[00:00:00] Since the Dawn of civilization, spies of every nation and culture have worked to infiltrate their adversaries and glean the information that will give their side. The advantage, the stakes are sky high, the strategies varied and imaginative, and the ultimate sign of success is that no one ever even knew you were there.
In each episode, we will explore the moral and ethical gray zones of ESP espionage, where treachery and betrayal go hand in hand with cunning and courage. This is the spycraft 1 0 1 podcast. Welcome to your clandestine classroom.
This is episode number 56 of the spycraft 1 0 1 podcast with me now is Robert Bayer who served as a case officer with the central intelligence agency for 21 years. He worked all over the world, particularly [00:01:00] through the middle east, between the late 1970s and late 1990s. After retiring, he turned a writing and has published seven nonfiction books to.
His book C no evil. The true story of a ground soldier in the CIA's war against terrorism was adapted into the 2005 film SIRA, starring George Clooney. Clooney's character was based on Robert himself. I invited Bob on the podcast after I picked up his newest book, the fourth man, which is about one of the last great unsolved mysteries of cold war espionage.
The book covers the hunt for a suspected fourth high level mole within the us government who is still working at the behest of Russia long after Aldrich Ames. Robert Hanson and Edward Lee Howard were identified. But first I wanna say a big thank you to everyone listening, who is also supporting me on Patreon, including Christian C and Sean B your monthly contributions there helped me keep this podcast going week in and week out.
As a way of thanking my patrons, I offer a lot of [00:02:00] great freebies and promotions, including free and discounted books and products from the spycraft 1 0 1 store patrons. Also get exclusive access to long form articles of mine that aren't available anywhere else. If you haven't signed up for my Patreon yet, but you want to just click the link in the show notes on whatever podcast platform you're listening to right now.
Bob. Thank you so much for taking the time for this discussion today. You, well, thanks for having me. I love this story. I can tell it's it's an incredible, and certainly, and I'm really, really happy that we could talk about this, honestly. I know that the fourth man theory has been written about a, a couple of times over the years, but.
Reading your book. It honestly just shocked me with the new information that you've brought to light. So I wanna ask how difficult was it for you to actually get this written and published, considering how many people are involved in this story? Well, Justin, the big problem is that the CIA hates this story and my former colleagues do the possibility.
That the [00:03:00] Russians, you know, had our lunch and completely, so I am not a popular person, but the way it came to me was the investigators themselves, wanted to blow the whistle. And that means the people who ran Russian operations, people encounter intelligence, and they walked me through. Most of the evidence, that some of it still classified, the FBI questioned me, to see if I had anything new that I'd come across anything new.
So there's, it's, it's still an open case. And then a lot of people simply didn't wanna talk about it. Like former directors, former FBI agents texted me back, said, I can't talk about this. I just know it's, what I'm trying to say is this is not an urban myth. The fourth man, everybody who knows anything directly involved knows there was a fourth man.
And the question is who was it? And as you know, and what I do in the book is just lay out the evidence. [00:04:00] So it's, it's becomes a bit of a thriller. And at the end, of course you can't say somebody is the fourth man, but I leave it up to the reader. To make up her mind, you know, who, who the fourth man was.
Right, right. Absolutely. That was, clear. I mean, nobody's been, you know, indicted, arrested, confessed, anything like that, but, you know, we are gonna discuss a lot of high level people that were, suspects, you know, at one time or another, Or over the course of the episode, but you know, it is clear that, nobody has gone to jail and maybe nobody will go to jail at any point, I guess that still remains to be seen.
So Bob, before we actually get into that story, can you just talk a little bit about your own career and what led you here for people that might not be familiar with you already? Yeah, I joined the CIA in 1976. I was like 21 or 22 and I was just planning to spend, you know, it, it wasn't really my thing.
, I wasn't didn't care about much, but it's one of those things. I just wanted to see what it looked like for me inside. And then. [00:05:00] This was 1976 and I ended up spending 21 years in the CIA, almost always in the middle east. I was involved in a C DETA against Saddam Hussain in, in 95. It went badly. I had some dealings with the Russians.
I Resigned in 19, December, 1997, I was just tired of it I got a medal after I desire, you know, left, you know, they barely tolerated me cause I was always doing crazy stuff. I like I was liaison with the Russian division and jumped out of a, an airplane with Russian soldiers and drove a tank and Russian maneuver. So I was, I was just, you know, I was sort of a pain in the ass to the CIA and then I, then I got out and taught myself.
More or less how to write. And that's my fascination now is writing and, and trying to write well and tell stories. Well, you certainly did a great job with this book and that was actually gonna be my [00:06:00] next question is what led you to the writing? Because your, your first book, right after you left, turned out to be kind of a, a runaway hit, was it.
It was the bestseller. It was right after 9/11 and people wanted to know what was the state of the intelligence community. And you know, I'm not, I can't judge my own book, but it, it was a runaway bestseller and it was the timing. It, these books were always in the timing. And, and I didn't do very, I mean, I started writing with a ghost writer and then we, we went different ways.
And so I had to sit down and write it myself. And it's not easy, you know, to tell story and engage the reader every chapter. So, I mean, you'd have to read it to, you know, I'll leave it up to your listeners, whether it's any good or not. If they have the time to read it So, anyhow, I did that. Then I wrote a book about Saudi Arabia, which is, is a country I'm not very objective about.
And just, you know, how evil that regime is. And I wrote a book about Iran, and then I wrote a novel, I don't know how good it was, but, once you start [00:07:00] writing and do it all the time and you get up in the morning, you think about it and say, am I being clear? Am I covering this?
Am I being engaging? And that's that's my fascination now is, is, is just writing. And it's, this story was just sort of dropped in my lap and I wasn't gonna do espionage ever again. And then I said, I gotta write this story. Hmm. Yeah. Well, I'm, I'm certainly glad that you did. I just finished it a couple of weeks ago.
Like I mentioned to you earlier when we were setting up this interview A little bit more backstory specifically about this book that I want to get into. You kind of, I don't wanna say you kind of start at the end of the Ames investigation. And so I wanted to briefly talk about the previous three moles because of course they come up quite a bit.
I've mentioned them a number of times in previous episodes, but I haven't done a complete episode on any of them yet. So can you just briefly talk about the significance of Ames and of Hansen and. Howard who a bit of a different case there, but still a very significant guy in his own way. Edley Edley Howard was fired for R for cause in the [00:08:00] early eighties, he was, he stole stuff out of a, he was, he was a psychotic, obviously.
He stole a purse out of a woman's bag and on a flight. And the CIA found about it and fired him, but he was on his way to Moscow. And then the FBI started to come down on him and then he ran for it and went to Moscow and sort of spilled the beans. He later died, his neck was broken in Moscow, in mysterious circumstances.
and, and right. Yeah. Yeah. Who knows, and then you had Ames who in 19 85 was outta money. It was sort of a very, a loser in every sense of the word. And he walked into the Russian. And spilt his guts in Washington, DC. And it led to the arrest of at least 10 Russians spies that were spying for the CIA.
Some of them were executed, some of them went to prison. And then you had Hansen who worked on and off for the Russians. He was an FBI [00:09:00] agent and he it was caught in 2001. So that's the first three men. You've got. And then what happened after Ames' arrest in 1994 was the head of counterintelligence.
Sat down some people and said, look, to see if there's anything else that can't be explained by Ames and Howard specifically. And so they open up this investigation of May 94. And what they see right away is that the Russians have a source in the FBI. Which turns out to be Hansen. We don't know that until 2001.
And then they decide there's another source in the CIA. He wasn't called the Fourth Man at that point in 1994, he was called the Big Case. And they confronted the leadership, these investigators, and I've talked to all of them except one who's passed away. They, they confront management and then management just [00:10:00] drops the ball.
It, it goes nowhere. and, they base their evidence on what they call a matrix. And they look for these compromises, the dates, like a deep chronology, and then they come up with a profile. it's not the kind of evidence you can take to court. It's very deductive, but it was, it was fascinating for them.
And they. Thought they knew who it was, but they weren't sure. And for me, that was the interesting part. All right. You've got these three ladies and one FBI analyst come to this conclusion and I don't really know how serious it is. The whole thing until last year, I got a call from the Los Angeles field office who says, can we send two guys from counterintelligence to see you in Colorado?
They come up and talk to me very friendly. Their FBI's just doing his jobs and they're what they wanna find out is if I know something that they don't, I don't think I did. But any case, they took notes, they listened, I corresponded with them. They never [00:11:00] mentioned the fourth man's name. So what I'm dealing with in this book is two investigations.
One is the 94 CIA investigation, which they decide there's a fourth man. And the current. FBI investigation. And since, I guess a couple months ago, they were out knocking on the doors of my sources for the book and seeing what else they they've missed. So what I do know, is the investigation is very current.
It's been going on for 25 years. More than 25 years, almost 30. And it's the greatest mystery in American counter espionage. I think I've talked to most people in this. And, and absolutely, like I said, nobody's happy about it. And I said, Hey guys, I'm just reporting what the investigators tell me.
And the FBI, as I heard it, I'm a, I'm a stenographer in this. And the thing that gets me is, is how little the FBI trusts [00:12:00] CIA Russian Operations. They just, they just thought it was completely penetrated by the Russians. You know, and, this is the book. What I'm hoping with the book is in a lot of ways is that there's Russians listening to this podcast in Moscow who know about the fourth man and come out and they'd get a lot of money, millions upon millions.
If they presented the evidence that would finally help the FBI catch the fourth man. Hm. Wow. That's really something. Do I recall correctly that the guy from Russia who assisted in getting. The identifying info on Hansen. Didn't he get 7 million from the FBI for that assistance. This is what I've heard.
There's a grade called The 7 Million Dollar Spy. I think it is a by David Wise, who's passed away, talks about that. Somebody carried out his file and that's how they caught Hanson. I don't know if that's true if that's disinformation, but it's, it's a great, it's a great audio book. Good, but the guy actually gets [00:13:00] Hanson's fingerprints and his voice voice print.
And that's how the FBI catches them. I mean, I think it's, it's all these stories. If you like, if you're a fan of le Carré this is, this story is Tinker Taylor Soldier Spy, except in one version of it, rather than Hayden, the, the spy is George Smiley. So the guy sent it, you know, find himself as really the spy.
But we, again I look at the evidence and keep this in mind. I look at the evidence presented to me by the FBI and the CIA. And I would not convict anybody in that list. I give you there's, it's simply not solid enough, but they tell me over and over again, there are a lot of secrets to this story, which we can't tell you about, cuz we don't wanna go to jail.
Wow that, yeah, I know there's a lot to remains to be seen, but the, the journey that we go on through your book is, is incredible. And I'm glad to, you know, be able to assist in telling it to a wider audience. How was it that [00:14:00] it wound up being you that wrote this book? Because like you said, you were not involved in, you know, 1994 when the, investigation was going on.
Like, why was it left up to you in a sense to write this story so many years later? Well, there's a guy named Bill, who I used to work for at the CIA. He was in charge of Russia and Eastern Europe. And he came to me and said, I think there was a fourth man. And he gave me a name and it doesn't really matter the name he gave me.
And he says, you should look into it cuz you write books now. And I said, okay, where do I start? And he said, well, one of the investigators ended up working for you. And she likes, you know, she got along with you. Well, go see her. And then what I proceeded to do is go through all the investigators to make sure their stories were the same and they were, and as you see in that book, I factor in failures of memory.
The fact that there's no documents that this case was never put on paper as such that the, the paper's been destroyed. Once I had the narrative down, then I started [00:15:00] calling everybody involved and some people said, oh, you're crazy that it wasn't a fourth man, or you, you got it wrong.
You've got all this wrong. And so I want the reader to come to see the problems I ran into nailing this story down. But again, it's the investigators who gave me the story. Then on top of it I know I'm not properly a journalist. I sent the manuscript to the FBI and to the CIA and said, look, here's the story I got.
If this, in any way interferes with your investigation, if there's any piece of evidence here, You don't want take it out because I'm a former government employee. I have certain obligations. And so they didn't take out much, very little. And so this, this is, this is the product you get. It's like a murder mystery, but we don't, we don't really know who the murderer is by the end.
Well, I don't know what, what you think, but, you know, Well, I mean, your book raised some incredible points, but it's like you keep, you know, you continue with the caveat, the, the correct [00:16:00] caveat that there's still a lot that is not known and not published yet. So, you know, it's certainly something I wanna keep an eye on in the years to come.
I don't know how long that might take. But Bob going back to, so I guess the aftermath of the Ames arrest, what were the first indicators that he might not be the only one that he might not be the last one? Well, there were three CIA agents. You know, these are Russians that are secretly working for the CIA that were betrayed in may.
85. And it wasn't until June 85, a month later that Ames walks into the Russians and gives up everything. So the FBI and the CI said, wait a minute, these three guys, they, that we really don't believe they were given up by Ames. They were given up probably six months. To a year in advance. So there have been 1984 and Hansen at, at this point, didn't know about these agents and he wasn't active.
his story is complicated and I don't wanna comp, but it wasn't [00:17:00] Hansen. It wasn't Howard didn't know anything about him and it was too early for aims. So that was their first indication. And then they went back this, these investigators at the CIA and looked at other compromises that occurred for no good reason.
And, and what they did is they just put 'em side by side in a chronology and then looked at who had access to the secrets. And where were they? And then there was a bunch of other by 1994, they think there's a fourth man. They sent two people. Two CIA officers to Moscow, what we call black. That means tourist passports to see if they would pick up Russian surveillance.
And they did. So the assumption was that the fourth man knew about their visit to Moscow and informed the Russians ultimately did nothing in Moscow, but so they just, they just kept on adding up. All these compromises. And [00:18:00] then they looked into all through the nineties. Long after Ames had been in jail, they continued to lose agents and people like that.
And so by, by 19 98, 19 99, everybody including. The FBI believes there was, there was a, there was a fourth man, but it depends who you talk to. At one point the FBI thought it was a guy. Who was in Russian operations, but he died in Budapest, in the arms of a prostitute and they put this out in the press.
I think it was the Washington times as sort of a baits to see what they could get. He was not the fourth man. His access did not accord. So the FBI was, was hot on this trail all through the nineties of the fourth man. And. You know, their best guess is the fourth, man. Didn't do it for money [00:19:00] and didn't pass documents a little like ha handsome pass documents.
But the whole idea was the fourth man, whoever he is wanted to beat the FBI, because for him, he was a psychopath and it was a game and it, it was a game on a very high level. And the fact that he's not in jail or never been caught or never named. Tells the investigators. He was very good. Right? So this, I mean, he was ego driven, but also very capable.
It appears is would that be accurate, very capable by, you know, people that are ego driven, you know, whatever it is in their personal relations, they just wanna see if they can win. It's it's not what you win. It's just it's to play the game and win mm-hmm and inspire just human beings. You know people are just off enough.
To play this game and, and, and if he never gets caught, well, there, there he was good. Wasn't. Right. [00:20:00] Right. So how did the senior leadership react to all of this? If the FBI is, is still gunning for somebody and people, you know, on the inside the analyst that you mentioned, they believe that there's somebody, what's the reaction.
Is it like a full court press or something else? Well, I don't know what the ins going on inside the FBI and this, I know the investigation's going on inside the FBI, but it's frustrating for them because 80% of FBI investigations, they open. Don't end up in an indictment or it's certainly not a conviction.
So this is, this is pretty standard for the FBI. They can suspect somebody, they could be totally wrong or right. The CIA, you know, would love to catch the person too. We're not talking about, they know who the person is in covering up. That's not the way it works. It's just that there's not enough evidence to get against him.
And I know from the former director, Gina Hask, that she'd been briefed on the fourth, man. She didn't say who she thought it was. She didn't gimme any details. And it it's very sensitive and it's like, it's not like the FBI agents can come out who have [00:21:00] retired and talk about it because they would be charged with interfering with an ongoing case.
So I understand why I just have a piece of it. This is, I mean, don't, don't go down that route that the government's covering up a scandal. It's just that they don't have the evidence. Right, right. Absolutely. Yeah. I guess eventually, I mean, they're still gunning for it, so yeah, there might be an indictment at some point, but it, you know, it just seems like after 25 years we haven't gotten it yet, it's gonna be, it's probably not gonna happen.
It would be my, you know what I would imagine. You would have to have a Russian come out who actually possessed the file or knew some concrete evidence. You know, remember with Ames, they caught him in Carus and in a trip that he did not acknowledge meeting a Russian, they knew the guy's name. They could put him in the same hotel, the same room, same flights, everything based on [00:22:00] that, they broke into Ames house.
Got evidence on his computer. So when they go to the judge, they say, look, we just broke into Ames house. We've got all this record of his money, his communications with the Russians, it was a slam dunk on Ames. Ames was a blank idiot. You know, if, if you're playing this game to win, he was an idiot, keeping this stuff on his computer.
And of course Howard defects and then the FBI, if this is true, getting the voice recordings of Hanson and his, his fingerprints on a trash bag that the Russians had that is solid, solid evidence. And this is what you need for an espionage case. You just can't say, well, I think this guy's a spy. And, and you know, you look at the matrix and who else could have given it up except this guy.
No prosecutor, as I understand, is gonna ever take that to court. Right, right. Yeah. That's understandable from a, from a legal perspective rather than, you know, knowing just simply knowing anyway, so Bob, where did the, you, you know, you were talking about [00:23:00] anomalies and timeline and that sort of thing, but eventually they get some direct information from one of their Russian agents who is not was not caught by Ames or, or not turned over by aims yet.
Right. Was that like the first, really concrete thing that came. It was the con, it was 94 was about the time that this, this Russian counter intelligence officer said you have another spy in the CIA and that coincided with these three agents. One of 'em was named Gordievsky, who was maybe compromised in may.
And Bohan was a, was a Russian military officer. He was compromised in may. So you had, you had these, these, these, these things just didn't fit the Ames Ames timeline, and, and, and then you, you just, then they went back to other cases that seemed to have gone bad before Ames approach the KGB. One goes back to 83, for instance.
And it was, they just, they just lined them all up and I don't think [00:24:00] there's anybody. Who does counter intelligence at the FBI Russian counter intelligence or the CIA that doesn't believe there's a fourth man. They may all have their own suspects. They may disagree the weight of the evidence, but they all sort agree.
There was a fourth man. But nobody wants to admit it. There's a spy. It's one thing to catch a spy, you know, to actually detect one, but to catch him and put him in jail, something else, it is a bridge that people just don't want to cross. Cuz it's so humiliating and embarrassing and, and the whole thing.
Yeah, I can understand that. I mean, you know, as an outsider, I guess I can understand why that would be, but you also wonder, you know, is it, is it better in the long run, you know, to allow that person to continue to work from the inside rather than suffer that, you know, public debacle of, of naming somebody, especially somebody potentially senior and long term and all that who's been working for the other side you know, I, I hate to be in their position, but it's, you know, a tough choice has to be made, but certainly, well, [00:25:00] Justin, it's a question of stove, PIP.
Because it's not something that was widely shared at the FBI or the CA as I understand the FBI in this thing called CI four, which does Russian counter intelligence, there's only a couple people. There's a little tiny room. They sit in this room, there's three or four of them. It's a, it's a vault. And they're dealing with paper, not computers, cuz they were compartmenting it from people like Hansen.
If, if, if they come to a conclusion about the fourth man, they can probably go to a supervisor in national security and the, and the FBI director and the FBI director says, keep digging. I can't take this to the department of justice with what you have. So the three or four people in this back room could be absolutely sure in their minds who the fourth man is.
They're missing the evidence and they're certainly not in a position to get the, the CIA guy fired. They're they, [00:26:00] they, they completely go at it. I mean, you know, the FBI gets a bad name, but these guys encounter intelligence are the, are, are sort of the best, the smartest. And, and they don't, they don't do conspiracy theories.
They just don't, they doesn't even enter their mind. They, they they're, they're dealing off evidence. And you'd have to get an FBI agent. That's been some really smart people. FBI agents go into counterintelligence and once they open an investigation, they have something solid, you know intersection, you know, in a, or putting down a Deadro or a maps or money or anything like that.
I mean, I mean, there, they can often get it wrong, but at the end of the day, They'll just say, well, we got it wrong. You know, this, this guy looked likely to us. Hmm. But it didn't work out. Wow. So you mentioned this small team that was put together in a vault. Can you talk about them a little bit? Like who were they and how they were chosen specifically to, to look for [00:27:00] this potential mold?
Yeah. What, what happened was in 94, made 94 after AMS was arrested, it was about three months. It was the director of operations at the CIA and the head of counter intelligence. Tell this lady lane, Bannerman who, who, whom I know very well. Sarah, look, we, we want you to go back and make sure we there's not, we don't have another problem in addition to Ames.
And she said, okay, I'll do it. But I want Diana Worthen and I want Maryanne Huff to counterintelligence analysts. They knew Russia really well. And then they assigned an FBI analyst named Jill Merck Millburn, and they just simply in this dark room, they just, they went through files. They would look for patterns of Russian intelligence officers.
They knew exactly what Aimes had betrayed. They knew what Howard had betrayed and they put everything down on an easel with paper, you know, those, those really big easels with a big stack of paper, [00:28:00] you know, or a mm-hmm big thick paper. And it was like, it was like a Jackson, Pollock you know, design where they're connecting dots and, and that's, and it was, they never put.
Summary on a, you know, on a thumb drive or, or send it around. And, and then they, they just, they came to a conclusion. Yes, there was another person at the CIA. Yes, there was somebody at the FBI and and their only recommendation was that the investigation be completely opened up. That means everybody on the suspect list.
You do credit histories on 'em you do travel, you do look at polygraphs. And so by November, 1994, that's what they're hoping for. And they confronted the CIA management and there was an FBI agent there. And what happens rather than [00:29:00] continuing the investigation as then, part of it. Is that one weekend, the FBI came into CIA headquarters and rated their vault, the CIA vault and took all the files.
So they come in on Monday morning and they've got no files. My gosh, it, it was very weird. And then the CIA started retaliating against him. And this is sort of a funny story because the head of the investigation lane Bannerman is sent to come work for me and a, in a, with nothing job. And I said, why is the senior officer assigned to me in a nothing job?
I mean, I laugh about it. Working for me is a punishment, but anyhow, you get the joke.
Wow. So, I mean, that really begs the question to me. Like, were they ever intended to find anything? I mean, what was the, even the point, you know, if, if you're gonna shut everything down, once they have some findings well, the, the, the, the, the investigation was runoff course, and they went after all these other people that they didn't, they [00:30:00] didn't fit the, they didn't fit the matrix and the profile that my investigators came up with it all.
And so they, they thought. These have to be red herrings, but this is not a conspiracy in the CIA. It's just the people. The fourth man was in a position to take over the investigation. So once he's identified, this is, this is their interpretation, not mine. So once he's identified by 1994, he's so senior, he says, no, wait a minute.
These people dunno what they're he didn't say this, but I'm gonna take over the investigation. So he's put in charge of looking for him. Oh, my gosh, unreal. This is their interpretation. I, you know, I just, I'm just, I look in this book, I'm just telling the story, you know, I'm, we're sitting around a campfire and you're telling me the story and I'm writing it down.
And the only thing I can do is, is check it, you know, a hundred ways to Sunday. So anyhow, they just, they, it, it was matrix. Look, I don't like the [00:31:00] matrixes because I don't, they're, they're deductive, you know, and it's they're circumstantial, but they weren't saying let's indict the fourth man. They said, let's simply take the matrix and do a general investigation.
And this is what they were stopped from doing. And they were, they were kicked outta the investigation, all three of them and the FBI agent. Was pulled back to FBI headquarters at, at, at buzzer's point. And it, their, their whole drift, their investigation was stopped. Hmm. You know, what's funny, Justin is like the CIA people in Russian operators, so upset about, he says, they're saying, well, you know, you got this from secondhand sources.
I said, no, no, no, no, no. This, the investigators came to me. They they're whistle blowing. It's in the. But it's like the denial it's like it it's like, you know, like accusing somebody of incest in the family. No, it's, it's very weird. I just, I find the whole thing. Fascinating. Yeah. Yeah. It [00:32:00] absolutely is. It's it's incredible.
And was this, was this all derived from the influence of the fourth man at that level? Or was this the whole organization thinking like, no, this has gone too far. It was your. It was the fourth man who hijacks the investigation. It wasn't the organization. The CIA generally cannot carry out an internal conspiracy.
I just, it just, you know, someone's gonna argue with me, they do it all the time, but it just, this sort of stuff comes out. So he takes over the investigation. He doesn't even say thank you very much. He just takes it over. He's the one that runs it up to the director saying we're on this. And, and, and that is the three ladies story and the FBI analyst, it was hijacked.
Hmm. Yeah. Unbelievable, unbelievable stuff. Yeah. So this all culminates. In, in their findings, right? In this briefing that, that lane Bannerman gives lane. Remember? [00:33:00] Yeah. She stands at the easel, said here's what we found. And the fourth man who they believe is the fourth, man. Again, this is not Bob bear storms out of the room.
Now we don't know what's going through his mind. He's in a bad temper and. That's it for the end of him and the guy who gave me the story originally, bill SGK who, who runs Russian operations said, oh, he could say, oh, I guess this meeting's over. He told me the story too. And I know this is bureaucratically.
This sounds, the CIA really worked this way. Again, this is what I've been told. Wow. So lane and her team, they, they go into this presentation and they know who's gonna be there. And they know that the person that they've narrowed it down to is gonna be in this briefing, how many other people are in it besides bill and, and this, the suspect anyway.
There's a, there's an FBI agent ed Kern. There is bill [00:34:00] Rin lane, Bannerman, Diana Worthen, Maryanne Huff, and a lady from security who I've gotten an email from Ruth Olson. So the six people office of security, it's a different office. So they all, they all watched it happen and it was like, what the hell does that mean?
Like And, and, and, and from that point on the investigation is closed down, starting in November, the lane Bannerman in the spring, you know, continues on as much as she can goes to the head of operations. A guy named price, whom I talk to soon has since died and walks through the matrix and the profile.
This goes on for three hours. And he didn't say anything. And, and then within the new director comes in and fires him for something totally unrelated. So he can't do anything about it. He's out, he's retired from the CIA lane. Bannerman [00:35:00] is put putting head of Russian operations. But she's not doing the counterintelligence investigation anymore and can only watch from the sidelines.
Hmm. It's it's hard for me to imagine what was going through their heads, walking into that room, knowing that they were knowing who they were briefing and knowing that they were gonna, you know, narrow it down to that person right there, you know, eye to eye with them. I mean, did she ever talk about what that was like to you specifically?
She just like, look, this, this lady is she's does counterintelligence. And she just went straight ahead. You know, this is, this is our evidence. You guys do something with it. So, anyhow, I mean they expected, you know, it's, it's, it's like you saying, all right, you know, there's been a crime committed that somebody had get up and, and run with it.
But the FBI agent. One didn't believe that there was a Russian source in the FBI who turns out to be handsome. He said, this is nonsense. That moles, aren't our promise. It's the CIAs. You know, we don't know if he was under the thumb because [00:36:00] he's just assigned to CIA headquarters and has to answer to CIA management, this FBI agent.
So I don't know his side to the story. He may said, well, you. I was just, I was doing what I was told to do, you know, by the CIA director. That's, that's part of the story. I don't. Hm. So what was it that, do you recall anything specific like the, the evidence or the indicators that allowed them to narrow it down to a single person at that point?
Like what fit this individual and no one else. They figured out that he had been assigned at Langley from 84 continuously to 94 and had access to Russian operations and also to counterintelligence at one time or. So they, they narrowed it down to someone who had hold those, held those two positions and had been a Washington since 1984.
Hmm. And there was only one person at that point, as far as they could tell, that's what they, that's what they believe. And, you know, again, I'm gonna, I hate to repeat myself, but the fact that the FBI [00:37:00] is knocking on doors of as two months ago, asking by this person by name. You know, you tell me what it means.
It's the, the FBI does not get in and travel around the country on, on a whim asking about somebody being a spy. It just doesn't happen. Right. Right. Very true. Very true. Yeah. I'm sure there's a lot of renewed interest, not just among the public, but I'm sure, you know, in FBI and CIA headquarters as well now with the publishing of this book.
So Bob, who was it that they. Determined that it might be in the end who wasn't, who was in the room that day? Yeah. You gotta read the book, right?
look, frankly, I know the guy and I don't, if, if you said to me he's a Russian, I say no way. I know the guy he's I know him. I knew him, you know, he was just, he's honorable. He is irascible. And if, if you were a judge and you and I was in the jury, he'd say, what's your, I'd say not, not guilty, but that's why I, I would love for somebody in [00:38:00] the FBI to say what the evidence is.
Yeah. Yeah. I certainly hope that that comes out. Whether it's in. Trial or declassified documents at some point. I know that the person, you know, I have read the book, of course, you know, like I, I mentioned earlier and I know that this person has publicly denied that it was them very recently as a matter, a matter of fact, but you know, you know, what's funny about that show.
I think I was on it too, is they didn't call my sources. It's. What that has happened to American journalism, call up these people and see what they say, but they didn't. Wow. Yeah. I'm, I'm not surprised they want to get something quick, fast in a hurry and they don't wanna do all the digging that somebody like you, you know, has the time and the energy and the attention of detail.
To do, I would imagine. Well, I've give I've, you know, I've anybody, any journalist who calls me up and said, well, who told you this? I said, listen, they're, they're willing to talk. I'll send you their contacts. You call 'em up. You get the story directly from them. There's a French [00:39:00] journalist on this. There's a couple other ones have called them.
And Jim at the intercept is called all my sources said, yeah, we that's what we told Bob and including Millburn at the FBI. Hmm. Hmm. Okay. So let me, let me ask you this. It's not the individual who's named in the book. If it's not the person who has, you know, emphatically denied that it's them. Is there a, a second most likely suspect, another senior person that it might have been, or did the evidence like point to one person and no one else, you know, that they found in 94 anyway, why not?
One of the actual investigators
or bill kin said, if you look at some of the compromises, two of them, it could be. But the point is you run, you keep doing the investigation. So any of the, any of my sources, I, I don't think all of them were, but any one of them could both worked in Russian operations and counter intelligence. And I tell 'em that.
I said it could be you and they go, yep. It could be, but you know but as you read the book, you gotta [00:40:00] make up your own mind. Right. Yeah. You, you make it really clear. I mean in the book that there's a lot of conflicting stuff and that there's a lack of, of, you know, total clarity at the moment as well.
You spoke to this individual, right? Was it over the phone? Was it face to face? Yeah. After your, you know, book, your manuscript was ready? No. I talked to him while I was doing the book I called, he called me up and he said, Bobby, it's, you know, sorry. And. And I said, you know, you're under investigation by the fing goes.
Yeah. And I said, still going on, he says, I didn't know that. And he said, I don't believe in matrices. I don't believe in it. I don't know why they're after me. I said, could the Russians be framing you all these years? And he says, yeah, why not? And, you know, it was a very, he even come, he said, come stay with me now yet.
He's not gonna talk to me now, but , you know it, it, it's such, I think it's an important story and needs to be told and myself having fallen under an FB FBI investigation for an illegal coup I mean, I know what it's like, but it's it's [00:41:00] sometimes because we are an open society. You just need to get this stuff out.
Yeah. Yeah. I, I can definitely see that, especially with the amount of time that has passed, because it's been, what about almost 28 years. Yeah. But this will go on 30 years. That's a long time for an FBI investigation. It's long, long time. I can imagine. I can imagine. And trust me, they don't waste their time.
They don't sit around say, you know, I don't like that guy. Let's let's see if we can go nail him. There's they're police. They're cops. They need evidence. Right, right. Absolutely. Do you think that, I mean, would they investigate without the intent of, you know, indicting someone at some point, would they investigate just to wrap things up, you know in an analytical sense or are they actively pursuing a suspect in your opinion?
Right now, the FBI analyst, if the FBI do analysis, but the agents who run the FBI want collars, they wanna put somebody in jail. They don't sit around and say, [00:42:00] Hey, this is like a lot of like a LA Carre story. Let's keep going. It's just, they don't work that way. They want mm-hmm, all give me the, you know, gimme the elements of a crime and I'm gonna go.
And, you know, the predicates, they call it. And once they have the predicates, they run for it. These people don't sit around and write novels. You. They they're just very hardheaded and they need evidence and they need evidence every 90 days to keep an investigation open. When you go to your boss, you say, all right, here's what we have.
And he says, you think, do you think we have something here? And they go, yes, sir. We do. And they go out this is not an FBI failure. It's not nor is it a CIA failure? Well, I mean the, the fourth man clearly is a, is a traitor, but I mean, aside from an individual committing a crime, this is not a, a really a failure.
I don't see it that way. Mm-hmm understandable. Yeah, absolutely. Do you, can you speculate maybe on why the investigation has taken this [00:43:00] long, if you know, four months into the initial. Analysis, you know, they had, they had come up with a name. I mean, why would it take another 20 plus years for you know, the ongoing investigation?
Is there, is there any indication of that? Any public? Well, I am, I am all but certain and I've got some names, so I know there's been several Russians who have defected from Moscow and talked to the FBI and the CIA about the fourth man. Oh, Some of 'em mentioned a name others didn't. So the FBI reopens the investigation full on investigation in 2005, almost certainly.
Thanks to, you know, a defector, a Russian defector. Okay. Who provided enough information to, for the FBI to throw this investigation? Okay. I got it. Yeah. Well, even that is 17 years ago at this [00:44:00] point, write that initial inform. Came out. So yeah, I'm, I'm certainly hoping for, I mean, don't you think this is just absolute fan?
I mean, I, I could not tell the story. Yeah. Yeah. It really is. It really gets the mind spinning certainly. And you know, we, haven't gone through the step by step. I mean, your book is a real, you know, it's like an investigation, procedural. I, in my opinion, you know, because of you go step by step through all the evidence and the timelines and all that, which is a real fascinating aspect of it to me.
And it really gets your head spinning because of how many people it could be and how many people. Like just like every normal person does have something to hide or made a mistake at some point, or, you know, could have been blackmailed into something it's really, really incredible stuff. And it's, it's hard to parse through certainly,
but yeah, I'm, I'm super happy that I read this book. I'm super happy that you had the opportunity to publish it. And you know, I hope a lot of people will read it. And the future. Do you have any like parting thoughts on it? Do you have a timeline? Do you think that maybe within one year or five years there might be some closure or at least some new [00:45:00] information about this?
What I'm hoping is with the situation in Russia, the turmoil there, and there's a lot of turmoil going on. It's some Russian intelligence officer who knows the story said, wait a minute, I can make some dough here. I'm gonna, I'm gonna defect. I know that's, you know, it's, it's like, you know, like fishing for, you know, whales with a worm, but you know, you can always hope, right?
Yeah. I mean, well, it certainly happened in the past. I mean, there's no question about it. So maybe it'll happen again. Yeah. Wonderful. So Bob, now that this is done, are, are you working on another book right now? You know, I was gonna do a book on the 34 California elections and I just it's, there's, there's an, I have an angle to it, but as I talk to my agents a bit thin you know, it's like, you know, it's, it's hard to get a book published.
It's you gotta convince the publisher. There's a real story there. And, and so anyhow, I just, you know, keep writing and. [00:46:00] You never know when you, you hit upon a good idea that might interest a publisher. Yeah. Well, certainly, I mean, you've had a lot of great track record so far. I've really enjoyed this and the other stuff I've read by you, and I've gotten a lot of positive feedback already from some of my listeners and followers about your previous books, like Cino evil.
So you know, I'm certainly rooting for you. Yeah. You know what I call myself in Cino evil. It's like, I'm, I'm sort of a Mr. McGoo meets meets ESP espionage, you know, like, oh, that's, you know, falling one, one adventure after another, and then coming back and telling the tale, you know? Mm. Oh, my gosh. Well, thank you so much, Bob.
This has been incredibly informative and I know a lot of my listeners are really, you know eager to, to hear that name and the name's in the book. And you can read a lot more about that individual. I really encourage you guys to pick it up and take a look. Certainly it's absolutely worth your time. So thank you so much, Bob, for coming on.
I really appreciate it. Thanks much. Bob, is there anywhere that my listeners can connect with you right now? Do you have like a public facing profile for people to follow you [00:47:00] on social media? Anything like that? You know, I don't do social media. I know it's really stupid because that's Twitter is the, if you wanna, if you wanna self promote, it's just like, I, like, I figure I, this is.
This is what I got to say. And mm-hmm, this, everything I know. And I don't, I'm terrible at self-promotion I would never be able to sell girl scout cookies. Well, okay, well, we'll, we'll certainly look for your books published and I'll let people know about it as well. So thanks again, Bob. I really appreciate it.
Thanks. If you're interested in more of spycraft 1 0 1. Look for my pages on Instagram at spycraft 1 0 1 and at cold dot war dot stamps, you can also find more great articles on my website. Spycraft one oh one.com. Thank you all for listening. And I hope you'll stick around because there's lots more to come.