Obama to Veto the bill Authorizing Lawsuits Against Saudi Arabia

Posted on September 12, 2016September 12, 2016 by Denise Simon

It was thought that declassifying and releasing those 28 pages of the 9/11 Commission report would produce the smoking gun that Saudi Arabia was exclusively behind the attacks. While there were some interesting facts and connections, the real proof was not there. In the first order of business since the return from summer break, the House voted along with the Senate approving legislation where victims’ families could sue Saudi Arabia. This puts, Barack Obama in a precarious position with regard to his veto pen. Does he stand with the families or with Saudi Arabia?

We have the answer according to Josh Earnest, the White House spokesperson:

Screen Shot 2016-09-12 at 3.44.01 PM

“That is still the plan. The president does plan to veto this legislation,” press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters. “I do anticipate the president will veto the legislation when it is presented to him. It hasn’t been presented to him yet.”

The Press Secretary reiterated the White House’s concerns with passing the bill saying, “It’s not hard to imagine other countries using this law as an excuse to haul U.S. diplomats or U.S. service members or even U.S. companies into courts all around the world.”

“The president believes that it’s important to look out for our country, to look out for our service members, to look out for these diplomats and allowing this bill to come into law would increase the risk that it would face,” he continued. More here.

It was al Qaeda that struck America 15 years ago for sure, but Iran and Saudi Arabia had is some measure a hand in training, financial support and harboring key al Qaeda operatives. Meanwhile, the al Qaeda operation is still quite functional and not to be dismissed or under-estimated.

In part from the LWJ: Some US officials argue that al Qaeda has been “decimated” because of the drone campaign and counterterrorism raids. They narrowly focus on the leadership layer of al Qaeda, while ignoring the bigger picture. But even their analysis of al Qaeda’s managers is misleading.

Al Qaeda has lost dozens of key men, but there is no telling how many veterans remain active to this day. Experienced operatives continue to serve in key positions, often returning to the fight after being detained or only revealing their hidden hand when it becomes necessary. Moreover, al Qaeda knew it was going to lose personnel and took steps to groom a new generation of jihadists capable of filling in.

From left to right: Saif al Adel, Abu Mohammed al Masri and Abu Khayr al Masri. These photos, first published by the FBI and US intelligence officials, show the al Qaeda leaders when they were younger.Last year, several veterans were reportedly released from Iran, where they were held under murky circumstances. One of them was Abu Khayr al Masri, who paved the way for Al Nusrah’s rebranding in July. Another is Saif al Adel, who has long been wanted for his role in the 1998 US Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. At least two others freed by Iran, Abu Mohammed al Masri and Khalid al Aruri, returned to al Qaeda as well.

Masri, Al Adel, and Aruri may all be based inside Syria, or move back and forth to the country from Turkey, where other senior members are based. Mohammed Islambouli is an important leader within al Qaeda. After leaving Iran several years ago, Islambouli returned to Egypt and eventually made his way to Turkey, where he lives today.

Sitting to Julani’s right during his much ballyhooed announcement was one of Islambouli’s longtime compatriots, Ahmed Salama Mabrouk. The diminutive Mabrouk is another Zawahiri subordinate. He was freed from an Egyptian prison in the wake of the 2011 uprisings.

Al Qaeda moved some of its senior leadership to Syria and several others from this cadre are easy to identify. But al Qaeda has also relied on personnel in Yemen to guide its global network. One of Zawahiri’s lieutenants, Hossam Abdul Raouf, confirmed this in an audio message last October. Raouf explained that the “weight” of al Qaeda has been shifted to Syria and Yemen, because that is where its efforts are most needed.

The American drone campaign took out several key AQAP leaders in 2015, but they were quickly replaced. Qasim al Raymi, who was trained by al Qaeda in Afghanistan in the 1990s, succeeded Nasir al Wuhayshi as AQAP’s emir last summer. Raymi quickly renewed his allegiance to Zawahiri, whom Raymi described as the “the eminent sheikh” and “the beloved father.” Another al Qaeda lifer, Ibrahim Abu Salih, emerged from the shadows last year. Salih was not a public figure beforehand, but he has been working towards al Qaeda’s goals in Yemen since the early 1990s. Ibrahim al Qosi (an ex-Guantanamo detainee) and Khalid al Batarfi have stepped forward to lead AQAP and are probably also part of al Qaeda’s management team.

This old school talent has helped buttress al Qaeda’s leadership cadre. They’ve been joined by men who signed up for al Qaeda’s cause after the 9/11 attacks as well. In July, the US Treasury Department designated three jihadists who are based in Iran. One of them, known as Abu Hamza al Khalidi, was listed in bin Laden’s files as part of a “new generation” of al Qaeda leaders. Today, he plays a crucial role as the head of al Qaeda’s military commission, meaning he is the equivalent of al Qaeda’s defense minister. Treasury has repeatedly identified other al Qaeda members based in Iran, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Some members of the “new generation” are more famous than others. Such is the case with Osama’s son, Hamzah bin Laden, who is now regularly featured in propaganda.

This brief survey of al Qaeda is not intended to be exhaustive, yet it is still sufficient to demonstrate that the organization’s bench is far from empty. Moreover, many of the men who lead al Qaeda today are probably unknown to the public.

The threat to the West

Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee in February, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper warned that al Qaeda “nodes in Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Turkey” are “dedicating resources to planning attacks.” His statement underscored how the threats have become more geographically dispersed over time. With great success, the US worked for years to limit al Qaeda’s ability to strike the West from northern Pakistan. But today, al Qaeda’s “external operations” work is carried out across several countries.

During the past fifteen years, Al Qaeda has failed to execute another mass casualty attack in the US on the scale of the 9/11 hijackings. Its most recent attack in Europe came in January 2015, when a pair of brothers backed by AQAP conducted a military-style assault on the Charlie Hebdo office in Paris. AQAP made it clear that the Charlie Hebdo massacre was carried out according to Zawahiri’s orders.

Thanks to vigilance and luck, al Qaeda hasn’t been able to replicate a 9/11-style assault inside the US. Part of the reason is that America’s defenses, as well as those of its partner nations, have improved. Operations such as the 9/11 hijackings are also difficult to carry out in the first place. Even the 9/11 plan experienced interruptions despite a relatively lax security environment. (Most famously, for example, the would-be 20th hijacker was denied entry into the US at an Orlando airport in the summer of 2001.)

But there is another aspect to evaluating the al Qaeda threat that is seldom appreciated. It is widely assumed that al Qaeda is only interested in attacking the West. This is flat false. Most of the organization’s resources are devoted to waging insurgencies in Muslim majority countries.

The story in Syria has been telling. Although al Qaeda may have more resources in Syria than anywhere else, Zawahiri did not order his men to carry out a strike in the West. Al Qaeda’s so-called “Khorasan Group” laid the groundwork for such operations, but Zawahiri did not give this cadre the green light to actually carry them out. Zawahiri’s stand down order is well known. In an interview that aired in May 2015, for instance, Julani explained that the “directives that come to us from Dr. Ayman [al Zawahiri], may Allah protect him, are that Al Nusrah Front’s mission in Syria is to topple [Bashar al Assad’s] regime” and defeat its allies. “We have received guidance to not use Syria as a base for attacks against the West or Europe so that the real battle is not confused,” Julani said. However, he conceded that “maybe” the mother al Qaeda organization is plotting against the West, just “not from Syria.” Julani emphasized that this “directive” came from Zawahiri himself.

To date, al Qaeda has not lashed out at the West from inside Syria, even though it is certainly capable of doing so. Al Qaeda’s calculation has been that such an attack would be too costly for its strategic interests. It might get in the way of al Qaeda’s top priority in Syria, which is toppling the Assad regime. This calculation could easily change overnight and al Qaeda could use Syria as a launching pad against the West soon. But they haven’t thus far. It helps explain why there hasn’t been another 9/11-style plot by al Qaeda against the US in recent years. It also partially explains why al Qaeda hasn’t launched another large-scale operation in Europe for some time. Al Qaeda has more resources at its disposal today than ever, so the group doesn’t lack the capability. If Zawahiri and his advisors decided to make anti-Western attack planning more of a priority, then the probability of another 9/11-style event would go up. Even in that scenario, al Qaeda would have to successfully evade the West’s defenses. But the point is that al Qaeda hasn’t been attempting to hit the West nearly as much as some in the West assume.

In the meantime, it is easy to see how the al Qaeda threat has become more diverse, just as Clapper testified. AQAP has launched several thwarted plots aimed at the US, including the failed Christmas Day 2009 bombing. In 2009, al Qaeda also plotted to strike trains in the New York City area. In 2010, a Mumbai-style assault in Europe was unraveled by security services. It is not hard to imagine al Qaeda trying something along those lines once again. Other organizations tied to al Qaeda, such as the Pakistani Taliban, have plotted against the US as well.

Fifteen years after the 9/11 attacks, al Qaeda lives. Fortunately, Zawahiri’s men have not replicated the hijackings that killed nearly 3,000 Americans. But the al Qaeda threat looms. It would be a mistake to assume that al Qaeda won’t try a large-scale operation again. Comprehensive story here.

The Obama Admin Has Officially Forgiven Iran

Posted on September 11, 2016September 11, 2016 by Denise Simon

Getty Image

Iran, a known and proven state sponsor of terror has a history of stealing worldwide peace.

Below is the Congressional hearing of the money transfer transaction(s) to Iran, and the testimony reveals there are more coming and others not previously known.

The timeline of that day as noted by those with President GW Bush.

The Falling Man:

After 15 years, why aren’t we asking about Iran’s role in 9/11?

There is an extensive al-Qaeda network feeding global branches based in the Islamic Republic.

Fifteen years on from the 11 September 2001 terror attacks on the US, al-Qaeda is better-positioned than ever before. Its leadership held, and it has rebuilt a presence in Afghanistan. More importantly, al-Qaeda has built powerful regional branches in India, North Africa, Somalia, Yemen and Syria.

Rebranding itself away from the savagery of Iraq, al-Qaeda has sought to embed itself in local populations by gaining popular legitimacy to shield itself from retribution if, or when, it launches terrorist strikes in the West. This is proceeding apace, above all because of a failure to assist the mainstream opposition in Syria, sections of which were forced into interdependency with al-Qaeda to resist the strategy of massacre and expulsion conducted by the Assad regime.

The 9/11 massacre had not come from nowhere. In February 1998, Osama bin Laden, then-leader of al-Qaeda, plus Ayman al-Zawahiri and three others signed a document that said “kill the Americans and their allies – civilians and military – is an individual duty for every Muslim”.

Al-Qaeda attempted to blow up US troops in Yemen in December 1992. Three months later, al-Qaeda attacked New York’s World Trade Center, murdering six people. In November 1995, a car bomb in Riyadh targeted the American training mission for the Saudi National Guard, killing six people. In June 1996, Iran blew up the US military living quarters at Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, murdering 19 people.

Al-Qaeda played “some role, as yet unknown” in the attack, according to the 9/11 Commission. The US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were levelled in August 1998, slaughtering 224 people and wounding 5,000, mostly Africans. And in October 2000, a skiff containing two suicide bombers struck an American Naval vessel, the USS Cole, in the port of Aden, killing seventeen sailors.

The conspiracy theories about 9/11 are now a feature of life today. Often proponents will hide behind the façade of “asking questions”. Instead of queries about jet fuel melting steel beams and nano-thermite, however, this inquisitiveness would be much better directed at the actual unanswered questions surrounding 9/11, which centre on the role of Iran.

In 1992, in Sudan, al-Qaeda and Iran came to an agreement to collaborate against the West “even if only training”, the 9/11 Commission records. Al-Qaeda members went to the Bekaa valley to be trained by Hezbollah, Iran’s Lebanese proxy. Hezbollah’s military leader at that time, Imad Mughniyeh, personally met Bin Laden in Sudan to work out the details of this arrangement.

There is no doubt that training provided by Iran made the 1998 East African Embassy bombings possible, and after the bombing numerous al-Qaeda operatives fled unhindered through Iran to Afghanistan. The 9/11 Commission documented that over-half of the death pilots “travelled into or out of Iran” and many were tracked into Lebanon.

Iran and Hezbollah wished to conceal any past evidence of cooperation with Sunni terrorists associated with al-Qaeda

Senior Hezbollah operatives were certainly tracking some of the hijackers, in at least one case travelling on the same plane. The operational planner of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, lived in Iran for long stretches of the 1990s. To this day there is an extensive al-Qaeda network that feeds the global branches based in Iran, sheltered from US counter-terrorism efforts.

“Iran and Hezbollah wished to conceal any past evidence of cooperation with Sunni terrorists associated with al-Qaeda,” the 9/11 Commission noted. But the connections were there, and “this topic requires further investigation”. Sadly, such investigation has never occurred. Instead, the Islamic Republic has been brought into the fold, with billions of dollars released to it through the nuclear deal and a curious belief that Tehran can, or will, help stabilise the Middle East has taken hold.

Bin Laden had intended to drive the US out of the region with the 9/11 attack. “Hit them and they will run,” he told his followers. This was a theme of his 1996 fatwa first declaring war on America. In this, he miscalculated.

The Taliban regime had sheltered Jihadi-Salafists from all over the Arab world. Some left over from the fight against the Soviet occupation; others on the run from the security services of their native lands or just wanting to live in a land of “pure Islam”. Though the training and planning for global terrorism occurred in Afghanistan, most of al-Qaeda’s resources were directed more locally, toward irregular wars, notably in Algeria, Bosnia, and Chechnya. Al-Qaeda trained up to 20,000 jihadist insurgents before 9/11. This sanctuary was lost in the aftermath of 9/11, something lamented by jihadi strategist Mustafa Setmariam Nasar (Abu Musab al-Suri).

Bin Laden had worked with Ahmad al-Khalayleh (Abu Musab al-Zarqawi), the Jordanian founder of what we now know as the Islamic State (Isis), to carve out a jihadi statelet in northern Iraq in the late 1990s led by a group called Ansar al-Islam.

Rice is thrown as Hezbollah members carry the coffin of top their commander Mustafa Badreddine on 13 May 2016Reuters/Aziz Taher

After the Taliban’s fall, al-Khalayleh moved into this area and into Baghdad in early 2002. After making preparations through Syria for the influx of foreign fighters, al-Khalayleh moved to the Ansar-held territory and waited for the US.led Coalition.

IS’s predecessor planned – with al-Qaeda’s blessing – to expel the Coalition forces and set up an Islamic state in Iraq that could then spread across the region, restoring the caliphate. But IS’s methods brought it into frequent conflict with al-Qaeda, and by 2008 IS had been strategically defeated after provoking a backlash among Sunnis in Iraq. The distinctions between IS and al-Qaeda hardened thereafter until their formal split in February 2014.

IS, post-2008, changed some tactical aspects so as to bring the tribes back on-board but remained remarkably consistent in its approach, including the celebration of violence, premised on the idea of building an Islamic state as quickly as possible, which would force the population into collaboration with it and ultimately acceptance over time. In contrast, al-Qaeda placed ever-more emphasis on building popular support that would culminate in a caliphate when it had a critical mass.

The discrediting of IS’s predecessor, operating under al-Qaeda’s banner, damaged al-Qaeda so much that Bin Laden considered changing the organization’s name. Events since then, above all allowing the Syria war to protract, allowed al-Qaeda to rebrand as “pragmatic”, using IS as a foil, and recover.

Al-Qaeda, vanguard-style, took on the local concerns, worked to solve them, and in turn claimed the protection of the local population. Al-Qaeda has tangled itself so deeply into local dynamics, in Yemen and Syria most notably, that it would require a substantial local effort to root them out.

Unfortunately, the Western approach is making the problem worse. A good example came on Thursday night (8 September 2016) when the US launched air strikes against some leaders of al-Qaeda in Syria, now calling itself Jabhat Fatah al-Sham (JFS), which ostensibly disaffiliated from al-Qaeda in July in order to further this process of entanglement.

JFS claims it has no external ambitions and is working to break the siege of 300,000 people in the rebel-held areas of Aleppo city, yet it is attacked. Meanwhile, the US has done nothing about the thousands of Iranian-controlled Shia jihadists, tied into Iran’s global terrorist network, who are the leading element in imposing the siege, and conducted these strikes likely in furtherance of a deal with Russia, which also helped impose the siege. JFS thus claimed that it is serving the Syrian people, while the US opposes the revolution and supports the pro-regime coalition.

“It is a highly unfortunate reality that many Syrians living in opposition areas of Syria perceive JFS as a more determined and effective protector of their lives and interests than the United States and its Western allies,” wrote Charles Lister. The West has been unwilling to do anything to complicate the ability of the Bashar al-Assad regime to commit mass-murder for fear of antagonizing the Iranians and collapsing a “legacy-setting nuclear accord“. While that remains the case, al-Qaeda will continue to gain power and acceptance as a necessary-evil in Syria, and the ramifications of Syria are generational and global.

It is true that there is far too much optimism in current assessments of IS’s impending doom. The group will outlast the loss of its cities, and the misguided way the Coalition has conducted the war will provide conditions for a potential revival. Still, it is al-Qaeda that has the long-term advantage.

IS claimed sole legitimacy to rule, gained visibility and therefore followers. But as strategists like Setmariam understood, this made them visible to their enemies too, a toll that is beginning to tell, especially abroad. In Syria, formal al-Qaeda branches were never the organisation’s only lever and al-Qaeda was much more interested in shaping the environment than ruling it. In essence, al-Qaeda will give up the name and the public credit for the sake of the thing – whether that’s the popular understanding of the religion or the foundations of an Islamic emirate.

“IS wants the world to believe that it is everywhere, and … al-Qaeda wants the world to believe that it is nowhere.” That quip from Daveed Gartenstein-Ross neatly summarizes the trajectory of the two organisations. What can’t be seen is harder to stop – al-Qaeda’s counting on it.

Kyle W. Orton is associate fellow at the Henry Jackson Society and a Middle East analyst and commentator.

The Explanation/Details of the DNC Super Delegates

Posted on September 6, 2016September 6, 2016 by Denise Simon

Influence at the DNC: More than 60 superdelegates are registered lobbyists

by Josh Stewart and Drew Doggett and Ben Berliner

(Graphic credit: Sunlight Foundation)

SunlightFoundation: Lobbyists wield enormous influence and, depending on your point of view, can bring positive or negative changes to our government. From reptile keepers to balloon enthusiasts, everyone has a constitutional right to petition government. The power some lobbyists hold over both parties in Congress and the White House is well documented. But what’s not well documented is how lobbyists play a role in the Democratic party’s nominating process.As Libby Watson noted earlier this year, most delegates to the Democratic National Convention, held this year in Philadelphia, are allocated based on the vote share from primaries and caucuses held in individual states, territories and the District of Columbia. But there are also 712 so-called voting superdelegates. These individuals include former and current elected officials as well as members of the Democratic National Committee. Superdelegates can support whomever they choose and are not bound by any primary or caucus result.

And, as we found, some of the superdelegates also happen to be lobbyists for interests like big banks, payday lenders, health care insurers and unions.

Since February, Sunlight has pored over hundreds of names and affiliations of DNC superdelegates from all over the country. Our methodology included going state by state to the respective lobbying registration database, as well as using data from OpenSecrets.org, to see if an individual was ever registered as a federal or state lobbyist.

At least 63 superdelegates have registered as a lobbyist at the federal level or state level at some point. (Note: As we documented in our state lobbying report card, some states keep poor records of lobbying, so some information may be out of date.)

Those include some pretty big names, such as former Democratic Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell — who used to lead DLA Piper, a law and lobbying firm — and former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, who was a registered lobbyist working for Ballard Spahr LLP on telecommunications and health issues as recently as 2012. Richard Gephardt, the former House minority leader, is also a registered lobbyist on behalf of a firm that shares his namesake, the Gephardt Group.

Some other notable lobbyist superdelegates:

Donald L. Fowler is a former Democratic National Committee chair who was a registered lobbyist for the S.C. Credit Union in South Carolina in 2009.
Alexis Tameron was registered to lobby for American Traffic Solutions in Arizona in 2011.
Joyce Brayboy is a lobbyist for Goldman Sachs, most recently registered in 2015.
Steve Grossman, a former president of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and now a federal lobbyist for HPS Inc. working on issues related to the budget.

By our count, 28 states and D.C. had at least one superdelegate who was at one time a registered lobbyist on the federal or state level. Thanks to K Street, the District of Columbia, unsurprisingly, had the most – a total of eight registered lobbyist superdelegates. Union lobbyists were also well represented among the superdelegates, totaling at least 11, mostly at the state level.

The issues that lobbyists represent are vast and reflect the Democrats’ big tent policy approach. They range from marriage equality to reproductive health to banking to traffic cameras to education, and some foreign governments like Pakistan, who as recently as 2010 were represented by Roy Temple, a superdelegate who worked for Cassidy and Associates.

And then there is Andres Ramirez, a superdelegate from Nevada. According to disclosure documents from the Nevada legislature, as recently as 2015 Ramirez represented a company called Community Loans of America Inc., which is the parent company of several payday and title loan lenders.

Registered lobbyist superdelegates. (To view this spreadsheet in a separate window, click here. It’s currently ordered by state.)

Pulling back another layer into the list of superdelegates reveals that there are several who aren’t officially registered as lobbyists, but are heavily involved in the influence industry. This includes individuals employed wholly or partially by law firms with a lobbying practice, public relations firms and government affairs firms. These shadow lobbyists (explained here), can be just as effective as registered lobbyists, all with little to no disclosure. This loophole became known as the Daschle loophole, after former South Dakota U.S. Senator Tom Daschle, who until recently worked as a “policy adviser” for lobbying firms and held similar titles for many years without registering a lobbyist. Though, Daschle, who is also a superdelegate, did register as a lobbyist this year, for Aetna, a health care company.

Sunlight’s research found that 32 superdelegates have job titles that are either identical or similar to a lobbyist, or work in public relations or advocacy for an organization that participates in lobbying and related activity.

This includes people like former Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd, who now serves as the CEO of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). The movie industry employs several registered lobbyists on behalf of the MPAA but Dodd is not currently registered.

Howard Dean, a former governor from Vermont and DNC chair, also falls in this category. He is a superdelegate and senior adviser to the public policy and regulation practice of Dentons, a powerhouse law firm with a reach on both sides of the aisle.

Other superdelegates who participate in activity similar or related to lobbying but are not registered, include Jennifer McClellan, a member of the Virginia House of Delegates. McClellan also works for Verizon as assistant general counsel, “focusing on state regulatory matters” for states.

Boyd Brown of South Carolina runs Resurgens, a government relations (lobbying) firm in South Carolina. The firm’s site says they “bring a concept to lobbying that the rest of the Statehouse lobby does not: countless personal relationships with the House and Senate memberships, state agency contacts and a deep understanding of how things get done inside the South Carolina General Assembly.” Also, Joanne Dowdell is a senior vice president of global government affairs for News Corp, and is similarly not registered as best we could find from federal lobbying registrations.

Shadow lobbyists or influencers: To view this spreadsheet in a separate window, click here. It’s currently ordered by state.

Several superdelegates work for consulting, communications or strategy firms whose work is similar to lobbying:

Alice Huffman, a superdelegate from California, is the president of AC Public Affairs, which offers “public affairs,” “public policy advocacy” and “building opinion leader support.”
Maria Echaveste, also from California, works for NGV LLC, which does “executive branch advocacy” and “legislative strategy.”
Three staffers for the Dewey Square Group are among the superdelegates; though none are lobbyists, the firm was registered to lobby on behalf of clients as recently as 2014.

Then there are even others who don’t really fall into any category, like former President Bill Clinton or Vice President Al Gore. Or donors like Laura Ricketts who is a co-owner of the Chicago Cubs. (In an ideological split, her father, Joe Ricketts, is a GOP megadonor.) Or former Speaker of the New York State Assembly Sheldon Silver, who was a superdelegate until he resigned in March after he was convicted of fraud, money laundering and extortion.

The DNC Rules Committee recently voted to create a commission to study the issue of superdelegates and its role in the Democratic nominating contest. This happened before in 2008, and afterward the party rebuffed the idea of reforming or altering the superdelegate process. It remains to be seen just what the Democratic party will do around the issue of superdelegates, but Sunlight will continue to track how lobbyists and others try to influence politics.

House DHS Chairman Releases Terror Threat Snapshot

Posted on September 2, 2016September 2, 2016 by Denise Simon

September-Terror-Threat-Snapshot

House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas) has released his monthly Terror Threat Snapshot for September 2016. The current edition paints an ominous backdrop for one of the worst years on record for homegrown Islamist extremism.

166 Homegrown Terror Plots; 26 Arrests

According to the snapshot, FBI Director James Comey estimates that around 80 percent of his Bureau’s 1,000-plus active homegrown terrorist investigations can be traced to ISIS, and he calls that statistic “the greatest threat to the physical safety of Americans today.” Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, 166 homegrown terror plots were uncovered in the United States; nearly 90 percent of U.S.-based ISIS supporters are male and close to 35 percent of them are recent converts to Islam.

The Terror Threat Snapshot states that 26 people have been arrested in 13 states so far in 2016. The offenses – all related to ISIS – include weapons charges, offering financial support to the Islamic State, and actual plots to attack U.S. targets and citizens. McCaul’s snapshot also points out 47 ISIS-linked plots to attack towns and cities in Europe, and 28 attacks targeting Westerners outside of the U.S. and Europe.

Recent ISIS-Related Arrests in the United States

Here is a breakdown of the recent major arrests, according to the snapshot:

Minnesota: U.S. citizen and Minneapolis resident Mohamed Amiin Ali Roble, 20, was charged for his role in a terror network that was dispatching its members to Syria in order to join ISIS.

North Carolina: 35-year-old U.S. citizen, Erick Jamal Hendricks of Charlotte, was arrested after attempting to hire a cell of terror operatives with a goal to ultimately launch attacks within the United States. Hendricks had also previously reached out – via social media – to the ISIS-linked group that targeted a cartoon competition in Garland, Texas in 2015.

Virginia: Nicholas Young, a 36-year-old U.S. citizen from Fairfax, Virginia, and a police officer for the Washington Metro Transit Police, was arrested for ISIS-related charges. Young is the first uniformed police officer in the U.S. ever charged with an ISIS-linked offense.

Michigan: Sebastian Gregorson, a U.S. citizen who recently converted to Islam, was arrested in Detroit for “possessing a destructive device and acquiring explosive materials without a license.” Gregorson is alleged to be a solid ISIS support and also possessed a CD entitled “Anwar al Awlaki” who was one of al-Qaida’s major recruiters.

Guantanamo Bay Detainees Released – Including Bin Laden’s Bodyguards

September’s Terror Threat Snapshot also states that a recent assessment performed by the Director of National Intelligence revealed that 30 percent of released Guantanamo Bay detainees have either returned to or are suspected of returning to jihadist activity. According to the snapshot, the Department of Defense announced that 15 detainees were handed over to the government of the United Arab Emirates. Of those 15, some were explosive experts, some were trained al-Qaida fighters and at least two of them were employed as Osama Bin Laden’s bodyguards.

Other highlights of this month’s Terror Threat Snapshot include the ongoing Iranian terror threat, foreign fighter statistics and a full report of foreign Jihadist networks and safe havens.

FBI Releases Hillary Server Investigation Documents

Posted on September 2, 2016September 3, 2016 by Denise Simon

Signed on January 22, of 2009, Hillary declared by signature her compliance to classified material.

Hillary Non Disclosure This is the actual document with her signature.

FBI Releases Documents in Hillary Clinton E-Mail Investigation

Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure. We also are releasing a factual summary of the FBI’s investigation into this matter. We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Appropriate redactions have been made for classified information or other material exempt from disclosure under FOIA.

FBI Background Investigation Hillary servers

FBI 302 Report on Hillary Interview

As a note, the FBI 302 report is shorter and frankly it tells us that Hillary told the FBI she cant remember sh*t. Hillary left all judgment to handling government material and security classifications to ‘her’ State Department professionals. The real background investigation report defines the best part of the whole scandal, it is 47 pages and quite chilling. Oh…there were several servers and 13 mobile devices. Her covert intelligence aide Sidney Blumenthal did receive at least 24 email exchanges with classified material. Redactions abound and avoiding FOIA was the underlying objective.