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.
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…