Tag Archives: Homeland Security

It’s you, Mr. President, not your chief of staff

The critiques are pouring in on the White House in the wake of the ouster of Reince Priebus as chief of staff.

Donald John Trump shoved Priebus out the door this week and hired Department of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly as the new chief.

But those critiques seem to be conveying the same message: The White House failure to function as a “fine-tuned machine” — which is how Trump once described his administration — belongs solely to the president, not the chief of staff.

It’s Trump’s tweets. It’s his capriciousness. It’s his ignorance of government and how it works. It’s the presence of unqualified family members in the innermost circle of key advisers. It’s that maniac communications director — Anthony “Mooch” Scaramucci — who reports directly to the president.

Because the president doesn’t know how to assemble a competent governing team, his chief of staff has fallen on the proverbial grenade.

His new chief of staff, Kelly, comes from an entirely different mold. He is a career Marine Corps officer; a retired four-star general; a war hero; a Gold Star father who lost a son in combat. He’s a kick-ass military man.

My latest Question of the Day is simply this: Is the president going to let Gen. Kelly run the White House and control the message the way it’s supposed to be done, the way many effective chiefs of staff have done?

I don’t know what John Kelly is doing this weekend as he prepares to assume this new gig, but I would hope he’d be on the phone with some preceding chiefs of staff and asking them for pointers on how he ought to proceed in this atmosphere of chaos and confusion.

The source of that chaos? He sits on the Oval Office.

Kelly vs. Mooch: All bets are off

John Kelly is about to take on the job of his nightmares.

He is the next White House chief of staff, replacing Reince Priebus, who was booted out of his job this week by the president of the United States, one Donald John Trump.

The president, moreover, has hired a communications director who is exhibiting the conduct of a madman. Anthony “Mooch” Scaramucci went on a profanity-laced tirade and predicted correctly that Priebus would be gone by the end of the week.

Now into this maelstrom comes Kelly, a retired Marine Corps general. He is a no-nonsense general-grade officer. He has served his country heroically and with supreme honor. He moves into the White House from the Department of Homeland Security, where he served as secretary.

It’s the Kelly vs. Mooch situation that ought to cause concern throughout the massive federal government.

Mooch reports to the Donald Trump. Tradition — something for which the president has zero regard — has made the communications director answer to the chief of staff.

Here’s my question: How long will it take Gen. Kelly to slap some sense into Mooch and tell this loudmouth that the chief of staff controls the message?

It’s being said in recent hours and days that no previous president would have put up with the hideous tirade that Mooch launched against Priebus. Mooch called Priebus a “schizophrenic,” adding a colorful f-bomb adjective in front of that term.

Can you imagine someone referring to, say, previous WH chiefs Leon Panetta or James Baker III with that kind of language?

With all of that said, Gen. John Kelly is walking into a White House that is in an utter state of confusion and chaos. It’s a direct reflection of the man who refused to let the previous White House chief of staff do his job.

Moreover, it all reflects directly on the incompetence demonstrated daily by Donald John Trump Sr.

Good luck to you, Gen. Kelly. You will need every bit of it.

Another prime al-Qaeda target emerges

Welcome to the world of most wanted public enemies, young man.

I refer to the son of Osama bin Laden, a fellow named Hamza bin Laden, a 28-year-old terrorist with visions of walking along his late father’s blood-soaked trail.

The young bin Laden has declared that he wants to rekindle al-Qaeda as a terrorist force, a force for evil.

OK, then. Here’s a thought for Donald Trump’s national security team.

You’ve got a professed killer on the loose with the stated aim of juicing up a bloodthirsty terrorist organization. That means he has declared himself to be an enemy of the United States of America.
What does this mean? It means the young man is fair game. He’s a target for our special ops forces, our CIA spooks and those who might be close to him who could help guide our personnel toward a hit in the manner of the mission that took out Osama bin Laden in May 2011.

The president has a first-rate national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, on the job. His homeland security secretary, John Kelly, also is a competent former Marine general. They have the best military apparatus ever assembled at their disposal; indeed, former Marine Gen. James “Mad Dog” Mattis has emerged as a serious-minded secretary of defense. They also have the best intelligence-gatherers available to them as well — no matter what the president might think of them.

Let’s get busy and find this guy.

I think they ought to commence — if they haven’t already — a “search and destroy” mission to rid the world of Osama bin Laden’s son.

Good hunting. We’ll await your report.

What about The Wall, Gen. Kelly?

greatwalloftrump

Donald J. Trump’s very first specious campaign promise en route to his being elected president of the United States was that he would build a “beautiful wall” along the length of our nation’s southern border.

He would secure our border with Mexico against those hordes or rapists, murders, drug dealers and, oh yes, international terrorists intent on destroying the United States of America.

And he’d make Mexico pay for it, too! That, of course, drew the expected rebuke from Mexican officials who said, in effect, “Oh, no we won’t.”

Now we have a Homeland Security secretary-designate, retired Marine Gen. John Kelly, on board with the still-forming Trump administration.

What about that wall, Gen. Kelly?

Are we going to build it? Do you support the president-elect on that nonsensical notion? And what about the “deportation force,” general? Are you going to hire all the thousands of homeland security agents it will take to round up the 11 million — or so — illegal immigrants living in this country?

Trump’s initial campaign pledge makes the homeland security appointment all that more important. The way I figure it, if Trump was going to make illegal immigration his signature issue — which he did when he rode down the Trump Tower elevator the day he announced his candidacy — then he meant for it to be the most important promise he’d make.

It’s interesting to me that we’ve heard nary a peep from Gen. Kelly — or the president-elect, for that matter — on the strategy we’re going to employ to build the wall.

Let’s hear it, guys!

Trump surrounded by ‘know-nothing’ generals?

kelly

First it was Michael Flynn.

Then came James Mattis.

Now we hear that John Kelly is joining the Donald J. Trump administration. What do these men have in common?

They’re all retired generals. Flynn is a soldier; Mattis and Kelly are Marines. Among them they have 11 stars on their epaulets. Army Lt. Gen. Flynn will be the national security adviser; Marine Gen. Mattis will be defense secretary; Marine Gen. Kelly is slated to be nominated to lead the homeland security department.

Hey, didn’t Trump say he knows “more than the generals, believe me” about ISIS?

It might be that perhaps he’s rethinking that bold — and reckless — boast. If so, then he ought to acknowledge as much.

But here’s another fascinating aspect of these men: They’re all blunt talkers. They speak their mind. They are take-no-prisoners kinds of men when it comes to policy discussion and debate.

The Flynn-Mattis relationship might be particularly fascinating to watch, given the traditional tension that exists between the national security chief and the defense boss.

Moreover, will these men’s penchant for candor and frankness work well with a president known to be, um, less than receptive to other people’s points of view, let alone these so-called truth-tellers?

This could be dramatic in the extreme.

Rep. McCaul: Solid choice, maybe, for Homeland Security

mccaul

I’ve spent a good deal of time criticizing some of Donald J. Trump’s picks for his Cabinet.

I now will say something good about someone under consideration for a key national security post: Rep. Michael McCaul might become secretary of homeland security in the Trump administration.

McCaul would be a solid choice.

The only remotely negative thing that comes to mind is that he reportedly is the richest member of Congress, so he would be continuing Trump’s pattern of picking rich folks to help him govern the country.

Beyond that? Well, McCaul has law enforcement experience and has chaired the House Homeland Security Committee.

It also is good that McCaul hails from Texas, one of the states on the front line of this homeland security debate.

Some critics have suggested that McCaul isn’t tough enough on illegal immigration. As the Texas Tribune reported: “In recent days, McCaul has come under fire from illegal immigration opponents who claim he has not been tough enough on the problem in Congress. In a TV interview Wednesday, McCaul called such criticism ‘incredulous and inflammatory and … slanderous.'”

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/12/02/cruz-praises-mccaul-trump-mulls-cabinet-job-him/

I like the fact that McCaul has congressional experience and that he represents a congressional district in a state where the homeland security issue has become arguably the most acute in the country.

From what I’ve heard from Rep. McCaul over the years, he doesn’t come across as a screamer. Instead, he sounds relatively reasonable and nuanced — which is a quality that Trump is going to need once he becomes president.

McCaul’s most vocal backer well might be U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, a fellow Texan. It’s an interesting twist, too, as the Tribune reports, given that many Republicans have hoped McCaul would challenge Cruz for the GOP Senate nomination in 2018.

Hmm. Imagine that. Cruz now wants him ensconced in the Trump administration — and perhaps out of the way of his own run for re-election.

Whatever. Rep. McCaul would be a good fit at the Department of Homeland Security.

Yes, call it an ‘act of terror’

terror

It doesn’t matter to me in the least — in this moment of profound grief and shock — what precisely motivated Omar Mateen to do what he did early this morning in Orlando, Fla.

He committed a terrorist act.

Was he motivated by some perversion of Islam? Was he motivated by hatred of the LGBT community? Was he just pissed off at the world in general?

Mateen was a 29-year-old American who decided to open fire with an AR-15 at a gay night club in Orlando. Fifty people are dead — so far; several of the injured are in critical condition. This madman committed the worst such mass murder in American history.

He has terrorized an entire city. Orlando has been shaken to its core. Mateen died in the melee, which of course deprives authorities of the chance to question the perp about why he committed this dastardly act.

Mateen has completed successfully a singular mission, which was to frighten a community. That, by itself, is the definition of a terrorist.

We’ll get to the truth eventually as to what motivated this monster. He reportedly proclaimed some allegiance the Islamic State; he might have been an ISIS agent, or he might have what’s been called a “lone wolf.”

Perhaps the biggest puzzle to solve will be this: How did this guy, who was on an FBI/Homeland Security “watch list” manage to continue to move about freely — and arm himself with an AR-15?

We’ll get these answers in due course.

Meantime, let’s all say it together: An American community has been struck by an act of terrorism.

Techno-terrorists elevate threat to U.S., world

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson issues a stern warning.

International terrorists have become cyber-savvy and are posing a uniquely new threat to the world.

Are we on guard against these guys? And what in the world do we do to stop them?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/us-security-chief-warns-of-new-phase-in-terror-threat/ar-BBjy1fG

“We’re very definitely in a new environment, because of ISIL’s (IS’s) effective use of social media, the Internet, which has the ability to reach into the homeland and possibly inspire others,” Johnson said in a TV interview this morning.

The Islamic State reportedly is recruiting heavily through the Internet. It’s also posing serious threats to cyber infrastructure.

It’s no longer just madmen with bombs strapped their chests who pose threats to human life. This global war has turned into a battle of wits.

This new threat brings to mind something that congressional leaders sought to bring to national attention. I keep waiting to hear from the Texas Panhandle’s congressman, Republican Mac Thornberry, on how we’re defending ourselves against cyber warriors.

House Speaker John Boehner tasked Thornberry some years ago to lead a congressional committee that would devise strategies to fight Internet hackers and other enemies who would seek to do serious damage to our cyber infrastructure.

When these discussions bring the news to the front pages and gobble up air times on our news networks, I always seem to miss hearing from Rep. Thornberry, who I understand to be an expert on these issues.

I trust he’s working behind the scenes. He’s also become chairman of the House Armed Services panel, which is a huge responsibility all by itself.

Still, our Homeland Security secretary no doubt can use all the help he can muster in protecting “the homeland” against cyber attacks.

Let’s hope this fight transcends the political differences that seem to divide the White House and Capitol Hill … even when it involves national security.

 

Have we seen enough from Secret Service?

Isn’t the Secret Service supposed to be the elite of the elite? The cream of our national security apparatus? The individuals charged with protecting the Most Powerful Person on the Planet?

What in the name of Homeland Security is going on with these individuals?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/secret-service-agents-disrupted-bomb-investigation-at-white-house/2015/03/12/0eb74590-c8c4-11e4-aa1a-86135599fb0f_story.html

Two more agents have been accused of driving under the influence of alcohol and taking their vehicle through an active investigation scene involving a bomb.

The Secret Service has a new director who was supposed to turn the agency around after it went through a series of shameful incidents involving disgraceful behavior and serious breaches of security at the White House.

Joseph Clancy hasn’t turned anything around.

The Secret Service used to be run by the Treasury Department. Since 9/11, it’s been handed over to the Department of Homeland Security. Did we hear of these kinds of screw-ups when Treasury was in charge? Maybe once in a while, but not with this kind of chilling regularity.

Any thoughts of returning the Secret Service to the Treasury Department? Well? Are there?

 

McConnell acts like a grownup on DHS bill

Well, glory be.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell actually is capable of acting like a governing grownup. Good for him.

He wants the Senate to pass a “clean” Department of Homeland Security funding measure, without trying to undo President Obama’s executive action on immigration. He’s now putting the screws on the House of Representatives, which might resist the Senate boss’s efforts to keep DHS functioning after Friday.

McConnell puts squeeze on House

Without the funding bill, DHS will furlough 30,000 federal employees and will effectively shut down, putting the nation’s borders at risk of infiltration by undesirables — you know, drug smugglers and terrorists.

It’s not that McConnell wants to give Obama a pass on the immigration action. He said he’s willing to vote on defunding the executive action after voting on the DHS bill. Whatever.

The big story is that McConnell is willing to avoid shutting down a key national security agency over a partisan political fight.

National security — protecting the homeland, for instance — ought to be above partisanship. In this day and time, though, everything becomes a partisan battle. Everything!

Congress has shown a propensity for pulling rabbits out of its hat. The DHS funding issue has a lot of Americans — including me — worried about the level of gamesmanship both sides are willing to play, even if it involves protecting the nation.

Lawmakers have three whole days to get this thing done.

Do it, ladies and gentlemen.