Andrew Bustamante: CIA Spy | Lex Fridman Podcast #310

0:00- Mossad will do anything.

0:01Mossad has no qualms doing what it takes

0:05to ensure the survival of every Israeli citizen

0:08around the world.

0:09Most other countries will stop at some point,

0:13but Mossad doesn't do that.

0:17- The following is a conversation with Andrew Bustamante,

0:20former CIA Covert Intelligence Officer

0:22and US Air Force Combat veteran,

0:24including the job of operational targeting,

0:27encrypted communications and launch operations

0:31for 200 nuclear intercontinental ballistic missiles.

0:36Andrew's over seven years as a CIA spy,

0:39have given him a skillset

0:41and a perspective on the world

0:43that is fascinating to explore.

0:46This is the Lex Fridman Podcast.

0:48To support it, please check out our sponsors

0:50in the description.

0:52And now, dear friends, here's Andrew Bustamante.

0:56The Central Intelligence Agency

0:58was formed almost 75 years ago.

1:01What is the mission of the CIA? How does it work?

1:04- The mission of the CIA is to collect intelligence

1:07from around the world that supports

1:08a national security mission

1:10and be the central repository

1:12for all other intelligence agencies.

1:14So that it's one collective source

1:17where all intelligence can be synthesized

1:20and then passed forward to the decision-makers.

1:23- That doesn't include domestic intelligence,

1:26it's primarily looking outward outside the United States.

1:29- Correct, CIA is the Foreign Intelligence Collection.

1:35King spoke if you will.

1:37FBI does domestic

1:38and then Department of Homeland Security does domestic,

1:41law enforcement essentially handles all things domestic.

1:45Intelligence is not law enforcement,

1:46so we technically cannot work inside the United States.

1:50- Is there clear lines to be drawn between,

1:52like you just said, the CIA, FBI

1:56and the other US intelligence agencies like the DIA,

2:00Defense Intelligence Agency,

2:01Department of Homeland Security,

2:04NSA, National Security Agency.

2:07And there's a list...

2:08- There's a list of about 33 different

2:10intelligence organizations.

2:11- It's like the army, the Navy has it.

2:13All the different organizations

2:14have their own intelligence groups.

2:16So is there clear lines here to be drawn

2:19or is the CIA the giant integrator of all of these?

2:23- It's a little bit of both, to be honest.

2:24So yes, there are absolutely lines.

2:26And more so than the lines, there are lines that divide

2:29what our primary mission is.

2:30Everything's gotta be prioritized.

2:32That's one of the benefits and the superpowers

2:34of the United States,

2:36is we prioritize everything.

2:38So different intelligence organizations are prioritized

2:41to collect certain types of intelligence.

2:43And then within the confines of how they collect,

2:47they're also given unique authorities.

2:49Authorities are a term that's directed

2:51by the executive branch.

2:53Different agencies have different authorities

2:55to execute missions in different ways.

2:58FBI can't execute the same way CIA executes

3:01and CIA can't execute the same way NGA executes.

3:05But then at the end, excuse me, when it's all collected,

3:08then yes, CIA still acts

3:11as a final synthesizing repository to create

3:15what's known as the President's daily brief.

3:17The PDB, the only way CIA can create the PDB is

3:20by being the single source of all source intelligence

3:24from around the IC, the intelligence community,

3:28which are those 30 some odd

3:30and always changing organizations that are sponsored

3:34for intelligence operations.

3:36- What does the PDB, the President's Daily Brief look like?

3:38How long is it? What does it contain?

3:41- So, first of all, it looks like the most

3:43expensive book report you can ever imagine.

3:45It's got its own binder. It's all very high end.

3:48It feels important. It looks important.

3:51It's not like a cheap trapper keeper.

3:54It's somewhere between, I would give it probably

3:56between 50 and 125 pages a day.

3:59It's produced every day around two o'clock in the morning

4:02by a dedicated group of analysts.

4:05And each page is essentially a short paragraph

4:09to a few paragraphs about a priority happening

4:13that affects national security from around the world.

4:16The president rarely gets to the entire briefing in a day.

4:19He relies on a briefer instead to prioritize what

4:23inside the briefing needs to be shared with the president.

4:25'Cause some days the PDB will get briefed in 10 minutes

4:28and some days it'll be briefed over the course of two hours.

4:30It depends on the president's schedule.

4:32- How much competition is there for the first page.

4:36And so how much jockeying there is for attention for,

4:41I imagine for all the different intelligence agencies

4:44and within the CIA, there's probably different groups

4:47that are modular and they're all care about

4:49different nations or different cases.

4:53And do you understand

4:57how much competition there is for the attention

4:59for the limited attention of the president?

5:01- You're 100% correct in how the agency

5:05and how officers and managers at the agency handle the PDB.

5:09There's a ton of competition.

5:10Everybody wants to be the first on the radar.

5:12Everybody wants to be on the first page.

5:14The thing that we're not baking into the equation

5:17is the president's interests.

5:19The president dictates what's on the first page of his PDB

5:21and he will tell them, usually the day before,

5:23I wanna see this on the first page tomorrow,

5:25bring this to me in the beginning.

5:26I don't want to hear about

5:27what's happening in Mozambique.

5:28I don't really care about what's happening in Saudi Arabia.

5:30I wanna see one, two, three.

5:32And regardless of whether or not those are

5:34the three biggest things in the world,

5:37the president's the executive.

5:38He's the one, he's the ultimate customer.

5:40So we do what the customer says.

5:42That has backfired in the past,

5:44if you haven't already started seeing how

5:46that could go wrong, that has backfired in the past.

5:49But that is essentially what happens when you serve

5:51in the executive branch.

5:53You serve the executive.

5:55- So what's the role, the director of the CIA

5:58versus the president?

5:59What's that dance like?

6:01So the president really leads the focus of the CIA?

6:06- The president is the commander-in-chief for the military.

6:09But the executive, the president

6:11is also the executive for the entirety

6:14of the intelligence community.

6:16So he's the ultimate customer.

6:19If you look at it like a business, the customer,

6:22the person spending the money is the president

6:25and the director is the CEO.

6:27So if the director doesn't create

6:29what the president wants, there's gonna be a new director.

6:31That's why the director of CIA

6:32is a presidential appointed position.

6:34Sometimes they're extremely

6:35qualified intelligence professionals.

6:37Sometimes they're just professional politicians

6:39or soldiers that get put into that seat

6:41because the president trusts them to do

6:44what he wants them to do.

6:46Another gaping area

6:50that causes problems.

6:52But that's still the way it is.

6:54- So you think this is a problematic configuration

6:57of the whole system?

6:58- Massive flaw in the system.

6:59It is a massive flaw in the system

7:00because if you're essentially appointing a director to do

7:04what you want them to do, then you're assigning a crony.

7:08And that's what we define corruption

7:10as within the United States.

7:11And inside the United States,

7:12we say if you pick somebody outside of merit

7:15for any other reason other than merit, then it's cronyism

7:17or it's nepotism.

7:19Here that's exactly what our structure's built on.

7:21All presidential appointees are appointed

7:23on something other than merit.

7:25- So for an intelligence agency to be effective,

7:27it has to discover the truth and communicate that truth.

7:31And maybe if you're appointing the director of that agency,

7:35they're less likely to communicate the truth to you

7:38unless the truth aligns perfectly

7:40with your desired worldview.

7:41- Well, not necessarily perfectly,

7:43because there are other steps, right?

7:45They have to go in front of Congress

7:46and they have to have the support

7:48of multiple legislatures or legislators.

7:51But the challenge is that the shortlist of people

7:55who even get the opportunity

7:57aren't a meritorious list.

7:59It's a short list based off of who the president is picking

8:01or who the would be president is picking.

8:03Now I think we've proven

8:05that an intelligence organization can be extremely effective

8:10even within the flawed system.

8:13The challenge is

8:14how much more effective could we be if we improved?

8:17And I think that's the challenge that faces

8:20a lot of the US government.

8:21I think that's a challenge that has resulted in

8:26what we see today when it comes to the decline

8:28of American power and American influence,

8:31the rise of foreign influence,

8:33authoritarian powers and a shrinking US economy.

8:37A growing Chinese economy.

8:39And it's just, we have questions, hard questions

8:42we need to ask ourselves about

8:43how we're gonna handle the future.

8:45- What aspect of that communication between the president

8:47and the CIA could be fixed to help

8:52fix the problems that you're referring to

8:54in terms of the decline of American power.

8:57- So when you talk about the president wanting to prioritize

9:02what the president cares about, that immediately shows

9:06a break between what actually matters

9:09to the long-term success of the United States

9:12versus what benefits the short-term success

9:15of the current president.

9:16- Because any president is just a human being

9:20and has a very narrow focus.

9:21And narrow focus is not a long-term calculation.

9:24- Exactly, what's the maximum amount of years

9:26a president can be president?

9:28Eight, he or she...

9:30- In the United States.

9:31- In the United States according

9:33to our current constitution.

9:35(Andrew laughing)

9:36But they're very limited

9:39in terms of what they have to prioritize.

9:41And then if you look at a four year cycle,

9:44two years of that is essentially preparing

9:45for the next election cycle.

9:47So what's only two years of really quality attention

9:49you get from the president,

9:50who's the chief executive of all the intelligence community.

9:53So the most important thing to them

9:55is not always the most important thing

9:57to the long-term survival of the United States.

9:59- What do you make of the hostile relationship

10:02that to me at least stands out of the presidents

10:04between Donald Trump and the CIA?

10:07Was that a very kind of a personal bickering?

10:11I mean, is there something interesting to you

10:13about the dynamics between that particular president

10:16and that particular instantiation

10:18of the intelligence agency?

10:19- Man, there were lots of things fascinating to me

10:21about that relationship, so first...

10:24- What's the good and the bad? Sorry to interrupt.

10:26- So lemme start with the good first

10:27'cause there's a lot of people who don't

10:28think there was any good.

10:30So the good thing is, we saw that the president,

10:35who's the chief customer, the executive to the CIA,

10:40when the president doesn't want to hear what CIA

10:43has to say, he's not gonna listen.

10:45I think that's an important lesson for everyone

10:47to take home.

10:49If the president doesn't care what you have to say,

10:51he's gonna take funding away, or she will take funding away.

10:54They're gonna take attention away.

10:56They're going to shut down

10:59your operations, your missions.

11:02They're gonna kill the careers of the people working there.

11:04Think about that, for the four years

11:05that President Trump was the president,

11:08basically everybody at CIA, their career was put on pause.

11:12Some people's careers were ended,

11:13some people voluntarily left their career there

11:16because they found themselves working for a single customer

11:20that didn't want what they had to produce.

11:21- So for people who don't know,

11:24Donald Trump did not display significant

11:26deep interest in the output.

11:30- [Andrew] He did not trust it, yeah.

11:30- He was a disinterested customer of the information.

11:32- Exactly right, and then what

11:34do disinterested customers do?

11:37They go find someone else to create their product.

11:39And that's exactly what Donald Trump did.

11:40And he did it through the private intelligence world,

11:43funding private intelligence companies

11:45to run their own operations

11:46that brought him the information he cared about

11:49when CIA wouldn't.

11:50It also didn't help that CIA stepped outside

11:53of their confines, right?

11:54CIA is supposed to collect foreign intelligence

11:56and not comment on domestic matters.

11:58They went way outside of that

12:00when they started challenging the president,

12:02when they started questioning the results, when they started

12:06publicly claiming Russian influence.

12:08That's all something the FBI could have handled by itself,

12:10the Justice Department could have handled by itself.

12:12CIA had no place to contribute to that conversation.

12:16And when they did, all they did was undermine

12:18the relationship they had with their primary customer.

12:21- Let me sort of focus in on this relationship

12:26between the president or the leader

12:29and the intelligence agency

12:31and look outside the United States.

12:34It seems like authoritarian regimes

12:36or regimes throughout history,

12:37if you look at Stalin and Hitler, if you look at today

12:40with Vladimir Putin, the negative effects

12:43of power corrupting the mind of a leader

12:47manifest itself is that they start

12:50to get bad information from the intelligence agencies.

12:53So this kind of thing that you're talking about,

12:55over time, they start hearing information

12:59they want to hear.

13:00The agency starts producing only the kind of information

13:04they want to hear.

13:06And the leader's worldview starts becoming distorted

13:09to where the propaganda they generate is also

13:14the thing that the intelligence agencies provide to them.

13:18And so they start believing their own propaganda

13:21and they start getting distorted view of the world.

13:23Sorry for the sort of walking through in a weird way.

13:27But I guess I want to ask, do you think,

13:30let's look at Vladimir Putin specifically.

13:32Do you think he's getting accurate information

13:37about the world?

13:38Do you think he knows the truth of the world?

13:40Whether that's the war in Ukraine,

13:42whether that's the behavior of the other nations in NATO,

13:45the United States in general.

13:47What do you think?

13:49- It's rare that I'll talk about just thinking,

13:52I prefer to share my assessment.

13:55Why I assess things a certain way rather than just

13:57what's my random opinion.

13:59And my assessment, Vladimir Putin is winning.

14:03Russia is winning.

14:04They're winning in Ukraine,

14:05but they're also winning the battle of influence

14:07against the West.

14:08They're winning in the face of economic sanctions.

14:11They're winning empirically.

14:13When you look at the math, they're winning.

14:15So when you ask me whether

14:17or not Putin is getting good information

14:19for his intelligence services,

14:20when I look at my overall assessment

14:22of multiple data points,

14:24he must be getting good information.

14:26Do I know how or why? I do not.

14:29I don't know how or why it works there.

14:31I don't know how such deep cronyism,

14:35such deep corruption can

14:38possibly yield true real results.

14:41And yet somehow there are real results happening.

14:43So it's either excessive waste and an accidental win,

14:47or there really is a system

14:48and a process there that's functioning.

14:50- So this winning idea is very interesting.

14:52In what way, short term and long term, is Russia winning?

14:56Some people say there was a miscalculation

14:58of the way the invasion happened.

15:00There was an assumption that you would be able to

15:03successfully take Kiev.

15:06You'd be able to successfully capture the east,

15:09the south, and the north of Ukraine.

15:11And with what now appears to be

15:15significantly insufficient troops spread way too thin

15:18across way too large of a front.

15:21So that seems to be like an intelligence failure.

15:27And that doesn't seem to be like winning.

15:29In another way, it doesn't seem like winning

15:31if we put aside the human cost of war,

15:34it doesn't seem like winning because the hearts

15:38and minds of the West were completely

15:41on the side of Ukraine.

15:43This particular leader in Vladi Zelensky

15:46captured the attention of the world and the hearts

15:48and minds of Europe, the West

15:52and many other nations throughout the world,

15:54both financially in terms of military equipment

15:57and in terms of sort of social and cultural

16:01and emotional support

16:03for the independence fight of this nation.

16:05That seems to be like a miscalculation.

16:08So against that pushback,

16:12why do you think there's still kernels of

16:17winning in this on the Russian side?

16:19- What you're laying out isn't incorrect

16:21and the miscalculations are not unexpected.

16:26Anybody who's been to a military college,

16:28including the Army War College in Pennsylvania,

16:30where so many of our military leaders are brought up.

16:34When you look at the conflict in Ukraine,

16:37it fits the exact mold of what

16:40an effective long-term military conflict,

16:44protracted military conflict would

16:46and should look like for military dominance.

16:49Now, did Zelensky and did the Ukrainians shock the world?

16:53Absolutely, but in that

16:55they also shocked American intelligence,

16:57which like you said, miscalculated.

17:00The whole world, miscalculated

17:01how the Ukrainians would respond.

17:03Putin did not move in there accidentally.

17:05He had an assessment.

17:06He had high likelihood of a certain outcome,

17:09and that outcome did not happen.

17:11Why did he have that calculation? Because in 2014 it worked.

17:15He took Crimean in 14 days.

17:19He basically created

17:23an infiltration campaign

17:25that turned key leaders over in the first few days

17:27of the conflict.

17:29So essentially there was no conflict.

17:30It worked in 2008 when he took Georgia,

17:33nobody talks about that.

17:35He invaded Georgia the exact same way. And it worked.

17:38So in 2008 it worked. In 2014, it worked.

17:40There was no reason to believe it

17:41wasn't going to work again.

17:43So he just carried out the same campaign.

17:45But this time something was different.

17:47That was a miscalculation for sure on the part of Putin.

17:51And the reason that there was no support from the West

17:53'cause let's not forget, there is no support.

17:55There is nothing other than the Lend-Lease Act,

17:59which is putting Ukraine in massive debt

18:01right now to the West.

18:03That's the only form of support they're getting from NATO

18:05or the United States.

18:08So if somebody believed Ukraine would win,

18:10if somebody believed Ukraine had a chance,

18:12they would've gotten more material support than just debt.

18:15And we can jump into that anytime you want to.

18:17But the whole world miscalculated.

18:19Everybody thought Russia was gonna win in 14 days.

18:21I said that they would win in 14 days

18:23'cause that was the predominant calculation.

18:26Once the first invasion didn't work, then the military does

18:30what professional militaries do, man, they reevaluate,

18:35they reorganize leaders

18:38and then they take a new approach.

18:40You saw three approaches. The first two did not work.

18:43The first two campaigns against Ukraine did not work

18:46the way they were supposed to work.

18:47The third has worked exactly like it's supposed to work.

18:51You don't need Kiev to win Ukraine.

18:53You don't need hearts and minds to win Ukraine.

18:56- [Lev] What's the third?

18:57- Yeah, what you need is control of natural resources,

19:00which they're taking in the East.

19:02And you need access to the heartbeat,

19:05the blood flow of food and money into the country,

19:09which they're taking in the South.

19:10The fact that Ukraine had to go to the negotiation table

19:14with Russia and Turkey in order to get exports

19:19out of the Black Sea, approved again, demonstrates just

19:22how much Ukraine is losing.

19:25The aggressor had a seat at the negotiation table

19:29to allow Ukraine the ability

19:31to even export one of its top exports.

19:33If Russia would've said no,

19:35then they would not have had that.

19:37That's like someone holding your throat.

19:39It's like somebody holding your jugular vein

19:41and saying, "If you don't do what I tell you to do,

19:46then I'm not gonna let you breathe.

19:48I'm not gonna let blood flow to your brain."

19:50- So do you think it's possible that Russia

19:53takes the south of Ukraine?

19:58So starting from Mariupol, the Haisyn region,

20:03- All the way to Odessa.

20:04- [Lex] All the way to Odessa

20:05- And into Moldova.

20:09I believe all of that will happen before the fall.

20:12- Fall of this year? - Fall of this year.

20:14Before winter hits Europe,

20:16NATO wants, Germany needs to be able

20:20to have sanctions lifted so they can tap into Russian power.

20:23There's no way they can have those sanctions lifted

20:26unless Russia wins.

20:28And Russia also knows that all of Europe,

20:31all of NATO is the true people feeling the pain of the war

20:36outside of Ukraine are the NATO countries

20:39because they're so heavily reliant on Russia.

20:42And as they have supported American sanctions against

20:45Russia, their people feel the pain economically,

20:49their people feel the pain.

20:50What are they gonna do in the winter?

20:51Because without Russian gas,

20:54their people are gonna freeze to death.

20:56- [Lex] Ukrainian people? - People all over NATO.

21:00Ukraine, everybody knows Ukrainians at risk.

21:03Everybody knows Ukrainians are dying.

21:05The game of war

21:08isn't even played majoratively

21:10by the people who are fighting.

21:11The game of war is played by everyone else.

21:13It's an economic game. It's not a military game.

21:16- [Lex] The flow of resources and energy, food

21:18- Attention, exactly right.

21:21- I was on the front in the Haisyn region, this very area

21:25that you're referring to, and I spoke to a lot of people

21:29and the morale is incredibly high.

21:33And I don't think the people in that region,

21:38soldiers, volunteer soldiers, civilians,

21:43are going to give up that land without dying.

21:47- I agree with you.

21:48- I mean, in order to take Odessa

21:51would require huge amount of artillery

21:57and slaughter of civilians, essentially.

22:00- They're not gonna use artillery in Odessa

22:01because Odessa is too important to Russian culture.

22:06It's gonna be even uglier than that.

22:07It's going to be clearing of streets, clearing of buildings,

22:11person by person, troop by troop.

22:13It'll be a lot like what it was in Mariupol.

22:16- [Lex] Just shooting at civilians.

22:18- Because they can't afford to just do bombing raids

22:20because they're gonna destroy cultural significant

22:24architecture that's just too important

22:25to the Russian culture.

22:26And that's gonna demoralize their own Russian people.

22:29- I have to do a lot of thinking to try to understand

22:31what I even feel, I don't know.

22:33But in terms of information,

22:37the thing that the soldiers are saying,

22:39the Russian soldiers are saying,

22:40the thing the Russian soldiers really believe

22:43is that they're freeing,

22:45they're liberating the Ukrainian people from Nazis.

22:54And they believe this

22:56because I visited Ukrainian, I spoke to the over a hundred,

23:00probably a couple hundred Ukrainian people

23:02from different walks of life.

23:04It feels like the Russian soldiers at least

23:08aren't under a cloud of propaganda.

23:11They're not operating on a clear view of the whole world.

23:15And given all that,

23:20I just don't see

23:26Russia taking the south

23:28without committing war crimes.

23:32And if Vladimir Putin is aware of what's happening

23:36in terms of the treatment of civilians,

23:39I don't see him pushing forward all the way

23:43to take the south,

23:44because that's not going to be effective strategy

23:49for him to win the hearts and minds of his people.

23:54- Autocracies don't need to win hearts and minds.

23:56That's a staunchly democratic point of view.

24:00Hearts and minds mean very little to people

24:03who understand core basic needs

24:09and true power.

24:12You don't see Xi Jinping worrying about

24:14hearts and minds in China.

24:16You don't see it in North Korea,

24:17you don't see it in Congo,

24:20you don't see it in most of the world.

24:22Hearts and minds are a luxury.

24:24In reality, what people need is food, water, power.

24:27They need income to be able to secure a lifestyle.

24:32It is absolutely sad.

24:34I am not in any way, shape or form saying

24:37that my assessment on this is enriching

24:42or enlightening or hopeful.

24:46It's just fact.

24:48It's just calculatable empirical evidence.

24:52If Putin loses in Ukraine, the losses,

24:56the influential losses, the economic losses, the lives lost,

25:01the power lost is too great.

25:03So it is better for him to push and push

25:07and push through war crimes, through everything else.

25:09War crimes are something defined

25:10by the International Court system.

25:12The International Court system has

25:14Russia as part of its board.

25:16And the international court system is largely powerless

25:20when it comes to enforcing its own outcomes.

25:23So the real risk gain scenario here for Russia

25:30is significantly in favor of gain over risk.

25:34The other thing that I think is important

25:36to talk about is everybody is trapped in the middle

25:40of a gigantic information war.

25:42Yes, there's battlefield bullets and cannons and tanks,

25:46but there's also a massive informational war.

25:48The same narrative

25:51that you see these ground troops in Ukraine,

25:55these Russian ground troops in Ukraine believing

25:57they're clearing the land of Nazis.

25:59That information is being fed to them

26:02from their own home country.

26:05I don't know why people seem to think that the information

26:07that they're reading in English is any more or less true.

26:10Every piece of news coming outta the West,

26:13every piece of information coming out

26:14in the English language is also a giant narrative

26:18being shared intentionally to try to undermine the morale

26:23and the faithfulness of English speaking Russians,

26:26which somebody somewhere knows exactly

26:27how many of those there are.

26:29So we have to recognize

26:31that we're not getting true information from other side

26:33because there is a strategic value in making sure

26:36that there is just the right amount of miss

26:38or disinformation out there.

26:40Not because someone's trying to lie to Americans,

26:42but because someone is trying

26:43to influence the way English speaking Russians think.

26:47And in that world, that's exactly why you see

26:49so many news articles cited to anonymous sources,

26:54government officials who do not wanna be named.

26:56There's nothing that links back responsibility there, right?

26:59There's nothing that can go to court there.

27:02But the information still gets released

27:04and that's enough to make Ukrainians believe

27:08that the United States is gonna help them,

27:10or that the West is gonna help them.

27:11It's enough to make Russians think

27:14that they're going to lose.

27:15And maybe they should just give up now

27:18and leave from the battlefield now.

27:19We have to understand we are in the middle

27:21of a giant information war.

27:24- Maybe you can correct me,

27:25but it feels like in the English speaking world,

27:27it's harder to control, it's harder to fight

27:30the information war because of, you know,

27:34some people say there's not really a freedom of speech

27:36in this country.

27:37But I think if you compare,

27:40there's a lot more freedom of speech

27:41and it's just harder to control narratives

27:44when there's a bunch of gorilla journalists that are able

27:48to just publish anything they want on Twitter or anything.

27:52It's just harder to control narratives.

27:53- So people don't understand where freedom of speech is.

27:56That's the first major problem.

27:57And it's shameful

27:59how many people in the United States do not understand

28:01what freedom of speech actually protects.

28:03So that aside, you're absolutely right.

28:06Fighting the information war in the West is extremely

28:09difficult because anyone with a blog,

28:14anyone with a Twitter account, I mean,

28:17anyone can call themselves a journalist essentially.

28:19We live in a world, we live in a country

28:21where people read the headline

28:23and they completely bypass the author line

28:26and they go straight into the content

28:28and then they decide whether the content's real or not,

28:30based on how they feel

28:31instead of based on empirical, measurable evidence.

28:35- So you mentioned the Lend-Lease Act

28:37and the support of the United States,

28:39support of Ukraine by the United States.

28:42Are you skeptical to the level of support

28:44that the United States is providing

28:46and is going to provide over time?

28:50- The strategy that the United States has taken

28:51to support Ukraine is similar to the strategy we took

28:54to support Great Britain during World War II.

28:57The enactment of the Lend-Lease Act

28:58is a perfect example of that.

29:00The Lend-Lease Act means that we are lending

29:02or leasing equipment to the Ukrainian government

29:06in exchange for future payment.

29:08So every time a rocket is launched,

29:10every time a drone crashes into a tank,

29:13that's a bill that Ukraine is just racking up.

29:18It's like when you go to a restaurant

29:19and you start drinking shots,

29:21sometime the bill will come due.

29:23This is exactly what we did when Europe

29:26and when Great Britain was in the face of Nazi invasion.

29:30We signed the same thing into motion.

29:32Do you know that the UK did not pay off the debt

29:34from World War II until 2020.

29:37They've been paying that debt since the end of World War II.

29:41So what we're doing is we're indebting Ukraine

29:45against the promise

29:46that perhaps they will secure their freedom,

29:48which nobody seems to want to talk about

29:50what freedom is actually gonna look like

29:51for Ukrainians, right?

29:52What are the true handful of outcomes,

29:55the realistic outcomes that could come of this,

29:57and which of those outcomes really looks

29:59like freedom to them, especially in the face of the fact

30:02that they're going to be trillions of dollars in debt

30:05to the West for supplying them with the training

30:09and the weapons and the food and the med kits

30:11and everything else that we're giving them.

30:12Because none of it's free. It's all coming due.

30:16We're a democracy, but we're also a capitalist country.

30:20We can't afford to just give things away for free,

30:23but we can give things away at a discount.

30:24We can give things away layaway,

30:27but the bill will come due.

30:28And unfortunately, that is not part of the conversation

30:31that's being had with the American people.

30:32- So debt is a way to establish some level of control.

30:37- Power - Is power.

30:39That said, having a very close relationship

30:44between Ukraine and the United States does not seem to be

30:49a negative possibility when Ukrainians think

30:52about their future in terms of freedom.

30:54That's one thing.

30:54And the other, there's some aspect of this war

30:57that I've just noticed that one

31:00of the people I talked to said that, "All great nations

31:06have a independence war", have to have a war

31:09for their independence.

31:11There's something, it's dark,

31:12but there's something about war just being a catalyst

31:16for finding your own identity as a nation.

31:19So you can have leaders, you can have sort of

31:22signed documents, you can have all this kind of stuff,

31:24but there's something about war

31:25that really brings the country together

31:27and actually try to figure out what is at the core

31:30of the spirit of the people that defines this country.

31:32And they see this war as that, as the independence war

31:37to define the heart of what the country is.

31:39So there's been, before the war, before this invasion,

31:43there was a lot of factions in the country.

31:46There was a lot of influence from oligarchs

31:50and corruption and so on.

31:51A lot of that was the factions were brought together

31:56under one umbrella effectively to become one nation

32:00because of this invasion.

32:01So they see that as a positive direction

32:04for the defining of

32:07what a free democratic country looks like

32:10after the war, in their perspective,

32:13after the war is won.

32:14- It's a difficult situation

32:16because I'm trying to make sure that you

32:19and all everybody listening understands that

32:23what's happening in Ukraine among Ukrainians is noble

32:26and brave and courageous

32:29and beyond the expectations of anyone.

32:35The fact is,

32:37there is no material support coming from the outside.

32:40In the American Revolution was won

32:43because of French involvement.

32:44French ships, French troops, French generals,

32:47French military might.

32:49The independence of communist China

32:54was won through Russian support.

32:56Russian generals, Russian troops on the ground

32:59fighting with the communists.

33:01That's how revolutions are won.

33:03That's how independent countries are born.

33:06Ukraine doesn't get any of that there.

33:08No one is stepping into that

33:10because we live in a world right now

33:14where there simply is no economic benefits

33:17to the parties in power to support Ukraine to that level.

33:21And war is a game of economics.

33:24The economic benefit of Ukraine is crystal clear in favor

33:29of Russia, which is why Putin cannot lose.

33:31He will not let himself lose.

33:33Short of something completely unexpected, right?

33:36I'm talking 60%, 70% probability Ukraine loses,

33:40but there's still 20%, 30% probability

33:42of the unimaginable happening.

33:44Who knows what that might be.

33:45And oligarch assassinates Putin

33:48or a nuclear bomb goes off somewhere

33:50or who knows what, right?

33:52There's still a chance that something unexpected will happen

33:55and change the tide of the war.

33:57But when it comes down to the core calculus here,

34:01Ukraine is the agricultural bed to support a future Russia.

34:06Russia knows, they know they have to have Ukraine.

34:09They know that they have to have it

34:10to protect themselves against

34:12military pressure from the West.

34:13They have to have it for agricultural reasons.

34:15They have major oil on natural gas pipelines

34:20that flow through Eastern Ukraine.

34:22They cannot let Ukraine fall outside

34:26of their sphere of influence, they cannot.

34:28The United States doesn't really have any economic

34:32vested interest in Ukraine.

34:34You know, ideological points of view and promises aside,

34:37there's no economic benefit.

34:39And the same thing goes for NATO.

34:41NATO has no economic investments in Ukraine.

34:44Ukrainian output, Ukrainian food

34:49goes to the Middle East and Africa.

34:51It doesn't go to Europe.

34:53So the whole, the West siding with Ukraine

34:58is exclusively ideological

35:00and it's putting them in a place

35:02where they fight a war with Russia

35:04so the whole world can see Russia's capabilities.

35:06Ukraine is a, as sad as it is to say, man,

35:09Ukraine is a pawn on a table for superpowers

35:14to calculate each other's capacities.

35:17Right now we've only talked

35:18about Russia and the United States.

35:19We haven't even talked about Iran.

35:21We haven't even talked about China, right?

35:23It is a pawn on a table.

35:25This is a chicken fight so that people get to watch

35:27and see what the other trainers are doing.

35:29- Well, a lot of people might have said the same thing

35:31about the United States back in the independence fight.

35:34So there is possibilities, as you've said.

35:38We're not saying 0% chance,

35:41and it could be a reasonably high percent chance

35:44that this becomes one of the great democratic nations

35:48that the 21st century is remembered by.

35:50- [Andrew] Absolutely. - And so you said

35:54American support, so ideologically, first of all,

35:57you don't assign much long-term power to that,

36:03that US could support Ukraine purely

36:06on ideological grounds.

36:09- Just look in the last four years, the last three years,

36:12do you remember what happened in Hong Kong

36:14right before Covid?

36:16China swooped into Hong Kong violently beating protesters,

36:22killing them in the street,

36:23imprisoning people without just cause.

36:26And Hong Kong was a democracy

36:30and the whole world stood by and let it happen.

36:32And then what happened in Afghanistan just a year ago?

36:35And the whole world stood by

36:37and let the Taliban take power again after 20 years of loss.

36:42We are showing a repeatable point of view.

36:46We will talk American politicians, American administrations,

36:51we will say a lot of things.

36:53We will promise a lot of ideological pro-democracy,

36:56rah rah statements, we will say it.

36:59But when it comes down to putting our own people,

37:02our own economy, our own GDP at risk,

37:07we step away from that fight.

37:09- America is currently supplying

37:11military equipment to Ukraine. - [Andrew] Absolutely.

37:13- And a lot of that military equipment has

37:15actually been the thing that turned the tides of war

37:18a couple of times already.

37:20Currently that's the HIMARS systems.

37:23So you mentioned sort of Putin can't afford to lose,

37:27but winning can look in different ways.

37:30So you've kind of defined so on, at this moment,

37:34the prediction is that winning looks like capturing not just

37:37the east but the south of Ukraine,

37:41but you can have narratives of winning that returned back

37:45to the, what was it?

37:48The beginning of this year before the invasion?

37:50That Crimea is still with Russia.

37:53There's some kind of negotiated thing about Donbas

37:56where it still stays with the Ukraine,

37:58but it there's some... - Public government.

38:01Just like what they have in Georgia right now.

38:03- And that could still be defined through mechanisms...

38:07- [Andrew] As Russia winning.

38:08- As Russia winning for Russia

38:09and then for Ukraine as Ukraine winning

38:13and for the West as democracy winning.

38:17And you kind of negotiate.

38:19I mean that seems to be how geopolitics works,

38:22everybody can walk away with a win-win story,

38:25and then the world progresses, with lessons learned.

38:29- That's the high likely, that's the most probable outcome.

38:31The most probable outcome is that Ukraine remains

38:35in air quotes, "a sovereign nation".

38:38It's not going to be truly sovereign

38:41because it will become,

38:43it will have to have new government put in place.

38:47Zelensky will, it's extremely unlikely he will be president

38:50because he has gone too far

38:53to demonstrate his power over the people

38:56and his ability to separate the Ukrainian people

38:59from the autocratic power of Russia.

39:02So he would have to be unseated.

39:04Whether he goes into exile

39:06or whether he is peacefully left alone is all gonna

39:09be part of the negotiations.

39:11But the thing to keep in mind also is

39:14that a negotiated piece really just means

39:16a negotiated ceasefire.

39:17And we've seen this happen all over the world.

39:19North Korea and South Korea are technically still

39:20just in negotiated cease fire.

39:23What you end up having is Russia will allow Ukraine

39:27to call itself Ukraine, to operate independently,

39:29to have their own debt to the United States.

39:32Russia doesn't wanna take on that debt.

39:34And then in exchange for that,

39:36they will have firmer guidelines

39:38as to how NATO can engage with Ukraine.

39:41And then that becomes an example

39:43for all the other former Soviet satellite states,

39:45which are all required economically by Russia,

39:48not required economically by the West.

39:51And then you can see

39:54how the whole thing plays out once you realize

39:56that the keystone is Ukraine.

40:00- There is something about Ukraine, the deep support

40:03by the Ukrainian people of America that is in contrast

40:07with, for example, Afghanistan,

40:10that it seems like ideologically Ukraine could be

40:15a beacon of freedom used in narratives by the United States

40:20to fight geopolitical wars in that part of the world.

40:24That they would be a good partner for this idea

40:27of democracy, of freedom, of all the values

40:30that America stands for.

40:31They're a good partner

40:32and so it's valuable if you sort of have a cynical,

40:37pragmatic view, sort of like Henry Kissinger type of view.

40:41It's valuable to have them as a partner, so valuable

40:45that it makes sense to support them in achieving

40:48a negotiated ceasefire that's on the side of Ukraine.

40:52But because of this particular leader,

40:54this particular culture, this particular dynamics

40:58of how the war unrolled and things like Twitter

41:02and the way digital communication currently works,

41:05it just seems like this is a powerful symbol of freedom

41:08that's useful for the United States,

41:09if we're sort of to take the pragmatic view.

41:12Don't you think it's possible that

41:17United States supports Ukraine financially,

41:21militarily enough for it to get an advantage in this war?

41:25- I think they've already got an advantage in the war.

41:27The fact that the war is still going on demonstrates

41:29the asymmetrical advantage.

41:30The fact that Russia has stepped up to the negotiating table

41:34with them several times without just turning to,

41:41I mean, you remember what happened in Chechnya,

41:42without turning to Chechnya level,

41:45just mass blind destruction, which was another Putin war.

41:51To see that those things have happened demonstrates

41:53the asymmetric advantage that the West has given.

41:56I think the true way to look at the benefit of Ukraine

42:01as a shining example of freedom in Europe for the West

42:06isn't to understand whether or not they could,

42:09they absolutely could.

42:10It's the question of how valuable is that in Europe,

42:14how valuable is Ukraine?

42:16Which before February, nobody even thought about Ukraine.

42:22And the people who did know about Ukraine knew

42:24that it was a extremely corrupt, former Soviet state

42:28with 20% of its national population,

42:31self-identifying as Russian.

42:33There's a reason Putin went into Ukraine.

42:35There's a reason he's been promising he would go

42:37into Ukraine for the better part of a decade

42:40because the circumstances were aligned.

42:43It was a corrupt country that self-identified

42:45as Russian in many ways.

42:48It was supposed to be an easier of multiple marks

42:52in terms of the former Soviet satellite states to go after.

42:55That's all part of the miscalculation

42:58that the rest of the world saw too,

42:59when we thought it would fall quickly.

43:02So to think that it could be a shining example of freedom

43:05is accurate, but is it as shining a star as Germany?

43:10Is it as shining a star as the UK?

43:12Is it as shining a star as Romania?

43:14Is it as shiny a star as France?

43:17Like it's got a lot of democratic freedom

43:20based countries in Europe to compete against,

43:23to be the shining stellar example.

43:26And in exchange on counterpoint to that,

43:29it has an extreme amount of strategic value to Russia,

43:33which has no interest in making it a shining star

43:36of the example of democracy and freedom.

43:38- Outside of resource,

43:39in terms of the shininess of the star, I would argue yes.

43:43If you look at how much it captivated

43:45the attention of the world.

43:46- The attention of the world has made no

43:47material difference, man, that's what I'm saying.

43:50- That's your estimation,

43:51but are you sure we can't...

43:56If you can convert that into political influence,

43:59into money, don't you think attention is money?

44:03- Attention is money in democracies

44:05and capitalist countries, yes.

44:08- Which serves as a counterweight

44:09to sort of authoritarian regimes.

44:11So for Putin resources matter,

44:14for the United States also resources matter,

44:16but the attention and the belief of the people also matter

44:21because that's how you attain and maintain political power.

44:24- So going to that exact example, then I would highlight

44:28that our current administration has the lowest

44:30approval ratings of president in history.

44:33So if people were very fond of the war going on in Ukraine,

44:36wouldn't that counterbalance some of our upset,

44:39some of the dissent coming from the economy

44:42and some of the dissent coming from the Great Recession

44:47or the great resignation

44:48and whatever's happening with the down stock market,

44:51you would think that people

44:52would feel like they're sacrificing for something.

44:54If they really believed that Ukraine mattered,

44:58that they would stand next to the president

45:01who is so staunchly driving

45:03and leading the West against this conflict?

45:06- Well, I think the opposition to this particular president,

45:09I personally believe has less to do with the policies

45:12and more to do with a lot of the other human factors.

45:19- But again, empirically this is, I look at things

45:21through a very empirical lens,

45:24a very cold fact-based lens.

45:26And there are multiple data points that suggest

45:29that the American people ideologically sympathize

45:32with Ukraine, but they really just want

45:34their gas prices to go down.

45:36They really just want to be able

45:37to pay less money at the grocery store for their food.

45:40And they most definitely don't want their sons

45:41and daughters to die in exchange for Ukrainian freedom.

45:46- It does hurt me to see

45:47the politicization of this war as well.

45:50I think that's maybe has to do with the kind of calculation

45:55you're referring to,

45:56but it seems like it doesn't.

45:58It seems like there's a cynical whatever takes attention

46:02of the media for the moment.

46:04The the red team chooses one side

46:07and the blue team chooses another.

46:09And then I think, correct me if I'm wrong,

46:12but I believe the Democrats went into full like support

46:17of Ukraine on the idealogical side.

46:20And then I guess republicans are saying,

46:22"Why are we wasting money?

46:24The gas prices are growing up."

46:25That's a very crude kind of analysis,

46:27but they basically picked whatever argument

46:29on whatever side.

46:30And now more and more and more,

46:33this particular war in Ukraine is becoming

46:37a kind of pawn in the game of politics.

46:40That's first the midterm elections then building up towards

46:43the presidential elections

46:45and stops being about the philosophical, the social,

46:50the geopolitical aspects, parameters of this war

46:53and more about just like whatever the heck captivates

46:56Twitter, and we're gonna use that for politics.

46:58- You're right in the sense of the fact that it's,

47:02I wouldn't say that the red team

47:03and the blue team picked opposite sides on this.

47:05What I would say is that media discovered

47:08that talking about Ukraine wasn't as profitable

47:12as talking about something else.

47:14People simply, the American people who read media

47:17or who watch media,

47:18they simply became bored reading about news

47:22that didn't seem to be changing much.

47:24And we turned back into wanting

47:26to read about our own economy

47:27and we wanted to hear more about cryptocurrency,

47:29and we wanted to hear more about the Kardashians.

47:31And that's what we care about.

47:32So that's what media writes about.

47:33That's how a capitalist market-driven world works,

47:37and that's how the United States works.

47:38That's why in both red papers and blue papers, red sources

47:41and blue sources, you don't see

47:43Ukraine being mentioned very much.

47:44If anything, I would say

47:46that your Republicans are probably more in support

47:48of what's happening in Ukraine right now

47:50because we're creating new weapons systems,

47:52our military is getting stronger,

47:54we get to test military systems

47:57in combat in Ukraine, that's priceless.

48:02In the world of the military industrial complex,

48:05being able to field test, combat test a weapon

48:10without having to sacrifice your own people

48:12is incredibly valuable.

48:13You get all the data, you get all the performance metrics,

48:15but you don't have to put yourself at risk.

48:17That is one of the major benefits of

48:20what we're seeing from supporting Ukraine

48:22with weapons and with troops.

48:23The long-term benefit to what will come of this

48:26for the United States, practically speaking

48:30in the lens of national security through military readiness,

48:34through future economic benefits, those are super strong.

48:38The geopolitical fight is essentially moot

48:42because Ukraine is not a geopolitical player.

48:45It was not for 70 years.

48:48And after this conflict is over, it will not again.

48:51Just think about what you were just saying,

48:53with the American people's attention span to Twitter

48:56and whatever's currently going on.

48:57If the Ukraine conflict resolved itself today

49:01in any direction, how many weeks do you think

49:04before no one talked about Ukraine anymore?

49:06Do you think we would make it two weeks

49:07or do you think we'd make it maybe seven days?

49:09It would be headline news for one or two days

49:13and then we'd be onto something else.

49:15It's just an unfortunate reality of

49:18how the world works in a capitalist democracy.

49:23- Yeah, it just breaks my heart how much, you know,

49:27I know that there's Yemen and Syria and...

49:32- That nobody talks about anymore.

49:33Still raging conflicts going on.

49:37- It just breaks my heart

49:38how much generational hatred is born.

49:42I happen to be from, my family is from Ukraine

49:46and from Russia.

49:47And so for me, just personally, it's a part of the world

49:50I care about in terms of its history.

49:54Because I speak the language, I can appreciate the beauty

49:58of the literature, the music, the art,

50:00the cultural history of the 20th century

50:02through all the dark times, through all the hell of

50:08the dark sides of authoritarian regimes,

50:10the destruction of war,

50:12there is still just the beauty that I'm able to appreciate

50:14that I can't appreciate about China, Brazil, other countries

50:18because I don't speak their language.

50:19This one I can appreciate.

50:20And so in that way, this is personally really painful to me

50:24to see so much of that history.

50:26The beauty in that history, suffocated by the hatred

50:30that is born through this kind of geopolitical game,

50:36fought mostly by the politicians, the leaders.

50:40- People are beautiful.

50:41And that's what you're talking about.

50:44People are beautiful creatures.

50:47Culture and art and science,

50:52like these are beautiful, beautiful things

50:53that come about because of human beings.

50:55And the thing that gives me hope is that

51:00no matter what conflict the world has seen,

51:02and we've seen some devastating,

51:04horrible crimes against humanity already.

51:07We saw nuclear bombs go off in Japan.

51:11We saw genocide happen in Rwanda.

51:13We've seen horrible things happen, but people persevere.

51:18Language, culture, arts, science, they all persevere.

51:21They all shine through.

51:24People don't even realize

51:25how gorgeous the architecture

51:27and the culture is inside Iran.

51:29People have no idea.

51:31Chinese people in the rural parts of China

51:35are some of the kindest,

51:37most amazing people you'll ever meet.

51:39And Korean arts and Korean dance, Korean drumming,

51:44I know nobody has ever even heard of Korean drumming.

51:47Korean drumming is this magical, beautiful thing.

51:50And the north, in North Korea does it better

51:53than anybody in the world.

51:54Taekwondo in North Korea is just

51:56exceptional to watch. - [Lex] in North Korea?

51:58In North Korea.

51:59Nobody knows these things.

52:00- How do you know about Taekwondo in North Korea?

52:02I have questions. (both laughing)

52:05That's fascinating, like, people don't think about that,

52:08but the culture, the beauty of the people

52:09still flourishes even in the toughest of places.

52:11- Absolutely and we always will.

52:13We always will because that is what people do.

52:16And that is just the truth of it.

52:18And it breaks my heart to see travesties

52:21that people commit against people.

52:23But whether you're looking at a micro level,

52:26like what happens with shootings here in the United States,

52:30or whether you look at a macro level

52:31like geopolitical power exchanges

52:35and intra and interstate conflicts

52:37like what you see in Syria

52:38and what you see in Ukraine,

52:40those are disgusting, terrible things.

52:42"War is a terrible thing."

52:43That is a famous quote,

52:47but people will persevere.

52:49People will come through.

52:53- I hope so. I hope so.

52:55And I hope we don't do something

53:00that I'll probably also ask you about later on is things

53:03that destroy the possibility of perseverance,

53:08which is things like nuclear war,

53:09things that can do such tremendous damage

53:14that we will never recover.

53:17But yeah, amidst your pragmatic pessimism,

53:20(Andrew laughing)

53:22I think both you and I have a kind of maybe

53:25small flame of optimism in there about the perseverance

53:28of the human species in general.

53:30Let me ask you about intelligence agencies

53:33outside of the CIA.

53:37Can you illuminate

53:40what is the most powerful intelligence agency in the world?

53:43The CIA, the FSB, formerly the KGB, the MI6, Mossad.

53:49I've gotten a chance to interact with a lot of Israelis

53:52while in Ukraine.

53:54Just incredible people in terms of both training and skills.

53:58Just all and every front.

54:00American soldiers too.

54:01Just American military is incredible.

54:04The competence and skill of the military, the United States,

54:09Israeli, got to interact, and Ukrainian as well.

54:13- [Andrew] It's striking. - It's striking.

54:14It's beautiful, I just love people, I love carpenters

54:16or people that are just extremely good at their job

54:19and they take pride in their craftsmanship.

54:22It's beautiful to see.

54:22And I imagine the same kind of thing happens inside

54:24of intelligence agencies as well that we don't get

54:27to appreciate because of the secrecy.

54:29Same thing with like Lockheed Martin, I interviewed

54:32the CTO of Lockheed Martin.

54:34It breaks my heart as a person who loves engineering

54:38because of the cover of secrecy,

54:41we'll never get to know some of the incredible engineering

54:43that happens inside of Lockheed Martin and Boeing...

54:45- [Andrew] Raytheon.

54:47- You know, there's kind of this idea that these are,

54:50you know, people have conspiracy theories

54:52and they're kind of assign evil

54:53to these companies to some part.

54:56But I think there's beautiful people inside those companies,

54:59brilliant people and some incredible science

55:02and engineering is happening there.

55:04Anyway, that said the CIA, the FSB,

55:08the MI6, Mossad, China, I know very little about the...

55:12- MSS Ministry of State Security.

55:15- I don't know how much you know,

55:16(both laughing)

55:17or just other intelligence agencies in India,

55:20Pakistan, I've also heard...

55:21- Yep, RAW is powerful. And so is ISS or ISSI.

55:26- And then of course European nations in Germany and France.

55:30Yeah, so what can you say about the power of the influence

55:34of the different intelligence agencies

55:35within their nation and outside?

55:37- Yeah, so to answer your question, your original question,

55:41which is the most powerful, I'm gonna have

55:43to give you a few different answers.

55:44So the most powerful intelligence organization in the world

55:49in terms of reach is the Chinese MSS,

55:53the Ministry of State Security because they have created

55:57a single solitary intelligence service that has global reach

56:02and is integrated with Chinese culture.

56:06So that essentially every Chinese person

56:08anywhere in the world is an informant to the MSS

56:11because that's their way of serving

56:14the middle kingdom jungle, the central kingdom,

56:17the Chinese word for China.

56:19So they're the strongest,

56:21the most intelligence service in terms of reach,

56:24most assets, most informants, most intelligence.

56:26- So it is deeply integrated with a citizenry?

56:29- Correct, with their culture.

56:30You know what, a Chinese person

56:32who lives in Syria thinks of themself as?

56:34A Chinese person.

56:35Do you know what a Chinese person,

56:36a Chinese national living in the United States

56:38thinks of themself as?

56:40A Chinese person, right?

56:41Americans living abroad often think of ourselves as expats,

56:45expatriates, living on the local economy,

56:48embracing the local culture.

56:50That is not how Chinese people

56:51view traveling around the world.

56:52- And by the way, if I may mention, I believe

56:56the way Mossad operates is similar kind of thing

57:01because people from Israel living abroad still think

57:05of themselves as Jewish and Israeli first.

57:09So that allows you to integrate the...

57:11- Culture and yep, the faith-based aspects. Exactly right.

57:14But the number of people in Israel is much, much smaller

57:17than the number of people in China.

57:18- So when it comes to reach China wins that game.

57:21When it comes to professional capability, it's the CIA

57:25by far because budget wise, capability wise,

57:29weapons system wise, modern technology wise,

57:31CIA is the leader around the world,

57:34which is why every other intelligence organization out there

57:36wants to partner with CIA.

57:38They want to learn from CIA, they want to train with CIA,

57:43they wanna partner on counter-narcotics

57:45and counter-drug and counter-terrorism

57:47and counter-Uyghur, you name it.

57:49People wanna partner with CIA.

57:50So CIA is the most powerful

57:51in terms of capability and wealth.

57:54And then you've got the idea, you've got tech.

57:59So tech alone, meaning corporate espionage,

58:04economic espionage, nothing beats DGSE in France,

58:09they're the top.

58:10They've got a massive budget that almost goes exclusively

58:12to stealing foreign secrets.

58:14They're the biggest threat to the United States,

58:16even above Russia and above China.

58:19DGSE in France is a massively powerful

58:22intelligence organization, but they're

58:24so exclusively focused on a handful of types

58:28of intelligence collection that nobody even

58:30really thinks that they exist.

58:31And then in terms of just terrifying violence,

58:35you have Mossad.

58:36Mossad will do anything.

58:38Mossad has no qualms doing what it takes

58:42to ensure the survival

58:43of every Israeli citizen around the world.

58:46Most other countries will stop at some point,

58:49but Mossad doesn't do that.

58:51- So it's the lines you're willing to cross?

58:54- And the reasons that you're willing to cross them.

58:56You know, the CIA will let an Americans stay in jail

59:01in Russia unlawfully and seek a diplomatic solution.

59:06I mean, the United States has let people,

59:07there are two gentlemen in from the 1950s

59:10who were imprisoned in China for 20 years

59:12waiting for diplomatic solutions to their release.

59:18We do not kill to save a citizen.

59:22But Mossad will.

59:26- And then they'll not just kill,

59:28they'll like do large scale infiltration.

59:31- They do amazing things.

59:33They spare no expense

59:35because it's a demonstration to their own people.

59:38Again, going back to the whole idea of influence,

59:40every intelligence operation that sees the light of day

59:45has two purposes.

59:47The first purpose is the intelligence operation,

59:51but if it was just the intelligence operation,

59:53it would stay secret forever.

59:54The second purpose

59:56of every successful intelligence operation,

59:58when they become public, it's to send a signal to the world.

1:00:02If you work against us, we will do this to you.

1:00:05If you work for us, we will take care of you in this way.

1:00:09It's a massive information campaign.

1:00:11- Do you think in that way, CIA is not doing a good job?

1:00:15Because there's, you know, the FSB perhaps much less so GRU

1:00:20but the KGB did this well,

1:00:24which is to send a signal, like basically communicate

1:00:28that this is a terrifying organization with a lot of power

1:00:33and Mossad is doing a good job of that.

1:00:36So this the psychological information warfare,

1:00:40and it seems like the CIA also

1:00:45has a lot of kind of myths about it,

1:00:47conspiracy theories about it,

1:00:49but much less so than the other agencies.

1:00:52- CIA does a good job of playing to the mythos.

1:00:54So when General Petraeus used to be

1:00:57the director of CIA, 2000...

1:00:59- And your workout partner, I read about this.

1:01:01- [Andrew] And workout partner.

1:01:02- So I loved and hated those workouts with Petraeus

1:01:05because he is a physical beast.

1:01:07He's a strong, fit at the time,

1:01:1060 something year old man.

1:01:11- Let me take a tangent on that

1:01:12'cause he's coming on this podcast.

1:01:14- Oh, excellent man. - So can you say

1:01:18what you've learned from the man in terms of,

1:01:22or like what you think is interesting and powerful

1:01:25and inspiring about the way he sees the world,

1:01:28or maybe what you learned in terms of how to get

1:01:31strong in the gym, or anything about life?

1:01:34- Two things right away.

1:01:34And one of 'em I was gonna share with you anyway,

1:01:36so I'm glad that you asked the question.

1:01:37So the first is that on our runs,

1:01:42and man, he runs fast,

1:01:43and we would go for six mile runs through Bangkok.

1:01:46And he talked openly about, I asked him,

1:01:51"How do you keep this mystery,

1:01:55this epic mythology about your fitness

1:01:59and your strength?

1:02:00How do you keep all of this alive with the troops?"

1:02:04And he had this amazing answer

1:02:06and he was like, "I don't talk about it."

1:02:08Myths are born not from somebody orchestrating the myth,

1:02:13but from the source of the myth, simply being secretive.

1:02:16So he's like, "I don't talk about it. I've never about it.

1:02:19I've never exacerbated it.

1:02:21I just do what I do and I let the troops talk."

1:02:24And he's like, "When it goes in favor of discipline

1:02:27and loyalty and commitment, I let it run.

1:02:30If it starts getting destructive or damaging,

1:02:33then I have my leadership team step into fix it."

1:02:37But when it comes to the mythos,

1:02:40the myth of him being superpowered soldier,

1:02:43that's what he wants every soldier to be.

1:02:44So he lets it run.

1:02:45And it was so enlightening when he told me,

1:02:48"When there's a myth that benefits you, you just let it go."

1:02:51You let it happen because it gets you further

1:02:54without you doing any work.

1:02:55It costs no investment for me.

1:02:56- So the catalyst of the virality of the myth

1:02:58is just being mysterious.

1:03:00- And that's what CIA does well.

1:03:02To go back to your first question, what does CIA do?

1:03:04They don't answer any questions. They don't say anything.

1:03:08And wherever the myth goes, the myth goes,

1:03:11whether it's that they sold drugs or use child prostitutes

1:03:14or whatever else, wherever the myth goes, they let it go.

1:03:17Because at the end of the day, everybody sits back

1:03:19and says, "Wow, I really just don't know."

1:03:22Now the second thing that I learned from Petraeus,

1:03:23and I really am a big fan of Petraeus.

1:03:27I know he made personal mistakes.

1:03:29You don't get to be that powerful

1:03:30without making personal mistakes.

1:03:32But when I worked out with him,

1:03:36the one thing that my commanding officer told me not

1:03:39to ask about, he was like,

1:03:40"Never ask the general about his family."

1:03:44I'm a family guy.

1:03:45So as soon as I met General Petraeus,

1:03:48one of the first things I asked him was,

1:03:49"Hey, what was it like raising a family

1:03:51and being the commander of forces in the Middle East?

1:03:55Like you weren't with your family very much."

1:03:57And the thing I love about the guy,

1:03:59he didn't bite off my head.

1:04:00He didn't snap at me. He didn't do anything.

1:04:02He openly admitted that he regretted some of the decisions

1:04:05that he made because he had to sacrifice

1:04:09his family to get there.

1:04:11Relationships with his children,

1:04:13absentee father, missing birthdays.

1:04:17We all say how sad it's to miss birthdays

1:04:19and miss anniversaries, yada, yada, yada.

1:04:21Everybody knows what that feels like.

1:04:22Even business people know what that feels like.

1:04:23The actual pain

1:04:25that we're talking about is when you're not there

1:04:27to handle your 13 year old's questions,

1:04:29when a boy breaks up with her or when you're not there

1:04:33to handle the bloody lip that your 9-year-old comes back

1:04:35with from their first encounter with a bully.

1:04:37Those are the truly heartbreaking moments

1:04:39that a parent lives and dies by.

1:04:42He missed almost all of those

1:04:45because he was fighting a war that we forgot

1:04:48and we gave up on 20 years later, right?

1:04:51He's so honest about that.

1:04:54And it was really inspiring to me

1:04:57to be told not to ask that question.

1:04:59And when I broke that guidance, he didn't reprimand me.

1:05:03He was authentic.

1:05:05And it was absolutely one of the big decisions

1:05:07that helped me leave CIA on my own in 2014.

1:05:10- And he was honest on the sacrifice you make.

1:05:16- The same man who just taught me a lesson

1:05:17about letting a myth live.

1:05:21That same guy was willing to be

1:05:23so authentic about this personal mistake.

1:05:27- I like complicated people like that.

1:05:30(Andrew laughing)

1:05:31So what do you make of that calculation,

1:05:34of family versus job?

1:05:36You've given a lot of your life

1:05:39and passion to the CIA to that work.

1:05:44You spoken positively about that world

1:05:47the good it does.

1:05:51And yet you are also a family man and you value that.

1:05:53What's that calculation like?

1:05:55What's that trade off like?

1:05:56- I mean, for me the calculation is very clear. It's family.

1:05:58I left CIA because I chose my family.

1:06:03And when my son was born, my wife and I found out

1:06:06that we were pregnant while we were still on mission.

1:06:08We were a tandem couple.

1:06:09My wife is also a former CIA officer undercover like me.

1:06:12We were operating together overseas.

1:06:14We got the positive pregnancy tests like so many people do.

1:06:20And she cried. My wife was a badass.

1:06:25I was like the accidental spy,

1:06:26but my wife was really good at what she does.

1:06:29And she cried and she was like, "What do we do now?"

1:06:31Like, it's what we've always wanted, a child,

1:06:34but we're in this thing right now

1:06:38and like, there's no space for a child.

1:06:41So long story short, we had our baby,

1:06:45CIA brought us back to have the baby.

1:06:48And when we started having the conversations about,

1:06:50"Hey, what do we do next?"

1:06:51'Cause we're not the type of people

1:06:53to want to just sit around and be domestic.

1:06:57What do we do next?

1:06:58But keep in mind we have a child now,

1:07:00so here's some of our suggestions.

1:07:02We could do this and we can do that.

1:07:04Let us get our child to a place

1:07:05where we can put him into an international school.

1:07:07Or we can get him into some sort of program where

1:07:12we can both operate together again during the day.

1:07:17But CIA, they had no patience for that conversation.

1:07:19There, family is not their priority.

1:07:23So the fact that we were a tandem couple, two officers,

1:07:26two operators trying to have a baby was irrelevant to them.

1:07:30So when they didn't play with us, when they did nothing

1:07:33to help us prioritize parenthood

1:07:39as part of our overall experience,

1:07:41that's when we knew that they never would.

1:07:43And what good is it to commit yourself

1:07:45to a career if the career is always going

1:07:47to challenge the thing that you value most?

1:07:50And that was the calculation that we made to leave CIA.

1:07:53Not everybody makes that calculation.

1:07:55And a big part of why I am so vocal about my time at CIA is

1:08:00because I am immensely appreciative of the men and women

1:08:05who to this day have failed marriages

1:08:09and poor relationships with their children

1:08:12because they chose national security,

1:08:14they chose protecting over their own family.

1:08:17And they've done it even though it's made them a, you know,

1:08:21abuse alcohol and abuse substances

1:08:24and they've got permanent permanent diseases

1:08:28and issues from living and working abroad.

1:08:31It's just insane the sacrifice that officers make

1:08:35to keep America free.

1:08:37And I'm just not one of those people. I chose family.

1:08:41- You said that your wife misses it. Do you miss it?

1:08:45- We both miss it. We miss it for different reasons.

1:08:47We miss it for similar reasons, I guess,

1:08:49but we miss it in different ways.

1:08:52The people at CIA a are just amazing.

1:08:57They're everyday people like the guy and the gal next door,

1:09:00but so smart and so dedicated

1:09:02and so courageous about what they do and how they do it.

1:09:06I mean, the sacrifices they make are massive,

1:09:08more massive than the sacrifices I made.

1:09:10So I was always inspired

1:09:12and impressed by the people around me.

1:09:13So both my wife and I absolutely miss the people.

1:09:16My wife misses the work because you know everything.

1:09:20When you're inside, it's all, I mean, we had top secret,

1:09:25we had TSSCI clearances at the time.

1:09:27I had a CAT 6, CAT 12, which makes me nuclear cleared.

1:09:30My wife had other privy clearances that allowed her

1:09:33to look into, you know, areas that were specialized.

1:09:37But there wasn't a headline that went out

1:09:40that we couldn't fact check with a click of a few buttons.

1:09:44And she misses that 'cause she loved that kind of...

1:09:45- And now you're just one of us living in the, you know,

1:09:50the cloud of mystery. - [Andrew] Exactly.

1:09:51Not really knowing anything about what's going on.

1:09:54- Exactly, but for me, I've always been the person

1:09:57that likes operating.

1:09:59And you know what you still get to do when you leave CIA,

1:10:01you still get to operate.

1:10:02Operating is just working with people.

1:10:04It's understanding how people think,

1:10:06predicting their actions, driving their direction

1:10:08of their thoughts, persuading them, winning negotiations.

1:10:13You still get to do that. You do that every day.

1:10:15- And you go apply that in all kinds of domains.

1:10:18Well, let me ask you on that,

1:10:20you were a covert CIA intelligence officer

1:10:24for several years.

1:10:26Maybe can you tell me the story of how it all began?

1:10:29Were you recruited and what did the job entail?

1:10:32To the degree you can speak about.

1:10:34- Feel free to direct me if I'm getting too boring.

1:10:36- No, every aspect of this is super exciting.

1:10:39(both laughing)

1:10:41- So I was leaving the United States Air Force in 2007.

1:10:48I was a lieutenant getting ready to pin on captain.

1:10:51My five years was up

1:10:53and I was a very bad fit for the US Air Force.

1:10:56I was an Air Force Academy graduate, not by choice,

1:10:58but by lack of opportunity,

1:11:00lack of lack of options otherwise.

1:11:01So I forced myself through the academy, barely graduated

1:11:04with a 2.4 GPA

1:11:07and then went on the Air Force, taught me how to fly.

1:11:09And then the Air Force taught me about nuclear weapons.

1:11:12And I ended up as a nuclear missile commander in Montana.

1:11:18And I chose to leave the Air Force

1:11:20because I didn't like shaving my face.

1:11:23I didn't like having short hair

1:11:24and I most definitely didn't like shining my shoes.

1:11:26And I did not want to be one of the people

1:11:28in charge of nuclear weapons.

1:11:29So when I found myself as a person in charge

1:11:31of 200 nuclear weapons,

1:11:33I knew that I was going down the wrong road.

1:11:34- I have questions about this

1:11:36and more importantly, I have questions

1:11:37about your hair, so you had short hair at the time?

1:11:40- Yeah, you have to, Military regulations,

1:11:42you can't have hair longer than one inch.

1:11:44- Okay, and the beautiful hair you have now

1:11:49that came to be in the CIA or after?

1:11:52- So I discovered I had messy hair in CIA

1:11:55'cause I used to go muj, we called it muj.

1:11:58I used to go mujahideen style.

1:12:00Big burly beard and crazy wacky hair.

1:12:03Because an ambiguously brown guy with a big beard

1:12:06and long hair can go anywhere in the world

1:12:09without anyone even noticing him.

1:12:12They either think that he is a janitor

1:12:14or they think that he is like some

1:12:17forgotten part of history.

1:12:18But nobody ever thinks that that guy is a spy.

1:12:21So it was the perfect, for me,

1:12:23it was one of my favorite disguises.

1:12:27It's what's known as a level two disguise.

1:12:29One of my favorite disguises to don

1:12:30was just dilapidated brown guy.

1:12:34(both laughing)

1:12:35- Can you actually, we'll just take a million tangents.

1:12:37What's a level two disguise?

1:12:41What are the different levels of disguise?

1:12:43What are the disguises?

1:12:44- Yeah, there's three levels of disguise by and large.

1:12:46Level one is what we also call light disguise.

1:12:50So that's essentially, you put on sunglasses and a ball cap

1:12:54and that's a disguise.

1:12:55You look different than you normally look.

1:12:57So it's just different enough

1:12:59that someone who's never seen you before,

1:13:01someone who literally has to see you

1:13:03just from a picture on the internet,

1:13:05they may not recognize you.

1:13:06It's why you see celebrities walk around with ball caps

1:13:09and oversized jackets and baseball hats

1:13:11'cause they just need to not look like they look

1:13:13in the tabloid or not look like they look in TV.

1:13:16That's level one.

1:13:18Lemme jump from level one to level three.

1:13:19Level three is all of your prosthetics,

1:13:22all the stuff you see in "Mission Impossible."

1:13:24Your fake ears, your fake faces, your fat suits,

1:13:28your stilts inside your feet.

1:13:31All that's level three.

1:13:32Whenever they make any kind of prosthetic disguise,

1:13:35that's a level three disguise.

1:13:37Because prosthetics are very damning

1:13:41if you are caught with a prosthetic.

1:13:43If you're caught wearing a baseball hat and sunglasses,

1:13:47nobody's gonna say, "You're a spy."

1:13:49But when you're caught with a custom made, you know,

1:13:51nose prosthetic, that changes the way your face looks.

1:13:55Or when someone pops out a fake jaw

1:13:57and they see that your top teeth don't look like they did

1:14:00in this prosthetic, then all of a sudden

1:14:03you've got some very difficult questions

1:14:04to ask or to answer.

1:14:06So level three is extremely dangerous.

1:14:08Level one is not dangerous. Level two is long-term disguise.

1:14:12Level two is all the things that you can do

1:14:14to permanently change the way you look

1:14:16for a long period of time.

1:14:17So that whether you're aggressed in the street

1:14:20or whether someone breaks into your hotel room

1:14:22or whatever, it's real.

1:14:24So maybe you get a tattoo,

1:14:27maybe you cut your hair short,

1:14:28maybe you grow your hair long, maybe you go bald,

1:14:31maybe you start wearing glasses.

1:14:32Well, glasses are technically a prosthetic,

1:14:34but if you have teeth pulled,

1:14:38if you gain 20 pounds, really gain 20 pounds

1:14:42or lose 15 pounds, whatever you might do.

1:14:44All of that's considered level two.

1:14:45It's designed for a long-term mission so that

1:14:49people believe you are who you say you are in that disguise.

1:14:53- A lot of that is physical characteristics?

1:14:55What about like, you know, what actors do,

1:14:59which is the.. - [Andrew] method acting.

1:15:02- Yeah, the method acting sort of

1:15:04developing a backstory in your own mind

1:15:07and then you start, you know, pretending

1:15:11that you host a podcast and teach at a university

1:15:15and then do research and so on,

1:15:18just so that people can believe

1:15:20that you're not actually a agent.

1:15:22Is that part of the disguise levels or no?

1:15:24- So yes, disguise has to do with physical character traits.

1:15:28That's what a disguise is.

1:15:29What you're talking about is known as a cover legend.

1:15:32When you go undercover, what you claim to be,

1:15:34who you claim to be, that's called your cover legend.

1:15:38Every disguise would theoretically have

1:15:40its own cover legend.

1:15:42Even if it's just to describe why you're wearing

1:15:44what you're wearing.

1:15:45It's all a cover.

1:15:47So the method acting, this is a fantastic point

1:15:50that I don't get to make very often, so I'm glad you asked.

1:15:52The difference between CIA officers in the field

1:15:55and method actors is that method actors try

1:15:57to become the character.

1:16:00They try to shed all vestiges of who they really are

1:16:04and become the character.

1:16:05And that's part of what makes them so amazing.

1:16:07But it's also part of what, like,

1:16:10makes them mentally unstable over long periods of time.

1:16:13It's part of what feeds their depression, their anxiety,

1:16:15their personal issues,

1:16:16because they lose sight of who they really are.

1:16:18Field officers don't get that luxury.

1:16:20We have to always, always remember

1:16:24we are a covert CIA intelligence officer

1:16:26collecting secrets in the field.

1:16:28We have to remember that.

1:16:29So we're taught a very specific skill

1:16:32to compartmentalize our true self separately,

1:16:38but make that true self the true identity.

1:16:42So then we can still live and act

1:16:45and effectively carry out our cover legend without ever

1:16:48losing sight, without ever losing that compass true north

1:16:51of who we actually are.

1:16:53And then we can compartmentalize

1:16:55and secure all the information that we need, retain it,

1:16:57remember it, but then return to our true self

1:17:00when we get back to a position of safety.

1:17:03- Is it possible to do that?

1:17:04So I just have kind of anecdotal evidence for myself.

1:17:09I really try to be the exact same person in all conditions,

1:17:12which makes it very easy.

1:17:15Like if you're not lying, it makes it very easy to,

1:17:19first of all, to exist,

1:17:21but also to communicate a kind of authenticity

1:17:23and genuineness, which I think is really important.

1:17:26Like trust and integrity

1:17:28around trust is extremely important to me.

1:17:30It's the thing that opens doors and maintains relationships.

1:17:34And I tend to think, like when I was in Ukraine,

1:17:39so many doors just opened to the

1:17:41like very high security areas and everywhere else too.

1:17:46Like I've just interacted

1:17:47with some incredible people without any kind of concerns.

1:17:51You know, who's this guy, is he gonna spread it?

1:17:54You know, all that kind of stuff.

1:17:55And I tend to believe that you are able

1:17:58to communicate a trustworthiness somehow

1:18:01if you just are who you are.

1:18:04And I think, I suppose method actors are trying

1:18:07to achieve that by becoming something

1:18:09and I just feel like there is very subtle cues

1:18:14that are extremely difficult to fake.

1:18:17Like you really have to become that person, be that person.

1:18:22But you're saying as a CIA agent, you have to remember

1:18:26that you are there to collect information.

1:18:29Do you think that gives you away?

1:18:31- So one of the flaws in your argument is

1:18:35that you keep referring to how you feel.

1:18:38I feel this, I feel that, I feel like this

1:18:40I feel like that.

1:18:41That feeling is a predictable character trait

1:18:45of all human beings.

1:18:46It's a pink matter, we call it pink matter.

1:18:49It's a cognitive trait.

1:18:52You are not alone in trusting your feelings.

1:18:55All people trust their feelings.

1:18:56But because what CIA teaches us is

1:18:59how to systematically create artificial relationships

1:19:04where we're the one in control of the source

1:19:06that is giving us intelligence.

1:19:08And the core element to being able

1:19:11to control a relationship is understanding

1:19:13the pink matter truth of feelings.

1:19:16What all people feel becomes their point of view

1:19:19on what reality is.

1:19:21So when you understand and you learn how to manipulate

1:19:23what people feel, then you can essentially direct them

1:19:26to feel any way you want them to feel.

1:19:28So if you want them to feel like they can trust you,

1:19:30you can make them feel that way.

1:19:32If you want them to feel like you're a good guy

1:19:34or a bad guy, if you want them

1:19:35to feel like they should give you secrets,

1:19:37even though their government tells them not to,

1:19:39you can do that.

1:19:40There are men who make women feel like they love them,

1:19:43and just so the women will sleep with them.

1:19:45There are women who make men feel like they love them

1:19:47just so the men will give them their money.

1:19:49Manipulation is a core behavioral trait

1:19:52of all the human species

1:19:54because we all understand to some level

1:19:56how powerful feelings are,

1:19:58but feelings are not the same thing

1:19:59as logical, rational thought.

1:20:01They're two different sides of the brain.

1:20:03What CIA teaches us how to do is systematically tap into

1:20:07the right side, emotional side of the brain so that we can

1:20:12quickly get past all of the stuff you were just saying.

1:20:14All of the well, don't you have to be convincing

1:20:16and don't you have to really know your story

1:20:18and don't you have to be able to defend it,

1:20:20don't you have to have authenticity

1:20:21and don't you have to have genuine feelings?

1:20:25Yes, all of those things are true if you're having

1:20:28a genuine relationship, but in an artificial relationship,

1:20:31there's ways to bypass all of that

1:20:32and get right to the heart of making someone

1:20:34feel comfortable and safe.

1:20:35- I guess the question I'm asking,

1:20:37and the thing I was implying is

1:20:40that creating an artificial relationship

1:20:42is an extremely difficult skill to accomplish the level.

1:20:48Like how good I am at being me

1:20:51and creating a feeling in another person that I create,

1:20:56for you to do that artificially,

1:21:00my sense is you gotta be really

1:21:01damn good at that kind of thing.

1:21:03I would venture to say it's, I mean, I don't know how

1:21:08to measure how difficult the thing is,

1:21:10but especially when you're communicating

1:21:12with people whose job depends

1:21:15on forming trusting relationships,

1:21:18they're gonna smell bullshit.

1:21:21And to get past that bullshit detector is tough.

1:21:27It's a tough skill.

1:21:28- [Andrew] Well, it's interesting, so I would say that...

1:21:30- Or maybe I'm wrong actually on that.

1:21:32- I would say that once you understand the system,

1:21:34it's not that hard.

1:21:35It makes a lot of sense.

1:21:37But I would also say that to your exact point,

1:21:39you are right that people smell bullshit.

1:21:42People smell bullshit.

1:21:43But here's the thing,

1:21:45if you come in smelling like goat shit,

1:21:48you still smell like shit,

1:21:49but you don't smell like bullshit.

1:21:51So they don't count you out right away.

1:21:53And if you come in smelling like rotten tomatoes

1:21:57or if you come in smelling like lavender,

1:21:59or if you come in smelling like manila

1:22:00or if you come in without any smell at all,

1:22:02all that matters is that you don't smell like bullshit.

1:22:05Here's the thing that's one of the secret sauces of CIA.

1:22:10When you look and act like a spy,

1:22:12people think you're a spy .

1:22:14If you look and act in any other way, you know what,

1:22:16they never ever think you are?

1:22:19A spy. They might think you're an idiot.

1:22:24They might think you're trailer trash,

1:22:24they might think that you're a migrant worker,

1:22:27but they never think you're a spy.

1:22:30And that lesson in everyday life is immensely powerful.

1:22:37If you're trying to take your boss's job,

1:22:39as long as you don't ever look like the employee

1:22:41who's trying to take the boss's job,

1:22:43the boss is focused on all the employees

1:22:44who are trying to take his job.

1:22:46Everybody's prioritizing whether they know it or not.

1:22:49The goal is to just not be the one that they're targeting.

1:22:51Target them without them knowing you're targeting them.

1:22:54- So people just, when they meet you, they put you in a bin.

1:22:58And if you want to avoid being put in a particular bin,

1:23:01just don't act like the person that will be,

1:23:03just show some kind of characteristics

1:23:06that bin you in some other way.

1:23:07- Exactly right. You have to be in a bin.

1:23:09Just choose the bin.

1:23:11(Andrew laughing)

1:23:11- Alright, so how

1:23:14you knowing these methods, when you talk to people,

1:23:17especially in civilian life, how do you know

1:23:20who's lying to you and not?

1:23:22- That gets to be more into the trained skill

1:23:25side of things.

1:23:26There's body cues, there's micro expressions.

1:23:31I don't believe that micro expressions alone do anything.

1:23:33I also don't believe that micro expressions

1:23:36without an effective baseline do anything.

1:23:37So don't for a second think that I'm...

1:23:40All the people out there pitching

1:23:41that you can tell if someone's lying

1:23:42to you just by looking at their face, it's all baloney.

1:23:46In my world, that's baloney.

1:23:47- Like the way you move your eyes or something like that?

1:23:50- [Andrew] Without knowing a baseline, without knowing...

1:23:51- For that individual. - For that individual,

1:23:53then you actually don't know.

1:23:54And an individual's baseline is based on education, culture,

1:23:57life experience, you name it, right?

1:23:58So it's huge.

1:24:00But when you combine facial expressions with body movements,

1:24:04body language, nonverbal cues,

1:24:06and you add on top of that effective elicitation techniques

1:24:10that you are in control of,

1:24:12now you have a more robust platform

1:24:15to tell if someone's lying to you.

1:24:16- So there's like a set of like interrogation trajectories

1:24:22you can go down that can help you figure out a person.

1:24:26- Technically they're interview concepts.

1:24:29- [Lex] Like this podcast concepts.

1:24:30- Correct, because an interrogation

1:24:32and interrogation is something

1:24:33very different than an interview.

1:24:34And in the world of professionals

1:24:36and interrogation is very different.

1:24:37- What's the difference?

1:24:38The nature or how relaxed the thing is or what?

1:24:40- So in an interrogation

1:24:42there's a clear pattern of dominance.

1:24:44There's no equality. Also, there's no escape.

1:24:47You are there until the interrogator is done with you.

1:24:49Anybody who's ever been reprimanded by mom and dad

1:24:51knows what an interrogation feels like.

1:24:53Anybody who's ever been called into the principal's office

1:24:54or the boss's office, that's what interrogation feels like.

1:24:57You don't leave until the boss says you can leave

1:24:59and you're there to answer questions,

1:25:01the boss asks questions.

1:25:02An interview is an equal exchange of ideas.

1:25:05You are in control of this interview for sure.

1:25:09But if we were having coffee,

1:25:11I could take control if I wanted to take control,

1:25:13if I wanted to ask you personal questions, I would,

1:25:15if I wanted to talk to you about your background, I could.

1:25:17- Why am I in control of this interview? Exactly.

1:25:19- Because the person in control

1:25:20is the person asking questions, always.

1:25:23- I'm sitting here, as you've spoken about,

1:25:26my power here is I'm the quiet one listening.

1:25:29(both laughing)

1:25:30- You're exactly right. Guess where this conversation goes?

1:25:33Anywhere you choose to take it,

1:25:35because you're the one asking questions.

1:25:36Every time I answer a question, I'm creating a pattern

1:25:39of obedience to you,

1:25:41which subliminally, subconsciously makes me

1:25:43that much more apt to answer your questions.

1:25:45- Of course you can always turn that

1:25:46and start asking me questions that should, you know...

1:25:50But you're saying that there's,

1:25:52through conversation, you can call it interviewing,

1:25:57you can start to

1:26:01see cracks in the story of the person

1:26:05and the degree to which they exaggerate or lie

1:26:08or to see how much they could be trusted,

1:26:12that kind of stuff?

1:26:13- What I'm saying is that

1:26:14through a conversation you develop a baseline, right?

1:26:16Like even just in the first part of our conversation,

1:26:20I've been able to create some baseline elements about you.

1:26:23You've been able to create baseline elements about me.

1:26:25Maybe they're just not front of mind.

1:26:27From those baselines, now we can push

1:26:30through more intentional questions to test...

1:26:34- [Lex] Got it.

1:26:35- To test whether or not the person is being truthful

1:26:37because they're operating within their baseline.

1:26:39Or if you are triggering sensitivities outside

1:26:42of their baseline, and then you

1:26:43can start to see their tells.

1:26:45- That's fascinating, yeah baseline,

1:26:46like even like the tells, right?

1:26:49The eye contact.

1:26:50Like you've probably already formed a baseline.

1:26:52I have trouble making eye contact.

1:26:54And so like, so if you ask me difficult questions

1:26:56and I'm not making eye contact, maybe

1:26:58that's not a good signal of me lying or whatever.

1:27:01Because I always have trouble making eye contact,

1:27:04stuff like that.

1:27:05That's really fascinating.

1:27:06- The majority of your eye movement is to the right.

1:27:08Your right. My left, right?

1:27:10Which is usually someone who's,

1:27:11if you ask micro expressionists,

1:27:13that's someone who's referencing fact.

1:27:16That's not necessarily what's happening for you

1:27:18because you're pulling concepts out of the air.

1:27:19So it's also a place that you

1:27:20reference something other than fact.

1:27:22It's a place for you to find creativity.

1:27:24So if I just thought that you were lying

1:27:25because you look up and to the right,

1:27:27I would be wrong.

1:27:28- That's so fascinating.

1:27:29And a lot of that has to do with like, habits

1:27:31that are formed and all those kinds of things.

1:27:33Or maybe some right hand, left hand type of situation.

1:27:36- [Andrew] Right eye dominance.

1:27:36- Right eye dominance is gonna make you look to the right.

1:27:39- Is this a science or an art?

1:27:40- It's a bit of both.

1:27:41I would say that like all good art,

1:27:44art is taught from a foundation of skills.

1:27:47And those skills are played

1:27:51or taught in a very structured manner.

1:27:53And then the way that you use the skills

1:27:56after that's more of the artistic grace.

1:27:59So I've always called espionage an art. Spying is an art.

1:28:03Being able to hack human beings is an art,

1:28:06but it's all based in a foundation of science.

1:28:08You still have to learn how to mix the color palette

1:28:10and use certain brushes.

1:28:12- Do you think of that

1:28:13as a kind of the study of human psychology?

1:28:17Isn't that what a psychologist does? Or a psychiatrist?

1:28:20What, from this process, have you learned

1:28:23about human nature?

1:28:25- [Andrew] Human nature?

1:28:26- I mean, I suppose the answer to that

1:28:28could be a book, and probably will be a book.

1:28:32- [Andrew] I'll save you that, yeah.

1:28:33- But sort of is there things that are surprising

1:28:37about human nature, surprising to us civilians

1:28:42that you could speak to?

1:28:43- Yes, one thing is extremely surprising about human nature,

1:28:47which is funny 'cause that's not the answer I would've said.

1:28:49So I'm glad that you clarified this specific question.

1:28:53The thing that's surprising about human nature

1:28:55is that human beings long, like in their soul,

1:29:02there's like a painful longing to be with other people.

1:29:07And that's really surprising

1:29:08because we all wanna pretend like we're strong.

1:29:11We all wanna pretend like we're, you know, independent.

1:29:14We all wanna pretend like we are the masters of our destiny.

1:29:18But what's truly consistent in all people is this like,

1:29:24longing to commune with others like us.

1:29:30My more practical answer about what I've learned

1:29:33to be the truth is that human nature is predictable.

1:29:36And that predictability is

1:29:38what gives people an incredible advantage over other people.

1:29:41But that's not the surprising piece.

1:29:43I mean, even when CIA taught me

1:29:44that human nature is predictable, it just made sense.

1:29:47I was like, oh yeah, that makes sense.

1:29:49But what I never ever anticipated was, no matter

1:29:53where I've been in the world, no matter who I've talked to,

1:29:55no matter what socioeconomic bracket,

1:29:58is that longing, man, it hurts.

1:30:01Loneliness sucks. And togetherness feels good.

1:30:04Even if you're together with someone you know isn't

1:30:06the right person, it still feels better than being alone.

1:30:09- I mean, that's such a deep truth you speak to.

1:30:11And I could talk about

1:30:13that for a long time.

1:30:15There is, I mean, through these conversations in general,

1:30:18whether it's being recorded or not,

1:30:21I hunger to discover in the other person that longing,

1:30:27you strip away the other things

1:30:29and then you share in the longing for that connection.

1:30:32And I particularly also have detected that in people

1:30:38from all walks of life.

1:30:40Including people that others might identify as evil or hard

1:30:47as completely cold, it's there.

1:30:52- It's there, they've hardened themselves in their search

1:30:57and who knows what dark place their brain is in,

1:30:59their heart is in.

1:31:00But that longing is still there.

1:31:03Even if it's an ember, it's there.

1:31:06It's the reason why in World War I

1:31:09and World War II, you know,

1:31:11enemy combatants still shared cigarettes on the front lines,

1:31:15you know, during periods of holidays

1:31:17or bad weather or whatever else.

1:31:18Because that human connection, man, it triumphs overall.

1:31:22- See, that's in part of what I refer to when I say love.

1:31:28Because I feel like if like political leaders

1:31:32and people in conflict at the small scale

1:31:34and the large scale were

1:31:37able to tune into that longing to seek in each other

1:31:44that basic longing for human connection.

1:31:46A lot of problems could be solved,

1:31:49but of course is difficult

1:31:53because it's a game of chicken

1:31:56is if you open yourself up to reveal that longing

1:32:00for connection with others, people can hurt you.

1:32:03- Well, I would go a step farther

1:32:04and I would say that taking the connection away, punishing,

1:32:10penalizing people by removing the connection

1:32:14is a powerful tool.

1:32:16And that's what we see. That's why we send people to jail.

1:32:20That's why we put economic sanctions on countries.

1:32:22That's why we ground our children

1:32:24and send them to their rooms.

1:32:25We are penalizing them, whether we know it or not.

1:32:28We're using punitive damage by taking away

1:32:32that basic human connection, that longing for community.

1:32:36- What was your recruitment process and training process

1:32:40and things you could speak to

1:32:44in the CIA?

1:32:46- As I was leaving the Air Force, all that was on my mind.

1:32:50I don't know what you were like at 27,

1:32:52but I was a total dip shit at 27.

1:32:54I'm not much better now at 42, but yeah...

1:32:57- You owe me both. (both laughing)

1:33:00Fake it till you make it.

1:33:01- But I was like, I just wanted

1:33:03to be anything other than a military officer.

1:33:06So I was actually in the process of applying

1:33:09to the Peace Corps through this thing called the internet,

1:33:12which was still fairly rudimentary in 2007.

1:33:16I had a computer lab that we went to

1:33:18and it had 10 computers in it and you had to log in

1:33:20and log out and slow internet and everything else.

1:33:22But anyways, I was filling out an online application

1:33:25to go work in the US Peace Corps.

1:33:28I wanted to grow my hair out.

1:33:29I wanted to stop wearing shoes that were shiny.

1:33:33I wanted to meet a hippie chick

1:33:35and have hippie babies in the wild,

1:33:37teaching Nigerian children how to read.

1:33:40So that was the path I was going down.

1:33:42And as I filled in all of my details, there came this page

1:33:46that popped up and it was this blinking red page

1:33:48and it said, "Stop here.

1:33:50You may qualify for other government positions.

1:33:53If you're willing to put your application on hold

1:33:55for 72 hours, that gives us a chance to reach out to you."

1:33:59So again, 27-year-old, I was like, sure,

1:34:04I'll put myself on hold if I might qualify

1:34:05for other government opportunities.

1:34:07And then about a day later I got a phone call

1:34:09from an almost unlisted number.

1:34:11It just said 703, which was very strange

1:34:14to see on my flip phone at the time.

1:34:16Just one 703 area code.

1:34:18And I picked it up and it was a person

1:34:23from Northern Virginia telling me that I was qualified

1:34:27for a position in national security

1:34:29and if I would be interested, they'll pay for my ticket

1:34:32and fly me up to Langley, Virginia.

1:34:35They didn't say CIA, they said Langley.

1:34:37I put one and one together and I was like,

1:34:39maybe this is CIA.

1:34:41Like this could, how cool is this?

1:34:43Or maybe this is all make-believe and this is totally fake.

1:34:45So either way it doesn't hurt me at all to say "Yes",

1:34:47they already have my phone number.

1:34:49So yes, yes, yes.

1:34:50And then I remember thinking, there's no way

1:34:52that happened and this isn't real.

1:34:54And then a day later I got FedEx or an overnight delivery

1:34:59of an airplane ticket

1:35:00and a hotel reservation and a rental car reservation.

1:35:03And then I just kept doing the next thing,

1:35:05which I found out later on as a form of control.

1:35:07You just do the next thing that they tell you to do.

1:35:10And then before I knew it, I was interviewing

1:35:12in a nondescript building with a person

1:35:15who only told me their first name for a position

1:35:17with the National Clandestine Service.

1:35:19- So you never really got a chance to think about it

1:35:21because there's a small steps along the way

1:35:23and it kind of just leads you

1:35:26and maybe your personality such that...

1:35:30- [Andrew] That's an adventure.

1:35:30- It's an adventure and because it's one step at a time,

1:35:34you don't necessarily see the negative consequences

1:35:36of the adventure.

1:35:37You don't think about any of that.

1:35:38You're just stepping

1:35:40into the adventure one step at a time.

1:35:41- And it's easy. There's no work involved.

1:35:43Somebody else is doing all the work

1:35:45telling me where to be and when.

1:35:46It's a lot like basic training in the military.

1:35:48Anybody who's ever been through basic training will tell you

1:35:50they hated the first few days.

1:35:52And then by the end it was really comforting

1:35:54because you just did what you were told.

1:35:56They told you when to eat,

1:35:57they made the decision of what to eat.

1:35:59Then you marched when they told you to march,

1:36:01shined your shoes when they told you to shine your shoes.

1:36:03Human beings love being told what to do.

1:36:06- What about the training process

1:36:10for becoming a covert CIA agent?

1:36:16- So the interview process is...

1:36:19- Yeah, the interview process too.

1:36:21How rigorous was that?

1:36:22- It was very rigorous.

1:36:23That was where it became difficult.

1:36:26Everything up to the first interview was easy,

1:36:28but there's three interviews and some people are lucky

1:36:31enough to have four or five interviews

1:36:33if something goes wrong

1:36:34or something goes awry with the first few interviews.

1:36:37And again, this might be dated from what I went through,

1:36:41but during the interview process is when

1:36:43they do your psychological evaluations.

1:36:47They do personality assessments, they do skills assessments.

1:36:53They'll start sending you back to your,

1:36:55wherever you're living with assignments.

1:36:58Not intel assignments,

1:36:59but actual like homework assignments.

1:37:02Write an essay about three parts of the world

1:37:05that you think will be most impacted

1:37:08in the next three to five years.

1:37:09Or, you know, prioritize the top three strategic priorities

1:37:12for the United States

1:37:13and you know, put it into 250 words or 2,500 words

1:37:17and whatever else,

1:37:19double spaced in this font, yada, yada, yada.

1:37:21Like super specific stuff.

1:37:22It's kind of stressful, but it's just like

1:37:24going back to college again.

1:37:26So you go through all of those acts

1:37:27and then you submit this stuff to some PO box that

1:37:31doesn't have anybody that's ever gonna respond to you.

1:37:33And then you hope you just send it into the ether

1:37:35and you hope that you sent it right.

1:37:38You hope that you wrote well enough.

1:37:40You hope that your assessment was right,

1:37:42whatever else it might be.

1:37:43And then eventually get another phone call that says,

1:37:45"Hey, we received your package.

1:37:46You've been moved to the next level of interview

1:37:49and now we need you to go to this other nondescript building

1:37:52in this other nondescript city."

1:37:53And then you start meeting,

1:37:56you start sitting in waiting rooms

1:37:59with other groups of people

1:38:00who are at the same phase of interview with you,

1:38:02which were some of the coolest experiences

1:38:04that I remember still.

1:38:05One of my best friends to this day who I don't get

1:38:07to talk to, 'cause he's still undercover,

1:38:10is a guy I met during those interview processes.

1:38:12And I was like, oh, we met and I saw what he was wearing.

1:38:15He saw what I was wearing. I was brown.

1:38:17- So you immediately connected

1:38:18and you liked the people there?

1:38:19- Close. More like we immediately judge each other.

1:38:22'Cause we're all untrained.

1:38:24So he looked at me

1:38:25and he was like, brown dude with crazy hair.

1:38:27And I was wearing, dude, I was dressed like a total ass.

1:38:29I was dressed in like a clubbing shirt.

1:38:32I don't know why I thought it would be a good idea to go

1:38:33to a CIA interview in like a clubbing shirt

1:38:36with my buttons unbuttoned down to here.

1:38:39And he was like, after we got in, he was like,

1:38:42"Yeah dude, you were always really cool to talk to."

1:38:43But I was like, there's no way that idiot's getting in.

1:38:46And I remember looking at him and being like,

1:38:47"Dude, you were just another white guy in a black suit.

1:38:50They're not looking for you. But here you are."

1:38:52So it was just, those kinds of things were so interesting

1:38:54'cause we were totally wrong about what CIA was looking for.

1:38:56Until you're in, you have no idea what they're looking for

1:38:59and you're just shooting in the dark.

1:39:02- Did they have you do like a lie detector test?

1:39:05- Yes. It's called a polygraph.

1:39:07- Polygraph, how effective, just interesting

1:39:09Per our previous discussion.

1:39:11How effective are those?

1:39:12- Polygraphs are really interesting.

1:39:14So one of the things

1:39:15that people don't understand about polygraphs

1:39:17is that polygraphs aren't meant to detect a lie.

1:39:19Like they're called a lie detector,

1:39:21but they're not actually meant to detect a lie.

1:39:23They're built to detect variants

1:39:27from your physiological baseline.

1:39:29So they're essentially meant to identify sensitivities

1:39:33to certain types of questions.

1:39:35And then as they identify a sensitivity to a question,

1:39:37it gives the interviewer an additional piece of information

1:39:40to direct the next round of questions.

1:39:43So then from there they can kind of see

1:39:44how sensitive you are to a certain level of questions.

1:39:46And your sensitivity could be a sign of dishonesty,

1:39:50but it could also be a sign of vulnerability.

1:39:54So the interrogator themselves, the interviewer themselves,

1:39:57they're the one that have to make

1:39:59the judgment call as to which one it is.

1:40:00Which is why you might see multiple interviewers

1:40:03over the course of multiple polygraphs.

1:40:06But that's really what they're all about.

1:40:07So I mean, they're extremely uncomfortable,

1:40:11like they're mentally uncomfortable.

1:40:13But then there's also, you sit on a pad

1:40:15because the pad is supposed to be able

1:40:17to tell like your body movements,

1:40:18but also like your sphincter contractions or whatever.

1:40:22So you're sitting on this pad, you're plugged in,

1:40:24you're strapped in, you're tied up,

1:40:26and it takes so much time to get in there.

1:40:28And then they start asking you questions,

1:40:30baseline questions at first,

1:40:31and then other questions from there.

1:40:33And you're just answering the best you can.

1:40:34And you never know what they're seeing

1:40:36and you don't know what they're doing.

1:40:37And it's really hard not to get anxious of that anyways.

1:40:39- Are they the whole time monitoring the readings?

1:40:42- Yeah, from like a big, they've got multiple screens

1:40:45and it's all information superiority.

1:40:47They have information superiority.

1:40:50You're the idiot looking away from them

1:40:51or looking sideways of them and trying not to move

1:40:54because you're afraid that if you like have gas

1:40:57or if you move a little bit's gonna

1:40:58vary you from your baseline.

1:40:59And the whole time you're worried your heart's racing

1:41:01and your blood pressure's increasing,

1:41:02which is a variance from baseline.

1:41:04So yeah, I means an interesting art.

1:41:06- Or your baseline. - [Andrew] Correct.

1:41:08- Maybe there's some people

1:41:08that are just chilling the whole time

1:41:10and that's their baseline.

1:41:13- But that's what they're doing.

1:41:14They're establishing a baseline.

1:41:15I mean, I guess that means the polygraph is a skill

1:41:20that you develop to do it well.

1:41:22- So when people talk about beating a lie detector,

1:41:24it's not that they're telling an effective lie.

1:41:26That's not hard.

1:41:27It's not hard to tell a lie to an interviewer.

1:41:31And the interviewer doesn't care if you're being honest

1:41:33or not honest about a topic.

1:41:34What they're looking for is sensitivity.

1:41:36If they see no sensitivity, that's a big sign for them.

1:41:40That's a big sign that you're probably a pathological liar.

1:41:43If you show sensitivity to many things, then that's a sign

1:41:47that you're probably an anxious person

1:41:49and they can still reset their baseline

1:41:51because they can tell how your anxiety is increasing,

1:41:54you know, in 15 minute increments.

1:41:57It's a unique skill.

1:41:58I mean, a really good polygrapher is immensely valuable.

1:42:02But it's the misnomers,

1:42:04the misconceptions about polygraphs are vast.

1:42:07- You also mentioned personality tests.

1:42:09That's really interesting.

1:42:11So how effective are personality tests?

1:42:14One for the hiring process,

1:42:15but also for understanding a human being.

1:42:17- So personality is extremely important

1:42:19for understanding human being.

1:42:20And I would say that there's a thousand different ways

1:42:22of looking at personality.

1:42:23The only one that I count

1:42:25with any significance is the MBTI.

1:42:28And the MBTI is what all the leading spy agencies

1:42:30around the world use as well.

1:42:32- Well, that's kind of interesting to hear.

1:42:34So there's been criticisms of that kind of test.

1:42:36- There have been criticisms for a long time.

1:42:38- And you think there's value? - Absolutely. Absolutely.

1:42:41And there's a few reasons why, right?

1:42:43So first, MBTI makes the claim

1:42:45that your core personality doesn't change over time.

1:42:48And that's how it's calibrated.

1:42:51And one of the big arguments is that people say

1:42:53that your personality can change over time.

1:42:56In my experience, the MBTI is exactly correct.

1:42:59Your core personality does not change

1:43:01because your core personality is defined

1:43:04as your personality when all resources are removed.

1:43:08So essentially your emergency mode, your dire conditions,

1:43:13that is your core personality.

1:43:15We can all act a little more extroverted.

1:43:18We can all, you know,

1:43:20be a little more empathetic when we have tons of time

1:43:23and money and patience.

1:43:25When you strip away all that time, money, and patience,

1:43:27how empathetic are you?

1:43:29How much do you like being around other people?

1:43:31How much do you like being alone?

1:43:33Do you make judgements

1:43:34or do you analyze information?

1:43:37That's what's so powerful about MBTI,

1:43:39it's talking about what people are like

1:43:40when you strip away resources.

1:43:42And then because it's so consistent,

1:43:44it's also only four codes.

1:43:46It's super easy to be able to assess a human being

1:43:50through a dialogue, through a series of conversations

1:43:54to be able to hone in with high accuracy,

1:43:57what is there four letter code.

1:44:00There's only 16 options and it becomes extremely valuable.

1:44:04Is it perfectly precise? And does everybody do it the same?

1:44:08I mean, the answers to those are no.

1:44:10But is it operationally useful in a short period of time?

1:44:15That is a resoundingly powerful yes.

1:44:18- Yeah I only know I think the first letter,

1:44:20it's introvert and extroverted, right?

1:44:21- [Andrew] Yep. I've taken the test before,

1:44:25just like a crude version of the test.

1:44:27And that's the same problem you have with IQ tests.

1:44:30There's the right thorough way of doing it

1:44:33and then there's like fun internet way of doing.

1:44:36And do you mind sharing

1:44:38what your personality...

1:44:41- [Andrew] Yeah my type index? - Yes.

1:44:44- I'm an ENTP, that's an extrovert,

1:44:46intuitor, perceiver, thinker.

1:44:51ENT thinker, P perceiver.

1:44:54My wife is an ISFJ, which is the polar opposite of me.

1:44:59E, I'm extroverted. She's introverted.

1:45:01I'm an intuitive, she's a sensor.

1:45:04I'm a thinker. She's a feeler.

1:45:05I'm a perceiver. She's a judger.

1:45:07- Is there a good science on like

1:45:10long-term successful relationships

1:45:12in terms of the dynamics of that?

1:45:13The 16, I wonder if there's good data on this.

1:45:17- I don't think there's a lot of good data

1:45:19in personalities writ large.

1:45:21Because there's not a lot of money

1:45:23to be made in personality testing.

1:45:26But I would say that

1:45:30with experience with a good MBTI test

1:45:34with a good paid test, a 400, 500 question test.

1:45:38Once you understand your own code

1:45:41and then you're taught how to assess the code of others.

1:45:44With those two things kind of combined

1:45:46'cause then you have experience in learning.

1:45:50It becomes very useful.

1:45:52And you can have high confidence in the conclusions

1:45:55that you reach about people's professions,

1:45:58about people's relationships with family,

1:46:00about people's relationships professionally,

1:46:02people's capabilities to deal with stress,

1:46:05how people will perform

1:46:07when pushed outside of their comfort zones.

1:46:09Really, really powerful useful stuff in corporate world

1:46:12and in the espionage world.

1:46:14- So in terms of compressed representation

1:46:16of another human being,

1:46:19you can't do much better than those four letters.

1:46:22- I don't believe you can do much better.

1:46:23In my experience, I have not seen anything better.

1:46:26- Yeah, it's difficult to realize

1:46:30that there is a core personality or the degree that's true.

1:46:34It seems to be true.

1:46:35It's even more difficult to realize that there is a stable,

1:46:40or at least the science says so,

1:46:42a stable, consistent intelligence.

1:46:46Unfortunately, you know, the G factor that they call

1:46:51that if you do a barrage of IQ test that's going

1:46:53to consistently represent that G factor.

1:46:57And we're all born with that and we can't fix it.

1:46:59And that defines so much of who we are. It's sad.

1:47:03- I don't see it as sad

1:47:04because it's, for me, the faster you learn it,

1:47:07the faster you learn what your own sort of natural strengths

1:47:12and weaknesses are, the faster you get to stop wasting time

1:47:17on things that you're never gonna be good at.

1:47:19And you get to double down on the things

1:47:21that you're already naturally skilled or interested in.

1:47:23So there's always a silver lining to a cloud.

1:47:26But I know now that I will never be a ballerina

1:47:29or a ballerino.

1:47:30I know that I'll never be an artist,

1:47:32I'll never be a musician.

1:47:33I'll never be any of those things.

1:47:35And when I was 18, that might've made me sad.

1:47:37But now at 42, I'm like, well shit, awesome.

1:47:40I can go be something else good

1:47:43instead of always being bad.

1:47:44- You're not gonna be a ballerina (indistinct)?

1:47:46- Because I'm not graceful.

1:47:48- And you've learned this through years of experience.

1:47:51- [Andrew] Yeah, exactly.

1:47:52- Well, I don't know if there's an MBTI equivalent

1:47:55for grace of movement.

1:47:56- I think it's called S sensor.

1:48:00Because a sensor is someone who's able to interact

1:48:02with the world around them

1:48:03through their five senses very effectively.

1:48:06Like if you talk to dancers,

1:48:07dancers can actually feel the grace in all of their muscles.

1:48:10They know what position their finger is in.

1:48:13I don't have any idea, I don't know

1:48:14what position my feet are in right now.

1:48:15I'd have to look to make sure I

1:48:17actually feel the floor right.

1:48:18- Yeah, I definitely have... Oh, that's good to know.

1:48:21So I don't, you know, I'm not a dancer, but I do have that.

1:48:25- [Andrew] You're a musician man.

1:48:27- Well the music, I don't know if that correlated

1:48:28- [Andrew] To be able to plug guitar.

1:48:29- Sure, yeah, that's true.

1:48:31There is that physical component,

1:48:32but I think deeper

1:48:33'cause there's a technical aspect to that

1:48:35that's just like, it's less about feel.

1:48:39But I do know jiujitsu, you know,

1:48:41and grappling I've done all my life.

1:48:43I don't, you know, there's some people who are clumsy

1:48:46and they drop stuff all the time.

1:48:47They run into stuff. I don't.

1:48:50First of all, I don't know how that happens, but to me,

1:48:52I just have an awareness of stuff.

1:48:54Like if there's a little...

1:48:55- [Andrew] Spiritual orientation.

1:48:56- Yeah, like I know that there's a small object I have

1:49:00to step over and I have a good sense of that.

1:49:04It's so interesting.

1:49:05Yeah, you're just like born with that or something.

1:49:06- My wife is brilliant and she still walks into doors.

1:49:10I mean, she'll walk in a doorway,

1:49:11she'll bang her knee on the same wall

1:49:13that's been there for the last 50 years.

1:49:15- It's for some reason really hilarious.

1:49:17That's good for that. (Andrew laughing)

1:49:20You've been asked, I think on Reddit,

1:49:23"Are there big secrets that you know

1:49:25that could lend you and our country in terrible trouble

1:49:28if you came out to the public?"

1:49:29And you answered, "Yes, I wish I could forget them."

1:49:32So lemme ask you just about secrecy in general.

1:49:36Are these secrets or just other secrets,

1:49:40ones that the public will never know

1:49:43or will it come out in 10, 20, 50 years?

1:49:47I guess the deeper question is

1:49:49what is the value of secrecy and transparency?

1:49:54- The standard classification

1:49:56for all human intelligence operations

1:49:59is something called 25X2, 25 by 2.

1:50:03So 50 years, 25 years times two years, or times two rounds.

1:50:07So in essence, anything that I've seen has the first chance

1:50:12of becoming public domain declassified after 50 years,

1:50:17unless there's some congressional requirement for it

1:50:20to be reviewed and assessed earlier.

1:50:22So by then, you know, I'll be 80 something years old

1:50:24or potentially dead, which is either way, that's when

1:50:29it can come out according to its typical classification.

1:50:35The value of secrets I have seen

1:50:39is that secrets create space.

1:50:44Secrets give opportunity for security.

1:50:48They give opportunity for thinking they give space.

1:50:52And space is an incredibly advantageous thing to have.

1:50:55If you know something somebody else doesn't know,

1:50:57even if it's just 15 or 20 minutes different,

1:51:00you can change the course of fate.

1:51:02So I find secrets to be

1:51:04extremely valuable, extremely useful.

1:51:07Even at the place where secrets are being kept

1:51:10from a large mass,

1:51:13part of what all Americans need to understand is that

1:51:17one of the trade-offs to building a system of government

1:51:23that allows us to be first world

1:51:26and wealthy and secure and successful.

1:51:28One of the trade-offs is

1:51:29that we have given up a great deal of personal freedom.

1:51:32And one of the personal freedoms

1:51:33that we give up is the freedom of knowing

1:51:37what we want to know.

1:51:39You get to know what the government tells you.

1:51:41You get to know what you need to know

1:51:43or what you've learned yourself,

1:51:44but you don't get to know secrets.

1:51:46People who do get to know secrets know them for a reason.

1:51:49That's why it's called a need to know.

1:51:51- How difficult is it to maintain secrecy?

1:51:54- It's surprisingly difficult as technology changes.

1:51:58It's also surprisingly difficult

1:52:02as our culture becomes one where people want notoriety,

1:52:06people wanna be the person who breaks the secret.

1:52:1025 years ago, 40 years ago, that wasn't the case.

1:52:13There was a time in the United States

1:52:14where if someone gave you a secret,

1:52:16it was a point of personal honor not to share the secret.

1:52:20Now we're in a place where someone tells you a secret

1:52:22like that could turn into a Twitter post

1:52:24that gets you a bunch of thumbs up

1:52:26and a bunch of likes or whatever else.

1:52:27- [Lex] It's an opportunity. - Right.

1:52:28So the value of secrets has changed

1:52:31and now there's almost a greater value on exposing secrets

1:52:34than there is on keeping secrets.

1:52:36That makes it difficult to keep secrets,

1:52:38especially when technology is going in the same direction.

1:52:41- Where is the line?

1:52:43And by the way, I'm one of those old school people

1:52:44with the secrets.

1:52:46I think it's a karma thing.

1:52:51Again, back to the trust.

1:52:52I think in the short term, you can benefit

1:52:55by sharing a secret.

1:52:57But in the long term,

1:52:58if people know they can trust you,

1:53:00like the juicy of the secret,

1:53:02it's a test of sorts, if they know you can keep

1:53:06that secret, that means like you're somebody

1:53:09that could be trusted.

1:53:10And I believe that like,

1:53:12not just effectiveness in this life,

1:53:14but happiness in this life is informing a circle

1:53:17of people you can trust.

1:53:18- Right, we're taught that secrets

1:53:20and lies are similar in that they have a limited shelf life.

1:53:24If you treat them like food.

1:53:26Secrets and lies have a very limited shelf life.

1:53:29So if you cash in on them while they're still fresh,

1:53:33you beat them before they spoil.

1:53:35You get to take advantage of 'em before they spoil.

1:53:38However, trust has no limit to its shelf life.

1:53:43So it's almost like you're trading a short-term victory

1:53:46and losing a long-term victory.

1:53:48It's always better to keep the secret.

1:53:50It's always better to let the lie live

1:53:53because it will eventually come to light from somebody else,

1:53:57not from you, because it already has a limited shelf life.

1:53:59But what you win in exchange for not being the one

1:54:02that cashed in on the secret is immense trust.

1:54:07- Let me ask you about lying and trust and so on.

1:54:12So I don't believe I've been contacted by

1:54:15or interacted with the CIA, the MI6, the FSB, Massod

1:54:20or any other intelligence agency.

1:54:23I'm kind of offended. (Andrew laughing)

1:54:26But would I know if I was?

1:54:29So from your perspective. - No.

1:54:31You would not know if you were.

1:54:33For sure you've been on their radar. Absolutely.

1:54:35You've got a file, you've got a dossier somewhere.

1:54:38- Why would I be on the radar?

1:54:39- [Andrew] Because you're... - Who's interesting

1:54:43- It's not necessarily

1:54:44that you are interesting to someone as a foreign asset

1:54:48or an intelligence collection source,

1:54:51but your network is extremely interesting.

1:54:54- The networks are important too?

1:54:55- Correct, if someone was able to clone your phone,

1:55:01every time you cross a border,

1:55:02you go through some sort of security.

1:55:04If you've ever been pulled into secondary

1:55:06and separated from your bag, that's exactly when

1:55:09and how people clone computers.

1:55:10They clone phones, they make whatever photocopies

1:55:15of your old school planner, whatever it might be.

1:55:19But for sure, you are an intelligence target.

1:55:23It just may be that you're not suitable to be a person

1:55:27who reports foreign intelligence.

1:55:28We've gotta understand that all people are potential sources

1:55:31of valuable information

1:55:33to the national security infrastructure of our host country

1:55:36and any country that we visit.

1:55:39Someone like you with your public footprint,

1:55:41with your notoriety,

1:55:42with your educational background,

1:55:43with your national identifications, becomes a viable

1:55:48and valuable target of information.

1:55:50- Yeah, so to speak to that,

1:55:55you know, I take security pretty seriously,

1:55:58but not to the degree that, you know,

1:56:01it runs my life, which I'm very careful about.

1:56:06- [Andrew] That's good. I'm glad to hear that.

1:56:07- So the moment you start to think about germs, right,

1:56:11like you start to freak out

1:56:14and you become sort of paralyzed by the stress of it.

1:56:17So you have to balance those two things.

1:56:19If you think about all the things

1:56:21that can hurt you in this world