On a sweltering, sticky day, witness
federal agents applying the heat to one
of Washington's best known figures. The
FBI visiting John Bolton's home, about
to box up and take away what may or may
not be classified paperwork in what
looks like a personal vendetta between
President Trump and one of his harshest
critics.
John Bolton was the third of Trump's
four national security advisers during
his revolving door first term. The
president was known to dislike his
walrus mustache, but it was Bolton's
constant desire to bomb Iran which
marked him out in the president's mind
as a crazy foreign policy hawk. In
Washington, revenge is often served cold
in the form of a tell- all book. and
after he was fired, the room where it
happened reportedly earned Bolton a $2
million advance. In it, he recalled this
historic first meeting with North
Korea's dictator, who by refusing to
disarm, denied Trump the Nobel Peace
Prize. Trump told me he was prepared to
sign a substancefree communicate, Bolton
wrote, have his press conference to
declare victory and then get out of
town.
and this summit in Finland where not for
the last time Trump took Vladimir
Putin's point of view. Putin had to be
laughing uporiously at what he'd gotten
away with in Helsinki was John Bolton's
conclusion.
>> Obviously, the book was already out and
leaked and everything else, but he
leaked classified information. So, he's
got a big problem.
>> Trump called Bolton a washed up
creepster, a low life who should be in
jail. And today's FBI search certainly
looks like the continuation of this
longunning feud. Bolton was dismissive
of this meeting in Alaska a week ago
from which Putin escaped any more
sanctions over Ukraine. So perhaps the
president's fury should come as no
surprise.
>> What Putin now wants to do is use his
KGB training to reel Trump back in uh
and get him back on his side.
>> President Trump's been pretty rude about
you in the past. He's called you dumb.
He's called you a loser. What advice
would you give him today?
>> Well, I' I'd probably give him the
opposite of what I thought he should do
and so he'd react against it and
actually do the right thing. But but
what what he should be doing is telling
Putin that uh if if they don't get
serious about withdrawing Russian forces
from Ukraine that he will significantly
increase US assistance. This afternoon,
the president described himself as
America's chief law enforcement officer,
all the while denying any involvement in
the FBI's raid.
>> Uh I I saw that just like everybody
else. I try and stay out of that stuff.
I'm allowed to be and I'm chief law
enforcement officer, believe it or not.
You know, I don't like to go around
saying that, but I am. That's the
position. Uh but I purposely don't want
to really get involved in it. I'm not a
fan of John Bolton. I thought he was a
sleaz bag, actually. Trump who has
repeatedly both in office and out of
office mishandled classified information
for him now to be pursuing John Bolton
because allegedly uh Bolton may have um
had or shared information of a
classified nature is the height of
hypocrisy.
>> Trump loyalists point out that nobody
should be above the law. But John
Bolton's disloyalty seems to have
provoked this federal action against
him. this presidency signaling far and
wide that criticism is not welcome in
the nation's capital.
Well, earlier I spoke to the lawyer Mark
Zade who represents uh intelligence
officials and whose own security
clearance, by the way, was taken away by
the Trump administration. I asked him
for his response to what happened this
morning to John Bolton.
>> Well, I think if this was 2020, I would
much better understand it. five years
later after the fact. Frankly, whether
or not there could have been a
legitimate basis for this lawfully a
number of years ago, it looks incredibly
vindictively, retaliatorally suspicious.
>> My question to you is, as someone who
might also get a knock on the door at
some stage, because you're also in his
sights, is this the beginning of a
fullyfledged campaign of retribution?
>> I think it is. I've been warning frankly
for months that the Espionage Act, which
isn't only about spying. It's about
retaining disclosing national defense
information, which doesn't even have to
be classified. That this is going to be
a vehicle for this administration to use
when it wants. And this could be the
first instance of that sort of opening
the door or Pandora's box. I think those
many journalists are going to be at risk
as well as those of us who are have been
inside or around the intelligence
community and have had access lawfully
to classified information. There are
risks now that have never existed before
and President Trump and the Justice
Department have have just found that
vehicle to pursue it. And of course, you
know, there have been other campaigns
against his critics, his opponents. He
would call them enemies. The law firms
that represented Hillary Clinton, the
law firms that represented those who
went after the Russia probe, the law
firms that looked into, you know, the
insurrection of the 6th of January. This
is part of an ongoing campaign, isn't
it?
>> It certainly looks that way. In fact,
leaks that have already started to come
from the Justice Department,
particularly to friendly media to the
president, have indicated that this is
beyond just Bolton. This is looking into
the Biden administration and officials
who they believe uh, you know, have done
President Trump wrong from the first
administration or now. I mean, this this
law in particular is very easily abused.
Historically, it hasn't been, but it's
been on the books for over a century.
And if an administration wants to cross
that line, this is the vehicle,
unfortunately, to be able to do it. And
it it's going to be painful for anyone
who falls victim to that, even if they
ultimately succeed in being able to push
back a prosecution.
And finally, I mean, Donald Trump uh has
hardly stayed above the fray. He's
described himself as the chief law
enforcement officer this morning. He
called uh John Bolton dumb and a loser.
And then, of course, you also have the
heads of the of the Department of
Justice and the FBI, who virtually
declared him guilty before he's even
been charged with a crime. in in fact
the individuals who are now in power in
the Justice Department were part of the
pre-publication review process inside
the White House during Trump's first
administration. So there is a direct
line in connection by them and it is
very clear there is a media campaign
especially behind the scenes to already
implicate John Bolton is being guilty. I
mean this is something that we have not
seen in the United States. This is what
we have historically condemned around
the world in any fascist or totalitarian
or authoritarian regimes and why we
always wanted to have a separation
between the Justice Department and the
White House. Well, wake up people. This
is now the second Trump administration.
>> Mark Zade, thank you very much indeed.
>> Thank you.
Now, the US Defense Secretary Pet Hex
has said that up to 2,000 National Guard
troops who've been deployed here in the
nation's capital will be armed with the
Pentagon declaring that they would soon
be on mission with their service issue
weapons. Hundreds of troops have been
patrolling the city streets since the
White House announced that it was
seizing control of the police force here
in the capital to crack down on what
they call a rise in serious crime.
Here's Paul McNamera on the streets of
Washington
DC.
>> Taking to the streets they're calling to
be freed. They came in droves descending
on the White House this week. The latest
decree from here they say an assault on
the system.
>> President Trump declaring a public
safety emergency. Our capital city has
been overtaken by violent gangs and
bloodthirsty criminals and we're not
going to let it happen anymore. We're
not going to take it.
>> Using the unique power over the city he
resides in, President Trump has
militarized the capital, which he can do
in a state of emergency, and deployed
the National Guard. Vehicles designed to
withstand bomb blasts in Afghanistan,
greet passengers as they step off trains
at DC's Union Station.
>> This was the greeting the vice president
received when he came here on Wednesday.
out of my city.
>> We don't have to live like this. We do
not have to allow our cities to be taken
over by violence and by disorder and by
chaos. You can actually do stuff.
>> The Trump administration rhetoric though
is at odds with the data. Despite the
picture painted by the president,
violent crime in Washington DC was
actually down 35% last year. Total crime
was down 15%. Now, the president made a
particular point about the homicide rate
that had hit a 50-year low in 2012. Had
been rising, but also was down last year
and on current trends was already
looking like it was coming down again
this year. Now, the homicide rate here
is still high. It's higher than in New
York. It's higher than in Chicago, but
it's smaller than in other similarsized
cities. So the question many are now
wrestling with is is all this really
about the numbers or about the politics?
>> I I think the president is completely
out of touch with reality.
>> Why do you think he's doing this then?
>> I think it's to exert power.
>> Is he making the right move?
>> I believe so. We need it. It's a
terrible thing for us to have this much
crime.
>> Thanks guys.
When you say you were nervous about
dropping your daughter off at uni,
>> was that because you were worried about
all the military on the streets or you
were worried about the crime that
they're meant to be a response to?
>> I'm worried about the militarization of
our cities.
>> Not the crime itself.
>> No, I I lived here before and this is a
I this is an incredibly safe city.
>> I know the city's unsafe and they feel
me make me feel safe. As simple as that.
You know, anybody who's honest can tell
you the same. We should thank them.
>> From Germany.
>> From Germany. Were you worried about the
crime in DC when you decided to come
here?
>> No.
>> Citizens may have taken to the streets,
but very few Democrats have taken to the
airwaves. Those that have are walking a
tight way. They want to sound tough on
Trump, but not weak on crime. Obviously
DC can do more to reduce violent crime
as we can across the country. So this is
all an opportunity for Donald Trump to
play dictator in DC.
>> Heavenly Father, we thank you for
bringing us together.
>> If the aim is to reduce crime,
Washington's ward aid is an area you may
think would welcome it.
>> So how's the increased police presence
made people feel around here feel any
safer?
My sense isn't
>> incomes are low here, crime is high, but
so is fear of law enforcement. At this
church last night, a hastily organized
know your rights session.
>> What's your fear here? Because the
message from the government is you've
got more police in the streets, it
should be safer. Yeah, I think that that
is not true in our community. And what
we see when there are particularly when
black young folks are interacting with
the crim with with law enforcement is
that there's more harassment, there's
more opportunity for abuse of power and
that young folks actually are um at a
disadvantage.
>> But the message from the president
today, both the one he wore and the one
he said, this is a decision he backs to
the hilt. To me, DC is very exciting.
And a lot of people say, "Well, where's
he going from there?" Well, I have calls
from politicians begging me to go to
Chicago, begging me to go to New York,
begging me to go to Los Angeles.
>> This is not about making DC great. This
is not about making DC.
>> Opponents say the president lacks the
authority to do elsewhere what he's done
in DC. The president's eternal message
to opponents, we'll see about that.
Paul Magnamar reporting there. Well,
joining me now from Virginia is retired
Major General Randy Manor who's the
former vice chief of the National Guard
here in Washington DC. Thanks so much
for coming on the program. Do you think
the deployment of 2,000 National
Guardsmen who are now armed was
necessary in order to combat crime in
this city?
Like most Americans, I fully support
community- based efforts to reduce uh
crime using trained law enforcement
officers with an effective judicial
court system. This is at most should be
a law enforcement operation, not a
military operation. Our National Guard
and our military are absolutely not
trained for this mission. They are
trained to attack and destroy the enemy.
Last time I checked, there's no one to
attack and destroy in Washington, at
least to the best of my knowledge. It's
a very dangerous mix. The idea that the
the press has not even yet uncovered
what the rules for the use of force are
that every young soldier and airman
should be carrying on their person with
a laminated card like whenever I was the
the acting uh deputy chief of the
National Guard bureau. It's also this is
very insulting to all of our family
members who are having their young men
and women either yanked out of college
to be put on the streets of Washington
or removed from their employers or in
many cases they're earning more money
before compared to what they're being
paid here. as well as of course it's
changing the entire way that citizens
view the National Guard which is instead
of it being we're here to help you in
times of disaster such as uh hurricanes
and flooding and forest fires here they
are being used as an intimidation factor
for which they have not been trained.
This is it's very heartbreaking again
for the for our American citizens in the
city of of Washington and it's also
heartbreaking to see our young men and
women in uniform these scarce resources
being misused in the way that they are.
>> Okay. So the president says this was
necessary, this deployment, because of
the quote horrible crime figures in the
nation's capital. And since the
deployment of these troops, he said the
crime has gone right down. There's not
been a single homicide in the last week.
Do you buy that?
>> I think that there's anything that you
can do to to for the president to
justify the use of the militarization of
our cities, particularly those that are
not supportive of his policies, is what
he will continue to follow. I think it's
more important that if indeed there are
crime problems, you don't bring in the
United States Army through the National
Guard to quite frankly intimidate all
the people that are there. Instead, what
you do is you refund the police. You
refund the training programs. You help
fill the gaps and the needs for the
Metropolitan Police Department and other
departments to ensure they have enough
officers on the streets. Again, this is
a military this is not a military
operation. This is a law enforcement
operation. So, it's using the wrong tool
to solve the problem. And it's something
where the unintended consequences are
that these that we have political props
that are basically the young men and
women in uniform and it disturbs me
greatly.
>> Right. Finally and briefly, do you think
that those troops deployed now and
they're all armed might actually use
live ammunition against protesters at
some stage in the near future?
>> Again, it's important to say what are
the rules for use of force. Every single
soldier receives a briefing, but I will
tell you that I have sat in them and I
have given them and an hour later you
don't remember. It's important that
these soldiers and airmen and the press
and the protesters fully understand what
are the terms for the use of force so
that everyone can be clear. Not the fact
to allow some young soldier or airman to
be to use his or her weapon
inappropriately compared to the training
exa exhaustive training many months that
police officers receive compared to a
few hours that a national guardsman
would receive.