a russian offensive, we will soon find out who's what happens when you've been wronged in the workplace? what do you do? let's say you're one of the top performing employees. you have met all of the criteria for promotion and you speak very difficult, foreign languages that you use at work literally every single day. but you're still passed over for promotion. and when you challenge it, you're told right to your face that you are being transferred to a less desirable position, just because of the color of your skin. you file a complaint with human resources after all, this kind of discrimination is patently illegal. but you've made trouble for the leadership and this isn't just the leadership of some random company. this is the leadership of the central intelligence agency. what happens next? not only are you not promoted, not only are you not given the assignment that you would originally been given,

but you're charged with multiple count of espionage, and you faced the prospect of spending the rest of your life in prison. i'm john curiosity and you're watching the whistleblowers ah. 2 2 today we're going to tell you about the story of one of the most heroic whistleblowers in the american intelligence community. this is the story of jeffrey sterling, an accomplished ca, operations officer, an expert on iranian affairs. jeffrey also happens to be african american. he joined the cia in 1993 and after going through operational and farsi language training, he was sent overseas to work on hard targets. he handled some of the most difficult cases in the near eastern operations division, but in 2000 he was passed over for a promotion. and his supervisor intimated that jeffrey could not have

a plumb assignment that he had already been given. simply because he was black. he filed the racial discrimination lawsuit against the cia, but instead of giving him his original assignment apologizing or trying to settle things quietly, the cia used it's nuclear option. we'll walk you through that story and tell you about one of the most resilient whistleblowers we know. jeffrey sterling, welcome to the show. thanks so much for joining us. thank you for having me, jeffrey. you and i were at the cia at the same time. in that period in the 1900 ninety's, the agency spent a great deal of time, energy and money focusing on the iranian nuclear program. you were trained in iran operations and you even learned to speak farsi. you had success overseas and you were involved in an operation that the ca ended up blowing. you return to ca headquarters and you were up for both a promotion and for a plumb assignment. tell us what happened then. why did you not go back overseas?

well, with regard to the iranian operation, but i was involved in caught operation, merlin and it was designed to 40 iranian nuclear program by giving them plan, given the iranians plans to a nuclear weapon. but the plan would have a flaw. so if you're running and use the plan to make a nuclear weapon, it wouldn't work. and the theory being that it would set the program back a number of years. well, i was given assurances that the plans would not the law and the plans would not be detected by anyone they were worked on by one of our national last year in the us. so i was given all sorts of assurance that this was a safe program and it wouldn't help the iranians get weapons. well, as we were going through and getting close to launch the individual who i was working with to approach the iranians with the plans. when he 1st saw the plan,

immediately protect the law. so far as being what it is. anybody sees a law, they're going to try to fix it and made it maybe even better than it would have been before. so when the individual was able to apply immediately, all sorts of alarm bells went off in my head. that this isn't going to help you, or you're actually going to help them develop a nuclear weapon. so i made my concerns known to my supervisors even all the way up through other channel within the ca. and the response basically was, as i was told at the meeting, where we learned about that the individual could see the flaw was to show i took my concerns to the senate intelligence committee with really no attention on really no care. there was a c, i ration and as long as the ca had,

it's pam approval. no one care. my goodness. i want to ask you also about your racial discrimination lawsuit. what happened? there is a problem for every intelligence community employee who's been wronged. you had a legitimate lawsuit, but it was dismissed by the district court after the ca invoked the state secrets privilege. you appealed to the federal court of appeals, but that court upheld the dismissal, saying, quote, there is no way for sterling to prove employment discrimination without exposing at least some classified details of the covered employment that gives context to his claim and quote, what this clearly means is that you may have been discriminated against you probably were discriminated against but to allow you to have your day in court like every other american would have, might expose secrets that has to be colossally frustrating. you never got your day in court. what happened next?

absolutely. well, even just add a little more context on that. i mean, i'm a lawyer, i went to law school, i knew the law. i knew what my options were and knew what protections i should have had under the constitution. i'm for a court one for the say to invoke state secret privilege to hi there discrimination . they weren't saying it wasn't discriminated. yes. they were saying that they didn't want to have to expose it or have it fall under scrutiny. foreign appeals court to uphold bad decision. it basically says and it is through everything i learned in law school out the door that a black man fighting for civil rights fighting for his civil rights is a threat to the national security of the century. oh, it's strong then it certainly it still things because i'm a front to the very nature of the constitution. i did not sign onto the cia with the thought that i'm giving up my civil rights. and that was also important to

understand is there was no argument about the merits of my discrimination case against the cia, or they just did not want to have their discrimination expose under the light of justice. and, and so it was tossed aside, i know without even getting to the merits of another thing that was happening in the background throughout this time was that the cia was intercepting emails that you were exchanging with. then new york times journalist james rising, rising, was covering the story of your discrimination suit. but the cia alleged without offering any proof that you were passing rise in secrets about iran, the sea, i never offered any proof that this was happening. in fact, there were disgruntled former c, i officers who otherwise would have been prime suspects. but they hadn't embarrassed the cia by accusing them of racial discrimination. you didn't know, of course, that you were being investigated under the espionage act and by the time you found

out the deck was already stacked against you, you were finally charged with multiple counts of espionage in the notorious eastern district of virginia. a disclaimer, i was also charged with multiple counts of espionage in the eastern district of virginia at about the same time. and like you, i hadn't committed espionage. and the charges against me were eventually dropped. but you were tougher than i was. you decided to fight them. that was an incredibly courageous move. tell us what that was like, what, what did it feel like as you were going through that experience? well, the, the initial shock was that i was trying to, i was the only purpose i had in mind joining the cia and exposing a flawed program was i was trying to serve my country satellite if you will, but then to be accused of violating the espionage act essentially is looking at the face of a spying and providing in the sequence. providing our country secrets to an enemy,

to be charged with that after trying to stand up for my rights as a citizen trying to work for the cia. and to be shown the door essentially by being accused of being a spy was a horrible experience. made me question everything about, you know, how my country viewed me. but i was the totally that i wasn't going to bow down to any sort of aggression like this. i knew i was never going to plead guilty to something that i did not do. and that certainly was the case here. i did not provide any one any secret with regards to anything that i worked on for with the ca. yes, in the throes of being fired. because as a result of my discrimination having the nerve to stand up to them and they,

i know there is a feeling that they had of retaliation. there is no vengeance like a vengeance runs deep and it runs law and any opportunity that they have to go after anyone perceived as an enemy, they're going to take it. they took that opportunity with me. yeah. i, you know, having my legal background, i knew what i was facing yet. i had a belief in truth that the truth will come out and, and that the criminal justice system would work the way it's supposed to do. it did not. i have no regrets about standing up for myself. i will never have any regrets . i think i regret how the system treated me and then really overall, how it treats whistleblowers in general. i think that is the crime here. agreed you underwent something of a show trial jeffrey, even former secretary of state condo. liza rice came out to testify against you, but the ca had to admit that he had had no actual evidence that you had committed

a crime. they had some metadata showing that you were in touch with rise and which you were clear about. but you argued that the 2 of you were talking about your racial discrimination lawsuit. nonetheless, you were convicted on a whole bunch of counts. this, of course, being the eastern district of virginia, after all. and even though you faced more than a 100 years in prison, you got 3 and a half. that in and of itself to me is evidence of your innocence. there is evidence that the c, i was upset with a sentence. the federal bureau of prisons claims that it tries to keep prisoners as close his family. sorry as close as possible to their families. but you were sent all the way across the country to a prison in colorado, and it was from this prison that you launched your appeal. tell us about those experiences. well, one thing i want to say it was about the eastern district in virginia. i mean, that is also the same court had decided i as a black man,

had no civil rights to be standing up for myself with national security. so it was a revolving door going to the same place that had no regard for me as a citizen of this country. but going through that trial, you're absolutely right. it was nothing more than a show for the see. i had absolutely no evidence to present. they had to admit that they didn't investigate anyone else other than me, even in the face of damning evidence against others. we had an individual on the stand who was part of the senate intelligence committee or the group that i spoke to my concerns about operation, maryland. that individual, shortly after the interview with me when i was using the proper channel channels to complain about classified operations that individuals fired or leaking information, no classified information from the senate intelligence committee reports. and by

the way, that reporter happened to be the same one that i was accused of leaking information too. and yet that individual wasn't question, wasn't investigated at all. yet, as you said, a collected every email that could possibly come from any computer i use as well as rise as well as others. but i was the only focus of their investigation. so going through that show trial was a little joke, if you will. the prosecution tried every move, every measure that they could try to keep me from looking at evidence. one of the only clear valid talks the judge has was that they couldn't prevent me from seeing classified information that i had already had access to. so that through their case, out of the window a little bit, but what they really ended up, really, the only thing that, that court proves beyond a reasonable doubt was that i was black. was that i was an african american. ah,

there was a whole parade of c i a officer saw white officers paraded on the stand to say yes, on the good c r a officer. no, i did not cloud, i did not leak classified information. not a bit of evidence about anything that i had done i supposedly, oh, no support for any other allegations, yet they were able to prove to that i was a, a black american. and as we unfortunately known this country, sometimes that's all that is needed. we're going to take a short break and return for the 2nd half of our conversation with theme cia whistleblower, jeffrey sterling. you're watching the whistleblowers stay tuned. 2 2 with ah, lisa canter,

russian state little narrative. i've tied as i'm phone and ignore slam scheme, the vast mckindoe's house lamps and music within 50000 feet. okay, so mine is the final speed anyone else with we will van in the european union the kremlin. yup. machine, the state on russia for date and switch r t spoke neck, given our video agency, roughly all band to on youtube. and we put on the 28th request with ah, for what happens when you mix digital gains with actual physical sport. something

like digital filters. yes. because on is preparing to host the 1st ever gains of the future. a cyber contest with a physical dimension. one of the innovators, eager to study at all, is on the verge of redefining sports and gaming. he tells us what's behind this synergy and if it's the future with ah, welcome back to the whistle blowers we're speaking with cia whistleblower jeffrey sterling. jeffrey were talking about your odyssey through the federal court in the eastern district of virginia. you were convicted of espionage despite the fact that

there was no actual evidence against you and you were sentenced to 3 and a half years in prison. one of the things that has been difficult for me to understand, and i'm sure you would agree, is that james, rising the new york times reporter whom you were accused of passing classified information to had only to say the words jeffrey sterling was not my source. and the case would have likely been over, but he refused to do that. why did risin ever explain himself to you? did he ever offer you an apology? oh no, he never explained a subsidy. and i've never felt that he needed to explain anything to me. right, and did not start that train that eventually landed me in prison. this was of and this was a purpose government with a purpose to come after me to teach me a lesson and send a message. as far as, i'm sorry. yes, you're absolutely right. yeah. it should have been over the moment that miss arise

. he said that i was not his source because i certainly was not a source. but then the entire ordeal turned into as the press was labeling in the writing case, because there was the concern on the issue of whether the government under the obama administration would put a reporter, journalist in jail, in prison, or refusing to testify about his sources. well, it became the rise in k, i became a spectator of my own criminal trial. and that was a bit disheartening, but i wouldn't lay any of that. blame on to mr. ryan, because no matter what he has no matter what he was going to say. the government was held back on at least sending me to trial one to show how the ca does great operations and to, to send a message to anyone who has the nerve to stand up and say no to government wrong.

so the interesting thing on that is the government didn't have the opportunity thanks again to the eastern district of virginia to call this arise and to force them to testify. yeah, they chose not to. i think they did so in the sense that they knew they had a, they had a current sleeve that they could use and it was going to be used throughout. and i think it was that, you know, a black man sitting at an attendance table. how i think our criminal justice system has proven that that is one of the easiest things to do. that's one of the easiest conditions to get and given the atmosphere, the environment being tried and isa ginger, with any concerns of national security. most individuals from the jury pool or connected in some way to some organization or some agency within the us

intelligence community. so there's already that stack, stack deck against you. but with regardless of only come back around, but mr. horizon, i don't have any animosity to him towards him for anything. he didn't start the process. i was like, his source. lizzy obligated to protect me in that sense. that's a debate i guess, can still wage on yet. this entire ordeal started by the u. s. government in the fact that they didn't call him, they lawyers, you put on your best evidence, but the fact that they didn't call him why and i think it lifted the fact that they had no evidence. and they really didn't care. they didn't care whether they call him or not. the purpose of the goal was jeffrey sterling and come after me. and that's either by breaking me financially through a lot of project the trial. yeah, we're talking about a situation for me, from the beginning of my discrimination issues with ca, to the trial,

and then we're talking almost 20 years. right. so there purposefully beyond this arrest jeffrey, you wrote an absolutely outstanding book about your life and experiences called unwanted spy the persecution of an american whistleblower. i was proud to write a blurb for the book, and the truth is that i read it in one sitting, which i told you at the time. i couldn't put it down. it's available, of course, at amazon, and wherever books are sold, the reviews were universally outstanding. what was the response to your book among your former colleagues at the ca? have you heard anything from any of them? actually maybe a 2 or 3 actually have you talk to as well when you stand up and you are considered a outcast as a ca, others at to see i will show you as oh,

my association runs branded at the ca. i've only had maybe one or 2 former colleagues who have read the read the book and congratulate me on it for telling the truth about how things are at the ca. but yeah, universally though, i haven't had much contact with any of the people. i really considered friends when i was at the agency. again, the fear of being also labels disgruntled employee by have any association with me. i think shy them away from me. but the, just to the book and thank you for your kind of kind of the most interesting reaction to the book. so again, as it was established in the court, i follow the rule. so as i was writing the book, i had to submit information to the publications review board so that they can make

sure i learned of all any classified information. of course, there were many aspects of the book that they had a problem with. so i probably sent them the trial transcript, which basically laid out my entire career at the cia, and there was much for them to argue about. so going through the process, it took me about 3 months to get publications review approval, and that is pretty unheard of if you actually care to follow the rules. we know so many other authors who don't even bother with it yet or not that's, that's very impressive. actually my, my 1st book took me 9 months to write. it took me 22 months to get it cleared by the see locations review board. they, they 1st gave me what's called a blanket rejection, where they said that literally everything i had written in the book was classified

. and therefore i was prohibited from moving forward with it. and i had to write back and say, look, it's not classified that i was born in pennsylvania. it's not classified that my ex wife spoke greek. it's not classified that i got a degree in middle eastern studies. and so that was the 1st salvo in a fight that lasted just short of 2 years. i know what you went through. i wanted to ask you to about some of the fall out. you took the c, i a's best shot and you survived. what advice would you give would be whistleblowers, especially in the national security arena, who are considering going public with evidence of wrongdoing? what would you tell them? i was told to stay true to yourself and if they're just because you're part of this massive machine, that is the us government do not look at your job through the lens of the fear or

the lens of apprehension about what can happen to you if you stand individual, stand up that, that stand up to aggression is stand up wrong doing what has made this country green and keeps making a great because there are people who have the nerve to get up and say enough or stop. so my advice to any would be whistleblower. i mean the thing is no one sets out to be a whistleblower. that's right. i know what i'm going. i'm going to blow the whistle today. you know, get to a point and we all have our own triggers of where we can see wrong doing and we decide to do something. and my advice is stay with that feeling stick with your god on wanting to come forward. there is going, especially on a government side, there is going to be anger thrown at you. there is going to be every legal method

possible to be thrown at you, but stick to your gun. because for me, the main thing that helped me go through all of this is that i was able to look myself in the mirror. if i looked and i could see and except and like who i saw that i was going to continue whatever course, you know, that was going to be late for me. if i had bowed down, if i had not blowing the whistle about racial discrimination at ca or about how foolhardy operation merlin was, i never would have been able to live with myself after that. i will have liked who i saw in there. so for, for any person who could potentially be it was a little or stick with think with what you know, stick with your feeling because that'll carry you through whatever hardships that you'll face. i would like to thank our guest c i whistle blower,

jeffrey sterling for joining us today. and thanks to our viewers, i'm john kerry. aku, please join us again next week for another episode of the whistle blowers. 2 2 ah, ah, in the 1950s, the u. s. used former nazis against the soviet union in the 21st century. they engineered kuta, the fish, the former soviet republic, into our confrontation with moscow. will certainly of the united states and the u. k. and the rest of the western world had not engaged in conflict with the ukraine and with the soviet union and its successor, the russian federation. we will not have the horrible situation we have today. i

think that if the american stopped, we would be at peace and the role would be a lot better place. and the economy, the world will function considerably better than is doing now. now when i was showing wrong, when i just don't know. i mean, you have to figure out this thing becomes the advocate and engagement. it was the trail. when so many find themselves worlds apart, we choose to look for common ground.

ah, yes. now can you give me if it's deploy smear to nancy, you know them look, you know, the new book is that probably the national she with will showcase is with a boy. why is it up to a boy ah, a big deal almost noon. that would be what am in my chair, this is laura doesn't want that extra mom, but i know it's up

a minute whole ah ah, no cooperation has never been named it any 3rd party. but we never allow any 3rd party to dictate to us what to do with cooperation between china and russia. as we said more than once, is very important in stabilizing the international situation. china's top different amounts and vladimir putin meet in moscow to discuss waste his friends and by launch will cooperate with all the visits a temporary refugee camp. and they don't yet republican picks of those who've been evacuated from the front lines in on tomorrow. but they told us to write our initials on our hands with a red marker because they were going.