can find this book wherever books are sold. A Trader and the FBI by Wayne Barnes. It is a fascinating story. I’m sure everybody’s going to enjoy reading this and I bet anything you’re going to have a movie out of this.

Wayne, I would. I would love to. Yeah. I tell you, Hollywood could use a good story. They seem to be. They seem to be hitting a dry well for a long period of time now. They could certainly use a good plot. I have a daughter, works in the movie industry as an editor editing films. And she says, yeah, everything comes through with either part number seven. Yeah, that’s right. A variation of something else, you know, which is, it’s a shame, but this is, this is different. And it’s always the true stories are the most interesting ones because they don’t follow this pattern that people use out there.

You know, they like to. It doesn’t fall into this rut. And so it’s a true story. It’s a fascinating story. I’m sure people love to read this book and we’ll all wait to see what they do with it in terms of movie. Hopefully they don’t mess it up too much when they do that. Thank you so much for joining us, Wayne. Appreciate it. My pleasure. I’m happy to be here. Thank you very much. Thank you. It’s fascinating. The common man. They created common core to dumb down our children. They created common paths to track and control us.

Their commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing. And the communist future. They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary. But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God. That is what we have in common. That is what they want to take away. Their most powerful weapons are isolated, isolation, deception, intimidation. They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us. It’s time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide. Please share the information and links you’ll find@thedavidknightshow.com thank you for listening. Thank you for sharing.

If you can’t support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. Thedavidknightshow.com.
[tr:tra].

See more of The David Knight Show on their Public Channel and the MPN The David Knight Show channel.