Sunday, August 6, 2017

Enemies Inside the Gates

If you tend to assign credibility to Daniel Greenfield ("Sultan Knish") you'll find his article in Friday's Front Page Magazine disturbing.  I might dismiss a lesser investigator, but not Greenfield.  Hat tip to Mike Miles at  90 Miles From Tyranny for pointing this story out. 

The point of the article?  That National Security Council head General H.R. McMaster is running an inside coup against President Trump.  Considering supporting reports today that he has "purged key Trump allies" inside the NSC, it appears true.

President Trump or General Kelly needs to get him out of there.

Greenfield begins:
Derek Harvey was a man who saw things coming. He had warned of Al Qaeda when most chose to ignore it. He had seen the Sunni insurgency rising when most chose to deny it.

The former Army colonel had made his reputation by learning the lay of the land. In Iraq that meant sleeping on mud floors and digging into documents to figure out where the threat was coming from.

It was hard to imagine anyone better qualified to serve as President Trump’s top Middle East adviser at the National Security Council than a man who had been on the ground in Iraq and who had seen it all.

Just like in Iraq, Harvey began digging at the NSC. He came up with a list of Obama holdovers who were leaking to the press. McMaster, the new head of the NSC, refused to fire any of them.

McMaster had a different list of people he wanted to fire. It was easy to make the list. Harvey was on it.
Derek Harvey was fired in July, apparently for not being adamantly pro-Muslim brotherhood, and pro-Obama.  Harvey wasn't alone.  McMaster also purged Ezra Watnick-Cohen, who had exposed the eavesdropping on Trump officials by Obama personnel and provided proof to House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes.  Watnick-Cohen's replacement?  Linda Weisgold, Obama's Director of the CIA Office of Terrorism Analysis, who helped draft the Benghazi talking points which blamed the Islamic terrorist attack on a video protest.
According to the media, Watnick-Cohen was guilty of “anti-Muslim fervor” and “hardline views.” And there’s no room for anyone telling the truth about Islamic terrorism at McMaster’s NSC.

McMaster had even demanded that President Trump refrain from telling the truth about Islamic terrorism.
Another of his targets was Rich Higgins, who had written a memo warning of the role of the left in undermining counterterrorism.  Higgins had served as a director for strategic planning at the NSC and had warned in plain language about the threats of Islamic terrorism, of Sharia law, of the Hijrah colonization by Islamic migrants, of the Muslim Brotherhood, and of its alliance with the left as strategic threats.  He was fired for identifying a security threat to the US.  Kinda sounds like the whole point of the NSC, doesn't it?

McMaster forced K.T. McFarland out of her role as Deputy National Security Advisor.  If you've watched Fox News in the last 20 years, you'll recognize K.T..  She was an Oxford and Cambridge grad, worked on a Ph.D. at MIT, and had worked at the Pentagon for the Reagan administration.  Her replacement?  Dina Habib-Powell, an Egyptian-American immigrant and former Bush gatekeeper whose pals included Huma Abedin and Valerie Jarrett.
Habib-Powell had attended the Iftar dinner with members of Muslim Brotherhood front groups. You can see her photographed at the American Task Force of Palestine gala. The ATFP was originally Rashid Khalidi’s American Committee on Jerusalem. She was there as a presenter at the Middle East Institute after a speech by Hanan Ashrawi. Her achievements under Bush included cultural exchanges with Iran, as well as cash for the Palestinian Authority and for Lebanon after the Hezbollah war with Israel.
Cash for the Palestinian Authority, also known as "Pay to Slay" is one of her achievements?  That would be your tax money that they use to kill families celebrating the birth of a child or otherwise threatening no one.   
As Caroline Glick has pointed out, the personnel being purged in the McMaster coup “are pro-Israel and oppose the Iran nuclear deal.”

When Adam Lovinger urged that “more attention be given to the threat of Iran and Islamic extremism,” his security clearance was revoked.  Robin Townley was forced out in the same way.
You probably noticed the story go by this week that:
McMaster sent a letter to Susan Rice, Obama’s former National Security Adviser, assuring her that the NSC would work with her to “allow you access to classified information.” He claimed that Rice's continued access to classified information is "consistent with the national security interests of the United States."

Why does Susan Rice, who is alleged to have participated in the Obama eavesdropping on Trump people, need access to classified information? What national security purpose is served by it?
Nothing good can come from this.  "In my days", clearances were only granted on a basis of "Need to know".  According to that link and journalist Sara Carter, McMaster specifically said, “I hereby waive the requirement that you must have a ‘need-to-know’ to access any classified information contained in items you 'originated, reviewed, signed or received while serving,' as National Security Adviser,”.  In my book that's a big red warning flag emblazoned "WTF?".  Why should she need that clearance?   The best place for Susan Rice is far, far from anywhere important.  

The purge of "America First" ideology is only starting.  Rumor is McMaster has a hit list.  You can bet that under his remodeling the NSC will be more like the way Obama would like it than what Trump supporters would like to see.  You can be sure that will include that the Iran Deal must stay, that Islam has nothing to do with Islamic terrorism, that we need to find ways to work with the aspirations of the Muslim Brotherhood, and that Israel must make concessions to terrorists.

I think of myself as a reasonable guy.  I'd like to hear "the other side".  In a situation like this, where none of us can see the inside, there's always a risk that these events are being interpreted the wrong way.  On the other hand, there's a strong circumstantial case that Daniel Greenfield is right and this is the inside-the-beltway swamp fighting back and removing everyone that agrees with Trump and his supporters.  By coincidence, Derek Hunter at Town Hall had a column today "We’re Witnessing A Slow-Rolling Coup" about the media/Democratic Party complex in an active attempt to destroy the president and the results of the last election.  

All of this goes together.  It's all the same story. 


  1. I'm not a McMaster fan and never have been. At the same time, I find it difficult to criticize somebody in his position because I'm not "there", and I've been out of the game long enough not to know any NSC insiders personally. We are doing well against ISIS (though that's Mattis, not McMaster) and I think that the strategy against North Korea is gaining traction with the Chinese insulting the Norks at the ASEAN Mtg. this past weekend.

    De-fanging ISIS and North Korea are high enough on my list of things to-do that I am slow to criticize.

  2. While LL is satisfied with keeping two rotweilers at bay, there are other threats to deal with and all evidence has the appearance that McMasters is simply another John Brennan. He is a plant, a Moose Limb lover who is carrying on the Obummer train of though on damaging America any way possible. Trump has many at his disposal and after his first six months, I am sure he has McM on his radar.
    This, unlike the "Mooch" issue is a much bigger deal and he may be playing a long game waiting to uncover more allies to McM and run a clean sweep in one fell swoop. Everyone knows the Obama holdovers are a problem. Everyone except Sessions who only issues stern warnings like "Don't do it!"

  3. LL, I think you know I respect your take, but I stand by my last paragraph (which partly says what you said):

    I'd like to hear "the other side". In a situation like this, where none of us can see the inside, there's always a risk that these events are being interpreted the wrong way. On the other hand, there's a strong circumstantial case that Daniel Greenfield is right and this is the inside-the-beltway swamp fighting back and removing everyone that agrees with Trump and his supporters.

    I don't know what's going on in those "hallowed halls", and the only people who do know would break their security oaths to say what's going on. Therein lies a big problem. As an investigative journalist, Daniel Greenfield is one of the good ones. That's all I have to go on.

    And LetsPlay, I thought the same thing. Maybe there are moves and countermoves going on to let the "opposition forces" self-identify and self-group, so they can be gotten rid of. I don't have a problem with Sessions telling leakers, "Don't do it". Especially if it's quickly followed with arrests and frog walks, along with "we told you not to do that!".

    1. My problem with the justice system is while there is plenty of evidence to go on, if you or I did anything remotely suggesting this kind of activity, you know our butts would be collecting splinters in the lock-up. Like the commander in "Top Gun" who gets coffee spilled on him, "I want some butts!" Not warnings. I want action!

  4. Given that you accept government keeping secrets from you in principal, how is it possible for you to be an informed electorate when a government employee can do evil and then hide it?

    Does a business manager accept an agent or subordinate keeping secrets?

    The name for an entity which business accepts keeping secrets is a vendor or competitor.

    You can't fire it, so government can't be a vendor. Government is your competitor.

    The shepherd raises the flock to shear and to eat. The sheepdogs work for the shepherd and are fed mutton. The risk of wolves is exaggerated.

  5. To have a look at the defense of McMaster there is a pretty good article on "The Last Refuge" that I found worth reading. I am getting suspicious that the left, neocon, rino uniparty is promoting the McMaster problem as a way of dividing Trump from Bannon and getting Bannon fired. There is a list of sources to back that opinion that I find reliable, for instance Victor Davis Hanson. I think the uniparty never Trumpers are getting desperate enough to try anything to stop Trump. indyjonesouthere

    1. However, why would he can a short list of good people when good people are in short supply and Trump can't get any more confirmed by our sick, corrupt politicians?

    2. Because he doesn't think they're good people?