A war without a map is a war that makes its own weather. We sat down with Trita Parsi to unpack how a cascade of bad assumptions, breathless narratives, and wishful thinking turned a coercive gambit into an open-ended conflict with Iran—one where objectives, talking points, and timelines keep shifting even as lives are on the line.

Trita cuts through the fog: the difference between genuine Iranian grievances and the smaller, trained elements that exploited nighttime protests; how sanctions primed the economy for anger but didn’t create a popular mandate for invasion; and why decision makers mistook frustration for fragility. We examine the information pipeline in Washington, from think tank echo chambers to media incentives, and how that ecosystem sold a portrait of a weak regime that would crack under pressure. Instead, Tehran absorbed the shock, retaliated, and narrowed its own political options, relying on a smaller, harder base that views surrender as existential defeat.

We also explore the high-stakes question of succession and the nuclear file. With the Supreme Leader assassinated, the prior anti-nuclear fatwa is gone, and the new leader’s stance remains uncertain. Inside Iran, sentiment may be tilting toward deterrence, but war-time bandwidth limits big doctrinal shifts. Choosing the late leader’s son signaled defiance more than dynastic ambition, a message sharpened by outside attempts to pre-veto his legitimacy. On the regional chessboard, Russia and China likely see growing return on supporting Tehran—at least with intelligence and targeting data—now that Iran can impose real costs and survive first contact.

Where does this end? The horizon for reconciliation has pushed decades away, yet the need for diplomacy has never been greater. The plausible near-term outcome is a durable ceasefire, not a thaw: a pragmatic arrangement that stops the bleeding without promising friendship. Along the way, we ask what it would take to rebuild strategy on reality rather than narrative—painstaking analysis, clear aims, and the humility to change course when facts refuse to cooperate.

If this conversation challenged assumptions or clarified the stakes, share it with a friend, subscribe for future episodes, and leave a review with the one question you want answered next. Your feedback shapes the show.

CHAPTERS

0:00 Setting The Stage: War And Claims

2:25 A Plan Built On False Assumptions

5:05 How DC Think Tanks Shaped Misreading

7:30 Protests: Grassroots Anger And Outside Actors

10:35 Nighttime Violence And State Crackdown

13:20 Nuclear Fatwa, Succession, And Public Mood

16:10 Why Tehran Chooses Risk Over Surrender

18:20 External Backing: Russia And China

Our theme music, Adventures In Jazz, was used with permission. Composed and performed by Bob Mamet.

A Swiss colonel sits down with us and lays out a chilling reality: one morning you can speak, the next you can’t bank. Jacques Baud, a former strategic intelligence analyst and UN mediator, explains how the EU sanctioned him for his public analysis of the Russia–Ukraine war—without charges, hearings, or a day in court. What follows is a clear-eyed look at how a foreign policy tool built for states is now deployed against individuals, turning speech into grounds for economic exile.

We walk through his method: describe reality, map the logic of both sides, avoid moral grandstanding. That approach, he argues, is now mistaken for advocacy in a media environment bent on binaries. He shares examples of editors who fear that reporting uncomfortable facts will be labeled “pro-Putin,” and he contrasts this era with the Cold War, when Western confidence allowed open access to hostile media. Today’s leaders, facing low approval and domestic drift, reach for narrative control—platform pressure, regulation, and sanctions—to mask poor outcomes and protect fragile legitimacy.

Baud traces how influence moved inside NATO and the EU from “old” to “new” Europe, shaping a more maximalist posture as neutrality erodes across the continent. We dig into the personal toll: frozen accounts, restricted movement, and a “dossier” so thin it cites a visit to a bookstore. Yet the public reaction surprises even him—strangers offering help, audiences multiplying, a reminder that censorship often backfires. Along the way, we ask whether prolonging conflict serves political and financial incentives, and he argues the deeper driver is weak leadership clinging to a single story.

If you care about free speech, media integrity, and sound geopolitics, this conversation offers a rare window into how policy, narrative, and personal liberty now collide in Europe. Listen, share with a friend who values open debate, and leave a review to help more people find thoughtful conversations that resist easy answers.

CHAPTERS:

0:00      Guest Introduction & Sanctions Context

2:40      No Due Process & Empty Dossier

6:00      Analyst’s Role: Describe, Don’t Judge

11:30   Media Bias, Narratives, And Root Causes

17:20   NATO, Old vs New Europe Power Shift

22:30   Legitimacy Crisis And Rising Censorship

28:45   Public Support vs Elite Narratives

33:20   Daily Life Under Sanctions

38:00   Switzerland’s Response And Redactions

42:10   US Angle And Free Speech Norms

47:00   How The List Was Built

52:40   Erosion Of Neutrality In Europe

57:40   Duration, Appeals, And What’s Next

1:02:00 Support Efforts & Closing Reflections

Leverage only matters if you use it. We sit down with Jimmy Dore to revisit Force the Vote, the moment progressives could have withheld support for Nancy Pelosi to demand a Medicare for All floor vote during the peak of COVID. The goal wasn’t guaranteed passage—it was sunlight, debate, and a roll call that would finally separate healthcare advocates from healthcare branding. Instead, the moment passed, and the masks slipped. What did that reveal about incentives inside Congress and the media that shape what’s “allowed” to happen?

From there, we trace how narratives congeal. “Not the right time.” “No strategy.” “It could set the movement back.” When the same phrases echo across outlets, donors, and friendly influencers, you’re not hearing analysis—you’re hearing message discipline. Jimmy breaks down how corporate media and donor-backed “independent” shows align on safe lines, why access journalism flatters power rather than challenges it, and how career risk eclipses public need. We also revisit vanished promises like the public option and the $15 minimum wage to show how platform planks become memory holes once elections end.

So where does change come from if not from the top? We talk labor, cross-partisan coalitions on material issues, and the gritty work of building pressure that can’t be spun away. There’s a candid look at third-party efforts and the reality of infiltration, plus a hard conversation about economic shocks, the dollar’s status in a multipolar world, and what it might take for people to demand public goods with real leverage. Through it all, we focus on practical power: organizing workplaces, strengthening local institutions, and supporting media that informs rather than manufactures consent.

CHAPTERS:

• 0:00 Jimmy Dore Joins The Show
• 2:30 Setting The Stage: Force The Vote
• 4:20 Withholding Votes As Real Leverage
• 8:30 Why The Vote Mattered During COVID
• 12:10 The Mask-Off Moment For Progressives
• 17:00 Media Chorus And Manufactured Timing
• 21:30 Silence From Leaders And Movement Drift
• 25:40 Public Option Promises That Vanished
• 29:40 The Two-Party Trap And Donor Power
• 35:20 How Corporate Media Rewards Loyalty
• 40:50 Labor As The Only Way Up
• 46:00 Dollar, Sanctions, And A Tipping Point
• 51:20 Third Parties And Infiltration
• 56:10 Avoiding Access Journalism

Power doesn’t just move through parliaments and battlefields; it flows through boardrooms, data centers, and media brands. We dig into a glossy “master plan” for Gaza unveiled in the Davos orbit—an investment pitch that rebrands occupation as redevelopment, with coastal resorts and AI infrastructure on one side and a displaced, surveilled workforce on the other. Max Blumenthal joins us to unpack how zoning maps, energy chokepoints, and biometric controls add up to a model that can be exported, not just contained. It’s a blueprint for profit in a controlled society.

The conversation turns to media capture and narrative laundering, zeroing in on CBS as a case study where legacy trust is wielded to normalize official lines and discredit dissent. We examine how journalists are kept out of Gaza, how language is weaponized against the press, and how this intersects with broader information operations. From there, the stakes escalate across the region: Washington’s calculus on Iran, the risks of a naval siege in the Strait of Hormuz, and the very real possibility that one mine could shock global markets. Iran’s standoff capabilities, manufacturing base, and drone systems complicate any rush to war, forcing a reckoning with consequences beyond soundbites.

Technology emerges as both lever and liability. Reports of Starlink workarounds, blackouts, and countermeasures reveal the internet as an instrument of hybrid warfare—one that can mobilize protest, reveal organizers, and bend narratives in real time. To cut through rhetoric, we go inside Iran’s Jewish community: synagogues without militarized guards, constitutional protections, and a civic identity that doesn’t fit propaganda talking points. Exile politics—royalist fantasies, “day-after” manifestos, normalization promises—collide with local legitimacy and the limits of imported regime change.

We close by tracing the playbook across Latin America: Venezuela’s sanctions-tested strategy, a controversial oil law aimed at recovery, and talk of sieges aimed at Cuba and pressure on Nicaragua. A pattern emerges—invest, surveil, contain—marketed as stability while extracting compliance. If Gaza becomes the pilot project for biometric cities and managed labor, the question is not whether the model works there, but where it goes next.

If this conversation challenges your assumptions, share it with a friend, subscribe for future episodes, and leave a review with the one insight that changed how you see the news cycle. Your take helps shape where we go next.

CHAPTERS:

• 0:00 Opening And Guest Introduction
• 1:55 Davos And The Gaza “Master Plan”
• 7:45 Investors, Data Centers, And Surveillance
• 12:40 Borders, Rafah, And Population Shifts
• 18:00 Media Capture And The CBS Controversy
• 24:30 Iran War Talk And U.S. Calculus
• 31:00 Starlink, Blackouts, And Protest Tactics
• 36:30 Inside Iran: Jewish Community And Daily Life
• 43:20 Exile Politics And Regime Change Fantasies
• 49:00 Mossad Ads, Influencers, And Online Ops
• 56:10 UK Media, Blacklists, And Lawfare
• 1:04:30 Venezuela: Sanctions, Strikes, And Strategy

What do we actually buy when we spend a trillion dollars on the Pentagon? Ben Freeman, director at the Quincy Institute and co-author of The Trillion Dollar War Machine, joins us to track the cash, the influence, and the narratives that keep America on a war footing while everyday security slips at home. We unpack the proposed $500 billion “plus up,” why it dwarfs any plausible threat environment, and how more than half of Pentagon spending flows to private contractors instead of service members.

Ben walks us through notorious procurement failures—from the Littoral Combat Ship to the F-35—showing how requirements creep, weak oversight, and heavy lobbying turn “defense” into a subsidy for stock buybacks and executive pay. We explore the lobbyist’s toolkit: bundling donations, leveraging district jobs, and ghostwriting policy while wearing a think tank badge. Then we pull back the curtain on the influence ecosystem: arms-maker-funded think tanks shaping commentary, media outlets running defense ads, and a framing of debate that sidelines restraint and makes escalation sound inevitable.

We also ask a hard question: what would a real Department of Defense look like? Ben argues the United States could defend the homeland at roughly half today’s budget, given geography and the true spending levels of China and Russia. The trade-offs are stark—every added dollar for the Pentagon is a dollar not going to schools, healthcare, housing, or infrastructure that actually improves safety. If you want a clear, evidence-based tour of how money, media, and policy lock us into forever budgets, this conversation delivers a map and a way out.

If this resonates, share the episode with a friend, subscribe for future conversations, and leave a review telling us where you think defense dollars should go next.

CHAPTERS:

0:00 Meet Ben Freeman And The Book;

2:18 The $500B Pentagon “Plus Up”;

6:52 Can The Pentagon Even Spend It;

9:55 Contractors Over Troops;

13:20 Procurement Boondoggles Exposed;

18:05 Lobbyists’ Toolkit And Bundling;

22:39 How Contractors Replaced Soldiers;

27:15 Waste, Fraud, Abuse In War Zones;

31:22 What Real Defense Should Cost;

36:02 Think Tanks And Their Funders;

41:12 Tax-Deductible Influence;

46:00 Shoddy Scholarship And Ukraine;

52:00 Media Capture And The Narrative;

Our theme music, Adventures In Jazz, was used with permission. Composed and performed by Bob Mamet.

A prison visit changed everything. Gabe Shipton walked into Belmarsh as a filmmaker and left as a brother on a mission, determined to fight the dehumanization of Julian Assange and defend the future of journalism. What followed was a masterclass in narrative warfare, grassroots organizing, and the power of independent media to bend reality back toward truth.

We explore how Ithaka  reframed a polarizing figure through a human story—a father, son, and husband—and turned cinema into a tool for mobilization. Gabe details the extraordinary surveillance inside the Ecuadorian embassy, the fallout from the Vault 7 revelations, and how a single label from Mike Pompeo opened the door to clandestine operations ordinarily reserved for foreign adversaries. With WikiLeaks engineered to resist takedowns, pressure converged on a person, and the stakes for press freedom became universal.

The conversation turns practical: how 60+ grassroots screenings across the U.S. built local leaders and real political leverage. How independent voices—from Tucker Carlson and Dave Smith to Jimmy Dore and Judge Napolitano—moved the needle when legacy outlets looked away. And how the Information Rights Project now supports whistleblowers and their families with media training, financial help, and a vast subscriber network that can take action fast. We also dig into Australia’s startling new speech proposals and social media restrictions on youth, exploring what happens when governments choose control over persuasion—and what citizens can realistically do next.

Gabe shares a personal update on Julian’s healing back home in Australia, the joy of family, and a careful re-entry into public debate. It’s a candid, hopeful look at how courage, craft, and community can win against long odds. If you care about free speech, transparency, and the people who risk everything to tell the truth, this is your map. Subscribe, share with a friend, and tell us: what’s one concrete action you’ll take this week to defend free expression?

Our theme music, Adventures In Jazz, was used with permission. Composed and performed by Bob Mamet.

CHAPTERS:

:26 New Year Kickoff And Guest Intro

1:11 Ithaka  And The Arrest That Changed Everything

3:18 Embassy Surveillance And CIA Targeting

7:16 Belmarsh Visit And A Family Mobilizes

9:58 Unwinding Media Dehumanization

11:29 Building A Global Grassroots Campaign

11:30 Correction: Grassroots Wins And Julian Returns Home

12:01 Founding The Information Rights Project

14:32 How To Make People Feel Powerful

19:42 Why Assange Threatened The Powerful

25:39 Vault 7 And Pompeo’s Retaliation

30:14 The Pardon Push And Independent Media

33:26 Corporate Press, Sanctions, And Speech Crackdowns

36:57 Julian’s Health, Family, And Healing

42:01 Australia’s New Speech Laws And Youth Bans

50:01 Bondi Attack, Intelligence Failures, And Fallout

57:36 Closing Reflections And Thanks

Year-end reflections tend to blur optimism and fatigue, and this conversation makes that line painfully clear. The promises attached to a noninterventionist reset—troop withdrawals, constitutional restraint, and a focus on domestic renewal—collide with a year marked by ad hoc tariffs, confused messaging on inflation, and fresh entanglements abroad. The guest frames a core contradiction: if leadership claims to prioritize Americans, why are we still paying for distant conflicts and eroding free speech at home? The Gaza crisis, Iran strikes, and campus crackdowns expose how rhetoric diverges from reality. This gap erodes public trust and feeds a cycle where political theater substitutes for policy, and citizens feel gaslit about the prices they see and the wars they fund.

Much of the episode probes U.S. military capability beyond slogans. The Navy’s struggle in the Red Sea, the cost and low availability of the F‑35, and carrier vulnerability to hypersonic missiles outline a stark picture: American power projection relies on legacy platforms ill-suited for modern threats. Recruiting shortfalls and low morale compound a force designed for offense but deployed without clear, defensible aims. The guest argues that spirit and mission clarity often outweigh marginal tech advantages; when strategy is incoherent, soldiers pay with their lives. Meanwhile, the budget swells while audits fail, producing more of the same at higher cost. In this model, “declare victory and leave” becomes a budget line, not a strategy.

Ukraine sits at the center of a wider critique of Western policy. The attrition math is brutal, and the guest challenges the premise that prolonging the fight serves any stated goal. If the ratio of losses is unsustainable and social cohesion is draining away, who benefits? A sober answer points to a weapons marketplace, NATO’s business incentives, and political elites who fear domestic challengers more than strategic failure. If NATO operates as a purchasing club for U.S. systems, its incentives skew toward perpetual demand. Yet the battlefield has also revealed that Russian and Chinese advances—hypersonics, layered air defense, nuclear-powered systems—outpace many U.S. offerings. As supply chains rely on strategic materials controlled by adversaries, long-term readiness falters under the weight of wishful procurement.

The conversation also tracks the ideological persistence of neoconservative thinking under new labels. Even when policy papers downplay two-front wars, the reflex for primacy survives. Without a redefinition of national interest and threat prioritization, strategies keep recycling the last century’s assumptions. The guest insists real reform would accept limits, shift to defense, and unwind global commitments that produce debt, blowback, and brittle alliances. But the acquisition state resists change because complexity and opacity protect it. When audits fail year after year, it is not an accident; it is a feature that shields careers and contracts.

The most practical counsel aims below the federal horizon. Build lives and communities that are less dependent on government; diversify income, skills, and supply lines; and practice civil freedoms locally even as national policy narrows them. This is not escapism; it’s resilience. Encourage skepticism toward official narratives, protect free speech norms culturally when institutions erode them, and invest in neighborly ties that reduce fragility. For some, that means relocating or leveraging global options. For others, it means doubling down on local enterprise, education, and mutual aid. The path forward may be plural and messy, but it is actionable and humane in a way that grand doctrine is not.

There is a through line connecting Gaza, Venezuela, Ukraine, the Red Sea, and our own kitchen tables: capability must match purpose. If leaders won’t shrink missions to fit reality, citizens can align their lives with clear, defensible goals—family stability, local prosperity, and open inquiry. That is not a retreat from public life; it is a refusal to fund illusions. The guest’s final note is not cynicism but sobriety: paradigms fail before they change. As the old one winds down, the work is to build trustworthy alternatives—economically, culturally, and politically—so that when the center stops holding, something better is already in place.

CHAPTERS:

• 0:30 Welcome And Guest Introduction
• 1:52 Expectations For 2025 Vs Reality
• 3:32 Nonintervention Promises And Israel-Gaza
• 6:14 Tariffs, Inflation, And Political Theater
• 9:17 Free Speech Backsliding On Campus
• 12:36 Venezuela Address And Legacy Optics
• 16:40 U.S. Military Capability In Decline
• 22:04 Carrier Vulnerability And Obsolete Systems
• 26:40 Recruiting, Readiness, And Morale
• 30:52 Red Sea Lessons And Costly Failures
• 34:04 Ukraine War: Attrition And EU Strategy
• 39:12 NATO As Business And Weapons Sales
• 43:12 End Of U.S. Defense Export Primacy
• 47:12 Hypersonics, Nuclear Tech, And Lag
• 51:28 Strategy Documents And Neocon Persistence
• 56:08 Pentagon Waste, Audits, And Reform Limits
• 1:00:24 Debt, Industrial Base, And MAGA Gaps
• 1:04:16 Personal Agency Outside Government
• 1:08:24 Building Resilient Communities

What if the rules of public health were rewritten by advertising money and platform levers rather than open debate? We sit down with Dr. Robert Malone to unpack how information control, corporate pressure, and crisis messaging collided with science across 2020–2022—and what that means for medical consent today. From the early push for repurposed therapeutics to the media and tech backlash that followed, Malone outlines a system where brands and gatekeepers shaped which evidence could surface, and which careers were sidelined.

We get specific about mechanisms instead of slogans: Event 201 playbooks, the Trusted News Initiative, ad-industry coordination through GARM, and why “sponsored by Pfizer” isn’t just a punchline—it’s an incentive structure. Malone details the suppression of early treatment pathways, the emergence of myocarditis risk in young males, and the downstream effect on public trust when safety signals meet spin. He also shares his current work with ACIP and the heated debate around the hepatitis B birth dose. The focus is narrower guidance, more transparent risk communication, and serologic testing to avoid unnecessary shots—moving from mandates toward genuine informed consent.

If you care about individual rights, data integrity, and rebuilding trust in public health, this conversation doesn’t ask you to pick a tribe; it asks you to demand better evidence and clearer trade-offs. We talk about combination vaccine safety gaps, the role of adjuvants like aluminum salts, and the uncomfortable truth that many products are tested alone but given together. The goal isn’t fear—it’s precision and honesty in how we weigh risk and benefit, patient by patient.

Listen and tell us where you stand: Who should decide medical risk—the state, the insurer, or the doctor and patient together? If this episode resonates, follow the show, share it with a friend, and leave a review so more people can find it.

CHAPTERS:

• 0:00 Framing The Crisis Of Expertise
• 0:56 Introducing Dr. Robert Malone
• 1:16 Host’s Vaccine Backstory And Concerns
• 4:15 Malone’s Career And Government Work
• 6:39 Early COVID Threat Assessment And Repurposed Drugs
• 9:22 Vaccine Risks, Mechanisms, And Media Blowback
• 13:18 Censorship, Amazon Delisting, And Rogan Fallout
• 15:52 Advertising Pressure, GARM, And CDC Ties
• 20:28 Event 201 And Information Control
• 24:18 The Censorship Industrial Complex
• 28:12 Early Treatment Suppression And Safety Signals
• 32:26 Data Integrity And Risk-Benefit Unknowns
• 34:47 ACIP Role And Hepatitis B Schedule Debate
• 39:25 State Authority Vs Individual Consent
• 43:05 Safety Gaps: Adjuvants And Combination Dosing
• 46:12 Presidential Priorities And Vaccine Policy
• 47:15 Where To Find Malone
• 49:26 Hosts’ Debrief And Future Guests

Power doesn’t persuade on its own—people do. Ambassador Chas Freeman joins us for a rare, unflinching look at how the United States drifted from negotiation to coercion, swapped empathy for slogans, and ended up trapped in conflicts with no off-ramps. We dig into the mechanics of real diplomacy, the difference between a ceasefire and a peace, and why ignoring your opponent’s interests is a fast way to get surprised by reality.

Freeman traces the lineage from Cold War containment to the unipolar “we can’t lose” mindset, explaining how that confidence morphed into sanctions-first thinking and performative statements that block talks before they start. On Ukraine, he lays out the missed chances: neutrality, minority language protections, and a continent-wide security settlement that could have been explored before the shooting began. Instead, Washington chose not to negotiate core issues, and the Kremlin moved from warnings to war. He outlines a concrete peace framework and explains why proxy warfare makes us a co-belligerent, not a neutral mediator.

Turning to China, we unpack the Panchsheel principles, why Taiwan is central to Chinese nationalism, and what election-cycle theatrics risk when nuclear tripwires are involved. Freeman warns that a Taiwan conflict won’t stay conventional and argues for a steadier formula: credible deterrence paired with a political settlement that preserves Taiwan’s autonomy. We also examine Africa as a test of strategy—where U.S. lectures and strikes compete poorly with China’s airports and railways—and the media ecosystem that narrows debate by filtering out inconvenient facts.

If you care about preventing great-power war, rebuilding diplomatic muscle, and aligning U.S. policy with actual national interests, this conversation will challenge your assumptions and give you a clearer map of the terrain. Subscribe, share with a friend who follows foreign policy, and leave a review with the one insight you think Washington most needs to hear.

CHAPTERS:

• 0:00 Setting The Stage: Freeman’s Career
• 3:10 What Diplomacy Requires And Why It’s Missing
• 9:40 From Containment To The Unipolar Hangover
• 15:30 Trump’s Style, Cronies, And State Weakening
• 22:40 Sanctions, Pride, And The Ukraine Red Line
• 30:10 Ceasefires Versus Peace And Forever Wars
• 37:20 Media Narratives And Alternative Outlets
• 45:05 China’s Principles And Taiwan’s Stakes
• 54:20 Africa, Somalia, And Great-Power Competition

He told the truth about CIA torture—and went to prison. Hear John Kiriakou explain why “official channels” failed, how secrecy is weaponized, and what blowback really looks like. Listen/Watch now and tell us: should the CIA even exist?

If the guardrails are the problem, where do you turn for the truth? We sit down with former CIA officer and author John Kiriakou to unpack the hard facts behind the United States’ post‑9/11 torture program, why rapport-based interrogation outperforms coercion, and how “official channels” can fail when every node in the chain is compromised. John walks us through his 56 hours with Abu Zubaydah, the FBI’s proven interrogation playbook, and the moment the Bureau was pushed aside so contractors could introduce learned helplessness and unapproved techniques.

From there, the story accelerates: an on‑air admission that torture was official policy, a crimes report, and years of surveillance culminating in Espionage Act charges. John breaks down how classification is weaponized to bury wrongdoing, how contractors without interrogation experience made millions, and why more whistleblowers were charged under modern administrations than in the previous nine decades combined. He also shares the lifeline he found in a network of truth-tellers—Tom Drake, Bill Binney, Daniel Ellsberg—who helped him withstand pressure designed to bankrupt and silence him.

We widen the lens to blowback: the rise of Al‑Qaeda and ISIS, CIA‑backed “Zero Units” in Afghanistan, and a chilling account of the Dasht‑i‑Leili massacre investigation that was smothered by politics and secrecy. John makes a provocative case that the U.S. intelligence community’s core functions already exist across DIA, NSA, DARPA, and State’s INR—and asks whether a sprawling CIA still makes Americans safer or merely multiplies risk, cost, and impunity. This is a candid, deeply informed look at torture, oversight, whistleblowing, and the real consequences of secrecy on national security.

If this conversation sparked new questions, share it with a friend, subscribe for more unfiltered interviews, and leave a review with the one thing you think must change first.

0:00 Opening And Guest Introduction

2:19 Capturing Abu Zubaydah And Rapport Methods

5:33 FBI Interrogations Vs CIA Torture

9:23 Reading Torture Cables And Internal Dissent

12:31 Why “Official Channels” Failed

16:07 Going Public With ABC And Fallout

19:32 Mitchell And Jessen And Learned Helplessness

24:08 Guantánamo, Mislabels, And Noncharges

26:47 Obama Era Reopening And Surveillance

32:18 Entrapment Attempt And Espionage Charges

38:00 Why The Obama White House Targeted Whistleblowers

42:28 The Whistleblower Community And Support

47:11 Secrecy Agreements And Classification Games

53:21 Dasht-i-Leili Massacre Probe Shut Down

Our theme music, Adventures In Jazz, was used with permission. Composed and performed by Bob Mamet.