Propaganda: Reports of HR McMaster Letter to Susan Rice Presented to Deceive…

CTH gave several warnings to be cautious and careful when reviewing political media as there are obvious attempts to push specific agenda narratives.  We could tell something was up in the DC proletariat.  The signals are often subtle but also follow a familiar pattern. The latest round of anti-McMaster stories are transparently part of that effort.

The long knives are out after National Security Advisor McMaster, and those knives are transparently connected to a very familiar and historic ideological world-view.

Example: Circa News writer, Sara Carter, today pushes a story about HR McMaster giving Susan Rice access -via a letter of approval- to ongoing classified intelligence; at least that’s the way the narrative engineers who pick up the ball from Carter are selling it.

Except it’s not true; that angle/narrative is entirely false.

In the letter (included below) National Security Advisor HR McMaster simply gave former NSA Susan Rice permission to continue accessing historic classified intelligence that she created and received while Mrs. Rice was President Obama’s NSA lead.

McMaster is NOT giving Rice ongoing access to new intelligence information, or current classified intelligence information. His letter was simply authorizing her to reference and have access to the historic intel work product she previously, personally and specifically was involved in.

Obviously Rice’s prior NSC work-product remains classified and as such cannot leave the control of the National Security Council.  Classified NSC information can be as innocuous as emails or memos to colleagues on the NSC during her tenure as NatSec Advisor, or it could be her schedule and calendar of events.  The McMaster letter simply allows Rice to have continued access to prior content she was in charge of. Nothing more.

Here’s the letter:

Example: Susan Rice has been called to testify to congress on prior intelligence.  How can she respond to intelligence requests if she cannot reference the material questioned by congress etc.? This is only one example of a reason for her to have access to her prior work product at the NSC.

The controversial stories being shouted from the rooftops are a nothingburger.  However, they do serve to provide examples of how the motives of those pushing them should be reviewed with a great deal of skepticism and cynicism.

Regardless of your position on him, there’s no doubt specific knives, with specific motives, are out to get rid of McMaster.   –Breitbart Has Another Hit HERE– Pay attention to what organizations are pushing this agenda; and more importantly, if you look at the specific authorship behind the writing, you’ll discover the uni-directional point of focus.

The Breitbart article by a Susan Glick (above) appears in the Jerusalem Post. Glick is connected to the Center for Security Policy run by Frank Gaffney, Jr.  The primary advocacy is toward Israel. Frank Gaffney was also removed from NSC policy influence. Gaffney is part of the original Ted Cruz coalition (Levin, Shapiro, Pollack, etc.) who also advocate vociferously for Israel.  Some, well, actually almost all, of those rigid ideologues view America-First policy as a risk to the priority of their preferred foreign policy.

There’s always an ongoing battle for priority in policy.  Pay attention to who and how these priorities are being pushed…

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Deep State, Islam, Israel, media bias, President Trump. Bookmark the permalink.

593 Responses to Propaganda: Reports of HR McMaster Letter to Susan Rice Presented to Deceive…

  1. Joe says:

    How bout this: F any of the former Hussein administration.

    They are our enemy and no good comes from helping them.

    No brainer.

    OK, now where’s the cold beer?

    Liked by 1 person

  2. MK Wood says:

    Do any of you seriously think any of those firings happened with out Pres Trumps knowledge? If Pres Trump gave an order, and that is what it would be, to McMasters to not let someone go and he did, do you think he would last more than a day? C’mon people, keep it real and use your brain. The dots are clearly there to be connected as to what is happening here. Hell, even I figured it out in 15 minutes.

    Like

    • POTUS doesn’t micromanage. I do not think he knew about these firing in advance or gave approval. His management style seems to be to give the department chiefs room and assist them when he can. Only when he becomes convinced he is not happy with results does he move in.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Who is watching WHAT she accesses? If she accesses product outside her previous work…will deep state look away? Or is it compartmentalized so well she cannot?

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Sherlock says:

    Letter must be read carefully. It does two different things.
    First paragraph recites that she has a current high level security clearance and will keep it, and can move it to other agencies or use it in the private sector. Also says that by virtue of her clearance, she will continue to have access to classified information. THIS paragraph puts no limits on the information she can access.

    Paragraph two is different–says that as to items she wrote, reviewed, etc. she will no longer have to demonstrate “Need To Know” in order to access them.

    If the intent was to prevent her from accessing any documents she didn’t write or review, etc.
    it is a horrible drafting job.

    However people come down on this letter is up to them, but at least read the letter carefully.

    On the larger issue: Remember when Bannon was removed from attendance at NSC meetings?
    Anyone know how that came about? I remember seeing in another thread today Rice’s tweets, wherein she suggested that McMaster abolish the “Strategic Initiatives Group”. Wasn’t this the name given to Bannon/Kushner and others?

    Liked by 5 people

    • sundance says:

      False. Perhaps rather than reading to spin on what the article says, you might just accept that people can read it for themselves.

      Then again, that raw information cuts against your agenda doesn’t it? Why would you need to tell people what’s in front of their eyes? Why is that important to you?

      Hence, you must try to tell people what they are reading. What you are selling is simply false, and CTH readers are smart enough to see that.

      The Truth Has No Agenda.

      Liked by 5 people

      • dreadnok89 says:

        Sundance, what is the truth on this guy then?

        Liked by 1 person

      • Sherlock says:

        What is “false”? I’m not “spinning” anything. And just what is my “agenda”? You do this periodically, going off on your posters, seeming to demand fealty to your interpretations of what is and what is not important. I read the letter. I simply disagree with your black and white interpretation of what it says. If that’s a no-no, so be it.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Regina says:

          Bannon was never “removed from attendance” at NSC meetings – in fact, he attended one the same day that fakenews came out. that was spin

          There are “Strategic Initiatives Group”s in almost every business, public and military organization – specifically referring to the WH, this was their position (when finally asked)

          “In early February, Sebastian Gorka, a deputy assistant to the president who is a member of the group, hit the airwaves to dispute reports that the SIG was an effort by Bannon to launch his own sphere of influence to rival the National Security Council, which at the time was helmed by Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser.

          Gorka said that, as a member of SIG, he was working on a cyber-security task force with former New York City mayor Rudolph Giuliani. There were also projects aimed at tackling veterans affairs issues, U.S. manufacturing and government technology and infrastructure.”
          http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/327296-wh-internal-bannon-think-tank-never-actually-existed

          Liked by 2 people

          • Sherlock says:

            Got it, thanks. So why did Rice tweet that she hoped they would dissolve/disband it? Still not getting that part–you mean it was because she bought into the press reports re: Bannon?

            Like

            • Regina says:

              She may have been talking about something entirely different – she may have been referring to a situation she herself was subject to? Maybe she doesn’t like Bannon. Maybe she doesn’t care about Bannon, but strongly believes that Flynn should be free to choose his own staff (apparently this is popular with Generals…ahem)

              I don’t know what she meant, but that’s the point – unless she explains what she meant, none of us know. There are pictures of her with Flynn where they’re both all smiles – BIG smiles – I don’t know what that meant either, but I don’t think it means Flynn was being disloyal to Trump.

              No one knows what Rice did – it’s all speculation. Earlier this week the speculation turned to Samantha Power, and boy did THAT shut down overnight…haven’t heard a peep. That, in itself, makes her seem a much more likely suspect than Rice.

              I have no personal opinion of Rice, don’t know enough about her. All I do know is that any time the last admin needed a flack to go on tv and read lies other people had scripted, they sent out Rice. What a $hit job she had –

              Like

        • TPR says:

          I can see your point about the first paragraph; however I agree with Sundance it is ambiguous. I don’t know what the first paragraph is actually saying. I don’t read it as definitely meaning what you says it does. It could just mean they’re keeping her information on file so if she wants access to classified information in the future she can go through the necessary steps to try and do that without having to submit new fingerprints, get FBI background checks, etc.

          Obviously, regardless of whatever clearance she has, she still has to be allowed access to said information separately. For example, just because a nuclear submarine officer has a security clearance to access certain info about the sub he’s assigned to, that doesn’t mean he has access to or could ever access classified info about any other sub, let alone anything else in the Navy or entire military.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Sherlock says:

            I don’t know what it means either. That’s why I said it was sloppily drafted.

            Liked by 2 people

          • skaebne says:

            I’ve held a TS/SCI clearance.

            An active security clearance is easier to transfer than it is to issue a security clearance de novo. Just letting a clearance lapse does not necessitate that the entire process be started from scratch, but it’s better not to let it lapse. It is standard practice when cleared personnel change employment for the organization they’re leaving to maintain the paperwork for their clearance in order to facilitate transfer of their clearance to the new organization when a clearance is required.

            I know, because I have been told almost exactly what appears in this letter when I changed employment. This is not a blanket continuation of her clearance, it is device to allow her to be cleared in the capacity appropriate to her new position with minimum overhead for the issuing office (DISCO in my case, now DSS)

            Liked by 2 people

            • Sherlock says:

              That may well have been the intent.

              Like

            • That is my understanding too that TS clearance is valid for 5 years once granted and it gets renewed if still on the job. Having said that, considering you are not Susan Rice, will you have been able to retain your TS/SCI clearance or it would have been revoked by now? I honestly do not know this and am curious to know – what would have happened to your TS/SCI if you did things similar to Susan Rice.

              Like

              • jello333 says:

                Of course I agree with everyone who says that Susan Rice should NOT have ANY kind of security clearance. But I’m not sure that’s the way the rules/laws work. After all, she hasn’t yet been OFFICIALLY convicted of XYZ… yet. And we’ve got the old “innocent till proven guilty” thing we have to deal with. (Though I think that maybe shouldn’t apply so much when it comes to security clearances.)

                Like

          • carrierh says:

            Her access to anything from the Obama administration needs to be denied to her and anyone else. Today is Trump’s administration and allowing any of the traitors to any information then or now is plain ridiculous. She lied and as an attorney that was not a good thing to do and hopefully she has or will be disbarred, just like the Clintons and the Obamas.

            Like

        • solomonpal says:

          As TGP previously reported, Susan Rice wanted General Flynn out. After McMaster was brought in to replace Flynn, she took to her Twitter account to congratulate him and said, “Hope you will be able to choose your team, have direct reporting and daily access to POTUS, and can eliminate Strategic Initiatives Group.”

          Like

      • Speaking English is Important says:

        It is not ambiguous. The first paragraph says we will help you maintain your security clearance. The second paragraph says (essentially) “by the powers vested in me” by the cited executive order I am hereby waiving the requirement that you display a “need to know” in order to access material you “originated, reviewed, signed” when you were NSA. So Rice continues to have some level of security clearance and for a limited number of “need to know” documents she still has access without having to display “a need to know.”

        Like

      • Tony says:

        Very strange and insincere on your part, HRM letter looks ambiguous to everyone who can read.

        Like

        • Speaking English is Important says:

          I hate to be a dick, but I don’t think you can read as well as you think. Or else your imagination runs wild. This says I waive section 4.4 of whatever for a limited set of documents. Talk to your lawyer or one of your smarter relatives. The problem is with your reading ability, not mine.

          Like

      • Reaganite says:

        The Cruz connection are eyebrow raising. I appreciate the article and having held a clearance in the past, I am a bit confused by the vagueness of this letter/authorization. What bothers me a bit is its overly broad nature. It seems it could cut two ways:

        1. Get what you want to prepare for hearings.
        2. You have unfettered access to everything and can leak to your heart’s content.

        Of course #2 is only effective in the absence of effective audit controls. The vagueness of the letter seems very strange. Should it not be accompanied by a more explicit order?

        Thanks again!

        Like

        • jello333 says:

          That makes sense… UNLESS this is more or less a kind of form letter that’s given to anyone in a similar situation as Rice. In which case, considering what the recipient and other “insiders” already know of the process, it isn’t really “vague” at all. It’s basically UNDERSTOOD what the letter means (limited scope to what she has access to). Just a guess.

          Like

    • G. Combs says:

      Key words are “NEED TO KNOW”

      If you do not have a valid reason to look at stuff you are not allowed to see it no matter what your clearance. Since Rice is NOT in the employ of the US government she has NO need to know ANY classified information except for that pertaining to her testimony before US government entities.

      Most recently according to Fox News, as of April 2017, Rice signed on as a Distinguished Visiting Research Fellow with American University, where she will apparently begin work on a new book. So she has ZERO “Need To Know”
      QED
      ………

      And just to make you shake your head — From WIKI:
      “… the Republican chairman of Senate Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism Lindsey Graham invited Rice to testify before his subcommittee whether the Obama administration had tried to “politicize intelligence”….”

      GOOD GRIEF that is nightmare making news Miss Lindsey???…. No wonder the snakes in the pit called DC are so well protected!

      Also these interesting connections
      “… She [Rice] is a past member of the boards of directors of the National Democratic Institute, the U.S. Fund for UNICEF,[28] the Atlantic Council and Internews Network.[89][90] She is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Aspen Strategy Group.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Sherlock, I am glad that I am not the only one coming to the same conclusion as you that first paragraph can be construed as Susan Rice having continuing access. If that was not the case, there was no need for that first paragraph and the letter could have started from the second paragraph.

      Like

      • BigMamaTEA says:

        Guess what gang, the Hilldabeast still has her Security Clearance also.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Sherlock says:

        That was basically my thought when I read it. Another way to have cured any possible ambiguity would have been to add “….as described in paragraph 2” to the line in para.1 ending with the words “…to allow you access to classified information.”

        Like

    • Thank you, that’s exactly how I interpreted this damning letter penned by McMaster. He’s got to go, this is traitorous and full-frontal attack on President Trump and the American people.
      Sundance, your take is disturbing.

      Liked by 1 person

    • sundance says:

      Liked by 1 person

      • maiingankwe says:

        Please don’t beat me over this, (you know sometimes I’m not the sharpest tool) but I honestly don’t know what to believe. My gut is telling me that our President knows McMaster and his heart, our President is good at reading people because he’s had to be in his businesses. I also know there are some who have been able to fool the best.

        What I wonder about is who the people really were who McMaster has fired. The papers and pundits declare they were staunch Trump supporters. They are also claiming the ones who are staying or replacing these are obama supporters or who worked during his presidency and have no loyalties to our President Trump. I believe your article states that they were cruz supporters, which is an entirely different thing even though they are republicans, and that is why of the easy mix up or the smokescreen.

        Wouldn’t this be easy enough for people to see if it’s true or not? I haven’t read any of the discussions here asking or relating about this, but then I haven’t read all five hundred comments either. So I apologize for that.

        Could someone please tell me if the people who were fired were our President’s supporters and if the replacements or the ones continuing work under McMaster do not any loyalties to our current President, but still to the previous? It would make it easier for me to conclude if McMaster is good for our President and country.

        I will say, I have a great deal of respect for Sundance and his brilliant mind, he is far better chess player than I could ever be, and I’m more than fine with that, it’s why I come here, to learn as well as share. No, I’m not kissing up, it’s just is what it is. There are a lot of brilliant Treepers here too who I have a great deal of respect for.

        For instance, Skaebne in an earlier post said he had TS/SCI clearance and there is no reason for me not to believe. He also wrote, “I know because I have been told almost exactly what appears in this letter when I changed employments.” In regards to the letter written by McMaster to Rice shown above. So I have a tendency to believe people who have the experience and with no skin in the game. I’m just going to keep listening to others and keep a better eye on what is going on regards to all of this before I make up my mind.

        Please don’t beat me up over this, I couldn’t take it today, it’s been a rough one. Feel free to do it tomorrow if one finds it necessary.
        Thank you,
        Ma’iingankwe

        Liked by 1 person

        • maiingankwe says:

          Looks like some of the Treepers here Have been talking about, Victoria Coates, Ezra Cohen-Watnick, Rich Higgins and Derek Harvey.

          Some of these were hired by Flynn, some were against Iran’s deal, some helped get our President elected and so on and so forth. At least I now have some names to look up for myself. I cannot trust journalists anymore since they always seem to be working for one puppet master or another. This is so not an easy game.

          Like

        • jello333 says:

          Personally, I may just slap you with a wet noodle a few times… but I’ll let you sit in a comfy chair during the ordeal.

          Liked by 2 people

  5. windwardman says:

    I trust Diana West and John Guandolo FAR more than H. R. McMaster:

    http://dailycaller.com/2017/03/02/the-islam-catastrophe-continues/

    Liked by 2 people

    • dissonant1 says:

      West has no political agenda that I know of, she knows of which she speaks, and the quotes provided from McMaster and Gorka are very troubling indeed. If part of the “purge” of the NSC is the result of divergent opinions on Islam from those of McMaster, that is certainly NOT a good development.

      Thanks very much for posting this!

      Like

    • yucki says:

      Diana West is a champ!

      Like

  6. The Drake says:

    The letter authorizes Rice to access classified information that she “received” while in office. For all we know, this included information about the incoming Trump administration, including unmasked information that she or others requested. Given (a) that the unmasking is under investigation by Congress (and should be by Mueller but who knows if it really is); (b) widespread leaks of classified information that was created while Susan Rice was in office (such as the Flynn transcripts); and (c) allegations against the Obama administration of using intelligence for political purposes… this is obviously very, very troubling.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Chewbarkah says:

      I agree. Were Rice not a potential criminal defendant for misuse of unmasking for political purposes, it might make sense to extend the courtesy of continuing her access to her own material. Given the toxic cloud over her conduct, including public lies and obfuscations, Rice should have zero access to any sort of classified information, ever, except that used as evidence against her in a court of law. Was nothing learned from allowing Sandy Berger a chance to review his own notes?

      Liked by 3 people

  7. Donna in Oregon says:

    1. Susan Rice is refreshing her memory for testimony, and has permission to view historical documents she was involved in.

    2. Iran is on the back burner right now. For obvious reasons: Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, NoKo. In order to understand the forces in this battle I have to read both sides to make a decision. So I read this….https://www.washingtonreport.me/2015-june-july/neocons-and-the-israel-lobby-are-promoting-war-with-iran-as-they-once-did-with-iraq.html

    3. President Trump is allowing the Arab Islamic American Summit to work out their differences. Qatar is still in the hot seat. All are afraid of Iran. Why would we interfere in the motivation of these countries efforts to destroy ISIS, help civilian Syrians, counter Iranian forces in Yemen, work out Sunni & Shia differences setting up their new government in Iraq, end ISIS social media.
    https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/05/21/president-trumps-speech-arab-islamic-american-summit

    4. ISIS is the mission right now. This includes Turkey, which has a role in the ISIS fight. The Muslim Brotherhood is a problem for Turkey support so why declare MB a terrorist organization now? Destroying ISIS is the mission.

    5. If NSC members don’t support the ISIS mission, they’re out. Lobby interests for Israel is not the focus.

    6. These are the policies of the President. Get on board, or get off the train.

    7. Can’t do the mission……leak NSC and on the President. You’re fired.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Warrior1 says:

      I trust sara carter more than Natl Review and HR McMaster.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Regina says:

        and you’ve been following Sara Carter for….a few months?
        What was she doing before Circa?
        Her bio is extensively padded – but this part is interesting:
        Sara is a thespian who studied with the London Academy of Music and Dramatic Art (LAMDA) and practices foreign accents to embarrass her family in public settings.

        Sara A. Carter is a national and international award-winning investigative reporter whose stories have ranged from national security, terrorism, immigration and front line coverage of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

        She is currently the senior national security correspondent for web-based Circa News, working on major projects in conjunction with Sinclair Broadcast Group affiliates across the nation.
        https://www.circa.com/staff/sara-carter

        now go look up Hannity Sinclair – see a connection?

        Like

        • Hoosier says:

          I happen to be a LesbianThepianGymnasticMidget (Pesky char limit on screen names over on FR.) You are not smart. You are in fact a dolt. A buffoon. A moron. Not smart enough to tie your own shoe laces, or wipe yourself. You smell. Peeeeeeewwwwww

          Like

        • Carolyn says:

          If you were unaware of Sara Carter before Circa then you were not paying attention. I’ve known of her since back in the Bush days when she was the ONLY reporter investigating the border and the Mexican gangs and the drugs and crime they were bringing in, including MS13. At the time she was with a small San Bernardino, CA newspaper… she has not padded anything, she has come to prominence through hard investigative work, and I think she is being unfairly smeared.

          Like

        • Warrior1 says:

          Some of us in SoCal have followed sara carter for many years. She is a well known anti corruption muckraker who has reported extensively on immigration matters, national security and govt corruption.

          Like

          • Regina says:

            Thank you Carolyn and Warren for pointing out my oversight – I guess my ignorance is (poorly) based on the fact that she’s new nationally. I had heard her say in an interview “when I was in the White House” and could never find anything backing that up – but not finding it doesn’t mean it isn’t out there somewhere.

            Hoosier – not sure what to do with your reply, so I’ll just leave it at that 😉

            Liked by 1 person

  8. omyword says:

    Read the letter carefully, its says Historical researchers AND former government employees. She is not a researcher. Also where in the letter does it limit her access to just HER files? Oh it seems to imply that …. but it also includes files she just signed off on, which could be a lot and has little to do with her specifically. I am wary of this, and it smells. Not liking it, no, not one bit. I hear a lot of excuses, but……jury is out.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Warrior1 says:

      Mcmaster waived the normal requirement that she have a need to know. There is no reason for him to do this. Need to know is a typical classified material requirement. Why mcmaster decided that rice is an exception to the rule is questionable.

      Like

      • Sherlock says:

        That’s only as to stuff she wrote, already saw, signed off on, etc. In other words, the exemption from “need to know” applies only to that stuff, and is probably reasonable. Whether she has ANY access at all to other stuff, who knows? I honestly can’t tell from the letter.

        Like

    • G. Combs says:

      ” She is not a researcher.”
      Actually Rice is since she is now at a university writing a book per Wikipedia.

      Doesn’t ‘writing a book’ come in handy for the swamp critters?

      Liked by 1 person

  9. dissonant1 says:

    The letter is very obviously (to me) standard procedure to allow Rice to access her work product and nothing else going forward. It is a sad statement about the state of our political system these days that everything becomes the subject of potential conspiracy theory (and no, I have made no judgments about McMaster in general).

    Here is yet another take on the McMaster “Long Knives” saga (albeit from Red State and take it on that basis): http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2017/08/03/long-knives-h.-r.-mcmaster/

    Liked by 1 person

  10. I trust Sara Carter far more than McMaster.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Regina says:

      State your reasons?

      Like

    • Carolyn says:

      Same here. Go back and read a story in February in the Washington Times stating Susan Rice was telling McMaster to get rid of all the Bannon supporters in NSC. McMaster has been doing just that – systematically – yesterday was a big day, with three gone, two of who were supporters of Bannon [Victoria Coates is a sad loss IMO] as well as the one who had led Nunnes to where he could find the unmasking information we now know about. As for Carter, I’ve read her stories for over ten years, she is not a neophyte, her stories in the small San Bernardino paper back when Bush was President is where she started to gain national attention, she was the ONLY reporter at the time willing to go into the border situation and how bad it was and the Mexican gangs – including MS13…..

      Liked by 1 person

  11. Jolene Hurt says:

    excerpt from: http://freebeacon.com/national-security/mcmaster-warpath-purges-key-trump-allies-white-house-nsc/

    ……”More purges are said to be on the way, according to multiple insiders who described a list of at least four other senior NSC officials McMaster intends to target. Other sources confirmed the likelihood of more purges, but disputed some details on that list.

    “McMaster basically has this list and over the next two weeks he’s going to phase out” more senior officials loyal to Trump, said one administration insider intimately familiar with the upheaval occurring at the White House National Security Council. “They’re taking out people who were chosen to best implement the president’s policy that he articulated during the campaign.”

    The latest victim of this purge is Ezra Cohen-Watnick, a senior NSC official originally hired by ousted National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. The White House acknowledged in a statement late Wednesday evening on Cohen-Watnick’s departure that McMaster viewed him as in conflict with his vision for the NSC.

    A second senior official, Rich Higgins, who worked in the NSC’s strategic-planning office as a director for strategic planning, was fired last month. The president was not informed of the move until after Higgins was fired, according to one source who is in regular contact with senior NSC figures.

    Published reports described Higgins’ firing as a “lasting victory” for McMaster over longtime Trump officials who helped get the president into office.

    A third senior official, then-NSC senior Middle East director Derek Harvey, was removed from his post roughly a week ago. He had also been a Flynn hire and a vocal opponent of the Iran deal.

    Victoria Coates, another Flynn hire who served as a senior NSC member up until this week, has been reassigned at her request to the administration’s Middle East peace team. The move is being viewed as a promotion and it is expected she will continue to play a role in the Iran portfolio, sources said.

    “McMaster’s agenda is different than the president’s,” said one administration source with knowledge of the situation.

    The moves have sparked outrage inside and outside of the administration, with multiple sources telling the Free Beacon that Trump is being pushed in a direction antithetical to the campaign promises that brought him into office….”

    Liked by 1 person

  12. mikeyboo says:

    This is the same sanctimonious bull-chit we got when we expressed doubts about Sessions.

    Like

  13. Bubba says:

    What I have learned, when absorbing the news of the day, is that EVERY Reporter has an agenda. EVERY one of them does.

    That doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re wrong on a particular subject. It doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re bad people. And, sometimes, their agenda creeps into their reporting subconsciously. But, the agenda is always there. Always.

    So, I make sure to ask myself why is the person reporting this and how does it fit into their agenda?

    Like

  14. ver2cal says:

    I’ll take any day of the week a STRONG anti-Iran / pro-Israel agenda and those who espouse it (more so those on Trumps agenda) then any sly Muslim apologists such as McMaster seeimgly is and his Obama buddies on the NSC.

    Like

    • Sherlock says:

      It’s not that easy, though. Bill Kristol would fit your first two criteria, but is anti-MAGA, anti-Trump, and is in my view an America-second twerp. He even objected to then-candidate Trump saying “America First”. To me, America First means just that, and I have no compunction in saying so. This is my country, its welfare is the foremost concern. Allies yes, foreign lobbyists and opinion makers and culture shapers and media controllers? Oh, hell no.

      I have no idea where McMasters fits, or doesn’t, on the spectrum. Hope he’s a good guy simply trying to juggle many considerations in protecting our country long term. We’ll see.

      As for Bannon? I love the guy, so my opinions will be colored by that. Kushner? Don’t know a thing about him, he’s a cipher to me. Have no idea at all if he’s a MAGA guy.

      Like

    • sundance says:

      So you support Ted Cruz foreign policy over Donald Trump foreign policy.

      Fair enough.

      Just don’t get defrosted about HR McMaster carrying out Trump foreign policy and not Cruz’s. Donald Trump is the current President.

      Like

  15. Just remember one thing. In the world of the CIA, Dept. of Defense, National Security etc. nothing is as appears to be. Take the letter with a grain of salt and try not to over interpret it. The purging of Trump loyalist from the NSC is a head fake in order to give the Obama holdovers a false sense of security. The best way to find out who the criminals are in this situation is to let them keep their jobs.

    Like

  16. Darklich says:

    I think he is giving her access to her information so when she’s hauled in front of Congress she can’t say ” I dunno…”

    Liked by 1 person

  17. sgs1370blog says:

    Glad Sundance does not seem to be fooled by the leaks and perhaps even intentional releases to keep the fake media off guard. I have no idea if McMaster Kelly etc are good people but I don’t think Trump is a dunce with regard to choosing people. If he messes up he fixes it and if M or K are screwups they will get fired also. Congress is the real problem, and although I hate Congress and wish they would get their act together Trump is keeping the show moving forward and only calling out the 3 crazy senators who are the complete fringe because he is loyal UNLIKE MOST “R” elected officials (there are many other “R” senators/congressmen who are not on the train…)

    Like

    • HMelville says:

      I agree. It’s better to have an inquiring and skeptical mind in politics rather than one that is in rigid lockstep with only one view or source.

      Like

  18. HMelville says:

    I used to have a spinning top toy when I was a kid. I am beginning to feel like that toy when I read contrary views on issues like this that I don’t have direct experience about. But sundance’s contrary views about why Sarah’s “never go anywhere stories” are being written and why Brietbart’s campaign to derail McMaster has suddenly become a BB vendetta are appreciated. I just hope Trump knows the truth on these matters.

    Like

  19. Ms. C says:

    How do we know this letter is real? The letter’s font looks like it came from an old typewriter.

    Like

  20. sundance says:

    Like

  21. tomasianews says:

    I find this article insightful. I noticed Breitbart has recently been posting more war hawk articles and this surprised me since I thought they were supportive of populist agenda. Gaffney drew my ire for demanding to bomb North Korea. He talks like going to war in Asia is just like playing a video game, without any consequences. I live and work in China. Tillerson played it smart to de-escalate tensions in this part of the world. President Trump indeed is trying to prevent wars and it appears that he’s assigned McMasters to push out the war hawks.

    Like

  22. jeans2nd says:

    My goodness, all this hysteria.
    The first paragraph states a fact. Top Secret clearances are renewed every five years (Secret is 10 years). Odds are Rice’s clearance is good for at least another year or two.

    The second paragraph limits Rice’s access.
    What is the big deal?

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Reaganite says:

    Thanks for the article Sundance. Once you laid out the Lyin Ted connection…I realized why I kept smelling Cuban cigars…

    Like

  24. osage44 says:

    Enemies of the Trump administration are behind this McMasters business. They are trying to undermine him. Unfortunately, some Trump supporters are falling for this misdirection and going after McMasters. Stop. He is loyal to POTUs.

    Like

  25. andrewalinxs says:

    Thankyou Sundance for pointing out in your tweets
    Read article
    Note author
    Go to author twitter feed
    Scroll Discover worldview etc.

    A lot of people need to investigate the viewpoints of the authors and understand where they are coming from with their information.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s