➡ The Judicial Watch text discusses the political climate surrounding Cash Patel, Donald Trump’s nominees, and the potential for preemptive pardons. It also delves into the challenges facing the Trump administration, including dealing with bad actors and institutional problems within the government. The text further explores the idea of holding these individuals accountable, possibly through a special counsel, and the potential consequences of their actions. Lastly, it touches on the importance of government departments serving the interests of the American people.

➡ The text discusses the need for government officials to respect the will of the people and the elected president, regardless of personal political beliefs. It emphasizes that no one is above the law and that those who misuse their authority should face consequences. The text also suggests that some officials may fear repercussions for their actions once they are no longer in power.

➡ The text discusses the potential appointment of Cash Patel as the head of the FBI, praising his qualifications and dedication to the country. It also criticizes the current state of counterintelligence in the U.S., suggesting a need for more proactive and aggressive operations. The text ends with optimism about the future under President Trump’s leadership, expressing hope for a free nation and justice for those wronged.

➡ The person previously known as 45 is now entering as 47, having learned from past betrayals and attempts on his life. He’s making new choices, including people who won’t tolerate the usual nonsense and are committed to making a difference. His supporters are eager for change and believe that his new approach, as 47, will be different from his past as 45.

To have that discussion says everything about Cash Patel and Donald Trump’s nominees. There is no reason why any president must consider preemptive pardons because the incoming administration has made it so clear that they will go after political adversaries. And Cash Patel has been incredibly vocal about that. And I hope that the Senate Republicans, who know Joe Biden very well and know he does not, would not take something like this lightly. Really consider the fact that that’s even part of this discussion about Cash Patel. He is unqualified. He is unhinged. Yeah, we know who’s unhinged, Congressman, and it’s people like you, pillars of the illegal, unconstitutional January 6th rodeo that was perpetrated against President Trump, his colleagues, and ended up with innocent men like Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro in federal prison.

The theme of this manhood hour, and could be the theme of all of them, is the man who steps into the arena. We’ll talk about Cash Patel. We’ll talk about the courage it takes to drain the swamp and what we can expect for the next four years with somebody who, I think he knows the challenge facing the Trump, the second Trump administration. He is the head of all things research and investigatory, that superlative organization, Judicial Watch. He’s a very good friend of America first and mine personally as well. Full disclosure. Chris Farrell, welcome back in studio.

Great to be with you, Seb. Thank you. Man, oh, man, do we have a lot to talk about. We do. So let’s begin with the impolite question. You are a counterintelligence professional. You’ve worn the uniform of the US army, hunting down and disinforming bad guys, spies inside the United States. The enemy is inside the wire. We look at McCabe, stroke, Comey, et al. What is the magnitude of the task for the second administration? Let’s just put this on the menu. I would like a government, a bureaucracy that serves the interests of the American people. To get to that point.

What is the scale of the challenge to get us back to that, Chris? It’s enormous. So you have bad actors who need to be held to account. But then you have institutional problems where the entire system has been set up in this perverse manner where you have professional political operatives manning all the departments and agencies. And so let’s go for the first category. You have the Mark Milleys and the. The known bad actors, people who are colluding with China, who were undermining the presidential chain of command. Windman leaking top secret documents in the Washington Post. And they joke about it.

They make fun of it. They’re proud of it. Right. I mean, Comey at that event where he said, well, with regards to Flynn, usually with a normal administration, I would have got the sign off of the White House. But I thought, no, I’m going to get away with it. I’m just going to send some agents in and trap General Flynn. Yeah, I mean, he laughs about it. That statement alone is, I mean, it’s a thunderbolt of admission of really the malice, the malicious intent. So there’s guys like that who there needs to be a special counsel dedicated just to them.

And then there’s other larger questions that are institutional, where there’s a whole bunch of government employees who actually believe that the Department of Justice is an independent department. Remember that line? They would say over and over again, well, the Justice Department, it’s independent. It’s not independent. It works for the president. Correct. Yeah, but they love repeating this. It’s funny how, you know, the Constitution is clear. The person elected to be the chief executive. Right. Embodies the executive, which means the federal government, from the Department of Agriculture to Delta Force works for him. Correct. They don’t work for Congress.

They don’t work for the Supreme Court. They don’t work for the Democrat Party. They work for the man chosen by the American people. It’s not very complicated. That’s correct. That’s exactly right. So all this language about independence and, well, you know, they need to be able to do their jobs well. Their jobs are dictated by the chief executive. So I don’t know what it is that they think they’re running off and doing by themselves. It doesn’t work that way. Let’s stick at the target set or the task ahead of the Trump administration. So we’ll stay with the first category, the known admitted malefactors at the strategic level, former FBI directors, chairman of the joint, Chief Brennan, who was instrumental to the Tri Agency operation Crossfire Hurricane that targeted the Trump campaign and then the Trump admin.

The 51 on the letter, the letter of the 51 active intelligence officers, contractors and retirees orchestrated by the then acting director of the CIA, Mike Morrell, to lie about the Hunter Biden laptop being rushed into disinformation. Now, I don’t want to give the game away, but let’s just with not full granularity, talk about as a candidate intelligence, as a former counterintelligence professional, how do you go about people who have acted unconstitutionally, broken the law under what is called the color of law, that they’ve used their former bureaucratic powers to denude Americans of their civil rights, whether it’s Catholics at a Latin mass enrichment, whether it’s J Sixes, whether it’s Peter Navarro, how do you go after them? Or what does a special counsel look for? Because in many cases there are statutes of limitations.

Do we get them on the record, testifying under oath in Congress, get them in a perjury lie concerning something they did outside of that five year window? We don’t resort to unconstitutional tactics as conservatives. So you want to do it by the book. What crimes are these people legally in jeopardy of? So I mean those are a lot is the short answer. But I think what’s what any normal responsible security manager, right, administratively, without even reaching the legal question, without going to court, without pretend I’m not an attorney and I’m not going to pretend to be, but without getting to that legal threshold, let’s take it down one level and say if you are a reasonable manager of an office or director of a particular office and you have a security manager who’s working for you and up comes a report or down comes a report that there is, and this is a key phrase, credible derogatory information on somebody like you know, a chairman of the JCS who admits calling his Chinese counterpart or who tells reporters that he told his staff about President Trump f him, I’m going to fight him from the inside.

Let him send me to Leavenworth. That’s a paraphrase, but it’s very close to what he said. That’s the definition of subversion. Well, just based on these credible reports of and we’ve talked about Comey bragging about, we have video evidence, transcripts, quotes, that alone, you suspend and or revoke their security clearances right off the bat, let me tell you, that dries up the meal ticket real fast because all these guys are trading on their former position as the former this and the X active clearances. That’s see, they have active clearances, right? And they use that for the consultancies and for their board memberships and their advisory when all that goes to zero and they don’t have access to anything more than, you know, the Washington Post or whatever it is that they’re reading that changes the nature of who they are because they see themselves as these sort of supreme beings.

They’re in the elite of the elite of Washington and they trade on that. Well, you cut that off and then you look at recalling certain people, flag officers, recalling them onto active duty and you impanel an Article 32 board under the Uniform Code of military justice, which is like a grand jury. And let a grand jury, an empanelled grand jury, evaluate the statements of people like Milley and see if there’s grounds to court martial. Because people don’t realize you may get your DD papers, you may separate, you know, formally from the service, but you’re always flag officers, Never really retire.

You never really retire, always subject to recall and the ucmj. And so somebody like Hayden, who’s gone off the deep end, another lunatic set of remarks by him. Millie, call these guys back on active duty and let’s evaluate them under an Article 32 grand jury process. Love it. And you know, arguably the army at least, and I’m sure the other services, they have an affirmative obligation, especially concerning senior leadership, especially that they police themselves, that senior leaders who are accused of misconduct get extra scrutiny because of who they are. Bingo. We’re talking to Chris Farrell. The website for you to Support is judicial watch.org follow them at Judicial Watch.

You look at this White House now, and it’s hard to imagine two FBI agents ending up in the sit room. How did that happen? I sent them something I probably wouldn’t have done or maybe gotten away with in a more organized investigation, a more organized administration. In the George W. Bush administration, for example, or the Obama administration. In both of those administrations, there was process. And so if the FBI wanted to send agents into the White House itself to interview a senior official, you would work through the White House counsel and there’d be discussions and approvals and who would be there.

And I thought, it’s early enough. Let’s just send a couple guys over bragging about it. He’s laughing about it. Perverting the course of justice, laying a trap for an innocent man. General Mike Flynn. That’s Jim Comey. He needs to pay for his crimes. He needs to stand in a court of law in front of an actual jury of his peers and pay for what he did with so many, many others. So let’s, let’s go to the second level, Chris. Or go from the strategic rather down to the tactical. I’m really curious what your approach would be here.

Say you’re coming into government service again as a civilian and you’re running a directorate of the nsc, or you’re working inside DOD or the FBI and a special counsel or others are dealing with the Milleys, the Comeies, the Brennans. But we have this huge government bureaucracy, and there are unnamed individuals who have positions of influence, GS13s, 14s, 15s, Sess who probably don’t like the fact that 77 million people chose President Trump to come back as the Commander in chief and the President. How would you set the right tone and make sure that those who are meant to be apolitical are actually implementing the will of the man chosen by the 77 million? Because.

And let me illustrate this by what I witnessed eight years ago. I wasn’t part of the NSC then, but because of my portfolio, national security, I would go to all the NSC meetings that were relevant to me. So isis, China, you name it. And I observed them because I’d never been inside a SCIF at an NSC meeting before. And then after about a month, I identified this trend whereby we’d be talking about something really important like the defeat ISIS plan. And we’d be in a secure conference room, we’d have outstations coming in from the CIA, dia, Kabul, you name it.

And I’d sit there for an hour, Chris, and it’s as if an election hadn’t occurred. Nobody mentioned the name of the president and nobody referred to his policies. And so after about a month, I decided to be the awkward, you know, squeaky wheel. And I’d raise my hand after about an hour and I’d say, excuse me, gentlemen. Excuse me, ladies. Did you hear what the President said yesterday about the jihadi threat? Did you listen to his speech on China? We need to be doing that if you were in the position to be called to serve again.

How does one deal with the inertia of a bureaucracy that just doesn’t give a damn about who the President is? Right. So this is like anything else. It’s a leadership question. Yeah. And I think this time President Trump has been educated the hard way. And I think President Trump, it’s incumbent upon him to make a statement as he kicks off. And this statement can be reproduced or reiterated at every department and agency. And it should also have a legal check. But the sentiment has to be looked. If you’re interested in serving your country, we want you here.

If you’re a political operative who’s going to set out to sabotage our operations, get out. The choice you make is now you can leave. If you don’t want to agree with the writ of 77 million Americans, you can say goodbye now. Right. And you can leave honorably. And we understand you don’t agree. Goodbye. Good luck. Time served. Bye. Bye. But it has to be explicit. It has to be absolutely, crystal clear. They won. And it has to come from the president where he says, I know that there’s people who don’t like me. They don’t like how I talk, they don’t like my ideas.

I accept that we are a divided country, but I won. And if you’re going to serve, you took an oath to the Constitution. Yeah. And that means that you have to follow lawful orders. And if you don’t want to, you have to resign. It’s that simple. Chris, how do we get here? That I mean, and I agree with you. I think that’s a wonderful idea. Day one, the president makes a statement. The people have spoken. Correct. If you don’t like what they’ve said, you can leave government service. Exactly right. How is it that a president has to say that? Because that’s kind of absurd.

Really? Yeah. Well, it’s the same reason, you know, I taught journalism law at George Mason University for five years and I would go into the class and I figured I’d had. I had juniors and seniors, so upper level class. And the class that I ended up teaching was like a seventh or eighth grade civics class. And so I have 20 and 21, 22 year old kids sitting there. They don’t know what the hell the Constitution is. They don’t know what the divisions within the three branches of government. They don’t understand federal, state and municipal. There’s zero education.

There’s no knowledge. So people are more indoctrinated in ideology than they are educated in government. And that’s part of the problem. The other part is there’s people floating around this town that think that because they went to Harvard and because they went to Yale and because they went to Stanford, they get to make the decisions. It’s the same arrogance as an Alger Hiss. You know, it’s one of those, one of those operatives who cares about the people. I went to Harvard. Right. And I’ll set the policy and just do as you’re told. Yeah. Never a true word.

We are getting to the pay dirt here. This is the stuff that has to happen starting 1201 on January 20th. And make sure you are following Judicial Watch on Twitter. Watch. The idea that no person is above the law is a bedrock principle of American justice. No man is above the law, no matter what the. And I agree with you. No. No man is above the law. No person is above the law. No one is above the law. No one is above the law. No one’s above the law. No one is above the law. No man is above the law.

Nobody is above the law. No one is above the law. No man is above the law. He has to be held accountable. He’s not above the law. No one’s above the law. Either that nor any other title puts you above the rule of law. And no one is truly above the law. That is what it means to have a rule of law. That is what it means to not have a king. They’re not above the law. Nobody is above the law. Everyone will be treated as Merrick Garland has said, as you know equally well, that no one is above the law, which is foundational.

No one is. Enough. Enough. The hypocrisy is too much. Too much for me. No one’s above the law unless their name is Hillary Clinton or Hunter Biden. I guess this is America first, one on one, the man who now, you’re not a lawyer, but you’re surrounded by them and your organization is called Judicial Watch. That is correct. I gotta get your take. Chris Farrell. It’s weird. First, talk to us about the Hunter Biden pardon 11 years back dated and then this incredible thing that floated around last week that the Biden White House is considering pardons for Comey, for Liz Cheney, for John Brennan.

Now, I know I’m an immigrant, but for me, my understanding is pardons are for people who have been convicted of a crime or are about to be or were innocent. And you’re setting the record straight because there was a miscarriage of justice. Why does Jim Comey or Liz Cheney, does that mean they’ve committed a crime? Crime. Guilty conscience. Right. Weird, right? Guilty conscience. It’s what we’ve been talking about for the last few minutes. And you’ve had some great drop in segments there to show they know what they’ve done, the jig is up. And they’re terrified that once the rule of law is applied to them.

Look, they know the outrageous sort of political jihad they went on to go after President Trump, manufacturing crazy lawsuits and prosecutions in New York. They know the insanity. And now there’s an opportunity for somebody to come back, somebody like Pam Bondi, let’s say, who’s going to come in and say, it appears to me that people have misused their authority and power. It’s a very grave crime. You can’t just because you have a title or you have a badge and a gun, you can’t just go out and do whatever the hell you want and expect zero consequences.

I mean, it’s literally dirty cops. Comey’s a dirty cop. Right. And so the idea that they can just run around and terrorize and harass people and then once you win the election, never mind Right. Every case gets dismissed, shut down, and there’s no consequence, there’s no accountability. Isn’t there also what a psychiatrist would call a bit of projection here, that they’ve been judicial law enforcement as a weapon, and they think, oops, we’re not in charge anymore. Right, right, right. And they knew that when they started it, because they knew at some point, one way or the other, the pendulum swings, right? And somebody’s going to come back to them and say, hey, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

Right? Let’s take a look at what you were doing. And all of a sudden, oh, you’re persecuting me. Right. And that’s exactly. This is. It’s so painfully obvious. And don’t think the American public doesn’t know it. That’s precisely why President Trump was reelected, because the American people saw through all this phony, baloney, double talk garbage, and they knew that he was being unjustly pursued. The lady doth protest too much. As the Bard of Avon once said, they’re protesting because there is guilty of sin and they know the crimes that they have committed. It’s not ideal to have an incoming potential head of the FBI, Cash Patel, who has published enemies lists, but one advantage of that is that he wrote a book.

He has an enemies list in it. So we know exactly who he has threatened to go after without cause. Just pardon everyone on it, the lunatic from the New York Times, Michelle Goldberg, say, oh, my gosh, Casper Patel has enemies list. Well, he doesn’t. He talked about the criminals that he chronicled in his book, Government Gangsters, which, weirdly, the Biden administration tried to prevent the publication of. I wonder why that is so strange, isn’t it? And when it comes to enemies list. Hey, Michelle, maybe you should have a chat with, ooh, I don’t know, Peter Navarro, Steve Bannon.

Maybe they can help you out on that regard. We’re going to continue in a moment. Now, we haven’t rehearsed this because we don’t give out talking points to our guests, not even when the President comes on the show. But gotta ask you, he’s a friend of mine. Full disclosure, Cash Patel. What’s the problem with Cash Patel, Chris? He’s too smart, he’s too capable. He’s too knowledgeable of the inside game. Right? The inside mechanics. And that terrifies them. He knows exactly where to go, what buttons to push, what questions to ask. What about this thing? That he’s not qualified.

So I didn’t even know this. So I know him pretty well. I knew that he was a counter terrorist and prosecutor for the Department of Justice. Chief Investigator for Devin Newton is on the Intelligence Committee. Correct. Chief of Staff of the Pentagon, Deputy Director of National Intelligence. And I didn’t even know this when we killed Baghdadi. He had the job I’ve been nominated for. He was the Senior Director of Counterterrorism. Woefully unqualified to run the FBI. Right. It’s just preposterous. He’s got all the credentials and anybody that says otherwise. He’s only 44 years old. How did he even do that? Well, all of that in 44 years.

Yeah. He’s an accomplished guy. He’s very smart. He’s actually also very humble. Yeah, he’s a very humble guy. Yeah. You know, I’m obviously older than he is by a couple of decades, but he walks up and talks to me and calls me sir, so, I mean, that’s just respective age, I guess. This is really. Can I just. He’s a very genuine. Can I underline what you just said? Yeah. He’s one of these people that shocks you because he’s lived and breathed this city, which is a stinking cesspit of egos. Right. He has no ego. He just has love a country.

Yeah. He’s a very kid of immigrants who loves America. He’s a very sincere, authentic guy, and he knows exactly what’s going on, and he speaks very plainly, and that makes the left nuts. It makes them crazy. I think he’s an excellent pick. And I think, you know, he can really clean house in the FBI and arguably maybe even shut it down, hopefully. But nonetheless, he can reform it. Man. Let’s talk about reform and let’s talk about your bailiwick and what you did for decades in the U.S. army. You’re the expert. I’m just gonna throw out something provocative.

As a child of the Cold War, I don’t think we’ve done proper counterintelligence. You did counterintelligence. Counterintelligence is dead. I don’t think we’ve done it for a couple of decades. Correct. So what do we do? Absolutely. If we get rid of the corruption people, Right. If we get out the proteges of Comey Brennan, the Strokes, who are still stuck inside. If we get rid of them, how do we begin to rebirth a counterintelligence capacity for America? So I know for a fact, because I still have friends in various places, that the Chinese are eating our lunch at a rate that is unimaginable.

Your Hair would stand straight up on end. Setting that aside, not to mention Iran and everybody else. Right, right. But they’ve also become incredibly risk averse. Who? The counterintelligence world. So us from the, from the FBI, but also the military services. Some of the military services back in the dark ages when I was actively doing this, some of them have always been a little gun shy. Navy and Air Force OSI were always kind of afraid of their own shadow. Who were the most forward leaning, who did you receive? The army, overwhelmingly the Army. Whether it was counter espionage investigations or offensive counterintelligence operations ofco, which is a nice way of talking about double agent operations is what it really is.

The army was always much more aggressive. The other departments were kind of wishy washy. They would wait and be reactive. The army was aggressively proactively running operations both ways. And that’s what we need to go to our counterintuitive. Instead of being a defensive reactive field or discipline within the intelligence, all the different ints, it needs to be spun around the other way. And we need to be running very aggressive offensive counterintelligence operations and counter espionage operations. Looking for. What was the last time you heard about a big spy bus? That silly, that Russian one. That was kind of a joke.

Other than the woman. Redhead. Other than the woman Montez, the DIA who was being robbed by the Cuba Cubans. Tell me a great female spy. You mean there’s none? Yeah, right, right, right. So, so, but, but to go back to the how you do it and it goes back to my tactical question earlier, I think you’re going to give me the same answer. This can only happen. This is simply a function of leadership. Right? Correct. You need to have the forward leaning director, agency head. And you also have to be able to tell people, you know what? You’re going to do this and it’s not going to be perfect.

You’re going to make a mistake, you’re going to screw up. There might be a problem, I don’t care, do it anyway. And if you’re, if you’re working hard and doing it the right way, even if there’s a problem, I got your back. Which is leadership. Exactly. And so your subordinates, and this makes people crazy in Washington D.C. your subordinates have to be allowed to fail. And you have to be able as a leader to say I understand, I got it. I’ll give you the top cover. You run as hard and fast as you can. If you don’t know what you’re doing or you don’t, you’re not sure.

Come to me and ask me. I’ll tell you what we need to do. Right, but that kind of conversation that I just gave you, a shorthand version of, that conversation doesn’t exist in Washington, D.C. it doesn’t. And there’s no one going to work every single day with the sole object of defeating China. Right. There might be somebody on January 20th. I hope so. There might be. I think his name is Donald Trump, the 47th president of the United States. We talked to Chris Farrell, director of investigations and research for Judicial Watch. And if you put me back in the White House, their reign is over.

Their reign will be over and they know it. And America will be a free nation once again. We’re not a free nation right now. We don’t have free press. We don’t have free anything. In 2016, I declared I am your voice. Today, I add, I am your warrior. I am your justice. And for those who have been wronged and betrayed, I am your retribution. I am your retribution. Not going to let this happen. Last question for you, Chris. This has been immensely fun and thank you for helping me navigate the future as well. Again, haven’t rehearsed this.

A bit of a spiritual question, a bit of a deep question, personal question. How are you feeling after November 5th? Have we got a shot? Chris, how are you feeling? I’m elated. I really am. Genuinely very positive and very optimistic. You know, I tell this to people and I mean it from the bottom of my heart. Encouragement is like oxygen. Because, look, when we’re down doing what we do, when we’re fighting, you know, kind of our heads down, we’re slugging away. Every once in a while, you have to sit up upright and you get a breath of oxygen.

And it really encourages you, it lifts you up, and that’s somebody says you’re doing a good job. And we now have legitimate encouragement. And President Trump is a better president as number 47. I think he was the best president since George Washington back in 40 was 45, but now he’s coming in as 47. And so it’s everything that he was doing right now, but now he knows all the BS and the backstabbing. And then they tried to shoot it, they tried to kill him. So he’s pretty serious, right? So he is a different cat. So coming in as 47.

This is exactly. So he was everything that he was in 45. And just to say this to God rest his soul, Lou Dobbs, a good friend of mine, I said he’s your best president since George Washington. And Lou loved that. I kept saying it over and over again. And he was and he is. But coming in now at 47, this is a real opportunity. And the picks that he’s making. Right. Yourself included. But other great folks, Pete Hegseth Cash, sending a message. These are people who are they’re not going to put up with the same old crap day in, day out.

And they’re really going to make a difference. And I think that a lot of his supporters are really motivated. They want to see the garbage taken out. And I think we’re going to. I don’t know if that’s going to be the title for this hour. President Trump, he’s a different kind of cat. But it’s true. 47 is going to be different from 45.
[tr:tra].

See more of Judicial Watch on their Public Channel and the MPN Judicial Watch channel.