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

 

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

 

Charlottesville Violent Participants Pt TWO


By John R. Houk

© August 17, 2017

 

On Wednesday 8/16/17, I posted Part ONE which I took a look at the racist participants of the Charlottesville rumble of Neo-Nazis, KKK and White Supremacist Nationalists spewing their odious ideology using the excuse of preserve the American history embodied by the Confederacy.

 

Clearly these White Supremacist racists were more interested in odious propaganda than in preserving history. Check out the racist sloganeering a couple of days before the Charlottesville VA rumble at nearby University of Virginia:

 

VIDEO: 8/12/17 White NEO-NAZI March at University of Virginia Chanting Nazi Slogans

 

Posted by GrimReaperNextDoor

Published on Aug 12, 2017

 

A group of white nationalists sparked outrage on a college campus in Virginia on Friday after the marched with torches across campus while chanting Nazi expressions.

The demonstrators marched on the campus grounds at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville late Friday as precursor to a Saturday protest planned to publicly oppose the removal of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee.

Marches could be heard chanting slogans including “white lives matter” and “you will not replace us.” Others could be heard chanting “blood and soil,” a well-known Nazi rallying cry. Police eventually declared the protest an unlawful assembly and both protesters and counter protesters reported being pepper sprayed.

Some videos captured at the scene appeared to show counter protesters clashing with the white nationalists.

University of Virginia president Teresa A. Sullivan condemned the READ THE REST

 

Ergo, the racist march at U of V seems like incitement practice in Charlottesville.

 

AND YET, the Left-Wing Counter-Protesters were at best infiltrated by violent Antifa/Black Lives Matter rumblers or at worst were the leaders of the rumbling Left.

 

In any case Leftist rumblers came just as armed as the racist White Supremacists. So, let’s look at Antifa and Black Lives Matter (BLM).

 

Antifa

 

VIDEO: Antifa Exposed – Newly Press

 

Posted by John Houk

Published on Aug 17, 2017

 

I found this exposé of Antifa on the Facebook page called “Newly Press”. (http://tinyurl.com/y754ycpp)

 

The undercover narrator is Joey Salads (sounds like it could be a pseudonym). With the one-sided reporting on the Charlottesville Rumble just looking at racist White Supremacists, it is good to remember that Communist anarchists were engaging in violence as well.

 

Racism is evil! BUT Communism is evil too!

 

From the New American:

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Police across the United States are being forced to deal with a new hard-Left, communist-derived movement organized under the code word “Antifa,” standing for “Anti-Fascist.”

 

The violent, confrontational nature of Antifa anarchists presents a challenge to U.S. law enforcement that is unprecedented; they reject the free speech principles upon which civil discourse depends, while seeking to achieve the demise of the U.S. Constitution, as it holds as illegitimate any compromise with their communist worldview.

 

The Antifa movement roots in Weimar Republic Germany

 

While the Antifa movement is anarchic in nature, it owes its birth to the Communist Party’s opposition to the Nazi fascist movement in post-World War I Germany.

 

1930s fascism is best explained by Jonah Goldberg. In his 2008 book Liberal Fascism, he points out that fascism is a phenomenon of the political Left, in that communists and fascists were “closely related, historical competitors for the same constituents.” In a key paragraph applying these principles to American fascism, Goldberg wrote:

 

Much like the Nazi movement, liberal fascism had two faces: the street radicals and the establishment radicals. In Germany, the two groups worked in tandem to weaken middle-class resistance to the Nazis’ agenda. In the previous chapter we saw how the liberal fascists of the SDS and the Black Panther movements rose up to terrorize the American middle class. In the remainder of this chapter — and the next — we will explain how the “suit-and-tie radicals” of the 1960s, people like Hillary Clinton and her friends, use this terror to expand the power and scope of the state and above all to change the public attitude toward the state as the agent of social progress and universal caring and compassion.

The Antifa movement in the U.S. is a return to the communist paramilitary riot tactics developed to fight the Brownshirts of the Weimar Republic. The goal was to terrorize middle-class Germans into rejecting the Nazis who had embraced the social-welfare programs of prior regimes.

 

 

In what was branded as a “DisruptJ20” protest, some 1,000 Antifa thugs broke windows at Starbucks, McDonald’s, and Bank of America, as well as in commercial buildings in downtown Washington. Antifa rioters flooded streets, blocked traffic, burned trash in the streets, and broke windshields of passing cars. They threatened to attack inauguration attendees on the streets, while shouting a continuous flow of angry, vulgar, and confrontational in-your-face insults.

 

 

The militant or radical Left as described by Lennard has little — if anything — in common with the traditional liberal politics of Democrats such as John F. Kennedy and Hubert H. Humphrey in the 1960s. She [i.e. Natasha Lennard] continued:

 

As organizers from anti-fascist research and news site Antifa NYC told The Nation: “Antifa combines radical left-wing and anarchist politics, revulsion at racists, sexists, homophobes, anti-Semites, and Islamophobes, with the international anti-fascist culture of taking to the streets and physically confronting the brownshirts of white supremacy, whoever they may be.” As with fascisms, not all anti-fascisms are the same, but the essential feature is that anti-fascism does not tolerate fascism; it would give it no platform for debate.

 

 

Lennard made it clear that Antifa radicals are READ ENTIRETY (How the Violent Hard-Left “Antifa” Movement Copies Communists in Weimar Republic Germany; By Jerome R. Corsi; New American; 8/15/17)

 

Ben Shapiro on Antifa:

 

… Antifa is a loosely connected band of anti-capitalist protesters generally on the far left who dub themselves “anti-fascist” after their compatriots in Europe. They’ve been around in the United States since the 1990s, protesting globalization and burning trash cans at World Trade Organization meetings. But they’ve kicked into high gear over the past two years: They engaged in vandalism in violence, forcing the cancelation of a speech by alt-right popularizer Milo Yiannopoulos at the University of California, Berkeley; a few months later, they attacked alt-right demonstrators in Berkeley; they attacked alt-right demonstrators in Sacramento, California, leading to a bloody street fight; they threw projectiles at police during President Trump’s inauguration; they attacked pro-Trump free-speech demonstrators in Seattle last weekend. They always label their opponents “fascists” in order to justify their violence.

 

In Charlottesville, Antifa engaged in street violence with the alt-right racists. As in Weimar, Germany, fascists flying the swastika engaged in hand-to-hand combat with Antifa members flying the communist red. And yet, the media declared that any negative coverage granted to Antifa would detract from the obvious evils of the alt-right. Sheryl Gay Stolberg of The New York Times tweeted in the midst of the violence, “The hard left seemed as hate-filled as alt-right. I saw club-wielding ‘antifa’ beating white nationalists being led out of the park.” After receiving blowback from the left, Stolberg then corrected herself. She said: “Rethinking this. Should have said violent, not hate-filled. They were standing up to hate.”

 

Or perhaps Antifa is a hateful group itself. But that wouldn’t fit the convenient narrative Antifa promotes and the media buy: that the sole threat to the republic comes from the racist right. Perhaps that’s why the media ignored the events in Sacramento and Berkeley and Seattle — to point out the evils of Antifa might detract from the evils of the alt-right.

 

 

Here’s the moral solution, as always: Condemn violence and evil wherever it occurs. The racist philosophy of the alt-right is evil. The violence of the alt-right is evil. The communist philosophy of Antifa is evil. So is the violence of Antifa. If we are to survive as a republic, we must call out Nazis but not punch them; we must stop providing cover to anarchists and communists who seek to hide behind self-proclaimed righteousness to participate in violence. Otherwise, we won’t be an honest or a free society. READ ENTIRETY (The Group That Got Ignored in Charlottesville; By Ben Shapiro; Creators.com; 8/16/17)

 

CSC Media Group looks a bit closer at Antifa ideology:

 

 

“Anti-fascism” became the official ideology of Stalinist parties, although anarchists, and migrant activists have also continued to identify as anti-fascists. The movement would continue through the end of World War II and right on through the Cold War.

 

The Resurgence

 

It would have an almost rebirth, or resurgence in the 1990s after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Once again the communists would fight against what they saw as right-wing fascist groups. Keep in mind, although these groups were fighting fascism, it wasn’t fighting fascism for freedom. Rather they wanted to replace it with communism.

 

 

The End Game

 

Now, the communist and the anarchists don’t have the same goals, other than fighting the powers that hold them back. They’ve decided that they will fight one enemy at a time. When that one is defeated they will fight the other ones standing next to them. They will continue to fight until only one is left standing.

 

 

… One of these groups is known as “Bamn” “By any means necessary.” One of their leaders is a school teacher in California. This is possibly why so many of the protests have been concentrated along the west coast.

 

 

… There are slogans like “antifascism means attack” not only against neonazis but also against the civil and capitalist system.

 

READ ENTIRETY (“Antifa” Anti-Fascists With Pro-Communist Roots; By Dominick Luckette; CSC Media Group; 4/28/17)

 

Here are two articles worth looking at to understand the evil and un-American the Antifa Communists are to Liberty and Freedom:

 

 

 

Black Lives Matter (BLM)

From Accuracy in Media:

 

The Black Lives Matter movement (BLM) casts itself as a spontaneous uprising born of inner city frustration, but is, in fact, the latest and most dangerous face of a web of well-funded communist/socialist organizations that have been agitating against America for decades. Its agitation has provoked police killings and other violence, lawlessness and unrest in minority communities throughout the U.S. If allowed to continue, that agitation could devolve into anarchy and civil war. The BLM crowd appears to be spoiling for just such an outcome.

 

 

Leftist Origins

 

Exploiting blacks to promote Marxist revolution is an old tactic. … Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn regarded Barack Obama, whose political career they sponsored, as a tool—a puppet—to use against white America. Obama’s legacy at home will certainly include more racial division.

 

[BLM Founder Photo not a part of AIM article]

 

Garza, Cullors and Tometi all work for front groups of the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO), one of the four largest radical Left organizations in the country. The others are the Communist Party USA (CPUSA), Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), and the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS). Nelini Stamp’s ACORN—now rebranded under a variety of different names—works with all four organizations, and Dream Defenders is backed by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the ACLU, the Southern Poverty Law Center and others.

 

FRSO is a hereditary descendant of the New Communist Movement, which was inspired by Mao and the many communist revolutions throughout the world in the 1960s and 1970s. FRSO split into two separate groups in 1999, FRSO/Fight Back and FRSO/OSCL (Freedom Road Socialist Organization/Organizaci?n Socialista del Camino para la Libertad). Black Lives Matter and its founders are allied with the latter group. Future references to FRSO in this article refer to FRSO/OSCL.

 

 

BLM is one of many projects undertaken by the FRSO. Except for the website, blacklivesmatter.com, there is no actual organization. The website implicitly acknowledges this, describing #BlackLivesMatter as “an online forum intended to build connections between Black people and our allies to fight anti-Black racism, to spark dialogue among Black people, and to facilitate the types of connections necessary to encourage social action and engagement.”

 

FRSO membership is disproportionately represented by blacks, gays and women, and self-consciously emphasizes those issues. Garza, who penned a “Herstory” of BLM, is a “queer,” black veteran activist involved in …

 

 

Cullors describes herself as a “working class, queer, black woman.” …

 

Cullors was trained by Eric Mann, a former Weather Underground leader who exhorts followers to become “anti-racist, anti-imperialist” activists. Mann runs another FRSO front, the Labor/Community Strategy Center. Like most professional leftists, he makes good money—over $225,000 annually—living in “the system” he advocates destroying.

 

Tometi is the daughter of illegal aliens from Nigeria. While in college, she worked for the ACLU defending illegal aliens against “vigilantes” opposed to illegal immigration. She is currently the executive director of Black Alliance for Just Immigration (BAJI).

 

 

Mainstream funders have helped fund BLM as well. For example, United Way has partnered with A&E and iHeartMedia to create Shining the Light Advisors, a committee of “nationally known experts and leaders in racial and social justice,” to oversee grant disbursements. These “advisors” include such radicals as Van Jones, Advancement Project co-director Judith Browne Dianis, and Rinku Sen, president of the Applied Research Center (ARC).

 

 

Its wide network of affiliates and partner organizations like CPUSA and ACORN allows BLM to turn out large crowds. Many participate simply to protest, commit violence, loot or all three.

 

 

Fithian echoes Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven—creators of the infamous Cloward/Piven Crisis Strategy—who spent decades attempting to provoke ghetto blacks to riot, because “Poor people can advance only when ‘the rest of society is afraid of them.’” …

 

 

Islamist organizations have also jumped on the BLM bandwagon, reminding us of the unholy alliance that exists –

between them and the radical Left. In September 2015, the Muslim Brotherhood front-group Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) joined BLM activists in storming California Governor Jerry Brown’s office. CAIR also participated in the Ferguson protests. Meanwhile ISIS is recruiting American blacks for its cause. 

 

Intellectual Genealogy of Black Lives Matter

 

We must be ready to employ trickery, deceit, law-breaking, withholding and concealing truth… We can and must write in a language which sows among the masses hate, revulsion, and scorn toward those who disagree with us.”—Vladimir Lenin

 

That quote from the Soviet Union’s first leader captures the entire essence of the Left’s strategy. No matter what the issue, no matter what the facts, the Left advances a relentless, hate-filled narrative that America is irredeemably evil and must be destroyed as soon as possible. The BLM movement is only the latest but perhaps most dangerous variant on this divisive theme.

 

 

Obama’s favorite Harvard professor Derrick Bell devised Critical Race Theory, which exemplifies Lenin’s strategy as applied to race. According to Discover the Networks:

 

“Critical race theory contends that America is permanently racist to its core, and that consequently the nation’s legal structures are, by definition, racist and invalid … members of “oppressed” racial groups are entitled—in fact obligated—to determine for themselves which laws and traditions have merit and are worth observing…”

 

Bell’s theory is in turn an innovation of Critical Theory—developed by philosophers of the communist Frankfurt School. …

 

 

The “White Skin Privilege” idea was created in 1967 by Noel Ignatiev, an acolyte of Bell and professor at Harvard’s W.E.B. Du Bois Institute (Du Bois was a Communist black leader who helped found the NAACP). Ignatiev was a member of CPUSA’s most radical wing, the Maoist/Stalinist Provisional Organizing Committee to Reconstitute the Marxist-Leninist Communist Party (POC). POC was the intellectual forerunner to FRSO.

 

 

But do not be confused; “White” does not mean white. “White” in radical construction means anyone of any race, creed, nationality, color, sex, or sexual preference who embraces capitalism, free markets, limited government and American traditional culture and values. By definition, these beliefs are irredeemably evil and anyone who aligns with them is “white” in spirit and thus equally guilty of “white crimes.” Ignatiev still teaches, now at the Massachusetts College of Art.

 

The Black Lives Matter movement carries this narrative to unprecedented heights, claiming that only whites can be racists. And while justifying violence to achieve “social justice,” the movement’s goal is to overthrow our society to replace it with a Marxist one. Many members of the black community would be shocked to learn that the intellectual godfathers of this movement are mostly white Communists, “queers” and leftist Democrats, intent on making blacks into cannon fodder for the revolution. READ INTIRETY (Reds Exploiting Blacks: The Roots of Black Lives Matter; By James Simpson; Accuracy in Media; 1/12/16)

 

When President Trump in a news conference had essentially what next lauding American history will be taken down:

 

Trump said that “this week… it’s Robert E. Lee. And, I heard Stonewall Jackson is coming down.”

 

“Is George Washington [coming down] next week. And, is it Thomas Jefferson the week after?” Trump said, noting both American icons were slaveholders in Virginia. (‘Is It George Washington Next Week?’: Trump Blasts Monument Removals as ‘Changing History’; Fox News; 8/15/17 4:58pm)

 

The New Zeal blog reports American historical monuments that had nothing to do with the Confederacy are being defaced:

 

Well, that didn’t take long. I predicted when all of this racist crap started that the lefty communists would move quickly from confederate statues onto other targets and here we go. The Lincoln Memorial was defaced yesterday with the ‘F’ word and other graffiti. Then, so-called Social Justice Warriors set their sights on the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. Hundreds demanded that a “racist” statue of former President Theodore Roosevelt be taken down. I strongly suggest they don’t do that. And the communists and radicals won’t stop there… they have a huge list of targets across the nation, including anything to do with the Founding Fathers.

 

READ THE REST (Communists And Black Lives Matter Radicals Demand NY Museum Remove Statue Of ‘Racist’ Theodore Roosevelt; Submitted by Terresa Monroe-Hamilton; New Zeal; 8/16/17 9:06 am EST)

 

One of the BLM founders – Alicia Garza – is paraphrased as stipulating at Mizzou U on 2/18/16:

 

“The goal of the Constitution was to make an agreement between factions known as states, which were built on the backs of black slaves.” She described constitutionalism as racist, saying: “The people vowing to protect the Constitution are vowing to protect white supremacy and genocide.” (The Real Agenda Behind Black Lives Matter; By  GERALD FLURRY; The Trumpet; 5/2016)

 

The influence of Marxists Cloward and Piven on Black Lives Matter:

 

In 1966, sociologists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven called for the overloading of the U.S. welfare system to force the potential collapse of our Democratic Republic government and end poverty by the government “guaranteeing an annual income for all Americans.”  This is Communism–a godless human government where the state is the ultimate entity to be worshiped and obeyed.

 

Fifty years later, are we seeing Cloward and Piven’s dream become reality?  Our nation is being divided and overwhelmed economically and socially, and some feel we are on the brink of becoming a Marxist state.

 

Cloward-Piven believed in forcing political change through orchestrated crisis and not surprisingly, they were both members of the Democratic Socialists of America. The two were also involved in the birthing of radical organizations such as ACORN, which has branched out into several organizations including some in support of Black Lives Matter, according to journalist, James Simpson.

 

 

This report examines in detail, for the first time, how communist groups have manipulated the cause of Black Lives Matter, and how money from liberal foundations has made it all possible.

 

 

…The radical Left model is based on alliances of many organizations that are working on separate issues but dedicated ultimately to the same thing: overthrowing our society in order to replace it with a hardcore socialist (read communist) one.

 

The goal is to present the appearance of a formidable mass of organizations. Some are large, but many are little more than a website or Facebook page. When necessary, they can all come together to promote the cause du jour. The deaths of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown and others were mere pretexts for socialist agitation. The real enemy is “the system.” This is why the BLM crowd denies the facts of those cases. As Stamp has said, “we are actually trying to change the capitalist system we have today because it’s not working for any of us.”

 

READ ENTIRETY (BLACK LIVES MATTER, CAPITALISM, AND COMMUNISM IN AMERICA; Posted by Stand Up For The Truth; StandUpForTheTruth.com; 7/18/16)

 

Here is an interesting insight from a blogger that has been inactive since April 2017:

 

[I]t isn’t surprising that Black Lives Matter is a communist organization—but the type of communism they subscribe to is. They are conservative communists attempting to fold the progressive movement back into traditional Marxism.

 

… BLM is rebirthing the traditional class struggle, reframing it in terms of black and white.

 

The policy platform proposed by BLM in August did nothing to hide this traditionalism. Its calls for collective ownership of resources, banks, and businesses, a highly progressive income tax, a guaranteed minimum income, and government jobs are lifted straight from the pages of Karl Marx’s “Communist Manifesto.” Here are two excerpts for comparison:

 

“Communist Manifesto”: Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

 

 

Black vs. White Is the New Proletariat vs. Bourgeoisie

 

But more important is BLM’s use of the black versus white dichotomy. While race has a long history as a wedge issue, BLM incorporates nearly all forms of modern marginalization—“including but not limited to those who are women, queer, trans, femmes, gender nonconforming, Muslim, formerly and currently incarcerated, cash poor and working class, differently-abled, undocumented, and immigrant”—into blackness. Conversely, whiteness represents all forms of privilege (economic, social, and legal) throughout the platform.

 

BLM has simply substituted Marx’s class conflict between the proletariat and bourgeoisie for class conflict between blackness and whiteness. …

 

The black vs. white dichotomy creates a permanent enemy class, to which defection is always incomplete. And unlike the proletariat class consciousness, race consciousness already exists, making mobilization easier. …

 

Why Black Lives Matter Rejects Intersectionality

 

Where Marxism prioritizes the class struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat (or between black and white), the modern theory of intersectionality prioritizes differences between identity politic groups. It posits that while white women face marginalization for their sex, they gain privilege from their race. Conversely, black men gain privilege from their sex while facing marginalization because of their race. Black women experience “double jeopardy,” suffering from both sex and race. This creates a hierarchy of oppression that is in constant flux as new forms of marginalization are recognized. Intersectional theory fractures the class conflict from two opposed groups into an unlimited number of conflicts within the hierarchy of oppression.

 

 

BLM treats intersectional conflicts and “non-black people of color” much the same way Marx treated the reserve army of labor and petty bourgeoisie: as auxiliaries to the proletariat and bourgeoisie conflict. In their glossary, BLM defines the term “non-black people of color” as intended “to provide greater context to the distinct and unique oppression imposed on Black people, while recognizing the struggles of other people of color.” Which is to say that while intersectional conflicts exist, the Black vs. White conflict takes priority.

 

READ ENTIRETY (How Black Lives Matter Is Bringing Back Traditional Marxism; I Have A Dream; 9/29/16)

 

Currently Antifa Communists and BLM Communists seem to have linked their agendas together fomenting violent revolution through race baiting. I have to wonder if the Obama Administration clandestinely empowered these anarchist revolutionaries. Many Conservatives have used this moniker for Barack Hussein Obama: Race-Baiter-in-Chief.

 

I also have to wonder if Obama’s Organizing for Action Deep State group (See Also HERE) has some clandestine linkage to BLM or even Antifa for that matter.

 

It is clear the American Left pulling out all the unConstitutional stops to destroy the Liberty and Freedom our Founding Fathers enabled during and after the Revolutionary War to form the greatest Republic the world has seen. If the Left has its way – Antifa and BLM are Marxist tools – the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution will be ripped up and placed on the forgotten ash heap of history.

 

JRH 8/17/17

Please Support NCCR

Fired NSC Aide Reveals Political Warfare Operation Targeting Trump


Does anyone besides me think it odd that pro-Trump Conservatives are being fired as leakers and/or resistant to the Trump agenda to make America great again?

 

Under the management of National Security Advisor H.  R. McMaster, several pro-Trump National Security Council (NSC) staffers have been fired over conflicts with their NSC bosses who seem to suspiciously support Obama’s deficient policies. The Washington Free Beacon names Rich Higgins, Derek Harvey and Ezra Cohen-Watnick as fired.

 

The Free Beacon article below emphasizes the firing of Rich Higgins for his memo on a Marxist Deep State in the U.S. Government, Leftist MSM and Pro-Islamists working to undo President Trump’s election and agenda. Also, the Free Beacon alludes H.R. McMaster is a part of the problem in the Deep State Memo.

 

JRH 8/12/17

Please Support NCCR

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

Fired NSC Aide Reveals Political Warfare Operation Targeting Trump

Higgins memo warns of Marxist, Deep State subversion

 

By Bill Gertz

August 11, 2017 4:37 pm

Washington Free Beacon

 

Gen. H. R. McMaster / Getty Images
 

A White House National Security Council official has charged that leftist opponents of President Trump are engaged in political warfare operations designed to subvert his presidency and drive him from office.

 

Rich Higgins, until recently director of strategic planning at the NSC, revealed the program in a seven-page memorandum produced in May that warns of a concerted information warfare campaign by the Marxist left, Islamists, and political leaders and government officials opposed to the populist president.

 

“The Trump administration is suffering under withering information campaigns designed to first undermine, then delegitimize and ultimately remove the president,” Higgins states.

 

“This is not politics as usual but rather political warfare at an unprecedented level that is openly engaged in the direct targeting of a seated president through manipulation of the news cycle,” he said.

 

Higgins, an Army veteran and former Pentagon official who specialized in irregular warfare and who was dismissed last month for writing the memo, said the attacks should not be confused with normal partisan political attacks or adversarial media attention.

 

The former aide criticized the White House for failing to counter the activities and said the political warfare attacks threaten the Trump presidency.

 

“The White House response to these campaigns reflects a political advocacy mindset that it is intensely reactive, severely under-inclusive and dangerously inadequate to the threat,” he said. “If action is not taken to re-scope and respond to these hostile campaigns very soon, the administration risks implosion and subsequent early departure from the White House.”

 

Higgins was fired by Deputy National Security Adviser Ricky Waddell July 21 after the memo came to Waddell’s attention as part of an internal search for leaks from the staff.

 

Higgins’s firing, along with that of two other NSC conservatives, Derek Harvey and Ezra Cohen-Watnick, has set off political infighting and charges from conservatives that National Security Adviser Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster is opposing Trump’s populist policies in favor of maintaining the policies of the former Obama administration.

 

Harvey, a retired Army colonel, recently complained to McMaster about the large number of officials who were kept on at the NSC from the Obama administration. He was told by McMaster that he has a “leadership problem,” according to people close to the matter.

 

Cohen-Watnick was senior director for intelligence programs at the NSC and ran afoul of McMaster because of his conservative views.

 

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.

 

According to White House sources, Trump is said to be unhappy with McMaster and has considered dispatching him to Afghanistan.

 

A possible replacement is said to be CIA director Mike Pompeo, who is regarded as more of a Trump loyalist.

 

An NSC spokesman declined to comment.

 

Foreign Policy first published the memo on Thursday and quoted sources as saying Trump read it and “gushed over it.”

 

Higgins urged in the memo that immediate action be taken to counter what he described as a campaign of subversion reflecting “cultural Marxist” narratives used by political leftists who are aligned with Islamist groups.

 

“In candidate Trump, the opposition saw a threat to the ‘politically correct’ enforcement narratives they’ve meticulously laid in over the past few decades,” Higgins said. “In President Trump, they see a latent threat to continue that effort to ruinous effect and their retaliatory response reflects this fear.”

 

During the presidential campaign, Trump was able to break through the leftist narratives and as a result the political left regards him as “an existential threat to cultural Marxist memes that dominate the prevailing cultural narrative.”

 

“For this cabal, Trump must be destroyed,” he said. “Far from politics as usual, this is a political warfare effort that seeks the destruction of a sitting president. Since Trump took office, the situation has intensified to crisis level proportions.”

 

The opponents also include officials within the permanent government apparatus, also called the Deep State.

 

Other opponents are supporting the Marxist subversion, including those within government, along with “globalists, bankers, Islamists, and establishment Republicans.”

 

“Globalists and lslamists recognize that for their visions to succeed, America, both as an ideal and as a national and political identity, must be destroyed,” Higgins said.

 

The political warfare campaign seeks to exploit differences in society based on sexism, racism and xenophobia narratives. The program is implemented by mainstream media, and the academic community is the main driver promoting the imposition of cultural Marxism and derivatives of it.

 

Islamists, supporters of political Islam in the United States, also are working with leftists who they regard as having the best chance of reducing Western civilization to the benefit of Islamic supremacists. The Islamists are seeking to divide American society against itself as a way of undermining stability.

 

“This is the intended outcome of hostile information cum political warfare campaigns and today we see their effects on American society,” he said.

 

Higgins also said a complicating factor in the political warfare program is that “many close to the president have pushed him off his message when he was candidate Trump thus alienating him from his base thereby isolating him in the process.”

 

The political warfare follows the insurgency methods used by Chinese Communist leader Mao Zedong. “In Maoist insurgencies, the formation of a counter-state is essential to seizing state power,” he said. “Political warfare operates as one of the activities of the ‘counter-state’ and is primarily focused on the resourcing and mobilization of the counter state or the exhaustion and demobilization of the targeted political movement.”

 

In the Marxist strategy and tactics, political correctness is being used to foster intolerance of political movements of the right and toleration of leftist movements.

 

The attack narratives being used are pervasive and can be seen in social media, television, and the 24-hour news cycle in all media, as well as within the foreign policy establishment. “They inform the entertainment industry from late night monologues, to situation comedies, to television series memes, to movie themes,” Higgins said. “The effort required to direct this capacity at President Trump is little more than a programming decision to do so. The cultural Marxist narrative is fully deployed, pervasive, full spectrum and ongoing.”

 

Information attacks against the president are carried out through overt publicity and covert propaganda and infiltration and subversion means.

 

The current campaign against Trump is seeking to delegitimize the president, his administration, and the vision of America he promoted as a candidate.

 

Key major opposition themes are that Trump is illegitimate, corrupt, and dishonest. Secondary political attacks include the notion that Russia hacked the election, Trump obstructed justice and is hiding Russian collusion, and that he is a “puppet” of Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

 

“Adversaries utilize these interlocking narratives as a defensive political and information warfare screen that silences critics and smears supporters of President Trump,” Higgins said.

 

“When people in the media question the behavior, actions and decisions of the Trump administration’s opponents, they are immediately said to be ‘working for the Russians’ or ‘supporting Russian propaganda.'”

 

Additionally Americans who support the president are deemed “deplorable” and “racist.”

 

“Attacks on President Trump are not just about destroying him, but also about destroying the vision of America that lead [sic] to his election,” Higgins said.

 

Higgins concluded the memo by noting that defending the president is a defense of the United States. “In the same way President Lincoln was surrounded by political opposition both inside and outside of his wire, in both overt and covert forms, so too is President Trump.

 

“Had Lincoln failed, so too would have the Republic. The administration has been maneuvered into a constant backpedal by relentless political warfare attacks structured to force him to assume a reactive posture that assures inadequate responses. The president can either drive or be driven by events; it’s time for him to drive them.”

 

Bill Gertz   Email Bill | Full Bio 
Bill Gertz is the senior editor of the Washington Free Beacon.

 

About Free Beacon

 

©2017 All Rights Reserved

 

+++

Blog Editor: Thanks to the Free Republic, here is an easy to read version Rich Higgins’ Deep State Memo about inner-government subterfuge to take out President Donald Trump. The FP link by the above Free Beacon article has a good summary but its Memo is one of those embedded deals.

 

BTW: I have noticed in a Google search that every Mainstream Media outlet condemns the Higgins Memo as crazy Right-Wing lunacy giving credence to the firing of the Pro-Trump NSC staffers being fired. I gotta tell ya though. I question nearly every condemnation coming from the Leftist MSM. And you should too.

 

The Complete Richard Higgins Memo
Circulating | May 2017 | Richard Higgins

Posted on 8/10/2017, 10:17:47 PM by BRK

Here is the entire memo…

POTUS & POLITICAL WARFARE

 

Free Republic

 

BACKGROUND.  The Trump administration is suffering under withering information campaigns designed to first undermine, then de legitimize and ultimately remove the President. Possibly confusing these attacks with an elevated interplay of otherwise normal D.C. partisan infighting and adversarial media relations, the White House response to these campaigns reflects a political advocacy mindset that it is intensely reactive, severely under-inclusive and dangerously inadequate to the threat. If action is not taken to re-scope and respond to these hostile campaigns very soon, the administration risks implosion and subsequent early departure from the White House.

 

This is not politics as usual but rather political warfare at an unprecedented level that is openly engaged in the direct targeting of a seated president through manipulation of the news cycle. It must be recognized on its own terms so that immediate action can be taken. At its core, these campaigns run on multiple lines of effort, serve as the non-violent line of effort of a wider movement, and execute political warfare agendas that reflect cultural Marxist outcomes. The campaigns operate through narratives. Because the hard left is aligned with lslamist organizations at local (ANTI FA working with Muslim Brotherhood doing business as MSA and CAIR), national (ACLU and BLM working with CAIR and MPAC) and international levels (OIC working with OSCE and the UN), recognition must [be] given to the fact that they seamlessly interoperate at the narrative level as well. In candidate Trump, the opposition saw a threat to the “politically correct” enforcement narratives they’ve meticulously laid in over the past few decades. In President Trump, they see a latent threat to continue that effort to ruinous effect and their retaliatory response reflects this fear.

 

INTRODUCTION. Responding to relentless personal assaults on his character, candidate Trump identified the players and the strategy:

 

The establishment and their media enablers will control over this nation through means that are very well known. Anyone who challenges their control is deemed a sexist, a racist, a xenophobe, and morally deformed.” – President Trump, Oct 2016

 

Culturally conditioned to limit responses to such attacks as yet another round in the on-going drone from diversity and multicultural malcontents, these broadsides are discounted as political correctness run amuck. However, political correctness is a weapon against reason and critical thinking. This weapon functions as the enforcement mechanism of diversity narratives that seek to implement cultural Marxism. Candidate Trump’s rhetoric in the campaign not only cut through the Marxist narrative, he did so in ways that were viscerally comprehensible to a voting bloc that then made candidate Trump the president; making that bloc self-aware in the process. President Trump is either the candidate he ran as, or he is nothing.

 

Recognizing in candidate Trump an existential threat to cultural Marxist memes that dominate the prevailing cultural narrative, those that benefit recognize the threat he poses and seek his destruction. For this cabal, Trump must be destroyed. Far from politics as usual, this is a political warfare effort that seeks the destruction of a sitting president. Since Trump took office, the situation has intensified to crisis level proportions. For those engaged in the effort, especially those from within the “deep state” or permanent government apparatus, this raises clear Title 18 (legal) concerns.

 

  • DISCUSSION.

 

The Opposition. While opposition to President Trump manifests itself through political warfare memes centered on cultural Marxist narratives, this hardly means that opposition is limited to Marxists as conventionally understood. Having become the dominant cultural meme, some benefit from it while others are captured by it; including “deep state” actors, globalists, bankers, lslamists, and establishment Republicans. Through the campaign, candidate Trump tapped into a deep vein of concern among many citizens that America is at risk and is slipping away. Globalists and lslamists recognize that for their visions to succeed, America, both as an ideal and as a national and political identity, must be destroyed. Atomization of society must also occur at the individual level; with attacks directed against all levels of group and personal identity. Hence the sexism, racism and xenophobia memes. As a Judea-Christian culture, forced inclusion of post-modern notions of tolerance is designed to induce nihilistic contradictions that reduce all thought, all faith, all loyalties to meaninglessness. Group rights based on sex or ethnicity are a direct assault on the very idea of individual human rights and natural law around which the Constitution was framed. “Transgender acceptance” memes attack at the most basic level by denying a person the right to declare the biological fact of one’s sex. When a population has 2 + 2 = 5 imposed on it, there are many that benefit:

 

  • Mainstream Media-The principle mechanism for implementing narratives.

 

  • The Academy– Academia has served as a principle counter-state node for some time and remains a key conduit for creating future adherents to cultural Marxist narratives and their derivative worldview.

 

  • The Deep State– The successful outcome of cultural Marxism is a bureaucratic state beholden to no one, certainly not the American people. With no rule of law considerations outside those that further deep state power, the deep state truly becomes, as Hegel advocated, god bestriding the earth.

 

  • Global Corporatists & Bankers – Exploitation of populations, unfettered by national protections and notions of personal morality and piety.

 

  • Democratic Leadership– The democratic leadership has been a counter-state enabler that executes, sustains, and protects cultural Marxist programs of action and facilitates the relentless expansion of the deep state.

 

  • Republican Leadership– More afraid of being accused of being called a racist, sexist, homophobe or lslamophobe than of failing to enforce their oaths to “support and defend the Constitution,” the Republican Establishment accepts and enforces cultural Marxist memes within its own sphere of operations. In doing so, knowingly or not, it becomes an agent of that. These “conservatives” become increasingly indistinguishable from their democratic counterparts save that they misrepresent themselves to their constituents. Lacking the discernment to recognize their situation, they will work with globalists, corporatists, and the international financial interests and will likewise service the deep state. These establishment Republicans are the hard left’s designated defeat mechanism in the destruction of the old regime as well as the American ideal. 1 Because candidate Trump publicly exposed them for their duplicitous activities, they are at risk as long as Trump can turn on them and are, therefore, bitter foes. Candidate Trump’s success remains an ongoing existential threat to establishment Republicans.

 

________________

 

1 For more information on how influence operations of the former Soviet Union targeted leading conservative groups and individuals in order to bring them into line with cultural Marxist narratives. See Link here:    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzZhqeLRIMo

 

  • lslamists – Islamists ally with cultural Marxist because, as far back as the 1980s, they properly assessed that the hard left has a strong chance of reducing Western civilization to its benefit. Having co-opted post-modern narratives as critical points, Islamists deploy these narratives to strategically blind and then control US decision makers. This is by design and purposeful. “By their own hands!” has been the declared strategy of the Muslim Brotherhood since 1991. This strategy seeks to divide American society against itself with the forced imposition of Islamist objectives on one half of American society by the other half. Once a society has been effectively atomized, the population will have lost its faith in the old order, detest those who reduced it, and divide along the lines of narrative adherence. This is the intended outcome of hostile information cum political warfare campaigns and today we see their effects on American society.

 

Complicating the current situation, many close to the president have pushed him off his message when he was candidate Trump thus alienating him from his base thereby isolating him in the process. When President Trump is not candidate Trump, he becomes dangerously exposed. While the base that elected candidate Trump identified with his vision, they are only Trump’s insofar as he holds to the vision that made him president.

 

Political Warfare Attacks -A Primer. As used here, “political warfare” does not concern activities associated with the American political process but rather exclusively refers to political warfare as understood by the Maoist Insurgency model2. Political warfare is one of the five components of a Maoist insurgency. Maoist methodologies employ synchronized violent and non-violent actions that focus on mobilization of individuals and groups to action. This approach envisions the direct use of non-violent operational arts and tactics as elements of combat power. In Maoist insurgencies, the formation of a counter-state is essential to seizing state power. Functioning as a hostile competing state acting within an existing state, it has an alternate infrastructure. Political warfare operates as one of the activities of the “counter-state” and is primarily focused on the resourcing and mobilization of the counter state or the exhaustion and demobilization of the targeted political movement. Political warfare methods can be implemented at strategic, operational, or tactical levels of operation.

 

Political warfare is warfare. Strategic information campaigns designed to delegitimize through disinformation arise out of non-violent lines of effort in political warfare regimes. They principally operate through narratives. Because the left is aligned with lslamist organizations at local, national and international levels, recognition should be given to the fact that they seamlessly interoperate through coordinated synchronized interactive narratives.

 

Cultural Marxism – A Primer. While the attacks on President Trump arise out of political warfare considerations based on non-kinetic lines of effort (as discussed below), they operate in a battle-space prepared, informed and conditioned by cultural Marxist drivers. In practical terms, the political warfare assault on President Trump cannot be separated from the cultural Marxist narratives that drive them. From an operational preparation of the environment perspective, President Trump is operating in a battle-space that reflects the left’s vision.

 

__________________________

 

2 This discussion relies on Thomas A. Marks’ treatment of the Maoist model as discussed in Maoist People’s War in Post-Vietnam Asia (Bangkok, Thailand: White Lotus Press, 2007), 1-14. Hereafter “Thomas A. Marks, Maoist People’s War.”

 

As used in this discussion, cultural Marxism relates to programs and activities that arise out of Gramsci Marxism, Fabian Socialism and most directly from the Frankfurt School. The Frankfurt strategy deconstructs societies through attacks on culture by imposing a dialectic that forces unresolvable contradictions under the rubric of critical theory. The result is induced nihilism, a belief in everything that is actually the belief in nothing.

 

That post-modern (diversity/multiculturalism) narratives seeks to implement cultural Marxist objectives can be demonstrated by reference to founding Frankfurt School theorist Herbert Marcuse’s repurposing of the term tolerance. In a 1965 ~ Marcuse defined tolerance as intolerance; said it can be implemented through undemocratic means to stop chauvinism (xenophobia), racism, discrimination; and should be extended to the left while denied to the right:

 

  • “The realization of the objective of tolerance would call for intolerance toward prevailing policies, attitudes, opinions, and the extension of tolerance to policies, attitudes, and opinions which are outlawed or suppressed.”

 

  • “Surely, no government can be expected to foster its own subversion, but in a democracy such a right is vested in the people (i.e. in the majority of the people). This means that the ways should not be blocked on which a subversive majority could develop, and if they are blocked by organized repression and indoctrination, their reopening may require apparently undemocratic means. They would include the withdrawal of toleration of speech and assembly from groups and movements which promote aggressive policies, armament, chauvinism, discrimination on the grounds of race and religion, or which oppose the extension of public services, social security, medical care, etc.” (8-9)

 

  • “Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left. As to the scope of this tolerance and intolerance: … it would extend to the stage of action as well as of discussion and propaganda, of deed as well as of word.” (12)

 

It is through such post-modern constructs that interoperable narratives are established among various left-wing groups as well as between them and Islamist groups at all levels. For example, from the 2001 Conference of Foreign Ministers at Bamako, Mali, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) declared its commitment to fight racism and xenophobia and then declared lslamophobia a “contemporary form of racism”:

 

  • In this context, the World Conference urges all states … take all necessary measures to combat hatred, discrimination, intolerance and acts of violence, intimidation and coercion motivated by racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance particularly against Islam

 

  • Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance which display an increasing trend, in their most subtle and contemporary forms, constitute a violation of human rights. 3. Contemporary forms of racism are based on discrimination and disparagement on a cultural, rather than biological basis. In this content, the increasing trend of lslamophobia, as a distinct form of xenophobia in non-Muslim societies is very alarming.

 

That the OIC made these claims as part of its planned inputs to the United Nation’s “Third World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance” further demonstrates the coordinated and interoperable nature of these narratives at international levels in international forums.

 

As cultural Marxist narratives intensify, they are to be further operationalized in the form of hate speech narratives. Hate speech narratives are non-random, coordinated, and fully interoperable escalations of cultural Marxist memes. Key international players include the European Union, the UN, and the OSCE, the OIC and the International Muslim Brotherhood. Hate speech memes are structured, coordinated, and implemented through these same international forums. They involve close coordination with media and social media and include the Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) narratives. David Shipler’s book Freedom of Speech provides a road map for how hate speech narratives are to be structured, deployed and enforced.

 

Battlespace. These attack narratives are pervasive, full spectrum and institutionalized at all levels. They operate in social media, television, the 24-hour news cycle in all media, and are entrenched at the upper levels of the bureaucracies and within the foreign policy establishment. They inform the entertainment industry from late night monologues, to situation comedies, to television series memes, to movie themes. The effort required to direct this capacity at President Trump is little more than a programming decision to do so. The cultural Marxist narrative is fully deployed, pervasive, full spectrum and ongoing. Regarding the president, attacks have become a relentless 24/7 effort.

 

While there is certainly a Marxist agenda and even lslamist motivations that must be seriously addressed in their own right, these motivations alone seem inadequate to explain the scope and magnitude of the effort directed against the president. The economic drivers behind the Marxist and Islamist ideologues are enormously influential and seek to leverage these ideological movements for their own self interests. While beyond the actual scope of this document, the benefactors of these political movements include; Urban Real Estate who depend greatly on immigrant tenants, International Banking who seeks to maintain US debtor status so as to control the application of American power, and elements of the business sector that depend upon immigrant labor or government infrastructure. The overall objective of these economic forces is the forced urbanization of the populace, thereby necessitating a larger, more powerful government. In summary, this is a form of population control by certain business cartels in league with cultural Marxists/corporatists/lslamists who will leverage Islamic terrorism threats to justify the creation of a police state.

 

Adversary Campaign Plan. Political Warfare has been described as “propaganda in battledress.”The effort directed at President Trump is executed along one overt, as well as two covert, lines of effort:

 

  • The overt line of effort is PUBLICITY. Publicity is the straightforward projection of a case that builds a picture in the audience’s mind designed to garner support. It is facts without context and information the adversary wants the audience to possess that creates an impression and sets conditions. It seeks to establish good will and receptiveness to additional inputs.

 

  • There are two covert lines of effort: PROPOGANDAand INFILTRATION/SUBVERSION.

 

o Propaganda is the deliberate direction, even manipulation, of information to secure a definite outcome. It is an attempt to direct the thinking of the recipient, without his conscious collaboration, into predetermined channels that are established in the Publicity line of effort. It is the unwitting conditioning of the recipient by devious methods with an ulterior motive that seeks to move them incrementally over time into greater belief and acceptance of message transmitted in the Publicity line of effort.

 

o Infiltration and subversion operate internal to the targeted organization in order to inform, target, coordinate, and amplify the effects of the publicity and propaganda. Both operate to gather intelligence, obstruct legitimate courses of action, provide inside information, and leak sensitive information that undermines the leadership and suppresses the morale of friendly elements.

 

______________________

 

3 “Political Warfare Executive – The Meaning, Techniques and Methods of Political Warfare,” His Britannic Majesty’s Government, London, 1942, 5.

o Infiltration of political and social groups within a target state is done for the purpose of extending counterstate influence and control. The endgame is concealed and may involve illicit activities.

o Subversion undermines or detaches the loyalties of significant political and social groups within the target state and transfers political and/or ideological loyalties to the counter-state. As the counter-state forms, a counter-elite of influential individual and key leaders within the target state will later facilitate the legitimacy and permanency of the new regime.

 

The Meta Narrative. Meta narratives seeks to delegitimize President Trump, his administration, and the vision of America he projected as a candidate. With cultural Marxist memes serving as the backdrop, President Trump is to be relentlessly characterized as unfit through the use of supporting narratives acting to move unwitting populations to belief in the meta narrative. Hence:

 

  • “President Trump is illegitimate”

 

  • “President Trump is corrupt”

 

  • “President Trump is dishonest”

 

Note that the twitter accounts and mainstream media personalities pushing this narrative have seen their audience numbers rise greatly in the past 6 months. This is a direct result of the supporting and backdrop narratives channeling individuals to this meta-narrative.

 

Supporting Narratives. Meta-narratives are supported by an ongoing series supporting-narratives that can be swapped out as circumstances warrant. It is important to recognize that these stories do not have to be true, valid or accurate to serve their purpose. Over time, deserved or not, the cumulative effect of these supporting narratives will result in a Trump fatigue. From a political warfare perspective, President Trump’s inability to meet this challenge will cast him as a weak failed leader. The current list of supporting narratives include:

 

  • “Russia hacked the election”       – illegitimate

 

  • “Obstruction of Justice”                – corrupt

 

  • “Hiding Collusion”                            – dishonest

 

  • “Putin Puppet”                                 – treasonous

 

Backdrop Narratives. The backdrop to the meta and supporting narratives are cultural Marxist memes designed to sustain a general sense of loathing of President Trump and the America that elected him.

 

Hence:

 

  • “[meta] President Trump is illegitimate, [supporting] he was elected because of Russian hacking, [backdrop] and besides, he a racist, sexist xenophobe.”

 

Adversaries utilize these interlocking narratives as a defensive political and information warfare screen that silences critics and smears supporters of President Trump. When people in the media question the behavior, actions and decisions of the Trump Administration’s opponents, they are immediately said to be “working for the Russians” or “supporting Russian propaganda.” Individual Americans who support the President are deemed “deplorable” and “racist.”

 

End State. Attacks on President Trump are not just about destroying him, but also about destroying the vision of America that lead to his election. Those individuals and groups seeking the destruction of President Trump actually seek to suffocate the vision of America that made him president. Hence, the end state is not just a delegitimized, destabilized, immobilized and possibly destroyed presidency; but also a demoralized movement composed of a large enough bloc to elect a president that subsequently become self-aware of its own disenfranchisement.

 

CONCLUSION.

 

The recent turn of events give rise to the observation that the defense of President Trump is the defense of America. In the same way President Lincoln was surrounded by political opposition both inside and outside of his wire, in both overt and covert forms, so too is President Trump. Had Lincoln failed, so too would have the Republic. The administration has been maneuvered into a constant backpedal by relentless political warfare attacks structured to force him to assume a reactive posture that assures inadequate responses. The president can either drive or be driven by events; it’s time for him to drive them.

 

Dear FRiends, We need your help to keep FR on the air. If you have not already done so, please make your donation today. Thank you very much for your loyal support!

 

Donate with our new secure link: https://freerepublic.com/donate/

Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC – PO Box 9771 – Fresno, CA 93794

 

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794

 

Connect Dots on Real Collusion


Compiled by John R. Houk

Posted July 31,2017

 

It’s time to play connect the dots with the real collusion story the Leftist Mainstream Media (MSM) will not do for you. The fear I have is that the GOP elitists are so into maintaining a swamp status quo, that they will not follow through in decriminalizing the U.S. Federal Government. So check out these dots and tell me where they lead.

 

JRH 7/31/17

Please Support NCCR

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

Fmr. Clinton aide details how Obama has set up secret ‘war room’ blocks from the White House to destroy Trump

 

By Carmine Sabia 

July 31, 2017

BizPAC Review

 

A former adviser to President Bill Clinton says there is a secret war room, run by the staff of former President Obama, miles from the White House that is designed to bring down President Donald Trump.

 

In a YouTube video shared on Thursday, Dick Morris, who worked for former President Clinton, said, “there is indication that Obama has set up a secret operation in a war room just about 2 miles from the White House.”  The staff consists of former Barack and Michelle Obama aides among others, and has two conference calls daily to create talking points against the president, held at 8:30 am and 9:45 am, according to Morris.

 

VIDEO: Secret Obama Opp To Torpedo Trump! Dick Morris

 

Posted by OpenMind

Published on Jul 28, 2017

 

Rogue Spooks: The Secret Intelligence Plot to Destroy Donald Trump http://amzn.to/2pQ13El

This is a mirror channel, the official channel of Dick Morris is here  https://www.youtube.com/user/dickmorrisreports please subscribe to Dick Morris, click the bell, to receive notifications when he goes live

SUBSCRIBE to see more similar videos https://goo.gl/scaine

Most Recent Upload https://goo.gl/lPjw8n

LET’S CONNECT!
– https://www.facebook.com/openmind95/
– https://twitter.com/MindOpen6

Amazon Affiliate Link
http://amzn.to/29qrJDg

 

On the call are Andrew Slavitt, who served as the head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and former Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, who also headed Health and Human Services, as saving Obamacare is of paramount concern.

 

“There operation is just a few blocks from the Capitol and it’s in a war room run by Leslie Dash, one of (former President) Obama’s top health care officials. Coordinating a nationwide anti-repeal campaign by liberal think tanks, local resistance groups — sympathetic governors, Medicaid insurance lobbyists, Democratic activists, pollsters and academics. It was conceived in the hours after (President) Trump was elected in November and the group called itself Protect Our Care,” Morris said.

 

“The covert part of the resistance in these moles who are buried in the Trump administration who are leaking to sabotage (President) Trump,” he added.

 

In March it was reported that former top aide to President Obama, Valerie Jarrett, was moving in with the Obama family as part of an operation to resist President Trump.

 

According to the rumors, Jarrett and Michelle Obama were creating a “nerve center” to figure out ways to remove President Trump from office, either by forcing him to resign or having him impeached.

 

Morris expounded on that idea on Sunday when he appeared on New York AM 970’s “The Cats Roundtable,” with host John Catsimatidis, a former candidate for mayor of New York City.

 

“The main thing that is going on, though, in politics is really an attempt at a coup d’etat, which is essentially what this whole Russian stuff is,” Morris told Catsimatidis. “In fact, I call it the illusion of collusion. The whole Democratic party is so taken up with the idea that Hillary [Clinton] lost the election because of collusion between Trump and [Vladimir] Putin.”

 

“I think the whole thing has been cooked up in an effort to topple Trump from power,” he said. “It amounts really to a coup d’etat between the intelligence community on the one hand and the media on the other.”

 

Sound Cloud: The Hosts Dick Morris 7/30/17

+++

Wasserman Schultz Seemingly Planned To Pay Suspect Even While He Lived In Pakistan

 

By Luke Rosiak – Investigative Reporter

07/29/2017 4:05 PM 

Daily Caller News Foundation

 

Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz seemingly planned to pay cyber-probe suspect and IT aide Imran Awan even while he was living in Pakistan, if the FBI hadn’t stopped him from leaving the U.S. Monday. Public statements and congressional payroll records suggest she also appears to have known that his wife, a fellow IT staffer, left the country for good months ago — while she was also a criminal suspect.

 

In all, six months of actions reveal a decision to continue paying a man who seemingly could not have been providing services to her, and who a mountain of evidence suggests was a liability. The man long had access to all of Wasserman Schultz’s computer files, work emails and personal emails, and he was recently accused by a relative in court documents of wiretapping and extortion.

 

Records also raise questions about whether the Florida Democrat permitted Awan to continue to access computers after House-wide authorities banned him from the network Feb. 2. Not only did she keep him on staff after the ban, but she also did not have any other IT person to perform necessary work that presumably would have arisen during a months-long period, according to payroll records.

 

Wasserman Schultz employed Pakistani-born Awan and his wife Hina Alvi, and refused to fire either of them even after U.S. Capitol Police said in February 2017 that they were targets of the criminal investigation. She said police wouldn’t show her evidence against the couple and, without it, she assumed they might be victims of anti-Muslim profiling.

 

Awan booked a round-trip ticket to Pakistan in July and planned to depart Monday, July 24 with a return ticket in six months. He was arrested at Dulles Airport during his attempt to leave.

 

The Associated Press reported that Awan’s lawyer, Chris Gowen, said Awan “had informed the House of his plans to visit his family.”

 

Wasserman Schultz’s spokesman cited Awan’s Monday arrest as the reason for ending his employment on Tuesday: “Upon learning of his arrest, he was terminated.”

 

The office’s insistence that his termination was prompted by the Monday arrest — and not the House Sergeant at Arms banning him and his wife from touching congressional computers or his six months in Pakistan — suggests that had he boarded the flight without incident he would still be on payroll.

 

“Does that mean if he had boarded the flight as planned the office would have been paying him for six months while he was abroad?” The DCNF investigative group asked Wasserman Schultz’s spokesman Thursday. “Why would it do that?” The spokesman did not respond.

 

Awan’s wife, Hina, left the country under similar circumstances March 5, after withdrawing the couple’s three kids from school without telling Virginia education officials, packing up all of her possessions, and hiding $12,000 in cash, according to an FBI affidavit. She allegedly had hundreds of thousands of dollars waiting in Pakistan for her — money the FBI says Awan had obtained partly through mortgage fraud and had wired overseas using a false explanation.

 

Two days later, on March 7, House records show Hina was cut from Wasserman Schultz’s payroll.

 

Though Hina bought a round trip ticket with a return in six months, the FBI said it “does not believe that Alvi has any intention to return to the United States.”

 

Wasserman Schultz spokesman David Darmrom did not respond to a DCNF IG request to explain why Hina had been terminated two days into a trip she claimed was temporary, while her husband had not been terminated for a six-month move. Between the part-time nature of her work and the ban, her absence was unlikely to have been noticed in two days without someone telling the office her plans.

 

Wasserman Schultz’s office also didn’t answer if the office knew Hina’s “round trip” was a permanent move.

 

Hina and Awan were both IT aides whose jobs required access to the network, but the House Sergeant-At-Arms banned them from accessing it beginning Feb. 2. Awan and Hina were her only IT staffers, and payroll records through the latest available period, March 31, indicate that no other IT staffer or vendor was added to the payroll after their ban.

 

A House source said Awan was seen in the House office building multiple times after the network ban. “Imran Awan is working in an “advisory” role for Wasserman Schultz, her spokesman said, “providing advice on technology issues.”

 

The spokesman wouldn’t say who did the office’s computer work after the ban, if not Awan.

 

As IT administrators, the suspects could read all emails sent and received by the lawmaker and see all files on the staff members’ computers, numerous House IT aides said. WikiLeaks shows that Awan also had the password to Wasserman Schultz’s iPad.

 

In public court documents filed in Fairfax, Va., Awan’s stepmother accused him of wiretapping and extortion. “Imran Awan did admit to me that my phone is tapped and there are devices installed in my house” and “Imran Awan threatened that he is very powerful and if I ever call the police again, [he] will … kidnap my family members back in Pakistan,” his stepmother, Samina Gilani, claimed in the documents (p. 21) filed April 14.

 

Despite her professed concern of stereotyping, all other colleagues who employed Awan, Hina or their other relatives on House payrolls fired them, including Rep. Andre Carson of Indiana, who is Muslim and has criticized Wasserman Schultz for blocking police from examining a laptop tied to Imran.

 

That laptop was found in an unused crevice of a House office building and seized as evidence by the Capitol Police, but Wasserman Schultz appeared determined to not let police see its contents, threatening “consequences” for the police chief if he didn’t release it. The exchange was captured on video.

 

Fox News reported that months later, she had blocked them from looking at it but had become open to “negotiating” with police, possibly turning over certain files, as Hillary Clinton was permitted to do in deciding which emails were “personal.”

 

Observers have decried Wasserman Schultz’s judgment and cybersecurity record, noting she was the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee when it was hacked. A group of Democratic donors filed a lawsuit saying she and the DNC “breached the duties they owed to… members of the DNC Donor Class by failing to exercise reasonable care and implement adequate [cyber]security protocols..”

 

+++

There’s more than bank fraud going on here.

By ANDREW C. MCCARTHY

July 29, 2017 4:00 AM
National Review

 

In Washington, it’s never about what they tell you it’s about. So take this to the bank: The case of Imran Awan, Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s mysterious Pakistani IT guy, is not about bank fraud.

 

Yet bank fraud was the stated charge on which Awan was arrested at Dulles Airport this week, just as he was trying to flee the United States for Pakistan, via Qatar. That is the same route taken by Awan’s wife, Hina Alvi, in March, when she suddenly fled the country, with three young daughters she yanked out of school, mega-luggage, and $12,400 in cash.

 

By then, the proceeds of the fraudulent $165,000 loan they’d gotten from the Congressional Federal Credit Union had been sent ahead. It was part of a $283,000 transfer that Awan managed to wire from Capitol Hill. He pulled it off — hilariously, if infuriatingly — by pretending to be his wife in a phone call with the credit union. Told that his proffered reason for the transfer (“funeral arrangements”) wouldn’t fly, “Mrs.” Awan promptly repurposed: Now “she” was “buying property.” Asking no more questions, the credit union wired the money . . . to Pakistan.

 

As you let all that sink in, consider this: Awan and his family cabal of fraudsters had access for years to the e-mails and other electronic files of members of the House’s Intelligence and Foreign Affairs Committees. It turns out they were accessing members’ computers without their knowledge, transferring files to remote servers, and stealing computer equipment — including hard drives that Awan & Co. smashed to bits of bytes before making tracks.

 

They were fired in February. All except Awan, that is. He continued in the employ of Wasserman Schultz, the Florida Democrat, former DNC chairwoman, and Clinton crony. She kept him in place at the United States Congress right up until he was nabbed at the airport on Monday.

 

This is not about bank fraud. The Awan family swindles are plentiful, but they are just window-dressing. This appears to be a real conspiracy, aimed at undermining American national security.

 

At the time of his arrest, the 37-year-old Imran Awan had been working for Democrats as an information technologist for 13 years. He started out with Representative Gregory Meeks (D., N.Y.) in 2004. The next year, he landed on the staff of Wasserman Schultz, who had just been elected to the House.

 

Congressional-staff salaries are modest, in the $40,000 range. For some reason, Awan was paid about four times as much. He also managed to get his wife, Alvi, on the House payroll . . . then his brother, Abid Awan . . . then Abid’s wife, Natalia Sova. The youngest of the clan, Awan’s brother Jamal, came on board in 2014 — the then-20-year-old commanding an annual salary of $160,000.

 

A few of these arrangements appear to have been sinecures: While some Awans were rarely seen around the office, we now know they were engaged in extensive financial shenanigans away from the Capitol. Nevertheless, the Daily Caller’s Luke Rosiak, who has been all over this story, reports that, for their IT “work,” the Pakistani family has reeled in $4 million from U.S. taxpayers since 2009.

 

That’s just the “legit” dough. The family business evidently dabbles in procurement fraud, too. The Capitol Police and FBI are exploring widespread double-billing for computers, other communication devices, and related equipment.

 

Why were they paid so much for doing so little? Intriguing as it is, that’s a side issue. A more pressing question is: Why were they given access to highly sensitive government information? Ordinarily, that requires a security clearance, awarded only after a background check that peruses ties to foreign countries, associations with unsavory characters, and vulnerability to blackmail.

 

These characters could not possibly have qualified. Never mind access; it’s hard to fathom how they retained their jobs. The Daily Caller has also discovered that the family, which controlled several properties, was involved in various suspicious mortgage transfers. Abid Awan, while working “full-time” in Congress, ran a curious auto-retail business called “Cars International A” (yes, CIA), through which he was accused of stealing money and merchandise. In 2012, he discharged debts in bankruptcy (while scheming to keep his real-estate holdings). Congressional Democrats hired Abid despite his drunk-driving conviction a month before he started at the House, and they retained him despite his public-drunkenness arrest a month after. Beyond that, he and Imran both committed sundry vehicular offenses. In civil lawsuits, they are accused of life-insurance fraud.

 

Democrats now say that any access to sensitive information was “unauthorized.” But how hard could it have been to get “unauthorized” access when House Intelligence Committee Dems wanted their staffers to have unbounded access? In 2016, they wrote a letter to an appropriations subcommittee seeking funding so their staffers could obtain “Top Secret — Sensitive Compartmented Information” clearances. TS/SCI is the highest-level security classification. Awan family members were working for a number of the letter’s signatories.

 

Democratic members, of course, would not make such a request without coordination with leadership. Did I mention that the ranking member on the appropriations subcommittee to whom the letter was addressed was Debbie Wasserman Schultz?

 

Why has the investigation taken so long? Why so little enforcement action until this week? Why, most of all, were Wasserman Schultz and her fellow Democrats so indulgent of the Awans?

 

The probe began in late 2016. In short order, the Awans clearly knew they were hot numbers. They started arranging the fraudulent credit-union loan in December, and the $283,000 wire transfer occurred on January 18. In early February, House security services informed representatives that the Awans were suspects in a criminal investigation. At some point, investigators found stolen equipment stashed in the Rayburn House Office Building, including a laptop that appears to belong to Wasserman Schultz and that Imran was using. Although the Awans were banned from the Capitol computer network, not only did Wasserman Schultz keep Imran on staff for several additional months, but Meeks retained Alvi until February 28 — five days before she skedaddled to Lahore.

 

Strange thing about that: On March 5, the FBI (along with the Capitol Police) got to Dulles Airport in time to stop Alvi before she embarked. It was discovered that she was carrying $12,400 in cash. As I pointed out this week, it is a felony to export more than $10,000 in currency from the U.S. without filing a currency transportation report. It seems certain that Alvi did not file one: In connection with her husband’s arrest this week, the FBI submitted to the court a complaint affidavit that describes Alvi’s flight but makes no mention of a currency transportation report. Yet far from making an arrest, agents permitted her to board the plane and leave the country, notwithstanding their stated belief that she has no intention of returning.

 

Many congressional staffers are convinced that they’d long ago have been in handcuffs if they pulled what the Awans are suspected of. Nevertheless, no arrests were made when the scandal became public in February. For months, Imran has been strolling around the Capitol. In the interim, Wasserman Schultz has been battling investigators: demanding the return of her laptop, invoking a constitutional privilege (under the speech-and-debate clause) to impede agents from searching it, and threatening the Capitol Police with “consequences” if they don’t relent. Only last week, according to Fox News, did she finally signal willingness to drop objections to a scan of the laptop by federal investigators. Her stridency in obstructing the investigation has been jarring.

 

As evidence has mounted, the scores of Democrats for whom the Awans worked have expressed no alarm. Instead, we’ve heard slanderous suspicions that the investigation is a product of — all together now — “Islamophobia.” But Samina Gilani, the Awan brothers’ stepmother, begs to differ. Gilani complained to Virginia police that the Awans secretly bugged her home and then used the recordings to blackmail her. She averred in court documents that she was pressured to surrender cash she had stored in Pakistan. Imran claimed to be “very powerful” — so powerful he could order her family members kidnapped.

 

We don’t know if these allegations are true, but they are disturbing. The Awans have had the opportunity to acquire communications and other information that could prove embarrassing, or worse, especially for the pols who hired them. Did the swindling staffers compromise members of Congress? Does blackmail explain why were they able to go unscathed for so long?

 

And as for that sensitive information, did the Awans send American secrets, along with those hundreds of thousands of American dollars, to Pakistan?

 

This is no run-of-the-mill bank-fraud case.

 

+++

Imran Awan Becomes Suspect In Seth Rich Murder Inquiry

 

By Baxter Dmitry

July 29, 2017

YourNewsWire.com

 

Imran Awan, the former DNC staffer who was arrested this week while trying to flee the United States, was with Seth Rich the night of his murder, according to new photographic evidence.

 

Police who originally investigated the murder suggested that Seth Rich might have been killed by someone he knew, due to the lack of struggle. The killer also took nothing from the victim, leaving behind his wallet containing $2000, watch and phone.

 

The photo, which directly links Imran Awan to Seth Rich, also links Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Awan’s former employer, to the former Seth Rich’s death.

 

Seth Rich with Imran Awan on the night of his murder.

 

Awan, who was kept on the DNC payroll for months and received several payments from Wasserman Schultz, was arrested earlier this week at Dulles airport. while trying to flee the United States and return to his native Pakistan.

 

Earlier this week WND reported that Seth Rich attended a party with Washington D.C. IT workers the night of his death, and that Rod Wheeler, the detective investigating the murder, was determined to learn more about who attended the party:

 

During the course of his investigation of Rich’s murder, Wheeler says learned something peculiar that he hadn’t heard before: Rich attended a party with numerous IT workers the night he was killed. After the party, Rich went to Lou’s City Bar, the last known location where he was seen before his murder.

 

Wheeler said he was determined to learn more about the IT party and who was in attendance, but all his questions have gone unanswered.

 

Seth attended that party, and I wanted to know who else was at that party. But I could never find out,” Wheeler said. “When I went back to ask other people who should have known who was at that party – these were people who were close to Seth – they told me, ‘You don’t need to know who was at that party because it had nothing to do with his death.’”

 

Uncovering more details about the attendees of the party is essential in the Rich homicide investigation, Wheeler contends.

 

He was at the party before he went to the bar. What you do in a murder investigation is you work backward. You want to trace the victim’s steps as far back as you can – who was that person around the day before? – as far back as you can,” he said.

 

What was interesting is when I am told as an investigator that I don’t need to talk to people who were at the party. It makes you wonder why.”

 

Now that we know Imran Awan was at the party, Rod Wheeler’s statement has become even more interesting.

 

Federal agents arrested Awan, the IT aide of Wasserman Schultz and the top suspect in a major Democratic hacking scandal, at Dulles Airport in Virginia as he tried to flee the U.S. and fly to the Mideast.

 

WND report: Awan’s arrest came just one day after reports emerged that the FBI had seized numerous “smashed hard drives” and other computer equipment from Awan’s previous residence. The former House IT staffer is suspected of stealing sensitive information from the office computers of numerous Democratic Party lawmakers and sending that data to a secret server.

 

Awan and his family members, all of whom worked as IT professionals for members of Congress, were banned from the House network Feb. 2, 2017, by the House Sergeant at Arms.

 

Despite the rapidly escalating scandal that potentially involves multiple federal crimes, Awan had been kept on the payroll of former DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who circumvented the ban by having him “advise” her office.

 

In the wake of WikiLeaks posting damaging internal emails during the 2016 election, Wasserman Schultz resigned from her post as DNC chairwoman and blamed the scandal on an alleged hacking by Russians.

 

After the emails became public, Donna Brazile, who served as interim DNC chairwoman following Wasserman Schultz’s resignation, initially claimed the messages were fabricated. Then she alleged Russians stole the emails.

 

The FBI requested access to the DNC’s server to determine who was responsible for the breach. According to former FBI Director James Comey, the DNC refused to grant access to its server.

 

Awan reportedly possessed the password to the iPad Wasserman Schultz used when the DNC emails were provided to WikiLeaks.

 

Meanwhile, some have speculated that Rich – who worked in the voter analysis division of the DNC and was brutally murdered on July 10, 2016, on a street near his Washington home – was an inside source who leaked party insider emails to WikiLeaks during the 2016 presidential race.

 

Well, now you have a possible suspect. Here’s the corrupt IT guy standing on the shoulders of Debbie Wasserman Schultz arrested at the airport trying to flee, charged with stealing hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, of dollars,” said Rivera.

 

What if he was the source to WikiLeaks? He has all the passwords. He has all the information. This is a huge story … Everyone assumed it was the Russians who hacked the DNC and then gave WikiLeaks the emails,” said Rivera.

 

For a long time people thought that Seth Rich was the person who leaked information to Wikileaks. Seth Rich was then murdered in a mysterious ‘botched robbery’ in which nothing was stolen.

 

[Wikileaks’ Founder] Assange told me personally five times that it wasn’t a state or Russia,” said Hannity.

 

If you can prove disgruntled Democrats were the leakers and not the Russians, as Julian Assange has said … doesn’t that blow the whole thing out of the water?” said Hannity.

 

Check out the video below.

 

VIDEO: GERALDO RIVERA FULL ONE-ON-ONE EXPLOSIVE INTERVIEW WITH SEAN HANNITY (7/25/2017)

 

Posted by Republican State Committee

Published on Jul 25, 2017

 

GERALDO RIVERA FULL ONE-ON-ONE EXPLOSIVE INTERVIEW WITH SEAN HANNITY (7/25/2017)

 

+++

SEE ALSO:

 

The Wasserman Schultz Horror Picture Show; Posted by Dee Fatouros & By Alex Christoforou; The Realistic Observer; 7/30/17 5:32 AM.

 

BOMBSHELL DROPPED ON ‘RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA’ MANTRA; By GARTH KANT; WND; 7/30/17.

________________

Fmr. Clinton aide details how Obama has set up secret ‘war room’ blocks from the White House to destroy Trump

 

Copyright © 2017 All Rights Reserved BizPAC Review

_____________

Wasserman Schultz Seemingly Planned To Pay Suspect Even While He Lived In Pakistan

 

© Copyright 2010 – 2017 | The Daily Caller

____________

There’s more than bank fraud going on here.

 

Andrew C. McCarthy is a senior fellow at the National Review Institute and a contributing editor of National Review.

_______________

Imran Awan Becomes Suspect In Seth Rich Murder Inquiry

 

Baxter Dmitry is a writer at Your News Wire. He covers politics, business and entertainment. Speaking truth to power since he learned to talk, Baxter has travelled in over 80 countries and won arguments in every single one. Live without fear.

 

Copyright © 2017 The People’s Voice, Inc. All rights reserved | Your News Wire

 

Is Deep State Crimes Unraveling?


John R. Houk

© July 28, 2017

 

Have Dems and their media allies been pulling the old sleight of hand by trying to pin a Russia-Russia-Russia collusion on President Trump?

 

Muse this: Even with Deep State cover-ups and Left Stream Media collusion with the cover-ups; there are felonious acts going on that involve the murder of Seth Rich, Dem IT crook Imran Awan, former Dem Party Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Crooked Hillary, Wikileaks, Nancy Pelosi and dear God who knows what else will be revealed.

 

All this is unravelling and you may not know it because the Left Stream Media is not informing their readers and listeners. The only wat – currently – to know is to watch Conservative media or anti-Left alternative news sources.

 

I am sure more info is forth coming and possibly even better sources than I have found. Here are a series of news articles that should allow you to construct at least a piece of the American Left Deep State conspiracy to end Constitutional government and the Trump Administration.

 

JRH 7/28/17

Please Support NCCR

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

PRIVATE EYE: COPS BAILED FROM MEETING ON SETH RICH, RUSSIA PROBES

 

By ALICIA POWE

July 27, 2017

WND

 

Murdered DNC staffer Seth Rich (Photo: GoFundMe)

 

WASHINGTON – Detectives leading the Seth Rich murder investigation agreed to meet with Capitol Hill investigators to discuss evidence surrounding the alleged hacking of Democratic National Committee emails during the 2016 presidential election, a private eye claims.

 

But the Metropolitan Police Department canceled its meeting with House investigators on the Hill just hours before it was scheduled to take place, according to former Washington, D.C., homicide detective Rod Wheeler.

 

Wheeler, who previously worked as the Rich family’s private investigator, told WND he had arranged the meeting between House investigators looking into the alleged Russian interference in the election and members of the MPD probing the unsolved murder of DNC staffer Seth Rich.

 

‘Why would they cancel?’

 

Incidentally, during one of Wheeler’s own discussions with House investigators probing the Russia case, he claims, they asked him: What do you know about the Awan brothers?

 

As WND reported, Imran Awan was arrested by federal agents Tuesday at Dulles Airport in Virginia as he attempted to flee to Pakistan. Awan, who has been charged with bank fraud, headed a group of at least five IT contractors working for dozens of House Democrats, including former Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla. He is suspected of much more, including the possible theft of sensitive information from the office computers of numerous Democratic Party lawmakers and sending that data to a secret server. Awan has somehow acquired the services of one of the top power attorneys in Washington, Chris Gowen, who is deeply connected to Bill and Hillary Clinton.

 

Wheeler claims a thorough investigation of the Democrats’ IT hacking scandal involving the Awan brothers may reveal more information about Rich’s murder, the 2016 email breach of the Democratic National Committee and the Awan family.

 

“I’ve been following the arrest of Awan – this is a guy whose name came up a couple of times in my investigation as someone that I should look at,” he said in a phone call to WND Wednesday. “I never really got a chance to look at them in the investigation – but what I did do – I met with the Capitol Hill investigators.

 

“I thought they should meet with D.C. police regarding the Seth Rich case because I thought they may find some correlation between the two things that they were doing,” he continued. “Hill investigators were very interested in meeting with D.C. police – they had never met with them pertaining to the Seth Rich case. The D.C. police detective was very interested in meeting with the Hill investigators.”

 

The MPD hadn’t returned WND’s requests for comment at the time of this report.

 

“The MPD detective didn’t give me any explanation as to why. He just said, ‘Rod, I am going to need to cancel that meeting,’” Wheeler explained. “I don’t know why they canceled. I do have some suspicions, but I don’t want to speculate. I am always hesitant to speculate because they hang you out to dry when you do.”

 

He added: “I’ve always wondered in the back of my mind, ‘Why would they cancel at the last minute?’”

 

Awan had access to DNC emails during WikiLeaks dump

 

As WND reported, federal agents arrested Awan, the IT aide of Wasserman Schultz and the top suspect in a major Democratic hacking scandal, at Dulles Airport in Virginia as he tried to flee the U.S. Tuesday and fly to the Mideast.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz

 

Awan’s arrest came just one day after reports emerged that the FBI had seized numerous “smashed hard drives” and other computer equipment from Awan’s previous residence. The former House IT staffer is suspected of stealing sensitive information from the office computers of numerous Democratic Party lawmakers and sending that data to a secret server.

 

Awan and his family members, all of whom worked as IT professionals for members of Congress, were banned from the House network Feb. 2, 2017, by the House Sergeant at Arms.

 

Despite the rapidly escalating scandal that potentially involves multiple federal crimes, Awan had been kept on the payroll of former DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who circumvented the ban by having him “advise” her office.

 

In the wake of WikiLeaks posting damaging internal emails during the 2016 election, Wasserman Schultz resigned from her post as DNC chairwoman and blamed the scandal on an alleged hacking by Russians.

 

After the emails became public, Donna Brazile, who served as interim DNC chairwoman following Wasserman Schultz’s resignation, initially claimed the messages were fabricated. Then she alleged Russians stole the emails.

 

The FBI requested access to the DNC’s server to determine who was responsible for the breach. According to former FBI Director James Comey, the DNC refused to grant access to its server.

 

Awan reportedly possessed the password to the iPad Wasserman Schultz used when the DNC emails were provided to WikiLeaks.

 

Meanwhile, some have speculated that Rich – who worked in the voter analysis division of the DNC and was brutally murdered on July 10, 2016, on a street near his Washington home – was an inside source who leaked party insider emails to WikiLeaks during the 2016 presidential race.

 

In an August 2016 interview, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange appeared to suggest that Rich was one of his sources.

 

Youtube version of WND VIDEO: Dutch TV – Julian Assange on Seth Rich Murder, possible Leak

 

Posted by Valley Forge Network

Published on Aug 9, 2016

 

Reposting for posterity in case it is taken down etc., also for research. Please visit the original posters channel.

‘Julian Assange seems to suggests on Dutch television program Nieuwsuur that Seth Rich was the source for the Wikileaks-exposed DNC emails and was murdered.’

Original Posting
Julian Assange on Seth Rich
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp7FkLBRpKg

Nieuwsuur
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCExcZNwh_3Mwm4fF4VSiu2w

 

On July 22, just 12 days after Rich’s death and days before the Democratic Party Convention in Philadelphia, WikiLeaks began publishing “44,053 emails and 17,761 attachments” from top DNC officials. Some of the emails showed DNC officials conspiring to sabotage Bernie Sanders’ candidacy and help secure the party nomination for Hillary Clinton.

 

WND has launched a GoFundMe campaign to get to the bottom of the Seth Rich murder. Help us find out what really happened to the DNC staffer!

 

Did Rich attend an IT party on night of his death?

 

During the course of his investigation of Rich’s mysterious murder, Wheeler claims, he learned something peculiar that he hadn’t heard before: Rich attended a party with numerous IT workers the night he was killed. After the party, Rich went to Lou’s City Bar, the last known location where he was seen before his murder.

 

Wheeler said he was determined to learn more about the IT party and who was in attendance, but all his questions have gone unanswered.

 

“Seth attended that party, and I wanted to know who else was at that party. But I could never find out,” Wheeler said. “When I went back to ask other people who should have known who was at that party – these were people who were close to Seth – they told me, ‘You don’t need to know who was at that party because it had nothing to do with his death.’”

 

Uncovering more details about the attendees of the party is essential in the Rich homicide investigation, Wheeler contends.

 

“He was at the party before he went to the bar. What you do in a murder investigation is you work backward. You want to trace the victim’s steps as far back as you can – who was that person around the day before? – as far back as you can,” he said. “What was interesting is when I am told as an investigator that I don’t need to talk to people who were at the party. It makes you wonder why.”

 

DNC’s Brazile asked cops why Wheeler was ‘snooping’ in Rich case

 

Wheeler told WND in May that the MPD withheld information from him pertaining to Rich’s murder after former DNC interim chairwoman Donna Brazile called police to ask why investigators were “snooping” into Rich’s slaying.

 

A manager at Lou’s City Bar told WND that police never interviewed the bar’s staff or requested evidence, such as footage from security cameras. And police also never questioned Rich’s DNC co-workers.

 

As WND has reported, Jack Burkman, head of a team of private investigators in D.C. working to find Rich’s killers, claimed the MPD was instructed by Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser for political reasons to stop investigating Rich’s murder. The MPD and the mayor’s office disputed Burkman’s allegations.

 

The total reward for solving Rich’s murder currently stands at approximately a half-million dollars. Yet, the DNC has offered no reward for information leading to the arrest of the murderer of its own young staffer. Instead, the DNC honored its murdered employee by dedicating a bike rack outside its headquarters to Rich’s memory.

 

The Rich family’s attitude toward Wheeler, he claimed, changed dramatically after Democratic political crisis consultant Brad Bauman became their spokesman. Rich’s family threatened legal action against Wheeler in May after he told a Fox affiliate that he believed police were covering up details about the crime. An attorney representing the family sent Wheeler a cease-and-desist letter on May 19.

 

Wheeler said he’s uncertain when he’ll be allowed to reveal his report on Rich’s murder, but he is perplexed that Rich’s family has never expressed interest in the report’s findings.

 

“The cease-and-desist order does not have an expiration date. I don’t know if it’s set up for life or what,” he said. “The family has never asked for my final report. Why not? That’s interesting. Why wouldn’t they ask their investigator, ‘Give us a copy of the report and let us see what’s in it’?”

 

+++

Unearthed email reportedly ties Nancy Pelosi to Wasserman Schultz’s arrested IT aide

 

By Carmine Sabia 

July 27, 2017 

BizPac Review

 

The recently arrested IT aide to former DNC Chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz may have interacted with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.

 

Imran Awan, who worked for Wasserman Schultz as an IT aide, was arrested on Tuesday while attempting to flee to Pakistan, after wiring $283,000 to the nation from the Congressional Federal Credit Union.

 

His wife, also a Dem staffer who raked in $168,300 tax payer dollars through the most recent House period, fled to Pakistan before him with $12,000 in cash.

 

As BPR recently reported:

 

Awan began working for Wasserman Schultz in 2005. Shortly afterward, several of his relatives mysteriously appeared on the payroll of other Democrats, even though they were rarely seen at work.

 

These four relatives collected a total of $4 million in salaries (funded by U.S. taxpayers) since 2009.

 

The staffers have been involved in an ongoing probe chronicled by BizPac Review thanks to the investigative work by the Daily Caller’s investigative team.

 

Now it appears Awan may have had access to Pelosi’s iPad, according to an email obtained by WikiLeaks.

 

WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange sent a reminder of the email that showed Pelosi’s iPad likely made it into his hands for some unknown reason.

 

https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/889997787085107207

 

Pelosi is doing s [sic] closed door meeting. No staff or anyone allowed. Kaitlyn come to Rayburn room and get her iPad for Imran.


Thanks.

 

Tracie and Kate I will call Kate. Conf in Tracie

 

Rosalyn Kumar
Rep. Wasserman Schultz

 

Imagine the classified information that might be on the iPad of Pelosi in addition to the computers of Wasserman Schultz.

 

Wasserman Schultz’s IT aide arrested by FBI at airport, was headed to Pakistan after $300k wire

 

It’s no wonder that Fox News’ Geraldo Rivera speculated that Awan might be the leaker of DNC emails to Wikileaks.

 

+++

Former DNC Chair Is Sweating Bullets After This Arrest

 

Posted by otwadmin

Off The Wire

 

Debbie Wasserman Schultz – Off The Wire

 

Debbie Wasserman Schultz has a lot to answer for.

 

While the head of the Democratic National Committee, she disgraced the position by colluding against Bernie Sanders.

 

Now one of her top aides, already under investigation for congressional security breaches, was arrested in conjunction with fraud charges, and the questions are only beginning.

 

Imran Awan, Wasserman Schultz’s IT aide for over a decade, was arrested while trying to flee to Pakistan.

 

From TruthRevolt.org:

 

A LONGTIME IT AIDE TO FORMER DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE CHAIRWOMAN DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, WAS ARRESTED AT WASHINGTON, D.C.’S DULLES INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT MONDAY NIGHT AS HE WAS “TRYING TO LEAVE THE COUNTRY.”

 

 

THE BLAZE REPORTS THAT FEDERAL AGENTS AND THE U.S. CAPITOL POLICE ARRESTED PAKISTANI-BORN IMRAN AWAN AND CHARGED HIM WITH “MULTIPLE COUNTS OF BANK FRAUD” STEMMING FROM THE INVESTIGATION OF AN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROCUREMENT SCANDAL IN THE U.S. HOUSE.

 

The Blaze has the background:

 

AWAN HAS BEEN THE LEAD SUSPECT IN AN ONGOING CRIMINAL PROBE INTO SECURITY BREACHES WITHIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THAT WAS LAUNCHED ON FEB. 2. HE ALLEGEDLY DOUBLED CHARGED THE U.S. HOUSE FOR IT EQUIPMENT AND MAY HAVE EXPOSED SENSITIVE HOUSE MEMBERS’ INFORMATION ONLINE. ACCORDING TO PREVIOUS REPORTS, WASSERMAN SCHULTZ KEPT AWAN ON HER PAYROLL, EVEN  THOUGH HE HAD BEEN BANNED FROM HOUSE SERVERS BY CAPITOL HILL SECURITY.

 

[…]

 

AWAN, WHO WAS HIRED IN 2005, WAS REPORTEDLY IN POSSESSION OF AN IPAD USED BY THEN-DNC CHAIR WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, A FLORIDA REPRESENTATIVE, AROUND THE TIME THAT DNC EMAILS WERE LEAKED TO WIKILEAKS.

 

AWAN, THREE MEMBERS OF HIS FAMILY, AND CLOSE FRIEND RAO ABBAS WERE HOUSE IT WORKERS AND ARE ACCUSED OF STEALING EQUIPMENT FROM DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS’ OFFICES WITHOUT THEIR KNOWLEDGE AND COMMITTING POTENTIALLY ILLEGAL VIOLATIONS ON THE HOUSE IT NETWORK, INCLUDING LEAKING SENSITIVE INFORMATION STORED WITHIN THE SERVERS AND PERSONAL DEVICES OF HOUSE MEMBERS.

 

THE AWAN FAMILY — AS WELL AS FRIENDS — WERE ALLEGED TO HAVE OWED MONEY TO THE TERRORIST GROUP HEZBOLLAH.

 

[…]

 

THE AWANS WORKED IN 32 HOUSE MEMBER OFFICES, ALL DEMOCRATS, INCLUDING THE OFFICE OF WASSERMAN SCHULTZ AND MEMBERS OF THE HOMELAND SECURITY COMMITTEE, THE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, AND THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE. THE TECH TEAM ALSO WORKED IN THE OFFICE OF THE HOUSE DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS.

 

Despite the email hacks that uncovered top Democrats’ misconduct and an ongoing, months-long federal probe that barred Awan from accessing congressional servers, Wasserman Schultz curiously kept him on the payroll until after his arrest.

 

Perhaps Wasserman Schultz is incredibly forgiving and truly values Awan’s counsel, or perhaps he had her over a barrel. Evidence suggests the latter is more likely.

 

The article continues:

 

HOUSE AUTHORITIES BEGAN INVESTIGATING THE AWAN FAMILY DURING THEIR SEARCH FOR A SECRET SERVER THAT WAS FUNNELING CONGRESSIONAL DATA OFF-SITE. CAPITOL POLICE ORDERED AWAN TO STAY AWAY FROM HOUSE SERVERS DURING THE INVESTIGATION, BUT SCHULTZ KEPT HIM ON IN AN “ADVISORY POSITION,” ALLOWING HIM TO WORK REMOTELY.

 

AFTER AN INVESTIGATION WAS LAUNCHED, AWAN MOVED SUDDENLY FROM HIS VIRGINIA RENTAL HOME, AND THE NEW TENANT, A MARINE CORPS VET, REPORTED THAT “WIRELESS ROUTERS, HARD DRIVES THAT LOOK LIKE THEY TRIED TO DESTROY [SIC], LAPTOPS, [AND] A LOT OF BRAND NEW EXPENSIVE TONER” WERE LEFT BEHIND IN THE GARAGE AFTER AWAN’S DEPARTURE. “THEY LEFT IN A HUGE HURRY. IT LOOKS LIKE GOVERNMENT-ISSUED EQUIPMENT. WE TURNED THAT STUFF OVER.”

 

THE FBI WERE REPORTEDLY SEIZED HARD DRIVES FROM AWAN’S HOME LAST SUNDAY. THE DAILY CALLER REPORTED THAT AN ANONYMOUS SOURCE IN CONGRESS CONFIRMED THAT THE FBI HAS JOINED A CRIMINAL PROBE INTO “SERIOUS, POTENTIALLY ILLEGAL, VIOLATIONS ON THE HOUSE IT NETWORK” BY IMRAN AND THREE OF HIS RELATIVES, “WHO HAD ACCESS TO THE EMAILS AND FILES OF THE MORE THAN TWO DOZEN HOUSE DEMOCRATS WHO EMPLOYED THEM ON A PART-TIME BASIS.”

 

“THE AWANS HAD [MEMBERS] IN THEIR POCKET,” ONE IT STAFFER TOLD THE DC. “THERE ARE A LOT OF MEMBERS WHO COULD GO DOWN OVER THIS.”

 

It’s no surprise that just last week Wasserman Schultz began “negotiating” with Capitol Police in possession of her computer; she’s trying to get ahead of what could be a massive scandal.

 

If the allegations against Awan and his family are true, he certainly doesn’t seem like the type to carry the water for culpable Democrats, which means he’s likely to cut a deal with investigators.

 

The stories he can tell should have House Democrats quaking in fear.

 

+++

Democrat Leadership is Involved in a Massive Criminal Cover-Up – Mainstream Media Silent

 

By Onan Coca

July 27, 2017

Consitution.com

 

Former Democrat National Committee chief Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) may be in a world of trouble.

 

Her former IT team has long been under suspicion for a series of very serious crimes. However, Schultz ran interference for her IT team for months and even fought to keep investigators from gathering evidence of their crimes.

 

When confronted on her behavior Schultz dissembled and continued to make it harder for everyone to do their jobs.

 

Thankfully, Imran Awan, the man who Schultz worked so hard to protect made one too many mistakes and was caught attempting to flee the country and return home to Pakistan.

 

Now, Geraldo Rivera wonders if we may have finally caught the real leaker of the DNC and Clinton campaign emails.

 

“Well, now you have a possible suspect. Here’s the corrupt IT guy standing on the shoulders of Debbie Wasserman Schultz arrested at the airport trying to flee, charged with stealing hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, of dollars.”

 

See below starting at 2:11 in the video:

 

VIDEO: GERALDO RIVERA FULL ONE-ON-ONE EXPLOSIVE INTERVIEW WITH SEAN HANNITY (7/25/2017)

 

Posted by Republican State Committee

Published on Jul 25, 2017

 

Sadly, even though Awan was captured several days ago and the crimes against him are deadly serious, the liberal media has had nothing to say about the story.

 

The news is just getting noticed by some of the network giants, but BizPac Review has been chronicling this unbelievable story for months, thanks to the exceptional investigative reporting of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

 

As of this writing — more than 3 days after the latest news broke — liberal media outlets CNN, the Washington Post, and the New York Times — STILL have not covered the stunning developments. Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh is disgusted that the mainstream media are apparently ignoring this story simply because it makes Democrats look bad.

 

Here’s what’s happening: Imran Awan, the former IT employee of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, was arrested at Washington Dulles Airport on Monday trying to flee the country on a flight to Pakistan after wiring $283,000 to the country. On July 23, the FBI had seized several smashed hard drives from Imran’s home.

 

Awan’s wife had already fled the country in March 2017 after authorities found $12,000 in cash hidden in her suitcase at the airport.

 

In 2005 Awan got himself a job with Debbie Wasserman Schultz. In the months following, several of Awan’s family members got jobs with other Democrat legislators even though it seems they didn’t actually do any work for them.

 

In fact, Awan made some $ 2 Million during his 13 years working for Debbie Wassreman Schultz. The other four members of the Awan family earned some $4 million dollars from the Democrat Party (paid by the American taxpayers) between 2009 and 2016. Think about that number. Four “IT personnel” earned $4 Million over the course of 7 years. That’s a nice salary for the “IT guys.”

 

During the same period Awan found his way onto the FBI’s radar after making some shady mortgage deals.

 

VIDEO: Everything you need to know about the Imran Awan Arrest and Debbie Wassermann Shultz

 

Posted by Mike Cernovich

Published on Jul 26, 2017

 

Check out my facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MikeCernovich/

 

While there is much evidence that the Awan’s financial deals were indeed criminal, there was a much more worrisome problem.

 

As WND reports Imran Awan, “is suspected of much more, including the possible theft of sensitive information from the office computers of numerous Democratic Party lawmakers and sending that data to a secret server. It is a major scandal almost completely ignored by the establishment media.”

 

If the government’s suspicions are warranted the data breach could be incredibly massive. Awan led a team of at least 4 or 5 IT staffers who worked for dozens of House Democrats and the government believes that they may have stolen crucial intelligence from all of those Democrats over the course of more than a decade.

 

Meanwhile, Debbie Wasserman Schultz kept Awan on her payroll throughout the investigation and even ran interference for him with investigators. She was seen threatening Washington, D.C. police investigators, refused to cooperate with federal investigators, and even harassed the investigators who were trying to protect our nation.

 

So why is Schultz still working in Congress?

 

+++

Clintons and Pelosi Now Caught Up in Democrat Muslim IT Spy Scandal

 

By TIM BROWN

JULY 27, 2017

Freedom Outpost

 

After engaging in numerous security violations over the years, former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz admitted to it, which then led to an investigation into her information technology (IT).  Following the FBI seizing several smashed hard drives from his home, Imran Awan was arrested while he tried to flee the country to Qatar and then Pakistan after wiring $283,000 from the Congressional Federal Credit Union to that country.  Now, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D) and both Bill and Hillary Clinton are coming into the mix of the Muslim IT spy scandal.

 

The Daily Caller reports“Chris Gowen, Imran Awan’s lawyer, is a long-time campaigner for former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and a member of an attorney team that brought a fraudulent lawsuit against energy giant Chevron.”

 

Apparently, the Democrats have paid at least $4 million since 2009 into this Muslim IT spy ring called the Awan group.

 

Imran Awan had been under investigation for stealing classified intel, potentially blackmailing house members and various other data breaches.

 

Among those in political office who employed the services of the Awans are at least 23 current and former Democrats in Congress.  Here’s the list:

 

  • Andre Carson

 

  • Luis Gutierrez

 

  • Jim Himes

 

  • Terri Sewell

 

  • Jackie Speier

 

  • Mike Quigley

 

  • Eric Swalwell

 

  • Patrick Murphy

 

  • Debbie Wasserman Schultz

 

  • Joaquini Castro

 

  • Lois Frankel

 

  • Ted Lieu

 

  • Robin Kelly

 

  • Tammy Duckworth

 

  • Mark Takano

 

  • John Sarbanes

 

  • Diana DeGette

 

  • Cedric Richmond

 

  • Charlie Crist

 

  • Jacky Rosen

 

  • Sandy Levin

 

  • Karen Bass

 

  • Marcia Fudge

 

Of course, you probably recognize many of these names as the usual suspects when it comes to corruption and treason in the Democrat Party.

 

Following Awan’s arrest this week, Wikileaks’s Julian Assange pointed out the link between Awan and Nancy Pelosi by pointing to a May 2016 email.  Here’s the text.

 

From: Kumar, Rosalyn Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 4:38 PM To: Stolitzka, Anna Cc: Kroll, Amy; Bonosky, Garret; Burgan, Geoff; Arkin, Sarah; Farhadian, Sarah; Guerra, Liana; Kate Houghton; Banfill, Ryan; jasonomalley77@gmail.com<mailto:jasonomalley77@gmail.com>; P. Aikowsky; rorokumar@gmail.com<mailto:rorokumar@gmail.com>; Tracie Pough; Lane, Kaitlyn; Extein, Seth; Steinberg, Jonathan; Meredtih Swan; Lindsey Schulte; courtney@dwsforcongress.com<mailto:courtney@dwsforcongress.com>; Anna Stolitzka

 

Subject: Re: DWS MOVEMENTS – 5/12/2016

 

Pelosi is doing s closed door meeting. No staff or anyone allowed. Kaitlyn come to Rayburn room and get her iPad for Imran. Thanks.

 

Tracie and Kate I will call Kate. Conf in Tracie

 

Rosalyn Kumar

 

Rep. Wasserman Schultz

 

Note that Awan had access to Pelosi’s iPad, as well.

 

What all do these treasonous Democrats know and how are they aiding these Muslim spies?  Who knows.  They could just be completely ignorant and in it for political gain or money or power… or they could know exactly what they are doing.

 

Either way, it looks as if this IT scandal goes all the way to the top in the DNC.

 

Instead of the media parroting the fake news narrative about Russian collusion, they should be reporting on this story as it is not only documented, but has great ramifications for national security.  We can safely say the mainstream media are colluding with the enemies of America.  They are not the press.  They are the propaganda machine.

+++

SEE ALSO:

 

Treason: GOP Congressman Says Muslim IT Spy Had Access To “All The Communication Of The Foreign Affairs Committee”; By TIM BROWN; Freedom Outpost; 7/27/17

_______________

Is Deep State Crimes Unraveling?

John R. Houk

© July 28, 2017

______________

PRIVATE EYE: COPS BAILED FROM MEETING ON SETH RICH, RUSSIA PROBES

 

Copyright 2017 WND

____________

Unearthed email reportedly ties Nancy Pelosi to Wasserman Schultz’s arrested IT aide

 

Copyright © 2017 All Rights Reserved BizPac Review

___________

Former DNC Chair Is Sweating Bullets After This Arrest

 

Off The Wire

____________

Clintons and Pelosi Now Caught Up in Democrat Muslim IT Spy Scandal

 

Copyright © 2017 FreedomOutpost.com