In an astonishing display of misconduct, it appears that the Obama Administration may have placed politics ahead of the nation’s security right before the 2016 election.
While the media is consumed with reports alleging Russia’s collusive interference in the November presidential election, and while there is no proof the Russians affected the result of the election, there is evidence the Obama Administration put electoral interests over our national security.
The facts, at present, are undisputed. Just a week before the 2016 election, an Obama Administration official or officials located within the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) National Security Division’s Counter Terrorism section resisted efforts to prosecute a known terror suspect. The suspect—who disappeared and remains at large—entered the U.S. as a refugee despite the fact the suspect had previously participated in attacks against American troops as an insurgent in Iraq.
Although the activities of the Iraqi terror suspect triggered an investigation by the Joint Terrorism Task Force who planned to charge him with visa fraud, while they continued their investigation on other possible charges, this investigation was stopped by National Security Division officials.
Rather than protect us, it appears they chose not to counter their partisan ally’s electoral narrative versus Donald Trump’s focus on the threat posed by radical Islamic jihadists.
This approach amounts to the subversion of our national security apparatus in favor of a reprehensible political calculus.
One other important note: the National Security Division, at the time, was overseen by Mary McCord, the Acting Assistant Attorney General and Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for National Security. She continues to oversee nearly 400 employees responsible for protecting the country from international and domestic terrorism.
Provoked by this state of affairs, Senator Ron Johnson reportedly noted in his letter to DOJ:
" ... local law enforcement and prosecutors allegedly ‘met resistance’ from officials within the National Security Division’s Counter Terrorism section in Washington DC."
Evidently, by resisting an effort by the Joint Terrorism Task Force in San Antonio and the U.S. Attorney’s office for the Western District of Texas to prosecute a terror suspect, the National Security Division advanced the false narrative that Islamic terror was not a serious threat to the homeland. The DOJ’s failure makes clear that the United States faces foreign enemies as well as internal threats from Obama loyalists who, evidently, are prepared to place ideology ahead of our nation’s security.
As the ACLJ has previously made clear,
. . . our federal government’s national security apparatus faces opposition from an ever-expanding and ever-ramifying network of individuals and groups that are prepared to subvert the Constitution, the rule of law and our national security interests in order to advance their own ideological precommitments.
Is this another example of the shadow government consisting of unelected bureaucrats subverting our national security? Consider that Ms. McCord assumed office shortly before the November election, a move which recalls former Attorney General Lynch’s decision to approve changes in intelligence sharing shortly before President Obama left office. Leaked intelligence information coincided with, and arguably facilitated General Michael Flynn’s resignation as National Security Adviser.
Shadow government activity remains a threat to the nation’s security. Members of this group within the federal bureaucracy can no longer be tolerated.
Although proof of cause and effect are difficult, it seems clear that, since this activity occurred on Mary McCord’s watch, the ACLJ calls for her immediate and unconditional resignation. In the absence of her resignation, we call on Attorney General Sessions to remove her from her acting position and the Department of Justice itself.
At the ACLJ, our Government Accountability Project is filing 7 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests this afternoon to get the truth about this shocking subversion. We’re sending one to each of the relevant agencies to determine who made what decision that led to this jihadist avoiding justice and allowed him to go free.
Finally, in light of President Trump’s newly reissued Executive order pausing the refugee program until thorough vetting standards can be established, it must not be overlooked that the terrorist in question in this report posed as a refugee in order to gain access to America. In fact, he may still be roaming free in our nation. This is precisely why the President’s Executive order is needed, and why we are preparing legal action to defend it from frivolous attacks in federal court.
Take action with us.
As we aggressively fight to protect our national security and Christians, we urgently need your support. Have your gift DOUBLED today. Have your gift doubled through our Matching Challenge.
Your data is secure. Learn More »
The ACLJ specifically called for a strategy session designed to counter the Islamic State, or ISIS almost one year ago. Consistent with this idea, the Trump Administration has invited more than 60 nations and international organizations to Washington next week. This comes as the Trump...
A federal district judge in Hawaii has just issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) blocking the key provisions of the President’s revised Executive order that pauses the refugee program and admittance of foreign nationals from 6 terrorist hotbeds (Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen)
As we reported about a week ago, President Trump issued a new, revised Executive Order addressing the very real terrorism threats hidden within our outdated and naive immigration and refugee programs. We previously filed an amicus brief at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals defending the...
Buried in the controversy over President Trump’s reissued Executive Order pausing the refugee program to ensure extreme vetting and the admission of foreign nationals from six terrorist hotspots, President Trump is simultaneously making the case for the establishment of in-region safe zones. This...