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.
President Obama’s verbal threat to Vladimir Putin to “cut out” the hacking or face the consequences months prior to the 2016 presidential election only reinforced a lesson learned going back to the days of George Kennan’s containment strategy: Deterring the Kremlin requires action, not just words alone.
It’s a lesson we would do well to keep at the forefront as President Trump and Putin continue their attempted rapprochement.
In Helsinki last week, Putin sought to elevate Russia to the same stature as the United States. He wants to soil U.S. soft power by linking it with Russia’s KGB authoritarianism, thereby ensuring that our allies and Russian human rights advocates threatening Putin’s regime security do not derive inspiration from the United States as a beacon of freedom, liberty and democracy.
Second, Putin wanted to drive a wedge between the United States and our allies. Under the guise of Soviet-style “collaboration,” Putin emphasized the United States could not solve any of the world’s problems without Russia, especially the ones Putin himself exacerbated, such as Syria. Putin wants to entangle U.S. and European foreign policy with Russia to dilute and distort NATO’s influence.
Nothing scares Putin more than neighboring Ukraine, an aspiring NATO and European Union member with a sizable Russian-speaking population and commitment to democracy. Alarmed over the Trump administration’s provision of Javelin anti-tank weapons to Kiev, with whom Russia is at war, Putin wants the United States to be perceived as Russia’s global partner to degrade the U.S.-Ukraine relationship.
Third, Putin wants to soil our democracy. He holds a black belt in Judo, a key principle of which is to use an opponent’s strength against them. Our core strength as a country derives from the First Amendment, freedom of the press, liberty and our democratic institutions. We are inherently vulnerable to influence operations, including disinformation, which quickly gain traction in our free and open cyberspace.
Make no mistake, Putin is ruthlessly focused on shaping our political discourse and stimulating partisan bickering by simultaneously supporting extreme, antithetical positions.
There was no better example of this tactic than the Kremlin bots staging simultaneous post-election rallies in favor of Trump and protesting Trump’s election. Putin deliberately left a trail of breadcrumbs and a Kremlin return address during intrusions in our cyberspace because he knows he can most effectively soil our institutions by adding a measure of conspiracy and association with Russia.
The even bigger prize for Putin would be to fracture the Republican Party of Ronald Reagan, under whose leadership the United States ended the “evil empire” of the Soviet Union — to Putin, the greatest geopolitical catastrophe in the 20th century.
Last week, National Intelligence Director Dan Coats said Russia was the “most aggressive foreign actor” whose cyber threats were “blinking red.” Having missed an opportunity in Finland, President Trump now should publicly announce that we know Russia interfered in our 2016 elections and will make Russia pay a price for continuing what national security adviser John Bolton rightly called an “act of war.” If Russia does interfere in the 2018 midterms, then the United States can take the serious countermeasures that the National Security Agency and Cyber Command have discussed to deter future attacks.
Simply put, Vladimir Putin hates Democrats and Republicans. For Putin, a KGB operative and former Director of Russia’s infamous Federal Security Service (FSB), all of us are the Kremlin’s “Main Enemy.”
We need President Trump to deliver a direct and unambiguous warning to Putin. This might be his last, best chance to induce a change in Russia’s behavior, and unite the Congress and our nation in collective defense before the next Russian cyber onslaught.
Daniel Hoffman is a former chief of station with the Central Intelligence Agency. His combined 30 years of government service included high-level overseas and domestic positions at the CIA. He reported on the Trump-Putin summit from Helsinki for Fox News. Follow him on Twitter @DanielHoffmanDC.
As most of the President’s men and women in senior roles re-iterated and even provided more detail about the Russian threat to U.S. national security in the days following the Helsinki summit, the President tasked his national security advisor to extend an invitation to Russian President Vladimir Putin to visit the White House to continue the dialogue that was started seven days ago.
Meanwhile, the President’s top-serving intelligence and law enforcement leaders rolled out detailed explanations of the threat, including a report released late last week by the Department of Justice that addressed what specific actions the DOJ is taking to address cyber threats.
Former CIA Chief of Station Dan Hoffman talks about the real threat and where the government’s focus should remain while the President sends a different message.
The Cipher Brief: What should the focus of the Intelligence Community be while the President is inviting Putin for a visit to the U.S.?
Hoffman: The first thing I’d say about the Intelligence Community is that there is a flow of intelligence from the IC to the President. The CIA does all-source analysis that informs the President’s decisions. But the IC also relies on policy makers to share what the policy is.
There were countless times when I was serving in senior positions in our headquarters when the director, or the acting director would come back from a meeting downtown and brief us on what was going on so that we would be in the know, and to help us understand what the requirements were for intelligence collection, because at the end of the day, the intelligence community is requirements driven. We send requirements out to the field, with our HUMINT (human intelligence) collectors and foreign sources to collect on what the policy makers, starting with the President, require. So, the first area of concern, and I think it’s reflected in some of the public polling about the way people feel about the Helsinki summit, is that there has been no definitive, detailed statement yet from this administration about what took place. Right now, we’ve ceded the post-summit discourse to Vladimir Putin and the Kremlin. The President said he didn’t want anyone with him because he was concerned about leaks. If I allow myself to be a little bit presumptuous, if I had been asked I would have said, “Mr. President the biggest concern about leaks is that they end up in Vladimir Putin’s hands. You’re in the room with him, the last thing you need to worry about is leaks.
The second thing about the summit is that we have about four areas of concern. One is on Ukraine and the idea that Putin had floated a resolution there where there would be a referendum to deal with pro-Russian separatists. And that is not something that the U.S. government would support, and the Russians got their answer this week when Secretary James Mattis approved $200 Million dollars in security cooperation assistance in the form of advisors and equipment and training for Ukraine. So, we’re standing by Ukraine, and standing by their independence, but I didn’t hear the President make any public statement about that. We don’t know what he said to Putin privately and that’s important to know.
Another issue is Syria, where there was apparently some discussion about a resolution in Syria whereby the U.S. and Israel might together not oppose Assad taking control of the country, including the area around the Golan Heights. The risk there is that I don’t think we can rely on Russia to have any influence over Iran, or Syria not in that sense, and I’d be concerned with any strategic alliance with Russia based on the fact that they’ve been complicit, and in alliance with Syria and have enabled Assad to commit crimes against humanity. The Russians have never had our interests at heart in Syria. They lied to Secretary Kerry when they said there wasn’t a military solution in Syria, when they went ahead shortly thereafter and imposed one. And it certainly didn’t turn out to be the quagmire that President Obama warned it would be for Russia. It’s really been the key that’s unlocked their resurgent leverage in the Middle East. I think the best we can hope for there is the sort of tactical collaboration of the sort we saw recently in Helsinki when General Joseph Dunford met with Russian Army Chief of Staff Gerasimov and talked about de-conflicting military operations, which is good to do. But strategic partnership, not a chance.
Another area of concern is Putin’s odd proposal to allow the Muller team to go to Russia and interview the 12 GRU Military Intelligence Officers, and in turn the Russians would get to have their turn with Ambassador McFaul, and Bill Browder. Browder’s not even an American citizen, and there is no extradition treaty with Russia and the fact that we’d even come close to equating the rule of law in the U.S., with this warped KGB authoritarianism that exists in Russia is not only wildly disconcerting to any of us who lived in Russia, but really quite dangerous. So those are three areas where we have some concern and I wish the administration would have come out and spoken out about those, and anything else that was discussed in the summit.
The last, and fourth area of concern is related to Russia’s cyber intrusions, and I don’t like to use the word meddle, meddle is too soft. We’ve gotten in this habit of saying they are meddling in our affairs, they’re not meddling they are influencing, they are intruding into our cyberspace with espionage purpose. So I think we should be careful to call it what it is, and raise some alarm bells. This week, the National Security Agency, and Cyber Command talked about taking counter-measures in cyberspace against Russia but before you do that, what you really need is for the President to warn Putin. That’s what deterrence is all about. The aggrieved parties, publicly state “if you cross this red line, we will take action.”
The Cipher Brief: But that’s clearly not the President’s strategy, so from a realists perspective, what now?
Hoffman: Right, so he didn’t do that, and so what Putin knows is that the U.S. intelligence community is preparing counter-measures. But when we take them, Putin will come back at us and portray himself as the aggrieved party. What Putin is trying to do here, in my view, is far more subtle and nuanced. He hates us all. He hates democrats, he hates republicans, he hates Secretary Clinton, he hates President Trump. We are all Russia’s main enemy. And, on Russia, we shouldn’t be each other’s enemies. We should be united, maybe with a slightly different take on specific policies, but at the end of the day we should be united with the understanding that Russia presents a threat to us.
There are limited areas in which we can work together like in arms control and counter-terrorism, we all know that. What I think what Putin wants to do, specifically with the idea of the trade of allowing Mueller’s team to speak with the GRU officers, is to divide the republican party. The same republican party of Reagan, that not only called the Soviet Union the evil empire, but was responsible for tearing down the Soviet Union. There are a lot of other reasons the Soviet Union fell apart, certainly Boris Yeltsin was the most important figure in tearing it apart from within. There was also the war in Afghanistan, Chernobyl, a failed economy and they lost the war of ideas to us. But for Putin, who continues to consider the collapse of the Soviet Union the greatest geo-political disaster of the 20th century, he knows that the republican party has been a stalwart defense against Russia’s expansion. And nothing would please him more than to divide the party, and drive a stake through it. And I continue to believe that what Putin is trying to do is to soil our democracy, and divide us by using discoverable influence operations and I think what he’d like to do is to continue to see republicans arguing amongst themselves as we see with Senator Lindsey Graham, vociferously arguing about how the President appears to be confusing what Senator Graham calls meddling with collusion. And there are some in the Republican party who are defending the President, and some who are not. But I think the end game for Putin is to try and do what he can to exacerbate the differences within the party, and try to break it. And I’m saying this because I’m trying to see the world through the twisted KGB eyes of Putin. I’m not an expert on domestic U.S. politics I’m the one who’s focused on understanding what makes Putin tick.
The Cipher Brief:We’ve seen Dan Coats, we’ve seen Christopher Wray and a number of other seniors in the administration reiterate the Russian threat on the heels of the Helsinki summit, so for those who do believe the threat is real, including the IC, that should put their mind at least a little at ease. However, what should we be focused on looking ahead that’s going to move the ball in the right direction for U.S. national security despite whether or not the President pushes forward with his next step, which is inviting Putin to the White House?
Hoffman: Where the IC will play a role right now is on reflections of the summit. That’s the immediate goal. So the IC will collect reflections on how Putin and his team assess the summit. So we’ll learn what was discussed in the summit, but we’ll learn it through Putin’s eyes and I guarantee that he will not accurately describe the results of the summit, even to his own people. That’s why it’s vitally important that we know, from President Trump, what the real facts are so the President can parse the intelligence we obtain from Putin and his team, from the facts.
The Cipher Brief: It sounds like you’re getting to the point of why it’s really so complicated to be the only person in the room when you have a meeting like this. Is the IC now handed a mess to try and figure out?
Hoffman: Yes. President Reagan had one on one meetings with Gorbachev, so it’s not unheard of, and it’s ok, but President Trump needed to have sat down, and maybe he did this, I don’t know, with Director CIA, Secretary of State, the National Security Advisor, and walked them through right away everything that happened. So, to get back to the role of the IC, the first thing is to collect on those reflections and get that back to the President so he is aware what the Russian’s are thinking now about the summit, and their way forward. What does Putin plan on raising in Washington D.C. during the visit? We don’t yet have a date for that summit, but certainly Putin will have his own ideas about what might make sense in terms of the issues he will want to raise and that is up to the IC to think about that. Collection on Russia’s relationships in Europe, and their covert influence operations are always important, never more so than now.
Ukraine is really the canary in the coal mine here. Because they are at war with Russia. I would argue that the country that scares Putin the most is Ukraine. Russia’s neighbor with a sizable Russian speaking population, a commitment to democracy and tilting politically toward the EU, as well as an aspiring NATO member. Putin is trying to influence U.S. political discourse on Ukraine and Europe as well, so collection on how he is going to portray Ukraine, and his plans for influence operations is really important.
Every time you meet with Putin it’s like he’s setting a bunch of traps. It’s like you’re out in the woods someplace, and you wish you had night vision goggles to see all the traps. So for us, the night vision goggles are counter-intelligence and understanding where Putin is trying to hurt us. But if you don’t understand that, you risk getting your leg caught in a whole bunch of traps. He’s setting a whole bunch of traps for us- Ukraine, Syria and this Cyber-Security working group idea, those are all traps that he has set.
Many jihadi and Marxist organizations frequently publish overtly defamatory and false comments about Understanding the Threat (UTT) and its President John Guandolo.
UTT would like to inject some truth into this situation.
The following is a list of the common attacks UTT endures, followed by UTT’s responses:
“Guandolo has made a career out of…promoting ludicrous Islamophobic conspiracy theories.”
In fact, UTT offers $1000 cash and the removal of relevant material we teach and publish to anyone who can bring something to our attention that is not true about sharia’s authority in Islam and what it says, or about the Muslim Brotherhood’s Jihadi Movement in the United States and their modus operandi.
UTT has made this offer on TV, radio, and in direct emails to U.S. Muslim Brotherhood leadership for over 3 years.
So far…no takers.
“Guandolo has made a career out of demonizing Muslims…”
UTT believes speaking truth about the evil and barbaric system that is Islam’s sharia brings light to muslims trapped in this system and who are enslaved by it. This, to us, seems the best way to demonstrate love and compassion to the muslim community, as opposed to calling a barbaric system “good” and “peaceful.”
“Guandolo’s trainings are little more than anti-Muslim witch-hunts.”
In fact, sheriffs, police chiefs, and prosecutors have opened cases as a direct result of UTT’s 3-day “Understanding and Investigating the Jihadi Threat” for police, intelligence professionals, and military personnel. One police officer who attended UTT’s 3-day program identified a wanted Al Qaeda terrorist wanted by the FBI less than one week after the training, and stated UTT’s training was the reason he was able to do so.
“At an event in 2011, Guandolo claimed mosques were fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood.”
Property records, leadership at U.S. Islamic centers/mosques, investigation by UTT, and testimony in federal courts reveal approximately 80% of the over 3000 mosques in all 50 United States are controlled by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood calls Islamic centers/mosques the “axis” of their Movement, and their stated objective is to wage jihad to establish an Islamic State under sharia – the same objective as ISIS and Al Qaeda.
“Guandolo was dismissed from the FBI.”
John Guandolo left the FBI on 1 December 2008 after being recruited out of the FBI by the Department of Defense for a significant pay increase and significantly more responsibility. His departure from the FBI was voluntary and honorable.
“Among his many bizarre and Islamophobic claims…that former CIA Director John Brennan was a secret Muslim…”
In fact, in February 2013, UTT’s John Guandolo was the first to break the story on a TV show hosted by The United West’s Tom Trento discussing U.S. government personnel with direct knowledge of John Brennan’s conversion to Islam when Mr. Brennan was the CIA Station Chief in Saudi Arabia in the 1990’s. In June 2017, former CIA Station Chief Brad Johnson publicly stated on the Glazov Gang TV show that many people in the CIA told him they heard and knew of John Brennan’s conversion to Islam.
“Among his many bizarre and Islamophobic claims…that Muslims are “obligated” to lie, and that it is “unprofessional” for officials to seek information about Islam from Islamic religious leaders (imams).”
Authoritative Islamic law – sharia – mandates lying by muslims to non-muslims when the objective is obligatory. In Islamic law, jihad is obligatory.
The Um dat al Salik (Reliance of the Traveller) is authoritative sharia approved by the highest authority in Islam – Al Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt. It states: “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives…it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible…and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory.”
Islamic scholars and all sharia mandate lying by muslims to non-muslims when the goal is obligatory. Advancing Islam is obligatory. Jihad is obligatory. Islamic leaders who know and understand sharia lie to non-muslims to advance Islam and have been caught doing so on numerous occasions.
Therefore, it is unprofessional for a non-muslim to use an Islamic scholar or Imam as the source of understanding of Islam because Islamic scholars and Imams know sharia and, therefore, understand their duty under sharia to lie to police chiefs, pastors, Members of Congress, Presidents, school board officials, and others in order to advance Islam.
Guandolo claims most Islamic organizations in America are a threat.
The largest terrorism financing trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history – US v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, Dallas 2008 – was the culmination of a 15 year FBI investigation. The evidence in this case reveals there is an “Islamic Movement” in the United States primarily led by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.
The evidence also reveals the most prominent Islamic organizations in the United States are a part of this Muslim Brotherhood network whose stated objective is to wage “civilization jihad” until they establish an Islamic state (caliphate) under sharia (Islamic law).
Evidence in the US v HLF trial reveals the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood was ordered by MB headquarters in Egypt to create a Palestine Committee to be a node for the terrorist group Hamas in the United States. The USMB created four (4) organizations to fulfill this mission, including the HLF and CAIR.
US v HLF and other evidence reveals MB groups in America include, but are not limited to:
Islamic Society of North America (ISNA)
Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR)
North American Islamic Trust (NAIT)
Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA)
Muslim Students Association (MSA)
Muslim American Society (MAS)
Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA)
International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT)
Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC)
Muslim Youth of North America (MYNA)
It is UTT’s hope the reader will read and study these responses so he/she can boldly speak truth using these responses as a guide.
UTT encourages our readers and followers not to be angry with our adversaries. They are doing what they do. We should pity them that all they have are lies and ad hominem attacks.
Breitbart News Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow spoke to journalist Mike Cernovich on Breitbart News Daily this morning discussing the Trump presidency, Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump’s influence, and the possibility of President Trump being held under “house arrest.”
Mike Cernovich appeared on Breitbart News Daily today to speak to Breitbart Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow about issues surrounding the Trump Presidency. Cernovich has a running series of posts called ” Dispatches from Trumpland” that were at the center of their discussion. “There’s some pretty explosive stuff in your report,” said Alex Marlow referencing Cernovich’s recent Trump Dispatches, “and so I just wanted to unpack some of it with you, the first place where it starts in your dispatch is that Trump is on house arrest and you cite John Bolton who people thought was under consideration for National Security Advisor, for Secretary of State who can’t even have access to the President right now and this is a pretty big departure from campaign trail Trump.”
“Exactly, so I’d heard from people that Trump is on house arrest,” replied Mike Cernovich, “I thought ‘oh c’mon, the President of the United States, that’s the weirdest thing I’ve ever heard’, but I kept digging into it and I kept hearing the same thing over and over again and then, of course, John Bolton wrote his column for National Review and he’s begging people to retweet it, he said ‘this is the only way the President is gonna see it,’ and I’ll say Alex, I don’t really understand, how can Trump not see who he wants to see? This is something I don’t really fully comprehend within the White House. I have talked to a lot of people, it’s a very weird situation.”
Marlow agreed, “it is a very weird situation, and this is something that I’m afraid is systemic of something that’s happening inside, people that listen to the show know that I’m not a huge ‘Javanka’ fan,” referencing Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, “and I’m just seeing the numbers here Mike and the people inside the White House, you’ve got Kushner, you’ve got Ivanka Trump, Gary Cohn, Dinah Powell, H.R. McMaster, who I know you were really the first person to call him out as a big threat to the MAGA agenda. And it’s just overwhelming and now with no Bannon and with no Gorka, just where is the President getting information that can tie him, connect him to his own base?”
“I heard [John] Kelly had taken his [Trump’s] phone, so he wouldn’t be getting messages on his phone which again I thought was a weird story when people were telling me that I said, ‘come on, get out of here you can’t take the President’s phone this is incomprehensible’ but again that Bolton thing confirmed it and I’m not a big John Bolton fan personally, I don’t have anything against him but I found it amazing that he was, again, begging for retweets saying ‘the only way the President is gonna see my article is maybe if it goes viral,’ because it has to get past General Kelly, that shows there is some kind of coup going on there.”
“Coup is a strong word,” said Marlow, “but it’s very hard to argue against it at this point.”
Marlow then mentioned his fears about Trump’s distance from his voting base and his refusal to appear on talk radio. Marlow stated that he worries that Trump doesn’t talk to people that understand or remember what the base voted for when they cast their ballot for Trump in November. Cernovich commented on Trump’s interview with Maggie Habermann for the New York Times but his failure to talk to the likes of Breitbart News, the Daily Caller or calling into the likes of Rush Limbaugh and other talk radio hosts.
Later in the interiew, Marlow asked, “Mike give us your thoughts on the threat to the America First Agenda coming from the media.”
“Yeah, the media is running public relations for the left,” stated Cernovich, pointing out that donations to the DNC are down considerably. He continued to describe that this showed that people have lost support within the DNC and that many no longer trust the media.
Marlow then went on to question Cernovich about his claims that White House staffer Ben Rhodes was essentially running the National Security Council. Cernovich replied with a claim that Rhodes was colluding H.R. McMaster to leak sensitive information from within the White House. According to Cernovich, “Ben Rhodes’ people leak all the information out to Rhodes and his intermediaries, McMaster looks the other way and that’s part of the coup.”
Marlow and Cernovich also discussed the “Trump Tax”, which was mentioned in the first part of Cernovich’s dispatches, which refers to the price that people pay for supporting Trump both privately and in the media. A source told Cernovich, “After what they did to Thiel, who is willing to pay the Trump tax?”
Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolan_ or email him at firstname.lastname@example.org.
President Trump has placed a high priority on rebuilding the U.S. military and allowing his commanders to make more calls. So far, in the administration’s first six months, successes have been piling up.
Here are the top five:
1. Islamic State Defeat in Mosul
The U.S.-led coalition assisted Iraqi security forces in uprooting the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) from its stronghold in Iraq, a major strategic and symbolic victory. ISIS had stormed into Iraq the summer of 2014, seizing large swaths of land and establishing Mosul as its de facto capital in Iraq.
Iraqi forces are now moving to clear other pockets of Iraq where there are still ISIS holdouts, with Tal Afar, just west of Mosul, being the next target.
Although the Mosul offensive began under former President Obama, President Trump called for a review of the ISIS war and made two significant changes. Defense Secretary James Mattis announced the changes on May 19 during a Pentagon briefing:
First, he delegated authority to the right level to aggressively and in a timely manner move against enemy vulnerabilities.
Secondly, he directed a tactical shift from shoving ISIS out of safe locations in an attrition fight to surrounding the enemy in their strongholds so we can annihilate ISIS. The intent is to prevent the return home of escaped foreign fighters.
The fight for Raqqa, the capital of its “caliphate,” is also underway, beginning last month. U.S.-led coalition forces are assisting local Syrian Kurdish and Arab forces on the ground, who now have the city encircled.
2. Diminished Islamic State Presence in Afghanistan
The U.S. military has been keeping ISIS on its back foot in Afghanistan after declaring its presence there in 2015. The U.S. military killed the emir of the terrorist group’s Afghanistan branch, ISIS-Khorasan, last week. Abu Sayed was killed in a U.S. strike in the group’s headquarters in Kunar province on July 11.
“The raid also killed other ISIS-K members and will significantly disrupt the terror group’s plans to expand its presence in Afghanistan,” Chief Pentagon Spokesperson Dana White said.
White said Afghan and U.S. forces launched a counter-ISIS-K offensive in early March 2017 to drive ISIS from their presence in Nangarhar. In April, the military dropped its largest conventional bomb on ISIS there.
A Pentagon report in June said ISIS-K has declined “in size, capability, and ability to hold territory” between December and May.
3. U.S. Navy Aircraft Carrier Fleet to Officially Boast Eleven Vessels Again
It is the first aircraft carrier of a new class in forty years, since the Nimitz-class carriers were commissioned in the 1970s, and will bring the Navy’s carrier count back up to 11 for the first time in five years, in accordance with the law.
Trump has pledged to build a twelve-carrier Navy and this milestone is a big step towards that. It is also symbolic of the president’s plans to rebuild the military.
“After years of endless budget cuts that have impaired our defenses, I am calling for one of the largest defense spending increases in history,” Trump said on the Ford in March.
Six Democrats and one independent opposed his nomination: Sens. Corey Booker (NJ), Tammy Duckworth (IL), Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), Kamala Harris (CA), Ed Markey (MA) and Elizabeth Warren (MA), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
The confirmation fills a key policy-making role at the Pentagon. He last served as senior vice president of supply chain and operations at Boeing Company.
Shanahan is taking over for Bob Work, an Obama holdover who had agreed to stay until his replacement could be found.
His confirmation brings the number of Senate-confirmed appointees at the Pentagon to six, out of 22 nominations so far.
5. Trump Challenging China in the South China Sea
President Trump has begun to challenge China in the South China Sea, sending the U.S. military to sail or fly within 12 nautical miles of land features claimed by China.
The purpose of these operations, called “Freedom of Navigation Operations” (FONOPs), is to make sure China knows the waters remain open to the international community, despite China and other countries’ claims of ownership.
One of the most consequential exchanges on the disposition of Syria’s border lands with Israel and Jordan – and the future of the Syrian conflict at large – took place between Presidents Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in a phone call on Tuesday, May 2. The call took place when German Chancellor Angela Merkel was visiting Putin at his Black Sea residence in Sochi.
DEBKAfile’s military and intelligence sources reveal that the two presidents focused strongly on an effort to agree on how de-escalate the Syrian conflict now in its sixth year and bring it to an end. The Russian leader proposed drawing armistice lines between the warring sides under the guarantee of a special Russian military mechanism. The Americans have not released any ideas, but they are believed to be contemplating establishing safety zones barred to the Syrian air force. One of those zones would be marked out in the south on Syria’s borders with Israel and Jordan.
The Syrian dictator Bashar Assad, the Iranian military-political command and Hizballah are resisting US feelers for the introduction of these safe zones, regarding the plan as a ploy hatched by the Saudis, Israelis and Jordanians to take control of South Syria by engaging local Syrian rebel groups as their vehicle. Damascus, Tehran and Beirut believe that if they allow the scheme to go forward without resistance, it will be the start of similar off-limits enclaves in other parts of Syria, and the country will quickly fall apart into self-ruling segments.
That is why late last month, Syrian army units, the Shiite militias under Iranian Revolutionary Guards officers’ command and Hizballah combined their resources to push against the local Syrian rebels of the South in the regions of the borders with Israel and Jordan.
It is doubtful whether Trump and Putin were able to work out something tangible in their first phone conversation since the US fired Tomahawk cruise missiles against the Syrian Shayrat air base on April 7. The Russian president used the shock of that event to cultivate closer ties with the Syrian ruler and strengthen his missile defenses, in case of an American repeat attack or Israeli air strikes on military targets in Syria.
At the same time, Putin becamed more careful about infringing on parts of Syria deemed to be under American influence, especially the Kurdish enclaves.
The US president was also careful not to direct personal attacks on Putin or criticize Russia’s military involvement in Syria, merely expressing the hope that at some point the two powers could reach an understanding to end the vicious conflict.
When reporters in Sochi asked the Russian president if he thought he could sell his plan to Assad, he replied: “A ceasefire is the first priority and cooperation with Washington is critical.”
At the same time, Russia operates in tandem with Turkey and Iran and was trying to “create the conditions for political cooperation on all sides,” he said.
Clearly, Putin was making the point that, just as the US deals with the Syrian issue in alignment with Saudi Arabia, Israel and Jordan, Russia coordinates its actions with Iran and Turkey. Since both presidents are similarly weighed down by their allies, the road to a consensus between Washington and Moscow is destined to be long with many convolutions. Therefore, the tension on the Israeli and Jordanian borders of southern Syria will continue to escalate before it abates.
Security clearances granting access to state secrets have become increasingly politicized in a bid by opponents to block senior advisers to President Trump from joining the closed White House community of those with access secret intelligence.
In February, intelligence agencies denied a high-level security clearance to Robin Townley, an African affairs specialist and close aide to then-White House National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.
The denial of the Top Secret, Sensitive Compartmented Information clearance, the high-level security clearance known as TS/SCI, was widely viewed as a bureaucratic power play by opponents of both Flynn and Townley inside intelligence agencies.
Angelo Codevilla, an intelligence expert, said the denial of clearances was engineered by the CIA and came despite Townley’s holding of the high level clearance for many years when he worked at the Defense Intelligence Agency.
The clearance denial drove Townley out of the White House National Security Council staff.
The apparent motivation was political, as Townley was known inside government as a critic of the current intelligence structure. Townley, like Flynn, advocated for intelligence reforms designed to improve what many critics regard as an outdated system of intelligence agencies.
“The CIA did not want to deal with him,” Codevilla stated. “Hence, it used the power to grant security clearances to tell the president to choose someone acceptable to the agency, though not so much to him.”
Flynn also is under scrutiny from the Pentagon inspector general over foreign payments he received after retiring as an Army three-star general and whether they were reported on security clearance forms.
Several months before Townley’s clearance denial, Democrats on Capitol Hill complained about plans to give high-level security clearances to Trump’s daughter Ivanka Trump, and her husband, Jared Kushner. Both were granted interim TS/SCI clearances and currently are presidential advisers.
The blocking of security clearances under Trump contrasts with the handling of clearances during the Obama administration when a key liberal adviser with a questionable security background was given a high-level clearance.
Ben Rhodes, the White House deputy national security adviser for strategic communications under Obama, was denied an interim TS/SCI clearance by the FBI in October 2008, according to an email obtained from John Podesta last year.
The email stated that Rhodes was the only White House official out of 187 prospective White House aides to be denied the interim TS/SCI clearance.
Yet, despite the denial, Rhodes would later be granted access to some of the most secret U.S. intelligence information and emerge as one Obama’s closest aides who boasted of a “mind-meld” with the president on various issues.
Rhodes became one of the most active originators and shapers of key American foreign and national security policies under Obama.
He engineered what he dubbed the “echo chamber” of pliable news reporters and think tank experts who could be relied on to spread White House propaganda, including false and misleading information, to the American public on the Iran nuclear deal in a bid to win congressional backing for the accord.
Two House Republicans asked the FBI in January to investigate how Rhodes was granted access to secrets for eight years after the initial denial of an interim clearance in 2008.
Regarding Ivanka Trump and Kushner, two House Democrats, Rep. Elijah Cummings (Md.) and Rep. Bennie Thompson (Miss.) complained on Twitter in November that granting clearances to the couple would be improper and a conflict of interest because they were in business and lacked government experience.
High-level security clearances are granted to White House officials so they can participate in various activities, including policy development work, meetings with the president and senior advisers, working groups, and intelligence briefings.
Most internal meetings are classified and thus a security clearance is required for access. Denying a clearance to an official can be tantamount to firing.
In the White House complex, junior clerical staff members often are granted TS/SCI clearance.
Most jobs inside the White House complex, which includes the executive mansion and the adjacent Eisenhower executive office building, where the National Security Council and other key posts are located, require the TS/SCI clearance. Other clearance levels include Secret and Confidential.
The process for gaining a clearance includes filling out Form SF-86 that requires disclosing details of past employment and finances.
Chinese hackers were able to gain access to millions of the secret and highly sensitive forms during the hack disclosed last year of the Office of Personnel Management. The stolen SF-86s were among some 22 million documents on federal employees stolen and could greatly assist Chinese intelligence agent recruitment and cyber espionage operations.
Ground for clearance denial can include illegal drug use, contacts with foreign governments, or a history of bankruptcy.
The TS/SCI clearance grants a holder access to special intelligence, such as information obtained from foreign recruited agents and electronic communications intelligence.
The clearance also can include signing extensive non-disclosure agreements.