London’s Crime is Surging and 80 Terrorists to be Released

UK terror attacks: Spike in hate crimes against Muslims ...

photo

London’s Mayor, Sadiq Khan is under fire for the growing crime in his city. How can the murder rate be higher than in New York?

As of March, London accounted for 17 percent of all recorded crime in England and Wales in the year prior, as well as 42 percent of all recorded robberies. A third of all knife crime took place in London as well.

London temporarily overtook New York in the number of murders in early 2018. In February, London’s police investigated 15 murders while New York saw 11 homicides. In March, the Metropolitan Police murder numbers increased further to 22, while the NYPD’s jumped to 21. New York has since recorded more murders.

Remember those Beatles, ISIS suspects? Well, Britain’s Home Office has suspended cooperation with the United States in extraditing them mostly due to the death penalty.

FILE PHOTO: A combination picture shows Alexanda Kotey and Shafee Elsheikh, who the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) claim are British nationals, in these undated handout pictures in Amouda

A combination picture shows Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh, who the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) identified as British nationals, in undated handout pictures in Amouda, Syria, released February 9, 2018 by the Syrian Democratic Forces.HANDOUT/REUTERS

 

Dozens of convicted terrorists are about to be released

BRITAIN is bracing itself, with 80 terrorists expected to be free to walk the streets by Christmas — and that’s not all the bad news.

AS MANY as 80 convicted terrorists will be free to roam British streets by the end of the year, including an Islamist preacher who urged people to join the Islamic State.

The extraordinary situation has arisen because about 40 per cent of the sentences for terrorism issued between 2007 and 2016 will have ended by Christmas — meaning police are powerless to stop them walking free.

Police and the government have admitted more resources will have to be pumped into keeping a close eye on the terrorists, at a time when resources are already stretched coping with a crime wave that has seen 80 killings in London so far this year.

UK Security Minister Ben Wallace said police would focus on getting them to “disengage” from extremism, but that would require a different approach than trying to prevent them being radicalised in the first place.

“It is a concern because what we are seeing nowadays is a large group of people who have effectively crossed the Rubicon to becoming radicalised. That is the mindset that they have now accepted or adapted,” he told BBC Radio.

To deal with the influx, police would be putting resources into efforts to “to try and make them disengage — that is slightly different from ‘deter them in the first place’ … and into how we effectively supervise them if they are released back into the community”.

That meant monitoring the terrorists, which inevitably would come at a cost both financial and through rediverting staff from other duties.

The actual number released could even be higher than 80, as some prisoners are eligible for release halfway through their sentences.

Those eligible for parole include Anjem Choudary, an Islamist preacher, who was jailed for five years in 2016 for inviting people to support Islamic State.

All the sentences given to people for financing terrorism, having terrorist information, or not disclosing information about terrorist acts, will have expired by the end of the year. Another two dozen will have lapsed by next year.

The discovery of the end of the sentences for 40 per cent of those issued between 2007-2016 was made by The Guardian last month. A former head of counter-terrorism, Richard Walton, told the paper the release of so many convicted terrorists was “worrying” — and any attempt to monitor them was “time-intensive” especially when the individuals knew they were being watched, so “often lie low for a period”.

Terrorist prisoners released on licence place a resource burden on both specialist counter-terrorism detectives and on mainstream policing. A risk-management process is used to monitor those released on licence and the monitoring of high-risk offenders is extremely resource-intensive.”

He went on to say: “Intelligence is often insufficient to gauge whether they have any intent to reoffend owing to their recent incarceration.”

That made monitoring them after their release even more difficult, especially as they were aware of the close attention security agencies were paying to them.

A program already exists to try to integrate terrorists back into the community, but so many returning to the community means extra vigilance will be needed.

To add to the problem the probation union has already warned its resources were stretched, while a 2016 review found extremism in British jails — where 700 inmates are considered to have extremist views — meant there was a real risk prisoners could be radicalised while they were behind bars.

News.com.au asked police what steps were being taken to ensure public safety given Mr Walton’s view and that of Mr Wallace, who believed there were challenges ahead.

A spokesman from the Met Police would only say they and intelligence agencies were working “tirelessly and at pace” to keep the public safe from terrorism.

“This includes monitoring and assessing existing and emerging threats and risks, including the release of convicted terrorists, and putting into place actions to mitigate them through a range of operations and activities.”

A Home Office spokesman told news.com.au national security would always be the government’s “main priority”.

“Terrorists released on licence are closely managed by the National Probation Service. They are subject to very restrictive licence conditions including, for example, living in approved premises; restrictions on movement and stringent curfews. Failure to adhere to conditions results in enforcement action, including prison recall.”

Terrorists are managed by multiple agencies and preparations begin months before their release. But the Home Office would not discuss specifics, and refused to say how many were being released.

“All offenders of extremist or terrorist concern are managed actively as part of a comprehensive counter-terrorism case management process. It would not be appropriate to release figures for how many of those offenders due to be released this year are deemed to be high risk.”

Since March last year there have been 12 terror plots thwarted and four other extreme far-right plots, and there can be up to 500 active investigations at any one time.

Meanwhile, this week a UK think tank urged the Government to replace laws surrounding treason that date back to 1351.

In a statement, Policy Exchange said a new treason law updated for modern times was needed, and argued a workable law of treason would mean offenders could be convicted and jailed for much longer.

“Many of them will … have betrayed this country. If they had been convicted of treason and imprisoned for life, the UK would be considerably safer,” the statement said.

Putin’s Threat During the Press Conf with President Trump

London – The Moscow lawyer said to have promised Donald Trump’s presidential campaign dirt on his Democratic opponent worked more closely with senior Russian government officials than she previously let on, according to documents reviewed by The Associated Press.

Scores of emails, transcripts and legal documents paint a portrait of Natalia Veselnitskaya as a well-connected attorney who served as a ghostwriter for top Russian government lawyers and received assistance from senior Interior Ministry personnel in a case involving a key client.

Politics: Natalia Veselnitskaya, Lawyer Who Met Trump Jr ... photo

The data was obtained through Russian opposition figure Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s London-based investigative unit, the Dossier Center, that is compiling profiles of Russians it accuses of benefiting from corruption. The data was later shared with journalists at the AP, the Swiss newspaper Tages-Anzeiger, Greek news website Inside Story and others.

Veselnitskaya has denied acting on behalf of Russian officialdom when she met with the Trump team, telling Congress that she operates “independently of any government bodies.”

But recent reporting has cast doubt on her story. In an April interview with NBC News, Veselnitskaya acknowledged acting as an “informant” for the Russian government after being confronted with an earlier batch of emails obtained through the Dossier Center.

Meanwhile, Putin carries through on those comments he made during the press conference with President Trump. More details below.

Translated: MOSCOW, July 17 – RIA Novosti. The Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation on Tuesday announced the names of American citizens who need to be interrogated in the case of the head of the Hermitage Capital foundation, William Browder, convicted in Russia. Among them, the head of the Office of the Prosecutor General’s Office, Alexander Kurennoy, called the former US Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul, several US intelligence personnel, two ex-assistants to the US Secretary of State, US financiers of the Siff brothers. The list also included an agent of the British Mi-6 Christopher Steel.

These names were announced by the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office the day after the Russia-US summit in Helsinki, where Russian President Vladimir Putin at a press conference asked US investigators to make inquiries to Russia for questioning 12 alleged Russian intelligence agents, “and maybe even come to Russia for survey “. At the same time, the Russian president stressed that then the American side expects similar steps on the principle of reciprocity: in response, the Russian side will wait that in the US in the presence of Russian investigators will question those individuals, including representatives of the US special services, whom Moscow suspects of committing crimes in the territory of the Russian Federation.

Earlier, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said that the US Justice Department put forward new charges against 12 Russians allegedly working for the GRU in the framework of the investigation conducted by the special prosecutor Robert Muller on the imputed Russian interference in the elections in the US.

Representatives of the State Department and special services

“We are ready to send another request to the US asking them to interrogate these people, as well as other employees of American special services, a number of state employees and entrepreneurs,” the head of the Office of the Prosecutor General’s Office, Alexander Kurennoy, told reporters.

Among American officials, whom Russia would like to interrogate in the case of the head of the Hermitage Capital foundation William Browder, Kurennoy called the former US ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul. He noted that under the leadership of McFaul “in 2009-2010, compiled a memorandum to the US State Department from Moscow on the progress of the investigation in the Magnitsky case.”

The head of the RF State Department also called the employees of the US National Security Agency Todd Hayman, Svetlana Engert and Alexander Shvartsman, CIA agent Jim Roth.

“These are the employees of the US National Security Agency Todd Hyman, he signed an oath to the US court on Browder’s words, Svetlana Engert – took the stolen materials of the criminal case from Russia, Alexander Shvartsman, took care of Browder during his stay in the US Jim Root, CIA agent , the financial manager of Browder, “- said Kurennoy.

The list includes two former assistants to the US Secretary of State, David Kramer and Jonathan Wiener, and Robert Otto, “until January 2017 – deputy head of the intelligence department of the US State Department, headed the Bureau of Intelligence and Research of the US Department of State on Russian domestic policy in the department for Russia and Eurasia” . In addition, the RF GP would like to interrogate and who was in 2009 an employee of the US Helsinki Commission Kayla Parker.

Browder’s “Trustees”

Kurennoy explained that the Prosecutor General’s Office wants to question the employees of the US special services who swore false allegations against businessman Denis Katsyv and guarded the head of the Hermitage Capital William Browder, convicted in the Russian Federation.

“As part of the investigation of one of the criminal cases against Browder, which continues to be investigated by the investigative authorities in Russia, and his criminal group, we are ready to send another request to our American colleagues in order to question these officers of the US intelligence services, a number of government employees, entrepreneurs and other persons involved to the illegal activities of Browder.All that I said above, we can confirm the documents, and if colleagues from the US will turn to us for relevant information, then we are within the framework of the international legal cooperation are ready to provide the necessary assistance and assistance, but I will emphasize on a parity basis, and not unilaterally, “Kurennoy said.

He added that they refer to those employees of the US special services who participated in the formation of false evidence of the guilt of the “citizen of Russia” in the US legal proceedings against Prevezon and took care of convicted businessman Browder.

Partners in crime

The list also includes American financiers brothers Ziff, whom the official spokesman of the RF State Duma called Browder’s “partners” for “criminal business.”

“They are recipients of illegal incomes, the Ziff brothers themselves, long-term partners in the criminal business of Browder,” Kurennoy said, referring to people whom he would like to interrogate the RF State Duma.

Not only Americans

Among those whom the Russian General Prosecutor’s Office would like to interrogate before the Browder case, not only US citizens, but also an employee of the British special service Mi-6 Christopher Steel.

“By the way, we have questions not only for US citizens, but I would also like to mention the employees of the special services of other countries who interacted with the people I mentioned earlier, for example, I would like to talk with Christopher Steele, an agent of the British Mi- 6. For a long period of time, he had contacts with a group of lobbyists of the “Magnitsky Act” and, interestingly, it was through this person that the very investigation of the special prosecutor (Robert) Müller, who is known as “Trump Dossier”, was initiated.

400 thousand instead of 400 million

Kurennoy also said that the criminal group Browder had withdrawn from Russia over 1.5 billion US dollars, of which about 400 thousand dollars, and not 400 million, as it was said earlier, fell on the accounts of the US Democratic Party.

“Browder’s criminal group with the help of offshore schemes withdrew money and shares from the Russian Federation for a total of more than $ 1.5 billion, of which $ 400,000 were transferred to the accounts of the Democratic Party,” he said.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said at a news conference on Monday after talks with US President Donald Trump in Helsinki that Browder’s business partners illegally earned more than $ 1.5 billion in Russia and sent $ 400 million to Hillary Clinton’s election campaign.

“Later, the president asked us to correct his reservation, which he made yesterday, not 400 million, but 400,000, but that’s quite a huge sum,” he said.

The Browder case

Browder is an international financier and investor, a former employer of the auditor Sergei Magnitsky. In 1995-2007, Browder was the largest foreign portfolio investor in Russia, now lives in London, Russia is declared an international wanted list.

In 2013, Browder was convicted in Russia for tax fraud. The court found that Magnitsky in the interests of Browder in 1997-2002 implemented an illegal scheme of tax evasion, using companies registered in Kalmykia and managed by Hermitage Capital. He is not going to return to Russia, so the verdict is in absentia – the opportunity to execute it will appear only if Browder is in Russia.

At the end of 2017, the Tverskoi Court of Moscow found Browder guilty of tax evasion and the bankruptcy of the Dalny Steppe enterprise, but did not tighten the sentence at the age of nine that was obtained under the previous sentence.

 

Mass Graves Covered up in Iran

Iran: Road to be built over individual and mass graves

The families of political dissidents who were forcibly disappeared and extrajudicially killed in Ahvaz, southern Iran, in the 1980s are suffering untold mental anguish and distress as the authorities are destroying the individual and mass graves of their loved ones. They are afraid of facing further persecution if they speak out.

***

Amnesty International reports that Iran’s regime is destroying a mass grave of the victims of the 1988 massacre. According to estimates from the opposition, these victims number in the 10s of 1000s (the vast majority from the MEK).

Meanwhile:

The Trump administration must now prepare for near-term Iranian terrorist attacks against the U.S. homeland, because the leader of Iran’s revolutionary guards, or IRGC, external action force gave a very aggressive speech on Thursday.

Addressing followers in the ancient city of Hamedan (a location probably chosen as a metaphor of Iranian durability), Qassem Soleimani warned Americans, “We are closer to you than what you think. You should know that I am your foe. The Quds Force alone and not all the Armed Forces is enough to be your rival. You are aware of Iran’s power in asymmetric war.”

Soleimani means for his words to be taken as references to terrorist attacks. In specific terms, IRGC modus operandi and tactical capability render “closer to you than what you think” and “asymmetric war” as references to Quds force attack cells and cyber-strike teams in the U.S. homeland, South America, and Europe.

But Soleimani wasn’t done there.

Again emphasizing “We are so close to you in places that you might not even think of,” Soleimani declared “You should know that there is not even a single night that we don’t think of destroying you.” Soleimani also drew a sharp reference to his role subjecting U.S. forces in Iraq to explosively formed penetrator attacks, stating “”have you forgotten when you had provided adult-size diapers for your battle tank crews?” EFP attacks killed hundreds of Americans and wounded many more.

Soleimani loved the EFPs for their brutality. In David Finkel’s The Good Soldiers, we hear about U.S. Army Specialist Joshua Reeves, whose vehicle was hit by an EFP in Baghdad. Reeves “wasn’t breathing, his eyes weren’t moving, his left foot was gone, his backside was ripped open, his stomach was filling with blood …” Reeves died the same day that his wife had told him that she had given birth.

And in a reference to Iranian martyrdom ideology, deeply vested in the revolution’s theological appropriation of the Battle of Karbala, Soleimani concluded, “We are thirsty for martyrdom and annihilation of arrogant powers.”

He wants the U.S. to know the IRGC will proudly die for their cause.

The U.S. may now have to help them on that course, because the U.S. must respond deliberately to this speech.

First off, President Trump should recognize that the Iranians aren’t playing around here. Soleimani has the pedigree to render very bloody terrorist attacks into action. He also has no qualms about massacring U.S. civilians (the Quds force nearly blew up a Washington, D.C., restaurant in 2011) and recently tried to blow up a Paris conference attended by U.S. officials. Indeed, Soleimani’s words exemplify why we argued this week that Trump must be more focused in his red-line warnings to Iran.

But what specifically should be done?

Both Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo should take the lead in warning that any terrorist attacks on the U.S. will result in two immediate effects.

First, aggressive U.S. military strikes on IRGC infrastructure belonging to the Quds force and the IRGC at large. Pompeo’s role is important here because the former CIA director took a tough line against the IRGC, and Soleimani knows he means business.

Second, the U.S. should make clear that Soleimani and his senior leadership figures will be personally targeted. While some, like former Obama administration official Tommy Vietor, believe such threats would be outrageous, it is important that the Iranian hardliners know any terrorist attacks will not meet a standard fare response. They must know that the U.S. will metaphorically gut them if they come for our citizens. If Soleimani and his cadre do not understand that U.S. deterrent posture, they will kill innocent Americans. Evidencing their willingness to up the ante, the Quds Force directed Houthi rebel forces in Yemen to target cargo vessels passing through the Red Sea on Wednesday.

But the Trump administration should also be clear about where this is heading. As it attempts to destabilize the Iranian regime with economic pressure, the Iranian regime is showing that it will not go down without a fight.

Ultimately, Qassem Soleimani’s threats should be taken very seriously. He is a skilled commander with significant terrorist capabilities and an ideologically vested hatred for America. He must be dealt with as such.

 

 

About that Time Obama Gave an AQ Affiliate Grant Money

There has been lots of chatter about removing the security clearance access of John Brennan and a few others. No one has asked about Hillary’s or…..Obama’s. There has been lots of chatter of impeachment, traitor and treason….but when it comes to aiding and supporting the enemy….check this out.

Grant money is a gift….by the way.

Islamic Relief Agency Admits Illegal Funds Transfer to ...

Islamic Relief Agency Admits Illegal Funds Transfer to ... story and photo, more detail here.

The Middle East Forum has discovered that the Obama administration approved a grant of $200,000 of taxpayer money to an al-Qaeda affiliate in Sudan — a decade after the U.S. Treasury designated it as a terrorist-financing organization. More stunningly, government officials specifically authorized the release of at least $115,000 of this grant even after learning that it was a designated terror organization.

The story began in October 2004, when the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated the Khartoum-based Islamic Relief Agency (ISRA), also known as the Islamic African Relief Agency (IARA), as a terror-financing organization. It did so because of ISRA’s links to Osama bin Laden and his organization Maktab al-Khidamat (MK), the precursor of al-Qaeda.

According to the U.S. Treasury, in 1997 ISRA established formal cooperation with MK. By 2000, ISRA had raised $5 million for bin Laden’s group. The Treasury Department notes that ISRA officials even sought to help “relocate [bin Laden] to secure safe harbor for him.” It further reports that ISRA raised funds in 2003 in Western Europe specifically earmarked for Hamas suicide bombings.

The 2004 designation included all of ISRA’s branches, including a U.S. office called the Islamic American Relief Agency (IARA-USA). Eventually it became known that this American branch had illegally transferred over $1.2 million to Iraqi insurgents and other terror groups, including, reportedly, the Afghan terrorist Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. In 2010, the executive director of IARA-USA and a board member pled guilty to money-laundering, theft of public funds, conspiracy, and several other charges.

ISRA’s influence also spread to Washington. Former U.S. congressman Mark Siljander (R., Mich.) pled guilty in 2010 to obstruction of justice and acting as an unregistered foreign agent after prosecutors found that IARA-USA had paid him $75,000 — using misappropriated USAID grant money — to lobby the government, in an attempt to remove the charity from the government’s terror list.

Despite this well-documented history, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) in July 2014 awarded $723,405 to World Vision Inc., an international evangelical charity, to “improve water, sanitation and hygiene and to increase food security in Sudan’s Blue Nile state.” Of these funds, $200,000 was to be directed to a sub-grantee: ISRA.

Responding to a Middle East Forum (MEF) inquiry, a USAID official explains that World Vision had alerted it in November 2014 to the likelihood of ISRA being on the terror list. USAID instructed World Vision to “suspend all activities with ISRA” and informed the State Department, OFAC, and USAID’s Office of the Inspector General. USAID and World Vision then waited for OFAC to confirm whether ISRA was designated or not.

USAID emails obtained by the Middle East Forum reveal that in January 2015, World Vision was growing unhappy while waiting for OFAC’s assessment. Mark Smith, World Vision’s senior director of humanitarian and emergency affairs, wrote to USAID, stating that the Islamic Relief Agency “had performed excellent work” for World Vision in the past, and that “putting contractual relationships in limbo for such a long period is putting a significant strain” on World Vision’s relationship with the Sudanese regime. Smith also revealed that World Vision had submitted a notice to OFAC indicating its “intention to restart work with [ISRA] and to transact with [ISRA]” if OFAC did not respond within a week.

World Vision’s statement stunned USAID officials, who complained that World Vision’s behavior “doesn’t make sense.” USAID official Daniel Holmberg emailed a colleague: “If they actually said that they wanted to resume work with ISRA, while knowing that it was 99% likely that ISRA was on the list then I am concerned about our partnership with them, and whether it should continue.”

On January 23, OFAC confirmed that ISRA was a sanctioned entity and denied World Vision “a license to engage in transactions with [ISRA].” Mark Smith and World Vision’s country program director in Sudan expressed their disappointment, stating that they were in discussions with ISRA as well as the Sudanese regime’s Humanitarian Aid Commission, which regulates the activities of international charities in Sudan.

Despite OFAC’s ruling, in February, World Vision wrote to OFAC and Obama-administration official Jeremy Konyndyk (who then served as director of USAID’s Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance) to apply to OFAC for a new license from USAID to pay ISRA “monies owed for work performed.” According to Larry Meserve, USAID’s mission director for Sudan, World Vision argued that if they did not pay ISRA, “their whole program will be jeopardized.”

While World Vision waited for a decision, on February 22, a pro-regime Sudanese newspaper, Intibaha, reported that the Sudanese political leaders had requested that World Vision be expelled from Sudan’s Blue Nile state. USAID disaster operations specialist Joseph Wilkes and World Vision’s Mark Smith speculated that this was “punishment” for the cancellation of the grant with ISRA, which a USAID official noted is “well connected with the [Sudanese] government.”

Then, incredibly, on May 7, 2015 — after “close collaboration and consultations with the Department of State” — OFAC issued a license to a World Vision affiliate, World Vision International, authorizing “a one-time transfer of approximately $125,000 to ISRA,” of which “$115,000 was for services performed under the sub-award with USAID” and $10,000 was “for an unrelated funding arrangement between Irish Aid and World Vision.”

An unnamed World Vision official described the decision as a “great relief as ISRA had become restive and had threatened legal action, which would have damaged our reputation and standing in Sudan.” Senior USAID official Charles Wanjue wrote to colleagues: “Good news and a great relief, really!” In August 2015, USAID official Daniel Holmberg even told a State Department official that he had been approached by the executive director of ISRA, and requested guidance on helping ISRA remove itself from the U.S. government’s terror list.

Obama-administration officials knowingly approved the transfer of taxpayer dollars to an al-Qaeda affiliate, and not an obscure one but an enormous international network that was often in the headlines.

How was this prominent terror funder initially approved to receive American taxpayer funds ten years after it had been placed on the “Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons” terror list?

Existing measures to prevent the payment of government monies to designated terrorist organizations include: first, a requirement that all grantees and sub-grantees of U.S.-government grants register for a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number; and second, a requirement that all government vendors register with the government’s System for Award Management (SAM) database. A designated organization should not be able to acquire a DUNS number, and any designation is explicitly recorded in the SAM database with a note that the designated organization is excluded from government grants.

However, ISRA was in fact assigned a DUNS number — as recorded at the government’s USAspending.gov website — which matched no organization in the government’s SAM database. The only listings for “Islamic Relief Agency” or “ISRA” in the SAM database are the designated Sudanese al-Qaeda affiliate and its branches.

Whoever approved this grant to ISRA either failed to check the government’s database of designated groups or did so and then chose to disregard it. Both explanations are alarming. And neither answer explains how ISRA acquired a DUNS number.

Most important: Now we know that the government deliberately chose to transfer at least $115,000 to ISRA after confirming that it was on the terror-designation list. In other words, an al-Qaeda front received taxpayers’ money with the apparent complicity of public officials.

It is no secret that the Obama administration sought to downplay the threat of Islamism, and even to coopt some Islamist movements to promote its agenda. In its foreign policy, the administration expressed support for Mohamed Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt, while domestically, the White House invited Islamists to design the government’s Countering Violent Extremism program. It is difficult to argue that these efforts were the product of anything but great naïveté and political dogma. Is it possible that this combination extended to deliberately funding an al-Qaeda affiliate?

Congress must investigate this question and, more broadly, where USAID is sending taxpayers’ money, for ISRA might not be the only example. The House’s Foreign Affairs, Oversight, and Financial Services Committees, along with the Senate Finance Committee, must examine how a designated group came to qualify for government monies, why OFAC and the State Department authorized the transfer of funds after learning of ISRA’s terror ties, and which bureaucrat or political appointee was responsible for this mess.

Asked to comment, current State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert told National Review: “As this occurred under the prior Administration, the current Secretary of the State, Secretary of Treasury, and USAID Administrator had no involvement in decisions surrounding this award or subsequent license.”

The American people need to know how their dollars funded an al-Qaeda affiliate. They need to know how deep this problem runs.

*** Millions upon millions come to mind shrink-wrapped on pallets on un-marked airplanes to Tehran comes to mind actually.