Thoughts & experiences using the updated "Meeting Intermediates" guide.

Since the last event we've received two intermediates in Northern Illinois, and Western Missouri.

#1 Springfield, IL
The first man was over the age limit but an exception was made by @Patrick TX (37). It was conducted with @Sam MN as my wingman.

Generally I like to select areas of historical significance since it gives the meeting a special setting. We chose the "Lincoln House" a large area of replica buildings taking up a city block including the actual house Lincoln once lived. The area has many visitors and a picnic bench area near the front. No vehicles are allowed within these replica roads allowing us to peer down the fence line towards the direction of the coordinates I forwarded. Without issue he provided his clothing and vehicle information. He arrived at the exact spot as planned.

Once comfortable he was told to close all applications, he complied. Opening telegram all the channels shown were legitimate with recent / prolonged use. He made no attempts to hide anything on his device at any point of this process and understood our reasoning. The phone placed flat the entire time was deactivated and pockets were to be emptied. The typical contents of keys and wallet laid on the table.

Next the task of removing his coat and lifting all layers underneath was done.. @Sam MN at this time was to be suspicious of anyone approaching the area and to inspect him visually during each step. At any point during the interview if my wingman decides he's not been honest or elaborate enough I've instructed him to press the issue as hard as he sees fit. This intermediate impressed us by the end of the conversation. Very disciplined, honest, and positive in his messaging. The next interview was not as easy.

#2 Jefferson City, MO
Interview was done with @Sam MN and @Mark MO today. Planning to head west in the early hours of the morning the intermediate was told to confirm the interview on the previous night. He failed in this regard finally sending a message that he had already left at 5:30 am. A note was taken onto the script before the meeting questioning his reliability and reasoning. Once in position at the park fully concealed behind a building the man was forwarded the actual meeting location. Clothing and vehicle information was again provided.

Due to the suspicion of his actions I required Sam and Mark to stay behind eventually exiting the vehicle once I reached the first sidewalk on the far side of the parking lot. The location masked my first position and since there was no guarantee I was a member of Patriot Front a targeted attack would be difficult. Looking ahead the individual wasn't where I asked him to be but the vehicle described was. To my right around 60 ft. was a man sitting on a bench not wearing the "yellow flannel" that I was expecting.

Continuing to walk past him he then identified himself to me, this was done on purpose. Asking why he wasn't at the pavilion he said "I'd rather be in the open" and the person sitting in a car across the lot was making him anxious. My instinct caused an aggressive order to come to the pavilion or the interview will end. He complied and we sat down.I read his notes patiently waiting for my wingmen to arrive. His nerves were shot as they came from behind the position he's facing.

We followed the same protocol as the interview the previous day. We dredged through all of his social media to an excessive degree. All layers of clothing shown and inspected. Cell phone turned off. Due to his actions the interview was an hour and fifteen minutes in length once questioning began. We exited the script over and over drilling into his experiences asking for details that would be almost impossible to consistently make up on the fly. Criticizing his inability to confirm the interview was met with admitting his mistake. His nervous attitude at the beginning was brought to light, he was absolutely scared. Noticing the yellow flannel under his jacket explained the clothing mix-up. This interview was unique in the way it became close to an interrogation at certain points. The decision was made that he was a legitimate applicant between the three of us.

Conclusion:
The new interview procedures are necessary. They're useful in protecting the recruiters and in the way it can make a person react. When someone cannot provide any media on their phone or refuses a single step then we've protected the entire organization from a potential threat. If the previous interview had one single red flag on his phone it would have ended instantly. I'll do whatever possible to keep infiltrators out and hope this report can assist others for upcoming interviewees. @Thomas