August 22, 2025 • 15 mins
An Analysis of the Investigation into John Bolton and the Long-Running Dispute Over His 2020 Memoir.
Government Gangsters: The Deep State, the Truth, and the Battle for Our Democracy (2023)
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/go-beyond-the-brief--6353252/support.
- Kashyap Pramod "Kash" Patel is an American lawyer and government official who has authored several books
Government Gangsters: The Deep State, the Truth, and the Battle for Our Democracy (2023)
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/go-beyond-the-brief--6353252/support.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
You found the podcast. You've found the podcast Go Beyond
the Brief, where we take a deep dive into the
societal currents shaping our lives. Together, we'll explore the often
unseen forces at play. We'll examine the research, dissect the data,
and most importantly, if you're seeking to understand what's shaping
our society, this is the place.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Okay, picture this. It's a Friday morning, August twenty second,
twenty twenty five. Things seem quiet, and then bam, news breaks.
Federal agents FBI are all over the home and office
of a major former official, John Botlin exactly. We see
these images, you know, agents carrying cardboard boxes out of
(00:42):
his place in Bethesa, his office in DC.
Speaker 3 (00:44):
Yeah, those visuals are powerful. Instantly creates a narrative.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
In the official line, a national security investigation looking for
classified records. So on the deep dive today, we really
want to unpack this. Our mission is to you know,
cut through the noise.
Speaker 3 (00:58):
Yes, separate the facts from the spin.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
Right, what are the actual legal moves here versus the
let's say, political interpretations swirling around.
Speaker 3 (01:06):
And there's a lot of squirrel.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
We need to look at the history leading up to
this raid, the specific legal actions, and what it all
really means for well, the rule of law.
Speaker 3 (01:15):
Which feels increasingly under pressure.
Speaker 2 (01:17):
And if you're thinking, wow, this sounds political, well you're
not wrong. Almost immediately, Michael Cohen jumps on MSNBC.
Speaker 3 (01:23):
Right, the former Trump attorney now a huge critic, and.
Speaker 2 (01:27):
He doesn't mince words. He says Bolton will be indicted,
flat out tells him to lawyer up.
Speaker 3 (01:34):
That instantly frames the whole thing, doesn't it. It takes
this official action, the raid, and puts it squarely in
a narrative of political payback. Absolutely, And what's really critical here,
I think, is how fast this happened. You have what
looks like a legitimate concern classified documents, mishandling. Sure, that's
a real issue, but it almost instantly gets fused with
(01:54):
these really strong political motives, at least in the public eye.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
And that fusion it really makes you a listener step
back and ask some hard questions, right.
Speaker 3 (02:03):
Definitely questions about the impartiality of the Justice Department, especially
when you're dealing with figures this high profile. This is
politically charged.
Speaker 2 (02:09):
Okay, So let's break down the incident itself. Friday, August
twenty second, FBI agents YEP executing a court authorized search
warrant Bolton's home in Maryland, his DC office.
Speaker 3 (02:21):
The justification being a criminal investigation into potential mishandling of
classified info. NBC Sky News AP they all confirmed it.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
And those pictures, the boxes, powerful imagery. Very but and
this is really important to stress, at that moment, Bolton
wasn't detained, He wasn't charged with anything.
Speaker 3 (02:42):
Absolutely crucial distinction. A search warrant means a judge found
probable cause to look for evidence. It doesn't mean guilt,
it doesn't mean charges are imminent.
Speaker 2 (02:51):
Right, It's an investigative step exactly.
Speaker 3 (02:53):
But then you layer on Michael Cohan's reaction.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
Which was immediate and strong.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
Very he wasn't just speculating. He said no doubt Bolton
would be indicted, advised him to.
Speaker 2 (03:04):
Lawyer up, and he framed it explicitly as political vengeance,
part of a larger ongoing campaign. He called it.
Speaker 3 (03:11):
He even tied it to a specific campaign promise, didn't
he He did.
Speaker 2 (03:14):
He quoted, I will be your retribution, and then he
made it personal.
Speaker 3 (03:19):
Comparing Bolton's situation to his own legal battles.
Speaker 2 (03:22):
Saying Bolton and others on some enemies lists would quote
suffer a very similar consequence to what I did. Intense stuff,
it is, and this really highlights that challenge for us,
for you listening, Yeah, how do you separate the verified action,
the FBI raid from the.
Speaker 3 (03:38):
Interpretation because Cohen's take is just that an interpretation, right,
a very potent one given his history with Trump. But
it's his analysis. It's not an official statement on the
investigation's trajectory.
Speaker 2 (03:50):
It's like a warning flare from someone who's been through that.
Speaker 3 (03:53):
Fire exactly, a veteran's warning, providing this really specific lens
to view it all.
Speaker 2 (04:00):
So if we string these events together, it feels less
like coincidence and more like a sequence.
Speaker 3 (04:06):
It certainly looks that way. You've got this old fight
over the memoir, the.
Speaker 2 (04:10):
One Bolton published in twenty twenty.
Speaker 3 (04:12):
Right, a fight that seemed settled legally. Yeah, the Biden
DOJ dropped, the lawsuit dropped, the grand jury.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
Probe case closed.
Speaker 3 (04:19):
Everyone thought, then change an administration, new president, new FBI director,
one known to be very loyal.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
To the president, cashim Pateel.
Speaker 3 (04:28):
Yes, and suddenly a new criminal investigation pops up about
the same book, which leads to the raid, which leads
to the raid, and then immediately triggers commentary like Cohen's
saying see retribution.
Speaker 2 (04:40):
It paints a picture of a well a politically driven
chain of events.
Speaker 3 (04:44):
It makes it very hard to see the legal process
separate from the political context surrounding it.
Speaker 2 (04:50):
And this whole thing didn't just start in twenty twenty five.
This has roots, specifically with that memoir. Can you remind
us about that book and the first round of legal bas.
Speaker 3 (05:00):
Sure the current investigation is tied directly back to Bolton's
twenty twenty book, The Room Where It.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
Happened, which was incredibly critical of Trump.
Speaker 3 (05:07):
Deeply critical, painted him, as Bolton's words, grossly ill informed,
seeing conspiracies behind rocks. It was a very public, very
messy break between them.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
And the Trump administration didn't take it lying down, not
at all.
Speaker 3 (05:21):
June twenty twenty, the Justice Department under ag Barr filed
a civil suit against.
Speaker 2 (05:26):
Bolton, trying to stop the book.
Speaker 3 (05:28):
Trying to stop publication, yes, claiming it had classified info
and Bolden hadn't finished the pre publication review. They saw
what's called prior restraint, which is.
Speaker 2 (05:37):
Legally really tough to get in the US right First
Amendment issues.
Speaker 3 (05:41):
Extremely tough, a very aggressive move. Bolton's team pushback hard,
said a career NSC official had cleared it and the
lawsuit was pure.
Speaker 2 (05:50):
Politics, and the government lost that round.
Speaker 3 (05:52):
They did. A judge denied the motion to block the
book basically said it was too late. The horses out
of the barn, hundreds of thousands of COEs were already
out there.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
Then the administration changes, Biden comes.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
In, and in twenty twenty one, the Biden DOJ decides
to just drop the whole thing. They abandoned the lawsuit
and crucially they also dropped a related grand jury investigation.
No charge is filed.
Speaker 2 (06:15):
That seemed like a pretty definitive endpoint.
Speaker 3 (06:17):
Then it certainly looked like it. The whole conflict seemed resolved.
Speaker 2 (06:21):
So for you listening, help us understand the key difference
between that fight and what's happening now.
Speaker 3 (06:27):
Okay, this is really the core distinction. The twenty twenty
case was civil. It was about stopping publication First Amendment stuff,
trying to block the book exactly. This twenty twenty five
investigation is a criminal probe. It's about the potential mishandling
of classified information, same subject matter the book, but a
totally different legal framework.
Speaker 2 (06:47):
Different potential consequences too. Criminal charges are obviously much more serious.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
Much more And just because the Biden DOJ closed their
investigation doesn't legally stop a new administration from opening a
fresh one if they believe they have grounds or just
different view.
Speaker 2 (07:00):
Okay, let's quickly run through that timeline again, because the
shifts are stark.
Speaker 3 (07:04):
Yeah, it helps clarify things.
Speaker 2 (07:05):
Early twenty twenty, Bolton submits the manuscript Trump.
Speaker 3 (07:08):
Is President standard procedure pre publication review.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
June sixteenth, twenty twenty. Trump's DOJ under bar files the
civil suit trying to stop the book. June twenty, twenty twenty.
Federal court says no book comes out. Twenty twenty one,
Biden administration drops the lawsuit, and the grand jury probe
seems over.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
Uh huh.
Speaker 2 (07:27):
January twenty twenty five, Trump returns to office shortly after
revokes security clearances for Bolton and others a signal perhaps,
And then August twenty two, twenty twenty five, FBI raid
revived criminal investigation Trump administration with Cash Bettel as FBI.
Speaker 3 (07:42):
Director, and that brings us right up to the present situation.
The legal basis for this raid is that revived criminal.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
Probe authorized by a court, meaning a judge saw a
probable cause.
Speaker 3 (07:52):
Correct probable cause, that a crime related to classified info
might have occurred and evidence might be found at those locations.
We don't see this specific the affidavit is sealed, and
the role.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
Of FBI Director Cash Patel feels significant here.
Speaker 3 (08:06):
Highly significant. The raid was specifically authorized by him, And.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
This isn't someone neutral towards Bolton is he?
Speaker 3 (08:13):
Far from it? Patel, a known Trump loyalist, actually listed
Bolton on an executive branch deep state list in his
own book back in twenty twenty three.
Speaker 2 (08:22):
Wow, that's unusual for an FBI director to have that
kind of public pre existing animosity towards someone his agency
is investigating.
Speaker 3 (08:30):
Highly unusual. It immediately fuels questions about impartiality, you.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
Know, and then the public statements afterwards.
Speaker 3 (08:36):
Also highly irregular for an ongoing investigation like this. Patel
posts on social media, no one is above the law
at FBI agents.
Speaker 2 (08:44):
On mission, and ag Pambondi reposts it, adding her own comment.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
Yeah, America's safety isn't negotiable. Justice will be pursued always
These feel less like standard procedure and more like.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
Well public justification tenant messaging.
Speaker 3 (08:58):
Exactly by many as justifying action against a political opponent,
almost in real time.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
And Bolton isn't alone in this renewed scrutiny.
Speaker 3 (09:07):
Apparently, no reports suggests he's just the latest. Others mentioned
as potentially being under inquiry by the new DOJ include
figures like nayag Letusia, James Adam Schiff, maybe even James Comey.
Speaker 2 (09:20):
All prominent Trump critics or investigators.
Speaker 3 (09:22):
Yes, so when you see this pattern, plus Patel's role,
plus the public statements, it starts to look less like isolated.
Speaker 2 (09:31):
Cases and more like what a policy.
Speaker 3 (09:34):
It strongly suggests that the retribution Bolton himself worn about
might be more than just rhetoric. It could be an active,
top down approach using the DOJ to settle political scores.
Speaker 2 (09:43):
Which also serves as a kind of political theater. Right
sends a message.
Speaker 3 (09:47):
Absolutely intimidation, a signal to other potential critics. It goes
beyond the legal specifics of Bolton's case.
Speaker 2 (09:53):
Okay, let's just quickly recap the key players and their stances.
It really paints the picture. John Bolton calls it a
retribute presidency.
Speaker 3 (10:00):
Donald Trump called Bolton names like low life, fired loser,
revoked his clearance.
Speaker 2 (10:05):
Michael Cohen predicts indictment, calls it promised retribution.
Speaker 3 (10:11):
Cash Patel, FBI director put Bolton on a deep state list,
posts no one is above the law.
Speaker 2 (10:17):
After the raid, Pam Bondy ag echoes Patel says justice
will be pursued always.
Speaker 3 (10:24):
It's quite a cast and their positions are very clear.
Speaker 2 (10:28):
So let's go back to Cohen's claim Bolton will be indicted.
What does that really mean legally speaking.
Speaker 3 (10:34):
Well, an indictment is that formal step a grand jury
has to agree there's enough evidence to proceed to a trial.
Speaker 2 (10:40):
It's not just an accusation. It's a formal charge exactly.
Speaker 3 (10:43):
And the raid, the search for evidence is way before that.
It doesn't guarantee an indictment at all. Bolton wasn't even
in custody.
Speaker 2 (10:50):
So Cohen's predicting a future legal step.
Speaker 3 (10:52):
Yes, a specific legal prediction, but its impact is immediate.
It raises the political temperature instantly.
Speaker 2 (10:58):
Still his advice to lawyer that seems sound no matter what.
Speaker 3 (11:02):
Oh, absolutely, anyone whose property is searched in a criminal
probe is a subject getting legal counsel immediately is just
standard prudent advice protector rights.
Speaker 2 (11:11):
But Cohen's whole take is colored by his own experience, isn't.
Speaker 3 (11:13):
It completely He sees this through the prism of his
own legal battles with the Trump world, which ended badly
for him.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
So for people critical of Trump, Cohen's interpretation might feel
like a validation of their fears.
Speaker 3 (11:26):
Precisely, it confirms those long held concerns about political persecution.
Whether it's accurate legally is separate from its political resonance.
Speaker 2 (11:34):
Which brings us back to this idea of the legal
process itself being used as messaging.
Speaker 3 (11:40):
And that's the really tricky part here. The raid was
very public, the comments from Patel, from Bondie, they weren't quiet.
Speaker 2 (11:48):
The media coverage was intense.
Speaker 3 (11:50):
All it combines to show how the process can become
a tool, even if nothing more happens, no indictment, the
raid itself sends a powerful signal.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
A message to other critics, you could be next.
Speaker 3 (12:01):
Exactly. It achieves an objective of intimidation of political theater.
Cohen gets that because he feels he lived it. It
makes it really hard for anyone you listening included to
separate the pure legal question from the political performance.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
Okay, stepping back for the bigger picture, There are legitimate
concerns about classified documents. That's not imaginary.
Speaker 3 (12:22):
No Handling classified material properly is a serious national security issue.
The investigation on its face addresses that.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
But the way this investigation was revived the political context,
that's what raises these huge questions about the DOJ's impartiality.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
It absolutely does. It feeds right into this narrative, this
fear of the weaponization of the Justice Department for political ends.
Speaker 2 (12:46):
And if people start believing that, losing faith that the
system is impartial.
Speaker 3 (12:50):
That's incredibly corrosive. Public trust and law enforcement in the
justice system is fundamental for a democracy to function. Erosion
of that trust is dangerous.
Speaker 2 (12:59):
This case feels like more than just Bolton.
Speaker 3 (13:01):
It feels like a test, a critical test, a test
of this administration's approach to political opponents. It seems to
validate Bolton's own retribution presidency warning, and.
Speaker 2 (13:11):
It says a precedent maybe for how critics might be
treated going forward.
Speaker 3 (13:14):
It could This whole situation is a prime example of
our justice system under intense pressure, where everything gets viewed
through these dual lenses legal merit and political.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
Motive, And the fact that the same issue classified info
in the memoir was handled so differently by two administrations.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
That really underscores how political will, not just the facts,
can shape these outcomes. One administration drops it, the next
pursues it criminally.
Speaker 2 (13:41):
Which hits right at the core of perceived impartiality.
Speaker 3 (13:44):
Exactly when cases against opponents seem to appear or disappear
depending on who's in power, it undermines faith in the
whole system. Add in the FBI director's known personal animosity.
Speaker 2 (13:56):
It deepens this suspicion considerably.
Speaker 3 (13:59):
So you're right, this isn't just about John Bolton. It's
really a test case for whether the US justice system
can stay insulated from the political goals and maybe even
the personal feelings of those in the executive branch.
Speaker 2 (14:10):
Or does it risk just becoming another battlefield in our
political wars.
Speaker 3 (14:13):
That's the fear.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
So we've peeled back a lot of layers today, the raid,
the history, the legal questions, the political interpretations, trying to
distinguish between genuine concerns about classified information and these really
powerful arguments about political retribution and.
Speaker 3 (14:28):
The implications for the rule of law are significant.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
We hope this deep dive has helped you listening at home,
navigate these complexities, understanding the difference between a legal action
and political commentary, and why that distinction is so vital
right now.
Speaker 3 (14:43):
It's crucial for informed citizenship, definitely
Speaker 2 (14:45):
So as we watch this unfold, maybe the question to
leave you with is this, what does it truly mean
for our democracy if the legal system itself becomes a
stage for political messaging, And how do we as citizens
ensure justice stays blind when public trust is constantly being
challenged by perceptions of political mode
You found the podcast. You've found the podcast Go Beyond
the Brief, where we take a deep dive into the
societal currents shaping our lives. Together, we'll explore the often
unseen forces at play. We'll examine the research, dissect the data,
and most importantly, if you're seeking to understand what's shaping
our society, this is the place.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Okay, picture this. It's a Friday morning, August twenty second,
twenty twenty five. Things seem quiet, and then bam, news breaks.
Federal agents FBI are all over the home and office
of a major former official, John Botlin exactly. We see
these images, you know, agents carrying cardboard boxes out of
(00:42):
his place in Bethesa, his office in DC.
Speaker 3 (00:44):
Yeah, those visuals are powerful. Instantly creates a narrative.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
In the official line, a national security investigation looking for
classified records. So on the deep dive today, we really
want to unpack this. Our mission is to you know,
cut through the noise.
Speaker 3 (00:58):
Yes, separate the facts from the spin.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
Right, what are the actual legal moves here versus the
let's say, political interpretations swirling around.
Speaker 3 (01:06):
And there's a lot of squirrel.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
We need to look at the history leading up to
this raid, the specific legal actions, and what it all
really means for well, the rule of law.
Speaker 3 (01:15):
Which feels increasingly under pressure.
Speaker 2 (01:17):
And if you're thinking, wow, this sounds political, well you're
not wrong. Almost immediately, Michael Cohen jumps on MSNBC.
Speaker 3 (01:23):
Right, the former Trump attorney now a huge critic, and.
Speaker 2 (01:27):
He doesn't mince words. He says Bolton will be indicted,
flat out tells him to lawyer up.
Speaker 3 (01:34):
That instantly frames the whole thing, doesn't it. It takes
this official action, the raid, and puts it squarely in
a narrative of political payback. Absolutely, And what's really critical here,
I think, is how fast this happened. You have what
looks like a legitimate concern classified documents, mishandling. Sure, that's
a real issue, but it almost instantly gets fused with
(01:54):
these really strong political motives, at least in the public eye.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
And that fusion it really makes you a listener step
back and ask some hard questions, right.
Speaker 3 (02:03):
Definitely questions about the impartiality of the Justice Department, especially
when you're dealing with figures this high profile. This is
politically charged.
Speaker 2 (02:09):
Okay, So let's break down the incident itself. Friday, August
twenty second, FBI agents YEP executing a court authorized search
warrant Bolton's home in Maryland, his DC office.
Speaker 3 (02:21):
The justification being a criminal investigation into potential mishandling of
classified info. NBC Sky News AP they all confirmed it.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
And those pictures, the boxes, powerful imagery. Very but and
this is really important to stress, at that moment, Bolton
wasn't detained, He wasn't charged with anything.
Speaker 3 (02:42):
Absolutely crucial distinction. A search warrant means a judge found
probable cause to look for evidence. It doesn't mean guilt,
it doesn't mean charges are imminent.
Speaker 2 (02:51):
Right, It's an investigative step exactly.
Speaker 3 (02:53):
But then you layer on Michael Cohan's reaction.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
Which was immediate and strong.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
Very he wasn't just speculating. He said no doubt Bolton
would be indicted, advised him to.
Speaker 2 (03:04):
Lawyer up, and he framed it explicitly as political vengeance,
part of a larger ongoing campaign. He called it.
Speaker 3 (03:11):
He even tied it to a specific campaign promise, didn't
he He did.
Speaker 2 (03:14):
He quoted, I will be your retribution, and then he
made it personal.
Speaker 3 (03:19):
Comparing Bolton's situation to his own legal battles.
Speaker 2 (03:22):
Saying Bolton and others on some enemies lists would quote
suffer a very similar consequence to what I did. Intense stuff,
it is, and this really highlights that challenge for us,
for you listening, Yeah, how do you separate the verified action,
the FBI raid from the.
Speaker 3 (03:38):
Interpretation because Cohen's take is just that an interpretation, right,
a very potent one given his history with Trump. But
it's his analysis. It's not an official statement on the
investigation's trajectory.
Speaker 2 (03:50):
It's like a warning flare from someone who's been through that.
Speaker 3 (03:53):
Fire exactly, a veteran's warning, providing this really specific lens
to view it all.
Speaker 2 (04:00):
So if we string these events together, it feels less
like coincidence and more like a sequence.
Speaker 3 (04:06):
It certainly looks that way. You've got this old fight
over the memoir, the.
Speaker 2 (04:10):
One Bolton published in twenty twenty.
Speaker 3 (04:12):
Right, a fight that seemed settled legally. Yeah, the Biden
DOJ dropped, the lawsuit dropped, the grand jury.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
Probe case closed.
Speaker 3 (04:19):
Everyone thought, then change an administration, new president, new FBI director,
one known to be very loyal.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
To the president, cashim Pateel.
Speaker 3 (04:28):
Yes, and suddenly a new criminal investigation pops up about
the same book, which leads to the raid, which leads
to the raid, and then immediately triggers commentary like Cohen's
saying see retribution.
Speaker 2 (04:40):
It paints a picture of a well a politically driven
chain of events.
Speaker 3 (04:44):
It makes it very hard to see the legal process
separate from the political context surrounding it.
Speaker 2 (04:50):
And this whole thing didn't just start in twenty twenty five.
This has roots, specifically with that memoir. Can you remind
us about that book and the first round of legal bas.
Speaker 3 (05:00):
Sure the current investigation is tied directly back to Bolton's
twenty twenty book, The Room Where It.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
Happened, which was incredibly critical of Trump.
Speaker 3 (05:07):
Deeply critical, painted him, as Bolton's words, grossly ill informed,
seeing conspiracies behind rocks. It was a very public, very
messy break between them.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
And the Trump administration didn't take it lying down, not
at all.
Speaker 3 (05:21):
June twenty twenty, the Justice Department under ag Barr filed
a civil suit against.
Speaker 2 (05:26):
Bolton, trying to stop the book.
Speaker 3 (05:28):
Trying to stop publication, yes, claiming it had classified info
and Bolden hadn't finished the pre publication review. They saw
what's called prior restraint, which is.
Speaker 2 (05:37):
Legally really tough to get in the US right First
Amendment issues.
Speaker 3 (05:41):
Extremely tough, a very aggressive move. Bolton's team pushback hard,
said a career NSC official had cleared it and the
lawsuit was pure.
Speaker 2 (05:50):
Politics, and the government lost that round.
Speaker 3 (05:52):
They did. A judge denied the motion to block the
book basically said it was too late. The horses out
of the barn, hundreds of thousands of COEs were already
out there.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
Then the administration changes, Biden comes.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
In, and in twenty twenty one, the Biden DOJ decides
to just drop the whole thing. They abandoned the lawsuit
and crucially they also dropped a related grand jury investigation.
No charge is filed.
Speaker 2 (06:15):
That seemed like a pretty definitive endpoint.
Speaker 3 (06:17):
Then it certainly looked like it. The whole conflict seemed resolved.
Speaker 2 (06:21):
So for you listening, help us understand the key difference
between that fight and what's happening now.
Speaker 3 (06:27):
Okay, this is really the core distinction. The twenty twenty
case was civil. It was about stopping publication First Amendment stuff,
trying to block the book exactly. This twenty twenty five
investigation is a criminal probe. It's about the potential mishandling
of classified information, same subject matter the book, but a
totally different legal framework.
Speaker 2 (06:47):
Different potential consequences too. Criminal charges are obviously much more serious.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
Much more And just because the Biden DOJ closed their
investigation doesn't legally stop a new administration from opening a
fresh one if they believe they have grounds or just
different view.
Speaker 2 (07:00):
Okay, let's quickly run through that timeline again, because the
shifts are stark.
Speaker 3 (07:04):
Yeah, it helps clarify things.
Speaker 2 (07:05):
Early twenty twenty, Bolton submits the manuscript Trump.
Speaker 3 (07:08):
Is President standard procedure pre publication review.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
June sixteenth, twenty twenty. Trump's DOJ under bar files the
civil suit trying to stop the book. June twenty, twenty twenty.
Federal court says no book comes out. Twenty twenty one,
Biden administration drops the lawsuit, and the grand jury probe
seems over.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
Uh huh.
Speaker 2 (07:27):
January twenty twenty five, Trump returns to office shortly after
revokes security clearances for Bolton and others a signal perhaps,
And then August twenty two, twenty twenty five, FBI raid
revived criminal investigation Trump administration with Cash Bettel as FBI.
Speaker 3 (07:42):
Director, and that brings us right up to the present situation.
The legal basis for this raid is that revived criminal.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
Probe authorized by a court, meaning a judge saw a
probable cause.
Speaker 3 (07:52):
Correct probable cause, that a crime related to classified info
might have occurred and evidence might be found at those locations.
We don't see this specific the affidavit is sealed, and
the role.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
Of FBI Director Cash Patel feels significant here.
Speaker 3 (08:06):
Highly significant. The raid was specifically authorized by him, And.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
This isn't someone neutral towards Bolton is he?
Speaker 3 (08:13):
Far from it? Patel, a known Trump loyalist, actually listed
Bolton on an executive branch deep state list in his
own book back in twenty twenty three.
Speaker 2 (08:22):
Wow, that's unusual for an FBI director to have that
kind of public pre existing animosity towards someone his agency
is investigating.
Speaker 3 (08:30):
Highly unusual. It immediately fuels questions about impartiality, you.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
Know, and then the public statements afterwards.
Speaker 3 (08:36):
Also highly irregular for an ongoing investigation like this. Patel
posts on social media, no one is above the law
at FBI agents.
Speaker 2 (08:44):
On mission, and ag Pambondi reposts it, adding her own comment.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
Yeah, America's safety isn't negotiable. Justice will be pursued always
These feel less like standard procedure and more like.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
Well public justification tenant messaging.
Speaker 3 (08:58):
Exactly by many as justifying action against a political opponent,
almost in real time.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
And Bolton isn't alone in this renewed scrutiny.
Speaker 3 (09:07):
Apparently, no reports suggests he's just the latest. Others mentioned
as potentially being under inquiry by the new DOJ include
figures like nayag Letusia, James Adam Schiff, maybe even James Comey.
Speaker 2 (09:20):
All prominent Trump critics or investigators.
Speaker 3 (09:22):
Yes, so when you see this pattern, plus Patel's role,
plus the public statements, it starts to look less like isolated.
Speaker 2 (09:31):
Cases and more like what a policy.
Speaker 3 (09:34):
It strongly suggests that the retribution Bolton himself worn about
might be more than just rhetoric. It could be an active,
top down approach using the DOJ to settle political scores.
Speaker 2 (09:43):
Which also serves as a kind of political theater. Right
sends a message.
Speaker 3 (09:47):
Absolutely intimidation, a signal to other potential critics. It goes
beyond the legal specifics of Bolton's case.
Speaker 2 (09:53):
Okay, let's just quickly recap the key players and their stances.
It really paints the picture. John Bolton calls it a
retribute presidency.
Speaker 3 (10:00):
Donald Trump called Bolton names like low life, fired loser,
revoked his clearance.
Speaker 2 (10:05):
Michael Cohen predicts indictment, calls it promised retribution.
Speaker 3 (10:11):
Cash Patel, FBI director put Bolton on a deep state list,
posts no one is above the law.
Speaker 2 (10:17):
After the raid, Pam Bondy ag echoes Patel says justice
will be pursued always.
Speaker 3 (10:24):
It's quite a cast and their positions are very clear.
Speaker 2 (10:28):
So let's go back to Cohen's claim Bolton will be indicted.
What does that really mean legally speaking.
Speaker 3 (10:34):
Well, an indictment is that formal step a grand jury
has to agree there's enough evidence to proceed to a trial.
Speaker 2 (10:40):
It's not just an accusation. It's a formal charge exactly.
Speaker 3 (10:43):
And the raid, the search for evidence is way before that.
It doesn't guarantee an indictment at all. Bolton wasn't even
in custody.
Speaker 2 (10:50):
So Cohen's predicting a future legal step.
Speaker 3 (10:52):
Yes, a specific legal prediction, but its impact is immediate.
It raises the political temperature instantly.
Speaker 2 (10:58):
Still his advice to lawyer that seems sound no matter what.
Speaker 3 (11:02):
Oh, absolutely, anyone whose property is searched in a criminal
probe is a subject getting legal counsel immediately is just
standard prudent advice protector rights.
Speaker 2 (11:11):
But Cohen's whole take is colored by his own experience, isn't.
Speaker 3 (11:13):
It completely He sees this through the prism of his
own legal battles with the Trump world, which ended badly
for him.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
So for people critical of Trump, Cohen's interpretation might feel
like a validation of their fears.
Speaker 3 (11:26):
Precisely, it confirms those long held concerns about political persecution.
Whether it's accurate legally is separate from its political resonance.
Speaker 2 (11:34):
Which brings us back to this idea of the legal
process itself being used as messaging.
Speaker 3 (11:40):
And that's the really tricky part here. The raid was
very public, the comments from Patel, from Bondie, they weren't quiet.
Speaker 2 (11:48):
The media coverage was intense.
Speaker 3 (11:50):
All it combines to show how the process can become
a tool, even if nothing more happens, no indictment, the
raid itself sends a powerful signal.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
A message to other critics, you could be next.
Speaker 3 (12:01):
Exactly. It achieves an objective of intimidation of political theater.
Cohen gets that because he feels he lived it. It
makes it really hard for anyone you listening included to
separate the pure legal question from the political performance.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
Okay, stepping back for the bigger picture, There are legitimate
concerns about classified documents. That's not imaginary.
Speaker 3 (12:22):
No Handling classified material properly is a serious national security issue.
The investigation on its face addresses that.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
But the way this investigation was revived the political context,
that's what raises these huge questions about the DOJ's impartiality.
Speaker 3 (12:38):
It absolutely does. It feeds right into this narrative, this
fear of the weaponization of the Justice Department for political ends.
Speaker 2 (12:46):
And if people start believing that, losing faith that the
system is impartial.
Speaker 3 (12:50):
That's incredibly corrosive. Public trust and law enforcement in the
justice system is fundamental for a democracy to function. Erosion
of that trust is dangerous.
Speaker 2 (12:59):
This case feels like more than just Bolton.
Speaker 3 (13:01):
It feels like a test, a critical test, a test
of this administration's approach to political opponents. It seems to
validate Bolton's own retribution presidency warning, and.
Speaker 2 (13:11):
It says a precedent maybe for how critics might be
treated going forward.
Speaker 3 (13:14):
It could This whole situation is a prime example of
our justice system under intense pressure, where everything gets viewed
through these dual lenses legal merit and political.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
Motive, And the fact that the same issue classified info
in the memoir was handled so differently by two administrations.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
That really underscores how political will, not just the facts,
can shape these outcomes. One administration drops it, the next
pursues it criminally.
Speaker 2 (13:41):
Which hits right at the core of perceived impartiality.
Speaker 3 (13:44):
Exactly when cases against opponents seem to appear or disappear
depending on who's in power, it undermines faith in the
whole system. Add in the FBI director's known personal animosity.
Speaker 2 (13:56):
It deepens this suspicion considerably.
Speaker 3 (13:59):
So you're right, this isn't just about John Bolton. It's
really a test case for whether the US justice system
can stay insulated from the political goals and maybe even
the personal feelings of those in the executive branch.
Speaker 2 (14:10):
Or does it risk just becoming another battlefield in our
political wars.
Speaker 3 (14:13):
That's the fear.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
So we've peeled back a lot of layers today, the raid,
the history, the legal questions, the political interpretations, trying to
distinguish between genuine concerns about classified information and these really
powerful arguments about political retribution and.
Speaker 3 (14:28):
The implications for the rule of law are significant.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
We hope this deep dive has helped you listening at home,
navigate these complexities, understanding the difference between a legal action
and political commentary, and why that distinction is so vital
right now.
Speaker 3 (14:43):
It's crucial for informed citizenship, definitely
Speaker 2 (14:45):
So as we watch this unfold, maybe the question to
leave you with is this, what does it truly mean
for our democracy if the legal system itself becomes a
stage for political messaging, And how do we as citizens
ensure justice stays blind when public trust is constantly being
challenged by perceptions of political mode
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.