I departed from the Republican Party after supporting a GOP
candidate for President in 2012 I did not in the first place. THEN he; i.e.
Mitt Romney, lost! Romney ran a weenie campaign refusing to point out Obama’s
horrendous record and allowing Obama to get away with lying without confronting
the situation. So I left the GOP.
Even though I stopped being a card-carrying Republican, I
ended up voting for GOP candidates in my State. A Democrat was, is and always
will be an unviable choice! This is the case especially after Obama has turned
the Democratic Party into the Communist-Dem Party.
Then came Donald Trump. I like most people was amused but
felt this is a guy that could never win, lacked Conservative credentials and I
was uncertain of any dedication he had to the Christian faith. I was Cruzing
with Ted until the math eliminated his campaign.
So, was I going to be stuck voting for The Donald? A guy I
did not want as a candidate for POTUS? So I began to listen to Donald Trump.
Unlike Romney, Trump was willing to Muslim terrorists
Radical Islamic terrorists and call Hillary Clinton a crook. The more the
Leftist Mainstream Media (MSM) harangued Trump, more I began to like him and
his populist “Make America Great Again.”
But I was still dissatisfied with the Republican Party.
Boehner as the Speaker was ineffective after the GOP took the House in 2014.
Then 2016 came. Trump won POTUS and the GOP was the majority
Party in both Houses of Congress. There was the appearance that Conservatives
finally had an authentic voice and reversing the curse of Obama’s Change
would be imminent.
I WAS WRONG!
After 8 years of saying what happen if the Republicans controlled
government with a Conservative reawakening, little happened except
Congressional resistance to Trump’s MAGA agenda.
AGAIN, the GOP had let me and many fellow Conservatives
down. President Trump was and is actually making things happen as far as
Executive action will take him. But nothing concrete to the promised MAGA will
be forthcoming as long as Republicans in the Senate and Republicans in the
House resist President Trump. These GOP resisters might as well join the
Communist-Dem Party. EVERY political inaction by the Republicans is a vote for
the status quo of the Communist-Dem Party to Socialize and disrupt Christian
faith and morals in America. In essence – the continuation of the Obama’s
Fundamental Transformation of America.
My fellow Americans. Do you want to live in a nation whence
political correctness and multiculturalism define how you – an American – must live
according to what the government tells you how to believe and worship and
speak?
Since the Republican legislators cannot get it together
enough to resist and change the Dem fundamental transformation, it might be
time to abandon the GOP and look for Trump activism in a political party
willing to act as a monolith for Conservative principles.
All this talk about Trump this, and Trump that, masks a far
bigger political controversy. The Republican Party leadership in Washington,
D.C., has fundamentally betrayed its constituents and they are about to learn
that they’ve been double-crossed — for years.
Every Republican candidate’s stock speech sounds the same,
the thunderous roar about a government out of control, federal spending out of
control (insert charts and graphs and why, if you stack hundred dollar bills,
they will reach the edge of the universe), federal taxes out of control (insert
comparisons to socialist countries), the federal bureaucracy out of control
(insert metaphors about chains, yokes, and the like), the family shattered with
federal funding of abortion a crime against humanity (watch for it — there! The
heart-wrenching sob), and our military is emasculated.
Two more items were added to the menu, courtesy of Obama.
Obamacare Will Be Repealed! and Illegal Immigration Will Not Stand!
In 2009, the Democrats controlled everything, partly due to
the Republicans’ cowardice on Capitol Hill, and in part because of some of the
most inept candidates and campaigns America has seen in years. The Obama folks
could have played it safe but went for socialist gold, using the power of the
legislative and the executive branches (and later the judiciary, thank you
Justice Roberts) to advance their agenda.
That included federal spending on a level unmatched in human
history resulting ultimately in a $19 trillion in debt we simply cannot pay,
and with so many tens of trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities that
“infinity” is not far behind. One seventh of the economy was confiscated by the
federal government with the passage of Obamacare. Our national borders were
declared open and discussions over our national sovereignty closed. And to top
it off, the Democrats all but declared themselves above the law.
The GOP harrumphed that this would not stand, by God! If
only… if only America
would vote them into the majority.
In 2009, the Tea Party was born. The Grand Old Party was
rejuvenated. Happy days were here again.
Just one year later, the Republicans captured the House, and
with that, the power of the purse. They now had the authority to stop the
insane spending on so many obnoxious and wholly unnecessary ventures. They
could end Obamacare simply by not funding it.
Instead, under the “leadership” of John Boehner, it did
absolutely nothing. Why, if only we had the Senate! Then we could take on the
President!
So in 2014, after spending hundreds of millions of campaign
dollars running hundreds of thousands of television and radio ads pledging to
end illegal immigration while repealing Obamacare “root and branch” (author:
Mitch McConnell), they were given control of the Senate.
And within a month McConnell re-authorized both, along with
every single other thing Harry Reid and Obama wanted for yet another year.
But that’s because we can’t do what we promised until we
have the Presidency! The excuse was as predictable as summer heat in the
Sahara.
In 2016, they were given that too.
They were given everything.
In January of this year, they formally controlled both
houses of Congress and the executive branch. Every single thing they’d ever
promised was now possible.
They now had the power to enact every single spending cut
they’d ever solemnly pledged. All those wasteful programs designed to fill the
liberal sandbox — PBS, NPR, Planned Parenthood, NEH and the rest of the
alphabet soup; all the hundreds of billions of dollars in corporate welfare to
multi-billion-dollar corporations; all of the hundreds of billions of dollars directed
toward leftist social engineering — poof! All of it could come to an end with a
stroke of a pen.
They now had the power to restore fiscal tax sanity too.
Remember the flat tax? The fair tax? Slashing the highest corporate taxes in
the world? Giving you a tax break? All of it could be done with a snap of the
fingers.
Repeal Obamacare? Check. End illegal immigration? Check.
Build the wall? Check.
Crush the Deep State? Done, by God, done!
There was not a damn thing the Democrats could do to stop
them from draining the swamp.
Except the Republican leadership didn’t mean it. With the
exception of the Freedom Caucus in the House, and literally a handful in the
Senate, the rank-and-file didn’t either. Not one word of it.
The opportunity arose for the vote to repeal Obamacare, and
after huffing and puffing, and huffing and puffing some more, the dust settled
and socialized health care remains the law of the land, perhaps permanently.
The opportunity arose for tax reform, to enact the cuts
America desperately needs. It was never a matter of if, it was a matter of how
much. It is now mid-August and nothing, absolutely nothing has been
accomplished — even attempted!
And now we face the final test: the debt ceiling. Will we or
won’t we stop the spending madness? Will the Republicans enact the cuts they’ve
promised, or will they now be the ones to kick the can, piling evermore
trillions of dollars of debt on their own grandchildren?
By every indication that’s precisely what they plan to do.
The signal has come from President Trump, from Speaker Ryan, and from Majority
Leader McConnell. The debt ceiling will be raised and no fiscal sanity will be
restored.
There is no difference between Republicans and Democrats.
Put them together. They are the swamp.
Just as Republicans have the power to enact the agenda
they’ve pledged in toto, so too do they now own the federal government, in
toto. It’s no longer Obamacare. It’s GOPcare. It’s no longer crazy liberal
Democratic spending. It’s crazy liberal Republican spending. It’s no longer
socialist Democratic Party taxation, it’s socialist Republican Party taxation.
All the legislation authorizing all these programs, all the graft, all the
waste, all the obscenity, all the immorality, and where Planned Parenthood is
concerned, all the killing — all of it is now formally authored by the
Republican Party.
Come the Congressional elections next year, and the
presidential election in 2020, the Grand Old Party will once again bellow its
hallowed promises. But this time it won’t work. This time there will be no
straw men to blame. This time their voters will know those hallowed promises
are not even hollow promises. They are lies.
These voters are tasting betrayal. They will not vote to
swallow more vomit.
We are watching the GOP systematically committing suicide.
Yesterday I posted Justin Smith’s critique of National
Security Advisor H.R. McMaster entitled “A Bitter Struggle”.
Justin’s theme is the obvious purge of Trump loyalists from the Trump National
Security teams and the incomprehensible protection of Obama holdovers.
If you read Justin’s submission, and you should, you must
have come away wondering: Why in the world would President Trump allow
people supportive of Obama’s destructive to the USA agenda to remain when the
President promised to drain the swamp?
After you read Ryan Mauro’s “25 Reasons to Reassign
General H.R. McMaster,” the question should be a question you cannot get
out of your head.
I need to stipulate my position for clarity to show you
where I stand. I’m a Conservative that subscribes to the Make America Great
Again (MAGA) agenda and to be honest, I have some of the Neocon tendencies that
lead to American Exceptionalism in foreign policy but have abandoned the
concept of nation building in the Muslim world. The wars in Afghanistan and
Iraq have proven that Western Concepts of Liberty and Islamic culture are totally
inimical to each other. Yet a strong America needs a strong-superior military
to enforce American National Interests.
Also, years of a cursory study of Islam has not on has shown
that American Constitutional Liberty and Islamic theopolitical ideology are
incompatible, but as a Christian I can say Islam revered writings are
deceptively as well as completely immersed in Antichrist ideology. I’m a
Christian but every single Jew should be aware the Islamic revered writings
even have more hate for Jews than for Christians.
AND pertaining to Israel, I am a Christian Zionist that
believes the entirety of the Land promised to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are to
their descendants which today embodies the Jews. A term applied to all twelve
tribes of the Hebrews that King David ruled as Israel. There NEVER has been a
nation or national people called Palestinians.
Every single thing I mentioned – as you will soon
discover – is something H.R. McMaster is diametrically opposed to!
National Security Adviser
General H.R. McMaster is moving aggressively—and successfully—to maximize his
power in the Trump Administration. President Trump is standing by his side as
anti-Islamist writers and think-tanks like the Center for Security Policy call for his termination
or reassignment.
McMaster’s ascent is a sudden
change in the balance of power in the White House. President Trump was widely
reported to be so disappointed with McMaster that Trump met with former U.N.
ambassador John Bolton to discuss replacing him. Trump and Bolton concluded it
was not the right move.
Then, Secretary of Homeland
Security General John Kelly became the new chief of staff. He told McMaster
that he wanted him to stay.
McMaster’s chief rivals, Chief Strategist Steve Bannon and Deputy Assistant Dr.
Sebastian Gorka, were then pressured into resigning.
The criticisms of McMaster
are well-warranted and are not the fruits of overactive imaginations among
bigoted “alt-right” smear-merchants, like Senator McCain characterizes them.
Here are 25 reasons that
President Trump should fire National Security Adviser McMaster or, if he’s
willing to, reassign him to a military position where he can excel on the
battlefield as he did before.
1. He is not on board
with Trump’s vision of waging an ideological war against radical Islam (or
whatever terminology you prefer).
You simply cannot have a
national security adviser who is at odds with the fundamental pillar of your
national security strategy.
In that speech, he rejected
the notion that jihadists are motivated by a religion-based ideology. Instead,
he claimed they are motivated by “fear,” a “sense of honor” and their
“interests,” which he described as the roots of human conflict for thousands of
years. He recommended that the U.S. must begin “understanding those human
dimensions.”
In May, McMaster stated in an interview
that the jihadists “are not religious people.”
A source close to National
Security Council (NSC) personnel revealed that McMaster
opposed President Trump’s summit in Riyadh, one of the high points of his
presidency thus far. McMaster felt it was “too ambitious.”
In Trump’s speech announcing
his strategy for Afghanistan, words like “radical Islamic terrorism” were
missing. This is clearly the influence of McMaster. In his resignation letter
to Trump, Dr. Gorka referenced these omissions and
said it “proves that a crucial element of your presidential campaign has been
lost.”
Raheel
Raza says it like it is. If calling out radical Islam is politically incorrect
then so be it. Raheel is bold enough to criticize and challenge radical Islam,
are you?
2. Endorsed a book
favorable towards “non-militant” Islamists
In 2010, McMaster endorsed a book that states,
as one of its central arguments, “It is the Militant Islamists who are our
adversary…They must not be confused with Islamists.”
The book contends that our
policy should not be aimed at Islamism overall
but only Islamist terrorist groups. That is the mindset of those who advocate
working with the “moderate” Muslim
Brotherhood and the “moderate” Taliban.
McMaster describes the book
as “excellent” and “deserv[ing] a wide readership.” Raymond Ibrahim reviewed
the book and found serious errors, ones that now
have dangerous consequences with McMaster as national security adviser.
3. Opposes designating
the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist Organization
Based on the above two
issues, it should be no surprise that McMaster reportedly opposes designating
the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.
4. Opposes a tough
stance on Qatar’s support of terrorism and extremism
McMaster opposed President Trump’s
tough stance on Qatar when our Arab allies confronted the tiny country, despite
the sea of proof that our
so-called “ally” is a major sponsor of Islamist terrorism and extremism,
including the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and Al-Qaeda.
McMaster, like Secretary of
Defense Mattis, was concerned about the U.S. base in Qatar.
This means that McMaster
essentially supports allowing the Qatari government to use our own base—which
protects them—to decide U.S. policies.
The UAE has recommended that
we move the base. There are no indications that McMaster is advocating that we
do that so we can exert more pressure Qatar in the future.
5. The book endorsed by
McMaster legitimizes Hamas
Aaron Klein, a senior Middle
East reporter, read the book that McMaster endorsed as “excellent” and,
shockingly, found that the author never characterizes Hamas
as a terrorist group. Instead, the author refers to Hamas as an “Islamist
political group” that is among Islamists “who do not fit into a neat category.”
“The question for Americans
is whether Hamas is an Islamist or Militant Islamist group,” the author,
Youssef H. Aboul-Enein, writes.
He’s as wrong as someone can
possibly be wrong. Beside the fact that Hamas has been designated by the U.S. as a Foreign Terrorist
Organization for 10 years, there is no question that Hamas is
a terrorist group. In fact, there isn’t much of a substantive difference between Hamas and ISIS.
Aboul-Enein’s argument is
that the U.S. should only target “Militant Islamists” and not more generic
Islamists. By questioning whether Hamas qualifies as Militant Islamist,
Aboul-Enein is questioning whether the U.S. should target Hamas.
The book also moves the
reader away from understanding that Islamists’ preaching of armed jihad rests
upon a strong theological foundation. Based on Klein’s description, the author
makes it sound as if Islamists are motivated by reasonable grievances against
policies and then sit down and conjure up a convoluted way to describe their
violent response as “jihad.”
If we don’t acknowledge the
deep theological basis of the Islamists’ worldview, we will not be able to
effectively respond to the ideology and its related narratives.
There is an important side
note as well: Klein points out that the author
of the book is the chair of Islamic Studies at National Defense University (which
is funded by the Department of Defense) and a senior adviser and analyst at the
Defense Intelligence Agency’s Joint Intelligence Task Force for Combating
Terrorism. This means that these views are being taught to very important
students.
6. McMaster believes
terrorism is caused by disenfranchisement and lack of education
In his endorsement of the
book, McMaster said, “Terrorist organizations
use a narrow and irreligious ideology to recruit undereducated and
disenfranchised people to their cause.”
Remember when the Obama
Administration’s State Department spokeswoman was mocked by the left and the right for
suggesting that ISIS needs to be countered by reducing unemployment and poverty?
That same view is held by our
current national security adviser.
7. Preserving the Iran
deal
McMaster is in favor of keeping the
nuclear deal with Iran. His position resulted in the U.S. certifying that Iran
is in compliance with the terms of the agreement. By claiming that Iran has
been obedient, it bolsters the regime’s credibility and makes America look
worse if we leave the deal later.
Former CIA analyst Fred
Fleitz was on a conference call with McMaster before it was certified and explained to McMaster how
Iran is violating the deal. When Fleitz asked why the administration would
certify Iranian compliance despite evidence of non-compliance, McMaster failed
to give a direct answer.
8. Failure to
understand the Israeli-Palestinian theater of the war with Islamism
The ideological war against
Islamism requires us to debunk Islamist propaganda against our allies.
It is now known that McMaster
declined to defend our best ally in the Middle East when questioned about
Israel’s conduct in its 2014 war with Hamas.
Israel’s extraordinary
efforts to limit civilian casualties in the war have been well-documented. When
McMaster was asked whether he would agree that the Israeli military fought
ethically, he gave an incoherent answer and then
admitted, “that’s kind of a non-answer, sorry, to your first question.”
McMaster tried to stop Trump from
visiting the Western Wall in Jerusalem and, when he realized he couldn’t win
that argument, pressured Trump not to go with any Israeli official.
McMaster twice refused to answer
whether the Western Wall is part of Israel, saying, “That’s a policy decision.”
The Conservative
Reviewreported that McMaster refers
to Israel as an “illegitimate,” “occupying power,” according to three current
and former officials from Trump’s inner circle.
Senior Middle East Annalyst
[sic] Caroline Glick substantiates the accounts
with her own sources who describe McMaster as “deeply hostile” to Israel.
According to these reports,
McMaster has characterized Israeli security measures as “excuses” to oppress
Palestinians and Israeli-Arabs. These sources also claim that he is not
supportive of U.S. support for Israeli counter-terrorism efforts and shut down
a joint initiative aimed at Hezbollah.
The initiative was led by
Derek Harvey, who McMaster fired (more on that later).
McMaster is a big reason why
there are increasing danger signs for Israel from
parts of the Trump Administration. This has been recognized by the Zionist
Organization of America, which is asking for McMaster’s
reassignment.
9.Appointing Kris
Bauman as top National Security Council adviser on Israel.
Kris Bauman was chosen in May as the top adviser on Israel for the
National Security Council. Journalist Daniel Greenfield reviewed Bauman’s 2009
dissertation and found highly disturbing content.
As Clarion reported earlier
this month, Bauman blamed Israel and the West for failing to see “Hamas’s
signals of willingness to moderate” and turning Gaza “into an open-air prison.”
He advocated a policy that includes “Hamas in a solution,” dismissing Hamas’
oft-stated pledge to destroy Israel and kill Jews until the end of time.
In his dissertation, Bauman
cites The Israel Lobby, a book that purports to disclose how Israel
secretly manipulates the U.S. institutions of power from behind-the-scenes. He
says the “Israel Lobby” “is a force that must be reckoned with, but it is a
force that can be reckoned with.”
Bauman clearly depicts Israel
as the aggressor in the Israel-Palestinian conflict, and, as Greenfield
points out, equates Jewish settlers in the West Bank with Palestinian
terrorists.
“It is true that one could
make an analogous argument regarding Palestinian terrorism, but there is one
major difference between the two. Israeli government control over settlement
expansion is far greater than Palestinian Authority control over terrorism,” Bauman
writes.
As to the failure of the
“peace process,” he blames Israel as well as the West for its “overwhelmingly
favored Israeli interests.” Prime Minister Netanyahu is blamed for “inciting
Palestinian violence” and deliberately undermining the prospects for peace.
A consistent theme appears in
Bauman’s thesis: Israel is the instigator of terrorism. To defeat terrorism,
stop Israel. And now he is in a strong position in the National Security
Council to try to make that happen.
10. Insubordination and
constant drama
McMaster goes beyond honestly
expressing himself to the president and crosses into insubordination,
undermining the president’s agenda and contributing to dysfunction.
A strong example of
McMaster’s well-known temper and ego was published in May by a prominent author
who recalled how McMaster
“went a bit batshit” because of an article he wrote where 95% of the content
celebrated McMaster’s remarkable success in Iraq.
The other five percent
focused on his forces’ initial mistakes and “mediocre” performance before
adapting to the situation. And that set McMaster off. The author even
quoted an expert who said McMaster’s success would become a “case study in
classic counterinsurgency, the way it is supposed to be done.”
Even major supporters of
McMaster who know him personally admit “he can be very
intense.” The left-leaning Politico, which is more inclined to
favor McMaster than his rivals, reports that his “temper is legendary” and he
“frequently blows his top in high-level meetings.”
Politico described McMaster as an “increasingly volatile
presence in the West Wing.” Three administration officials told the Daily
Caller the same thing, with one describing the National Security
Council as having a “poisonous environment.”
In addition to targeting
Bannon and Gorka and anyone he sees as being in their camp, McMaster reportedly couldn’t even
get along with Trump’s senior adviser and son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who should
be on his team. (The relationship is said to have improved, though.)
He also clashes with Secretary of
Defense Mattis over military matters and Afghanistan. Mattis gave a dismissive
response to these charges, however.
At his very first National
Security Council meeting, McMaster immediately told those
under him that President Trump is wrong to use the term “radical Islam” because
the terrorists are “un-Islamic.”
Right away, he got to work
building a coalition to wage internal battles.
When it came time for Trump’s
Joint Address to Congress, McMaster fought tooth and nail to stop him from
using the “radical Islam” terminology. He wrote and widely distributed throughout
the government a memo criticizing the president.
Trump was very open that this
would be his view. If McMaster couldn’t stand it, then he shouldn’t have
accepted the appointment.
When President Trump and
Chief Strategist Bannon asked McMaster for a list of holdovers from the Obama
Administration that may be leaking inappropriate information to the press, he refused to cooperate and
to fire them. He said hiring and firing was his prerogative and that most would
be leaving anyway.
When President Trump said
South Korea would have to help cover the cost of a missile defense system to
defend them from North Korea, McMaster immediately told the South Koreans that
Trump’s words weren’t actual policy. Trump was furious and screamed at
him on the phone.
Trump is said to have
confronted McMaster about the “general undermining of my policy.”
McMaster has worked hard to
expand his fan club in the Trump Administration at the expense of those he
disagrees with, particularly those closest to the president’s views.
The Washington Free
Beaconreported earlier this
month, “A White House official said McMaster appears to be trying to clear out
anyone from the NSC staff who is outspokenly pro-Trump and has been
slow-rolling the president’s directives that he disagrees with.”
In his resignation letter,
Dr. Gorka wrote to Trump,
“Regrettably, outside of yourself, the individuals who most embodied and
represented the policies that will ‘Make America Great Again,’ have been
internally countered, systematically removed, or undermined in recent months.”
As these internal battles
have been waged, a steady stream of derogatory leaks have appeared in the
media. Bannon has been blamed for anti-McMaster coverage at Breitbart,
but McMaster somehow isn’t blamed for the leaks favorable to his side that
appeared in the mainstream media. The pro-McMaster leaks substantiate why top
generals saw him as a “publicity hound” in the
military who advanced because of his closeness to General Petraeus.
11. Pushing out Chief
Strategist Steve Bannon
On issues related to
Islamism, Bannon was an important voice to have in the White House. He was a
main proponent of designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist
Organization and of waging an ideological war on Islamism.
Bannon understood the need to
promote Muslim reform versus McMaster’s promotion of “non-Militant” Islamists.
Shortly before his resignation on August 18, Bannon met with Dr. Daniel Pipes
and Gregg Roman of the Middle East Forum, one of the most effective
anti-Islamist organizations and promoters of Muslim modernist reformers.
Bannon was McMaster’s top
target. McMaster had forced out many officials that he felt were too close to
Bannon, personally and politically, apparently attempting to monopolize power
as much as possible. After resigning, Bannon said, “No administration in
history has been so divided.”
Bannon disagreed with
McMaster on the April 6 airstrike on a Syrian airbase and the new strategy for
Afghanistan. Although there are serious merits to the airstrikes and the new
strategy for Afghanistan, it is absolutely essential to have the views Bannon
represents be a part of the decision-making process. A good teammate can
disagree with a decision but still improve the option that is ultimately
chosen.
12. Pressuring Dr.
Sebastian Gorka to resign
Dr. Sebastian Gorka, the
deputy assistant to the president and author of Defeating Jihad, resigned reportedly due to
pressure from McMaster and Chief of Staff Kelly.
Gorka and Bannon were the
main proponents of designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist
Organization.
Gorka is best known as the
man who flattens the media like a human bulldozer. These viral
TV segments earned the adoration of President Trump, who personally intervened to stop
plans by his senior adviser and son-in-law, Jared Kushner, to move Gorka out of
the White House and to a federal agency.
Trump’s satisfaction with
Gorka and his success in handling the media should be considered important
assets for an administration that struggles with messaging and perception. His
book shows he is focused on a long-term plan for victory over Islamism.
Unfortunately for him, Chief
of Staff Kelly disagreed with Trump and was reportedly “displeased” with
Gorka’s popular television segments and McMaster saw him as part of the Team
Bannon that he sought to conquer.
Gorka was also probably seen
as too much of a political liability, as he had become the victim of one of the
most vicious and
meritless smear campaigns in recent
memory.
However, Gorka’s media
appearances, input and the ridiculousness of his enemies made him a political
asset.
13. Sidelining K.T.
McFarland
Shortly after McMaster took
his post, Deputy National Security Adviser K.T. McFarland was transferred out.
McMaster had the leading role in making it
happen.
She became the ambassador to
Singapore; not exactly a position where her national security experience is
being used to its full potential. Among her viewpoints is supporting
designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.
14. Firing Ezra
Cohen-Watnick
McMaster wanted to fire Ezra
Cohen-Watnick, the senior director for intelligence programs at the National
Security Council, right from the start. Watnick was initially saved by Bannon and
Kushner.
Before joining the
government, Cohen-Watnick organized an
“Islamo-Fascism Awareness” event on his campus. He understands the issue of
Islamist extremism and is passionate about it.
Watnick joined the Defense
Intelligence Agency in 2010, became an intelligence officer and left in January
2017 for his senior National Security Council spot. He is believed to have entered
the Defense Clandestine Service in 2012 and went to the CIA’s training facility
known as “The Farm” in Virginia. He obviously had a strong background.
He was brought into the NSC
by former National Security Adviser Mike Flynn and, therefore, was seen as an
ally of the Bannon-Gorka team inside the administration.
We don’t know much about what
Watnick advocated while in the National Security Council aside from expanding U.S. operations
against Iranian-backed militias in Syria.
Watnick was accused of
improperly sharing intelligence with Rep. Devin Nunes, but there is disagreement over whether
he did anything wrong. However, we know McMaster wanted to get rid of him right
from the beginning, so this was probably just a good opportunity for a power
play.
15. Trying to Hire
Linda Weissgold
McMaster had already begun
interviewing CIA official Linda Weissgold as Watnick’s replacement before Bannon
and Kushner initially stopped him.
Under the Obama
Administration, Weissgold was the director of the CIA’s Office of Terrorism
Analysis. That means she was responsible for the false talking points about
the terrorist attack in Benghazi in September 2012.
16. Firing Retired Col.
Derek Harvey
Last month, McMaster fired President Trump’s
top Middle East adviser from the National Security Council. The reason, as
explained by one senior White House official, is that McMaster “wants his own
guy.”
Harvey had an exemplary
record and was thought to have a good relationship with McMaster, going back to
when they served together under General Petraeus. He was described as one of
Petraeus’ “most trusted intelligence advisors in Iraq” during the remarkably
successful surge that turned the situation around.
Harvey was fired because of
policy differences and McMaster’s desire to win the internal power struggle and
cement his group over the National Security Council. McMaster and Harvey disagreed on “nearly
every” area, particularly when it came to radical Islam and Iran. Harvey
advocated working more closely with Israel, Egyptian President Sisi and Saudi
Arabia.
Harvey had also put together
a proposal for how the Trump Administration could scrap the nuclear deal with
Iran. McMaster “blasted” his performance
on Iran policy but according to a senior official who spoke to the
left-wing Daily Beast, Harvey “was stuck in a Catch-22 situation”
because lower-level staff dragged their feet in helping him.
According to the Weekly
Standard—a publication that is certainly not in the Bannon/Trump
camp—McMaster fired him because he didn’t like how close
Harvey was to Bannon. Another detailed account said McMaster was also irked by
his closeness to Kushner.
The most complete story says that
McMaster directly told Harvey not to get too close to Bannon and Kushner.
Shortly before he was fired, McMaster saw him leaving Bannon’s office. The
sources say Harvey actually didn’t talk to Bannon too much, but McMaster had
asked for information about Trump’s foreign policy priorities and that
necessitated a meeting with Bannon.
McMaster saw Harvey at
Bannon’s office on a Friday. When Monday came around, McMaster’s executive
officer, Ylli Bajraktari (a Pentagon official from the Obama Administration)
reminded Harvey it is not a “good idea” to talk to Bannon. He was fired four
days later.
One other report states that Defense
Secretary Mattis complained to McMaster about Harvey. The more exhaustive account
based on sources close to Harvey dispute elements of that account.
17. Replacing Harvey
with Michael Bell
McMaster replaced Harvey with
Michael Bell, who was the National Security Council’s director for Persian Gulf
affairs.
Not surprisingly, Bell is on
record for harshly criticizing then-Deputy
Assistant Dr. Sebastian Gorka to the Washington Post. Bell claimed
that Gorka was too biased on Islam-related issues, stopping just a few steps
shy of hitting him with the “Islamophobe” label.
Clearly, McMaster was picking
a team to go to war with the White House. There’s no other way to interpret
this decision.
18. Ousting of Adam
Lovinger
In May, National Security
Counil [sic] analyst Adam Lovinger had his security clearance revoked for unclear
reasons that Lovinger described as “puzzling and baseless.” He was then fired.
Lovinger was at the council
on loan from the Pentagon’s Office of Net Assessment, where he had served as a
strategic affairs analyst for 12 years. He was a known Trump supporter and was
brought into the council by Flynn. Therefore, he would have been seen by
McMaster as a Bannon ally.
Caroline Glick described Lovinger as a
“seasoned strategic analyst” who clashed with McMaster because he favored India
over Pakistan. He also opposed the nuclear deal with Iran and supported the use
of terminology like “radical Islam.”
Lovinger confirmed that his
conservative views on foreign policy had irked bureaucrats, and he believes his
clearance was taken away for political reasons.
The Washington Free
Beaconreported on May 1 that
“security clearances granting access to state secrets have become increasingly
politicized in a bid by opponents to block senior advisers to President Trump.”
Another example of this
happening is Robin Townley, who held a top secret clearance and was picked by
former National Security Adviser Mike Flynn as the council’s senior director
for Africa. The CIA declined to grant him the
necessary security clearance for Sensitive Compartmented Information. A source
close to Townley said it was a politically-motivated “hit job.
19. Ousting Tera Dahl
Tera Dahl, the National
Security Council’s deputy chief of staff, transferred out of the
council in June. She will likely be working at the U.S. Agency for
International Development.
Dahl was a writer for Breitbart and
therefore seen as belonging to Bannon’s camp. She also co-founded a foreign
policy think tank with Katharine Gorka, wife of now-former Deputy Assistant
Sebastian Gorka (Katharine Gorka is currently an official adviser to the
Department of Homeland Security’s policy office.)
Dahl was especially
interested in Egypt. She is supportive of Egyptian
President el-Sisi, arguing that his actions are helping to transition the
country towards democracy and stability. She visited Egypt and believes he is
getting unfair treatment by some Western media outlets and think-tanks who want
to demonize him and exonerate his Muslim Brotherhood enemies.
The left-wing Buzzfeed described
the change as a result of warring factions inside the White House over foreign
policy. It explained, “The move frees up
National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster to install another staffer of his
choosing in his drive to reshape the NSC to his liking.”
Dahl is said to have
expressed interest in transferring because she was close to National Security
Council Chief of Staff Keith Kellogg, whose tensions with McMaster have
“created an uncomfortable working environment at the NSC.”
The council’s spokesperson
Michael Anton claims “it was always her
intent to move into a policy role once this task [at NSC] was completed.”
20. Firing Rich Higgins
McMaster and/or his deputy,
Ricky Waddell, fired the NSC’s director
of strategic planning, Rich Higgins, on July 21.
Higgins has an extensive
background of national security service and has a deep understanding of the
Islamist ideology, its associated doctrines and how it interacts with political
movements that Islamists find common cause with.
Higgins had a deep
understanding of the Muslim Brotherhood and how Islamists got political access
and impacted policy under the Bush and Obama Administrations. He studied how
political correctness had resulted in cleansing counter-terrorism training and
national security policy documents from references to the ideological basis of
the threat.
Higgins was pushing for the
declassification of documents related to radical Islam and Iran and, more
specifically, Presidential Study Directive 11. He had good reason to do so.
There were reports that the previous
administration was not disclosing important documents, including ones from Bin
Laden’s compounds that contradicted its narratives about the nature of the
Al-Qaeda threat and the group’s relationship with Iran.
Presidential Study Directive
11 is reportedly an assessment of Islamist
movements in 2010-2011 by the Obama Administration that resulted in a secret
recommendation to align with “moderate” Islamists in handling the Arab Spring.
If this is indeed what
happened, the directive’s declassification is of the utmost importance for
understanding the Islamist threat, the fruits of this strategy and the dynamics
of the region, not to mention historical documentation.
Alarmingly, according to
a Gulf News report, the Presidential Study
Directive 11 documents were obtained by the Al-Hewar Center in Washington, D.C.
and show that the U.S. decided to back the “political Islamists” including the
Muslim Brotherhood.
McMaster reportedly “detonated” after coming
across a seven-page memo that Higgins wrote which warned about a campaign by
Islamists, Marxists, “bankers,” establishment Republicans and “globalists” to
destroy the Trump presidency. The memo was given to Donald Trump Jr.
and the president himself, who is said to have “gushed over it.”
Such a political memo would
be inappropriate for the National Security Council. Its tone gives the
impression of an author who sees all opposition to the Trump Administration as
part of a seditious conspiracy. Its first reference is an
interview between a member of the conspiratorial John Birch Society and a
Soviet defector about “Jewish Marxist ideology.”
However, the memo was not intended
for the NSC. It was a personal political analysis of how parties with various
interests are trying to undermine the administration’s agenda.
According to Breitbart, Higgins used his
personal computer to write the memo and did not use NSC time. He didn’t even
use his NSC email to send it to anyone but himself. (He sent it from his
personal email to his work email to print out.)
Another comprehensive Breitbart account says
Higgins was fired on July 21 with several holdovers from the Obama
Administration present and a Muslim woman with a hijab who
worked as an equal employment officer. McMaster’s deputy, Ricky Waddell, told
him it was his last day because “we’ve lost confidence in you.”
According to this account,
McMaster was not responsible for the firing and hadn’t even read the memo. It
was entirely the responsibility of Waddell. After the termination, parts of the
memo were leaked to media outlets that would be most hostile to Higgins.
Regardless of whether
Higgins’ firing was due to McMaster or Waddell, it was still done under
McMaster’s leadership and was part of a broader push against perceived
competitors.
President Trump was said to
be “furious” at Higgins’ firing.
21. CAIR Comes to
McMaster’s Defense
The Council on American-Islamic Relations
(CAIR) is a deceptive Islamist bulldog that tears into any
opponent by falsely branding them as an Islamophobic bigot. The Justice
Department identified the organization as a Muslim Brotherhood “entity” set up
to support Hamas and designated it as an unindicted co-conspirator in a
terrorism-financing trial.
CAIR slaps the “Islamophobe”
label on practically everyone, obviously including almost every member of the
Trump Administration. It has done so to Muslim adversaries, President Obama, Hillary
Clinton, Democratic supporters of
gun control measures to stop terrorists from obtaining firearms and White House Chief of Staff Kelly whose
name was referenced in a letter thanking CAIR’s Florida branch.
But not McMaster.
When McMaster came under
heavy criticism for his stances on Islamism-related issues, CAIR came to his defense. It branded
his opponents as “Islamophobes” and “white supremacists.”
22. Reports of a possible
CAIR official on his staff
Ayaan Hirsi Ali from
presenting a paper on Islamist extremism to the National Security Council.
There are unconfirmedreports that it was one of
McMaster’s appointees who blocked Hirsi Ali. One account of the incident says
she was also blocked from seeing President Trump.
Hirsi Ali is one of the most
prominent women’s rights activists and anti-Islamist voices in the world. She
is executive producer of the Clarion Project’s Honor Diaries documentary
about the oppression of women in the Muslim world. She is a strong advocate for
secular-democratic Muslim reformers.
The person who is said to
have blocked her is Mustafa Javed Ali, who protested that she is an
“Islamophobe.” According to one of the reports, a source said that Mustafa said
“that the only way she could present the paper would be to have someone from
CAIR come in to refute her work.”
Mustafa Javed Ali is reportedly a former “diversity
outreach coordinator” for CAIR. However, there is no public confirmation to
confirm this as his name does not appear on CAIR’s website.
23. Holdovers
An analysis by the Daily
Caller found that about 40 of the 250 National
Security Council officials are holdovers from the Obama Administration.
Presumably, these officials would be very hostile to the Trump Administration’s
agenda. They should be the first suspects in the ongoing stream of leaks from
the NSC.
National security expert Jed
Babbin identified four NSC
officials who previously reported directly to Deputy National Security Adviser
Ben Rhodes, the Obama Administration official who boasted of creating an
“echo chamber” in the media to promote the nuclear deal with Iran using
“compadres” in the media to influence reporters who “literally know nothing.”
In July, McMaster told NSC staffers,
“There’s no such thing as a holdover.” He was professing confidence that those
who worked in the Obama Administration would loyally serve President Trump.
Likewise, NSC spokesperson
Michael Anton defended the holdovers as
“stalwarts.”
As mentioned before, when
Trump and Bannon asked McMaster for a list of holdovers that may be leaking to
the press, he refused to cooperate and
to fire them. He said hiring and firing was his prerogative and that most would
be leaving anyway.
One former NSC staffer told
the Daily Caller that McMaster has “protected and coddled
them.”
Iran expert and Nobel Peace
Prize nominee Ken Timmerman wrote a book titled Shadow Warriors in 2007
about how the Bush Administration was undermined by opponents within the
governmental bureaucracies.
Timmerman’s observation
should serve as a contemporary warning:
“George
W. Bush never got the first rule of Washington: People are policy. He allowed
his political enemies to run roughshod over his administration through a vast
underground he never dismantled and never dominated.”
24. McMaster was an
11-Year Member of the International Institute for Strategic Studies
Breitbartdiscovered that McMaster
was a member of the
International Institute for Strategic Studies from September 2006 until
February 2017 when he became national security adviser. IISS was part of a
campaign to promote the nuclear deal with Iran and gets funding from Islamist
allies.
Its website shows that one of its top donors is the Open Society
Foundation, formerly named the Open Society Institute, whose founder and chairman is
left-wing partisan activist George Soros. The foundation donated between
100,000 and 500,000 euros (roughly $120,000-$600,000) to the IISS.
The Open Society Foundation
is motivated by hyper-partisanship and works hard to defend American Islamists
and slander opponents of the Muslim Brotherhood as bigots.
For example, it financed
the Fear Inc. reports about
the “Islamophobia Network” that is a powerful weapon in the
Islamists’ and Regressive Left’s arsenal for character assassination and
protecting groups like CAIR.
IISS also has Ploughshares
Fund as a major donor, giving between 25,000
and 100,000 euros (about $30,000-$119,000). The Plougshares Fund is also funded
by Soros and his entities like Open Society.
When Ben Rhodes boasted about
orchestrating the “echo chamber” to promote the nuclear deal with Iran, he
specifically mentioned Ploughshares as his example of an outside group he
utilized.
The president of
Ploughshares, Joseph Cirincione, is a member of the International Institute for
Strategic Studies. Plougshares specifically listed IISS, the group
that McMaster belonged to, as the recipient of a grant for work on Iran issues
in 2016.
Soros’ Open Society
Foundation/Institute donated about $70,000
overall to selling the Iran deal, but other entities funded by Soros gave more.
Ploughshares donated at least $800,000.
Ploughshares also donated
over $400,000 to the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), which has long
been accused of being a lobby for the Iranian regime. Ploughshares
also awarded $70,000 to Princeton University to sponsor the work of former
Iranian regime official Seyed Hossein Mousavian. The Heritage Foundation’s
James Phillips writes, “This essentially
amounted to subsidizing Iran’s propaganda efforts inside the United States.”
As Breitbart’s
Aaron Klein shows, IISS was a loyal contributor to the Rhodes-Plougshares
“echochamber.” It supported the deal and defended Iran against accusations of
violations. It cast doubt on concerns that Iran and North Korea work on WMD
together. And it criticized Trump’s attitude towards Iran.
IISS also receives funding
from many companies that profited from the Iran deal like ExxonMobil. Its list
of donors includes many governments, both allies and adversaries of the U.S.
Governmental donors of
concern include Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Brunei, Kuwait, Russia
and China.
25. President Trump is
frequently unhappy with McMaster’s performance.
As mentioned before,
President Trump has confronted McMaster about his “general undermining of my
policy” and was furious at him for telling
South Korea to basically ignore Trump’s words.
Trump complains that
McMaster talks too much at meetings and
has described him as a “pain.” There have been multiple articles indicating
that Trump might be on the cusp of firing McMaster.
“I am at a pain to find an
issue that H.R. actually aligns with the president, except for the desire to
actually win and beat ISIS. That’s the only one,” said one administration
official.
A former senior NSC
official said, “I know that the
president isn’t a big fan of what McMaster’s doing. I don’t understand why he’s
allowing a guy who is subverting his foreign policy at every turn to remain in
place.”
Trump has reportedly said in private that he
regrets choosing McMaster as national security adviser and went so far as to
meet with former U.N. ambassador John Bolton to float the possibility of him
replacing McMaster. Bolton and Trump agreed that it was not the right move.
At the time, McMaster blasted the media for its
downplaying of Iran’s role in murdering U.S. troops.
This led to many people’s
(including this author’s) initial enthusiasm for him
as national security adviser despite his statement in 2014 that the
“Islamic State is not Islamic.”
Thinking it unfathomable that
Trump would choose someone who is so fundamentally at odds with his national
security vision, many chalked up the statement to a clumsy articulation of the
U.S. position that ISIS shouldn’t be treated as the representative of the
Muslim world.
But what was once
unfathomable has become reality.
McMaster performed well as a
military commander fighting an insurgency. If he is to continue serving the
Trump Administration, then he should be reassigned to focus on taking his
success in Iraq and repeating it in Afghanistan.
Ryan Maurois
ClarionProject.org's Shillman Fellow and national security analyst and an
adjunct professor of counter-terrorism. He is frequently interviewed on
top-tier television and radio.
The Clarion Project (formerly Clarion Fund) is a 501(c)3
non-profit organization dedicated to educating both policy makers and the
public about the growing phenomenon of Islamic extremism. The Clarion Project
is committed to working towards safeguarding human rights for all peoples.
