How Crooked Hillary Can Bring Down Deep State


 

John R. Houk

© September 15, 2017

 

I found a series of emails from Judicial Watch that exposes the workings of the Deep State that is working to thwart the promises of President Donald Trump.

 

Per the emails, I have three cross posts:

 

  • A video on the Comey memos.

 

  • Thanks to FOIA and Law suits, the revelation of more Crooked Hillary emails revealing classified materials on her nefarious private email server which includes Huma Abedin and the exposure actual Pay-To-Play deals with the Clinton Foundation.

 

  • Ending with a Judicial Watch Facebook video of On Watch with Chris Farrell exposing more details of Crooked Hillary’s State Department silencing private security contractors in relation to the Benghazi Islamic terrorist attack.

 

All these Judicial Watch information reporting relating to Crooked Hillary shows good reasons for her to be locked up. ALSO, you should realize if any DOJ courage exists to take on the Deep State protection of Crooked Hillary, then the Obama Deep State “Resistance” means all clandestine options will be made to protect Obama and his nefarious minions. Why? The answer is obvious! If Crooked Hillary begins to go down for any of her crimes including her husband, then Obama’s Deep State Resistance will be exposed. Crooked Hillary will take the whole Manchurian Left down with her if she is prosecuted. That would mean all things Barack Hussein Obama would tumble like a reverse domino theory.

 

JRH 9/15/17

Please Support NCCR

*************

VIDEO: Inside Judicial Watch: The Comey Memos

 

Posted by Judicial Watch

Published on Sep 13, 2017

 

In this installment of “Inside Judicial Watch,” Carter Clews joins Mark Tapscott, the Executive Editor of the Daily Caller News Foundation, to discuss the missing memos of James Comey and the controversy surrounding the former FBI director.

 

Keep up with Judicial Watch: Donate today!

https://www.judicialwatch.org/donate/thank-youtube 

 

Sign up for the JWTV Club ► http://subscribe.judicialwatch.org/subscription/join-the-video-club

 

Check out our website ► http://www.judicialwatch.org

 

“Like” us on Facebook ► http://www.facebook.com/JudicialWatch

 

Follow us on Twitter ► http://twitter.com/JudicialWatch

 

Subscribe to our YouTube channel ► https://www.youtube.com/user/JudicialWatch/featured?view_as=public  

 

++++

Judicial Watch: New Clinton Emails Uncovered, Reveal Additional Mishandling of Classified Information

 

Press Room

SEPTEMBER 14, 2017

Judicial Watch

 

Documents also show more instances of pay to play with Clinton Foundation donors

Abedin’s controversial mother advised Clinton speechwriter to exclude references to ‘democracy/elections/freedom’ and ‘empowerment of women’ for Clinton speech in Saudi Arabia

 

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released 1,617 new pages of documents from the U.S. Department of State revealing numerous additional examples of classified information being transmitted through the unsecure, non-state.gov account of Huma Abedin, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, as well as many instances of Hillary Clinton donors receiving special favors from the State Department.

 

The documents included 97 email exchanges with Clinton not previously turned over to the State Department, bringing the known total to date to at least 627 emails that were not part of the 55,000 pages of emails that Clinton turned over, and further contradicting a statement by Clinton that, “as far as she knew,” all of her government emails had been turned over to department.

 

The emails are the 20th production of documents obtained in response to a court order in a May 5, 2015, lawsuit Judicial Watch filed against the State Department (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00684)). Judicial Watch sued after State failed to respond to a March 18, 2015, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking: “All emails of official State Department business received or sent by former Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin from January 1, 2009 through February 1, 2013 using a non-‘state.gov’ email address.”

 

On September 11, 2009, the highly sensitive name and email address of the person giving the classified Presidential Daily Brief was included in an email forwarded to Abedin’s unsecure email account by State Department official Dan Fogerty.

 

The State Department produced many more Clinton and Abedin unsecured emails that were classified:

 

 

  • On April 16, 2009, Deputy Assistant Secretary Jeffrey Feltman sent to Abedin’s unsecure email account classified information about an unknown subject.

 

  • On June 18, 2009, Abedin sent classified information summarizing a June 18, 2009, “Middle East Breakfast” meeting between various senators, representatives and State Department officials, at which Deputy Secretary Jack Lew and George Mitchell briefed the congressmen with “an update on our discussions with the [Middle East] parties.”

 

  • On June 23, 2009, U.S. diplomat Martin Indyk, who had his security clearance suspended in 2000 for “possible sloppiness” in the handling of classified information, sent a memo containing classified information to Abedin’s unsecure email account.  The memo, written for Clinton, pertained to Indyk’s discussions with top Israeli officials:

 

Could I ask you to review the memo below that I wrote yesterday on my return from Israel?  If you think it worthwhile, I’d be very grateful if you showed it to HRC (I have already shared it with Mitchell and Feltman). A confrontation with Bibi appears imminent.  I’ve never been one to shy away from that, as she may know.  But it has to be done carefully, and that doesn’t appear to be happening.  And I’m concerned that she will be tarred with the same brush if this leads to a bad end.  So I think she needs to make sure that the friction is productive.  I’ve made some suggestions at the end of the memo

 

  • On August 1, 2009, Abedin forwarded classified information from State Department official Richard Verma to her unsecure email account.  The email from Senator Russ Feingold was sent to Hillary Clinton regarding her upcoming Africa trip.

 

  • On August 4, 2009, Assistant Secretary Jeffrey Feltman sent classified information about discussions with Kuwaiti officials to Abedin’s unsecure email account.  Feltman noted that the Kuwaitis felt a lunch they had with Obama was “chilly.”  The discussions concerned Guantanamo as well as Kuwait’s treatment of detainees.

 

  • On Sept 20, 2009, Abedin forwarded classified information to her unsecure email account. The email was from State Department official Esther Brimmer and concerned foreign leaders’ discussions regarding a UNESCO leadership appointment.

 

  • On November 1, 2009, U.S. Ambassador to the UAE Rick Olson sent classified information to Abedin’s unsecure email account. The email shows that Olsen was traveling with Hillary in the Middle East, and Abedin asked him to “work on a list of everything covered in the mbz [presumably Mohammed bin Zayed bin Sultan Al-Nahyan, the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi] meeting for Hillary.” Olson asks: “do you want it on this system (I can sanitize), or on the other system.” She replies: “This system easier. We are staying without class[ified] computers. Thx.”

 

  • On December 1, 2009, Abedin sent classified information about foreign military contributions to the Afghanistan war effort to her unsecure email account. The email originated with State official Sean Misko who wrote to Deputy Chief of Staff Jake Sullivan that he first “accidentally” sent it on the “high side” (secure) but was resending.

 

  • On December 25, 2009, Abedin sent to her unsecure email account classified information prepared by Deputy U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Francis Ricciardone concerning the Afghan elections.

 

  • On December 26, 2009, U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Carlos Pascual sent a memo to Clinton, which was found on Abedin’s unsecure email account. It contained extensive classified information involving U.S. and Mexican counter-drug operations in Mexico.

 

  • On March 22, 2010, Abedin forwarded to her unsecure email account classified information about a telephone conversation between President Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon.

 

  • On April 13, 2010, Abedin forwarded to her unsecure email account classified information rom Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman regarding diplomatic discussions with the foreign ministers of Algeria and Morocco.

 

  • On May 24, 2010, Abedin forwarded to her unsecure email account classified information about the minutes of a State Department senior staff meeting regarding State Department officials’ meetings in Uganda.

 

  • Among Abedin’s unsecure email records is a document that is simply titled “NOTE” with the date September 12, 2010. The contents are entirely redacted as classified.

 

  • On January 28, 2011, Abedin sent Clinton an unsecure email containing classified information relating to a briefing White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs gave.

 

  • On March 21, 2012, Clinton received a memo from State Department officials Joseph Yun and Derek Mitchell marked “Sensitive But Unclassified” and sent to Abedin’s unsecure email account. It contained classified information about elections in Burma.

 

  • Jake Sullivan emailed to Hillary’s unsecure email account classified information in which Sullivan discussed the content of conversations with UK Prime Minister Gordon regarding “the situation” in Northern Ireland. The date of this email is not included on the document.

 

  • On April 8, 2012, Abedin sent classified information to her unsecure email regarding a call sheet and an “Action Memo” for Clinton relating to a call with Malawi President Joyce Banda. On April 9, 2012, Monica Hanley again forwarded the classified information to Clinton’s unsecure email account.

 

Other emails contain sensitive information that was sent via Hillary Clinton’s unsecure email servers.

 

On August 18, 2009, confidential assistant Monica Hanley provided Abedin with laptop and fob (a physical device that provides a login code) logins and passwords to log onto a laptop, as well as a secure State Department website at https://one.state.gov. Included were a PIN number and instructions on how to access her email from the secure State Department website. Abedin forwarded this information to her unsecure account.

 

(The FBI interviewed Clinton’s confidential assistant Monica Hanley in its probe of Clinton’s email practices, and State’s Diplomatic Security staff reprimanded her after she left classified material behind in a Moscow hotel room. Hanley was the staffer tasked with finding BlackBerry phones for Clinton to use.)

 

On August 19, 2009, Hanley asked Abedin to call her and provide Abedin’s computer password so that she could download a UN document for Cheryl Mills from Abedin’s computer. Instead of calling Hanley, Abedin apparently provided the computer password in her unsecure reply email, saying, “Its [redacted].”

 

On April 17, 2009, Clinton aide Lona Valmoro emailed Clinton’s sensitive daily schedule for April 18 to various Clinton Foundation officials, including Doug Band, Terry Krinvic and Justin Cooper. She also forwarded Clinton’s daily schedule for July 16 to numerous Clinton Foundation officials. She did the same thing on September 8, 2009. She did so again on January 10, January 14 and April 11, 2010.

 

The details of Hillary’s arrival on November 18, 2009, in war-torn Kabul, Afghanistan, for the inauguration of President Karzai, were found on Abedin’s unsecure email account. Included were precise times of landing at Kabul Airport, the occupants of her vehicle, arrival and departure times at the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, and meeting times with U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

 

The new documents show that Clinton donors frequently requested and received special favors from the State Department that were connected to the Clinton Foundation.

 

On July 14, 2009, Gordon Griffin, a XL Keystone lobbyist, sent an email to Clinton Foundation executive Doug Band, asking if Band could get him into a Council on Foreign Relations dinner at which Clinton was speaking. Band forwarded the email to Abedin, saying, “Can u get him in?” Abedin replied: “Yes will get him in.” Band was a top aide to President Bill Clinton and co-founder of Teneo. Griffin was a major donor to Hillary Clinton’s Senate and presidential campaigns.

 

On July 16, 2009, Zachary Schwartz asked Band for help getting visas to travel to Cuba for a film production crew from Shangri La Entertainment. Band forwarded the request to Abedin, telling her, “Please call zach asap on this. [Redacted.] Important.” Abedin responded, “I’ll call zach when we land in India.” Abedin concludes with “Enjoy. Cuba is complicated. Am sure you aren’t surprised to hear that.” Schwartz worked for Steve Bing, a mega-donor to the Clintons and owner of Shangri La Entertainment. Bing has reportedly donated $10-25 million to the Clinton Foundation and paid Bill Clinton personally $2.5 million a year to be an adviser to a green construction company Bing owned.

 

On September 11, 2009, Terrence Duffy, chairman of futures brokerage firm CME Group, a donor to the Clinton Foundation, asked Clinton to arrange “government appointments” for him in Singapore and Hong Kong. Clinton, using her HDR22@clintonmail.com address, forwarded the request to Abedin, “fyi.” Abedin responded to Duffy’s email, saying she would “follow up” with Duffy’s secretary, Joyce. Duffy gave $4,600 to Hillary’s 2008 presidential campaign; CME Group paid Hillary $225,000 for a speaking fee and has donated between $5,001 and 10,000 to the Clinton Foundation.

 

Abedin, using her huma@clintonmail.com address, later told Joyce, “Would like to get some more information and details so we can try to help.” Further along in the exchange, Joyce responds “We would also like some help in arranging meetings with some key govt officials in both locations, such as the Prime Minister of Singapore, and would appreciate any help you may be able to provide.”

 

On September 29, 2009, Abedin followed up with Duffy, telling him that “we are happy to assist with any and all meetings” and that she had “discussed you and your trip with our assistant secretary of state for east asia and pacific affairs,” suggesting that Duffy write the assistant secretary, Kurt Campbell. Duffy replied, “Thank you very much. I did connect with Kurt Campbell today.”

 

On May 5, 2010, major Clinton Global Initiative member, Clinton Foundation donor and real estate developer Eddie Trump forwarded to “Dougie” Band a request for assistance from Russian American Foundation Vice President Rina Kirshner to get the Russian American Foundation involved in a State Department program. Band forwarded the request to Abedin, saying, “Can we get this done/mtg set.” As Judicial Watch previously reported, the State Department doled out more than $260,000 to the Russian American Foundation for “public diplomacy.”

 

Major Clinton donor Bal Das, a New York financier who reportedly raised $300,000 for Hillary’s 2008 presidential campaign, asked Abedin on November 11, 2009 if Hillary Clinton could address the Japan Society at its annual conference in 2010. Clinton did speak to the Japan Society’s annual conference in 2011.

 

The emails also provide insight on the inner workings of the Clinton State Department, in particular her engagement with her staff.

 

In a May 19, 2009, “Global Press Conference” memo, Clinton was given in advance the “proposed questions” of four of the seven foreign reporters. Examples include: “What is the Obama administration’s view of Australian PM Rudd’s proposal to form an Asia-Pacific Community” and “Why can’t American drones not find, detect and destroy the insurgency supply line?”

 

In a document entitled “HRC Pakistan Notes” prepared for Clinton by her staff, Clinton apparently had to be reminded about all her trips to Pakistan and of “stories that you have told/remember.” Her reminder instructions include: “You loved Faisal mosque, and it was especially meaningful to have CVC [Chelsea] with you.” And: “Your first Pakistani friend was in College. She introduced you to Pakistani food and clothes.” And: “You have had lots of Pakistani and Pakistani American friends over the years. From Chicago to California to Washington, DC, you have friends all over the country. They know how much you love Pakistani food …”

 

On February 12, 2010, Case Button, a Clinton speechwriter, asked Abedin if her mother, a professor at Dar Al Hekma, a women’s university in Saudi Arabia where Clinton held a town hall meeting, would be willing to give him advice on talking points he was preparing for Clinton. Abedin responded, “Talk to my mom for sure. She will have good points for you.” After reviewing Hillary’s draft remarks, Huma’s mother, Saleha Abedin, (a controversial Islamist activist), offered some advice: “Do not use the political terms such as ‘democracy/elections/freedom.’ Do not use the term ‘empowerment of women’ instead say ‘enabling women’ Do not even mention driving for women! Don’t sound sympathetic to ‘women’s plight’ or be ‘patronizing’ as other visitors have done and made the students extremely annoyed. They rightly consider these as in-house issues …” No references to these issues appear in Clinton’s speech.

 

Abedin’s involvement in a major appointment at the State Department is controversial given that Abedin’s mother was an Islamist activist. On July 24, 2009, Cheryl Mills forwarded to Abedin a CV for someone being considered for the position of Special Envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. It had been sent to Mills from State Department recruiter Margaret Carpenter. Rather than forwarding the resume on to Clinton for her approval, Abedin simply responds to Mills: “I’m a hundred percent fine with him.”

 

Abedin also offered her opinion to Clinton on administration leaders: On January 21, 2011, while on a trip to Mexico, Abedin emailed Hillary that “Biden is a disaster here.”

 

On February 20, 2012, Clinton expresses outrage over an apparent wardrobe miscommunication for a meeting in Mexico and sent an email to Abedin with the subject line “I’m venting.” Clinton admonished:

 

So, here I sit in the meeting surrounded by ever other person dressed in a white shirt provided by the Mexicans. Patricia is not wearing the exact style that all others are but her own white shirt. But, since no one ever told me about this, and instead assumed I didn’t need to know, I had no idea about any of this until I just walked into the large meeting in front of the entire press corps and I’m wearing a green top. So, what’s my answer when asked why I think I’m different than all my colleagues and why I’m dissing our hosts?

 

I am sick of people deciding what I should know rather than giving me the info so I can make a decision. This really annoys me and I told Monica [Hanley] I just didn’t understand.

 

“The emails show ‘what happened’ was that Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin obviously violated laws about the handling of classified information and turned the State Department into a pay for play tool for the corrupt Clinton Foundation,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The clear and mounting evidence of pay for play and mishandling of classified information warrant a serious criminal investigation by an independent Trump Justice Department.”

 

To read more about Huma Abedin’s emails, click here.

 

+++++

Via Judicial email alert:

 

On Watch: Return to Benghazi

Sent: 9/14/14 4:34 PM

Sent by Judicial Watch

 

The latest edition of Chris Farrell’s On Watch.

 

On this edition of On Watch, Judicial Watch Director of Investigations and Research Chris Farrell discussed the September 11, 2012, Benghazi terrorist attack. New reports show just how dire security at the compound really was and how security officials charged with protecting the compound were later pressured by the Clinton State Department to keep quiet.

 

Facebook VIDEO: Video was live on Facebook Judicial Watch

September 14, 2017 11:29am

 

__________________

How Crooked Hillary Can Bring Down Deep State

John R. Houk

© September 15, 2017

________________

Judicial Watch Posts

 

© 2017 Judicial Watch, Inc.

 

Judicial Watch is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Contributions are received from individuals, foundations, and corporations and are tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law.

 

425 Third Street SW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20024
888-593-8442

 

DONATE

 

House Intel Committee Subpoenas FBI, DOJ Over Trump Dossier


The House Intel Committee is making a move on the Deep State within the Federal government pulling every vile lever to bring down the Trump Administration.

 

JRH 9/7/17

Please Support NCCR

***************

House Intel Committee Subpoenas FBI, DOJ Over Trump Dossier

 

By DEBRA HEINE

SEPTEMBER 6, 2017

PJ Media

 

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., . (Photo By Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call) (CQ Roll Call via AP Images)

 

The House Intelligence Committee has subpoenaed the FBI and the Justice Department for documents relating to the Trump “dodgy dossier,” the Washington Examiner reported Tuesday evening. The committee is seeking information regarding the FBI’s relationship with dossier author Christopher Steele and its possible role in funding what started out as an opposition research project by shady lefty research firm Fusion GPS.

 

While it has been widely reported that “a wealthy GOP donor” originally funded the anti-Trump dossier, the managers of the Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, and John Kasich campaigns have all told the Examiner’s Byron York that they knew nothing about a GOP-funded oppo-research project on Trump. Meanwhile, Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson has refused to answer the question about who bankrolled the dossier.

 

The House Intel Committee is one of several congressional committees looking into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Additionally, Justice Department Special Counsel Robert Mueller is leading a separate investigation into alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

 

The subpoenas to the FBI and DOJ are a sign of the GOP’s frustration with the lack of cooperation they are getting from even the Trump Justice Department.

 

“I’m sure you’re noting with the same irony I’m noting the difficulty that a Republican Congress is having getting information from a Department of Justice run by Jeff Sessions,” Gowdy told York.

 

The committee issued the subpoenas — one to the FBI, an identical one to the Justice Department — on August 24, giving both until last Friday, September 1, to turn over the information.

 

Neither FBI nor Justice turned over the documents, and now the committee has given them an extension until September 14 to comply.

 

Illustrating the seriousness with which investigators view the situation, late Tuesday the committee issued two more subpoenas, specifically to FBI Director Christopher Wray and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, directing them to appear before the committee to explain why they have not provided the subpoenaed information.

 

The subpoenas are the result of a months-long process of committee investigators requesting information from the FBI and Justice Department. Beginning in May, the committee sent multiple letters to the FBI and Justice requesting information concerning the Trump-Russia affair.

 

“We got nothing,” said committee member Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., who is taking a leading role in the Russia investigation. “The witnesses have not been produced and the documents have not been produced.”

 

In a telephone interview Tuesday, Gowdy said the FBI has said it needed more time to comply, and also that complying might interfere with the investigation of special counsel Robert Mueller. Whatever the reason, the documents haven’t been produced.

 

“A subpoena is a tool of last resort in Congress,” Gowdy, a former federal prosecutor, said.

 

Like investigators with the Senate Judiciary Committee, who are also pursuing information about the dossier, the House committee wants to know the origin of the FBI’s involvement in the creation of the document. They are particularly interested to know whether the FBI or Justice Department ever presented information from the dossier — unverified, possibly from paid informants — to a court as a basis for obtaining a surveillance warrant in the Russia investigation.

 

“I want to know the extent to which it was relied upon, if at all, by any of our intelligence agencies or federal law enforcement agencies,” Gowdy said, “and to the extent it was relied upon, how did they vet, or either corroborate or contradict, the information in it?”

 

The House intelligence panel, like the Senate Judiciary Committee, has had so-called “de-confliction” discussions with Mueller’s office and believes the special counsel does not object to the House seeking information on the dossier.

 

The committee believes that seeking information on the origin of the FBI’s role in the dossier, and the bureau’s relationship with dossier compiler Steele, a former British spy, will lead to a better understanding of the FBI’s entire counter-intelligence probe on the question of Russian interference in the 2016 campaign.

 

“Several of our lines of questions centered on the dossier, or, if you don’t like the word ‘dossier,’ just insert ‘the origin of the Russia investigation,'” said Gowdy.

 

The former prosecutor seems determined to get to the bottom of the Trump dossier mystery.

 

“Congress created the FBI, we created the Department of Justice, we’re the ones who passed the laws that set the boundaries of their jurisdiction, and and we’re the ones that fund them,” he said. “It is not illegitimate for us to ask what prompted this investigation, and it is certainly not illegitimate for us to test and probe the reliability of that underlying information, particularly if, in theory, there are either charging decisions and/or court filings that relied upon that information.”

 

According to CNN, the reason the Justice Department has been been refusing compliance with the subpoenas is because they don’t want to interfere with the Mueller investigation.

 

VIDEO: House Subpoenas FBI and Justice Dept to get records on Trump-Russia Dossier. #Breaking #Russia

 

Posted by Almutaz Bur News Network

Published on Sep 5, 2017

______________

Copyright © 2005-2017 PJ Media All Rights Reserved.

 

About PJ Media

 

Remember the Corruption


John R. Houk

© September 5, 2017

 

President Trump is dealing with the current events going on at this very moment: Hurricane Harvey and Texas, North Korea launching missiles seemingly every other week insinuating a nuke-warhead, Russia-Russia-Russia, DACA repeal and more I am sure I have missed. We The People that put the President in Office, tend to forget the probable treasonous activities the Mainstream Media (MSM) has refused to look at for EIGHT YEARS.

 

That issue being submerged by current events is the obvious to me Obama Administration corruption that includes old Mr. Soetoro, Crooked Hillary, other Executive Branch player, former FBI Director Comey, Obama’s Intel agencies and let’s not forget the Non-Government Organization the Clinton Foundation pay-for-play collusion.

 

We must keep in our memory that America was controlled by probably the most criminally corrupt Presidency in our nation’s history. This is the reason Ben Shapiro’s very short article encouraging a legal investigation into Hillary, Obama, and Comey caught mu eye. The article is short but the reasoning is huge!

 

JRH 9/5/17

Please Support NCCR

***************

Time For A Full-Scale Investigation — Maybe Even A Special Counsel — On Hillary, Obama, and Comey

 

By BEN SHAPIRO

September 4, 2017

The Daily Wire

 

Last week, Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) released news that they’d found evidence that in April and May 2016, then-FBI Director James Comey prepared a statement letting former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton off the hook for her alleged mistreatment of classified information. As the senators noted, “As of early May 2016, the FBI had not yet interviewed Secretary Clinton. Moreover, it had yet to finish interviewing sixteen other key witnesses, including Cheryl Mills, Bryan Pagliano, Heather Samuelson, Justin Cooper and John Bentel. These individuals had intimate and personal knowledge relating to Secretary Clinton’s non-government server, including helping her build and administer the device.”

 

This is patently insane.

 

It’s particularly insane given the fact that Comey posed for years as a by-the-book, no-nonsense advocate for the law. But the fact is that Comey knew that no matter what happened, Attorney General Loretta Lynch would exonerate Hillary Clinton, and so he decided to take the heat off of Lynch and President Obama by putting his reputation on the line on their behalf. As Andy McCarthy puts it at National Review, this was exactly the same time period in which President Obama was publicly attempting to brush off the Hillary accusations. McCarthy writes:

 

The decision not to indict Hillary Clinton was not made by then-FBI Director Comey. It was made by President Obama and his Justice Department — Comey’s superiors. If you want to say Comey went along for the ride rather than bucking the tide (as he concedes doing when Lynch directed him to call the Clinton probe a “matter,” not an “investigation”), that’s fair. But the fact that Comey already knew in April what he would say in July has long been perfectly obvious. The Obama administration was going to follow its leader. What Comey ultimately stated was just a repeat of what Obama was openly saying in April, and what Obama’s Justice Department was leaking to the press in May.

 

This certainly calls for a full-scale investigation from the Justice Department. The media are consumed, day in and day out, with the possibility of quasi-obstruction of justice from the Trump administration regarding the Russia investigation; they’re speculating that Trump must have fired Comey to protect himself, that he’s impeding the investigation into former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, that his former campaign manager Paul Manafort might be pardoned by Trump in order to protect the president. But we saw activity at least as nefarious with President Obama and Hillary Clinton. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If Attorney General Jeff Sessions isn’t capable of taking on this investigation into Hillary and Obama and Comey, a special prosecutor should be appointed. It’s past due.

_________________

Remember the Corruption

John R. Houk

© September 5, 2017

_________________

Time For A Full-Scale Investigation — Maybe Even A Special Counsel — On Hillary, Obama, and Comey

 

© COPYRIGHT 2017, THE DAILY WIRE

 

Ben Shapiro is editor-in-chief of The Daily Wire and host of “The Ben Shapiro Show,” the top conservative podcast in the nation. Shapiro is the author of seven nonfiction books, including The New York Times bestseller Bullies: How the Left’s Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silences America (Simon & Schuster, 2012) and national bestsellers Brainwashed: How Universities Indoctrinate America’s Youth (WND Books, May 2004), Porn Generation: How Social Liberalism Is Corrupting Our Future (Regnery, June 2005), and Project President: Bad Hair and Botox on the Road to the White House (Thomas Nelson, 2008). Shapiro was hired by Creators Syndicate at age 17 to become the youngest nationally syndicated columnist in the U.S. He earned a BA in Political Science from UCLA in 2004 and graduated from Harvard Law School in 2007. After working as an attorney for Goodwin Procter LLP, Shapiro began his own legal consulting firm, Benjamin Shapiro Legal Consulting (Los Angeles).

 

Ben Shapiro’s columns are printed in major newspapers and websites including READ THE REST 

 

An Intro to … Reassign McMaster


Intro by John R. Houk

Intro © August 30, 2017

 

Yesterday I posted Justin Smith’s critique of National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster entitled “A Bitter Struggle”. Justin’s theme is the obvious purge of Trump loyalists from the Trump National Security teams and the incomprehensible protection of Obama holdovers.

 

If you read Justin’s submission, and you should, you must have come away wondering: Why in the world would President Trump allow people supportive of Obama’s destructive to the USA agenda to remain when the President promised to drain the swamp?

 

After you read Ryan Mauro’s “25 Reasons to Reassign General H.R. McMaster,” the question should be a question you cannot get out of your head.

 

I need to stipulate my position for clarity to show you where I stand. I’m a Conservative that subscribes to the Make America Great Again (MAGA) agenda and to be honest, I have some of the Neocon tendencies that lead to American Exceptionalism in foreign policy but have abandoned the concept of nation building in the Muslim world. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have proven that Western Concepts of Liberty and Islamic culture are totally inimical to each other. Yet a strong America needs a strong-superior military to enforce American National Interests.

 

Also, years of a cursory study of Islam has not on has shown that American Constitutional Liberty and Islamic theopolitical ideology are incompatible, but as a Christian I can say Islam revered writings are deceptively as well as completely immersed in Antichrist ideology. I’m a Christian but every single Jew should be aware the Islamic revered writings even have more hate for Jews than for Christians.

 

AND pertaining to Israel, I am a Christian Zionist that believes the entirety of the Land promised to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are to their descendants which today embodies the Jews. A term applied to all twelve tribes of the Hebrews that King David ruled as Israel. There NEVER has been a nation or national people called Palestinians.

 

Every single thing I mentioned – as you will soon discover – is something H.R. McMaster is diametrically opposed to!

 

JRH 8/30/17

Please Support NCCR

****************

25 Reasons to Reassign General H.R. McMaster

 

By RYAN MAURO 

August 27, 2017 

Clarion Project

 

National Security Adviser General H.R. McMaster is moving aggressively—and successfully—to maximize his power in the Trump Administration. President Trump is standing by his side as anti-Islamist writers and think-tanks like the Center for Security Policy call for his termination or reassignment.

 

McMaster’s ascent is a sudden change in the balance of power in the White House. President Trump was widely reported to be so disappointed with McMaster that Trump met with former U.N. ambassador John Bolton to discuss replacing him. Trump and Bolton concluded it was not the right move.

 

Then, Secretary of Homeland Security General John Kelly became the new chief of staff. He told McMaster that he wanted him to stay. McMaster’s chief rivals, Chief Strategist Steve Bannon and Deputy Assistant Dr. Sebastian Gorka, were then pressured into resigning.

 

The criticisms of McMaster are well-warranted and are not the fruits of overactive imaginations among bigoted “alt-right” smear-merchants, like Senator McCain characterizes them.

 

Here are 25 reasons that President Trump should fire National Security Adviser McMaster or, if he’s willing to, reassign him to a military position where he can excel on the battlefield as he did before.

 

  1. He is not on board with Trump’s vision of waging an ideological war against radical Islam (or whatever terminology you prefer).

 

You simply cannot have a national security adviser who is at odds with the fundamental pillar of your national security strategy.

 

In 2014, McMaster said that the “Islamic State is not Islamic.” He went so far as to describe jihadists as “really irreligious organizations.”

 

In that speech, he rejected the notion that jihadists are motivated by a religion-based ideology. Instead, he claimed they are motivated by “fear,” a “sense of honor” and their “interests,” which he described as the roots of human conflict for thousands of years. He recommended that the U.S. must begin “understanding those human dimensions.”

 

In May, McMaster stated in an interview that the jihadists “are not religious people.”

 

A source close to National Security Council (NSC) personnel revealed that McMaster opposed President Trump’s summit in Riyadh, one of the high points of his presidency thus far. McMaster felt it was “too ambitious.”

 

In Trump’s speech announcing his strategy for Afghanistan, words like “radical Islamic terrorism” were missing. This is clearly the influence of McMaster. In his resignation letter to Trump, Dr. Gorka referenced these omissions and said it “proves that a crucial element of your presidential campaign has been lost.”

 

Here’s the Clarion take:

 

VIDEO: The Politically Incorrect Raheel Raza

 

Posted by Clarion Project

Published on Mar 21, 2017

 

Raheel Raza says it like it is. If calling out radical Islam is politically incorrect then so be it. Raheel is bold enough to criticize and challenge radical Islam, are you?

 

  1. Endorsed a book favorable towards “non-militant” Islamists

In 2010, McMaster endorsed a book that states, as one of its central arguments, “It is the Militant Islamists who are our adversary…They must not be confused with Islamists.”

 

The book contends that our policy should not be aimed at Islamism overall but only Islamist terrorist groups. That is the mindset of those who advocate working with the “moderate” Muslim Brotherhood and the “moderate” Taliban.

 

McMaster describes the book as “excellent” and “deserv[ing] a wide readership.” Raymond Ibrahim reviewed the book and found serious errors, ones that now have dangerous consequences with McMaster as national security adviser.

 

 

  1. Opposes designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist Organization

 

Based on the above two issues, it should be no surprise that McMaster reportedly opposes designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

 

  1. Opposes a tough stance on Qatar’s support of terrorism and extremism

 

McMaster opposed President Trump’s tough stance on Qatar when our Arab allies confronted the tiny country, despite the sea of proof that our so-called “ally” is a major sponsor of Islamist terrorism and extremism, including the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and Al-Qaeda.

 

McMaster, like Secretary of Defense Mattis, was concerned about the U.S. base in Qatar.

 

This means that McMaster essentially supports allowing the Qatari government to use our own base—which protects them—to decide U.S. policies.

 

The UAE has recommended that we move the base. There are no indications that McMaster is advocating that we do that so we can exert more pressure Qatar in the future.

 

  1. The book endorsed by McMaster legitimizes Hamas

 

Aaron Klein, a senior Middle East reporter, read the book that McMaster endorsed as “excellent” and, shockingly, found that the author never characterizes Hamas as a terrorist group. Instead, the author refers to Hamas as an “Islamist political group” that is among Islamists “who do not fit into a neat category.”

 

“The question for Americans is whether Hamas is an Islamist or Militant Islamist group,” the author, Youssef H. Aboul-Enein, writes.

 

He’s as wrong as someone can possibly be wrong. Beside the fact that Hamas has been designated by the U.S. as a Foreign Terrorist Organization for 10 years, there is no question that Hamas is a terrorist group. In fact, there isn’t much of a substantive difference between Hamas and ISIS.

 

Aboul-Enein’s argument is that the U.S. should only target “Militant Islamists” and not more generic Islamists. By questioning whether Hamas qualifies as Militant Islamist, Aboul-Enein is questioning whether the U.S. should target Hamas.

 

The book also moves the reader away from understanding that Islamists’ preaching of armed jihad rests upon a strong theological foundation. Based on Klein’s description, the author makes it sound as if Islamists are motivated by reasonable grievances against policies and then sit down and conjure up a convoluted way to describe their violent response as “jihad.”

 

If we don’t acknowledge the deep theological basis of the Islamists’ worldview, we will not be able to effectively respond to the ideology and its related narratives.

 

There is an important side note as well: Klein points out that the author of the book is the chair of Islamic Studies at National Defense University (which is funded by the Department of Defense) and a senior adviser and analyst at the Defense Intelligence Agency’s Joint Intelligence Task Force for Combating Terrorism. This means that these views are being taught to very important students.

 

  1. McMaster believes terrorism is caused by disenfranchisement and lack of education

 

In his endorsement of the book, McMaster said, “Terrorist organizations use a narrow and irreligious ideology to recruit undereducated and disenfranchised people to their cause.”

 

Remember when the Obama Administration’s State Department spokeswoman was mocked by the left and the right for suggesting that ISIS needs to be countered by reducing unemployment and poverty?

 

That same view is held by our current national security adviser.

 

  1. Preserving the Iran deal

 

McMaster is in favor of keeping the nuclear deal with Iran. His position resulted in the U.S. certifying that Iran is in compliance with the terms of the agreement. By claiming that Iran has been obedient, it bolsters the regime’s credibility and makes America look worse if we leave the deal later.

 

Former CIA analyst Fred Fleitz was on a conference call with McMaster before it was certified and explained to McMaster how Iran is violating the deal. When Fleitz asked why the administration would certify Iranian compliance despite evidence of non-compliance, McMaster failed to give a direct answer.

 

  1. Failure to understand the Israeli-Palestinian theater of the war with Islamism

 

The ideological war against Islamism requires us to debunk Islamist propaganda against our allies.

 

It is now known that McMaster declined to defend our best ally in the Middle East when questioned about Israel’s conduct in its 2014 war with Hamas.

 

Israel’s extraordinary efforts to limit civilian casualties in the war have been well-documented. When McMaster was asked whether he would agree that the Israeli military fought ethically, he gave an incoherent answer and then admitted, “that’s kind of a non-answer, sorry, to your first question.”

 

McMaster tried to stop Trump from visiting the Western Wall in Jerusalem and, when he realized he couldn’t win that argument, pressured Trump not to go with any Israeli official. McMaster twice refused to answer whether the Western Wall is part of Israel, saying, “That’s a policy decision.”

 

The Conservative Review reported that McMaster refers to Israel as an “illegitimate,” “occupying power,” according to three current and former officials from Trump’s inner circle.

 

Senior Middle East Annalyst [sic] Caroline Glick substantiates the accounts with her own sources who describe McMaster as “deeply hostile” to Israel.

 

According to these reports, McMaster has characterized Israeli security measures as “excuses” to oppress Palestinians and Israeli-Arabs. These sources also claim that he is not supportive of U.S. support for Israeli counter-terrorism efforts and shut down a joint initiative aimed at Hezbollah.

 

The initiative was led by Derek Harvey, who McMaster fired (more on that later).

 

McMaster is a big reason why there are increasing danger signs for Israel from parts of the Trump Administration. This has been recognized by the Zionist Organization of America, which is asking for McMaster’s reassignment.

 

9.Appointing Kris Bauman as top National Security Council adviser on Israel.

 

Kris Bauman was chosen in May as the top adviser on Israel for the National Security Council. Journalist Daniel Greenfield reviewed Bauman’s 2009 dissertation and found highly disturbing content.

 

As Clarion reported earlier this month, Bauman blamed Israel and the West for failing to see “Hamas’s signals of willingness to moderate” and turning Gaza “into an open-air prison.” He advocated a policy that includes “Hamas in a solution,” dismissing Hamas’ oft-stated pledge to destroy Israel and kill Jews until the end of time.

 

In his dissertation, Bauman cites The Israel Lobby, a book that purports to disclose how Israel secretly manipulates the U.S. institutions of power from behind-the-scenes. He says the “Israel Lobby” “is a force that must be reckoned with, but it is a force that can be reckoned with.”

 

Bauman clearly depicts Israel as the aggressor in the Israel-Palestinian conflict, and, as Greenfield points out, equates Jewish settlers in the West Bank with Palestinian terrorists.

 

“It is true that one could make an analogous argument regarding Palestinian terrorism, but there is one major difference between the two. Israeli government control over settlement expansion is far greater than Palestinian Authority control over terrorism,” Bauman writes.

 

As to the failure of the “peace process,” he blames Israel as well as the West for its “overwhelmingly favored Israeli interests.” Prime Minister Netanyahu is blamed for “inciting Palestinian violence” and deliberately undermining the prospects for peace.

 

A consistent theme appears in Bauman’s thesis: Israel is the instigator of terrorism. To defeat terrorism, stop Israel. And now he is in a strong position in the National Security Council to try to make that happen.

 

  1. Insubordination and constant drama

 

McMaster goes beyond honestly expressing himself to the president and crosses into insubordination, undermining the president’s agenda and contributing to dysfunction.

 

A strong example of McMaster’s well-known temper and ego was published in May by a prominent author who recalled how McMaster “went a bit batshit” because of an article he wrote where 95% of the content celebrated McMaster’s remarkable success in Iraq.

 

The other five percent focused on his forces’ initial mistakes and “mediocre” performance before adapting to the situation. And that set McMaster off.  The author even quoted an expert who said McMaster’s success would become a “case study in classic counterinsurgency, the way it is supposed to be done.”

 

Even major supporters of McMaster who know him personally admit “he can be very intense.” The left-leaning Politico, which is more inclined to favor McMaster than his rivals, reports that his “temper is legendary” and he “frequently blows his top in high-level meetings.”

 

Politico described McMaster as an “increasingly volatile presence in the West Wing.” Three administration officials told the Daily Caller the same thing, with one describing the National Security Council as having a “poisonous environment.”

 

In addition to targeting Bannon and Gorka and anyone he sees as being in their camp, McMaster reportedly couldn’t even get along with Trump’s senior adviser and son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who should be on his team. (The relationship is said to have improved, though.)

 

He also clashes with Secretary of Defense Mattis over military matters and Afghanistan. Mattis gave a dismissive response to these charges, however.

 

At his very first National Security Council meeting, McMaster immediately told those under him that President Trump is wrong to use the term “radical Islam” because the terrorists are “un-Islamic.”

 

Right away, he got to work building a coalition to wage internal battles.

 

When it came time for Trump’s Joint Address to Congress, McMaster fought tooth and nail to stop him from using the “radical Islam” terminology. He wrote and widely distributed throughout the government a memo criticizing the president.

 

Trump was very open that this would be his view. If McMaster couldn’t stand it, then he shouldn’t have accepted the appointment.

 

When President Trump and Chief Strategist Bannon asked McMaster for a list of holdovers from the Obama Administration that may be leaking inappropriate information to the press, he refused to cooperate and to fire them. He said hiring and firing was his prerogative and that most would be leaving anyway.

 

When President Trump said South Korea would have to help cover the cost of a missile defense system to defend them from North Korea, McMaster immediately told the South Koreans that Trump’s words weren’t actual policy. Trump was furious and screamed at him on the phone.

 

Trump is said to have confronted McMaster about the “general undermining of my policy.”

 

McMaster has worked hard to expand his fan club in the Trump Administration at the expense of those he disagrees with, particularly those closest to the president’s views.

 

The Washington Free Beacon reported earlier this month, “A White House official said McMaster appears to be trying to clear out anyone from the NSC staff who is outspokenly pro-Trump and has been slow-rolling the president’s directives that he disagrees with.”

 

In his resignation letter, Dr. Gorka wrote to Trump, “Regrettably, outside of yourself, the individuals who most embodied and represented the policies that will ‘Make America Great Again,’ have been internally countered, systematically removed, or undermined in recent months.”

 

As these internal battles have been waged, a steady stream of derogatory leaks have appeared in the media. Bannon has been blamed for anti-McMaster coverage at Breitbart, but McMaster somehow isn’t blamed for the leaks favorable to his side that appeared in the mainstream media. The pro-McMaster leaks substantiate why top generals saw him as a “publicity hound” in the military who advanced because of his closeness to General Petraeus.

 

  1. Pushing out Chief Strategist Steve Bannon

 

On issues related to Islamism, Bannon was an important voice to have in the White House. He was a main proponent of designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist Organization and of waging an ideological war on Islamism.

 

Bannon understood the need to promote Muslim reform versus McMaster’s promotion of “non-Militant” Islamists. Shortly before his resignation on August 18, Bannon met with Dr. Daniel Pipes and Gregg Roman of the Middle East Forum, one of the most effective anti-Islamist organizations and promoters of Muslim modernist reformers.

 

Bannon was McMaster’s top target. McMaster had forced out many officials that he felt were too close to Bannon, personally and politically, apparently attempting to monopolize power as much as possible. After resigning, Bannon said, “No administration in history has been so divided.”

 

Bannon disagreed with McMaster on the April 6 airstrike on a Syrian airbase and the new strategy for Afghanistan. Although there are serious merits to the airstrikes and the new strategy for Afghanistan, it is absolutely essential to have the views Bannon represents be a part of the decision-making process. A good teammate can disagree with a decision but still improve the option that is ultimately chosen.

 

  1. Pressuring Dr. Sebastian Gorka to resign

 

Dr. Sebastian Gorka, the deputy assistant to the president and author of Defeating Jihadresigned reportedly due to pressure from McMaster and Chief of Staff Kelly.

 

Gorka and Bannon were the main proponents of designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

 

Gorka is best known as the man who flattens the media like a human bulldozer. These viral TV segments earned the adoration of President Trump, who personally intervened to stop plans by his senior adviser and son-in-law, Jared Kushner, to move Gorka out of the White House and to a federal agency.

 

Trump’s satisfaction with Gorka and his success in handling the media should be considered important assets for an administration that struggles with messaging and perception. His book shows he is focused on a long-term plan for victory over Islamism.

 

Unfortunately for him, Chief of Staff Kelly disagreed with Trump and was reportedly “displeased” with Gorka’s popular television segments and McMaster saw him as part of the Team Bannon that he sought to conquer.

 

Gorka was also probably seen as too much of a political liability, as he had become the victim of one of the most vicious and meritless smear campaigns in recent memory.

 

However, Gorka’s media appearances, input and the ridiculousness of his enemies made him a political asset.

 

  1. Sidelining K.T. McFarland

 

Shortly after McMaster took his post, Deputy National Security Adviser K.T. McFarland was transferred out. McMaster had the leading role in making it happen.

 

She became the ambassador to Singapore; not exactly a position where her national security experience is being used to its full potential. Among her viewpoints is supporting designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

 

  1. Firing Ezra Cohen-Watnick

 

McMaster wanted to fire Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the senior director for intelligence programs at the National Security Council, right from the start. Watnick was initially saved by Bannon and Kushner.

 

Before joining the government, Cohen-Watnick organized an “Islamo-Fascism Awareness” event on his campus. He understands the issue of Islamist extremism and is passionate about it.

 

Watnick joined the Defense Intelligence Agency in 2010, became an intelligence officer and left in January 2017 for his senior National Security Council spot. He is believed to have entered the Defense Clandestine Service in 2012 and went to the CIA’s training facility known as “The Farm” in Virginia. He obviously had a strong background.

 

He was brought into the NSC by former National Security Adviser Mike Flynn and, therefore, was seen as an ally of the Bannon-Gorka team inside the administration.

 

We don’t know much about what Watnick advocated while in the National Security Council aside from expanding U.S. operations against Iranian-backed militias in Syria.

 

Watnick was accused of improperly sharing intelligence with Rep. Devin Nunes, but there is disagreement over whether he did anything wrong. However, we know McMaster wanted to get rid of him right from the beginning, so this was probably just a good opportunity for a power play.

 

  1. Trying to Hire Linda Weissgold

 

McMaster had already begun interviewing CIA official Linda Weissgold as Watnick’s replacement before Bannon and Kushner initially stopped him.

 

Under the Obama Administration, Weissgold was the director of the CIA’s Office of Terrorism Analysis. That means she was responsible for the false talking points about the terrorist attack in Benghazi in September 2012.

 

  1. Firing Retired Col. Derek Harvey

 

Last month, McMaster fired President Trump’s top Middle East adviser from the National Security Council. The reason, as explained by one senior White House official, is that McMaster “wants his own guy.”

 

Harvey had an exemplary record and was thought to have a good relationship with McMaster, going back to when they served together under General Petraeus. He was described as one of Petraeus’ “most trusted intelligence advisors in Iraq” during the remarkably successful surge that turned the situation around.

 

Harvey was fired because of policy differences and McMaster’s desire to win the internal power struggle and cement his group over the National Security Council. McMaster and Harvey disagreed on “nearly every” area, particularly when it came to radical Islam and Iran. Harvey advocated working more closely with Israel, Egyptian President Sisi and Saudi Arabia.

 

Harvey had also put together a proposal for how the Trump Administration could scrap the nuclear deal with Iran. McMaster “blasted” his performance on Iran policy but according to a senior official who spoke to the left-wing Daily Beast, Harvey “was stuck in a Catch-22 situation” because lower-level staff dragged their feet in helping him.

 

According to the Weekly Standard—a publication that is certainly not in the Bannon/Trump camp—McMaster fired him because he didn’t like how close Harvey was to Bannon. Another detailed account said McMaster was also irked by his closeness to Kushner.

 

The most complete story says that McMaster directly told Harvey not to get too close to Bannon and Kushner. Shortly before he was fired, McMaster saw him leaving Bannon’s office. The sources say Harvey actually didn’t talk to Bannon too much, but McMaster had asked for information about Trump’s foreign policy priorities and that necessitated a meeting with Bannon.

 

McMaster saw Harvey at Bannon’s office on a Friday. When Monday came around, McMaster’s executive officer, Ylli Bajraktari (a Pentagon official from the Obama Administration) reminded Harvey it is not a “good idea” to talk to Bannon. He was fired four days later.

 

One other report states that Defense Secretary Mattis complained to McMaster about Harvey. The more exhaustive account based on sources close to Harvey dispute elements of that account.

 

  1. Replacing Harvey with Michael Bell

 

McMaster replaced Harvey with Michael Bell, who was the National Security Council’s director for Persian Gulf affairs.

 

Not surprisingly, Bell is on record for harshly criticizing then-Deputy Assistant Dr. Sebastian Gorka to the Washington Post. Bell claimed that Gorka was too biased on Islam-related issues, stopping just a few steps shy of hitting him with the “Islamophobe” label.

 

Clearly, McMaster was picking a team to go to war with the White House. There’s no other way to interpret this decision.

 

  1. Ousting of Adam Lovinger

 

In May, National Security Counil [sic] analyst Adam Lovinger had his security clearance revoked for unclear reasons that Lovinger described as “puzzling and baseless.” He was then fired.

 

Lovinger was at the council on loan from the Pentagon’s Office of Net Assessment, where he had served as a strategic affairs analyst for 12 years. He was a known Trump supporter and was brought into the council by Flynn. Therefore, he would have been seen by McMaster as a Bannon ally.

 

Caroline Glick described Lovinger as a “seasoned strategic analyst” who clashed with McMaster because he favored India over Pakistan. He also opposed the nuclear deal with Iran and supported the use of terminology like “radical Islam.”

 

Lovinger confirmed that his conservative views on foreign policy had irked bureaucrats, and he believes his clearance was taken away for political reasons.

 

The Washington Free Beacon reported on May 1 that “security clearances granting access to state secrets have become increasingly politicized in a bid by opponents to block senior advisers to President Trump.”

 

Another example of this happening is Robin Townley, who held a top secret clearance and was picked by former National Security Adviser Mike Flynn as the council’s senior director for Africa. The CIA declined to grant him the necessary security clearance for Sensitive Compartmented Information. A source close to Townley said it was a politically-motivated “hit job.

 

  1. Ousting Tera Dahl

 

Tera Dahl, the National Security Council’s deputy chief of staff, transferred out of the council in June. She will likely be working at the U.S. Agency for International Development.

 

Dahl was a writer for Breitbart and therefore seen as belonging to Bannon’s camp. She also co-founded a foreign policy think tank with Katharine Gorka, wife of now-former Deputy Assistant Sebastian Gorka (Katharine Gorka is currently an official adviser to the Department of Homeland Security’s policy office.)

 

Dahl was especially interested in Egypt. She is supportive of Egyptian President el-Sisi, arguing that his actions are helping to transition the country towards democracy and stability. She visited Egypt and believes he is getting unfair treatment by some Western media outlets and think-tanks who want to demonize him and exonerate his Muslim Brotherhood enemies.

 

The left-wing Buzzfeed described the change as a result of warring factions inside the White House over foreign policy. It explained, “The move frees up National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster to install another staffer of his choosing in his drive to reshape the NSC to his liking.”

 

Dahl is said to have expressed interest in transferring because she was close to National Security Council Chief of Staff Keith Kellogg, whose tensions with McMaster have “created an uncomfortable working environment at the NSC.”

 

The council’s spokesperson Michael Anton claims “it was always her intent to move into a policy role once this task [at NSC] was completed.”

 

  1. Firing Rich Higgins

 

McMaster and/or his deputy, Ricky Waddell, fired the NSC’s director of strategic planning, Rich Higgins, on July 21.

 

Higgins has an extensive background of national security service and has a deep understanding of the Islamist ideology, its associated doctrines and how it interacts with political movements that Islamists find common cause with.

 

Higgins had a deep understanding of the Muslim Brotherhood and how Islamists got political access and impacted policy under the Bush and Obama Administrations. He studied how political correctness had resulted in cleansing counter-terrorism training and national security policy documents from references to the ideological basis of the threat.

 

Higgins was pushing for the declassification of documents related to radical Islam and Iran and, more specifically, Presidential Study Directive 11. He had good reason to do so.

 

There were reports that the previous administration was not disclosing important documents, including ones from Bin Laden’s compounds that contradicted its narratives about the nature of the Al-Qaeda threat and the group’s relationship with Iran.

 

Presidential Study Directive 11 is reportedly an assessment of Islamist movements in 2010-2011 by the Obama Administration that resulted in a secret recommendation to align with “moderate” Islamists in handling the Arab Spring.

 

If this is indeed what happened, the directive’s declassification is of the utmost importance for understanding the Islamist threat, the fruits of this strategy and the dynamics of the region, not to mention historical documentation.

 

Alarmingly, according to a Gulf News report, the Presidential Study Directive 11 documents were obtained by the Al-Hewar Center in Washington, D.C. and show that the U.S. decided to back the “political Islamists” including the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

Daniel Greenfield reported that the Al-Hawre Center is linked to a Muslim Brotherhood front named the International Institute of Islamic Thought, which has come under counter-terrorism investigation.

 

McMaster reportedly detonated” after coming across a seven-page memo that Higgins wrote which warned about a campaign by Islamists, Marxists, “bankers,” establishment Republicans and “globalists” to destroy the Trump presidency. The memo was given to Donald Trump Jr. and the president himself, who is said to have “gushed over it.”

 

Such a political memo would be inappropriate for the National Security Council. Its tone gives the impression of an author who sees all opposition to the Trump Administration as part of a seditious conspiracy. Its first reference is an interview between a member of the conspiratorial John Birch Society and a Soviet defector about “Jewish Marxist ideology.”

 

However, the memo was not intended for the NSC. It was a personal political analysis of how parties with various interests are trying to undermine the administration’s agenda.

 

According to Breitbart, Higgins used his personal computer to write the memo and did not use NSC time. He didn’t even use his NSC email to send it to anyone but himself. (He sent it from his personal email to his work email to print out.)

 

Another comprehensive Breitbart account says Higgins was fired on July 21 with several holdovers from the Obama Administration present and a Muslim woman with a hijab who worked as an equal employment officer. McMaster’s deputy, Ricky Waddell, told him it was his last day because “we’ve lost confidence in you.”

 

According to this account, McMaster was not responsible for the firing and hadn’t even read the memo. It was entirely the responsibility of Waddell. After the termination, parts of the memo were leaked to media outlets that would be most hostile to Higgins.

 

Regardless of whether Higgins’ firing was due to McMaster or Waddell, it was still done under McMaster’s leadership and was part of a broader push against perceived competitors.

President Trump was said to be “furious” at Higgins’ firing.

 

  1. CAIR Comes to McMaster’s Defense

 

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is a deceptive Islamist bulldog that tears into any opponent by falsely branding them as an Islamophobic bigot. The Justice Department identified the organization as a Muslim Brotherhood “entity” set up to support Hamas and designated it as an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism-financing trial.

 

CAIR slaps the “Islamophobe” label on practically everyone, obviously including almost every member of the Trump Administration. It has done so to Muslim adversaries, President Obama, Hillary Clinton, Democratic supporters of gun control measures to stop terrorists from obtaining firearms and White House Chief of Staff Kelly whose name was referenced in a letter thanking CAIR’s Florida branch.

 

But not McMaster.

 

When McMaster came under heavy criticism for his stances on Islamism-related issues, CAIR came to his defense. It branded his opponents as “Islamophobes” and “white supremacists.”

 

  1. Reports of a possible CAIR official on his staff

 

Ayaan Hirsi Ali from presenting a paper on Islamist extremism to the National Security Council. There are unconfirmed reports that it was one of McMaster’s appointees who blocked Hirsi Ali. One account of the incident says she was also blocked from seeing President Trump.

 

Hirsi Ali is one of the most prominent women’s rights activists and anti-Islamist voices in the world. She is executive producer of the Clarion Project’s Honor Diaries documentary about the oppression of women in the Muslim world. She is a strong advocate for secular-democratic Muslim reformers.

 

The person who is said to have blocked her is Mustafa Javed Ali, who protested that she is an “Islamophobe.” According to one of the reports, a source said that Mustafa said “that the only way she could present the paper would be to have someone from CAIR come in to refute her work.”

 

Mustafa Javed Ali is reportedly a former “diversity outreach coordinator” for CAIR. However, there is no public confirmation to confirm this as his name does not appear on CAIR’s website.

 

  1. Holdovers

 

An analysis by the Daily Caller found that about 40 of the 250 National Security Council officials are holdovers from the Obama Administration. Presumably, these officials would be very hostile to the Trump Administration’s agenda. They should be the first suspects in the ongoing stream of leaks from the NSC.

 

National security expert Jed Babbin identified four NSC officials who previously reported directly to Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes, the Obama Administration official who boasted of creating an “echo chamber” in the media to promote the nuclear deal with Iran using “compadres” in the media to influence reporters who “literally know nothing.”

 

(Rhodes also has the distinct honor of being the only person to be called an “asshole” in the headline of a Foreign Policy article.)

 

In July, McMaster told NSC staffers, “There’s no such thing as a holdover.” He was professing confidence that those who worked in the Obama Administration would loyally serve President Trump.

 

Likewise, NSC spokesperson Michael Anton defended the holdovers as “stalwarts.”

 

As mentioned before, when Trump and Bannon asked McMaster for a list of holdovers that may be leaking to the press, he refused to cooperate and to fire them. He said hiring and firing was his prerogative and that most would be leaving anyway.

 

One former NSC staffer told the Daily Caller that McMaster has “protected and coddled them.”

 

Iran expert and Nobel Peace Prize nominee Ken Timmerman wrote a book titled Shadow Warriors in 2007 about how the Bush Administration was undermined by opponents within the governmental bureaucracies.

 

Timmerman’s observation should serve as a contemporary warning:

 

“George W. Bush never got the first rule of Washington: People are policy. He allowed his political enemies to run roughshod over his administration through a vast underground he never dismantled and never dominated.”

 

  1. McMaster was an 11-Year Member of the International Institute for Strategic Studies

 

Breitbart discovered that McMaster was a member of the International Institute for Strategic Studies from September 2006 until February 2017 when he became national security adviser. IISS was part of a campaign to promote the nuclear deal with Iran and gets funding from Islamist allies.

 

Its website shows that one of its top donors is the Open Society Foundation, formerly named the Open Society Institute, whose founder and chairman is left-wing partisan activist George Soros. The foundation donated between 100,000 and 500,000 euros (roughly $120,000-$600,000) to the IISS.

 

The Open Society Foundation is motivated by hyper-partisanship and works hard to defend American Islamists and slander opponents of the Muslim Brotherhood as bigots.

 

For example, it financed the Fear Inc. reports about the “Islamophobia Network” that is a powerful weapon in the Islamists’ and Regressive Left’s arsenal for character assassination and protecting groups like CAIR.

 

These reports were used to justify the removal of Islamism from counter-terrorism training.

 

IISS also has Ploughshares Fund as a major donor, giving between 25,000 and 100,000 euros (about $30,000-$119,000). The Plougshares Fund is also funded by Soros and his entities like Open Society.

 

When Ben Rhodes boasted about orchestrating the “echo chamber” to promote the nuclear deal with Iran, he specifically mentioned Ploughshares as his example of an outside group he utilized.

 

The president of Ploughshares, Joseph Cirincione, is a member of the International Institute for Strategic Studies. Plougshares specifically listed IISS, the group that McMaster belonged to, as the recipient of a grant for work on Iran issues in 2016.

 

Soros’ Open Society Foundation/Institute donated about $70,000 overall to selling the Iran deal, but other entities funded by Soros gave more. Ploughshares donated at least $800,000.

 

Ploughshares also donated over $400,000 to the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), which has long been accused of being a lobby for the Iranian regime. Ploughshares also awarded $70,000 to Princeton University to sponsor the work of former Iranian regime official Seyed Hossein Mousavian. The Heritage Foundation’s James Phillips writes, “This essentially amounted to subsidizing Iran’s propaganda efforts inside the United States.”

 

As Breitbart’s Aaron Klein shows, IISS was a loyal contributor to the Rhodes-Plougshares “echochamber.” It supported the deal and defended Iran against accusations of violations. It cast doubt on concerns that Iran and North Korea work on WMD together. And it criticized Trump’s attitude towards Iran.

 

IISS also receives funding from many companies that profited from the Iran deal like ExxonMobil. Its list of donors includes many governments, both allies and adversaries of the U.S.

Governmental donors of concern include Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Brunei, Kuwait, Russia and China.

 

  1. President Trump is frequently unhappy with McMaster’s performance.

 

As mentioned before, President Trump has confronted McMaster about his “general undermining of my policy” and was furious at him for telling South Korea to basically ignore Trump’s words.

 

Trump complains that McMaster talks too much at meetings and has described him as a “pain.” There have been multiple articles indicating that Trump might be on the cusp of firing McMaster.

 

“I am at a pain to find an issue that H.R. actually aligns with the president, except for the desire to actually win and beat ISIS. That’s the only one,” said one administration official.

 

A former senior NSC official said, “I know that the president isn’t a big fan of what McMaster’s doing. I don’t understand why he’s allowing a guy who is subverting his foreign policy at every turn to remain in place.”

 

Trump has reportedly said in private that he regrets choosing McMaster as national security adviser and went so far as to meet with former U.N. ambassador John Bolton to float the possibility of him replacing McMaster. Bolton and Trump agreed that it was not the right move.

 

Conclusion

 

McMaster has put his life on the line for the country and ascended because of his impressive leadership during the worst days of the war in Iraq. He “basically was the first commander to get things right in Iraq.”

 

At the time, McMaster blasted the media for its downplaying of Iran’s role in murdering U.S. troops.

 

This led to many people’s (including this author’s) initial enthusiasm for him as national security adviser despite his statement in 2014 that the “Islamic State is not Islamic.”

 

Thinking it unfathomable that Trump would choose someone who is so fundamentally at odds with his national security vision, many chalked up the statement to a clumsy articulation of the U.S. position that ISIS shouldn’t be treated as the representative of the Muslim world.

 

But what was once unfathomable has become reality.

 

McMaster performed well as a military commander fighting an insurgency. If he is to continue serving the Trump Administration, then he should be reassigned to focus on taking his success in Iraq and repeating it in Afghanistan.

 

Also Read: 

 

Has Trump Kept His Word on Radical Islam?

 

The Nikki Haley Report Card

_______________

An Intro to … Reassign McMaster

Intro by John R. Houk

Intro © August 30, 2017

_____________

25 Reasons to Reassign General H.R. McMaster

 

Ryan Mauro is ClarionProject.org’s Shillman Fellow and national security analyst and an adjunct professor of counter-terrorism. He is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio.

 

The Clarion Project (formerly Clarion Fund) is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization dedicated to educating both policy makers and the public about the growing phenomenon of Islamic extremism. The Clarion Project is committed to working towards safeguarding human rights for all peoples.

 

Copyright 2017 Clarion Project Inc. All Rights Reserved

 

About Clarion Project

 

President Pardons Arpaio, Speaker Ryan Grumbles


John R. Houk

© August 27, 2017

 

President has pardoned Joe Arpaio from a Leftist Judge convicting him of contempt for not standing down to enforcing immigration law. I wasn’t surprised that the Leftist MSM and the Dems went to fits over the pardon. BUT I am extremely disappointed that Speaker of the House Paul Ryan condemned the President’s pardon.

 

I have been willing to give Rep. Ryan the benefit of the doubt in his part-time negativity to the Trump agenda. I have felt he had been a man that stuck to his principles before politics.

 

Ryan’s condemnation of the Arpaio pardon means he is placing politics over Conservative principles. NOW I am on the dump Ryan as House Speaker train.

 

JRH 8/27/17

Please Support NCCR

**************

Donald Trump Pardons Sheriff Joe Arpaio

 

By CHARLIE SPIERING

25 Aug 2017

Breitbart Big Government

 

Donald Trump & Joe Arpaio

 

President Donald Trump pardoned Sheriff Joe Arpaio on Friday evening, citing his record of service to his country.

 

“Arpaio’s life and career, which began at the age of 18 when he enlisted in the military after the outbreak of the Korean War, exemplifies selfless public service,” read a statement from the White House.

 

The Arizona sheriff, now 85-years-old, is considered a hero among supporters of immigration enforcement. Arpaio served in the Army before becoming a police officer in Washington DC and Las Vegas and a special agent in the DEA. He became the Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona in 1992.

 

“After more than fifty years of admirable service to our Nation, he is worthy candidate for a Presidential pardon,” the statement concluded.

 

Arpaio was convicted in July 2017 for violating a federal judge’s order to not detain suspected illegal immigrants. He faced up to six months in jail for the conviction and possible fines.

 

Arpaio endorsed Donald Trump for president in January 2016, as he was campaigning against primary challengers in Iowa.

 

“I have fought on the front lines to prevent illegal immigration,” Arpaio said when he endorsed Trump. “I know Donald Trump will stand with me and countless Americans to secure our border.”

 

++++++++++++

Paul Ryan breaks with Trump to condemn pardon of Joe Arpaio

 

By Kyle Feldscher

Aug 26, 2017, 6:15 PM

Washington Examiner

 

House Speaker Paul Ryan, left, sips from a Boeing mug as he sits with the Boeing Co. CEO Dennis Muilenburg Thursday, Aug. 24, 2017, in Everett, Wash. Ryan toured the factory before speaking with and taking questions from some workers there, mostly on tax reform. (AP Photo/Elaine Thompson)

 

House Speaker Paul Ryan is breaking with President Trump over the latter’s decision to pardon former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio on Friday.

 

“The speaker does not agree with the decision,” said spokesman Doug Andres. “Law-enforcement officials have a special responsibility to respect the rights of everyone in the United States. We should not allow anyone to believe that responsibility is diminished by this pardon.”

 

Ryan becomes the highest-ranking GOP lawmaker to break with Trump over the decision to pardon Arpaio, who was convicted of contempt of court for refusing to stop detaining Latinos on suspicion of being illegal immigrants.

 

The decision was announced Friday and has been roundly criticized by Democrats and some Republicans, including both Arizona senators.

 

Arpaio was a political surrogate for Trump on the campaign trail and it was widely believed Trump would announce his pardon during a rally in Phoenix Tuesday night.

 

While Trump demurred at the idea of announcing the pardon then — he said he didn’t want to create controversy — the decision was eventually announced as Hurricane Harvey bore down on the southeastern Texas coast Friday night.

 

It’s Trump’s first pardon and it’s one of the earliest first pardons for a president in modern administrations.

_____________

President Pardons Arpaio, Speaker Ryan Grumbles

John R. Houk

© August 27, 2017

__________

Donald Trump Pardons Sheriff Joe Arpaio

 

Copyright © 2017 Breitbart

____________

Paul Ryan breaks with Trump to condemn pardon of Joe Arpaio

 


Copyright 2017. Washington Examiner. All Rights Reserved.

 

An Intro: Continuing U.S. Marxist Sedition Exposé


John R. Houk

© August 26, 2017

 

I’d like to reiterate that the White Supremacists in America are an incipient evil. Their efforts to protect American history would be commendable EXCEPT for one simple fact. These guys are complete racists that hate anybody who is not White, they hate Jews and Christians that don’t identify with the racist religious ideology of White Identity.

 

The only legitimate criticism the Left MSM has is that sincere people protesting historical cleansing with the Neo-Nazis and White Identity racists are idiots for associating with the racists. It’s legitimate to protest historical cleansing but it is STUPID to protest with morons whose goal is to protect the slave mentality of Southern Antebellum America.

 

The Leftist MSM is ABSOLUTELY illegitimate in not pointing out the nefarious goals of the Marxist oriented Antifa and Black Lives Matter (BLM).

 

I’ve been so annoyed by the Left’s brainwashing of the American public that Antifa and BLM goals are lofty and valuable to the values of American culture.\

 

Antifa and BLM have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to with American values or the Constitutional Liberty instituted by our Founding Fathers!

 

That being said, this is not first post exposing the Marxist orientation of Antifa and BLM. Here are past posted titles posted on my blogs:

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am adding to the Antifa exposé with a cross post from both BPR and the Daily Caller (the BPR post sources Daily Caller but there are enough differences to use them both). Beginning with BPR, here we go.

 

JRH 8/26/17

Please Support NCCR

***************

New militant Antifa wing gets seriously organized, calls for revolution and releases list of goals

 

By Carmine Sabia 

August 24, 2017

BizPac Review

 

An armed Antifa group is fundraising to support the building o a new cell in Philadelphia.

 

And the alt-left media is helping it by publishing its press release calling for “abolitionism and revolutionary anarchism” to “decisively eradicate the abhorrence of 21st century slavery.”

 

What is 21st century slavery?

 

According to the group’s website, it is the prison system. The group, known as the Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement (RAM) intends to use some of its funds raised to create an “underground railroad” to help people “escape the state.”

 

Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement screemshot

 

In other words they intend to use an underground railroad to help criminals escape because the group believes that “the Civil War was never resolved and the system of slavery transitioned into the prison industrial complex.”

 

RAM sees the police as the enemy and praises Black Panther Mumia Abu Jamal who, in 1981, murdered police officer Daniel Faulkner.

 

It also cites fellow cop killer Russell Maroon Shoatz, as a part of “Philadelphia’s rich revolutionary tradition.”

 

RAM terrorist video Screenshot

 

RAM hosts workshops specifically against police titled “Our Enemies in Blue.”

 

The group’s website also seeks to abolish of gender and calls for its members to steal tools and lands so that it can build its own state, independent of the United States.  RAM also plans to build local “defense teams” and councils as well as national councils.

 

The group models its movement on the far left Rojava Revolution in Syria, and praises communism as providing a “foundation in communal and council based political organization and militant defense.”

 

A website video rife with anarchy and violence heavily hints at an armed revolution to destroy the government.

 

RAM support of Syrian Islamic Terrorists screenshot

 

Trump’s economic advisor Gary Cohn is currently under fire for praising Antifa as “citizens standing up for equality and freedom.”

 

Does RAM sound like that to you?

 

Emotional Sanders barely gets through powerful letter sent from father to his deployed soldier son [Blog Editor: “Emotional Sanders …” really has nothing to do with the Antifa post but included because it is part of the post.]

 

[Blog Editor: BPR placed their own copy of a RAM video promoting violence in America. It’s easier to embed in Youtube, which is below]

 

VIDEO: Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement Video

Posted by Brooklyn Base

Published on May 19, 2017

 

The Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement is a political movement dedicated to freeing people from bondage and building anarchist resistance.

 

h/t: Daily Caller.

+++

Antifa Has A New Cell In Philly, And They’re Calling For Property Seizures, Violence On Police, And All-Out Revolution

 

By Ian Miles Cheong

08/24/2017 6:45 PM

The Daily Caller

 

An armed Antifa group is launching a new cell in Philadelphia, with support from the “alt-left” alternative media.

 

The group currently hosts anti-police workshops called “Our Enemies in Blue.” The group draws inspiration from convicted murderers and calls for violence against the police, theft of goods, and armed insurrection.

 

Antifa websites like It’s Going Down, Sub.Media and Insurrection News have been promoting the group, which calls itself the Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement, calling on their readers to donate to a Fundrazr account for the creation of the new cell.

 

The press release the group published in far-left media is filled with hyperbolic claims about how “mosques are being ruthlessly bombed” and how “LGBTQ are being battered.”

 

“The destruction of black life continues unabated as millions languish in the plantations of the modern day slave system,” the group states.

 

Taking pride in the “legacy” of “Philadelphia’s rich revolutionary tradition,” RAM cites Mumia Abu Jamal, the Black Panther activist who shot and killed Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner in 1981.

 

It also cites Russell Shoats, who shot a police officer in the back five times in 1970. Similar to Antifa, the actions of the Black Panthers have been described as having a “very undefined purpose of assaulting police officers.”

 

Like other Antifa groups, RAM claims to oppose the usual -isms and white supremacy, but a quick look at the organization’s “Political Foundation” page, as highlighted by Far Left Watch, notes the inclusion of several alarming points, including the “Abolition of Gender,” and the “Expropriation and the Cooperative Economy.”

 

Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement (Screenshot: RAM website)

 

The latter calls on members to “expropriate” or “take away” goods, lands, and tools to “begin the revolutionary process.” Expropriation is another way of saying “seize” or “steal.”

 

The organization models itself after the so-called Rojava Revolution, a leftist guerilla [sic] movement currently active in northern Syria. RAM states that the communists offer a “foundation in communal and council based political organization and militant defense.”

 

The organizations within the Rojava Revolution are currently involved in combat against ISIS.

 

Far Left Watch notes that RAM has been hosting a variety of anti-police workshops including a “Legal Training” workshop, a class on the “Introduction to Anarchism,” and one called “Our Enemies in Blue,” which deals with anti-police action–or how to handle police officers during violent clashes.

 

Despite active calls for violence against law enforcement and revolution against the government, the liberal media has been surprisingly lenient in its coverage of Antifa, depicting them as righteous crusaders against the rise of white supremacy.

 

Ian Miles Cheong is a journalist and outspoken media critic. You can reach him through social media at @stillgray on Twitter and on Facebook.

_____________

An Intro: Continuing U.S. Marxist Sedition Exposé

John R. Houk

© August 26, 2017

______________

New militant Antifa wing gets seriously organized, calls for revolution and releases list of goals

 

Carmine Sabia Jr started his own professional wrestling business at age 18 and went on to become a real estate investor. Currently he is a pundit who covers political news and current events.

 

Copyright © 2017 All Rights Reserved BizPac Review

 

About BizPac Review

________________

Antifa Has A New Cell In Philly, And They’re Calling For Property Seizures, Violence On Police, And All-Out Revolution

 

© Copyright 2010 – 2017 | The Daily Caller

 

About The Daily Caller

 

BILL CLINTON’S CHILDHOOD FRIEND: HILLARY IN NO POSITION TO COMPLAIN OF ‘CREEPY’ MEN


Crooked Hillary recently released her new book called “What Happened”. Personally, I have NO intention of reading a book by a compulsive liar who acts as if she is above the law with the full support of the Dem Party and the Left Stream Media.

 

Crooked Hillary’s book has an audio version narrated by her arrogant self. It is the narrated version that is causing such a stir among the Leftist Mainstream Media (MSM) and Fox News (still the better of them even though the network appears to be excising their Conservative stalwarts).

 

The news media is focusing on the narration in which Crooked Hillary vividly describes one of the Presidential debates by calling future President a breathing down her neck creep.

 

Joseph Farah sent me an email highlighting a WND post that shows Crooked Hillary is not exactly a reliable witness of what a real creep looks like. Can you say Slick Willie Clinton?

 

The WND article hits two birds with one stone. In showing Crooked Hillary what a real creep looks like, the article also pushes a Slick Willie victim’s book “HILLARY THE OTHER WOMAN: A POLITICAL MEMOIR,” by the victim Dolly Kyle.

JRH 8/25/17

Please Support NCCR

*****************

BILL CLINTON’S CHILDHOOD FRIEND: HILLARY IN NO POSITION TO COMPLAIN OF ‘CREEPY’ MEN

Dolly Kyle on why twice-failed Dem hopeful can’t and won’t just ‘go away’

 

August 24, 2017

WND

 

 

In her new election memoir “What Happened,” former Democratic Party presidential nominee Hillary Clinton says her “skin crawled” during a debate with Republican nominee Donald Trump.

 

She claims she wanted to tell Trump “back up, you creep, get away from me” and that she had to hold the microphone “extra hard” to keep her composure.

 

But some women aren’t buying Clinton’s attempt at playing the victim.

 

Among them is Dolly Kyle, childhood friend of “Billy” Clinton, a longtime romantic partner of the former president and the author of the 2016 election blockbuster Hillary the Other Woman.”

 

She scoffed at the idea Hillary Clinton could have been discomfited standing next to Trump.

 

“First, how does Hillary Clinton define ‘creepy?’” she asked. “She is married to a rapist and serial sex abuser. She hangs out with John Podesta, Sidney Blumenthal, George Soros and Anthony Weiner, among other swamp dwellers. Then she calls Donald Trump ‘creepy’ for standing too close to her on a public stage. That would be funny if it weren’t so pitiful.

 

“Second, what in the world is ‘marriage’ as defined by the Clintons? It’s a co-dependent, coat-tail clutching, power-and-money-grubbing criminal conspiracy on an international scale. It’s a woman attacking other women rather than having the gumption to divorce a pervert and make her own way in the world. Some people might think that’s ‘creepy.’”

 

Kyle accused Hillary Clinton of being a false feminist and suggested the former first lady’s actions have undermined the entire feminist movement. Kyle claimed Hillary Clinton’s conduct has put women’s rights groups in the position of covering for the Clintons instead of calling them out for their behavior.

 

“The National Organization for Women, that public bastion of feminism, has been shamefully silent over the decades as the Clintons have used and abused women (and men) as needed in their unabated quest for money and power,” Kyle said. “Ask some of the Haitian women how they feel about the Clintons’ wholesale rape of their country through the disdainfully greedy actions of the Clinton Foundation.”

 

The NATIONWIDE SENSATION that rocked the presidential election. Hillary Clinton isn’t going anywhere – and Americans need to stay informed and on the alert. Now available at the sensational price of only $1.99! Pick up your e-book copy of Hillary the Other Woman at the WND Superstore. Don’t miss this incredible opportunity!

 

Kyle also said Clinton is trying to have it both ways, claiming to be a strong woman yet also feigning weakness and looking for sympathy.

 

“In her new book, Hillary says that rather than challenging Donald Trump for standing too close to her during the second presidential debate, she just clutched her microphone tighter,” Kyle noted. “Isn’t this a great example for women? Cower and clutch. The fact is, Hillary clutched that microphone tighter when she saw Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey sitting in the audience, silently accusing her and her putative ‘husband’ by their mere presence.”

 

Indeed, Kyle argues Hillary Clinton has never apologized or even accepted responsibility for covering for Bill Clinton’s behavior. Kyle says Hillary Clinton actually led the campaigns of personal destruction against the former president’s alleged female victims.

 

“Billy Clinton never denied raping Juanita Broaddrick, although he denied sexually assaulting Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey,” Kyle observed. “The pathological liar also denied having a relationship with me over a couple of decades, although letters to me in his own handwriting (saying things like ‘I miss you’ and ‘We’ll get together somehow’) on ‘Governor of Arkansas’ stationery are appended to my publicly available deposition. Hillary led the attacks against Juanita, Paula, Kathleen and me, as well as every woman he attacked over the decades. She sees this as OK because this is war, and she is the avenger. Some people might think that’s creepy. It’s certainly not a stellar example of feminism.”

 

Clinton’s spectacular rejection by the American people in 2016 raises the question: Why won’t Hillary Clinton just go away?

 

It’s simple, argues Kyle. She psychologically can’t.

 

“It’s not odd for a person who has spent her entire life scratching and clawing to get to the presidency to keep on keeping on,” Kyle said of Clinton’s behavior. “What else can she do? She’s obsessed … and defeated, but she doesn’t know the fight has been called.

 

“Hillary can’t go away. She can’t shut up. She can’t be a gracious loser, and she will continue to do whatever she can to reinvent history. Imagine writing a book title ‘What Happened’ as if the 2016 election were hers as a matter of right. She is so arrogant that she has to explain what forces conspired against her to cause the unbelievable loss. She has media support in this, of course, because the left-leaners never saw it coming, and they want to blame someone else, too.”

 

What do YOU think? What is Democrats’ biggest fear? Sound off in today’s WND poll!

 

Kyle suggested the biased mainstream media are encouraging Hillary Clinton’s delusions by promoting the narrative President Trump’s victory was somehow illegitimate.

 

“Hillary will try to assign some of the blame for her loss to the Russians, despite the fact that she was the presidential candidate with the chummy connections over there,” Kyle said. “Hillary (and the media) will perpetuate the myth of her winning the ‘popular vote.’ They will ignore the mounting evidence of voter fraud in California where all those ‘popular’ votes were cast. They will ignore the fact that our Founding Fathers had the brilliant foresight to design the Electoral College to keep one or two populous states from dictating to the rest of the country.”

 

Kyle also claimed Hillary Clinton may be scared of finally suffering the consequences for her scandal-plagued career.

 

“Maybe, just maybe, Hillary thinks that by being vocal and visible she can maintain enough support from the Democrat Party to keep her from being investigated, charged, convicted and sent to prison for any of dozens of crimes, up to and including treason,” Kyle alleged.

 

Whatever the case, a resigned Kyle stated she doesn’t believe Hillary Clinton will ever go away nor ever accept full responsibility for her defeat. She will continue to blame others.

 

“It would have been impossible for Hillary to lash out (or do anything else) honestly because she has very little history of acting from a position of honesty and integrity,” Kyle said. “She can’t spontaneously be honest about anything. Everything Hillary says and does is calculated to advance her position. Truth is an obstacle to be avoided.

 

“I think it’s quite possible that Hillary believes what she says, because she is a pathological liar. Pathological liars believe their own stories, and that’s what makes them appear credible to gullible people. Unfortunately for Hillary, she has had so many bumps on the head or physical illnesses of some sort that she’s having trouble keeping her stories straight. She also has memory problems, as we know from her repeatedly claiming ‘I don’t recall’ under oath.

 

“In summary, I know Hillary and Billy well enough to know that if they say it’s sunny outside, I’m going to grab an umbrella.”

 

[Blog Editor: WND inserts a Tucker Carlson episode talking about Crooked Hillary’s book. I am posting a Youtube version the same segment.]

 

VIDEO: Tucker Carlson Laughs At Hillary Clinton’s New Book

 

Posted by IamMarcus

Published on Aug 23, 2017

 

ucker Carlson Laughs At Hillary Clinton’s New Book Memoir Discuss With Mark Steyn On FOX News

Excerpts From FOX News
http://www.foxnews.com

FAIR USE NOTICE
This video may contain copyrighted material; the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available for the purposes of criticism, comment, review and news reporting which constitute the ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Not withstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work for purposes such as criticism, comment, review and news reporting is not an infringement of copyright.

 

The NATIONWIDE SENSATION that rocked the presidential election. Hillary Clinton isn’t going anywhere and Americans need to stay informed and on the alert. Now available at the sensational price of only $1.99! Pick up your e-book copy of Hillary: The Other Woman at the WND Superstore. Don’t miss this incredible opportunity!

_________________

© Copyright 1997-2017. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.