About the Event

You’ve been looking for a Veteran organization that has energy and is on the attack. Vets with purpose and energy.

You came to the right place.

Welcome to Vets in the Fight

You served honorably in any number of places and actions, and your military oath still defines who you are … what you will always be.

“I, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.”

Register at Vets In The Fight.





America’s Security and the Veteran Voter

Monday, 10 October 2016 (Columbus Day) and Tuesday, 11 October 2016

Owens Auditorium Sandhills Community College

Pinehurst, North Carolina, USA

Veteran Patriots Action Conference (VPAC)

Vets in the Fight … all honorably discharged American military personnel who embrace their oath of office; and there are 22 ½ million of us … along with our spouses … may  well be the only segment of American society bound by an irrevocable oath to Duty, Honor, Country; irrevocably invested in America’s Security; and the only segment of voters capable of banding together to elect the candidate who will ‘ bring integrity, honor and credibility to the office of Commander-in-Chief  ‘ at the polls on 8 November 2016.


Hosting a National Discussion:  Special Operations Speaks, Veteran Patriots Action Conference and other sponsors bring the national discussion of America’s Security and the Veteran Voter to the Sandhills of North Carolina a month prior to the general elections: Monday (Columbus Day) the 10th & Tuesday, 11th of October,  2016, Owens Auditorium, Sandhills Community College, Pinehurst, NC.  We invite all Veterans … and their spouses … who still hold their military oaths dear to come to Pinehurst to be part of the most historic national discussions since the Civil War and since our American Revolution before it.


Editor’s Note: One more time.


America First Million Member Sign-Up

Please join us in our commitment to promote American exceptionalism, freedom, our Constitution,  our American way of life, and our safety and security by making a donation and subscribing to our periodic newsletters and messages by donating below.

Sign up


For those unaware…It’s still our country.




Hillary Clinton’s Medical Condition is a National Security Issue Dr. Dave Janda with MG Paul Vallely

Hillary Clinton’s Medical Condition is a National Security Issue.

The Dr. Dave Janda Show with Paul Vallely, MG U.S. Army (ret.) September 11, 2016

Dr. Dave Janda and MG Paul Vallely, USA (ret.) discuss Hillary Clinton’s medical condition and how it impacts our national security.




One small problem…She did not take a taste…

Medical Device hidden.








Off her feet.


Operation Freedom

Every Sunday from 3-5PM ET, WAAM Radio turns on the bright lights and fires up its own operating room. Dr. Dave Janda, an orthopedic surgeon and health care policy analyst, hosts a two hour “dissection” of current events that are impacting every person, family and business in our community and country.

Dr. Janda brings to the operating table information the mainstream media either ignores or is afraid to bring to light. Every week, Dave will bring featured guests to WAAM’s Operating Room that have a background in health care, economics, finance, and geo-politics discussing current events. When the listener “leaves the operating room,” they are better off and on the road to a better life.

Reflections on 9/11’s Vulnerabilities by Michael Cutler

United We Stand 911.


Editor’s Note: Preamble and article from our great friend and regular SUA contributor Michael Cutler, a retired Senior Special Agent of the former INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) whose career spanned some 30 years. He has testified before well over a dozen congressional hearings, provided testimony to the 9/11 Commission as well as state legislative hearings around the United States and at trials where immigration is at issue.

From Michael Cutler, Special Agent INS :


As a New Yorker, on that horrific day, my country and my home town were attacked.  On that day the ashes from the conflagration at what would come to be known as “Ground Zero” fluttered down on my neighborhood in Brooklyn and contained, in part, the ashes of my neighbors.

I had participated in a Congressional hearing about the vulnerabilities that visa fraud and immigration benefit fraud create for the United States at a House Immigration Subcommittee hearing on May 20, 1997, roughly four and a half years prior to the attacks of 9/11.  That hearing was one of a number of hearings that were predicated on two terror attacks conducted on American soil in 1993 by radical Islamist aliens who had gamed the visa process and the immigration benefits program- including the amnesty of 1986.

 The rage I experienced on 9/11 has not dimmed in the years that followed because those very same vulnerabilities are not still an issue- but have actually been exacerbated by the failures of our government to secure our nation’s borders and effectively enforce our immigration laws.

In fact, the 9/11 Commission, to which I provided testimony, made it clear that failures of the immigration system, including the adjudication of visa applications and the adjudication of applications for immigration benefits enabled terrorists to enter the United States and embed themselves.

Those processes and other components of the immigration system still fail abysmally to protect America and Americans.

These failures are my focus today.

I ask that if you like my commentary that you forward it – and this e-mail, to as many folks as you can.

As Americans, irrespective of race, religion or ethnicity, we are in this battle for survival together.  This is not about being a Democrat, a Republican, a Conservative or a Liberal.  It is not about being an Independent.  This is about being an American!

Those who advocate for the effective enforcement of our immigration laws are not “Anti-Immigrant” but are “Pro-Enforcement.”  To be “Pro-Enforcement” is taking a “Pro-Immigrant” position because under our current immigration laws our nation admits more lawful immigrants than all of the other countries on this planet.  Our immigration laws are utterly blind as to race, religion and ethnicity and must finally be effectively enforced!

Tactics of intimidation and deceptive use of language are the stock and trade of the open border anarchists. Anyone who would dare to suggest that our government must exercise caution in admitting aliens in the United States to protect the safety and security of America and Americans are quickly branded “racist” and “nativist”. Their objective is to shut down debate and discourse – the hallmarks of true democracies.

Americans must be willing to stand their ground and not be intimidated by false accusations – far too much hangs in the balance! Many people have come to complain that we have become too “Politically Correct” to speak the truth about important issues. My view is that the artful use of language that has been described as examples of political correctness are in fact, examples of Orwellian “Newspeak”.


Editor’s Note: Michael’s reminder about what happens with weak access control:

Reflections on 9/11’s Vulnerabilities

The failures that proved key factors in the attacks — and how Obama has exacerbated them.

September 9, 2016

Michael Cutler




It is hard to believe that 15 years have passed since the terror attacks of September 11, 2001.

What may be overlooked as the news media discusses the attacks of 9/11 is that in 1993, more than 23 years ago, terrorists from the Middle East also carried out two deadly attacks in the United States.

On January 25, 1993 a Pakistani citizen, Mir Aimal Kansi stood outside CIA Headquarters with an AK-47 and opened fire on the vehicles of CIA officials reporting for work.  When the smoke cleared, two CIA officer lay dead and three other were seriously wounded.  Kansi fled the United States and was ultimately brought back to stand trial.  He was found guilty and executed for his crimes. He had applied for political asylum.

Kansi’s strategy of fleeing the United States after the attack is one often used by alien terrorists and criminals to evade U.S. law enforcement authorities.  These foreign nationals have a sort of “trap door” they can escape through and all too often, this tactic is successful. In the case of Kansi, however, because of the nature of his crimes, our government took the extraordinary measures of tracking him down and capturing him in Pakistan.  He was apprehended by American law enforcement agents who were assisted by Pakistani officials. The New York Times reported on his capture in an article published on June 18, 1997, “U.S. Seizes the Lone Suspect In Killing of 2 C.I.A. Officers.”

On February 26, 1993, a bomb-laden truck was parked in the garage under the World Trade Center complex and detonated. The blast killed six innocent people and injured more than one thousand and inflicted an estimated one-half billion dollars in damages to that complex of buildings just blocks from Wall Street.

That attack was also carried out by alien terrorists who managed to not only game the visa process in order to enter the United States and get past the inspections process at ports of entry, but game the immigration benefits program as well.

On May 20, 1997, I participated in my first congressional hearing. That hearing was conducted by the House Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims and was predicated on those two terror attacks.  The topic of that hearing was “Visa Fraud And Immigration Benefits Application Fraud.”

There were a number of additional hearings conducted by the House of Representatives and the United States Senate about the terror attacks of 1993 and fact that aliens seeking to launch terror attacks had been easily able to gain entry into the United States.

On February 24, 1998, just two days shy of the fifth anniversary of the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the U.S. Senate’s Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism and Government Information conducted a hearing on the topic, “Foreign terrorists in America : five years after the World Trade Center.”

That transcript and the transcript of other hearings have apparently been gathering dust. The hearing made it clear that failures of the immigration system were leaving our nation vulnerable to terrorists from foreign countries and yet, nothing of consequence was done about it.

It is notable that during the hearing Senator Dianne Feinstein hammered failures of the immigration system more than three years before the attacks of September 11, 2001 and included in her testimony this statement:

I am also concerned that we need to strengthen further our immigration laws and procedures to counter foreign terrorist operations. I have grave reservations regarding the practice of issuing visas to terrorist supporting countries and INS’ inability to track those who come into the country either using a student visa or using fraudulent documents through the Visa Waiver Pilot Program.

Now, however, when Donald Trump proposes blocking the entry of aliens from countries that sponsor terrorism, he is roundly accused of being an “extremist” by the media and by the Democrats.

Yet Senator Diane Feinstein’s comments about the wisdom of issuing visas to aliens from such problematic countries raised no such complaints in 1998.

Feinstein went on to state, in part:

The Richmond Times recently reported that the mastermind of Saddam Hussein’s germ warfare arsenal, Rihab Taha, studied in England on a student visa. And England is one of the participating countries in the Visa Waiver Pilot Program, which means, if she could have gotten a fraudulent passport, she could have come and gone without a visa in the United States.

The article also says that Rihab Taha, also known as “Dr. Germ,” that her professors at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, speculate that she may have been sent to the West specifically to gain knowledge on biological weaponry.

What is even more disturbing is that this is happening in our own backyard.

The Washington Post reported on October 31, 1991, that U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq discovered documents detailing an Iraqi Government strategy to send students to the United States and other countries to specifically study nuclear-related subjects to develop their own program. Samir AJ-Araji was one of the students who received his doctorate in nuclear engineering from Michigan State University, and then returned to Iraq to head its nuclear weapons program.

The Washington Institute for Near Eastern Policy found in September 1997 that many terrorist-supporting states are sending their students to the United States to get training in chemistry, physics, and engineering which could potentially contribute to their home country’s missile and nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs.

If you think these issues have been addressed to protect us, you would be wrong.

On November 20, 2013, ABC News reported, “Exclusive: US May Have Let ‘Dozens’ of Terrorists Into Country As Refugees.”  This is not a new problem. On July 13, 2011 the Washington Times published a truly disturbing article, “Visas reviewed to find those who overstayed / Aim is to find any would-be terrorists.”

Consider that on September 2, 2014 ABC News reported, “Lost in America: Visa Program Struggles to “Track Missing Foreign Students.”

Here is how this report began:

The Department of Homeland Security has lost track of more than 6,000 foreign nationals who entered the United States on student visas, overstayed their welcome, and essentially vanished — exploiting a security gap that was supposed to be fixed after the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks. 

“My greatest concern is that they could be doing anything,” said Peter Edge, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement official who oversees investigations into visa violators. “Some of them could be here to do us harm.” 

Homeland Security officials disclosed the breadth of the student visa problem in response to ABC News questions submitted as part of an investigation into persistent complaints about the nation’s entry program for students. 

ABC News found that immigration officials have struggled to keep track of the rapidly increasing numbers of foreign students coming to the U.S. — now in excess of one million each year. The immigration agency’s own figures show that 58,000 students overstayed their visas in the past year. Of those, 6,000 were referred to agents for follow-up because they were determined to be of heightened concern. 

“They just disappear,” said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla. “They get the visas and they disappear.” 

Coburn said since the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks, 26 student visa holders have been arrested in the U.S. on terror-related charges. 

Tightening up the student visa program was one of the major recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission, after it was determined that the hijacker who flew Flight 77 into the Pentagon, Hani Hanjour, had entered the U.S. on a student visa but never showed up for school. 

It was clear to everyone that multiple failures of the immigration system enabled all of those terrorists to enter the United States and launch their deadly attacks in 1993.  Yet while some laws were enacted to address the vulnerabilities of the immigration system, those laws were of scant value because the former INS did not get any additional agents or other enforcement personnel.  In fact, the Clinton administration implemented a program, Citizenship USA (CUSA), which enabled an estimated 1.2 million aliens to acquire U.S. citizenship via the naturalization process.

That process required that the applications be moved so quickly that thousands of aliens were granted citizenship before their fingerprints were run through the system.  Moreover, to make certain that the bureaucratic machinery was able to move at “warp speed,” Doris Meissner, the Commissioner of the INS back then, decided to streamline the process for conferring citizenship to the point that many applications were adjudicated without even a face-to-face interview.

U.S. citizenship provides the “keys to the kingdom” and is a serious matter.

The failures of the Clinton administration to address the vulnerabilities of the immigration system literally and figuratively left the door wide open for the terror attacks of 9/11.

On December 6, 2014 Fox News published a report, “Saudi-born US naval engineer allegedly gave undercover agent info on how to sink carrier” that focused on how Mostafa Ahmed Awwad was educated in the United States, became a resident alien and then acquired U.S. citizenship, and later agreed to provide an FBI undercover agent with the plans of the Gerald R. Ford, a 13-billion-dollar aircraft carrier that is still under construction and has brand-new unique innovations. Allegedly Awwad even told the undercover agent where the ship would be most vulnerable to being sunk by a missile strike.

I addressed the significance of the naturalization process in terms of national security in my article, “The Immigration Factor – Naturalized U.S. Citizen Added to FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorists List.”

The “War on Terror” grinds on and numerous additional terror attacks were attempted by radical Islamists within our borders and in countries around the world.  Fortunately not all of the attempted attacks were successful and our law enforcement officers were able to identify some terror plots before they could be carried out.  Yet some attacks, such as the Boston Marathon bombing of April 15, 2013 and the attack in San Bernardino on December 2, 2015, caused death, injuries and mayhem.

Once again, immigration failures were behind the ability of the terrorists to carry out these and other attacks.  Yet the administration continues to admit Syrian refugees who cannot be vetted, and so-called “sanctuary cities” go unpunished for harboring and shielding illegal aliens from detection by the federal government, in clear violation of our immigration laws and the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

The 9/11 Commission Staff Report on Terrorist Travel detailed numerous examples of instances where terrorists committed visa and immigration benefit fraud — including political asylum fraud — to enter and embed themselves in the United States.

Page 54 of the report contained the following excerpt under the title “3.2 Terrorist Travel Tactics by Plot”:

Although there is evidence that some land and sea border entries (of terrorists) without inspection occurred, these conspirators mainly subverted the legal entry system by entering at airports.

In doing so, they relied on a wide variety of fraudulent documents, on aliases, and on government corruption. Because terrorist operations were not suicide missions in the early to mid-1990s, once in the United States terrorists and their supporters tried to get legal immigration status that would permit them to remain here, primarily by committing serial, or repeated, immigration fraud, by claiming political asylum, and by marrying Americans. Many of these tactics would remain largely unchanged and undetected throughout the 1990s and up to the 9/11 attack.

Thus, abuse of the immigration system and a lack of interior immigration enforcement were unwittingly working together to support terrorist activity. It would remain largely unknown, since no agency of the United States government analyzed terrorist travel patterns until after 9/11. This lack of attention meant that critical opportunities to disrupt terrorist travel and, therefore, deadly terrorist operations were missed.

In my recent commentary, “Hillary Clinton’s Immigration Goals Would Irrevocably Undermine National Security,” I focused on how the fatally flawed adjudications process conducted by USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services), which has provided terrorists with political asylum and even United States citizenship, would require the beleaguered employees of USCIS to provide unknown millions of illegal aliens with lawful status under the aegis of Clinton’s amnesty program.

There would be no ability to conduct in-person interviews or field investigations, hence no way to verify their identities, backgrounds or possible affiliation with criminal or terrorist organizations.  There would be no way to determine when, where or how they actually entered the United States.

Ms. Clinton has certainly not learned the lessons of 9/11.


Article here








America First Million Member Sign-Up

Please join us in our commitment to promote American exceptionalism, freedom, our Constitution,  our American way of life, and our safety and security by making a donation and subscribing to our periodic newsletters and messages by donating below.

Sign up


A is fore.



The Clinton Revelations That Must Not Disappear as the News Cycle Changes

Editor’s Note: Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely served 32 years in the Army, having retired as Deputy Commanding General, US Army, Pacific.

The Clinton Revelations That Must Not Disappear as the News Cycle Changes

By Paul Vallely, MG U.S. Army (ret)

The Federal Bureau of Investigation tried to bury the news on the Friday before Labor Day weekend; a major measuring stick for the Trump campaign will be how much they can get the revelations into the post-holiday-weekend news cycle.

Among the revelations . . .

1. The FBI investigation began because of a referral from the U.S. Intelligence Community Inspector General. This is not the vast right-wing conspiracy or one of Hillary Clinton’s partisan foes; the IG’s office is staffed by those whose professional duty is to protect our nation’s secrets. Looking at the evidence, they grew concerned that a crime may have or is likely to have been committed. The inspector general, I. Charles McCullough, III, is career law enforcement: FBI, Department of the Treasury, NSA.

2. The FBI cannot prove conclusively that hostile foreign actors accessed her server; but they did find that “hostile foreign actors successfully gained access to the personal e-mail accounts of individuals with whom Clinton was in regular contact and, in doing so, obtained e-mails sent to or received by Clinton on that personal account.”

3. As we all know, Clinton claimed she used the private server for “convenience” because she only wanted to use one device. The FBI found 13 total mobile devices used to send e-mails; they asked for them and Clinton’s lawyers said they could not locate any of those devices. The FBI identified five iPads used by Clinton; three were turned over to the FBI. Hillary’s Blackberry phones were off-the-shelf from AT&T stores around the Washington, D.C. area. Apparently Clinton didn’t like upgrades; “According to Abedin, it was not uncommon for Clinton to use a new Blackberry for a few days and then immediately switch it out for an older version with which she was more familiar.”

No one knows where the old phones are; in two instances, her phones were destroyed with a hammer. This means there are eleven or so mobile phones with God knows how much classified information on them effectively missing.

4. Clinton was obligated to get permission to use her personal device; at no time did she do so. Everything she has said about her use of the personal device being permitted is completely false.

5. “State employees alleged that John Bentel, [a senior State Department official, handling IT for senior officials] discouraged employees from raising concerns about Clinton’s use of personal e-mail.” When interviewed by the FBI, Bentel denied anyone raising any concerns, that he had discouraged anyone from raising those concerns, or that he was aware she was using a personal account for State business. This seems implausible. As Clinton herself said to the FBI, it was common knowledge among State Department employees.

6. This should be thrown in the face of any Clinton defender who cites Colin Powell as an exculpatory witness:

7. “In 2011, a notice to all State employees was sent on Clinton’s behalf, which recommended employees avoid conducting State business on personal e-mail accounts due to information security concerns.” Clinton said she didn’t recall sending that notice or ever getting any advice on using personal accounts.
Clinton told the FBI she could not recall or not remember 39 times.
Here’s the really galling part, considering the screams of outrage that greet any comment about Clinton’s age or health in this election cycle:

CLINTON stated she received no instructions or direction regarding the preservation or production of records from State during the transition out of her role as Secretary of State in early 2013. However, in December of 2012, CLINTON suffered a concussion and then around the New Year had a blood clot. Based on her doctor’s advice, she could only work at State for a few hours a day and could not recall every briefing she received. CLINTON did not have any discussions with aides about turning over her email records, nor did anyone from State request them. She believed her work-related emails were captured by her practice of sending email to the email address of her staff. CLINTON was unaware of the requirement to turn over printed records at that time. Her physical records were boxed up and handled by aides.

Ace of Spades noticed, “Hillary’s Brain Damage came right at the sweet spot: It came to provide her an alibi, then left just in time to permit her to be president.”

Jeryl Bier reminds everyone that Hillary really cannot offer this excuse because she signed official documents affirming she had been properly briefed:

The second paragraph of the Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement—which she signed on January 22, 2009—states that “I hereby acknowledge that I have received a security indoctrination concerning the nature and protection of classified information.” And the form also notes that classified information is not always so marked, but is still regulated by the agreement.

Obviously, you should be reading everything Andy McCarthy writes on issues of national security and the Clintons, and he points out that her excuses were nonsensical:

For example, when asked about an email chain containing the symbol “(C)” — meaning “confidential,” a designation ubiquitous in classified documents — Clinton claimed not to know what it meant and, according to the notes, “could only speculate it was referencing paragraphs marked in alphabetical order.” This is a response so absurd as to be insulting (the interview notes do not tell us if the FBI asked her to find (A), (B) and (D) notations that would be necessary to have the “alphabetical order” story make sense — assuming, for argument’s sake that one would indulge the possibility that this could be a truthful answer from a classified information consumer as high-level as Clinton).



America First Million Member Sign-Up

Please join us in our commitment to promote American exceptionalism, freedom, our Constitution,  our American way of life, and our safety and security by making a donation and subscribing to our periodic newsletters and messages by donating below.

Sign up



Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy Looking through the smokescreen.

Editor’s Note: A great article from our great friend and regular SUA Contributor, Fred Gedrich and our friends at The Washington Times.

Fred Gedrich is a foreign policy and national security analyst. He served in the U.S. departments of State and Defense.

The Clinton Foreign Policy Brand is not a REAL AMERICAN BRAND. Since Bosnia, Rwanda, Somalia, Haiti, and Syria, it has been one of carnage, culling, and capitulation. It is not one that secures freedom, but one that crushes out the breath of freedom.

We must ask ourselves the question: Is this what American citizens want our foreign policy to be associated with now and in the future?







Looking through the smokescreen

Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy record deserves scrutiny

By Fred Gedrich –
Monday, September 5, 2016


Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, her allies, and others have declared Donald Trump unfit for the presidency because of his lack of national security credentials. American voters should carefully look through that smokescreen to see the global damage resulting from President Barack Obama and Secretary Clinton’s “smart” foreign policies, and how she behaved in office before casting their presidential ballots.

On the surface, Mrs. Clinton’s resume appears impressive. She served the nation as first lady for eight years, as twice-elected U.S. senator from New York for eight years, and as the 67th U.S. Secretary of State during President Barack Obama’s first term for four years. She is also the first woman ever nominated for the presidency by a major political party. And, if elected, she would become the first secretary of state to be elected president since James Buchanan in 1856.

As U.S. senator, her most important and controversial votes were in favor of the Afghanistan and Iraq war resolutions. Those wars, to date, have resulted in 6,888 American troop fatalities, 49,897 American troop injuries, at an estimated cost to the American taxpayer of between $4-6 trillion. And despite the enormous American sacrifice of blood and treasure during the Bush and Obama administrations, these two nations remain among the most dangerous places on earth, infested with radical Islamic terrorists who continue to threaten U.S. citizens and U.S. national security.

As secretary of State (the executive branch of U.S. Government’s third highest position after the president and vice president), Mrs. Clinton dutifully carried out President Obama’s foreign policies and served as a key member of his National Security Council, providing advice and assistance to him on the most important and urgent foreign policies and national security matters. She promised to move the country in a new direction with “smart” foreign policies designed to make the United States more secure and the world more peaceful.

Some significant examples of where those policies led and how she handled her secretary of state duties follow:

  • The 2016 Institute for Economics and Peace’s Global Peace Index Report provides an assessment of the current global landscape. It shows a decade-long decline in peace with terrorism at an all-time high, battle deaths from conflict at a 25 year high, and the number of refugees and displaced people at a level not seen in sixty years. Since 2009, terrorism-related deaths have more than tripled; battle deaths from conflict have more than tripled; and refugees and internally displaced persons almost doubled to 60 million people.
  • The 2016 U.S. State Department’s 2016 annual report on terrorism lists 59 foreign terrorist organizations (about 75 percent of them which gestated and operate in Muslim-majority countries) that threaten U.S. citizens and security — a growth of 34 percent since its 2009 report. IntelCent (a private firm which collects and disseminates up-to-date global terrorist activity) currently ranks Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Turkey, Pakistan, Libya and Somalia as the world’s most dangerous countries, and the Islamic State (which evolved from al Qaeda in Iraq) and the Taliban among the most dangerous terror groups.
  • The 2016 Freedom House reports on global and press freedom shows that global freedom declined for the 10th consecutive year and that press freedom at its lowest point in 12 years. Of the world’s 7.3 billion people, only 40 percent live in freedom and only 13 percent enjoy a free press.
  • The Federal Bureau of Investigations and State Department Inspector General officially confirmed in 2016 that Secretary Clinton used an unauthorized private, unsecure computer system to store official government communications, some containing very sensitive, highly classified information. Use of the private system prevented Congress from promptly overseeing, and the media from legitimately reporting on, her official activities and possibly exposed U.S. state secrets to skilled Chinese, Russian, Iranian, and North Korean cyber-thieves engaged in espionage.
  • The Associated Press recently reported that more than half the people (85 of 154) outside the government who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of State gave a total about $156 million — either personally or through companies or groups to her family’s Clinton Foundation. She also met with at least 16 representatives of foreign governments who gave another $170 million to it. The revelation raises serious ethical and conflicting interest issues.

In sum, Hillary Clinton has wrapped herself in President Obama’s foreign policy mantle to facilitate her rise to the presidency. However, that mantle and the ‘smart’ policies it purports to represent have made the world more dangerous and less free. And her conduct as secretary of state arguably shows someone who may have placed her self-interests above the nation’s best interests.

Conversely, successful international businessman and non-politician Donald Trump offers American voters a new direction away from the failed President Obama and Secretary Clinton globalist policies, and the established D.C. national security and crony capitalism order which have caused U.S. and global security so much harm. The world will be anxiously awaiting the voters decision on which way America will go.

Fred Gedrich is a foreign policy and national security analyst. He served in the U.S. departments of State and Defense.
Article here








America First Million Member Sign-Up

Please join us in our commitment to promote American exceptionalism, freedom, our Constitution,  our American way of life, and our safety and security by making a donation and subscribing to our periodic newsletters and messages by donating below.

Sign up