Exclusive: Coup plotters considered never allowing Trump to be inaugurated

The Deep State against the President Donald Trump

By Charles “Sam” Faddis

An exclusive report based on a senior Department of Defense official’s account – the coup plotters considered never transferring power to the President-elect of the United States of America.

Recent revelations, including the declassification of key documents, have effectively ended any speculation about what really transpired in 2016 and 2017 in regard to Donald Trump and spurious allegations of Russian collusion. The story was a fabrication. None of it was ever true. There really was a conspiracy, and we really did witness the first attempted coup in American history.

Information uncovered within the last few days by AND Magazine adds significantly to our understanding of the scope of the conspiracy and suggests strongly that subsequent to the election of Donald Trump there was serious consideration given to simply not transferring power to the President-Elect.

According to a former senior Department of Defense official interviewed by AND Magazine, in the wake of Donald Trump’s “surprise” victory in November 2016, a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) was rushed through pushing the false Russian collusion narrative and asserting as the judgment of the Intelligence Community as a whole that the Russians had not only interfered in the election but had done so in order to assist Donald Trump and help him become President. We have known for some time that this NIE was drafted, what we now know is considerably more about the highly unusual way in which it was drafted.

An NIE is supposed to represent the consensus of the Intelligence Community (IC). It is created in a lengthy collaborative process involving working-level analysts and experts. Only when the final version is effectively agreed upon and hammered out, does the document make is way to agency heads for final approval.

Such was not the case with this NIE. According to the senior official interviewed, this NIE was written by CIA Director Brennan, FBI Director Comey, and DNI Clapper. All work on the NIE was done at the Top Secret level with only a handful of individuals having access to what was written. Objections to the conclusions reached were dismissed summarily on the basis that Mr. Brennan, Mr. Comey, and Mr. Clapper had personally written the NIE findings and recommendations and would handle all inter-agency input themselves.

In short, the conclusions had been preordained. There was no room for discussion.

Circa November 10, 2016, the senior official speaking to AND Magazine received a phone call in his office at the Pentagon on a secure phone. The call was from the Department of Defense Under-Secretary’s office that coordinated attendance and participation in inter-agency meetings at the White House. The call concerned planning for a short fuse, inter-agency meeting at the White House. It was explained that a new committee was being formed to finalize and establish the timeline and storyline connecting Russia with the election of President Trump. The senior official speaking to AND Magazine had been named to be part of this new committee.

During this phone call, it was explained to AND’s source that one of the committee’s taskings was to develop a plan to delay and/or reschedule the inauguration. While the official to whom the call was made ultimately deliberately avoided attending committee meetings, he did see subsequent Top Secret email traffic that showed significant inter-agency discussion of the possibility of not proceeding as scheduled with the transfer of power.

At some point, this idea appears to have been dropped in favor of proceeding with the strategy of creating an impeachment narrative, but for months apparently there was significant discussion of the possibility of simply not handing over the Presidency to Donald Trump.

This same committee likely prepared the read ahead for the infamous January 5, 2017 meeting in the White House, which formally endorsed the impeachment narrative. Present at that meeting were President Obama, Vice-President Biden, National Security Advisor Susan Rice, CIA Director Brennan, DNI Clapper, FBI Director Comey, and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates.

During this timeframe AND’s source was also directly involved with the so-called Five Eyes intelligence-sharing agreement involving NSA, its British counterpart GCHQ, and other allied nations. The source saw directly that there was a significant spike in “end-around” intel sharing between GCHQ and NSA during this time period. The term “end-around” is a reference to the practice, officially not sanctioned, of using foreign intelligence services to collect intelligence on American targets and thereby evade the legal restrictions on doing so that control NSA and other U.S. intelligence agencies. In many cases, this was done by simply having British GCHQ personnel print hard copies of reports and then simply “leave them” on a tabletop in a common NSA/GCHQ work environment where they would be “discovered” by NSA personnel.

The increase in the amount of this “end-around” reporting coincided precisely with the timeframe in which we now know law enforcement and intelligence agencies focused their attention on members of the Trump campaign. Given that fact, it is at a minimum highly suspicious and more than possible that this mechanism was being employed to help with what we now know to be politically motivated targeting by individuals associated with Donald Trump, his campaign, and his incoming administration.

For at least three years we were fed the lie that Donald Trump was in bed with the Kremlin and deserved to be removed from office on that basis. His election was illegitimate. He was a real-life “Manchurian Candidate.”

When that was exposed as a lie, the backers of the original narrative shifted gears. The whole matter should probably just be dropped. To the extent there was any “wrongdoing” it concerned the misconduct of a handful of “overzealous” mid-level personnel. “Change some regulations. Tighten some procedures. Move on.”

All of that is a lie too. Every day we see additional evidence that makes that crystal clear. When we have reached the point where an outgoing President and his subordinates are seriously planning not to hand over power to the President-Elect, we are standing on the precipice. This is no longer about partisan politics. This is about the very real possibility of losing our democracy.

The Romans went for centuries living in a democratic system based on the rule of law. They woke up one day to discover that they lived in an empire and that powerful forces in the capital city made the call regarding who their Emperor was. We may be far closer to that day than we realize.

This exclusive report may not be reprinted or republished without the express written consent of AND Magazine. We welcome links to this report.

Source: AND Magazine – Expert Analysis and Commentary

DNI declassifies Brennan notes, CIA memo on Hillary Clinton ‘stirring up’ scandal between Trump, Russia

Obama, Clinton treason
Obama, Clinton treason

By Brooke Singman | Fox News

A source said Brennan’s handwritten notes were taken after briefing Obama on the matter,

Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe on Tuesday declassified documents that revealed former CIA Director John Brennan briefed former President Obama on Hillary Clinton’s purported “plan” to tie then-candidate Donald Trump to Russia as “a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server” ahead of the 2016 presidential election, Fox News has learned.

Ratcliffe declassified Brennan’s handwritten notes – which were taken after he briefed Obama on the intelligence the CIA received – and a CIA memo, which revealed that officials referred the matter to the FBI for potential investigative action.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence transmitted the declassified documents to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees on Tuesday afternoon.

Today, at the direction of President Trump, I declassified additional documents relevant to ongoing Congressional oversight and investigative activities,” Ratcliffe said in a statement to Fox News Tuesday.

A source familiar with the documents explained that Brennan’s handwritten notes were taken after briefing Obama on the matter.

We’re getting additional insight into Russian activities from [REDACTED],” Brennan notes read. “CITE [summarizing] alleged approved by Hillary Clinton a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service,” Brennan’s notes read.

The notes state “on 28 of July.” In the margin, Brennan writes “POTUS,” but that section of the notes is redacted.

Any evidence of collaboration between Trump campaign + Russia,” the notes read.

The remainder of the notes are redacted, except in the margins, which reads:  “JC,” “Denis,” and “Susan.” “

The notes don’t spell out the full names but “JC” could be referring to then-FBI Director James Comey, “Susan” could refer to National Security Adviser Susan Rice, and “Denis” could refer to Obama chief of staff Denis McDonough.

The declassification comes after Ratcliffe, last week, shared newly-declassified information with the Senate Judiciary Committee which revealed that in September 2016, U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral on Hillary Clinton purportedly approving “a plan concerning U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections” in order to distract the public from her email scandal.

That referral was sent to Comey and then-Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok.

The following information is provided for the exclusive use of your bureau for background investigative action or lead purposes as appropriate,” the CIA memo to Comey and Strzok stated.

“This memorandum contains sensitive information that could be source revealing. It should be handled with particular attention to compartmentation and need-to-know. To avoid the possible compromise of the source, any investigative action taken in response to the information below should be coordinated in advance with Chief Counterintelligence Mission Center, Legal,” the memo, which was sent to Comey and Strzok, read. “It may not be used in any legal proceeding—including FISA applications—without prior approval…”

Per FBI verbal request, CIA provides the below examples of information the CROSSFIRE HURRICANE fusion cell has gleaned to date,” the memo continued. ““An exchange [REDACTED] discussing US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s approval of a plan concerning US presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering US elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server.

The memo is heavily redacted.

READ FULL TEXT: FOX NEWS

Beware of the useful idiots

By Jon A. Brake

And we call those people useful idiots
And we call those people useful idiots

Useful Idiots “It was during the Soviet Union’s heyday that Joseph Stalin introduced the politic altermuseful idiot” to describe that category of citizens who embraced and up held Moscovite policy with innocent intentions.” – ekathimerini-com) The term has been used torefer to Soviet sympathizers in Western countries. – Cause of Liberty)

Is the Old Guard standing down or are they fighting back? Is Populism here to stay or is it just in for a four year stand? The Old Guard is both Republicans and Democrats and they have power, lots of power. The United States will never have term limits because it would take an act of Congress and that would put them out of work and power. Populism is a view that disrupts the Old Guard. Populismis the result of someone using the “common man” to win elections. Populism can use both ideas from the left and right that earn the trust of the “common man”.

The United States today is in a bind, high taxes and a lot of debt. We were put here by a lot of well meaning Old Guard that only wanted to keep their job and power “to help the people.”It is as if the Old  Guard used the guide book “Rules for Radicalsto put this country on the path to destruction. You could say they were “Useful Idiots” and they never knew it.

Saul Alinsky and the “Rules for Radicals” Saul Alinsky wrote a book in 1971 called Rules for Radicals. Alinsky died in 1972 but his writings influenced those in political control of our nation to day.

(Editor’s Note: Saul David Alinsky (January 30, 1909 –June 12, 1972) was an American community organizer and writer. He is generally considered to be the founder of modern community organizing. He is often noted for his 1971 book Rules for Radicals.” -Wikipedia)

American liberals the most useful idiots I could ever hope for
American liberals the most useful idiots I could ever hope for

President Obama
According to Alinsky biographer Sanford Horwitt, U.S.President Barack Obama was influenced by Alinsky and followed in his footsteps as a Chicago based community organizer. Horwitt asserted that Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign was influenced by Alinsky’s teachings.” -Wikipedia

Hillary Clinton
“In 1969, Hillary Rodham wrote a 92 page senior thesis for Wellesley College about community organizer Saul Alinsky entitled “There Is Only the Fight . . . : An Analysis ofthe Alinsky Model. “The thesisis now available. While the work by Rodham as a college student was the subject of much speculation in articles and biographies of Hillary Rodham Clinton in the1990s, access to the thesis was limited by the college, at the request of the Clinton White House, during her time as firstlady. ”Wikipedia)

Where Are We Today
All of Saul Alinsky’s eight rules are currently in play
How to create a social state by Saul Alinsky: There are eight levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a social state. The first is the most important
1) Healthcare– “Control healthcare and you control the people.”(Editor’s Note: The reality is that when you look at the actual net gains over the past two years since the program was fully implemented, the number is 14 million, and of that, 11.8 million (84 percent) were people given the “gift” of Medicaid. The Daily Signal)

2) PovertyIncrease the Poverty level as high as possible; poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live. (Editor’s Note: “In 2016there were 40.6 million people in poverty.” – U.S. Census

3) Debt – Increase the debt toan unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty. (Editor Note: As of November 1, 2017, the official debt of the United States government is $20.5 trillion. This amounts to: 1. $62,703 for each person living in the U.S.2. $162,561 for each household in the U.S.3. 105% of the U.S. gross domestic product. 4. 570% of annual federal revenues. – Just Facts – A Resource for Independent Thinkers)

4) Gun Control– Removethe ability to defend themselves from the government. That way you are able to create a police state. (Editor’s Note: “When the colonists began to rise up against British authority, early American revolutionaries were denied these basic rights, including that to carry firearms. As Aaron Burger writes for the Christian Science Monitor, the Founding Fathers recognized through the success of their Revolution the potential benefits of an armed citizenry in dispelling a distant government.Seeker)

5) WelfareTake control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income). (Editor’s Note: In a May report, the Census Bureau said 52.2 million people are on Welfare)

6) Education – Take control of what people read and listen to take control of what children learn in school.

(Editor’s Note: Our educational system is essentially a Soviet style government run monopoly that could only beloved by the likes of Lenin and Stalin. The government decides where your kids go to school; what curriculum they’ll study; and even develops long term educational plans just like the Communists devised five year plans. -CNN Living)

Are you just their useful idiot?
Are you just their useful idiot?

7) Religion – Remove the belief in the God from the government and schools. (Editor’s Note: On June 25,1962, the United States Supreme Court decided inE ngel v. Vitale that a prayer approved by the New York Board of Regents for use in schools violated the First Amendment by constituting an establishment of religion. – Religion & Politics)

8) Class Warfare –Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent, and it will be easier to take (tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor. (Editor’s Note: “Class warfare. (in Marxist thought) the struggle for political and economic power carried on between capitalists and workers.”- Dictionary.com)

We in the United States have Healthcare that many want and very few can afford. “The Poor will always be with us. ”Out Debt is more than our GDP. See page 3. We have 52 million people on Welfare. High Schools are graduating students who cannot read or write. We have taken peoples Religion and turned it into something that some think is bad. And today, Congressmen win elections and reelection by turning many against a few. Today, the City, County, State and Nation needs informed voters not Useful Idiots
Source: Manhattan Free Press

RELATED
Our Educational System makes US Land of useful idiots

Trump says Obama may have committed treason

Courtesy: The Hill

Trump accuses Obama
Trump accuses Obama

President Trump on Monday suggested without evidence that his predecessor, former President Obama, committed treason in connection with the investigation into the 2016 Trump campaign’s contacts with Russia.

Treason. Treason. It’s treason,” Trump said in an interview with CBN News. The president did not elaborate on the specific charge but repeated his assertion that the previous administration “spied” on his campaign in the course of the Russia probe.

They’d been spying on my campaign,” Trump told CBN News’s David Brody. “Turned out I was right. Let’s see what happens to them now.”

Trump signaled he was looking forward to the results of U.S. Attorney John Durham’s ongoing investigation into the origins of the Russia investigation, calling the Connecticut prosecutor “highly respected” and praising Attorney General William Barr.

I want to stay out of it because otherwise it’s going to look political,” Trump said. “Let’s see what they come up with.”

Trump and his allies have long charged that FBI agents were motivated by political bias in targeting his 2016 campaign as part of the investigation into Russia’s election interference, which was eventually taken over by former special counsel Robert Mueller. The investigation dogged Trump during his first two years in office, and he regularly derided it as a “witch hunt.”

A Justice Department inspector general report issued last year, however, found that the FBI was not driven by bias in its decision to open investigations into Trump campaign associates and that those probes had an adequate predicate.

Still, the watchdog was deeply critical of the Justice Department’s actions in applying for a warrant to wiretap former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. Durham is said to be investigating at least one potential crime related to the Page warrant.

Elie Honig, a legal analyst and former federal prosecutor in New York, dismissed Trump’s claim Monday about Obama as “petty and ridiculous.”

“First, all the wiretaps were court-approved. Second, there’s no proof Obama had anything to do with those lawful wiretaps. And third, if we need to get technical (and we don’t because there’s nothing there) treason only applies during a declared war,” Honig told The Hill.

Trump has sought to tie Obama to what he has vaguely described as a nefarious effort by officials in the prior administration to target his campaign, though he has not pointed to specific evidence of criminal wrongdoing.

Until Monday, Trump had declined to name a specific crime he believed his predecessor committed. He stepped up his attacks on Obama after the former president was reported as warning in a private phone conversation that the “rule of law is at risk” in the wake of the Justice Department’s decision to move to drop perjury charges against Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

Asked to address Trump’s remarks about Obama in May, Barr said he did not expect a criminal investigation of either Obama or former vice president Joe Biden, Trump’s 2020 Democratic challenger.

“Based on the information I have today, I don’t expect Mr. Durham’s work will lead to a criminal investigation of either man,” Barr told reporters during a press conference. “Our concern over potential criminality is focused on others.”

Barr told Fox News in an interview on Sunday that he expected developments in Durham’s probe sometime this summer.

Source: The Hill

Syria: Putin’s a brutal tyrant, but he has a policy and a plan, Obama doesn’t

The United Nations showdown this week has demonstrated just how badly President Obama is being outplayed by Vladimir Putin. Hold onto your hat, the worst is yet to come.

Claiming to be lining up a coalition to fight the Islamic State, Putin is also aligned with Iran and Iraq to keep the butcher of Syria, Bashar al-Assad, in power.

This axis of evil would be trouble anywhere, but the involvement of Iraq adds a unique dimension. We are helping to prop up that government and launching airstrikes against the Islamic State in Iraq, an effort that involves giving Iraq’s military our intelligence data.

But The Wall Street Journal reports that Iraqi officials say they will now give that data to the Russian military. That means our intelligence will be used to keep Assad in power.
So more than four years after Obama demanded that Assad resign, the Syrian dictator not only survives, he has gained powerful allies. And we have effectively become one of them, even as Obama still insists Assad must go.
To read again his initial demand that Assad quit in August 2011 is to appreciate the consequences of Obama’s failure to act. “For the sake of the Syrian people, the time has come for President Assad to step aside,” he said then.

At the time, The Washington Post reported that “hundreds of Syrian civilians” had been killed by the government.
Now the dead are said to number 250,000, with 4 million Syrians driven into exile. Yet Obama was at the U.N. Monday, sounding very much like it was still 2011. He demanded “a managed transition away from Assad into a new leader,” yet again offered no plan for making that actually happen.
Putin is a brutal tyrant, but he has a policy — and a forceful plan to deliver results.
There in lies the difference between a leader and a charlatan.

Source: Fox News

Michael Goodwin is a Fox News contributor and New York Post columnist.

Lawmakers authorize use of Russian military force for anti-IS airstrikes in Syria

MOSCOW, September 30. /TASS/. The Federation Council has unanimously granted permission to the Russian president to use the nation’s military force in Syria, Kremlin chief of staff Sergey Ivanov told journalists on Wednesday.

The Federation Council unanimously supported the president’s request – 162 votes in favor [of granting permission],” Ivanov said.
Russia will use only its Air Force in Syria against the Islamic State (IS) terrorist group upon the request of Syrian President Bashar Assad, Ivanov said, stressing that no ground troops will be sent.
“The operation’s military goal is exclusively air support of the Syrian armed forces in their fight against the IS,” he said. This operation by the Russian Air Force is limited in time and the types of the used weapons are not disclosed, Ivanov added.

The use of armed forces on the theater of military operations is ruled out,” he said.
President Vladimir Putin has earlier requested the upper house of parliament to authorize the use of Russia’s armed forces outside the country “based on the generally recognised international law norms and principles,” the Kremlin press service said.

Russia strictly complies with international law
Such operations and airstrikes can be conducted either upon the UN Security Council’s decision or the request from the government of a state. Baghdad has earlier sent the respective request to the international coalition.

According to Ivanov, Syria’s Assad “turned to [Russia’s] leadership, requesting military assistance”. He stressed that “it will be an operation of the Russian Air Force only.”
Ivanov stressed that there is “a principal difference” in the approach of Russia and its Western partners. “They do not comply with the international law, while we do so.”

Anti-IS fight aimed at ensuring Russia’s national security
The Kremlin chief of staff has stressed that Russia’s participation in the operation against the terrorists comes mainly in an effort to ensure national security and is not about “attaining foreign policy objectives or satisfying some ambitions.”

Ivanov noted that the number of Russian and CIS nationals in the ranks of the Islamic State terrorist group has been on the rise. “There are thousands of them, some of whom have returned to Russia. It does not take a clairvoyant to realize that such people will keep on coming back to Russia.”
“Thus, we should pre-empt them and act while they are far away, rather than put off dealing with the problem for later, after they have gotten back to Russia,” Ivanov added.

Russia’s participation in operation discussed on UN General Assembly’s sidelines
President Vladimir Putin told reporters on Monday after his visit to New York that the issue of carrying out anti-terrorist operations in Iraq and Syria was discussed during his contacts with the other leaders. He stressed that in any case Russia would act in full compliance with the international law.

Putin said that any involvement of Russia’s troops in the ground operations is out of question. The effort on the fight against terrorism should be in parallel with the political process in Syria, he said.
The Russian leader noted that while supporting the country’s authorities in the anti-terror fight, Moscow would insist on carrying out political reforms simultaneously.

Media reports said on Tuesday that US Defence Secretary Ashton Carter has ordered his subordinates to open a communications line with Russia on Syria.
Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook said this was done in line with the agreement reached on Monday at the meeting of US President Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin in New York. The consultations will allow preventing possible conflicts in Syria between the Russian military and the anti-terrorist coalition led by the United States, he said.

Right for using Russia’s military force abroad
Under Russia’s Constitution, the upper house of parliament, the Federation Council, is responsible for deciding on the possibility of using Russia’s armed forces outside the country.
Last time, the Federation Council used this right on March 1, 2014 when it gave permission to the president to use Russia’s forces on the territory of Ukraine until the normalization of the situation there.
On June 25, 2014 the upper house canceled the respective resolution upon the request of President Putin. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the decision came amid the launch of trilateral talks on resolving the situation in eastern Ukraine.

Source: TASS. Russian News Agency

U.S. Begins Military Talks With Russia on Syria

LONDON — As the first Russian combat aircraft arrived in Syria, the Obama administration reached out to Moscow on Friday to try to coordinate actions in the war zone and avoid an accidental escalation of one of the world’s most volatile conflicts.

The diplomatic initiative amounted to a pivot for the Obama administration, which just two weeks ago delivered a stern warning to the Kremlin that its military buildup in Syria risked an escalation of the civil war there or even an inadvertent confrontation with the United States. Last week, President Obama condemned Russia’s move as a “strategy that’s doomed to failure.”

But the White House seemed to acknowledge that the Kremlin had effectively changed the calculus in Syria in a way that would not be soon reversed despite vigorous American objections. The decision to start talks also reflected a hope that Russia might yet be drawn into a more constructive role in resolving the four-year-old civil war.

At Mr. Obama’s instruction, Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter on Friday opened a dialogue on Syria with his Russian counterpart, Defense Minister Sergei K. Shoigu, aimed at making sure that American and Russian forces avoid running into each other by mistake. The Russians have sent tanks, other equipment, marines and now combat aircraft to their new military hub near Latakia in western Syria. The Americans have flown hundreds of air missions in Syria striking the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL.

But while Mr. Carter’s initial military-to-military talks were limited in scope, officials indicated that the larger goal was to draw the Russians into a political process that would ultimately replace Syria’s government of President Bashar al-Assad, a longtime ally of the Kremlin.

“The president believes that a mil-to-mil conversation is an important next step,” Secretary of State John Kerry said on Friday in London, where he was visiting to consult with allies. “It will help to define some of the different options that are available to us.”

Still, the stakes have become even higher, as a senior United States official on Friday confirmed that four Russian Su-27 fighter aircraft had been deployed to the air base in recent days, along with four large Hip troop-transport helicopters and four Hind helicopter gunships. The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence reports, said that more than 20 Condor transport plane flights had delivered weapons and equipment to the air base in the past 10 days.

The Russian military buildup in Syria could serve the Kremlin’s interests in several ways. It could help strengthen Mr. Assad, whom Russia has long backed and who has suffered a number of military reversals in recent months. It could put Moscow in a stronger position to shape the formation of a new Syrian government if Mr. Assad is pushed out of power. It also helps Russia cement its strategic interests in what experts say is its most important new Middle East military outpost in decades.

Some former diplomats view the Russian move as a brazen effort to undercut American influence in the region.

But after failing to impede the buildup by convincing nations to close their airspace to Russian transport planes — Bulgaria banned the flights but Iraq did not — the White House is trying to make the best out of a situation it feels it is powerless to prevent.

Administration officials have long argued that Mr. Assad’s brutal and often indiscriminate crackdown against its foes has encouraged support for the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL. And they seem intent on exploring the closed-door comments by Russian diplomats that they are not wedded to the Syrian leader.

As Western officials look for a political solution, they appear to be demonstrating some flexibility. Though the Obama administration has long said that Mr. Assad must go in order for there to be a durable solution to the Syria crisis, Mr. Kerry allowed for the possibility that Mr. Assad might remain in power in the short term.

Our focus remains on destroying ISIL and also on a political settlement with respect to Syria, which we believe cannot be achieved with the long-term presence of Assad,” Mr. Kerry said at the start of a meeting here with Abdullah bin Zayed, the United Arab Emirates foreign minister. “But we’re looking for ways in which to try to find a common ground.”

Philip Hammond, the British foreign secretary whom Mr. Kerry is scheduled to meet on Saturday, made a similar point earlier this month.

We are not saying Assad and all his cronies have to go on day one,” Mr. Hammond told a parliamentary committee. “If there was a process that was agreed, including with the Russians and the Iranians, which took a period of months and there was a transition out during that period of months, we could certainly discuss that.”

Source: New York Times

Assad Must Go? No, American Arrogance Must Go!

What gives Washington DC the right to determine who rules in Syria?

White House Press Secretary Joshua Earnest channeled President Obama’s famous chant that “Assad must go” when he claimed during a regular press briefing that:

“The international community has decided that it’s time for Assad to go.  He clearly has lost legitimacy to lead.  He has lost the confidence of those citizens of his country — at least the ones that — or I guess I should say particularly the ones that he is using the resources of the military to attack.”

The arrogance on display is both stupefying and dangerous. The problem in Syria isn’t, nor ever has been, President Assad – it’s always been the US’ arrogance in dictating demands and then militarily enforcing them after they’ve been rejected.

American Arrogance

Syria’s ills are directly traceable to the failure of American foreign policy in the Mideast. The US rabidly went on a regime change streak that began during the Bush years, with former Supreme Allied Commander of Europe for NATO General Wesley Clark revealing in his 2007 memoirs that a senior general showed him a memo and said:

“‘Here’s the paper from the Office of the Secretary of Defense [then Donald Rumsfeld] outlining the strategy. We’re going to take out seven countries in five years.’ And he named them, starting with Iraq and Syria and ending with Iran.”

Earlier that year, investigative journalist Seymour Hersh wrote an expose in The New Yorker in which he detailed, among other proposed regional regime change specifics, that the Bush Administration was planning to use the Muslim Brotherhood to launch a Gulf-funded sectarian war against the Syrian government.

At the time, the reason was supposedly because of Damascus’ closeness to Tehran, but later information as reported by The Guardian reveals that the decision to build a Friendship Pipeline between Iran, Iraq, and Syria in 2010, and Damascus’ rejection of a similar one from Qatar, likely had a lot to do with why the anti-government terrorist plan was pushed forward for activation the year after.

Beginning in 2011, the Mideast was rocked by the so-called “Arab Spring”, which Russian General Chief of Staff Valery Gerasimov would in hindsight categorize as a theater-wide Color Revolution during an official conference on the topic last year in Moscow.

What the US had wanted to do is overthrow all of the Mideast’s republics (even those allied with the US such a Egypt) in order to bring a transnational Muslim Brotherhood clique to power in each of them that would thus make it a lot easier to control the entire region.

Think of it as the neocons’ version of a 21st-century communist party, but directed towards control of the Mideast and not Europe (which has the EU for that).

The Gulf Monarchies were not targeted because of their staunch pro-American allegiance and the potential that any domestic disruption would have in upsetting the US’ economic interests there.

Between the pro-American Gulf Monarchies and the pro-American EU thus lay a handful of republics that weren’t so firmly under the US’ sway (or not at all influenced by it like Syria), so in order for the US to securely control the broad swatch of Afro-Eurasia stretching from Iceland to Yemen, it needed to overthrow those governments, ergo the “Arab Spring” Color Revolutions.

The People’s Will

But something went wrong as it always does with the US’ plans, and it was that the Syrian people wholeheartedly rejected the Muslim Brotherhood’s ploy at regime change, instead favoring to preserve the secular and multicultural society that Syrian civilization is historically known for.

For this simple reason, the Color Revolution attempt was a dismal failure from the very beginning, hence why the US and its allies (notably Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia) sought to transform it into an Unconventional War by arming their proxies and ordering them to escalate their soft coup attempt into a hard one.

The resultant Hybrid War that’s been raging for the past four and a half years is thus a manifestation of the US’ geopolitical obsession for regime change. Far from realizing that the people had resoundingly rejected such an approach from the very beginning, the US and its allies dug in by reinforcing their proxy elements inside the country and allowing foreign fighters to flood into Syria via the Turkish border.

Amidst this external onslaught being launched against them, the Syrian people continued to bravely soldier on and democratically show the rest of the world that they supported their government.

A constitutional referendum in 2012passed by an 89% margin and with the participation of 57% of the population, while President Assad was reelectedin 2014 with 88.7% of the vote in which 73% of the electorate took part.

Both sets of numbers trump the civil society participation and political legitimacy of Western countries and their leaders, and as President Assad once said, there is no way he could remain in office during this war if he didn’t truly have the support of the vast majority of the population.

It’s also telling that most of the country’s refugees haven’t fled the country, but have instead decided to stay in their homeland and seek safety under the protection of the Syrian Arab Army, which currently provides security to around 80% of Syria’s citizens.

Be that as it is, the US and its allies stubbornly ignored the people’s will, and instead continued to blindly pump weapons and fighters into the country in clear confirmation of the adage that insanity is “repeating the same thing over again but expecting different results”.

Ground Zero In The War On Terror

All of those fighters and weapons that the US and its allies were shipping into Syria were bound to lead to some major problems, chief among them the rise of ISIL, but this was actually predicted and supported by the US government a couple years ago. Judicial Watch published a declassified report that it received in May from a Freedom Of Information Act request that proves that the Pentagon’s Defense Information Agency thought that:

“If the situation unravels there is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in Eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran).

This bombshell dovetails with what Syrian Ambassador to Russia Riyad Haddad recently said in an interview where he accused the US of using terrorism to promote regime change in his country. President Putin followed up at the CSTO summit by warning countries of the risks inherent in employing double-standards towards terrorists and directly or indirectly using them to further certain tactical objectives.

In order to stem the tide of terror that the US unleashed in the Mideast, Russia is rapidly moving forward with assembling an inclusive anti-ISIL coalition, and President Putin is expected to use his keynote speech at the UN General Assembly later this month to make his case that the situation is far too pressing to care about regime change, and that the world must unite in supporting Syria as it fights on its behalf on the frontlines against terror.

American arrogance got the world into this mess, but if you ask Russia, it’ll be Syrian humility that gets it out in one piece.

Source: Russia Insider