Posted tagged ‘Mike Pompeo’

Pompeo Speaks

September 12, 2017

Pompeo Speaks, Power LineScott Johnson, September 12, 2017

Pompeo also acknowledged and discussed Iran’s collaborative relationship with al Qaeda. President Obama, you may recall, helped make billions of dollars available to the Iranian regime for its nefarious purposes. President Trump’s options with Iran may be limited, but at least he understands that we need a way out and means to do something about it. Iran seems to me to represent the single most sinister example of Obama’s efforts to bind those who would follow him to his warped vision.

******************************

Bret Baier interviewed CIA Director Mike Pompeo yesterday afternoon for a segment of the FOX News Special Report. The interview was occasioned by the anniversary of 9/11. The questions were well informed and the answers were direct. Most striking to me was Pompeo’s contrast with his predecessor.

Baier, for example, asked Pompeo whether the intelligence assessments supported the proposition that ISIS constituted a junior varsity terrorist organization consistent with the advertised assessment of President Obama. “No,” Pompeo responded.

Baier elicited news from Pompeo with his answer to the question when the trove of documents captured in the raid on bin Laden’s compound would be released. Pompeo promised that they would be released in their entirety “very soon” — with the exception of copyrighted material or pornography that people still get online at different sites including services as Zoom Escorts Glasgow. “Everything other than those items will be released in the weeks ahead,” he said.

Pompeo also acknowledged and discussed Iran’s collaborative relationship with al Qaeda. President Obama, you may recall, helped make billions of dollars available to the Iranian regime for its nefarious purposes. President Trump’s options with Iran may be limited, but at least he understands that we need a way out and means to do something about it. Iran seems to me to represent the single most sinister example of Obama’s efforts to bind those who would follow him to his warped vision.

Via FOX News Insider and Steve Hayes.

CIA Keeping a Watchful Eye on. . .its Director!

August 27, 2017

CIA Keeping a Watchful Eye on. . .its Director! Power Line, Paul Mirengoff, August 26, 2017

Pompeo works closely with President Trump, as one should want a CIA to do. But does this mean he is going to compromise the investigation into the 2016 election in order to help Trump politically?

There is no reason to think so. The anti-Trump, anti-Pompeo leakers at the CIA acknowledge that Pompeo has not impeded the investigation. However, they express concern “about what he might do if the CIA uncovered new information potentially damaging to Trump and Pompeo were forced to choose between protecting the agency or the president.” The fear, as one of them put it, is “that if you were passing on something too dicey [to Pompeo] he would go to the White House with it.”

The fear is absurd. If the Trump’s enemies in the CIA, the FBI, or the Mueller dream team ever come up with anything damaging to Trump, the president will read about it in the Washington Post and the New York Times before anyone has time to “go to the White House with it.”

******************************************

This Washington Post story is called “At CIA, a watchful eye on Mike Pompeo, the president’s ardent ally.” It sounds like the CIA is spying on its own director. If there is such a thing as the “deep state,” I think we have sighted it.

According to Post reporter Greg Miller, “Mike Pompeo has taken a special interest in an agency unit that is closely tied to the investigation into possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign, requiring the Counterintelligence Mission Center to report directly to him.” That’s one way of putting it. A more honest way would be to acknowledge that the investigation in question is actually a broad counterintelligence probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

The media and its Democratic allies would have us believe that Russian interference in that election is the greatest, most ominous intelligence caper of all time. Even if it falls somewhat short of that billing, as it almost certainly does, why shouldn’t the head of the CIA take a “special interest” in the matter?

The Post and the Democrats can’t have it both ways. Russian interference in the 2016 election can’t be both an unprecedented assault on our democracy by a hostile foreign power’s intelligence operatives and a matter as to which the CIA director should take little interest.

I’m sure the Post, as well as Trump’s enemies in the CIA, would like Pompeo to recuse himself from the investigation, as Jeff Sessions recused himself at the Justice Department. But there’s no reason why he should.

Sessions recused himself because of testimony he gave regarding the Russian ambassador and, perhaps, because he was part of the Trump campaign team. Pompeo has given no problematic testimony about Russia and was not part of the Trump campaign.

Unlike Sessions, he did not even provide Trump an early endorsement. Even when Trump became the presumptive nominee, Pompeo would say only that he would “support the nominee of the Republican Party because Hillary Clinton cannot be president of the United States.”

That was then. Now, Pompeo works closely with President Trump, as one should want a CIA to do. But does this mean he is going to compromise the investigation into the 2016 election in order to help Trump politically?

There is no reason to think so. The anti-Trump, anti-Pompeo leakers at the CIA acknowledge that Pompeo has not impeded the investigation. However, they express concern “about what he might do if the CIA uncovered new information potentially damaging to Trump and Pompeo were forced to choose between protecting the agency or the president.” The fear, as one of them put it, is “that if you were passing on something too dicey [to Pompeo] he would go to the White House with it.”

The fear is absurd. If the Trump’s enemies in the CIA, the FBI, or the Mueller dream team ever come up with anything damaging to Trump, the president will read about it in the Washington Post and the New York Times before anyone has time to “go to the White House with it.”

Moreover, executive-order guidelines prohibit the CIA from passing information to the White House “for the purpose of affecting the political process in the United States.” Neither the Post nor its sources offers any reason to believe that Pompeo would violate this order. In lieu of such evidence or analysis, the Post’s Miller ends up whining about Pompeo’s social conservatism, as if it is somehow relevant.

Miller’s piece contains this bit of unintended irony: In addition to the importance of the Russia investigation, the other reason the CIA has given for Pompeo’s active participation in the matter is concern about leaks. The fact that CIA officials are smearing the director in the pages of the Washington Post, going so far as to say he can’t be trusted to follow executive-order guidelines, strongly suggests that Pompeo’s concern about leaks is well-founded.

If CIA employees are going to keep a “watchful eye” on their director, they shouldn’t object if their director keeps a watchful eye on them.

Secret Iran Deals Cover Military Site, Other Past Arms Work

July 23, 2015

Secret Iran Deals Cover Military Site, Other Past Arms Work

Lawmakers demand congressional access to two IAEA accords

BY:
July 23, 2015 5:00 am

via Secret Iran Deals Cover Military Site, Other Past Arms Work | Washington Free Beacon.

The Iran nuclear agreement includes two secret side deals covering a key Iranian military site and other past arms activities, according to two lawmakers who are demanding that Congress be granted access to the documents.

The secret agreements were reached between Iran and the International Atomic Energy (IAEA) on Tehran’s past nuclear arms work and are a central component of the Vienna accord reached by Iran, the United States, and five other states.

A key part of the nuclear agreement requires Iran to disclose all military nuclear arms work before international sanctions are lifted. The IAEA has until December to report on the past military activities.

Rep. Mike Pompeo, (R., Kan.), a member of the House Permanent Select Committee, said in an interview he first learned of the secret side deals by questioning IAEA officials.

Pompeo, who first revealed the agreements along with Sen. Tom Cotton, (R., Ark.), said there may be additional secret pacts the Obama administration has not disclosed to Congress as required by legislation covering congressional review of the Iran nuclear agreement.

The agreements deal with access to Iran’s military facility at Parchin, a military site that was excluded from the public text of the Vienna agreement reached July 14. A second secret accord outlines how past nuclear arms work by Iran will be addressed.

“It’s outrageous,” said Pompeo of the secret agreements, noting that other members of the six-nation agreement may already have been briefed on the side deals.

“We have asked for information from the intelligence community and the State Department about these agreements,” Pompeo said.

At the State Department Wednesday, spokesman John Kirby disputed the lawmakers claims and said “Congress has what we have.” The side agreements in question are “IAEA documents” that are not part of the formal agreement, the spokesman told reporters.

“There’s no side deals. There’s no secret deals between Iran and the IAEA that the P5- plus-1 has not been briefed on in detail,” Kirby said.

Kirby called the IAEA accords “technical arrangements” that are standard practice by the agency. The documents will not be released publicly or to other states.

“But our experts are familiar and comfortable with the contents, which we would be happy to discuss with Congress in a classified setting,” Kirby said.

The issue was expected to be raised during closed-door briefings on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, Kirby said.

Rep. Robert Pittenger, a member of the House Financial Services Committee and vice chairman of the panel’s Task Force to Investigate Terrorism Financing, voiced concerns about the Iran deal after a closed-door meeting with Secretary of State John Kerry, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew.
“Nothing they talked about gave me confidence the administration has adequately addressed the issue of inspections or sanctions relief [for Iran],” Pittenger (R-N.C.) told the Free Beacon.
Iran has been receiving $700 million a month for the past several months and will get a windfall of over $100 billion in frozen funds as part of the deal, he said, while at the same time Tehran continues to support terrorism and backs Syria.
“A zebra’s stripes don’t change,” he said. “This administration is under the erroneous assumption that Iran will be different today than it was from yesterday.”

Congress has been provided with copies of all materials related to what is dubbed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, including annexes and a verification assessment, he said.

White House National Security Adviser Susan Rice echoed Kirby’s comments that all Iran deal documents were given to Congress.

“These [IAEA-Iran] documents are not public, but nonetheless, we have been briefed on those documents, we know their contents, we’re satisfied with them and we will share the contents of those briefings in full in a classified session with the Congress,” Rice said. “So there’s nothing in that regard that we know that they won’t know.”

Pompeo said the administration may be seeking to provide Iran with a face-saving measure after Iran publicly announced all its military facilities would be off-limits to international nuclear inspectors.

“It may well be that this was an attempt to give political cover for Iranian negotiators, but in some sense, that’s not my problem,” he said.

Diplomacy is no excuse for preventing Congress, as representatives of the American people, from fully understanding what has taken place in the past at Iran’s nuclear facility at Parchin and other verification issues, Pompeo said.

“This is one of the central questions of the agreement,” he added. “We need to see these agreements before we vote.”

Parchin is the location near Tehran where, according to the IAEA, Iran is suspected of carrying out nuclear arms testing, and specifically high-explosives testing of the type needed to create a nuclear blast.

Cotton, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said the secret deals must be disclosed to Congress.

“The administration says this deal isn’t about trusting Iran, but that is exactly what it’s asking Congress and the American people to do if side deals related to the Parchin military facility and possible military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear program are kept secret,” Cotton told the Washington Free Beacon.

“My colleagues and I are demanding that the president produce these side agreements for congressional review,” he said. “It is hard to see how Congress can fulfill its duties if it’s kept in the dark about significant portions of the nuclear deal.”

IAEA Director Yukiya Amano announced July 14 that Iran had agreed to a “road-map” accord that would resolve past nuclear arms work.

Pompeo and Cotton said the IAEA secret side agreements govern Parchin inspections and terms for how Iran will satisfy the IAEA’s questions about past nuclear arms work.

Those question are outlined in a November 2011 IAEA report. The report lists the following outstanding nuclear weapons questions:

  • Procurement of nuclear and dual-use civilian-military equipment and materials by the Iranian military;
  • Development of undeclared methods for producing nuclear material;
  • Acquisition of nuclear weapons information and documents from a secret nuclear supplier network; and,
  • Indigenous design work on a nuclear weapons and testing of components.

Congress passed the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act that requires the administration to provide Congress with all documents, including “annexes, appendices, codicils, side agreements, implementing materials, documents, and guidance, technical or other understandings and any related agreements, whether entered into or implemented prior to the agreement or to be entered into or implemented in the future,” according to the law signed by the president.

Pompeo called the agreement “the worst of backroom deals.”

Not providing access to the side deals violates the law and indicates the administration is “asking Congress to agree to a deal that it cannot review.”

Said Cotton: “That we are only now discovering that parts of this dangerous agreement are being kept secret begs the question of what other elements may also be secret and entirely free from public scrutiny.”