[00:13] Speaker 1: Welcome. Leo Roundtable at leoroundtable.com, the law enforcement talk show. My name is Chip The Block, and I'm your host for a group of law enforcement professionals that talk about today's news and issues, but we do it from a law enforcement perspective. And let me introduce the crew. Guys, if you don't mind waving for the, uh, video portion of our show. Uh, we've got Chief Ralph Ornelas, and he retired from the Los Angeles, uh, County Sheriff's Off- oh, I, I almost said office, but they don't have offices in California. They have departments. So, yeah, the Los Angeles, uh, County Sheriff's Department. And then we got, uh, a, a couple of Secret Service special agents in charge, so these, these, these SACS. We're gonna call them SACS, you know. Uh, we've got Rich Gierepoli and Frank Loveridge, the dynamic duo, the Shake and Bake team.

[00:55] Speaker 1: You're gonna find out firsthand why these guys are not allowed to be, to appear together for the most part on, uh, you know, on, on national news networks. You know, it's just, it's not always pretty, uh, but on our show it is, so you're gonna find out firsthand. So thanks for being on the show, gentlemen. Appreciate it. And a shout-out to our sponsors as well. You know, our title sponsor gulls at gulls.com, and that, that code to give you 15% off your next purchase at gulls.com, it's RADIO15. So remember that code, RADIO15. Also, we have compliantetechnologies.com, our satellite sponsor. We're on satellite radio right now. And we're streaming with over a million people during the live show. We have gunlearn.com, mymedicare.live, safeguardrecruiting.com, our streaming sponsor, and, and they're allowing us to stream to over a million people right now. And also, twobells.com. They built a new online store at leoroundtable.com if you want cool shirts, uh, mugs, all that kind of stuff.

[01:44] Speaker 1: And look, we got better mugs than what we, we sent Frank the other day. Frank, I gotta get you the, the, uh, the old mugs, which are better than what you ordered. So I, I'm gonna take, I'm gonna take care of you. Uh, but yeah. I know you're thinking, "Yeah, you're gonna take care of me just like the knife that you were supposed to send me and, and freaking Rich that's still on the back of my freaking car." And yeah. I, I haven't forgot about that either. Uh, but, but those are our sponsors. We've also got Brian Burch with the Tampa Free Press at tampafb.com. Thanks for carrying our content, Brian. Also, Ray Dietrich, formerlawman.com. And Travis Yates with lawofficer.com. Thanks to all those entities for helping make this show happen. And, and now, what in the world are we talking about today? We have some great topics. And you know, I, I kind of pick the topics depending on who's gonna be on the show.

[02:22] Speaker 1: And so we got some doozies because we got, you know, the Shake and Bake team here today. Uh, but Delta is telling US law-... and I love it. How long have we been saying that, that if these congresspeople, you know, that are shutting down the government, if they were the ones not getting paychecks, how quickly that would turn? Well, we've got, we're, we're, we're, we're close. Delta's saying US lawmakers, they can no longer skip security lines until they start funding, uh, restart funding to the TSA. So let's just start... I, I, I, I love it. You know, I thought that was pretty cool. And then we've got another one. Minnesota sues the Trump administration after eye shootings of Renee Good and Alex Preddy. Um, so yeah. The state... it, it took them a little while, but now they're suing the Trump organization. We're gonna, we're gonna define their argument, even though it may not make much sense. We're gonna, we're gonna tell you what it is. And then we got...

[03:06] Speaker 1: The Senate actually confirms Mark Wayne Mullin already as the DHS chief, despite the Democrat resistance. Uh, we've got, uh, fired FBI agents, they're suing, uh, Patel, Kash Patel and Pam Bondi over Arctic Frost political purge. So, um, I, our feds are gonna have to tell us whether they've got a case or not. Uh, then we got body cam at Baltimore. Uh, Baltimore Police officers, they fatally shoot a 37-year-old guy named Dwight Hawkins during a foot chase. And we've got another one. We've got suspect fatally shot by Coolidge Police officers when he charges at them with a machete. That was the weapon of choice, I guess. Dade officers involved in a fatal 2019, uh, UPS shootout, uh, dismissed on a Stand Your Ground law. Uh, wow. Uh, these Dade County officers, that was the one, it was during rush hour traffic. The bullets are flying. People are dying. And I don't mean necessarily the bad guys. I mean like innocent people, and the hostage.

[03:58] Speaker 1: Uh, we got video shows a fallen officer fatally shooting a knife-wielding suspect after two people end up being stabbed. And then lastly, uh, we're gonna have to make sure we cover this with you guys on the show. There is a drag show. You heard that correctly. I said a drag show at the center of a police watchdog agency scandal. And, uh, and where else would this be, be going on at? And, uh, I, I believe this is, uh, let me think about... let me, let me look at this. San Francisco. Yeah. Is that a shocker? San Francisco. So I, I see Frank nodding his head. I, you know, uh, you know, if any of you guys know anybody at the end of the video, I'd appreciate if you would come forward with that information too. I don't think anybody would want to... See, Ralph. Ralph, don't laugh, 'cause you're the closest person on the show that lived the Cal- to, to, to live the San Francisco...

[04:42] Speaker 1: So, you know, I didn't want to direct that, that question towards you, but you know, the likelihood of it being Richard Frank is kind of nil right now. So anyhow, uh, I just, uh, wanted to start it off. But let's start off with we have three main topics. We got seven minutes before we take our first commercial break. So if you guys are up for it, let's talk about Delta. And, and so, notthebee.com is the source. Delta tells US lawmakers that they can no longer skip security lines until they restart funding to the TSA. So it says Delta has had enough. And normally, and I wasn't aware of this, members of Congress, they can skip the lines at the airport. Delta Airlines, they just pulled the plug on those, those special perks. And the people responsible for the dysfunction, they now get to stand in it like everyone else. Same lines, same delays. And, and, and I mentioned earlier, it should be the same way with paychecks.

[05:26] Speaker 1: Atlanta's Delta Airlines, which is where they're stationed at or, or headquartered at, they announced this week that it is suspending some elite services for members of Congress, including airport escorts and Red Coat service, until the TSA is fully funded. And their Congressional Reservations desk, however, is remaining open. A spokesperson for Delta told the AGC that the House and Senate members, that they will now be treated like all flying passengers according to their SkyMiles status. In other words, just like you and me. And for years, Americans have been told to live with, uh, the systems that they didn't design while lawmakers floated above the consequences, and Delta just ended that. According to our article, at least it's being ended for now. Rich Gierepoli, what do you got to say?

[06:07] Speaker 2: You know, let's keep something in mind. When all these congressional members, uh, travel, whether, whether they're doing it on official business or it's personal travel, it's all claimed as official business. Who's paying for those tickets? We are. And 99% of the time, those tickets that these congressional members are flying on are first class tickets. Right? It is all a scam. I love what Delta's doing. I hope every other airline does the same thing. And I, and I just want to make a point of saying, because I've, I've been asked this many times, the US Secret Service does not provide any level of protection to any members of Congress or the Senate.Hillary Clinton was an ex- an exception. One, because she was a former first lady, and two, because it was easier and better, it worked better for her to maintain the Secret Service detail as opposed to the Capitol Police. But I totally applaud this. And Ship, you hit it right on the head.

[06:59] Speaker 2: Once it starts affecting the members of Congress, whether they're withholding the pay or withholding these perks, to include that free cup of coffee they're getting from the airlines, which I've gotta pay $9 for if I'm traveling, um, you know, that's when it'll get their attention. But, you know, there's no reason Chuck Schumer and that idiot Maxine Waters, who's gotta be the stupidest person I've ever met in my life, needs to have any type of, um, red cap service when she gets on board a plane. It's all a scam. Shut it down.

[07:27] Speaker 1: Uh, Frank.

[07:29] Speaker 3: All right. Richie, I always agree with you and I do agree with you, but I think Delta needs to go... I applaud Delta, but I think they need to go one step further. I think they should escort these congresspeople and bring them down and sit them in the cargo section of the aircraft underneath where they put the luggage 'cause that's about what they deserve. Let's face it, they're the problem. The problem is... And let's get to the root of this problem. It's not DHS they're going after, it's ICE. And why are they going after ICE? They're going after ICE 'cause ICE is removing the criminal illegal aliens that they've let into this country over the last four years and they brought in, at USCIS, under Alejandro Mayorkas during the Obama administration. Their goal is to give them amnesty. Their goal is to let them get into areas where they can increase the electoral college votes in those areas as well as voting as well through mail-in ballots and other nefarious means.

[08:22] Speaker 3: So I will tell you this much right now, it's not about DHS, it's about ICE. And we know that because that's what they wanna negotiate on. They're using it as a political tool to get this negotiation going through. I think it's absurd. They're hurting the American people. It's disgraceful. And I'll be honest with you, put them in the cargo section. That's where they need to be.

[08:43] Speaker 1: Y- you know, uh, Ralph, before you say something, I'm glad... Frank said something that a lot of people don't get. I think everybody on the... on the show gets it, but, you know, there's two ways, there's two benefits they have to bringing in these illegals is actually the voting. The voting itself, some of these locales actually allow, uh, whether legally or not, you know, people to vote or... or they'll... or they'll vote because they don't get caught. But the electoral college is a very important aspect of that. It's based off of the population and, uh, they were very strategic in how they relocated these people and bused these people and flew these people in planes to different locations to bump up the electoral college, not just for any jurisdiction, but for... for special jurisdictions. You know, they wanted... they wanted blue jurisdictions. They wanted to increase electoral college votes. So I- I'm glad you mentioned that, Frank, because a lot of people just don't...

[09:28] Speaker 1: they just don't get it. Uh, Chief Ralph.

[09:31] Speaker 3: No, uh, all three of you bring up great points. But you know what I would love to see? When they... when they go on this, how you guys not paying TSA or anybody else, I believe the Democrats and the Republicans too, they don't get paid, these congresspeople. Don't pay them. You know, these... they're... they... they think they're special. And I'm sorry, they serve us just like Rich, Chip, Frank, and myself serve the public. You know, some... we shouldn't pay these people. Sorry.

[10:02] Speaker 1: All right. I love it, guys. So, we'll... This... this conversation's... W- we're gonna have this conversation for... for quite a while. It's not going anywhere anytime soon. Did you have any closing words, Rich?

[10:11] Speaker 2: I'll tell you one interesting thing I think that's worth mentioning is these people, at the end of the day, are government employees. Granted, they were elected by some constituency, which now I can't even have any confidence in who that constituency is, right? But at the end of the day, they're not entitled to a damn thing. They chose to run for office, they've got it, that's on them. You know, these perks that are extended, unacceptable. I have one point I'd like to make. People always ask me when I was a Secret Service agent, and Frank will support me on this one, and you're flying on Air Force One with the president, whether we eat the meals that are served on the plane or not, I still get a bill for that. And it's not cheap. You think it's... it's expensive to buy a bag of peanuts and a Coke on board a Delta flight? Try flying on board Air Force One and getting a bill for a breakfast for $70 or a dinner, right, Frank, for $90.00.

[10:59] Speaker 2: You get hit with that bill as a government employee, but not these senators and congressmen, but Rich Stairopoli, GS-9, who's making-

[11:06] Speaker 1: Mm-hmm.

[11:06] Speaker 2: ... $42,000 a year, has to pay for that meal.

[11:10] Speaker 1: Wait, come on. Are you-

[11:11] Speaker 2: There you go.

[11:11] Speaker 1: Is that leg- is that legit? Seriously?

[11:13] Speaker 2: Right.

[11:13] Speaker 3: Yeah.

[11:13] Speaker 1: Are you kidding me?

[11:14] Speaker 3: So what they do, Chip, is they take your credit card when you first go to the president's detail. They put that on file. And then what happens is whenever you get-

[11:22] Speaker 1: Oh, my gosh.

[11:23] Speaker 3: ... on Air Force One, you get... your meals come off of that credit card. Same thing at the White House.

[11:28] Speaker 1: No way.

[11:28] Speaker 3: When you're at the White House in W16, which is the room that we're in, we go to the w-... the, uh, naval... navy mess to get our meals and we have to pay for it there as well.

[11:37] Speaker 1: Oh, my gosh. I... I just learned something. I did not know that. Well, it looks, by the judge of... of, uh, of... of Chief Ralph's face, he didn't know it either. Wow. Uh, all right, guys, we're up for our first commercial break. Stick with us. We'll be right back. (instrumental music plays) My family only cares about one thing, that I come home safe.

[11:57] Speaker 4: At Gulls, every order begins with a promise. Made with purpose. Stitched for support. Back with pride. Answered by dedicated hands. Delivering the standard you have sworn to uphold. We serve more than the mission. We serve the person. Each piece is engineered to help get our first responders through the shift and back home safe.

[12:50] Speaker 1: Welcome back. Leo Roundtable at leoroundtable.com, uh, the law enforcement talk show. My name is Chip DeBloccio, I'm your host. We're joined by Chief Ralph Ornelas. We got two Secret Service ex, uh ... We got Frank Loveridge and Rich Gierepoli. We've been talking about Delta growing a set and telling Congress that, "Hey, you know what? Until you fully fund TSA, uh, you're going to stand in line like everybody else. No special perks for you." So, uh, I love it. So if there's, uh, if there's nothing else on that, we'll jump to our next, our second of three main stories. Uh, Ralph, go ahead.

[13:19] Speaker 5: I would like to see the other airlines jump on board of this. Not just Delta.

[13:22] Speaker 1: Oh, that would be great, wouldn't it?

[13:23] Speaker 5: Not just, not just Delta. I mean, that would be a real, a real statement.

[13:27] Speaker 1: Yeah, and, and of all places to be headquartered in Atlanta, this is coming from Atlanta, I mean, you know, I mean that says something. I mean, I, I applaud them. That's even more of a reason to applaud them. Rich?

[13:37] Speaker 2: But, but you know what? This is also a police matter, right? Because when some senator or congressman shows up at JFK airport, a Washington National catch a, a shuttle flight, right, it's the cop that goes to the desk first and says, "Hey, I've got Senator Schumer or whoever here." Um, let's see what happens when the police departments say, "You know what? We're not gonna provide any escorts anymore, you're on your own."

[13:57] Speaker 1: Ooh. Ooh.

[13:57] Speaker 2: Then I want to see Chuck Schumer or Maxine Waters cut to the front of a four-hour TSA line at JFK airport and, you know-

[14:03] Speaker 1: Wow.

[14:03] Speaker 2: ... some family from Bensonhurst beats the hell out of her, right? Because, you know-

[14:07] Speaker 1: Wow.

[14:07] Speaker 2: ... who do you people think you are? But I think the ultimate what's going to happen here is these people are gonna start flying privately and you know who's gonna foot the bill? We are.

[14:15] Speaker 1: Probably.

[14:15] Speaker 2: Just like Pocahontas Warren there flies private every time she goes back up to Maine and Massachusetts, right, Frank? You know that for, for a fact. It's ridiculous.

[14:22] Speaker 5: Absolutely, yeah.

[14:25] Speaker 2: Well.

[14:26] Speaker 1: Golly.

[14:26] Speaker 5: Or, or AOC, yeah.

[14:28] Speaker 2: Another winner, right?

[14:29] Speaker 1: Well, guys-

[14:30] Speaker 2: She's, she's too stupid to spell out her name, that's why she uses the initials.

[14:34] Speaker 1: (laughs) Well, look, let's hop over to Minnesota real quick. It's gonna get, it's gonna ... it's not gonna get any better. Uh, Tampa Free Press at tampafp.com, Minnesota sues the Trump administration over the ICE shootings of Rene Good and Alex Preddy. You know, those are two people I, I wouldn't want to put all my, all my eggs in one basket and, and, and you ... I would think that they would have a better argument, but those names tell me that they don't. In a historic legal showdown between the state of Minnesota and the feds, uh, it's a power grab. The state of Minnesota filed a federal lawsuit. Now, now it's the state filing a federal lawsuit. So make sure everyone understands that. I'm not talking to our panelists but to our audience, w- they're, they're not doing it in state court.

[15:12] Speaker 1: But the federal lawsuit on Tuesday they filed is against the US Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security, and they're alleging that the federal authorities, that they are illegally obstructing state investigations into three separate shootings by the feds. So state investigations of federal shootings, if you guys catch my drift. Two of these were fatal. We're all familiar with them, and they occurred in Minneapolis during the month of January. Now, the lawsuit filed by the Minnesota Attorney General, and these names are gonna ring a bell, and yeah, they're not, they're not ... they don't have great reputations, surp- shockingly. Uh, Attorney General Keith Ellison, uh, Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty and BCA Superintendent Drew Evans, uh, they mark a boiling point in the fallout from Operation Metro Surge, which of course is that massive immigration enforcement action that started in late 2025. Now, the three shootings encompassed ...

[16:04] Speaker 1: It was a three-week period in January 2026. Federal agents allegedly killed, um ... I don't know why they put allegedly in here when we got video, but Rene Good, Alex Preddy, um, both armed, Rene Good with a car and Alex Preddy with a gun, and they wounded a guy named Julio Cesar Sosa Salas, and, uh, and, and so, guys, any, any ... I mean, we, we all know that they're putting all their cards ... They keep throwing out these, these names, uh, you know, Rene Good, Alex Preddy, a- and they're, and, and they're even saying that when ICE is going to go work at, you know, in, in place of the TSA or help TSA out, they're worried about them shooting and killing American citizens at, you know, at the airport. Um, it says the Minnesota, um, the D- the, uh, DHS Secretary Kristina Noem said that Minnesota did not have any jurisdiction, and the filing also referenced the statements by President Trump who allegedly claimed that there would be no cooperation because Minnesota officials were crooked.

[16:57] Speaker 1: The state claims, of Minnesota, vital evidence is being wi- withheld from them or mishandled, including the vehicle where Rene Good was, uh, uh, killed. Well, uh, y- th- I guess it's the same vehicle she used to mow down the, the freaking agent in it and hit him with it. It's apparently shrink wrapped, you know, um, in a storage facility that the FBI has. They, they want the identities of the masked agents involved and we know why. They want to dox them and them personal items belonging to the deceased such as the cell phones, and, you know, I'm sure they were lying. The lawsuit also points out to a photograph posted by President Trump on soc- uh, on social media, it was Truth Social, that showed the firearm allegedly that belonged to Alex Preddy, and they have an issue because it was sitting unprotected on a car seat and they say ... Uh, what, what do they mean by, uh, w- was the vehicle were the windows down? Was the vehicle unlocked?

[17:42] Speaker 1: Were people like, you know, where there were like kids running, I mean, you know, unprotected. It's just, I, I think everything they say with a grain of salt. The plaintiffs are asking for a judge, and I'm surprised they didn't even say activist judge, because that's what they really want. They want a judge to declare the federal government policy of non-cooperation unlawful and they want to force the DOJ and DHS to hand over all requested evidence and allow access to witnesses as well A- and just finally, um, on a, on a note, I just want to remind everybody that M- Minneapolis, you know, the state of Minnesota, they've said, they've been saying that, "Hey, we're underfunded, we're understaffed, we don't have the manpower to go in and control the protests, the agitators, we can't help the feds out." So the feds, ICE is rolling with border patrol, which is having to do the job of local government in order to try to keep a handle on all these guys, these bad actors, and that's why Rene

[18:32] Speaker 1: Good, for example, got shot and killed when she hit, you know, mowed down the ICE agent with her car and he's sliding backwards as she's trying to run him over. And th- that's the fault of Minneapolis police. But then as soon as they shoot and kill somebody because they have to because the police aren't doing their jobs, then all of a sudden they suddenly have the manpower to allow police officers to leave Minneapolis police headquarters and go out there and shut the scene down and start grabbing evidence because they want to collect evidence so they can charge the federal agent, they just have to shoot and kill somebody like Rene Good because they weren't doing their job in the first place to control the, the rioters, protestors and all that stuff.

[19:03] Speaker 1: Frank Loveridge

[19:05] Speaker 3: Well, first one I'd point out is the Supremacy Clause, where federal agents are generally immune from state prosecution if they acted within the scope of their federal authority and had an objectable reasonable belief that their conduct was necessary. So, let's look at these three occasions. We had an individual that was in a vehicle that was out there. They weren't out there doing a peaceful protest.

[19:26] Speaker 2: (clears throat)

[19:26] Speaker 3: They were obstructing the ICE agents from doing their job. And on top of that, she drove her vehicle towards an ICE agent. We saw that clearly on video. And what happened? The, uh, the officer, the agent took the right, uh, action and neutralized the threat. If you go to the second one, there was a confrontation on the sidewalk. That needs to be investigated. I get it. But also, would you trust Minnesota to do this investigation?

[19:51] Speaker 2: No way.

[19:51] Speaker 3: Would you give them evidence that they could use? Would you give them the ability to basically put these agents on trial nationwide where they're not safe and their family's not safe? That's why we have a Supremacy Clause, to protect these individuals who are doing their jobs. I know we're going to commercial break, so I'll leave it with that.

[20:10] Speaker 1: (instrumental music) Thank God. And I know you'll, you'll ex- you'll break it down some more when we come back from our second commercial break, but, uh, perfect timing. Commercial break, guys. We'll be right back. Guys, time to talk about Compliant Technologies at complianttechnologies.com, and they are committed to providing non-lethal solutions to help officers gain the upper hand safely and rapidly in a humane, low optics manner, utilizing their CD3, which stands for Conductive Distraction and De-Escalation Device technology. Now, their flagship product, we all know by now, is called the GLOVE. It's helped officers not only tens of thousands of times, but they had over 250,000 deployments with no injuries or deaths. It's an amazing statistic.

[20:44] Speaker 1: Uh, they've actually achieved non-lethal status in an arena that predominantly can only offer less lethal results, and when it comes to weapons retention, transitioning to a sidearm or a conductive energy weapon, the GLOVE at complianttechnologies.com, they have virtually eliminated weapons confusion. So, stay ahead of the game with Compliant Technologies and their revolutionary CD3 that hundreds of agencies have already turned to nationwide. And friends, take it from me, when it comes to safety, this is one of the most commonsense, hands-on solutions that's ever come along. Go to complianttechnologies.com today and tell them that Chip sent you. Again, that's complianttechnologies.com, and make sure you watch those cool videos as well. You'll be glad that you did. Welcome back. Leo Roundtable at leoroundtable.com, the law enforcement talk show. My name is Chip DeBlock, and I'm your host.

[21:23] Speaker 1: We're joined by, we got two SACs, Secret Service, Rich Terpoli, Frank Loveridge, and we got Chief Ralph Ornelas from, from, uh, the LA area in California. Uh, wow, we've been talking about a lot of news items. I see your, your mic is open, Frank, so I'm gonna hold off the Senate confirmation. Did you have anything you wanted to add on any of the last stories or nope? You're just teasing me? Okay.

[21:43] Speaker 3: I was just teasing you, uh, Chip.

[21:45] Speaker 1: All right. So rvmnews.com, "Senate confirms War- uh, Mark Wayne Mullin as the DHS chief despite Dem resistance." And it says, "On Monday, they voted to confirm him as the next secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, approving the nomination by a 54 to 45 margin in a vote that largely followed party lines." But there were two Democrats, Senator John Letterman of Pennsylvania and Senator Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, that joined Republicans in supporting this. Now, Senator Rand Paul, who's been such a disappointment for quite a while, tr- of Kentucky of all places, I'm sorry, Frank, uh, you know, was the only Republican to oppose Mullin's confirmation. There is a story there. Uh, President Donald Trump, um, also nominated Mullin on March the 5th after he reassigned Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Y- other news sources, "Nah, they fired, they fired her." And look, there may be some pol- politics going on in the background, but she was reassigned.

[22:45] Speaker 1: Uh, I would not say that's a, I know what, I know what it's, you know, I- I- I've seen people get fired. Um, I- I would say this is a reassignment clearly. Uh, but, yeah, any, any commentary on our new, uh, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security guys? Uh, at least we got that done. Ralph, Ralph Ornelas?

[23:01] Speaker 3: I, I, I, I, I love that guy. Uh, I think he's great. I think he's a stand-up man. What I've read about him, when I, how I see him speak, the way he shot down, um, you know, what's his name, Sanders, from, uh, Vermont, you know, and just shut him down in, in a hearing. Uh, I think he's got a lot of moxie, and I think he's, to me, I, you know, I think he's ethical and he's, he's got strength.

[23:24] Speaker 1: All right. I love it. I love it. Rich?

[23:26] Speaker 2: And I agree with you, Ralph. I like the guy as well. I think it was a, it was a great pick, you know? But the problem is the bar has been set so low for the expectations of the DHS secretary. If the guy does nothing other than when tornado season swings through Oklahoma, if he sends the Coast Guard in to rescue people from on top of their homes, he's 10 steps ahead of any other previous, uh, Homeland Security, uh, you know, directors, uh, secretaries. So, I- I- I hope the guy starts doing some great things, but he's gonna find out, um, he's gonna be spending a lot of time, uh, before Congress, which is one of the reasons I think they rifled this through so quickly, so they've got somebody to go after.

[24:02] Speaker 3: I know Frank wants to say something, but I wanna say this to you, Rich-

[24:05] Speaker 2: Uh.

[24:05] Speaker 3: ... and the audience, everybody. You know what he's gotta do, though? He's gotta really sit down with Tom Homan-

[24:11] Speaker 2: Oh, yeah.

[24:11] Speaker 3: ... and pick, and pick his brain at where the min- land mines are and how he's gotta come up with a plan to address this stuff.

[24:18] Speaker 2: Yep.

[24:18] Speaker 3: A- and also what he's gotta do, he's gotta look at those, those, some of those crazy recommendations from the Democrats and say, "Yes, no," and some of those you can't implement.

[24:27] Speaker 2: No, I agree with you.

[24:28] Speaker 3: I-

[24:28] Speaker 2: Yeah.

[24:28] Speaker 3: Yeah, I just want to say that I think that obviously it's gonna be difficult for anyone in that position. The Democrats are going to be on the offensive and you're gonna be, once again, sitting in front of hearings explaining the actions of, uh, the different components within DHS. But I think he's a great person for the job because he's been in the Senate. He's been there. They know who he is. He's got a rapport with most of them, with the exception of Rand Paul, unfortunately. But, uh, I think he'll do a pretty good job with the, with, uh, holding his own. And, uh, I'm glad they went ahead and did this. I think it was time to move on. Uh, you know, I'm not taking any shots at Kristi Noem, but, uh, there was some negative publicity that was hurting the cause. Um, and I think, uh, President Trump got a little upset with the whole, uh-...

[25:07] Speaker 3: af-, uh, you know, the allegation that sh- he knew about the, uh, spending that took place, uh, on those commercials, so, um, I think it was time to move on.

[25:14] Speaker 1: Ye-, yeah, you know, and, and something that me and Jeff Weninger and Chip talked about it about a week ago. You know, when I was a drill instructor at the academy, when you give too much airtime to somebody-

[25:24] Speaker 3: Yeah.

[25:24] Speaker 1: ... they start belie- they start believing their press releases and stuff.

[25:27] Speaker 3: Yep.

[25:27] Speaker 1: And I hate to say it, she started doing that. And, you know, you gotta be careful of that.

[25:34] Speaker 3: Yeah, let's just say-

[25:34] Speaker 1: I mean, what, what she-

[25:35] Speaker 2: Which was, which was clearly evident in that commercial that they spent, what, $200 million on. That wasn't a commercial. That was a, uh, a Kristi Noem, uh, you know, public service announcement for three minutes.

[25:45] Speaker 3: It was.

[25:45] Speaker 2: Come on, lady. Uh, it went a little too far there.

[25:47] Speaker 3: She did a lot of good things. Let's not take that... You know, let's not just-

[25:51] Speaker 2: Yeah.

[25:51] Speaker 3: You know, she... And think about all the, uh, criminals that we put in jail, uh- Yeah ... w- shutting down the border, um, you know, all the things that, that we can take pride in. But I would have to tell you this. I think it came to an end, uh, after the commercials, uh, the, the whole scandal came out about the money that was paid for those commercials. And I think where the money went was a problem also, that some people that were close to her, uh, you know, benefited from those commercials, so..

[26:16] Speaker 1: Hey, Fran- hey, Frank, you wa- you worked, you worked OPR, okay? I worked-

[26:20] Speaker 3: Mm-hmm.

[26:20] Speaker 1: ... internal affairs and stuff like that-

[26:22] Speaker 3: Yep, I do.

[26:22] Speaker 1: ... in investigations. When she, when she... There's an allegation of nefarious relationship with somebody, I mean, it doesn't bode well. It just doesn't go well.

[26:31] Speaker 3: Yeah.

[26:31] Speaker 1: You lose credibility.

[26:33] Speaker 3: Yeah.

[26:33] Speaker 2: And-

[26:34] Speaker 3: You're absolutely right, Ralph. Go ahead. Go ahead, Rich.

[26:36] Speaker 2: Well, I was gonna say, think about how much i- it would have swung the other way if she would have spent all that money on a commercial to highlight, um, you know, ICE agents whose homes are being foreclosed on, right?

[26:47] Speaker 3: Yeah.

[26:47] Speaker 2: Or who have to move their-

[26:48] Speaker 3: Yeah.

[26:48] Speaker 2: ... families into a hotel 'cause these animals are coming after them, right? There you go. And I th- she just-

[26:54] Speaker 3: Yeah.

[26:54] Speaker 2: ... she got off track somewhere and-

[26:57] Speaker 3: Yeah.

[26:57] Speaker 2: ... you know. But I agree with you. Yeah, she, did she do a good job? Yeah. But all it takes is one incident and you're done.

[27:03] Speaker 3: Got it.

[27:03] Speaker 2: And that's wha- what happened.

[27:05] Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, she's still with the organization.

[27:06] Speaker 3: Right.

[27:06] Speaker 1: Hopefully, she'll, uh, shine in her new role. We'll, we will, we will see. We'll be covering it here. You know, uh, Tampa Free Press, we've got a f- we got fired FBI agents, they're suing Patel and Bondi over Operation Arctic Frost political purge. So, interesting. Veteran FBI special agents, they filed this federal lawsuit, they did this on Thursday, claiming that they were illegally filed by, fired by Director Kash Patel and Attorney General Pam Bondi as part of a political purge targeting those who investigated President Donald Trump. And it was filed in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, alleges that these agents now, they're not identifying the agents only as John Doe 1 and John Doe 2. They were terminated without notice, hearings, or evidence of misconduct. You guys can tell us whether that is actually matters or not.

[27:53] Speaker 1: Both men were previously assigned to Operation Arctic Frost, and that was the probe, uh, into efforts to overturn the 2020 election that led to President Trump's 2023 indictment. Now, John Doe 1, 21-year veteran, white-collar guy, three years away from retirement when he was ordered to report to the Washington field office on Halloween night. And he was fired when his children were at home waiting for him in their costumes. They were (laughs) going to go trick-or-treating. And I'm sorry. Instead of getting sympathy from me, it, it, I erupted in laughter. I'm sorry. And then John Doe number two, an eight-year, uh, agent, he was a public corruption guy, and, uh, he was on a squad doing that, fired Election Day 2025. The lawsuit says that just weeks prior, he personally briefed Director Patel on a sensitive fraud case. Patel reportedly t- told him, "Good work. Keep going," and, and, and then I guess he's upset because he got fired after he was told that. Uh, okay, um, that happens.

[28:49] Speaker 1: Uh, the lawsuit points to a series of public statements by Patel, Bondi, and Senator Chuck Grassley as evidence of a coordinated effort to remove deep state actors. In January of 2026, a post on Truth Social, Trump's platform, uh, Patel referenced, uh, to, I guess he, he referred to terminated agents as corrupt actors, and he touted the end of a weaponized law enforcement. And it goes on to say, uh, Patel wrote that, "Under your leadership, this FBI found the corrupt actors and terminated their employment last year." And, uh, Trump referred to the agents, um, it says, as scum. I don't... It doesn't say necessarily those specific agents, uh, John Doe 1 and 2. But the legal team for the agents argues that the firings... Now here's their, their, their legal s- their sounding, um, they're saying that the firings violate the First Amendment, okay, whatever, against political retaliation, and the Fifth Amendment, uh, the right to due process.

[29:43] Speaker 1: They point out that while the termination letters cite one reason, poor judgment, the, uh, personnel forms, they're r- list of, uh, I guess the reason was Article II, which is, uh, presidential authority to, uh, rather than specific misconduct, presidential authority to remove them. And it says, "Your case assignment does not dictate your career or your termination." That's what Pat- Pel- Patel said, but they're saying that solely because they were in Arctic, uh, Frost operation, that is why they were let go. The agents report they have been unable to find any work in law enforcement or the private sector due to the stigma of being labeled weaponized agents, or maybe it was because of what they actually did. Uh, one plaintiff alleged, uh, that he had a job lined up, uh, at a company, but the CEO had concern over the optics of hiring someone targeted by the administration. And finally, the plaintiffs are seeking immediate reinstatement. They wanna go back.

[30:32] Speaker 1: They wanna be back in the FBI. They want their name cleared to restore their professional reputations. Wow. Frank Loveridge.

[30:40] Speaker 3: Well, I'll just say one thing. When we came on this job, we raised our right hand and we took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States, not to complete the political objectives of the actual party that's in power at the time. These people went after 400 Republicans in this targeted investigation, over a dozen Republican congressmen, they went after them. For what reason? What probable cause did they have? So what I would have to say is, is that you remember one thing. You work for the American people.And you have to remember that as well. Some of the people in the leadership at that time were basically putting them in the position where they were going after, targeting people for the wrong reasons, and I'll tell you right now, that is weaponization in its highest form and it needs to come to an end. And if these people are removed from their positions because they followed those orders, well, then that's good.

[31:30] Speaker 3: We're cleaning out what we have to do to make sure that we have a, uh, an unbiased, uh, Justice Department and a FBI.

[31:38] Speaker 1: Well, yeah, you guys are hearing that from a former SAC, former with the Secret Service, so, and, uh, former fed, he knows what he's talking about, so... Guys, we're coming up on our third commercial break. It's amazing that time is just flying by like this and, and we haven't even got to a story with a video component yet. And we haven't gotten to the one where we've got the, uh, the PrideFest in the video on that either. I know you're thinking about that, Rich. So look, uh, we're coming up on our third commercial break. Stick with us, guys. (laughs) We'll be right back. All right, guys. Time to talk about GunLearn at GunLearn.com. Hey, there's a new, there's a new twist here. They are thrilled to announce an exciting new partnership with Smarter Degree. Uh, certification as a firearms specialist, which is what they do. We've been talking about it for years now at GunLearn.com.

[32:16] Speaker 1: If you've been certified as a firearms specialist, even over the last five years, now you can take that certification and it's worth college credits through Smarter Degrees university partners. And whether you're pursuing a degree or just simply want to look at maximizing the value of your education, the partnership, it opens up a new pathway to academic recognition for your firearms training. And of course, GunLearn is the first and the only company to offer a step-by-step program that takes you from your present knowledge level to become a safe, accurate, and competent certified firearms specialist. And they provide citations from federal law and ATF rulings for every point taught to ensure accuracy. And their training is approved by major forensic organizations, by law enforcement agencies, and also firearm manufacturers. And they've been doing this since 1996.

[32:53] Speaker 1: Uh, so if you haven't got your certification or looked at it lately, go to GunLearn.com in order to get it done and get college credits as well. Welcome back. Leo Roundtable at LeoRoundtable.com, the law enforcement talk show. My name is Chip The Block and I'm your host. We are joined by Chief Ralph Cornalis, and we've got two former Secret Service SACs, Frank Loveridge, Rich Seripolli, and, uh, we've been covering all of our, you know, our, all of our, you know, main stories right now, our main articles and stuff. Uh, this last one, um, you know, the Senate cons- confirmed Markwayne Mullins, and then of course we talked about, uh, the fired FBI agents that are suing, uh, Kash Patel, the FBI director, and our, our very own Attorney General Pam Bondi. And, uh, you know, guys, before we move on to a, to a story with, like, a video component, any predictions on this lawsuit? Is there any, any, gonna be any traction to this? Do...

[33:42] Speaker 1: Can one of you guys just make a forecast or prediction that this will see the light of day or not? It... Will it go anywhere? Frank? Rich?

[33:51] Speaker 3: Uh, uh, I would say this, uh, Chip, that probably depending on the jurisdiction of where this is happening, I think we can predict the results. Um, but then I think there is the appellate decision that will have to be looked at by, um, higher courts, and this could, uh, potentially elevate... But I don't... I, I have to say that if it's, uh, if it's in Washington, DC, I don't have any, uh, confidence-

[34:11] Speaker 1: Okay.

[34:12] Speaker 3: ... in the out- in the out-, uh, out... yeah, of the result.

[34:15] Speaker 1: Okay.

[34:15] Speaker 2: Well, I think the other problem is l- it, it'll come down to a lot on the shoulders of the in-house legal council at the bureau, just like we saw for years at the Secret Service. Due to their incompetence and ineptitude and lack of real legal experience, they were super willing to settle every lawsuit that went on, every EEO complaint. And I swear-

[34:34] Speaker 1: Really?

[34:34] Speaker 2: ... it at DHS. When I got-

[34:35] Speaker 1: Yeah.

[34:35] Speaker 2: ... to DHS, I had 90 open EEO complaints on a staff of just short of 700. Right? And legal council wants to settle all these things. Hey, y- you know, I shut all that down. I said, "We're not settling anything. We're gonna go to court. That's why we have all these attorneys."

[34:51] Speaker 1: Huh.

[34:51] Speaker 2: "Well, let's see what the bureau's willing to do. Are you gonna fight these or not?" And I'd love to see the agents that didn't participate in this, that drew the line, come back and sue these guys who were fired for tarnishing the reputation of the bureau and impeding their ability to get hired when they retire.

[35:08] Speaker 1: Huh.

[35:08] Speaker 2: That's what should be going on here. These guys-

[35:11] Speaker 1: Yeah.

[35:11] Speaker 2: ... that got dumped, that's on them. Too bad.

[35:15] Speaker 3: Yeah, Rich for being in the Office of Professional Responsibility, I saw a lot of those EEO complaints come across my desk.

[35:20] Speaker 2: (coughs)

[35:20] Speaker 3: I investigated a lot of 'em and I'll tell you this, uh, uh, the Secret Service was very, uh, active in settling these lawsuits, um, as opposed to gaining the publicity that they didn't want to have, the negative publicity out there in the media. So that, that is another reason why. But I think this one's already in the media, so I would hope the Department of Justice, uh, they lock down and go after this, and basically, uh, make their arguments. And I think if they do, I think a, a, a reasonable jury can, uh, can, can see this is nonsense.

[35:48] Speaker 1: Okay.

[35:48] Speaker 5: Y- you know, I hope that the OPR, Frank and Rich and Chip, they have done a, a really competent, professional job in the investigation- ... of those two FBI agents because we all know that the investigators who investigate these, they have to cross the T's and dot the I's and cover everything to present the facts of the case. So, uh, I hope that that's happening and, and I think they should fight it, Rich, what you stated in, Frank, because they need to

[36:15] Speaker 1: Right. And we gotta roll, we gotta roll along here, guys.

[36:17] Speaker 5: Oh.

[36:17] Speaker 1: It was great. Last words, uh, Frank?

[36:19] Speaker 3: Yeah, just real quick, I was gonna say, these people that investigated this were picked by hand, handpicked to do this.

[36:24] Speaker 1: Okay.

[36:24] Speaker 3: So, when you look at that, you're gonna see some things in their backgrounds that might, uh, raise your eyebrows.

[36:29] Speaker 1: All right. Interesting. Well, guys, cbsnews.com, there's two stories I want to cover, uh, before we end. Uh, Dade County officers, they're involved in that 2019 UPS shootout. Uh, i- i- the, uh... It, it's been dismissed, the case, on this, on Stand Your Ground law. So the Broward County circuit judge, they don't give his name, dismissed the cases of three former, former now, I did say former, Miami-Dade sheriff's office officers who were involved in a 2019 shooting that left two civilians dead due to Florida Stand Your Ground law. Um, and of course, Miami-Dade, there was, uh, you know, like kinda, it's kinda like a metro. Uh, the police officers working for the sheriff's office. Uh, the orders came down on Monday afternoon. Former Miami-Dade Officer Rodolfo Mirabel, Officer Richard, uh, Steisteman, and Officer Leslie Li, uh, they had been facing charges in connection with the incident that happened December the 5th, but way back in 2019. And there were two, uh, assailants.

[37:20] Speaker 1: They, these guys, uh, hijacked a UPS truck in Coral Gables. It was a jewelry heist. The hijacking, uh, sparked a police chase.This is rush hour traffic. Shootout going on and the truck gets stuck in traffic on the Miramar Parkway and after the shoot, I mean, bullets were flying like, like candy, right? And so the confrontation left the UPS driver, the hostage guy, Frank Ordonez, um, he ended up getting killed. And then there's an innocent bystander, I think the guy was in a car, Richard Cutshaw, he ended up dead as well. Um, and so, you know, there's a lot of questions. Look, we've covered this and talked about this before, there, there's always questions about your backdrop and whether, you know, the, you know, the need, you know, the, the shooting, if it's justified in certain situations and stuff, so I don't wanna, um, I, I, I don't wanna go through that. We've only got four and a half minutes.

[38:09] Speaker 1: But, um, the case has been dropped, so, but the guys are out of their jobs too, so, um, unless ... Do I have one guy that maybe wants to make a commentary on this? But, uh, Ralph, you're probably the closest out of everybody in doing IA stuff to give, uh, what... Are you pleased with this? I mean, the guys don't have jobs. How do you feel about the, the criminal case being dropped?

[38:30] Speaker 5: Um, I'm glad the criminal case has been dropped, but I don't know the administrative process. What they found that tactically or by p- their policy, that they might have violated which would substantiate them not hiring them back.

[38:43] Speaker 1: Okay.

[38:43] Speaker 5: And, and big part of that I've, I've seen it where we didn't pro- file criminal charges but we did discharge people.

[38:51] Speaker 1: Okay. All right. So, um, yeah. They left, there's a lot (laughs) ... This left a lot of questions, uh, I, I agree. Well, guys, moving on. You know, our last one that I wanna cover, uh, it's a, it's a wild story and we're gonna jump to San Francisco. Um, in fact I had a, a, a, a, a viewer send this to me. There's a video attached to this. It's sfstandard.com, uh, it's titled Watch the Drag Show at the Center of a Police Watchdog Agency Scandal. So, The Standard, this publication, they've obtained a video of the head of San Francisco's Police Watchdog Agency participating in a drag show in the department's office. Dude's got a beard. Uh, the footage corroborates some allegations in a civil lawsuit filed by a former employee who listed the event as one of the many ina- inappropriate incidents that she witnessed. Paul Henderson, Executive Director of the Department of Police Accountability, if you can believe that, and at least one other manager, COO Nicole Armstrong.

[39:45] Speaker 1: They're seen in the video participating in the 2023 Pride event, um, in which, uh, three drag queens performed. The footage shows the audience members appearing to place dollar bills in the dancers' clothes. Fest- festivities happened from 11:00, uh, AM until, uh, June 20th, uh, 2023, or on June 20th. Uh, the DPA is tasked with investigating the police misconduct and recommending new policies, but the agency's internal culture has been criticized amid resignations, firings and claims of wrongdoing. In her lawsuit against the city, the former employee named, uh, Janelle Cawood characterized the drag show as an event organized by Henderson, who allegedly told interns to bring dollar bills, I guess, into the office. The suit says that, alleges that the party was one of the several inappropriate incidents and events at the agency. I'm glad we only had to look at video of one of these guys.

[40:36] Speaker 1: There's some more stuff in here but we got two minutes left, um, I, you know, I always worry when we cover things like this of offending certain people. You know, I know Frank's in California so he may be easily offended watching some of this stuff. I don't know where he's at, if you're on the fence on this kind of activity, you know, uh, Chief Ralph or not, but, uh, I'm just having fun with Ralph. But, uh, guys, c- c- come on, comment. I know the guys are not fighting to open up their mics to talk about this, but Chief Ralph is gonna start it off by taking one for the team. Chief Ralph.

[41:02] Speaker 5: You know, uh, first of all, here is an entity that is supposed to investigate police department in San Francisco, right? A policy ... And look what this director, Paul Henderson, puts on, in, in the office. And then the other thing is this, gentlemen and audience, you know, dollar bills at 11 o'clock in the morning at an event? You know, what are you gonna do with those dollar ... You know, we know what goes on with dollar bills, so what are they gonna do with those dollar bills, you know, in the office with these, the drag, uh, production? Or ... And I, I, I laughed, they said it's an artistic presentation. Go ahead.

[41:42] Speaker 1: Did you see when he laid on his back and he was kicking his feet like it was, it was ... Yeah.

[41:47] Speaker 5: I, I thought it was you, Chip, to be honest with you.

[41:49] Speaker 1: (laughs) Oh, I was getting ready to throw Rich's name out there, you beat me to the punch.

[41:53] Speaker 5: (laughs) Oh I had to save my paisan

[41:55] Speaker 1: (laughs)

[41:56] Speaker 2: I appreciate that. You know what? Listen, my stance is you wanna go to a Village People concert, then go to a Village People concert, right? You don't host this kind of nonsense in a police agency or in a fire house or in any city property. This is nonsense. I'd clean house, I'd fire every one of those idiots.

[42:12] Speaker 1: Wow.

[42:12] Speaker 2: Are you kidding me? How stupid ... And then you, you go as far as telling interns to participate as well? How stupid can you be? But they think they can get away with this because we're couching under the umbrella of this whole LGBT ... Get, get out of here with this nonsense. You gotta start firing people, this, this is ridiculous. There, it, it, there's no difference between this and hosting, you know, transgender book readings at the Pentagon, which was shut down, right?

[42:38] Speaker 1: It ...

[42:38] Speaker 2: Come on.

[42:38] Speaker 1: That's an idea.

[42:39] Speaker 5: Saved by the bell.

[42:40] Speaker 1: You just, you just gave that to somebody.

[42:41] Speaker 5: (laughs)

[42:42] Speaker 1: (laughs) Fi- final words, Frank? We're winding it down.

[42:45] Speaker 5: Well, I would just say that it, the thing that makes this the most inpro- inappropriate is where it took place. Bringing this into your office space and trying to claim this is an artistic event is absolutely absurd. That's the first thing. If you were to bring women in and have strippers in your office, and I think it's $5 now not $1, I just wanna be corrected on that one, it must have, inflation, it must have gone up. But I would tell you this would not be appropriate no matter who you are, and it shouldn't be appropriate for a drag show as well, so yes. Richie, I agree with you. It's hard to believe that but I do agree with you. Get rid of 'em.

[43:17] Speaker 1: Thanks, guys. Uh, Chief Ralph Ornellas from California and former Secret Service Sachs. We've got Rich Tierrapole and Frank Loveridge. Thank you guys so much for being on the day's show. You guys knocked it out of the park. Uh, we have golis.com, complianttechnologies.com, gunlearn.com, medicare.lifesafeguardrecruiting.com and twobells.com. Thanks for watching the show, streamers. We'll see you guys back tomorrow, 12 noon Eastern.

[43:42] Speaker 1: (rock music)