so civilizations, because of this separation in between, within the real easy was separated sharply. it's mistaken. but if you allow yourself to get rid of what is bad in you and try to be a making a common sense with the rest of the people by doing the same, then you have these kinds of collective. and this, the, the chinese had the before, even in the image or is it but actually is exactly half way road in between as a society that is developing individual development and the freedom which is now in that and in the west. and collectivism, which is the church absolutely say, well we are striving for the balance between personal dignity and social connection . and i think this is, you know, ultimately what the oldest society is trying to figure out. but we have to, we've been there, it's been amazing talking to you. thank you very much for them,

both of us and thank you for watching hope to hear again are well the part the, [000:00:00;00] the, to take a fresh look around his life. kaleidoscopic isn't just a shepherd,

reality distortion by power to division with no real live indians. fixtures, design to simplify will confuse really once a better wills. and is it just because it shows you fractured images, presented as fast. can you see through their illusion going underground can the, or the most americans have complaints about corruption, whether at the local state or even the national levels. we don't have to live with corruption as an endemic part of our culture, like many other countries do. but it's still frustrating when one encounters it. and then what happens when the corruption that one encounters is so agree just so

bold as to put a person's life in danger. what happens when green clouds, the judgment of otherwise professional accomplished people? what happens when your own lawyer turns against you? and how about if your lawyer is working with rudy julie hunting to do it? you go to court and you assume that on john kerry onto welcome to the whistle blowers the . 2 2 2 is talk pleasant, it was born and raised in slovenia, a patriot, and a natural athlete. he decided to join his country's intelligent service, where he specialized in counter terrorist operations. he trained with the u. s. secret service and the navy seals before deciding to emigrate to the united states in 2003 because of his athletic ability, he was actually drafted as a place kicker by an nfl team in 2004 and offered that he declined so that he could instead work for

a company under contract with the international criminal court is talk to. busy counter terrorist teams to retrieve evidence or to capture people around the world under indictment in the i, c. c. it was during one of these operations in 2017. that is talk, and his team of operations officers entered a series of alleged terrorist safe houses in africa, in pursuit of terrorist suspects. they found their man, but they also found a stash of cash. these are houses with pallets of american currency, notably one with $6000000000.00 and another with $10000000000.00. in $100.00 bills. the source of the money is a mystery. it most likely belong to the government of former libyan leader. more mar, i'll come daffy. it may have been a c, i is money. it could have been money hoarded by all tied up. is talk, ordered that the cash be secured in warehouses and because he's a patriot,

he thought to return it to the us treasury. he received permission to do just that from the us department of the treasury. but when he went to africa to pick up the money and to take it back to the us. the american embassy turned on him and he was arrested by local authorities, jailed, beaten, and eventually expelled. just weeks later, the american government officials who were supposed to help him, retired with new houses and new cars. sounds fishing, doesn't it. were joined by bruce spine. he's a former associate deputy attorney general of the united states. he's one of the country's leading constitutional scholars. and he's the attorney representing is talk public in his suit against the us government and the officials who apparently turned on him. bruce, welcome to the show. you know, thank you for inviting you to bruce. let's start at the very beginning here. tell us about this money. where is it? why is it there? and how did is time go about getting permission to bring it back?

and so the money really can be located any more specifically then uh, somewhere in africa and card for security concerns. uh, i think that uh, where did it come from? uh, the most likely place is uh from uh, colonel cut off these uh, covers did choose amounts of cash that were probably like his weapons of conventional weapons that were scattered throughout africa when he was overthrown. now this is not a case where there was any real watkins, a buy stock to be secretive. it was all transparent. he took the initial samples of the cash to the us department of justice. had them interrogate him free hours, tests the cash to make certain it was authentic,

it wasn't counterfeit. and that's not an example of someone who think is doing something wrong. i mean, we didn't have briggs instance al capone's visit j edgar hoover before just gang sleggs. so after he had obtained this bidding and clearance from the department of justice, he proceeded with his a port a for part of the attorney who had turned against them to the treasury department and asked for letters authorizing the repatriation of $6000000000.00. first could be as much as 10000000000 additional into the treasury department and he was given to letters and instructions as to how the wire transfer might be done. then he proceeded to travel to ivory coast where the 6000000000 was being held. and it was available for transfer. uh once he had the approval of the us embassy. he was told by his lawyer. yes, she with a mr. billington,

who will be the man in charge of the embassy. and he will do everything necessary to have the money repay tree. lo and behold, when the stock arrives with a letter from the treasury department in which is lawyers knowledge that he had been completely vetted and approved by the justice department. mister building 10 screams and yells, and he was in the criminality that he and others are all going to be going to prison. he ordered him to be detained by marines at the embassy he left into part is that he had a mr. plastic arrested, imprisoned with hardened criminals, where his life was in danger for hours after that duration. uh, the money that had been stored in

a nearby police office was disappeared. i don't think it takes much speculation to know what likely happened to it. it was a french lawyer who is close to his doc, who is able since ivory coast is a french speaking country, a former french colony to intercede. vouch for mister plus, next integrity in fact was capturing terrorist. he wasn't a terrorist himself and he was able to be released after being really under enormous stress, almost living in torture conditions, joe tail, and then returned to the united states. and then his lawyer abandoned him. lawsuit erupted because the, the suspicion was, as you mentioned in your opening, this sudden surge of wells in persons who are working for the government, which doesn't pay you laws must style salary indicative of they had

unexplained the ability to buy very palatial houses and vehicles which now the case is now on appeal, but at least as we speak, there's been no disputing. the factual narrative that has been related on your program. and you have to ask, why would a country, it's got a $34.00 trillion dollar national debt. it's running annual budget deficits of $1.00 to $2.00 or more trillion dollars. turn away billions of dollars cost free and repatriated money. it doesn't make any sense unless there's some old tier motors, right? so the government officials that were involved in the whole, ultimately the vindicate. but i think what this shows, in some sense, john, and i think you experience just to see a and after $911.00,

it almost became routine for the government to throw money anywhere under any name of anti terrorism, helping someone remember we were giving cut off the money in part because you've been to w m d, there is no congressional oversight. no tracking money goes everywhere. mm hm. and i think this is an effort to try to retrieve the money, keep it out of the hands of terrorists. be a good samaritan, right? to the extent there's money pay pay taxes on and it all goes into the ditch. and it's really very uncomplimentary to the federal government. and i want underscore then it was under both the trump invited administrations. that's right. not a partisan issue. so bruce happens, so it is talk, is trying to do the right thing. he goes to the treasury department to get permission. he walks out of the treasury department with a signed letter authorizing him to return the money that he found to the us treasury. as you said, he flies to africa,

he goes to the us embassy to meet with the officials there. this meeting came after a meeting in washington with a judge, eugene sullivan, and with representatives of the state department and the justice department. and then what happened? well, what happened was when he arrived and was told to go to the embassy instead of being received amicably and enthusiast, typically with this treasury letters, it was may be challenged, still with statements. well, the treasury letters are focused and you know, they're not all sense. and when it's dark, said, well, they are authentic this on the letterhead, there was nothing fishy about them. he could call the treasury, gave them phone numbers that he can call back in washington dc. this, after all is the digital age. you don't have to sail across the atlantic ocean to get a response that was not done. it was simply a dogmatic steve. no, i don't believe this is right. i think that you're not who you are, that this is fraud. all come through his re statements that he had him detained

with machine guns pointed at him right for hours. and then suddenly, as you can imagine, all the billions of dollars disappear, disappeared, additional $10000000000.00 nearby also disappeared as well. so the whole thing makes no sense at all if you're a truly bona fi, uh uh, an embassy official. and someone is coming with the letter saying i'm trying to repatriate $6000000000.00 to the us treasury. here's the money here. the letters you initially would say, okay, well that's wonderful. i'll make a phone call, let me just i, i want to have it verified. and that's where you can do in this day and age you pick up a phone is what's the app? there are ways to communicate you can communicate by email. that's right, but that wasn't done. it was just a contrived excuse to prevent the repatriation of money. and you would think that the department of treasury, department of justice would be furious. what is the money was going to come in and

at least cut the deficit? $6000000000.00. that's not pocket change. nothing. anything. they've been hostile. this stuff nord efforts. i've sent letters to the new general counsel, the treasury department under by no response whatsoever. no interest in any of this . and the fact is, this, these billions are not just the ceiling and they are the floor. for reasons known, perhaps best of the intelligence community. there are a lot of us dollars all over africa, run a b informants, a band, and the money, maybe c i a, they don't say they're attacked and so they have to band and we're caches. if you work in africa, you readily understand that caches the cooling of the rail and if you will, and that's how you get things done. so in lots of, yes, that's how you, through friends and the enemies very quickly and enemies into french very quickly.

so there could be huge amounts there, and especially because congress does know, oversight and c, i a can span without any auditing, whatsoever. you can imagine money being printed in going everywhere, right? we, we used to say as a c i o. and we have to say to you that intelligence is a, is a cash business. there is no oversight. there is no one to keep the honest, people honest. but bruce hold that thought we're going to take a short commercial break. and when we come back, we're going to speak with bruce, find a little bit more about taking to the courts. what happens when an individual takes on the lady american government stay tuned. 2 2 2 2 2 2 the. 2 the,

[000:00:00;00] the after the end of world war 2, great britain decided to make up for its losses with the merciless exploitation of its colonies. the plundering of the occupied territories. 8 my la, devastated as a result of decades loan fighting extremely hard. j, as in grew and in 1948, the colonial administration was forced to declare a state of emergency. in response patriots united him to the malay in people's liberation army, and began a guerrilla war. london decided to suppress resistance, georgia and mass deport agents. executions of civilian n, sprain of chemicals, scale being and cutting off at these were the barbaric methods the british used trying to keep my la within their empire. the massacre in the village of baton

gully, committed by the scots guards against the unarmed beds caused a particular stir. the entire male population became victims. trying to suppress the gorilla movement, the occupiers relocated 500000 people to concentration camps. for roses, girl d boards, fruits. the patriots were scattered. however, the british experienced the strength of the malay resistance to the full extent. the british army losses in the la were the largest since the end of world war 2. in 1957, the british empire was forced to recognize malay and independence. the resilience of them a late people put an end to the history of british colonialism in southeast asia. the the welcome back to the list of lawyers. i'm john kerry onto were speaking with attorney bruce fine about

a nightmarish experience that his client is talking plus, nick has had in trying to return as much as $16000000000.00 in cash to the us treasury cash. he found in what was apparently a safe house in africa. bruce, good to have you with us. thanks again. a. thank you, bruce that you filed a federal lawsuit in washington, dc on is talked plugged next behalf. tell us about that. so what exactly does it say? well, the suit charges are common law fraud, basically. uh the narrative is that his lawyer promised falsely to represent is tax best interest in assisting him to repatriate the money . but in fact, going buying is types back. he never intended to represent the stock,

but to plot with associates, his son and 3 federal defendants, to sabotage the repatriation and take the money all or in part for himself and his compatriot. mm hm. they were re, federal, defendants involved and plus his lawyer in the lawyer, son. now what we had here is there's congress enacted what's called the westfall act many years ago. the purpose was to try to relieve the anxiety of federal officials and thought, well, you know, if we're su and then it puts a strain on our finances, it's going to make us less aggressive in discharging our do. so the westfall act enables the government to substitute the united states for federal defender in cases where the federal defender in part is acting arguably to benefit in some way the united states itself. our argument was, with regard to these 3 defendants,

you can't possibly be benefiting united states. you're trying to block the repatriation no billions of don't rush by definition. i mean that's not, that's not hard sites. and since that is a prerequisite to claiming the benefits of the best law act, we said no, these individuals have to defend themselves. but of the judge, i thought, and the road is decision said in some sense they were trying to help united states because they were acting in their official capacities when the wrongs occurred. well, that's true enough. they were acting in their official capacities, but not to benefit the united states. they're explaining their official capacity is just, i would charge the united states to use it to enrich themselves. me not the united states. mm hm. um. so that was one issue that we rejected. and then when it came to the judge common law fraud, we made a very simple fraud claim. namely, it's your state of mind. someone state of mind is a fact. under the law,

you represent that you're going to be faithful and honest and representing a client. at that time you intend to dishonor the client's interest to sabotage they climb. you've misrepresented your state of mind. that's fraud. it's common law fraud is similar in a case where you have a contract where you sign a contract knowing at the time you sign, you do not intend to fulfill your just tricking the other side to go along. and the judge, you should are ruling saying, well, we could sue the lawyers for malpractice, negligence but not. it's wrong. i don't, i still can't understand that reasoning at all. um, i just let me know and we have a case now. it's on appeal to you as court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit to where you know, never where i'm optimistic they, we can prevailed here. one of the things that is interesting to me, and i've read this lawsuit and i've read the responses, of course, is that the sullivans this former judge, eugene sullivan,

and his son against whom the lawsuit is still pending. it's that the sullivans never dispute your allegations of fraud. they never say and their response, we didn't steal the money. what should we take from that as well? you take the inference is that they're trying to escape on technicalities any the justice. so otherwise, even the allegations you know, when they're unrelated and you obviously have a chance to put that in your replies and judge sullivan has submitted documents and memoranda. he but is never had and never says, i did do it, is that i was his lawyer. all long i represented them fairly, there's a that it's all around the edge. it's my own view. as a lawyer in court regularly is that there's an issue of docket, congestion, and judges often times look for excuses to get rid of cases that they don't think

are high profile and no right. at least this gets off my doc and then the court of appeals can take care of. right. and i think that's what happened in this particular case. i still cannot conceive because it's just a very, very elementary principal of common law fraud. going back 80 years, at least this representing your state of mind can be fraudulent if you intend to violate a representation where you sail honor, and that's exactly what we allege in the complaint. when the judge sullivan said i will be your attorney to start class next signed up at the same time he was planning. that's really not what i'm going to do. i'm not going to represent him. i'm going to sabotage him to my benefits. now that's obviously something that we have to prove it trial if this went forward and goes forward. but surely it states the common law fraud claim. the judge said, no, you, you all, you have the legs,

just negligence or now practice, which seems to me quite a sure. one of the things that i've learned from you is in cases like this, the defendant has to specifically rebut the accusations that the plaintive is making. and frankly, i was surprised when elements of this suit were, were denied because rather than to say, no, i didn't do it. the response was no, you shouldn't be allowed to assume me. well, that's right. i mean, use it when you file an answer and a complaint you have 2 of you, either a firm or deny or a firm. you know, all the factual allegations here at the defendants ran away from there to didn't even put a cow over any of the details that were set forth in that to me speaks volumes. and even though there is where you called, you know,

litigation privilege. you can make statements that are rather critical of other people and litigation, not incurred defamation, but the other side is a chance to say, by the way, none of this is true and they have ample opportunity to do that. and nothing that has happened in the lawsuit outside the lawsuit suggest that any of the narrative that we set forth is wrong. and unfortunately, justice is ledford more than mercury foot, i think will prevail, but it's not going to happen. okay. well, that's actually my next question for you, bruce is, is what's next? how long do you expect this to take? and do you expect that justice is attainable? finally for is not pleasant. i do think that's true. i think we'll probably have, you know, an argument in the us court of appeals, i believe probably sometimes in june and july,

sometime in the summer. i don't think it's all that difficult. the case is probably from now, you know, 6 months before we get an opinion, i hope it reversed and it goes back at that time. there might be some kind of settlement. i don't know. uh because the money involved is very, very large. uh, but who knows mean what the landscape is gonna look like, and we, for the case ends, we may have a new administration, may not be buying that it may not be true. i hope a new administration would look more favorably at what we're trying to do here. as we'd be working with them. i'd just say with, there's more money there. we're repatriate. why are you turning this away? that's right. but it's, it's, it's really quite scandalous that congress has no oversight which with, you know, they're investigating all this other stuff. it's, you know, dribble in here, something that could really put a dent in the budget deficit. the good care list,

bruce fine, thank you so much for joining us. well, thank you for inviting me, john. thank you. why is it sometimes so hard to do the right thing? why do governments so often stand in the way of debris are good? we can probably all agree that it's more important to do the right thing then to do things right. mark twain, the author said, quote, you're never wrong for doing the right thing on quote. but i would add that doing the right thing often takes great courage and integrity, like the courage and integrity displayed by his talk. pleasant. thank you to bruce fine for joining us today. and thanks to our viewers for being with us for another episode of whistle blowers and john kerry onto we'll see you next. 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

the, [000:00:00;00] the, [000:00:00;00]

the, the magenta itself, the gaining independence and from the form of the ivory coast, remained under the strong influence of its foam and metropolitan pro french president, phoenix, who said one, yet ruled the country for 33 years, ensuring the interest to from the dead the gun on deed isn't it in a new house, including his foster, larry's chestnut goods was douglas who saw him a little more appropriate after the death of, of a one year. a new lead to long come back. ball came to power and i'm ready to double for example, the accuracy. why do you know if we're picking up from the input? isn't good enough for tiffany to one is the one the bronze immediately dean. good luck. boeing. enemy, a deep political crisis ensued. walk a, the country 2nd largest city, turned into

a theater of law. looking to talk with somebody from 130 to the other 2 voters on no mortgage. how did the dramatic events unfold? and how is walk a recovering from? he is a bloody conflict. watch on, see the republic of felicia is illegal and violate, sold the constitutional and democratic rules. all america includes stationed in the i must leave the nation enough that says immediately as the west african country cox. because the us for about another you, for any attempt to reach the border region of belgrade, like 2 people were killed in