What’s a little Coup among enemies?

American Spectator
George Neumayr — March 21, 2018 [excerpts]
“As his plot to destroy Trump backfires, his squeals grow louder.”

America will triumph over a president it elected? That’s the raw language of coup, and of course it is not the first time Brennan has indulged it. In 2017, he was calling for members of the executive branch to defy the chief executive. They should “refuse to carry out” his lawful directives if they don’t agree with them, he said.

Another hardcore leftist, Samantha Power, who spent the weeks after Trump’s victory rifling through intelligence picked up on his staff, found Brennan’s revolutionary tweet very inspiring. “Not a good idea to piss off John Brennan,” she wrote. Sounded pretty dark and grave. But not to worry, she tweeted later. She just meant that the former CIA director was going to smite Trump with the power of his “eloquent voice.”

Out of power, these aging radicals can’t help themselves. They had their shot to stop Trump, they failed, and now they are furious. The adolescent coup talk grows more feverish with each passing day. We have a former CIA director calling for the overthrow of a duly elected president, a former attorney general (Eric Holder) calling for a “knife fight,” a Senate minority leader speaking ominously about what the intelligence community might do to Trump (“they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you,” Schumer has said), and assorted former FBI and CIA officials cheering for a coup, such as CNN’s Phil Mudd who says, “You’ve been around for 13 months. We’ve been around since 1908. I know how this game is going to be played. We’re going to win.”

A little late, the coup should have happened by 2011. That was the tree that never fell in the woods, and everyone heard it. But commie fans like Brennan loved that era.

The Post Facto Coverup

I apologize for yet another rant, though I like to call them op-eds on the current state of liberaldom. And the current state is disgusting.

I have a little familiarity with language but that fails when it comes to describing what is going on. As is my usual argument about liberalism, perception is reality — being that perception is what they live in.

I am continually amazed how far they will go to either assert that perception as fact or in denying the reality around them. Such is the liberal animal though, since it is a creature of habit and habitiat, driven by its ideology. The other chief tool is projecting on opponents their own exact faults and abuses. The failures of what they do either do not exist in their minds or are just more opportunities to obfuscate the truth.

You know the saying that “sunlight is the best disinfectant” but there isn’t enough sunshine at the equator to disinfect this corruption from the left. No, I’m not buying that excuse that both sides do it and one side didn’t create all this. We see where the corruption is rolling like a river from.

And you might say, “but you are not being objectively fair.” That’s the problem with the left, I do have a bias for good reasons and don’t pretend to be an impartial tool. And most liberals don’t have an ounce of objectivity. They pride themselves on being biased. They demand objectivity from everyone else.

So we have an investigation into Trump over Russia. But a dossier with information from Russian operatives was assembled to use against him.

Here’s the line the left uses: if Mueller is removed it creates a Constitutional crisis. But the Special Counsel investigation itself created a Constitutional crisis. We don’t have to worry about an investigation getting corrupted, it was born of corruption — what else could it be?

We’re getting to the real point, the obvious mission of the investigation. First, it was started in search of a justification. But that is not the problem now. We see what the whole thing really is: the purpose of the investigation is a cover up for what went on. It is a giant cover up operation for the mass politicization and corruption of the DOJ and FBI.

Now the whole Trump campaign that evolved into the transition of President-elect Trump has been pilfered by Mueller. It is an investigation of the whole apparatus.

Let’s be clear that this is an investigation of a campaign and the election. We have the loser colluding with government against the president — as they did during the campaign. What we had even before the investigation is government targeting a president. And it continues. There is not enough sunlight to sanitize this. We know what is going on, from warrantless searches to surveillance of a candidate/campaign, however falsely they justified it.

Then we have one more interesting thing. I complained back in the campaign about the way they treated Trump. And I was outraged by their branding him with names. Remember former CIA director, Mike Morell went to media to write an op-ed attack on Trump, using his years in intelligence as his credentials for it — to add a certification of legitimacy for his charges. He called Trump an unwitting agent of a foreign government. That was akin to treason. Obama also followed that similar track.

Update, the same Mike Morell comes out to apologize for getting it wrong saying they reacted badly. Sorry, not really! It was the half-hearted dance the liberal bastards do when their heads are in a vice. See how he morphs a feigned apology into pointing the finger of blame… but on Trump: The Hill

Michael Morell, the former Acting Director of the CIA, recently confessed that maybe it was a mistake for himself, the former chief of the CIA and NSA, Gen. Michael Hayden, and the then-Director of the CIA, John Brennan, to criticize candidate Donald Trump. He admitted that he failed to understand how Trump would interpret their campaign criticism, which is pretty damning coming from someone who briefed presidents on how foreign leaders think.

Of course, Morell didn’t cop to his behavior, saying, “So, I don’t think it was a mistake. I think there were downsides to it that I didn’t think about at the time … I don’t think I fully thought through the implications.” [more]

Wait, he does not apologize saying it was “not a mistake”. Mike just didn’t “think through the implications” — the implications of politicizing intelligence and calling someone a traitor. The problem is he knew exactly what he was doing then. But the new revelations of biases would taint what he did so he’s trying to duck and cover it.

He didn’t know how Trump would respond to that? I don’t know, how do you respond to be called a foreign agent of an enemy? How do you respond to government and intelligence conspiring against you? If Hillary would have won, that would be the end of it. Success. No need to ever mention it again. Don’t even pull the knife from the victim, just let him lay there. I have a special contempt for Morell after what he did. So the problem was how Trump interpreted it?

But what Morel took part in, and helped cause, was real damage. Even apologizing now would never undo any of that. In fact, they get to have it both ways — just like Clinton defenders — because they got to do their political attacks and benefited from them. Now they are still reaping all the benefits of the false attacks. Except they want to be excused for what they did.

That brings it back to the investigation. Never mind the faulty premises or the conflicted political biases, or the illegalities involved. Never mind spending a year beating on the results of the election with a sludge hammer. Never mind what the last administration did, or what the other candidate did in the process of “democracy.” Never mind the sheer corruption and bias involved across government.

Finally, never mind that this whole thing has been a cover up and a diversion from focusing on the real corruption that ran rampant for 8 years. They needed a scapegoat and a whipping post. Never mind what this cover up of corruption does to democracy. Yet they had the nerve to complain that Trump was somehow threatening or destroying democracy, “as democracy was under attack.” There is no undoing what they did, or turning back.

Right Ring | Bullright

Media enemy of the State

What happens when the media becomes the enemy of the state? Well, we’re about to find out — if it hasn’t been getting clearer all along. It isn’t pretty.

There is no limit to how far the mainstream media zealots and agenda-driven hacks will go. They aren’t armed with the Freedom of Press but with a vendetta and an active imagination with a radical anti-American agenda. (like their messiah Obama)

Some will say, ‘but it’s good and necessary to have an adversarial press.’ Yes, but we are past that, way over that adversarial stage. We are in a new era of hate – resistance.

You can look at it this way, we now have an Independent Counsel investigation. We also have a press acting as if it were special prosecutors. That’s how they operate, with an assumption that they have all these extra powers, as lieutenants for the resistance.

So, in effect, we have the 2 major investigations in Congress. (plus the minor ones) both of them now coordinating with Mueller in the Special Counsel. Mueller feels he has de facto power, direct and indirect, over both of those bodies. And final word. Trump has O.

Then there is the press who thinks no rules apply to it — as if there are any in the other three. Media plays collaboratively off all three official bodies. They handle the steady leaks and anonymous sources, even creating their own news when needed to fill any gaps.

Gas Ahead photo 100_2273.jpg

Photo image cred

There are now leaks coming from the Special Counsel — which we were told would be super tight-lipped. The media worried at first they would be shut out of the info flow because Mueller does not tolerate leaks. Now he appears to be accommodating media.

It is now a full blown coup on the White House.under a unified front. So it comes from multiple directions. Don’t think we are quite there yet? Look around a little more.

Meathead Media is now covering all the voices calling for Sessions to leave. They have their sites on him. More intel leaks are said to justify him leaving. They say he can’t remain. The same voices and media talking heads are also calling for the impeachment process to begin. Many more than Auntie Maxine are chanting impeachment as if there it were as inevitable as his inauguration. Almost like it was planned.

Whether anyone is leaving yet, at this point, they are out to totally shut down this presidency. Make it so unable to function that he cannot survive. That’s the objective.

It just gets worse all the time, as the left ramps up radicalization of all assets at once. With the media being in the center of all the the activity. The harder you look the worse it is.

Here is what News Busters just reported a day ago. Press risks all for its agenda.

At the forum, CIA Director Mike Pompeo took to the stage slammed The New York Times for putting the life of an officer at risk. “We had a publication, you work for Bret, that published the name of an undercover officer at the Central Intelligence Agency. I find that unconscionable,” he angrily declared to the thunderous applause of the audience.

But get this, they seem more concerned for safety of anonymous sources that provide them information than covert operators. This is serious stuff. They are now endangering our national security and our people on the ground. But then the NYT person who was interviewing Pompeo explained it this way — or tried to.

The Times claimed one of the reasons they published the name was because it had appeared in other articles. [their own] Their second reason was that Donald Trump was the president. “[Redacted] is leading an important new administration initiative against Iran,” they said.

Wow, totally outrageous and vindictive. Saying it is justified because Trump is president… which somehow gives them the right to name the person again, with personal information. This is nothing like Valerie Plame. This is real time intel they are messing playing with. Putting lives at risk, daily. Leaks, leaks and super leaks and no one cares.

What we have here is the CIA Director calling out the press right there live, at a security forum. Oh it might not be a hearing at the Capitol but this is even bigger. Right there on stage and people applauded Pompeo for bringing the heat. They deserve public shaming, not that it will work. Is it war?

This is not press or media, these are subversives acting out like seditious cells. That’s how they feel about Trump being President. Jeopardizing the nation’s security means nothing. Disdain for Trump above everything else. Hate rules, Resistance for resistance sake.

Radicals are lose.

And it seems, more and more every day, that not only are there real inherent conflicts and bias with Mueller’s entire team but that he is clearly out to extract a pound of flesh for Comey’s firing. Will he get it? Mueller went rogue from the start. Deep State. All weapons are out in a full assault. Media is at the center driving it all. Hostile enemies within.

RightRing | Bullright

Brennan no saint has dirty hands

Report: Muslim Sympathizers at CIA Behind Trump Leaks

Obama loyalists still at CIA fuel radical Islam
Jerome R. Corsi | Infowars.com – February 16, 2017 | Infowars

WASHINGTON, D.C. – It’s time to “drain the swamp” at the CIA, as former CIA Director John Brennan, a clear Muslim sympathizer, packed the agency with Obama loyalists determined to bring down the Trump administration.

Looking for anti-Trump leakers, President Trump needs to be as concerned about the CIA as the NSA.

Few remember that it was John Brennan’s private security company that was responsible for the breach of State Department files which sanitized the passport records (still never seen by the public) of presidential candidate and then-Sen. Barack Obama prior to the 2008 presidential election.

On March 21, two unnamed contract employees for the State Dept. and a third were disciplined for breaching Obama’s passport files. Two were found to be employees for Stanley, Inc., a security firm based in Arlington, Virginia, that was headed by former CIA agent John Brennan, who was then serving as an advisor on intelligence and foreign policy to Sen. Obama’s presidential campaign.

Brennan was an undergraduate at the American University in Cairo in the 1970s, where he studied Arabic. In 1976, he voted in the presidential election for Communist Party USA candidate Gus Hall. He speaks Arabic fluently, having served in the CIA as station chief in Saudi Arabia.

On Feb. 13, 2010, as President Obama’s chief counterterrorism advisor in the White House, Brennan hosted a public forum, co-hosted by the White House Office of Public Engagement and the Islamic Center at New York University, where he quoted a lengthy statement in Arabic which he didn’t translate for his English-speaking audience.

More: http://www.infowars.com/report-muslim-sympathizers-at-cia-behind-trump-leaks/

Values of Obama

Obama came out this week to blast the perceptions known as the torture report.

The report documents a troubling program involving enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorism suspects in secret facilities outside the United States, and it reinforces my long-held view that these harsh methods were not only inconsistent with our values as nation, they did not serve our broader counterterrorism efforts or our national security interests. Moreover, these techniques did significant damage to America’s standing in the world and made it harder to pursue our interests with allies and partners. That is why I will continue to use my authority as President to make sure we never resort to those methods again.

As Commander in Chief, I have no greater responsibility than the safety and security of the American people. We will therefore continue to be relentless in our fight against al Qaeda, its affiliates and other violent extremists. We will rely on all elements of our national power, including the power and example of our founding ideals.

But last year another revelation was taking shape. That was statements Obama made to top aides, revealed in a new book. The Washington Times reported:

The president’s specific words: I’m “really good at killing people,” authors Mark Halperin and John Heilemann write in “Double Down: Game Change 2012,” The Daily Mail reported. They get their claim from a Washington Post report that buries the statement as a brief anecdote in an article, in which the president is described as speaking to aides about the drone program and then making the claim.

So when he wants to talk about “harsh” methods, I guess Obama is all over the statements — being a Nobel Peace Prize recipient. But if talking about drones and killing people, Obama prides himself on that. Whether it was an off hand remark or not it shows the duplicitous attitude of Obama. On one hand, he actually made a campaign theme on his ability to kill people. Oh that’s right, he made another, earlier campaign about interrogation methods and closing Gitmo.

But droning people? He has weekly meetings about killing people, as revealed in 2012. He is personally involved in the process. Well, with all the practice, he should be good at it by now. Yet he condemns those interrogation tactics as inconsistent with our values.

It’s ironic that this 2012 NYT report was to bolster confidence in his national security credentials in the midst of a long, tough reelection campaign.

President Obama, overseeing the regular Tuesday counterterrorism meeting of two dozen security officials in the White House Situation Room, took a moment to study the faces. It was Jan. 19, 2010, the end of a first year in office punctuated by terrorist plots and culminating in a brush with catastrophe over Detroit on Christmas Day, a reminder that a successful attack could derail his presidency. Yet he faced adversaries without uniforms, often indistinguishable from the civilians around them.

“How old are these people?” he asked, according to two officials present. “If they are starting to use children,” he said of Al Qaeda, “we are moving into a whole different phase.”

It was not a theoretical question: Mr. Obama has placed himself at the helm of a top secret “nominations” process to designate terrorists for kill or capture, of which the capture part has become largely theoretical.

Well the values of protecting US citizens, like in Benghazi, hardly rank high on his list. His whereabouts on the night of the attack are still undetermined. The lies after about what it was did not seal his commitment to Americans’ security, or our values.

But now he stands for American “values”? Toss in the values of his Obamacare sales pitch, in most places called lying, repeated with precision. He implies that he read the Democrat’s report version at least, as opposed to pesky briefings he cannot be bothered with.
“Values”…got some?

“What lies behind us and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson

RightRing | Bullright

ISIS and CIA , Saudi Arabia’s Islamic State

Conventional wisdom, what is conventional in Iraq or Mid-East for that matter?

Suspicions Run Deep in Iraq That C.I.A. and the Islamic State Are United

SEPT. 20, 2014 | NYT

BAGHDAD — The United States has conducted an escalating campaign of deadly airstrikes against the extremists of the Islamic State for more than a month. But that appears to have done little to tamp down the conspiracy theories still circulating from the streets of Baghdad to the highest levels of Iraqi government that the C.I.A. is secretly behind the same extremists that it is now attacking.

“We know about who made Daesh,” said Bahaa al-Araji, a deputy prime minister, using an Arabic shorthand for the Islamic State on Saturday at a demonstration called by the Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr to warn against the possible deployment of American ground troops. Mr. Sadr publicly blamed the C.I.A. for creating the Islamic State in a speech last week, and interviews suggested that most of the few thousand people at the demonstration, including dozens of members of Parliament, subscribed to the same theory. (Mr. Sadr is considered close to Iran, and the theory is popular there as well.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/21/world/middleeast/suspicions-run-deep-in-iraq-that-cia-and-the-islamic-state-are-united.html?_r=2

The Islamic State . . . of Saudi Arabia

Between beheadings, they’ll help train the “moderate” Syrian rebels.
By Andrew C. McCarthy | NRO
September 20, 2014

The beheadings over the last several weeks were intended to terrorize, to intimidate, to coerce obedience, and to enforce a construction of sharia law that, being scripturally rooted, is draconian and repressive.

And let’s not kid ourselves: We know there will be more beheadings in the coming weeks, and on into the future. Apostates from Islam, homosexuals, and perceived blasphemers will face brutal persecution and death. Women will be treated as chattel and face institutionalized abuse. Islamic-supremacist ideology, with its incitements to jihad and conquest, with its virulent hostility toward the West, will spew from the mosques onto the streets. We will continue to be confronted by a country-sized breeding ground for anti-American terrorists.
Advertisement

The Islamic State? Sorry, no. I was talking about . . . our “moderate Islamist” ally, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

But the confusion is understandable.

Islamic State terrorists have infamously decapitated three of their prisoners in recent weeks. That is five fewer than the Saudi government decapitated in August alone. Indeed, it is three fewer beheadings than were carried out in September by the Free Syrian Army — the “moderate Islamists” that congressional Republicans have now joined Obama Democrats in supporting with arms and training underwritten by American taxpayer dollars. […/]

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/388460/islamic-state-saudi-arabia-andrew-c-mccarthy

Obama switched sides

Mideast expert: Obama switched sides in war on terror

‘America has moved toward its Muslim enemies’
by Garth Kant | WND
August 28, 2014

WASHINGTON – It’s an explosive charge, one that puts the president’s motives into question.

A former CIA agent bluntly told WND, America has switched sides in the war on terror under President Obama.

Clare Lopez was willing to say what a few members of Congress have confided to WND in private, but declined to say on-the-record.

She said the global war on terror had been an effort to “stay free of Shariah,” or repressive Islamic law, until the Obama administration began siding with such jihadist groups as the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates.

Why the switch?

Lopez explained, when the so-called Arab Spring appeared in late 2010, “It was time to bring down the secular Muslim rulers who did not enforce Islamic law. And America helped.”

And why would Obama want to do that?

As she told WND earlier this month, Lopez believed the Muslim Brotherhood has thoroughly infiltrated the Obama administration and other branches of the federal government.

She also came to the conclusion Obama had essentially the same goals in the Mideast as the late Osama bin Laden: “to remove American power and influence, including military forces, from Islamic lands.”

Why would Obama order the killing of bin Laden?

Because the president “couldn’t delay any longer,” once the opportunity was presented, Lopez told WND.

There were “no more excuses” available to avoid it and he “thought it might look good,” she mused.

The former CIA operative’s perspective affects her prescription for what the U.S. should do about the terror army ISIS, as she called for caution and restraint.

While there has been a sudden chorus of politicians and military experts calling for the immediate elimination of the terrorist army after it beheaded American journalist James Foley last week, Lopez believes the U.S. should have an overall strategy in place before fully re-engaging in the Mideast militarily.

Any military action would be further complicated, she told WND, if it were not clear which side the U.S. is on, either in the short term or in the overall war on terror.

Lopez’s insights are backed by an impressive array of credentials.

Former CIA operations officer Clare Lopez

She spent two decades in the field as a CIA operations officer; was an instructor for military intelligence and special forces students; has been a consultant, intelligence analyst and researcher within the defense sector; and has published two books on Iran. Lopez currently manages the counter-jihad and Shariah programs at the Center for Security Policy, run by Frank Gaffney, former assistant secretary of defense for international security policy during the Reagan administration.

[…/]

Much more at: WND

If Obama is selling excuses, I’m not buying

In a stunning revelation about Obama’s secret Afghanistan troop visit, the administration is forced to admit they outed the top spook in the area. Ever quick to scramble, on anything scandal related, they called it an accident and revised their press blurb. Too late they already had spread the word though most outfits did not release the name after. Yea, let’s just call it an accident. But I’m not so sure. (who can be certain about the reasoning of anything in this twisted regime?)

See, if we learned one thing in the last year of scandals, it is that the administration prides itself on its talking points. The information it gave the press was a list of the supporting staff and network in Afghanistan. Always wanting to thank their subordinates and cronies, they issued the release with the name on it with various VIPs.

White House mistakenly reveals CIA official’s name

May 26th 2014 2:32PM

By Ken Dilanian

WASHINGTON (AP) – In an embarrassing flub, the Obama administration accidentally revealed the name of the CIA’s top official in Afghanistan in an email to thousands of journalists during the president’s surprise Memorial Day weekend trip to Bagram Air Field.

The officer’s name – identified as “chief of station” in Kabul – was included by U.S. embassy staff on a list of 15 senior American officials who met with President Obama during the Saturday visit. The list was sent to a Washington Post reporter who was representing the news media, who then sent it out to the White House “press pool” list, which contains as many as 6,000 recipients.

The Associated Press is withholding the officer’s name at the request of the Obama administration, who said its publication could put his life and those of his family members in danger. A Google search appears to reveal the name of the officer’s wife and other personal details.

The intentional disclosure of the name of a “covered” operative is a crime under the U.S. Intelligence Identities Protection Act.
MORE

That’s right, on first blush you notice they referred to the person as the “station chief”. This on the heels of Benghazigate, where we heard such words regularly. Knowing full well station chief refers to CIA, even most people know that. Its a no-brainer. I could see if they released the name only but listing the title “station chief” should give anyone pause. But then what does it really matter if they did it intentionally or not? Then they revised it, but only thanks to a reporter that they caught it at all.

How nice that the press are taking it on themselves to withhold it, as if that fixes the problem. I bet Al Jazeera will be as kind too. More troubling that the information was WH cleared prior to release.

Of course, we haven’t heard the last of this and a “oops” won’t make it go away. These are the same people that were so hyper sensitive about Valerie Plame, who for all intents and purposes was in Washington. Whether she was or not under cover at the time. Here you have the station chief divulged in a war zone, at a super critical time, especially as we consider a mass exodus from there. It will be interesting to hear how the media try to bury this as a non-issue. Obama is just a walking talking scandal machine.

Accidentally, no foul, no harm…yet. Oh, he was leaving anyway. I expect that’s the sort of excuses we’ll here.

But the even more interesting thing is that in his speech Obama went out of his way to thank ambassadors and their families for the sacrifices they make too, often at great personal risk or in harms way. And then they out a top operative in the area. They are they same people who went after Fox’s James Rosen, and his family, for leaking information, threatening charges. But carefree Obamanoids give away data by themselves. Well, not like it was intentional or something.

Good thing there would never be an accidental leak of secret information on Obama, and his super-secret records though. Heads would roll then.

RightRing | Bullright

Benghazi black hole

Not much has changed since these clips.

Oh, “the kind of insanity we’re dealing with.”


The outrage goes on. Boehner, complicit or just complacent?

Did CIA’s Mike Morell Lie Under Oath About Changing the Benghazi Talking Points?

April 2, 2014

After former acting CIA Director Mike Morell testified to the House Intelligence Committee that he is the one who changed the Benghazi talking points, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) renewed her call for a select committee to investigate the attack. She suggested that Morell either lied to senators shortly after the attack, or lied during his testimony today.

4 Dead in Benghazi
“Should have been done long ago.”
“How can you run when you know?”

What will it take?
 

Benghazi attack could have been prevented if US hadn’t ‘switched sides in the War on Terror’ and allowed $500 MILLION of weapons to reach al-Qaeda militants, reveals damning report

Citizens Committee on Benghazi claims the US government allowed arms to flow to al-Qaeda-linked militants who opposed Muammar Gaddafi
Their rise to power, the group says, led to the Benghazi attack in 2012
The group claims the strongman Gaddafi offered to abdicate his presidency, but the US refused to broker his peaceful exit
The commission, part of the center-right Accuracy In Media group, concluded that the Benghazi attack was a failed kidnapping plot
US Ambassador Chris Stevens was to be captured and traded for ‘blind sheikh’ Omar Abdel-Rahman, who hatched the 1993 WTC bombing plot

By David Martosko, U.s. Political Editor

Published: 15:09 EST, 22 April 201 | Daily Mail UK

The Citizens Commission on Benghazi, a self-selected group of former top military officers, CIA insiders and think-tankers, declared Tuesday in Washington that a seven-month review of the deadly 2012 terrorist attack has determined that it could have been prevented – if the U.S. hadn’t been helping to arm al-Qaeda militias throughout Libya a year earlier.

‘The United States switched sides in the war on terror with what we did in Libya, knowingly facilitating the provision of weapons to known al-Qaeda militias and figures,’ Clare Lopez, a member of the commission and a former CIA officer, told MailOnline.

She blamed the Obama administration for failing to stop half of a $1 billion United Arab Emirates arms shipment from reaching al-Qaeda-linked militants.

‘Remember, these weapons that came into Benghazi were permitted to enter by our armed forces who were blockading the approaches from air and sea,’ Lopez claimed. ‘They were permitted to come in. … [They] knew these weapons were coming in, and that was allowed..

‘The intelligence community was part of that, the Department of State was part of that, and certainly that means that the top leadership of the United States, our national security leadership, and potentially Congress – if they were briefed on this – also knew about this.’

The weapons were intended for Gaddafi but allowed by the U.S. to flow to his Islamist opposition.

More: Dailymail.co.UK
 

Hillary Clinton Cancels Appearance Where Benghazi Victim’s Mom, Protestors Await

April 4, 2014

Hillary Clinton was the planned keynote speaker at the 17th Annual Western Healthcare Leadership Academy in San Diego on April 11 – but she’s cancelled her visit in the midst of planned protests from San Diego locals and military families.

Protestors organized by “The Difference Matters” do not want the former U.S. Secretary of State to come because of Clinton’s role in the Benghazi scandal.

What difference, at this point, does it make?”
How can you run when you know?

Moderate Muslims rarer than WMD

Syria: Obama chases mirages of moderates in Syria.
In the Bush years we chased the trail of WMD.

If the Bush administration was in search of WMDs, the Obama regime is in a perpetual search for “Muslim moderates”. In the end, neither may find the holy grail, as both are kept well-hidden and at least under tight control. I’m not going to bother stating which one there is more evidence of, but the use of WMDs was confirmed in Syria. Moderate Muslims are proving far more illusive every day.

September 5, 2013

    (Reuters) – Secretary of State John Kerry’s public assertions that moderate Syrian opposition groups are growing in influence appear to be at odds with estimates by U.S. and European intelligence sources and nongovernmental experts, who say Islamic extremists remain by far the fiercest and best-organized rebel elements.

    General Martin Dempsey, warned: “Syria is not about choosing between two sides but rather about choosing one among many sides. [if you like playing the odds]

    “It is my belief that the side we choose must be ready to promote their interests and ours when the balance shifts in their favor,” Dempsey wrote. “Today they are not.”

The Blaze 9/27/13

The Raqqah Revolutionaries Brigade and the God’s Victory Brigade abandoned their secular command and pledged loyalty to the Al Nusrah last week, Reuters reported.

The Raqqah Revolutionaries Brigade is believed to have more than 700 fighters in its ranks. According to the Long War Journal, the “size of the God’s Victory Brigade, which announced its merger with the Al Nusrah Front on Facebook, was not disclosed, but it is said to have 15 battalions.” Those battalions can have dozens to hundreds of fighters, according to the website.

By Greg Miller, Published: October 2 ] Wash Post

    The CIA is expanding a clandestine effort to train opposition fighters in Syria amid concern that moderate, U.S.-backed militias are rapidly losing ground in the country’s civil war, U.S. officials said.

    But the CIA program is so minuscule that it is expected to produce only a few hundred trained fighters each month even after it is enlarged, a level that officials said will do little to bolster rebel forces that are being eclipsed by radical Islamists in the fight against the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Both Obama and Kerry are playing a dangerous game where an optimal goal is a stalemate with the Islamists, rather than defeat of them. Its a losing proposition.

Moderates today… Islamic extremists tomorrow. Odds on finding then confirming WMD are much better.

Related: https://rightring.wordpress.com/2013/09/28/al-qaeda-seized-weapons-for-syria-rebels/

The Spook that Never Was

How an EPA employee stole $900K by pretending to be a CIA agent

BY: CJ Ciaramella — Free Beacon
October 2, 2013 12:24 pm

The strange and sordid saga of John Beale, a top Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) official who defrauded the federal government out of nearly $900,000, has by turns outraged, flabbergasted, and sickened members of Congress, but on Tuesday it achieved something even rarer: It left them speechless.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R., Calif.), the head of the powerful House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, had asked one of Beale’s former supervisors, Robert Brenner, if he had seen Beale lately.

“I’ve seen Mr. Beale,” Brenner testified, pausing to chew over his next sentence. “Well, I’ve seen him a lot over the last two weeks. He’s renting out his home, so he’s staying in my guest house right now.”

For a brief moment, the oversight committee, usually full of bluster, was left gob smacked.

Over the course of two congressional hearings Monday and Tuesday, new details emerged about Beale, a former top EPA official who over the course of 13 years bilked the agency out hundreds of thousands of dollars in fraudulent travel vouchers and illegal bonuses. Along the way, Beale falsely claimed to be an agent for the Central Intelligence Agency, a Vietnam War veteran, and remained on payroll for over a year after a retirement party on a Potomac dinner cruise.

Overall, Beale spent two and a half years absent from work while still getting paid. According to investigators, he committed time card fraud, travel fraud, impersonated a federal agent, and misused a government passport, among other crimes.

In the House oversight hearing, Issa noted that if Beale had actually retired, he would have gotten away scot-free.

“That is 100 percent correct,” Sullivan replied.

“I guess we should be happy he got greedy,” Issa said.

http://freebeacon.com/the-spook-that-never-was/

What a sordid affair and going on for decades. What does it take to get to the bottom of things?

Benghazi Syria connection question remains

Frank Wolf Asks if Benghazi Site Was Stockpiling Syrian Weapons

Says the issue has a bearing on congressional debate over Syria strike

BY: Adam Kredo — Free Beacon
September 9, 2013

A top congressional appropriator suggested on Monday evening that the State Department and CIA might have been stockpiling weapons for Syrian opposition fighters when they came under attack by jihadists in Benghazi, Libya.
“I firmly believe that whatever the State Department and CIA were doing in Benghazi had a direct connection to U.S. policy in Syria—a policy that to date has not been fully revealed to the American people or Congress,” Rep. Frank Wolf (R., Va.) said on Monday evening during a discussion focusing on “unanswered questions” surrounding the Sept. 11, 2012, attack that killed four Americans.
“Were these rebels being armed with weapons collected in Benghazi?” Wolf asked, according to a copy of his prepared remarks. “Again, there is reason to believe this may be the case and a clear explanation is warranted.”
The issue has a direct bearing on Congress’ debate about military intervention in Syria, where President Bashar al-Assad stands accused of using chemical weapons.
“Given the pending request for authorization to use military force in Syria, it is more important than ever that the Congress understand U.S. support and assistance to Syrian rebels and whether groups responsible for the American deaths in Benghazi may have been at the same time benefitting from U.S. assistance in Syria,” Wolf said.
Congress cannot “make an informed decision” about Syria before the circumstances surrounding the Benghazi attack are “more fully understood,” said Wolf, who sent a pair of letters to President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry on Monday to reveal whether weapons in Benghazi could have reached Syrian rebels and “jihadist fighters.”
“The two [issues] are intimately related and may [have] a direct bearing on U.S. national security,” Wolf said.
Congress could get more answers by holding a public hearing with former CIA Director David Petraeus and current Director John Brennan, Wolf said.
More: http://freebeacon.com/frank-wolf-asks-if-benghazi-site-was-stockpiling-syrian-weapons/

Shariafying the Government

Big hat tip to Dave the Rave for the original article, Many thanks.

Obama Administration Paves the Way for Sharia Law

by William Bigelow DATELINE: 6 Aug 2012

The most terrifying danger Americans face from a second Barack Obama term isn’t the economy, which is scary enough.

The most harrowing prospect is the Obama Administration’s passivity in the face of attempts to introduce aspects of sharia law into our legal system. Now there is strong and open evidence of the Obama administration collaborating with Islamist activists to ensure the path toward sharia law is accelerated.

Just last week, Thomas Perez, Assistant Attorney General of the Department of Justice (DOJ) Civil Rights Division, was asked this question by Trent Franks (R-AZ), a member of the House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution: “Will you tell us here today that this Administration’s Department of Justice will never entertain or advance a proposal that criminalizes speech against any religion?”

Perez refused to answer. Four times.

And why would Franks target Perez?

Here’s why:

Last October, at George Washington University, there was a meeting between DOJ officials, including Perez, and Islamist advocates against free speech. Representatives from the Islamist side included Mohamed Magid, president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). The ISNA was an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding trial in 2008, as well as functioning as a Muslim Brotherhood Front. The leader of the Islamist attack was Sahar Aziz, an Egyptian-born American lawyer and Fellow at the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding, a Muslim advocacy group based in Michigan. At the meeting, the Islamists lobbied for:

1.Cutbacks in U.S. anti-terror training
2.Limits on the power of terrorism investigators
3.Changes in agent training manuals
4.A legal declaration that criticism of Islam in the United States should be considered racial discrimination

Aziz said that the word “Muslim” has become “racialized” and, once American criticism of Islam was silenced, the effect would be to “take [federal] money away from local police departments and fusion centers who are spying on all of us.”

And what was the response from Perez and the DOJ officials?

Nothing.

That’s right: no objection, no defense of our first amendment right to free speech.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/08/03/Obama-administration-paves-the-way-for-sharia-law 

Hat tip to Dave the Rave for this article

Now, the administration goes even further: (how big is this bed going to get?)

Obama to Muslims: Tell me what you want

‘Outreach summits’ launched, 1st stop Chicago

Published: 3 days ago

A series of Muslim Outreach Summits are planned coast-to-coast by the Obama administration to get feedback from Muslims on how the government can better serve them and their specific desires.

The president’s adopted home town of Chicago will be the first stop.

WND initially discovered documents referring to the Muslim summits while examining a U.S. Department of Education procurement of data-gathering and report-writing services.

The services are specific to information being assembled by the White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, or WHIAAPI, which Obama created via executive order in 2009.

Upon closer inspection, however, WND learned that the Education Department explicitly will direct the selected contractor to chronicle findings and recommendations gleaned from the Muslim Outreach Summits.

The White House views this year’s venues as an extension of a previous outreach to “new immigrants and refugees – some of the most underserved in the AAPI community,” according to a document titled “WHIAAPI 2013 Faith-Based and Community Engagement.”

Complementing the prior effort will be the three “regional convenings,” tentatively scheduled June 15 in Chicago, June 22 in San Francisco and June 29 in New York City.

“These cities are main AAPI immigrant hubs and entry points for new immigrants/refugees,” according to a related document, “Questions Received from Vendors: Development and Preparation of the AAPI Annual Report to the President.”

“Each convening with [sic] include panel discussions/workshops with federal officials on key issues impacting the community and also an open-dialogue session to hear directly from the community about issues of concern.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/obama-to-muslims-tell-me-what-you-want/

Obama Schedules Series Of Muslim Outreach Summits

Donna Anderson
Infowars.com
May 31, 2013

In the 2004 and 2008 elections, nine out 10 Muslim Americans voted for Democratic candidates.
As part of his Executive Order to increase participation of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in Federal Programs, President Obama has scheduled a series of Muslim Outreach Summits to find out how to make it easier for Muslims to assimilate into American society. Aside from the obvious, there’s one big problem here – there is no mention of the word “Muslims” in the executive order.
Obama’s executive order states: The purpose of this order is to establish a President’s Advisory Commission on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and a White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. Each will work to improve the quality of life and opportunities for Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders through increased access to, and participation in, Federal programs in which they may be underserved. In addition, each will work to advance relevant evidence-based research, data collection, and analysis for AAPI populations and subpopulations.
But a request for quote looking for someone to write the annual report for the White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPI) states: The report must reflect the work and recommendations of the Commission, as well as the findings and recommendations gleaned from the Muslim Outreach Summits.
In a response to questions from contractors, there is no separate legislation to cover the Muslim Outreach Summits, it’s part of the AAPI EO and “The Muslim Outreach will cover Muslims that are part of the AAPI Community.”
The Muslim Outreach Summits are already scheduled. The first will be in Chicago on June 15, followed by San Francisco on Jun 22 and New York on June 29. The town-hall meetings will discuss was to “remove barriers to AAPI access.”
According to the “Overview & Objectives” document accompanying the request for quote, participants in the AAPI and Muslim summits will learn about federal resources and programs that can assist their constituency base,” and they’ll be able to engage directly with federal representatives from a broad range of federal service and federal aid agencies.
In the 2004 and 2008 elections, nine out 10 Muslim Americans voted for Democratic candidates. In the 2012 election the numbers dipped a little. Only 68 percent of Muslims said they’d vote for Obama, and 25 percent were undecided.
According to a 2012 HuffPo article, Muslim Americans “continue to place high importance on civil rights and foreign policy,” but they’re also concerned about the economy, jobs, education and health care.
“We came to this country for the opportunities it offered us, and we need to be focused on domestic issues that impact all Americans because now this is our home,” said New Yorker Zeba Iqbal, an Obama supporter and former executive director of the Council for the Advancement of Muslim Professionals.
Read more:
http://www.infowars.com/obama-schedules-series-of-muslim-outreach-summits/

But hold your hats, it can get worse and usually does with Obama. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck… well, it isn’t an elephant.

Obama took great pride in nominating Brennan as CIA chief. But there is some murky water there.

Shock claim: Obama picks Muslim for CIA chief

Former FBI expert claims John Brennan converted to Islam

Published: 02/10/2013

One of the FBI’s former top experts on Islam has announced that President Obama’s pick to head the Central Intelligence Agency, John Brennan, converted to Islam years ago in Saudi Arabia.
As WND has reported, former FBI Islam expert John Guandolo has long warned that the federal government is being infiltrated by members of the radical Muslim Brotherhood. But Guandolo now warns that by appointing Brennan to CIA director, Obama has not only chosen a man “naïve” to these infiltrations, but also picked a candidate who is himself a Muslim.
“Mr. Brennan did convert to Islam when he served in an official capacity on the behalf of the United States in Saudi Arabia,” Guandolo told interviewer and radio host Tom Trento.
“That fact alone is not what is most disturbing,” Guandolo continued. “His conversion to Islam was the culmination of a counterintelligence operation against him to recruit him. The fact that foreign intelligence service operatives recruited Mr. Brennan when he was in a very sensitive and senior U.S. government position in a foreign country means that he either a traitor … [or] he has the inability to discern and understand how to walk in those kinds of environments, which makes him completely unfit to the be the director of Central Intelligence.”
Brennan did indeed serve as CIA station chief in Riyadh in the 1990s and today holds the official title of Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism. On Jan. 7, Obama nominated Brennan as the next director of the CIA, though he has yet to be confirmed.
“Are you kidding me?” Trento balked at Guandolo’s allegations. “The head of the CIA is a Muslim? For real? … Are you sure?”
“Yes I am,” Guandolo asserted. “The facts of the matter are confirmed by U.S. government officials who were also in Saudi Arabia at the time that John Brennan was serving there and have direct knowledge. These are men who work in very trusted positions, they were direct witnesses to his growing relationship with the individuals who worked for the Saudi government and others and they witnessed his conversion to Islam.”
A former Marine and combat veteran, Guandolo worked for eight years in the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division as a “subject matter expert” in the Muslim Brotherhood and the global spread of Islamism. Guandolo boasts he created the Bureau’s first counterterrorism training/education program and twice received United States Attorney’s Awards for investigative intelligence.
Guandolo is also one of the authors of the Center for Security Policy’s Team B II report, “Shariah: The Threat to America.”
“My contention is that [Brennan] is wholly unfit for government service in any national security capacity, and that would specifically make him unfit to be the director of Central Intelligence,” Guandolo told Trento.
Guandolo then broke down a three-part argument against Brennan’s confirmation.
“The first is he has interwoven his life professionally and personally with individuals that we know are terrorists,” Guandolo asserted. “He has overseen and approved and encouraged others to bring known leaders of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood into the government in positions to advise the U.S. government on counterterrorism strategy as well as the overall ‘war on terror.’”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/shock-claim-obama-picks-muslim-for-cia-chief/#sJbHiVQH1wui5kBq.99