Islamic Operatives Use Soviet Tactics to Target Conservatives

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, August 9, 2018:

The Islamic Movement in the United States manifests primarily as an espionage and counterintelligence threat, not merely as a “terrorist” threat.

When operatives in the Islamic Movement meet with police chiefs, elected officials, FBI Directors, business leaders, Pastors, Rabbis and others, they portray themselves as friendly, but they are working to recruit and use them, much as U.S. government counterintelligence operatives recruit foreign assets.

These jihadi operations may take months or years to develop, but the benefits of having an influential American official working for jihadis is a major victory for the Islamic Movement.

Examples of successful penetration operations include:

President Clinton’s Islamic Advisor Abdurahman Alamoudi, who created the Muslim Chaplain Program for the Department of Defense and met with Mr. Clinton more than any other muslim in America, was an Al Qaeda financier who is now in federal prison.

Senator Richard Durbin’s go-to guy for all things Islamic prior to his hearing on the civil rights of muslims in America was Mohamed Magid and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).  Magid was the leader of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) which was identified by the Department of Justice as a Muslim Brotherhood organization and a financial support arm for Hamas leaders and Hamas groups overseas.

The Islamic Movement also identifies conservative threats to their Movement and targets them for destruction, ensuring they lose their influence.

When Irving, Texas Mayor Beth Van Duyne publicly decried the Sharia Courts in Irving, she was targeted by muslim leaders.  Several months later the Clock Boy Operation was launched against her.  Democrats attacked her for her “civil rights” failures in the incident, and Republicans called for a review of the zero tolerance policy in incidents of this nature.  Mayor Van Duyne was left standing alone as Islamic leaders planned.

Most Patriots aware of Milwaukee’s Sheriff David Clarke were drawn to him for his outspoken call for law and order, strong stance on national defense, and for boldly stating America needs to police muslim communities.

Sheriff Clarke was also considered for positions inside the Trump Administration.

In walks Hedieh Mirahmadi.  A classic honey trap.

Dr. Hedieh Mirahmadi grew up a shia muslim of Iranian decent who later converted to sunni Islam.  Mirahmadi is an attorney with a degree in Islamic doctrine from the As-Sunna Foundation.  She is the founder of the World Organization for Resource and Development and Education (WORDE), and the former Secretary General of the Islamic Supreme Council of America.

Red flags about Ms. Mirahmadi include her close working relationships with Muslim Brotherhood organizations and leaders like Salam al Marayati, participation in the Muslim Brotherhood’s Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) initiative, and the fact she publishes articles about Islamic doctrine (sharia) that are patently false despite the fact she has a degree in the subject.

Most notably, Ms. Mirahmadi works with federal agencies and police organizations around the United States to discuss “extremism” and the Muslim Brotherhood.  Yet, none of the groups with whom she works have demonstrated any level of understanding of the jihadi’s doctrine – sharia – nor the Muslim Brotherhood network and their modus operandi.

In fact, the agencies with which Mirahmadi work, have a completely counter-factual understanding of sharia and the Muslim Brotherhood.

So, the Islamic Movement targeted Sheriff David Clarke and sent Mirahmadi in.  To demonstrate the effectiveness of this operation, UTT offers the following:

Sheriff Clarke went from calling for police to patrol muslim neighborhoods 18 months ago to recently calling people on social media speaking truth about Islam “racists.”

When articles written by investigative journalist Laura Loomer were published a year ago about Hedieh Mirahmadi’s questionable background, Sheriff Clarke publicly attacked and mocked Loomer.

This week Sheriff David Clarke admitted he was duped, and openly stated Hedieh Mirahmadi is a Muslim Brotherhood operative.

The lesson for everyone reading this article is that David Clarke is one of many Patriots who have been duped by Muslim Brotherhood operatives acting on behalf of our Islamic foes, even if they are not intentionally doing so.

Twenty years Abdurahman Alamoudi was the “pillar of the Islamic community in Washington, D.C.” and turned out to be an Al Qaeda operative.

After 9/11, Anwar al Awlaki was considered the “new face of Islam in America” and gave presentations at the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol, but turned out to be an Al Qaeda operative killed in a U.S. drone strike in 2011.

In 2005, FBI Special Agent in Charge of the Washington Field Office Mike Rolince gave Mohamed Magid an award, and in 2016 FBI Director James Comey presented Magid with the FBI Director’s Award.

Mohamed Magid was the President of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), identified by the Department of Justice as a Muslim Brotherhood organization which seeks to overthrow the U.S. government and establish an Islamic State.  Evidence entered into the largest terrorism financing trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history (US v HLF, Northern District of Texas, 2008) reveals ISNA provides financial support to Hamas organizations and Hamas leaders overseas.

Hamas is a designated foreign terrorist organization.

The threat from the Islamic Movement in the United States manifests itself primarily as an espionage and counterintelligence threat, not merely as a “terrorist” threat.

It is high time the U.S. government treats Islamic spies working to destroy America the same way it treated the Rosenbergs.

U.S. Islamic Movement Enters Final Stage

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, Aug. 20, 2017:

The leading edge of the Islamic Movement’s Final Stage in the United States is upon us.  The violence is now beginning in earnest.

One day in the future, history will record with great astonishment how military leaders, politicians on both sides of the aisle, intelligence professionals, and others were catastrophically unprofessional for 16 years after 9/11/2001, thus putting the American people in grave peril.

Understanding the Threat’s (UTT) has trained thousands of local, state and federal officers/agents on the Islamic threat (sharia and the jihadi network in the US), the hard-left Marxist/Socialist/Communist threat, and how these Movements work together to bring down the U.S. government.

The response to UTT’s training is always the same:  (1) none of those in attendance, including FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force agents/officers, have ever heard the information presented, and (2) they all agree it is critical to protecting their communities.  See some comments here.

When UTT’s President John Guandolo was recruited out of the FBI by the Department of Defense (end of 2008) he briefed a number of 3 and 4 star generals and admirals, numerous Members of Congress, the Chairmen of the House Intelligence, Homeland Security, and Judiciary Committees, former Directors of intelligence agencies, former National Security Advisors, and others.  None of these good men and women were aware of the massive jihadi network in the United States, nor what sharia is and how it operates to drive the Global Islamic Movement.

UTT’s Chris Gaubatz’s experience (2008) undercover inside the headquarters of U.S. Hamas doing business as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) revealed “America’s largest muslim civil rights group” – as they are called – is engaged in fraud, sedition, espionage, and terrorism.  Yet CAIR and its leaders are unimpeded in their work by U.S. agencies sworn to dismantle them.

Today, the situation is significantly worse than it was nine years ago.  The enemy has gained significant ground in the war while our leaders have barely scratched the surface on understanding the danger facing the Republic.

The Muslim Brotherhood has increased their ground game:

*Insinuated Muslim Brotherhood sympathizers into Mr. Trump’s administration and utilized their network to cease efforts to designate the MB a terrorist organization – with support from Mrs. Clinton.

*Created an army of attorneys to do battle in U.S. courts to slow down judicial action by US government

*Expanded their Islamophobia campaign to bring social media giants Facebook, Twitter and others onboard to stifle free speech, specifically truthful speech about Islam.

*Broadened their cooperative efforts with hard-left Marxist organizations to directly attack those individuals and organizations speaking truth about Islam.

* Leaders within the Islamic Movement:  (Hatem Bazian) call for an intifada (violent uprising) in the United States; (Linda Sarsour) call for jihad against the President; numerous U.S. imams are calling for the annihilation of Jews here; and many Islamic leaders are openly calling for sharia to be imposed in the United States.

Now, the violent war UTT has warned about and predicted inside the United States has begun.

The Islamic Movement’s initial tool for violence in the United States is the anarchists and “domestic terrorist” hard-left Marxist/Socialist Communist organizations, including Antifa, Black Lives Matters, and dozens of groups forming together.

Many of these people and groups call for the killing of the President, as did Missouri State Senator Maria Chappelle-Nadal.

These are the Brown Shirts of the 21st century.

These violent and subversive Movements have hundreds if not thousands of groups giving them direct support like the Southern Poverty Law Center, J-Street, Transgender Law Center, Center for New Community, Franciscan Action Network, Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, Interfaith Alliance, Jews Against Islamophobia, Jews for Racial and Economic Justice, Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, American Center for Outreach, ACLU, Arab American Anti-Discrimination Committee, Arab American Institute, Asian Americans Advancing Justice, NAACP, National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, National Lawyers Guild, Anti-Defamation League and many others.

For a more extensive list of the George Soros funded Marxists/anarchist groups click HERE.

These two massive Movements in the United States funded by external and internal entities whose stated goal is the destruction of the United States.  They publish doctrine, websites, speeches, and books which call for the overthrow of our government, and then take actions in furtherance of these goals.

This is not only a violation of numerous federal laws, but these actions demand that all people who are in positions of authority and who have sworn an oath to the Constitution have a duty to take actions to destroy these Movements and defend our Republic.

As the violence escalates we will see social unrest like occurred in Baltimore, Ferguson, Berkley, and elsewhere. But it will be much worse.

Remember the Brown Shirts were killed on the Night of the Long Knives and Adolf Hitlers Black Shirts took charge.  So it is in history with Movements like this.

Remembering this is a war of narratives – and Information War – more than anything else, all of these escalating actions will come with a pre-planned propaganda campaign just like we saw in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Here are five things citizens are encouraged to do:

  1. Understand the Islamic threat. Use the resources at http://www.UnderstandingtheThreat.com and know what sharia is and what it says. Sharia drives the enemy in this war. Be weary of those who vilify the Muslim Brotherhood, and then defend Islamic doctrine as being “peaceful.”  Remember, the Islamic Movement is the leading element in this war.  They are using the left as their tools.  Do not lose focus.
  2. Understand the play book of the hard-left Marxist Movement in the United States.  Read Rules for Radicals.
  3. Move quickly to educate open-minded people in your community, especially those with leadership qualities.  Remember Sheriffs and Pastors are the two groups of people we need most right now in this war.
  4. Develop the right mind-set. Think August 1939 Poland.  “Resistance Movements” can simply be citizens organizing to support those defending their states/communities in numerous ways.
  5. Know the foundation upon which this nation was created: the law of nature (legally defined as the will of God) and nature’s God (legally defined as “Holy Scripture”).

Leaders of the US Council of Muslim Organizations, the leading MB element in the US. General Masul of the Muslim Brotherhood Nihad Awad (also Hamas leader) is front row 3rd from right

For every person who becomes educated as to the true nature of the threats we face as a nation is another person who will be fully committed to defending it at a deep level.

Speak truth boldly.

Did the FBI chief lie to Congress about the Hillary email probe?

Photo: AP

Photo: AP

New York Post, by Paul Sperry, October 12, 2016:

Congressional leaders investigating the FBI’s suspiciously inept investigation of ex-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s e-mails are turning their attention to FBI chief James Comey’s truthfulness. Did he mislead them? Did he perjure himself?

Two days after clearing Clinton of criminal wrongdoing, Comey went to Capitol Hill and explained his reasons for coming to that stunning conclusion. Testifying under oath, he claimed to be an open book: “I think transparency matters tremendously.”

But he not only held back critical details about his investigation, he repeatedly misrepresented his actions and findings.

In his July 7 testimony, Comey assured Congress that he examined all the evidence of Clinton’s lawyers and aides deleting her e-mails, and concluded they weren’t trying to hide anything. “We did not find evidence to indicate that they did the erasure to conceal things of any sort,” he swore. “We didn’t find evidence of evil intent to obstruct justice there.”

“In his statements before Congress, Director Comey repeatedly assured us that the FBI investigated whether charges of obstruction of justice and intentional destruction of records were merited,” the chairmen of three House committees and a Senate committee complained last week in a letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch. “The facts of this investigation call those assertions into question.”

Congress has now obtained letters detailing unprecedented immunity agreements and side deals with multiple witnesses in the case — including one in which Comey agreed to prevent his investigators from reviewing any e-mails from Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills to Clinton’s server administrator Paul Combetta generated in late 2014 and early 2015. The off-limits correspondence, the chairmen point out, could reveal information “directing the destruction or concealment of federal records.”

Astonishingly, before Comey agreed to the June side deal with Mills’ attorney, he “already knew of the conference calls between Secretary Clinton’s attorneys and Mr. Combetta, his use of BleachBit, and the resulting deletions, further casting doubt on why the FBI would enter into such a limited evidentiary scope of review.”

In other words, Comey never really investigated Clinton and her aides for obstruction of justice, as he claimed. Lacking access to key evidence, he couldn’t have explored the possibility, though the circumstances were beyond suspicious.

“The sequence of events leading up to the destruction of Secretary Clinton’s e-mails — the conference call, the work ticket, the use of BleachBit, and [Combetta’s] subsequent refusal to discuss the conference call with the FBI — raises questions about whether Secretary Clinton, acting through her attorneys [including Mills], instructed [Combetta] to destroy records relevant to the then-ongoing congressional investigations,” noted House Oversight Committee Chair­man Jason Chaffetz.

In his July testimony, Comey said it was unclear if anyone had helped Clinton’s lawyers delete e-mails — yet he had to have known that Combetta, in his final interview under his immunity deal, had admitted destroying evidence under subpoena.

Comey also swore his team asked Clinton if she knew her lawyers had wiped clean the devices containing her e-mail archives, when it seems clear from the summary of her interview that agents did not ask her that question.

“Did you ask that question?” Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) asked.

“Yes,” Comey replied.

In 4½ hours of testimony, Comey never once mentioned that he’d agreed to give Mills, Combetta and three other key subjects of his investigation immunity from prosecution. Also belying his pronouncements of “transparency,” he failed to reveal the unusual side deals that severely limited the scope of his probe.

Congressional investigators only learned about the deals weeks later, and still have not obtained all of the documents.

Lynch and Comey have redacted parts of the side-deal letters, including the names of all Justice Department and FBI personnel. They have also restricted access to the letters to certain members of Congress, while prohibiting even those members from removing them from the secure viewing room where they are kept. They’re also barred from taking notes.

“These onerous restrictions are not consistent with the high degree of transparency you and director Comey promised to Congress,” the chairmen complained.

Though Comey has turned over some 250 pages of investigative-case summaries and witness-interview summaries known as FBI 302s, he’s still withholding summaries of interviews with some 30 other witnesses.

It’s more evidence that Comey hasn’t been straight with the public about this probe, and raises serious questions about his integrity.

Congress must treat Comey as a hostile witness and investigate the investigator.

Paul Sperry, formerly DC bureau chief for Investor’s Business Daily, is the author of “Infiltration.”

Also see:

Why did feds grant immunity to Hillary’s ‘highly improper’ aide?

Cheryl Mills and Hillary Clinton Photo: AP; Reuters

Cheryl Mills and Hillary Clinton Photo: AP; Reuters

New York Post, by Paul Sperry, Sept. 24, 2016:

If anyone would know Hillary consigliere Cheryl Mills’ reputation for obstructing investigations, it’s FBI Director James Comey. He complained about her lack of cooperation while probing Clinton scandals in the 1990s. Yet he agreed to give Mills immunity from prosecution in his probe of Hillary’s illegal e-mails as secretary of state, where Mills was chief of staff.

As a Whitewater investigator for the Senate in the mid-1990s, Comey sought information from Mills; but wouldn’t you know, the then-deputy White House counsel claimed a burglar stole her notes.

Comey concluded that Hillary Clinton ordered Mills to block investigators. The obstruction, the Senate committee found, included the “destruction of documents” and other “highly improper . . . misconduct.”

Two years later, Mills was in the middle of another Hillary scandal, involving the then-first lady’s integration of White House and Democratic National Committee computer databases.

This time the House subpoenaed information from Mills, who not only withheld the documents but, a government committee said, “lied under oath” — prompting staff lawyers to send a criminal referral to the Justice Department demanding prosecutors charge Mills with obstruction of justice and perjury.

In 2000, a Commerce Department official testified that Mills ordered her to “withhold” from investigators e-mails and other documents exposing yet another scandal involving the first lady — the selling of seats on foreign trade junkets for campaign cash.

At the same time, a federal judge suggested Mills helped orchestrate a cover-up that blamed a technical “glitch” in the White House archiving system that conveniently resulted in the loss of 1.8 million e-mails under subpoena in the Monica Lewinsky, Filegate and other scandal investigations.

Fast-forward to Hillary’s tenure as secretary. In October 2012, Mills sorted through key Benghazi documents and decided which to withhold from a review board. She also leaned on witnesses. Deputy ambassador to Libya Gregory Hicks testified before Congress in 2013 that Mills told him in an angry phone call to stop cooperating with investigators.

The FBI chief was fully aware of Mills’ M.O. when he launched his investigation. Yet even after discovering she was in the middle of everything improper, if not illegal, he treated her with kid gloves.

Comey knew it was Mills who had Hillary’s e-mails moved off her private unsecured server and onto laptops, where she decided which ones were government-related and OK for public release and which were “personal.” He knew it was Mills who shredded the e-mails that were printed out and who had the rest of the 31,000 e-mails deleted, and then had the laptops bleached clean.

And he knew it was Mills who told the Denver tech who maintained the server to stop retaining her e-mails and to delete Hillary’s archived e-mails, all of which the tech dutifully performed after Congress subpoenaed them and ordered them preserved.

Even so, Comey agreed to grant Mills immunity in exchange for her cooperation in the investigation. He also agreed to ground rules that left some lines of inquiry off-limits. When agents in April tried to pin her down on the procedures she used to search for Hillary’s e-mails under order, she and her lawyer stormed out of the room. So much for Comey’s cooperative witness.

Mills claimed such information was protected under “attorney-client privilege,” which is ridiculous. Mills was chief of staff for Hillary, not her lawyer, at the time Hillary was bypassing government security and squirreling away state secrets in her basement.

And even though Mills deleted the records after she left State and was supposedly acting as Hillary’s attorney then, privilege does not apply when a client seeks advice on how to commit a crime and the crime is committed.

Yet Comey’s agents abided by her claim and never pursued the line of questioning again. In effect, they gave her a pass on the whole question of the criminal obstruction behind which she looks to be the mastermind. And then, three months later, they let her sit in on Hillary’s interview even though Hillary was represented by attorney David Kendall!

Mills should be dragged before Congress to publicly answer questions the FBI refused to ask her. But she would just lie with impunity like she did in her past testimony involving other Hillary scandals.

Rather, it would be more productive to grill Comey under the klieg lights. Why did he give a key suspect who orchestrated the destruction of government records immunity as a witness? Why didn’t he demand prosecutors convene a grand jury to question Mills under oath? Was he pressured by the attorney general?

Sweating Mills could have cracked the case wide open. No one would have ever let H.R. Haldeman get away with editing the Nixon tapes. Why would the FBI director let Hillary’s chief of staff get away with deleting her e-mails?

Paul Sperry is author of “The Great American Bank Robbery,” which exposes the role of race-based Clinton housing policies in the mortgage bust.

Also see:

New Youtube: 200,000 refugees in 2017? The buck stops with the Republican Congress!

ref resRefugee Resettlement Watch, by Ann Corcoran, Sept. 1, 2016:

I reported yesterday that the Open Borders Left has signaled how many refugees they want Obama to propose when he does his United Nations confab on September 20th.

They want 200,000 in fiscal year 2017!

There is only one entity that can stop them and that is Congress—either they fund Obama’s last ‘determination’ or they don’t.  Although your governors and your state and local elected officials should hear from you, and it goes without saying that Hillary must be defeated, but there is only one place where it really matters this fall—-Congress!

Congress holds the purse strings, they decide in the appropriations process unfolding in Washington right now whether the US will take 2,000 or 200,000 refugees in 2017 because as we know the federal resettlement contractors would shrivel up and go away without YOUR money feeding their salaries, offices, staff, travel, lobbying! etc.

Anyway, here is my new youtube promoting that message (LOL! laughing at this freeze frame!):

Here is the link to the video if it doesn’t play in your e-mail:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hX6CD_rduIU

Yesterday a reader asked me to publish the addresses for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Speaker Paul Ryan because, as you know, trying to reach them electronically is impossible.

Remember the other side is flooding Congress with postcards, see here (scroll down to see card).  Maybe it’s time for an old fashioned letter writing campaign to counter them. After all, it is your money that will be required to fund 200,000 refugees’ travel, placement, and lives in America.  (In an upcoming post, I’ll give you some other important legislators who need to hear from you!)

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell

317 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone Number: (202) 224-2541

Speaker Paul Ryan

1233 Longworth HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-3031

Obama Admin Hid Details of Multi-Million Dollar Cash Payout to Iran From Congress

John Kerry and Javad Zarif / AP

John Kerry and Javad Zarif / AP

Washington Free Beacon, by Adam Kredo, Aug. 4, 2016

The Obama administration took steps to withhold from lawmakers the details of a $400 million cash payout to Iran and continues to rebuke inquiries from Congress for information about how another $1.3 billion in taxpayer funds was awarded to the Islamic Republic, according to multiple conversations with congressional sources apprised of the matter.

U.S. officials familiar with the recent transfer of $400 million in hard currency to Iran withheld details of the exchange from Congress during briefings in classified and unclassified settings, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.

The disclosure threatens to complicate efforts by the administration to downplay new reports detailing how U.S. officials used an unmarked aircraft to transfer $400 million in “pallets of cash” to Iran on the same day it freed several U.S. hostages.

Lawmakers and others have claimed for months that the payment was part of a “ransom” aimed at securing the release of the hostages. The White House denies this claim and has said the payment was part of a settlement to resolve decades-old legal disputes with the Islamic Republic.

Nearly eight months after congressional officials demanded a formal accounting of this payment–which amounted to $1.7 billion in total–the administration is still declining to provide lawmakers with the full story, sparking outrage on Capitol Hill.

“It has been seven months since President Obama announced that he was giving the Islamic Republic of Iran almost $2 billion,” Rep. Mike Pompeo (R., Kan.), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, told the Free Beacon on Wednesday.  “And we are just now finding out damning details about how $400 million, which is less than half of the total, was sent to Iran using foreign aircraft and foreign currencies.”

Pompeo led several unsuccessful inquiries into the cash payout. He said the administration has been stonewalling efforts to obtain a full readout of the exchange in both classified and unclassified settings since January.

Pompeo expressed anger that the administration is “totally stonewalling congressional inquiries,” while leaving it to the press to unearth the details of the exchange.

“That is far too long of a timeline, especially as it is in the face of the Obama administration totally stonewalling congressional inquiries into this matter since January,” Pompeo said.

“We still do not know how the other $1.3 billion was sent, and we still have three Americans sitting in prisons in Iran,” Pompeo said, explaining that the bulk of the cash to Iran remains shrouded in mystery.

Congressional sources with knowledge of the situation told the Free Beacon that the State Department and other administration officials withheld details regarding the payment for more than three months–and only then provided a barebones accounting of the payout that omitted all mention of the secret cash delivery.

Sources who spoke to the Free Beacon said this was an intentional effort by the administration to keep lawmakers in the dark and prevent them from receiving a full accounting of the $1.7 billion payout.

A timeline centered around these inquires reveals that administration officials stonewalled Congress for months before providing responses that omitted any mention of the hard currency transfer.

Pompeo launched an inquiry seeking further details in January, when the legal settlement was first announced.

By mid-March, the State Department still had not responded, as was first reported by the Free Beacon.

The State Department informed Pompeo later that month in a hand-delivered letter that the information he was seeking was classified.

A classified briefing was held in late April. Sources familiar with the briefing told the Free Beacon that administration officials made no mention of the $400 million cash delivery. This information was only made public when the Wall Street Journal reported it late Monday.

One congressional source working on the issue said that the Obama administration could now spend funds set aside for American victims of terrorism on further payments to Iran.

“This just makes you wonder how far President Obama is willing to go to appease the Iranians,” the source said. “Iran keeps taking American citizens hostage because it knows the administration will cave. It wouldn’t surprise me if the president has authorized negotiations with Iran over the $2 billion that is meant to go to the families of the victims of Iranian terror.”

“Every action this administration has taken toward Iran has been in furtherance of the regime’s interests and at our expense,” the source added. “What else is currently being negotiated between the administration and Iran? The American people deserve to know and they should demand full transparency.”

A second congressional source involved in the issue told the Free Beacon that obfuscation by the administration has become a pattern and practice when it comes to Iran.

“Congress continues to press the Obama administration on every change and new policy regarding Iran,” the source said. “At every turn, we are met with ‘no comment’ and further secrecy, which is why the American people do not like this deal and understand it does not make them safer.”

Another source familiar with the administration’s thinking said that administration efforts to downplay the latest disclosures do no comport with the reality that this payment was part of a secret negotiation.

“The Obama admin is hoping to convince people that there’s nothing new in this scandal,” the source said. “But they can’t convince members of Congress because members know that they weren’t told all the details about this cash payment for hostages. For instance, the administration has refused to fully disclose all the ways in which it has transferred money to Iran all of the time.”

The White House declined on Wednesday to offer further details to reporters.

***

Also see:

House To Hold Hearing On DHS Readiness After Reauthorizing Agency’s Politically Correct Training Program

ISIS (1)Daily Caller, by Kerry Picket, June 17 2016:

WASHINGTON — A week after House Republicans and Democrats overwhelmingly passed a bill that reauthorizes the Department of Homeland Security’s controversial “Countering Violent Extremism” training, the committee that crafted the bill is holding a hearing next Thursday to ask how prepared DHS is.

The House Homeland Security Committee’s Counterterrorism and Intelligence Subcommittee is expected to have a hearing next Thursday asking how prepared DHS is to address terrorist threats.

CVE training, The Daily Caller previously reported in 2013, stresses personnel appease different cultural backgrounds. For example, under the section of being “sensitive to constitutional values,” it suggests, “Don’t use training that equates radical thought, religious expression, freedom to protest, or other constitutionally-protected activity, including disliking the U.S. government without being violent.”

In addition, the policy manual, which was created by an inter-agency working group from DHS and the National Counterterrorism Center, urges, “Trainers who equate the desire for Sharia law with criminal activity violate basic tenets of the First Amendment.”

DHS CRCL CVE Training – Dos and Donts

When asked by The Daily Caller what the intent of including CVE training in the bill, a House homeland committee aide said it was to “expand the number of people familiar with the material and specifically these three things that they have been doing for the last few years now, because there’s a very small team at the department that’s really active with the CVE.”

The aide added that travel makes up a large portion of their budget. And the genesis for the idea came from the notion that “generic training material community awareness briefings—those types of things, if more people were trained on them they would have a wider reach.”

The FBI found itself in a similar situation in 2011, when Justice Department’s subject matter experts deemed its training manual and several instructors culturally insensitive to Muslims. Both the materials and the instructors were purged from the agency. The agency adopted a CVE training policy thereafter.

TheDC asked House Speaker Paul Ryan on Thursday if the GOP is so concerned about law enforcement being unable to investigate subjects with Islamic backgrounds as a result of accusations of discrimination, then why Republicans overwhelmingly support the bill?

“I had concerns about this aspect of DHS and one of the reasons why we delayed the markup of the homeland security bill in the appropriations committee is because we wanted to look at all these issues to see if something needed to be improved through the appropriations process and that’s one of our concerns,” Ryan said.

Follow Kerry on Twitter

**

Also see: