Speaker 1: Eight oh five, the fifty five KRCD Talk station. A
Speaker 1: very happy Friday to you, Brian Thomas, wishing everyone very
Speaker 1: happy Friday and happy as I can be to welcome
Speaker 1: with the fifty five KRC Morning Show Chris Pihote. And
Speaker 1: what an impressive resume Chris is got. He served as
Speaker 1: a chief executive for FBI Science and Technology Programs. In
Speaker 1: his earlier career, he was with the US government senior
Speaker 1: executive service official. Retired from the FBI after twenty five years.
Speaker 1: And I just mentioned part of the FBI Science and
Speaker 1: Technology program he was a one point director of the
Speaker 1: US government twenty four hour Global Terrorist Screening Center, also
Speaker 1: Special Agent in charge of the FBI's Buffalo, New York
Speaker 1: Field office. In his early career, he worked on programs
Speaker 1: in areas regarding counter terrorism, counterintelligence, technical programs, physical and
Speaker 1: informational security, weapons of mass destruction, intelligence collection. I could
Speaker 1: go on, we wouldn't be able to talk about his
Speaker 1: book Wanted the FBI. I once knew how to restore
Speaker 1: faith in the world's premier law enforcement agency. Chris pyhotame
Speaker 1: to the Morning Show. It's a pleasure to have you on.
Speaker 2: Oh, it's a pleasure to be with you this morning,
Speaker 2: and thanks for the opportunity to visit with.
Speaker 3: You and your audience.
Speaker 1: Oh and I'm sure they are excited to hear from you.
Speaker 1: And the name of the book I think suggests it
Speaker 1: all how to restore faith, suggesting of course that a
Speaker 1: lot of us have lost faith in the FBI. And
Speaker 1: I'm going to get your impressions where you think it
Speaker 1: went wrong. But as I observe from the notes and information,
Speaker 1: somewhere after September eleventh, that's when the problems kicked in.
Speaker 1: How do you connect September eleventh and how has the
Speaker 1: direction of the FBI deteriorated leading to you writing about
Speaker 1: this in the book Wanted the FBI.
Speaker 3: I once knew.
Speaker 2: Well after nine to eleven there are some obvious, of course,
Speaker 2: shortfalls that allowed that tragedy to happen. So the FBI
Speaker 2: made a very violent shift in its organizational operations, moving
Speaker 2: from a traditional law enforcement kind of the cops and
Speaker 2: robbers organization that it was into being a national security
Speaker 2: focused intelligence organization domestic security related function that it became.
Speaker 2: And as all things in the government do, they start
Speaker 2: with good intention and then move into other areas of
Speaker 2: mission creep and then a lack of mission focus after
Speaker 2: a while, and what we saw was certain decisions were
Speaker 2: being made that led the FBI to becoming what we
Speaker 2: what I call corporatized. There were a lot of private sector,
Speaker 2: private sector approaches, private sector ideas brought into the FBI
Speaker 2: to change its culture after nine to eleven, and the
Speaker 2: corporatized FBI moved away from the beliefs and values and
Speaker 2: practices that made the FBI legendary leading up to that point. Well,
Speaker 2: I think we threw out the baby with the bathwater.
Speaker 1: Okay, I understand, and I guess you know, when I
Speaker 1: think a traditional FBI, you know, going back to you know,
Speaker 1: the television program and busting people for you know, RICO violations,
Speaker 1: organized crime and all those complex criminal investigations. The world
Speaker 1: has changed dramatically because of the Internet and cybersecurity, and
Speaker 1: you are an expert in cyber operations and security practices.
Speaker 1: Is that part of the challenge the FBI faced in
Speaker 1: this culture shift, dealing with the realities of this mean,
Speaker 1: wide open and insecure systems that we have.
Speaker 3: It was definitely a challenge.
Speaker 2: Back when the Internet came online very quickly, we found
Speaker 2: that the Internet enhanced our lives, but it also made
Speaker 2: better bad guys and it gave them better opportunities to
Speaker 2: attack people from afar. And we saw a lot of
Speaker 2: the traditional criminal activities become enhanced and unlimited by geography
Speaker 2: and other logistics that used to limit the criminal activity
Speaker 2: and effectiveness.
Speaker 3: So what we found and also.
Speaker 2: Was that the national security threat environment changed with the
Speaker 2: Internet as well when it came to terrorism and counterintelligence activities.
Speaker 2: So the FBI had a lot of searching to do
Speaker 2: when it came to looking at how we're going to
Speaker 2: protect the American people while still upholding the constitutional freedoms
Speaker 2: that our society enjoys.
Speaker 3: And it was a difficult transition.
Speaker 1: Well, I guess it seemed to have become very politicized
Speaker 1: in you know, the the investigations of January sixth, for example,
Speaker 1: it seems to me that the entire resources of all
Speaker 1: the FBI we were turned on every single individual that
Speaker 1: happened to be in the area of the of the
Speaker 1: Capitol building during that riot. It would that have been
Speaker 1: the norm under earlier FBI times that they would spend
Speaker 1: so much time and effort to go after those folks.
Speaker 2: No, what you saw there was the result of the
Speaker 2: last iteration of CI leadership allowing their own personal and
Speaker 2: political views to overly influence SBI operational decision making and
Speaker 2: resource allocation. Used to be where the FBI would have
Speaker 2: been very reluctant and almost unwilling to do something like that,
Speaker 2: But we've seen that cultural decline and erosion over time
Speaker 2: where the leadership was either amenable to it or unable
Speaker 2: to resist the maybe the influence of the last administration.
Speaker 1: Well, as a lawyer, I viewed the law as the law.
Speaker 1: You know, as long as it's equally applied, it says
Speaker 1: what it is. There are crimes on the book. You
Speaker 1: go after people regardless of political stride. But is this
Speaker 1: politization that seems to have gone on, is that because
Speaker 1: of the hiring practices. Did they actually seek out and
Speaker 1: seek to hire and hire people who were of a
Speaker 1: particular political mindsets that they would embrace this.
Speaker 3: Kind of.
Speaker 2: I'm not I don't think it's the recruitment of new people.
Speaker 2: It was the promotion of people inside the organization who
Speaker 2: showed a I guess you can call it a likeness
Speaker 2: to the senior leadership's political views. So what you saw
Speaker 2: was all those people of like mind rising into very
Speaker 2: senior and influential positions that then pushed those ideas and
Speaker 2: practices down into the workforce.
Speaker 1: And I suppose a frontline agent who was interested in
Speaker 1: the old school idea of just finding criminals and prosecuting
Speaker 1: bad guys. They were told and instructed by their politicized
Speaker 1: seniors that you do the job that I'm telling you
Speaker 1: to do, and they probably had no say in the matter.
Speaker 3: Then, yeah, you have very.
Speaker 2: Little say in what you can actually do. You accept
Speaker 2: direction and order.
Speaker 3: And this is what I tried to explain to somebody
Speaker 3: the other day.
Speaker 2: If you're given an order or direction that's not illegal
Speaker 2: or unsafe, you know, causing bodily harm, I mean, you're
Speaker 2: you're obligated to do what you're told on a certain level.
Speaker 2: And I said, there's a difference between being an independent
Speaker 2: investigator versus being an insubordinate investigator.
Speaker 3: So it's a fine.
Speaker 2: Line you walk, and people will voice their displeasure and
Speaker 2: their disagreement, but ultimately, if it's a lawful, legal order
Speaker 2: that comes from the White House to the Attorney General,
Speaker 2: from the director of the FBI, the folks are going
Speaker 2: to grit their teeth and still do their best to
Speaker 2: you know, conduct a mission and protect the American people.
Speaker 1: And my recollection is the FBI was at least on
Speaker 1: some level involved with and sometimes inside social media suppressing
Speaker 1: speech of the certain viewpoints. Your reaction to that even happening,
Speaker 1: it seems to me to be something that should be
Speaker 1: way beyond and outside of the FBI's job to tell
Speaker 1: people what they can and cannot say on social media
Speaker 1: or direct social media companies to suppress certain types of
Speaker 1: speech or messages.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, there was no there was no place for that.
Speaker 2: I think the relationship that the FBI has with social
Speaker 2: media is a cooperative one to identify potential threats to
Speaker 2: public safety and then work with social media to you know,
Speaker 2: to to put messaging out to people on how they
Speaker 2: can remain safe and then take care of themselves, not
Speaker 2: to suppress speech, not to target certain types of speech,
Speaker 2: whether conservative or liberal, or whatever your your flavor is.
Speaker 2: But the FBI, and it's in its last iteration again,
Speaker 2: allowed its own personal at the leadership level, allowed its
Speaker 2: own personal ideas and beliefs to form some of those
Speaker 2: relationships that were to me unhealthy and took took us
Speaker 2: down a bad path toward that I would call almost
Speaker 2: you know, a certain level of censorship.
Speaker 1: Now, with Cash Mattel being confirmed as the new FBI director,
Speaker 1: your reaction to the confirmation to Cash Hotel generally, and
Speaker 1: do you think he's in a position and can sort
Speaker 1: of right the ship if I can use that term again.
Speaker 2: Sure, Well, first of all, I'd like to offer congratulations
Speaker 2: to Director Patel. I'm glad he made it through the confirmation.
Speaker 3: Process as he did. I saw it was a It
Speaker 3: was a.
Speaker 2: Pretty close vote, but these days, I think we received
Speaker 2: voting on these matters that roll along.
Speaker 3: You know, political lines, So it wasn't unexpected.
Speaker 2: As far as mister Patel's future goes, I think, you know,
Speaker 2: he's the right guy.
Speaker 3: For right now.
Speaker 2: He has the confidence of the Chief Executive and the
Speaker 2: Attorney General, and I think he actually wants to be
Speaker 2: part of a foundational change of the FBI, and he
Speaker 2: wants to be part of that return of the FBI
Speaker 2: to being that trusted and dependable organization that so many
Speaker 2: people counted on for decades. And you know, he wants
Speaker 2: to return the FBI to the trust of the American people.
Speaker 2: So I think he has a good background. He understands
Speaker 2: the threat environment, that the FBI will be working in
Speaker 2: with him, and I think he's got a form a
Speaker 2: senior leadership team around him to help him make some.
Speaker 3: Of those foundational changes. Those are one of his first
Speaker 3: orders of business.
Speaker 2: He's got to figure out where his command and control
Speaker 2: is going to come from in the organization.
Speaker 1: What kind of reminds me of, in some parallels with
Speaker 1: Pete Hegseth, trying to return the military to its core
Speaker 1: mission of as I boil it down, kill people, and
Speaker 1: break things the military ethos as opposed to DEI and
Speaker 1: expanding you know what, wolf policies and the like, and
Speaker 1: to that end, do you think that had a deleterious
Speaker 1: effect on the FBI those types of policies, the DEI
Speaker 1: and and focusing on things that seem totally unrelated to
Speaker 1: law enforcement.
Speaker 2: Yeah, absolutely terribly damaging to the FBI. The FBI, in
Speaker 2: its core mission set is or to protect us from
Speaker 2: national security threats and crime problems.
Speaker 3: That's what the FBI does.
Speaker 2: And they're good at it when they're allowed to do
Speaker 2: it and they're given.
Speaker 3: The proper leadership environment.
Speaker 2: What we saw over the past four years was a
Speaker 2: series of distractions from the core mission set and we
Speaker 2: also saw again the substitution of some of the senior
Speaker 2: leadership's personal political ideas and ideologies and personal preferences versus
Speaker 2: the objective, apolitical, skilled investigative work that the FBI was
Speaker 2: known for.
Speaker 1: Well, and you speak of national security threats and crime,
Speaker 1: I'm rather concerned, and of course I don't. I'm not
Speaker 1: alone in my concerns. With the last multiple years of
Speaker 1: open borders. We know of significant numbers of Chinese military age.
Speaker 1: Man not picking on the race of China, but we
Speaker 1: know if they're here and they got here, they probably
Speaker 1: had the approval of the Chinese Communist Party. And therein
Speaker 1: as the challenge, we know that CCP has hacked into
Speaker 1: all kinds of our operations, both in private industry but
Speaker 1: also into the federal government. You're an expert in security
Speaker 1: matters like cyber operations and security practices. Do you view
Speaker 1: this as significant a threat? Is at least I perceive
Speaker 1: it to be, And if so, what can we possibly
Speaker 1: do about it?
Speaker 2: It is an absolutely significant threat. I mean, we have
Speaker 2: allowed a threat environment to form and intensify over the
Speaker 2: past four years like we've never seen before. And you know,
Speaker 2: the last administration had certain I think ideological or political
Speaker 2: views that they allowed this to happen, and now the
Speaker 2: American people will suffer for it. The FBI has to
Speaker 2: take a look at the current threat environment. We can't
Speaker 2: be fighting the last threat, the last threatn environment like
Speaker 2: the military gets accused of fighting.
Speaker 3: The last war.
Speaker 2: We can't be stuck in the last threat environment.
Speaker 3: We have to look at what we have now.
Speaker 2: When it comes to international adversaries and opponents versus the
Speaker 2: internal threat that is now within our borders. You said
Speaker 2: the unchecked migration of unvetted personnel. These people have come
Speaker 2: to the United States, some seeking a better life, some
Speaker 2: looking to be here for I would say, reasons that
Speaker 2: are not good for our communities. And the FBI has
Speaker 2: to reallocate its resources, reprioritize its operations, and look at
Speaker 2: its current partnerships with other federal, state, and local law
Speaker 2: enforcement to go out and find these people and quantify
Speaker 2: the threats to our communities and keep everybody safe.
Speaker 1: Indeed, and you know, it's just I sit here and
Speaker 1: I look at my watch, going, well, it's just a
Speaker 1: moment in time away for a sleeper cell to launch
Speaker 1: its nefarious activities, and I have to I mean, I
Speaker 1: feel just as confident as I can be that part
Speaker 1: of the illegal immigration population are here for the purposes
Speaker 1: of launching nefarious operations like terrorist actions. You're just waiting
Speaker 1: for the green light.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I think you have a group of folks,
Speaker 2: you know, factions of people who may be here for
Speaker 2: something like that, but you also have factions of people
Speaker 2: who are here simply to commit crime, and they're here
Speaker 2: to damage the safety and security of our communities. The
Speaker 2: United States is a relatively soft target. These people come
Speaker 2: from hard, hard lives, and they come from rough places,
Speaker 2: and the United States has always been a fairly high trust,
Speaker 2: high security community, and they come from different places that
Speaker 2: we're not used to certain behaviors and activities, and I
Speaker 2: think we're going to find that the American people are
Speaker 2: going to be subjected to increase crime, violence, and possible,
Speaker 2: as you said, terrorism, Not to mention the national security
Speaker 2: counterintelligence espionage activities that largely go on quietly but also
Speaker 2: damage our national security and welfare.
Speaker 1: Well be up to the FI maybe perhaps engage in
Speaker 1: more widespread use of RICO to go after some of
Speaker 1: these criminal enterprises, like the gangs, for example, if they're
Speaker 1: coordinating efforts two or more people and further and so
Speaker 1: of a criminal activity you're in rico and that's going
Speaker 1: to subject into some serious prosecutorial possibilities there.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, And also the you know, the administration has just
Speaker 2: designated certain international crime international gangs as terrorist organizations, which
Speaker 2: opens up another avenue for use of certain investigative and
Speaker 2: legal tools. So the FBI's got to also make sure
Speaker 2: that it's not overly concerned, which it has been, about
Speaker 2: offending people. Oh, just like other organizations, they're worried about
Speaker 2: offending people and notwith keeping the American people safe.
Speaker 3: And I think that was a mistake. Amen.
Speaker 1: Christopher Plihotel, the name of the book wanted the FBI,
Speaker 1: I once knew how to restore faith in the world's
Speaker 1: premier law enforcement agency a guide to do that. So
Speaker 1: I gotta draw from the name of the book and
Speaker 1: our conversation today. You do have at least some measure
Speaker 1: of hope and this this thing can get turned around
Speaker 1: and they can get back to their core mission.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, I think there are people, there are enough people.
Speaker 3: With any FBI who will respond.
Speaker 2: Very favorably to a proper principled leadership environment that focuses
Speaker 2: on upholding the Constitution, protecting the American people, and being
Speaker 2: the SBI of old. And there are enough people who
Speaker 2: are waiting for that environment to come back. They'll snap
Speaker 2: back into place, and they're going to give the people
Speaker 2: back the FBI that we all deserve and need.
Speaker 1: Chris, I'm so happy we're able to end on a
Speaker 1: little dose of optimism at the end.
Speaker 3: There.
Speaker 1: Get a copy of the book.
Speaker 3: You can get it.
Speaker 1: I put your book up at fifty five KC dot
Speaker 1: com on my blog page so people can easily buy
Speaker 1: a copy of an all the courage them to do that. Chris,
Speaker 1: thanks for your time today, Thanks for writing the book,
Speaker 1: and I appreciate your, uh well, your work for the
Speaker 1: American people throughout your entire career.