Trump’s National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster Reveals TREASON in WRITING In Civil War II, McMaster's Treason Caught in way Similar to how Benedict Arnold's Treason Discovered

Home  »  Big Government  »  Trump’s National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster Reveals TREASON in WRITING
Print This Post Print This Post
Aug 5, 2017 No Comments ›› admin

By Ben Barrack

Donald Trump’s National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster is a traitor in a civil war. In particular, in the war between the American people and the deep state, McMaster has chosen the deep state. The way in which he was caught is similar to how America’s most notorious traitor was caught – with a damning document(s).

McMaster revealed his treason in writing when he sent a letter he signed to Barack Obama’s National Security Adviser Susan Rice in late April of this year. As Circa News reported, McMaster even sent the letter via U.S. Mail, perhaps the best way to avoid detection. That indicates the secrecy of a deep state spy who betrayed his President.

Oddly enough, America’s most notorious traitor, Benedict Arnold was outed when American patriots came into possession of papers that revealed Arnold’s treason.

Via ListVerse:

Arnold’s plan unraveled due to an intercepted document: when American forces captured British Major John André carrying papers revealing the proposed surrender of West Point, Arnold fled to a British ship docked on the Hudson river, narrowly escaping the forces of one highly pissed off George Washington.

So, why does McMaster still have a job and why isn’t Trump ‘highly pissed off’? The reports have been flooding in about McMaster’s penchant for opposing the Trump agenda at every turn, from firing Trump loyalists who oppose globalism, to his refusal to say ‘radical Islamic terrorism’, to opposing Trump on the Iran deal negotiated by the Obama administration. There have even been credible charges that McMaster is anti-Israel.

McMaster refuses to say ‘radical Islamic terrorism’

In the wake of the revelations about his letter to Rice, it’s the far left and #neverTrumpers who are the ones defending McMaster. Again, why does he have job? Trump has even released a statement defending McMaster after news of the letter came to light.

So did his son-in-law Jared Kushner, who said:

“General McMaster is a true public servant and a tremendous asset for the president and the administration.”

McMaster used back channels to give Rice security clearance after she was outed for having unmasked Americans. In many ways, this discovery is worse than accusations that McMaster – along with his deputy Dina Powellare leakers. The secretive behavior of McMaster relative to Rice is certainly in line with someone who would also leak classified or negative information about Trump to the press.

As WBdaily has reported on extensively, Powell’s relationships with Obama and Clinton loyalists – as well as with far left-wing media figures scream disloyalty as well. Yet, Trump does not seem to care.

Dina Powell is close with both Valerie Jarrett and Hillary’s Muslim Brotherhood spy Huma Abedin

As these explosive revelations continue, Trump risks angering his base, which is the only thing he has. If Trump loses his base, the swamp will drag him down.

The timing of McMaster’s letter to Rice is perhaps the most disconcerting because it was after Trump publicly revealed his contempt for what the Obama administration had done to him through surveillance and unmasking. On March 2nd, Trump tweeted out that he learned his campaign had been wiretapped (surveilled) by the Obama administration.

Perhaps more explosive was what Trump told the New York Times on April 5th. In an interview with the Times, Trump implied Rice committed a crime:

“I think the Susan Rice thing is a massive story. I think it’s a massive, massive story. All over the world,” Mr. Trump said.

What McMaster did was make it easier for Rice to engage in further espionage just three weeks later.

Back on April 2nd, it was revealed by Mike Cernovich that Barack Obama’s National Security Adviser Susan Rice authorized the unmasking of U.S. citizens. Sometime later that month, Donald Trump’s National Security Adviser, H.R. McMaster – who replaced Michael Flynn – sent a letter to Rice that allowed her to keep her top security clearance (h/t Cira).

Just two days after Cernovich’s report, Rice appeared on MSNBC and was interviewed by Andrea Mitchell. In that interview, Rice conceded to unmasking U.S. persons. Below are a few audio clips followed by a video of the entire interview.

In clip #1, Rice was asked if she sought to unmask the names of Trump campaign officials. Instead of leaving it there, Mitchell appeared to wonder if the question was too tough and literally caused Rice to change her answer, by adding a part at the end of her question about spying. In so doing, Mitchell made it easier for Rice to answer the question:

In clip #2, while explaining the process of her involvement in unmasking, Rice conferred upon herself the right to request unmasking but then attempted to bat away accusations of irresponsibility with legalese. The part in question is looped below. Rice said unmasking results are “not typically broadly disseminated”. This is key because the implication was that those results are sometimes broadly disseminated:

In clip #3, Rice is asked about Flynn, McMaster’s predecessor who lost his job as a direct result of the unmasking process. What’s key in this clip is Rice’s response to Mitchell’s question about whether there was any suspicion about Flynn. Instead of saying, ‘absolutely not’, Rice said it would be ‘crossing a line’ if she were to comment on it. That she didn’t dismiss any charges of suspicion implicitly means that there were suspicions:

This leads us to an article penned by National Review’s Andrew McCarthy on the same day of the interview between Rice and Mitchell.

Wrote McCarthy:

The national-security adviser is not an investigator. She is a White House staffer. The president’s staff is a consumer of intelligence, not a generator or collector of it. If Susan Rice was unmasking Americans, it was not to fulfill an intelligence need based on American interests; it was to fulfill a political desire based on Democratic-party interests.

Here is the entire interview between Mitchell and Rice:

If Rice wasn’t authorized to unmask Americans when she was National Security Adviser in the Obama administration, why did McMaster surreptitiously authorize to give her top security clearance during the Trump administration?

If treason isn’t the answer, what is?

The larger question is: Why is Trump standing by him?

Tagged with: , , ,

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

%d bloggers like this: