Wingnut dispatch Muslim Brotherhood
by digby
Here’s a little treat from the right wing fever swamps offered up just so you’ll know what they’re getting at when you inevitably hear about it down the road:
Hillary Clinton’s longtime aide Huma Abedin’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood are well documented and well known to Clinton and to other Washington insiders, such as Republican Senator John McCain, who defended Abedin in a speech on the Senate floor when five conservative Members of the House of Representatives called for the State Department Inspector General to look into Abedin’s fitness to hold a high level security clearance while she served as Hillary Clinton’s deputy chief of staff at the State Department.
Some observers have called the Clinton email scandal an unprecedented breach of national security. But now that it has been revealed that Huma Abedin is a central figure in the national security disaster wrought by the compromise of military and diplomatic intelligence sent and received through Hillary Clinton’s unsecured private email server, is there really no precedent for Abedin’s role in this disaster?
Actually there is, but it lies shrouded in the murk of the lies that the liberal media have constructed to obscure the truth about the penetration of the United States government by another anti-constitutional totalitarian political movement – world Communism.
Like Islam, totalitarian Communism posited the overthrow of American constitutional government and the subsequent substitution of a system that would regulate the minutest details of human existence.
And like Islam, totalitarian Communism had its active agents, “fellow travelers” and sympathizers who found their way into positions of power and influence in the United States government with the intention of undermining our constitutional system of government.
Among the most influential of those individuals whose Communist associations were revealed was Alger Hiss. Hiss held a variety of sensitive diplomatic posts during World War II and ultimately headed the San Francisco Conference that organized the United Nations. After the end of the war and the organization of the United Nations he became president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
In that capacity Hiss was a leading advocate of the United Nations and a major internationalist influence on the United States government and our policies toward the Soviet Union, an enemy state that had the goal of burying the United States, as Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev once put it.
In 1948 Hiss was outed as a secret communist by Whittaker Chambers and accused of lying during his testimony to the House Un-American Affairs Committee. Hiss denied the charge and filed a libel suit against Chambers, but after Chambers produced a number of copies of State Department documents and said they were given to him by Hiss for transmission to the Soviet Union, perjury charges were brought against Hiss when he denied before a grand jury that he had committed espionage. The Hiss-Chambers affair would prove to be the watershed case* of the investigation of Communist influence in the United States government.
It is important to remember that Hiss was never convicted of espionage, he was convicted of lying about his communist associations, and of course he lost his libel suit against Chambers when he was shown to have transmitted U.S. government secrets outside of channels.
The left and the Washington establishment have never stopped defending Hiss, or really accepted that Hiss was exactly what Chambers said he was, but the Hiss affair eventually served as a model for how to manage the congressional investigation into Communist influence in the United States government, but not in the way you might expect.
Rather than expose themselves to the prospect of a perjury charge future witnesses called before the House Un-American Affairs Committee and its Senate counterpart run by Senator Joseph McCarthy began to invoke their Fifth Amendment right to stay silent and not answer any questions about their affiliation with the Communist Party or world Communism.
Actions oddly similar to Huma Abedin’s refusal to answer under oath interrogatories regarding the Clinton email scandal.
The congressional investigations into Communist influence in the United States government were eventually brought to a close and Senator McCarthy was brought into disrepute by his famous interchange with Joseph N. Welch, chief counsel for the United States Army while it was under investigation for Communist activities by McCarthy’s Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, wherein Welch defended a junior attorney in his firm, Fred Fisher, whom McCarthy had accused of being a Communist.
Of course it does little good over sixty years later to note that Welch himself admitted that Fisher had indeed been a member of the National Lawyers Guild, a Communist front organization, but it was merely a youthful indiscretion and after all Fisher was a Harvard man, so case closed.
Except, as subsequent scholarship has shown, McCarthy was right about the penetration of the cultural institutions and government of the United States by Communists and Communist sympathizers, even if he couldn’t connect all the dots in individual cases at the time.
Writing at Breitbart in January 2014, our late friend M. Stanton Evans elaborated on, and, more relevant, quantified McCarthy’s efforts to identify Communists inside the federal government.
What Evans found in writing Blacklisted By History, his groundbreaking book about McCarthy, is that there is a good deal of information available about the Communist penetration of the United States for those who care to view it: sizable tranches of McCarthy’s papers, and those of his opponents; reams of formerly confidential data from the FBI; thousands of pages of hearing transcripts and archives of his committee and other panels of the Congress; intercepted Soviet communications and revelations from Cold War defectors; and so on.
Looking at this mass of materials and matching them up with McCarthy’s cases, Stan Evans found that the main thing to be noted is a recurring pattern of verification.
Time and again, said Evans, we see the suspects named by McCarthy or his committee–treated at the time as hapless victims–revealed in official records as what McCarthy and company said they were–except, in the typical instance, a good deal more so.
How is this ancient Cold War history relevant to the present circumstance of Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s email server and the penetration of the United States government and cultural institutions by the Muslim Brotherhood?
As our friend Diana West observed in defense of her book, American Betrayal, it is rather hilarious, in a mirthless way, to hear Learned Professors still attempting to maintain the domain of “Cold War Studies” as a rather sterile realm in which the Rosenbergs, Hiss and lesser known “spies” lurked, only stealing secret formulas, never actually influencing anything, certainly not the course of American strategy or the movement of world events. (For more on this see Diana West in CHQ, “Stan Evans and Sen. McCarthy Were Right: The US Government Was Infiltrated By Communists”)
So it is with the Muslim Brotherhood; influencing the course of American policy toward Muslim nations, scrubbing American anti-terrorism policy of any reference to Islam and most of all influencing American policy to increase the wave of legal immigration from Muslim countries are not illegal – any more than Fred Fisher joining the communist-influenced National Lawyers Guild was not illegal – but they do undermine the American will to resist Islamist influence and defend constitutional government.
And there’s another parallel between Ms. Abedin and the targets of the Cold War investigation into Communist influence in the United States. Like many of the targets of the investigations of the 1950s Ms. Abedin has resisted putting herself under oath to answer questions about her actions in moving classified information from the secure State Department computer system to Hillary Clinton’s unsecured private email served where what was sent and to whom could not be tracked, or at least tracked as easily.
In 2012, when five House conservatives requested the State Department investigate whether or not it was appropriate for Ms. Abedin to hold a high level security clearance, given her long family history of ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, Senator John McCain rose to give the equivalent of Joseph Welch’s defense of Fred Fisher – calling the questions regarding Ms. Abedin’s family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood “sinister accusations [that]rest solely on a few unspecified and unsubstantiated associations of members of Huma’s family.”
And the five conservative Members of Congress were smeared in the media as Islamophobes, McCarthyites and worse.
We know, just like the Communists of the twentieth century, the Muslim Brotherhood is operating in the United States – and recruiting high level operatives such as Egypt’s former anti-American president, Mohammed Morsi, (overthrown in a popular uprising) who joined the Muslim Brotherhood after being recruited into the Muslim Students Association right here in America.
Huma Abedin’s role in the national security disaster that is unfolding in the Hillary Clinton email scandal now begs the question “why wasn’t that IG investigation conducted?”
It also begs the question “was any inquiry into whether Ms. Abedin’s family ties rendered her unsuitable for a position that involved access to classified information, especially about the Muslim Brotherhood, ever conducted?” Answering that question is of paramount urgency now that it has been revealed that Huma Abedin was at the heart of a breach of America’s most sensitive intelligence while she was Hillary Clinton’s deputy chief of staff at the State Department.
A security clearance and access to the highest levels of American military and diplomatic intelligence are not constitutional rights. It is time for Ms. Abedin to be put under oath to answer questions about her associations with the Muslim Brotherhood, whether or not she lied during her security clearance process and her role in moving classified material from the secure State Department system to the unsecure Hillary Clinton email server.
And I must point out that our wonderful FBI chief James Comey is certainly helping things with comments like this:
As Americans stood horrified at the news of a Jordanian pilot burned alive by the terrorist group known as the Islamic State, one of the top law enforcement officers in the country talked about how Mississippians can fight those kind of extremist ideals within our own borders.
FBI Director James Comey, who was in the state for the second visit of his 10-year term, said there are open cases looking into individuals who may be related to ISIS/ISIL in every state in the Union except Alaska.
“Mississippi is a great state, but like all 50 states it has troubled souls that might look to find meaning in this sick, misguided way. The challenge that we face in law enforcement is that they may be getting exposed to that poison and that training in their basement,” Comey said. “They’re sitting there consuming and may emerge from the basement to kill people of any sort, which is the call of ISIL, just kill somebody.”
So he stressed that the threat is very real, not just for military or law enforcement or the media, all of whom have been warned by the FBI that ISIS could be gunning for them, but for ordinary citizens as well.
.