Deprecated: Function create_function() is deprecated in /data/user3/2019/148/11208/wordpress/.b88524c1561b782a1a78bd24d1712ffb/wp-content/plugins/smooth-slider/slider_versions/widgets_1.php on line 103
EDITORIAL Archives - The American Report


CIA assets killed in China soon after Leon Panetta took over CIA – Panetta tied to communist Hugh De Lacy, a suspected Chinese agent

By Mary Fanning and Alan Jones | May 20, 2017

CIA human informants were killed or imprisoned in China beginning around 2009, according to the New York Times. The damage to American intelligence was described as “crippling” and of historic proportions.

President Barack H. Obama appointed Leon Panetta as CIA Director in 2009.

Leon Panetta had extensive contact with CPUSA member Rep. Hugh De Lacy (WA-D). De Lacy had ties to both the Soviet Silvermaster spy ring and the Chinese communist party. De Lacy was invited to China on an all-expenses paid trip.

An investigation into the how the identities of CIA assets in China were leaked would be incomplete without further investigation into Director Panetta’s interactions with Hugh De Lacy.

Is Middle East Instability An Opportunity To Apply Leverage?


Retired Colonel, U.S. Army Reserve

1:02 PM 12/30/2016

So far, the best thing that happened in the battle against radical Islam was the Iran-Iraq War.

As I have written, even without ISIS, the Middle East, the epicenter of radical Islam, is a complex political-military environment dominated by the Sunni-Shia religious conflict, but influenced by ethnic aspirations, tribal rivalries, regional hegemony, superpower competition and ever-shifting allegiances.

In order to maneuver successfully in the Middle East, the United States must better understand the political culture and, when necessary, learn to manipulate its rules.

In an environment with a chronic level of instability, of ambiguities and animosities, we have no permanent friends or enemies and need to reexamine our relationships on a continual basis, including using mutually destructive behaviors among opponents for our short- or long-term advantage.

One such untapped opportunity for greater foreign policy nuance is our contradictory alliance with Saudi Arabia.

For over fifty years, fueled by oil revenues, Saudi Arabia has exported a “rigid, bigoted, patriarchal, fundamentalist strain of Islam known as Wahhabism,” which may have “fueled global extremism and contributed to terrorism” because “the exclusionary Saudi version of Sunni Islam, with its denigration of Jews and Christians, as well as of Muslims of Shiite, Sufi and other traditions, may have made some people vulnerable to the lure of Al Qaeda, the Islamic State and other violent jihadist groups.”

Saudi-funded Wahhabism has, in many cases, undermined local, more inclusive and tolerant variations of Islam. According to Thomas Hegghammer, a Norwegian terrorism expert, the effect of “Saudi proselytizing might have been to slow the evolution of Islam, blocking its natural accommodation to a diverse and globalized world.”

For example, a Pakistani town near the border with Afghanistan, known for its mixture of Sunni, Shia, Barelvi and Deobandi traditions, was transformed after the arrival of a Saudi-trained cleric: “women who had used shawls to cover their hair and face began wearing full burqas. Militants began attacking kiosks where merchants sold secular music CDs. Twice, terrorists used explosives to try to destroy the village’s locally famous [Barelvi] shrine.”

The export of Wahhabism is clearly contrary to the interests of the United States, yet Saudi Arabia remains an “ally,” no doubt influenced by Saudi contributions across the American political spectrum from Senator John McCain (R-AZ) to the Clintons.

In the war against radical Islam, the US cannot continue its role as global firefighter while supporting the arsonist.

The Saudi Wahhabi initiative was accelerated by the 1979 Iranian revolution that “brought to power a radical Shiite government, symbolically challenging Saudi Arabia, the leader of Sunnism, for leadership of global Islam. The declaration of an Islamic Republic escalated the competition between the two major branches of Islam.”

It is ironic, then, that the two foremost promoters of radical Islam, Saudi Arabia and Iran, should now find themselves, not only in a contest for theological hegemony, but for regional political-military dominance including a proxy war in Yemen.

To me it smells like a foreign policy opportunity to further US interests by exploiting naturally-occurring Muslim internecine, whether figurative or literal.

In addition to the Sunni-Shia struggle, the same could be said for other historic enmities not of our making: Turkey-Kurds, Russia-Turkey, Turkey-Syria, Iran-Kurds, Turkish Secularists-Turkish Islamists, and a variety of ethnic minorities seeking greater autonomy.

It’s not rocket science. It’s Machiavelli.

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired US Army Reserve colonel, a command and control subject matter expert, trained in Arabic and Kurdish, and a veteran of Afghanistan, northern Iraq and a humanitarian mission to West Africa. He receives email at

Obama’s Rigged Intelligence Community

Obama’s Rigged Intelligence Community
Not since the pope declared the Earth flat and Dan Rather inaugurated “fake but accurate” news has so much baloney been disseminated by so many media outlets based on so little evidence.

Fake intelligence generating fake news to provide a basis for a fake Congressional investigation.

According to a December 9th Washington Post article:

“The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency.”

Unfortunately for the CIA super sleuths, that may not be true.

A day later, The Washington Post said that the FBI did not concur, calling the CIA evidence “fuzzy” and “ambiguous.”

Based on an interview with Craig Murray, the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, who is a close associate of WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange, the UK Guardian wrote:

“’I know who leaked them,’ Murray said. ‘I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things.’”

We already know that Barack Obama has politicized the intelligence community – for years.

According to a September10, 2015 Daily Beast report:

“More than 50 intelligence analysts working out of the U.S. military’s Central Command have formally complained that their reports on ISIS and al Qaeda’s branch in Syria were being inappropriately altered by senior officials.”

“The complaints spurred the Pentagon’s inspector general to open an investigation into the alleged manipulation of intelligence. The fact that so many people complained suggests there are deep-rooted, systemic problems in how the U.S. military command charged with the war against the self-proclaimed Islamic State assesses intelligence.”

One defense official called it: “The cancer was within the senior level of the intelligence command”

If you have been wondering about the source of the Russian hacking kerfuffle, wonder no more.

CIA Director John “Watch Me Pull a Rabbit Out of My Hat” Brennan will soon publish his “intelligence” in the Journal of Irreproducible Results.

Does anyone seriously believe that Brennan, your proverbial political butt-snorkeler, would not stoop to create fake intelligence in pursuit of some perfidious aim?

In 2008, CNN reported that Brennan, a then Obama “foreign policy and intelligence” advisor, as well as a $2300 contributor, was “CEO of a company whose employee is accused of improperly looking at the passport files of presidential candidates.”

The Washington Times, which broke the story, stated the State Department’s inspector general (IG) was investigating the matter to determine “whether the three contract employees who accessed the records had a political motive or were part of a political operation to obtain personal data on Mr. Obama, Sen. John McCain or Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton” and “officials do not know whether information was improperly copied, altered or removed from the database during the intrusions.”

In July 2008, the State Department IG issued a 106-page heavily-redacted report on the incident in which over half the pages still remain completely blank.

Many believe the breach “was an effort to sanitize Obama’s passport records” of embarrassing or potentially campaign-killing evidence prior to the 2008 Presidential election.

Fast-forward to October 2016, less than a month before the Presidential election, there appeared an endless numbers of articles blaming the release of emails from the Democrat National Committee on Russian hacking. It was an accusation backed by Obama intelligence officials. Many of those articles implied a Trump-Russian connection, some even suggesting sanctions or perhaps stronger measures be taken against the Russian state.

“Yes, why not risk thermonuclear war with Russia in order to score a few political points against Donald Trump?” said the galacticly stupid.

What we are witnessing today is fake news based on faked intelligence instigated by the failed Democrat Party, promoted by a corrupt media and exploited by a scorned and impotent Republican establishment.

It is all being done to discredit President-elect’s Trump’s victory, to disable his administration and to deny the American people a voice in their own government.

First we had disinformation connecting Trump to Vladimir Putin and Russian hacking; then the bogus recounts in the critical states of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania; and now the baseless, politically-driven intelligence reports as a reason to turn electoral college votes away from Trump in the million-to-one chance that they might be able to annul the election and install Hillary Clinton in the White House.

It is a coup attempt in slow motion.


Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired US Army Reserve colonel, a command and control subject matter expert, trained in Arabic and Kurdish, and a veteran of Afghanistan, northern Iraq and a humanitarian mission to West Africa. He receives email at

Sweetheart Deal Handed Port Canaveral’s Cargo Container Terminal to Family of Saddam Hussein’s Nuclear Mastermind


In a breathtaking national security lapse, the brother and business partner of Saddam Hussein’s rogue nuclear weapons mastermind Dr. Jafar Dhia Jafar took control of cargo container operations at Florida’s Port Canaveral in a secretly-negotiated 2014 deal code-named “Project Pelican.”

The “Project Pelican” deal leased the Port Canaveral cargo container to Gulftainer, a UAE ports company owned by Iraqi oil magnate Hamid Jafar through the Iraqi Jafar family’s business empire The Crescent Group.

Port Canaveral awarded Gulftainer a 35-year no-bid container terminal lease at Port Canaveral.

Treasury Secretary Jacob “Jack” Lew declined to conduct a National Security Threat Analysis of Gulftainer and its Iraqi and Emirati owners, as required under Committee on Foreign Investment (CFIUS) and Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007 (FINSA) laws. That review includes input from all sixteen U.S. intelligence agencies.

Dr. Jafar is infamous for his uranium enrichment genius and known to possess deep ties to IranRussia, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). That Dr. Jafar was a national security threat is evidenced by the fact that he was wanted by coalition forces at the outset of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Dr. Jafar and his brother Hamid Jafar hold leadership positions at The Crescent Group, which owns Gulftainer, with Dr. Jafar serving as CEO of Crescent’s URUK Engineering and Contracting subsidiary while Hamid serves as Chairman of The Crescent Group.

Cargo container terminals are the very location at which national security experts fear the U.S. homeland is most vulnerable.

“Lawmakers said an undetected radiological weapon smuggled into a U.S. port inside a cargo container is at the top of the list of homeland security nightmares” reported FCW in July 2016.

Aviation and cargo security expert Glen Winn, who is also a former Secret Service agent, asserted that “while we may not be able to check every cargo container coming into the country without bringing global commerce to a standstill, it is imperative that the lessees to America’s ports receive the proper National Security Threat Analysis. That is the point at which you maintain your national security.”

In 2011, San Diego Assistant Port Director Al Hallor – who at the time was also a high-ranking Customs and Border Protection officer at the port – told San Diego’s ABC 10 News that a “weapon of mass effect” had been found, but not at the port itself. The Department of Homeland Security soon tried to walk back Hallor’s statements, insisting that he was “nervous” and “misspoke” during the interview.

The Port Canaveral/Gulftainer deal is especially disconcerting because Port Canaveral plays a major role in space exploration and the strategic defense of the nation.

Port Canaveral, a component of U.S. critical infrastructure, is in close proximity to a U.S. Navy nuclear submarine base, two U.S. Air Force Space Command bases, and NASA’s Kennedy Space Center. In military jargon, Gulftainer is “inside the wire.”

Canaveral is also the second busiest cruise ship port in the world.

George Cecalia, Communications Director for Representative Bill Posey (R-FL), whose district includes Port Canaveral, and the Congressman’s military expert, said in an interview that the U.S. Federal Maritime Commission briefed them on the Gulftainer deal. The Commission reportedly assured Posey’s staff that the Gulftainer Port Canveral deal was a “run of the mill contract.” They claim they were not informed that the lessee was the notorious Dr. Jafar and his brother Hamid Jafar.

Officials with Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay’s Submarine Group 10, in conversation with Alan Jones, said they became alarmed in October 2012 upon learning that Dr. Jafar was connected to Gulftainer. Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay’s Submarine Group 10 often moves Ohio-class ballistic missile nuclear submarines in and out of Port Canaveral. The Navy officials say they contacted the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) and FBI counter-terrorism officials.

A SpaceX official speaking to Alan Jones in Florida reacted with an “oh [expletive]” upon learning that Gulftainer, which handles recovery of the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket booster at Port Canaveral, has ties to Dr. Jafar. The official added that the information would immediately be communicated to senior SpaceX officials, including CEO Elon Musk.

Alan Jones is an investigative journalist who broke a series of national security stories at Washington Times Communities.

Mary Fanning is an investigative journalist who covers the Middle East and national security, known for her series “The Betrayal Papers.”

WikiLeaks Email Ties Apparent Clinton Pay-To-Play to Port Canaveral Deal with Family of Saddam Hussein’s Nuclear Mastermind



 An email made public through the organization WikiLeaks suggests that a company controlled in part by the family of Saddam Hussein’s nuclear weapons mastermind donated to the Clinton Foundation’s Clinton Global Initiative before a different company controlled by the same family was awarded a 35-year no-bid lease to Port Canaveral’s cargo container terminal.

The Treasury Department declined to perform a mandatory national security check before awarding a 35-year lease at the port to Gulftainer’s GT USA. That the company, linked to the family of Dr. Jafar Dhia Jafar, now controls Port Canaveral’s cargo container terminal operations presents a significant national security risk, observers note.

On October 24, 2016, WikiLeaks released an email, dated August 18, 2012, from the Clinton Foundation to former President Bill Clinton, advising the former President that “new sponsor” The Abraaj Capital Group agreed to support the 2012 Clinton Global Initiative Annual Meeting with a $550,000 donation.

The Abraaj Group is a UAE private equity company co-founded by Hamid Jafar, the Iraqi business partner and brother of Dr. Jafar Dhia Jafar. Hamid Jafar’s son, Badr Jafar, is currently listed as a member of Abraaj’s board of directors.

The same year as the donation revealed in the Wikileaks email, the State Department’s Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) awarded The Abraaj Group with the first of hundreds of millions of dollars in loans and investment management contracts.

Another corporation, Crescent Petroleum, also appears to have financially supported an educational campaign co-chaired by former President Bill Clinton and Dr. Jafar’s nephew Majid Jafar, CEO of Crescent Petroleum. Gulftainer is a subsidiary of Crescent.

Shortly before the signing ceremony for Gulftainer’s new Port Canaveral cargo container terminal, Bill Clinton flew to Dubai to attend one of the educational campaign’s events with Majid Jafar.

The timeline surrounding the Port Canaveral deal, known as “Project Pelican,” suggests the Abraaj dealings are not unrelated.

  • March-June 2012: The Jafars attempted to take over Florida’s Port Jacksonville (JAXPORT), which is near Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay. Gulftainer secretly offered $250 million to become a “silent partner” “behind the scenes” with the port. The CEO of JAXPORT turned them down after the Jacksonville Business Journalexposed the plan because Gulftainer “wanted us to turn over the port to them, and we’re not going to do that.”
  • 2012: Gulftainer began negotiating “Project Pelican” with Port Canaveral while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State. Port Canaveral CEO John E. Walsh, who was new to the ports industry, told “Florida Today” that the June 23, 2014 deal-signing ceremony was “the culmination of a two-year effort to bring Gulftainer to Brevard County,” Florida. The timeline Walsh revealed confirms that Project Pelican negotiations were underway while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, while the Jafars’ Abraaj Group was donating money to the Clinton Foundation, and The Abraaj Group received OPIC monies through the State Department.
  • August-September 2012: Secretary Clinton awarded The Abraaj Group the first of hundreds of millions of dollars in loans and investment management contracts through the State Department’s OPIC.
  • September 2012: The Abraaj Group donated between $500,000 and $1 million to the Clinton Foundation according to Romanian hacker Gucifer. Confirmed to be $550,000 by WikiLeaks.
  • March 2014: Crescent Group Vice-Chairman Majid Jafar (nephew of Dr. Jafar) met with former President Bill Clinton in Dubai. Majid and Clinton co-chair the Dubai-based Business Backs Education Crescent Petroleum is listed as a “supporting company” on the initiative’s webpage.
  • June 23, 2014 – Secret “Project Pelican” deal was publicly announced on the day of the Port Canaveral signing ceremony, with Hamid’s son Badr Jafar in attendance.

Alan Jones is an investigative journalist who broke a series of national security stories at Washington Times Communities.

Mary Fanning is an investigative journalist who covers the Middle East and national security, known for her series “The Betrayal Papers.”

Benghazi’s Unconnected Dots

Benghazi’s Unconnected Dots
12:24 PM 12/05/2016

If all politics is local, then all foreign policy is personal, a combination of piques, proclivities and prejudices.

The attack on the US government facilities in Benghazi, Libya on September 12, 2012 by radical Islamic militias and the death of four American was both an act of war and a national tragedy. In foreign policy terms, however, it was still just one scene in a larger international tapestry, a yet not entirely clear complex sequence of events.

During 2015, I wrote a series of articles about Benghazi, Libya and the Obama-Clinton policy of overthrowing authoritarian, but stable Arab governments and replacing them with so-called “moderate” Islamist movements like the Muslim Brotherhood as an alternative to more violent groups like al Qaeda and the Islamic State published here, here, here, here, here and a 2016 summary here.

Those articles were based on a search of publicly-available sources and interviews with individuals directly or indirectly involved in the Benghazi attack, both American and Libyan, who will remain unnamed.

If Barack Obama’s approach to Libya could be described as the intersection of ideology and incompetence, Hillary Clinton’s was the product of naked ambition.

Clinton was among the most vocal early proponents of using U.S. military force to topple Libyan dictator Moammar Qaddafi, claiming erroneously that Qaddafi was about to engage in a genocide against civilians in Benghazi, where the Islamist rebels held their center of power.

Eventually Obama bowed to her leadership on the issue, privately informing members of Congress that Libya “is all Secretary Clinton’s matter.”

Many will recall Clinton, on October 20, 2011, cackling to a TV news reporter over the death of Qaddafi: “We came, we saw, he died.”

According to released emails, Hillary, at that time, considered the violent 2011 “regime change” in Libya such a triumph that her aides discussed labeling it the start of a “Clinton Doctrine” and a prelude to her Presidential campaign in 2016.

In terms of US foreign policy and national security, the role of Hillary Clinton in the Libyan fiasco was as reckless as it was cataclysmic, but that is not the whole story.

What reignited my interest in this topic was a recent article in the New York Times “In Trump’s Security Pick, Michael Flynn, ‘Sharp Elbows’ and No Dissent.” Again carrying water for the Obama Administration, The Times criticized Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, President-elect Trump’s choice for National Security Advisor, for the temerity to suggest Iranian involvement in the Benghazi attack, because, regurgitating the conventional wisdom, “Iran, a Shiite nation, has generally eschewed any alliance with Sunni militants like the ones who attacked the American diplomatic compound.”

That is not quite right.

Although you would be hard-pressed to find a heavy Iranian footprint in Libya, Iran, like the US, often operates via surrogates, in this case, Shiite Arabs speaking non-North African Arabic such as Levantine indicating someone from Lebanon or Alawite Syria. Furthermore, Shiite and Sunni Muslims often collaborate when their interests intersect as in opposition to the US or recent Syrian/Turkish joint action against the Kurds.

It would have been a disaster for the 2012 Obama reelection campaign, the Iran nuclear deal and his legacy, if it was known that Iran was involved in the Benghazi attack and that those operations, the interdiction of the flow of arms to Syrian rebels and the thwarting of US policy in Syria and Iraq were driven by penetration of the Obama Administration by Russian intelligence.

That is, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were not only arrogant and inept in the conduct of their foreign policy, but they were duped and outmaneuvered by the Iranians and Russians, enmity from which may have spilled over into the 2016 Presidential campaign in the form of WikiLeaks and accusations of Russian meddling.

One wonders if Obama’s proclivity for appeasing Iran and his fear and loathing of Vladimir Putin are the keys to connecting the remaining dots of the Benghazi attack and perhaps might also explain Lt. Gen. Flynn’s hurried departure from his administration for treading dangerously close to the truth.

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired US Army Reserve colonel, a command and control subject matter expert, trained in Arabic and Kurdish, and a veteran of Afghanistan, northern Iraq and a humanitarian mission to West Africa. He receives email at

There is no place for me in Hillary’s America

There is no place for me in Hillary’s America


By Lawrence Sellin, contributor


I consider myself a patriot, someone who believes in the Constitution, the rule of law and representative government.

Under a President Hillary Clinton, none of those will any longer exist.

Electing Hillary will mean, quite literally, the end of the United States as it was originally designed.

The Constitution will be de facto obsolete; the rule of law will be arbitrarily applied dependent upon one’s financial status or political clout; and we will have a government driven by crony capitalism and political expediency, benefitting only the rich and powerful, and one conspicuous for corruption, fraudulent elections and pseudo-representation.
Under Hillary’s open borders policy, the United States of America will be neither United nor America. It will not be a melting pot, a nation guided by the notion of E Pluribus Unum, but a collection of simultaneous arguments, where the only thing we have in common is our differences.

It will mean a president, who is, without any doubt, hopelessly corrupt and a pathological liar.

It will mean that the organs of government will not be used to enforce the law, but to enforce the political whims of Hillary Clinton, courtesy of the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Internal Revenue Service.

Because, when blatant and outrageous lies are no longer sufficient to soothe the electorate into complacency, such a government must begin to curtail freedom and oppress the people in order to pursue its policies and remain in power.

For me, one who traveled in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe during the Cold War, Hillary’s approach to government has a familiar ring.

In “Mountain of Crumbs”, a memoir of childhood in the 1960s and 1970s propaganda-soaked Soviet Union, Elena Gorokhova explains the meaning of “vranyo”, the Russian word for “a white lie or half-truth:”

“In Russia we played the ‘vranyo’ game on a daily basis. The government lied to us, we knew they were lying, they knew we knew they were lying, but they kept lying anyway and we pretended to believe them.”

“In practice vranyo provided a coping mechanism for both unbearable tragedies and petty annoyances. Can’t feed your starving children? Tear up a piece of bread to make a mountain of crumbs and declare it an abundance of food.”

Or declare: the failed Obamacare a success, a moribund economy as booming, a world wracked by Islamic terrorism as safer, illegal immigration as beneficial or the Clinton Foundation as honest.

Angelo Cordevilla provides an insightful comment about the 2016 election:

Never before has such a large percentage of Americans expressed alienation from their leaders, resentment, even fear. Some two-thirds of Americans believe that elected and appointed officials — plus the courts, the justice system, business leaders, educators — are leading the country in the wrong direction: that they are corrupt, do more harm than good, make us poorer, get us into wars and lose them. Because this majority sees no one in the political mainstream who shares their concerns, because it lacks confidence that the system can be fixed, it is eager to empower whoever might flush the system and its denizens with something like an ungentle enema.

Hillary Clinton represents that wrong direction, the constipated status quo, while Donald Trumpprovides a laxative.

The United States under Hillary Clinton will become ungovernable. Millions of Americans, those “basket of deplorables,” who are the bedrock of the country will simply “tune out” the federal government and the media.

Without the Constitution, the rule of law, representative government, a recognizable culture or even defined borders, there is no reason to be patriotic and little reason to participate.

America will become Hillary’s dystopia, the ideological and the incompetent leading the unwilling to do the undesirable.





Sellin holds a Ph.D. is a retired U.S. Army Reserve colonel, a command and control subject matter expert, trained in Arabic and Kurdish, and a veteran of Afghanistan, northern Iraq and a humanitarian mission to West Africa. He receives email at

Hillary: If you like your corruption, you can keep your corruption

Hillary: If you like your corruption, you can keep your corruption

By Lawrence Sellin, contributor


The stain of corruption darkens everything that the Clintons touch.

Second only to national security, it is the responsibility of the president to uphold the law, not to position him or herself above it.

Setting the wheels of corruption in motion, the Obama administration has fundamentally transformed the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from law enforcement agencies into political hit-squads dedicated to suppressing opposition, silencing criticism and protecting the powerful from the consequences of their criminal activities.
In July of this year, Judicial Watch obtained FBI documents through a federal court order in a

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, which showed the following:

(1) “IRS officials stated that the agency was targeting conservative groups because of their ideology and political affiliation”;

(2) The FBI and DOJ had an abundance of evidence “suggesting illegal targeting, perjury, and obstruction of justice”;

(3) “Both the FBI and the DOJ collaborated with Lois Lerner and the IRS to try to prosecute and jail Obama’s political opponents”; and

(4) The FBI investigation “looked the other way when it came to Obama’s IRS criminality.”

Also in July, FBI Director James Comey provided shocking details from the Bureau investigation, saying that Clinton and her team at the Department of State were “extremely careless” when it came to handling classified materials; it found 110 emails on 52 separate threads that contained classified information.

Yet Comey made the appalling decision not to refer the email server evidence for prosecution by the DOJ; according to a Fox News report, one person close to the yearlong probe claimed that career agents and attorneys involved in the case “unanimously believed that Hillary should have been charged.”

Not only did Comey inappropriately absolve Clinton of any wrongdoing, he offered immunity to her aides, seemingly to obstruct rather than facilitate further investigation; he allowed witnesses of the alleged criminal activity to serve as Clinton’s “lawyers”; and he physically destroyed evidence contained on the laptops of Clinton’s staff.

Recently released FBI documents, according to Powerline, indicate that Clinton aide Patrick Kennedy “tried to bribe the FBI to change the classification of a Benghazi document so as to enable Hillary’s false claim that she didn’t send or receive classified information on her illegal home server.”

In addition, Hillary Clinton had email exchanges with her IT expert Bryan Pagliano, undermining a claim, made under oath, that she did not recall discussing with him the management of the private, unsecured email server she used at State — a server we can now conclude was set up to conceal the “pay to play” scheme between the Department of State and the Clinton Foundation.

According to The Spectator: “From 2001 to 2015, the Clinton Foundation raised over $2 billion in donations. From February 2001 to May 2015, Bill Clinton gave 637 speeches and made $132,021,691 in speaking fees alone. Hillary gave 92 speeches from February 2013 to March 2015. She was paid $21,648,000. While the Clintons made speeches to Goldman Sachs and Citigroup, it was the foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation that were the most disturbing.”

Of those cases described in Peter Schweizer’s book “Clinton Cash,” one directly affected national security. Rosatom, a state-owned Russian company, gained control of one-fifth of America’s uranium reserves. “Shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One,” states a New York Times report, Bill Clinton “received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.”

We now learn through James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas that Hillary Clinton and her acolytes have used unethical and perhaps illegal means to secure her election to the presidency, including using hired “provocateurs,” some even mentally ill, to instigate violence at Republican events. The clandestine videos also revealed discussions of voter fraud schemes taking advantage of sloppy registration policies for the purpose of registering otherwise ineligible voters. In another Project Veritas video, a Democrat activist who bragged about disrupting Donald Trump campaign events was found to be on Clinton’s campaign payroll after a search of Federal Election Commission records was conducted.

Electing Hillary Clinton will be an endorsement of permanent political corruption and consent for the use of government as an instrument to extinguish dissent.





Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D., is a retired U.S. Army Reserve colonel, a command and control subject matter expert, trained in Arabic and Kurdish, and a veteran of Afghanistan, northern Iraq and a humanitarian mission to West Africa. He receives email at

Hillary, Soros and the political genocide of Christianity

Hillary, Soros and the political genocide of Christianity

By Lawrence Sellin Ph.D., contributor




Hillary Clinton seems to have a problem with religious liberty when it conflicts with her progressive goals.

During an April 2015 speech to the Women in the World Conference she said, “Deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed” for the sake of giving women access to “reproductive health care and safe childbirth.”

Translated, that means that Clinton, who believes that reproductive rights are a “fundamental human right”, would, through repeal of the Hyde Amendment, force all taxpayers to fund all abortions, even partial birth, that is, “day of birth” abortions regardless of our religious convictions.

Clinton is also willing to impose federal penalties, including denying tax-exempt status, in order to, as Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito wrote, “stamp out every vestige of dissent” to a far-left agenda.

There is a deliberate and comprehensive anti-Christian plan being promoted by Hillary Clinton and funded by George Soros because they believe that Christian principles are an impediment to the implementation of their progressive policies.

In her now infamous “basket of deplorables” speech at a September 9th New York City Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) fundraiser, Clinton said, “You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic – you name it.”

The phrasing was no accident. Those “grossly generalistic” accusations are the basis of every leftist diatribe meant to demonize any individual or group that stands in opposition to their extremist policies.

As reported by Ken Klukowski, senior counsel with First Liberty Institute, the largest law firm in the United States exclusively dedicated to protecting religious liberty, Hillary’s words originate from a report issued by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights two days before Clinton’s anti-Christian screed. Chairman Martin Castro, an ally and supporter of Clinton and Obama, said in a statement accompanying the report, “The phrases ‘religious liberty’ and ‘religious freedom’ … remain code words for discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance.”

It is also no coincidence, according to conservative Ken Blackwell writing for The Hill, that Hillary’s running mate, Tim Kaine, during his “mission” trip to Latin America in 1980, apparently was and may still be a zealous advocate of “liberation theology,” which is “a radical, Marxist-based ideology at odds with the Church, the pope, and the United States, but supportive of (and supported by) the Soviet Union.”

All of that circles back to newly-released Wikileaks emails, in which longtime Clinton confidante, John Podesta discusses infiltrating the Catholic Church with progressive ideology to foment revolution as a “Catholic Spring.”

Podesta said, “We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a moment like this.”

Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good (CACG) is a George Soros-funded nonprofit organization dedicated to galvanizing Catholic and Christian voters to support progressive candidates, causes, and legislation. CACG, which deplores economic inequality, characterizes modern America as a society where “greed, materialism, and excessive individualism” are ubiquitous and views conservative politics and free markets as the enemies of authentic social justice.

That is why theology that adheres to millennia-old Christian teachings on human life, other social issues, and religious liberty are considered “deplorable” and “irredeemable” by the Left.

That is why, according to Hillary Clinton, traditional Christian views “have to be changed.”

That is why John Podesta and George Soros established Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good; to make Christianity more amenable to Marxist-based ideologies such as government-run socialized healthcare, government redistribution of wealth and unlimited and unrestrained taxpayer-funded abortions.

It is what the Hillary Clinton campaign, in their leaked emails, calls “Christian democracy.”

It is what I call political genocide.





Sellin is a retired US Army Reserve colonel, a command and control subject matter expert, trained in Arabic and Kurdish, and a veteran of Afghanistan, northern Iraq and a humanitarian mission to West Africa. He receives email at

Government Of The People, By The People, And For The People: Will It Endure?





Retired Colonel, U.S. Army Reserve


Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, captured the essence of the 2016 election when he commented about a number of Republicans disavowing endorsements of or support for Donald Trump following the release of the vulgar 2005 video:

“A lot of these bed-wetting, hand-wringing Republicans: They’re not afraid Donald Trump is going to lose — they’re scared to death that Donald Trump is going to win,” and “mess up the neat little package of fun they have and they all play to the donor class.”

Even avowed Hillary supporter MSNBC anchor Mika Brzezinski tore into Republicans who withdrew their support for Donald Trump over his hot mic comments, calling them “pathetic, weak and spineless.”

The arrogance of political establishment has only gotten more brazen since 1993, when Lewis H. Lapham (“A Wish for Kings”) wrote:

“The politicians dress up the deals in the language of law or policy, but they’re in the business of brokering the tax revenue, and what keeps them in office is not their talent for oratory but their skill at redistributing the national income in a way that rewards their clients, patrons, friends and campaign contributors.”

Corruption is now endemic in Washington DC, where politicians like the Clintons convert public service into personal profit by granting financial favors to foreign governments and international business interests.

I have long said that there is a Cold Civil War underway in the United States to determine who should control the federal government. It is not a contest between the Democrat and Republican ideologies, but a battle between the entrenched power of the bipartisan political establishment versus the rights and liberties of the American people. It is a conflict between those who want to adhere to the Constitution and the rule of law and the party leaders, who wish to continue the practices of political expediency and crony capitalism.

In this election cycle, Donald Trump has forced the permanent political establishment out of the closet, exposing it to the voters for what it really is, an oligarchy; a small, mutually supportive group of politicians, media outlets and financiers that exercises control of the government for corrupt and selfish purposes.

It should surprise no one that Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan doesn’t support Donald Trump and wishes to continue business as usual in Washington DC.

It is because Ryan’s policies more closely match those of Hillary Clinton.

Both promote open borders and international trade agreements that treat American workers simply as chips in a high-stakes globalist poker game.

The rise of Donald Trump can be directly attributed to a Republican Party that never practiced the principles that it preached nor pursued the policies it proposed. They are people who are only interested in maintaining their position as the junior partners in the ruling elite and courting the affection of the mainstream media.

As Charles Krauthammer noted, Republican voters have felt not just let down or disappointed, but betrayed, sold out to donors and lobbyists:

“Did they repeal Obamacare? No. Did they defund Planned Parenthood? No. Did they stop President Obama’s tax-and-spend hyperliberalism? No. Whether from incompetence or venality, they let Obama walk all over them.”

When the disingenuous Republican establishment talks about “limited government,” what they really mean is limiting voter choice, limiting the need to fulfill their campaign promises and limiting their responsibility to represent the views of those who placed them in office.

Likewise, Hillary Clinton champions policy positions in public that are meant to deceive voters about the true intentions of her private policy positions.

Hillary’s America will be defined by globalist exploitation of our economy and the further subservience of our workforce to those global interests.

In Hillary’s America there will be unlimited mass migration through open borders, which will forever change the demographics of the country in ways that will render American culture unrecognizable and ensure a permanent far-left Democrat Party majority.

The First Amendment will be replaced by political correctness and speech codes.

Black Lives Matters and other domestic extremist groups will be encouraged to create crises that can be exploited to limit individual liberties.

For example, the Second Amendment will be decimated by additional federal regulations and executive orders, further restricting private gun ownership and ultimately leading to universal confiscation.

Do Americans want eight years of a President Clinton, who, through top aide Huma Abedin, will do even more to empower the Muslim Brotherhood and impose its agenda on America, such as Sharia in our schools, courts and communities?

If, according to the political-media establishment, the 2016 election is “over” because of crude, but private eleven-year-old comments in order to elect a thoroughly corrupt, tyrannical and ruthless woman, then America is surely “over” too.

Nothing is more important than defeating Hillary Clinton. Nothing.

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired US Army Reserve colonel, a command and control subject matter expert, trained in Arabic and Kurdish, and a veteran of Afghanistan, northern Iraq and a humanitarian mission to West Africa. He receives email at