U.S. Marines participate in an amphibious assault exercise in Chonburi, Thailand, in February 2020: the Marines will be sea-based and able to sail into the waters of the South China Sea.   © Sipa/AP

Admiral James Stavridis was 16th Supreme Allied Commander of NATO and 12th Dean of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. He spent the bulk of his operational career in the Pacific, and is author of “2034: A Novel of the Next World War.”

The Atlantic Council’s publication of The Longer Telegram, which lays out a sweeping blueprint for a U.S. strategy to face China, provides significant clues about a new lay-down of American forces around east Asia.

Whether the new Biden administration fully embraces the paper’s aggressive stance remains to be seen, but elements are under serious consideration. Certainly, the new team at the National Security Council, led by highly respected Asia hand Kurt Campbell and a deep bench of Asia experts, will be looking at a wide variety of options for the military component of a new overall strategic posture.

One of the key elements in the military component is a series of “red lines” to which the U.S. would respond militarily.

These include “any nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons action by China against the U.S. or its allies or by North Korea; any Chinese military attack against Taiwan or its offshore islands, including an economic blockade or major cyberattack against Taiwanese public infrastructure and institutions; any Chinese attack against Japanese forces in their defense of Japanese sovereignty over the Senkaku Islands, which China claims as the Diaoyu, and their surrounding exclusive economic zone in the East China Sea; any major Chinese hostile action in the South China Sea to further reclaim and militarize islands, to deploy force against other claimant states, or to prevent full freedom of navigation operations by the U.S. and allied maritime forces; and any Chinese attack against the sovereign territory or military assets of U.S. treaty allies.”

At U.S. Indo-Pacific headquarters, strategic, operational, and tactical teams are putting together new approaches for deploying American forces. These new options will be sent back to the Pentagon as part of the overall “posture review” being undertaken by new Secretary of Defense General Lloyd Austin. What will emerge?

One option is an enhanced role for the U.S. Marine Corps, which traces so much of its pre-9/11 operational history to the Pacific going back to World War II. Under the dynamic intellectual leadership of Marine Corps Commandant Dave Berger, gone are the large troop formations, armored capability, and land-based Marine tactics of the “forever wars” in the Middle East.

Instead, in the context of a U.S.-China strategy, the Marines will be resolutely sea-based and able to sail into the waters of the South China Sea, well inside the island chains China relies on for defense. Once inside, they will use armed drones, offensive cyber capabilities, Marine Raiders — highly capable special forces — anti-air missiles, and even ship-killer strike weapons to attack Chinese maritime forces, and perhaps even their land bases of operations. The Chinese militarized artificial islands in the South China Sea would be juicy targets, for example. In essence, this will be guerrilla warfare from the sea.

An airstrip and buildings on China’s man-made Subi Reef in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea, pictured in April 2017: juicy targets.   © AP

In addition to a new Marine tactical and operational approach, the U.S. Navy will be undertaking more aggressive patrols throughout the waters off China. Some will say this is merely the military equivalent of “driving doughnut holes in your neighbor’s lawn.” But the strategic concept is clever: to gradually include other allied warships in this aggressive freedom of navigation patrols. Doing so internationalizes the pushback on Chinese claims of sovereignty over the South China Sea.

In particular, the Pentagon is hoping to include British, French, and other NATO allies in the effort. Indeed the recent NATO defense ministerial in Brussels involved consultations over the alliance’s role in facing the rising military capability of China. Over time, the U.S. would like to convince Australia, New Zealand, India, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and Vietnam to participate in such deployments. The U.S. overall maritime strategic posture is predicated on creating a global maritime coalition to face the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s highly capable forces.

In addition to the sea service’s activities, the U.S. Air Force will likely be shifting additional long-range land-attack bombers and fighters to Pacific bases that are widely distributed across Asia, including some very remote sites on smaller islands. These so-called spokes will be supported from larger bases in Guam, Japan, Australia, and South Korea. The concept, dubbed Agile Combat Employment, adds a high degree of mobility to the currently concentrated combat power of both fighter and attack aircraft deployed in the region.

Finally, the U.S. Army will increase both combat power and mobility to deploy units forward in support of the red lines along those advocated in the telegram, including enhanced capability based in South Korea and Japan but easily capable of deploying to smaller islands throughout the region.

Both the Army and Air Force would be on the forward edge of additional training and exercises with the Taiwanese as well. Look for increased emphasis from the new American Space Force to focus intelligence and reconnaissance on the theater, as well as enhanced offensive cyber options from the U.S. Cyber Command, in coordination with the National Security Agency.

Taken together, it seems clear that the U.S. military is stepping up its presence and combat capability in the Western Pacific, and positioning for a conflict with China over the coming decades.

The Longer Telegram provides an important clue as to what options the Pentagon and the White House are considering as part of an expected new strategy to face the rise of China. Hopefully, skillful diplomacy and the intertwined economies of the two great powers will preclude the outbreak of war — but U.S. military planners are busy these days.

Source: https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/How-the-US-military-is-preparing-for-a-war-with-China

The post How the US military is preparing for a war with China first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

WASHINGTON — Over recent days, officials from the newly minted U.S. Space Force and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence briefed multiple congressional committees on an “uptick” in Russian military activity in space targeting U.S. defense and intelligence satellites, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

While the sources declined to comment on the specifics of recent incidents, which follow general increases in Chinese and Russian aggression in space, these recent actions were deemed “serious enough” to merit briefings on Capitol Hill, said one of the sources. Officials also briefed committees on plans to counter the Russian aggression, the source said.

The aggressive acts come amid rising concerns about Russian and Chinese activities in space, particularly when it comes to anti-satellite weapons. Earlier this year the Pentagon stood up the Space Force, a new branch of the military authorized by President Trump, which is supposed to help protect U.S. space assets.

Much of the work related to protecting military systems in space in classified, but during a recent virtual conference, Army National Guard Maj. Gen. Tim Lawson hinted at “things coming” that would help combat space-based threats, while emphasizing the importance of creating a large, resilient network of small satellites that are less vulnerable than the large military and intelligence satellites currently operating.

Representatives for the House and Senate Intelligence Committees as well as the Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined to comment. “ODNI does not discuss intelligence matters or sensitive and classified communication with Congress,” wrote an ODNI spokesperson in an email. Spokespeople for the House and Senate Armed Services Committees, the Pentagon and the Space Force did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A Yuanwang-class Chinese space tracking ship. (Siyuwj via Wikicommons)

Russian meddling in space has long been a topic of concern for the U.S. government, within the Pentagon and the broader national security apparatus. Space has not been a safe “sanctuary” for several decades, noted Robin Dickey, an analyst at the nonprofit Aerospace Corporation’s Center for Space Policy and Strategy. 

“The Russians have been doing this s–t for several years,” explained one former national security official who served during the Trump administration.

Russian military satellites and other spacecraft frequently perform what are called “proximity” operations, explained the former official, which involve getting close to U.S. satellites to search for vulnerabilities or determine capabilities, not unlike adversaries scanning digital networks for virtual flaws in cyberspace. “It’s a dangerous game,” continued the former official. “People need to wake up.”

The U.S. government’s fleet of spy and defense satellites is worth billions of dollars and helps blanket the globe in near constant coverage, helping U.S. officials spot worrisome developments like a new weapon test or locate a terrorist hideout. Satellites are vital for communication, navigation, weather, environmental monitoring, and defense and intelligence more broadly.

The Defense Intelligence Agency, tasked with collecting and analyzing intelligence for the Pentagon, recently published a lengthy report titled “Challenges to Security in Space.” According to the report, both China’s and Russia’s militaries “view space as important to modern warfare” and aim to conduct operations there “as a means to reduce U.S. and allied military effectiveness.”

The DIA authors also noted that both Russia and China are developing “jamming and cyberspace capabilities, directed energy weapons, on-orbit capabilities, and ground-based antisatellite missiles”—technology that could have direct negative or destructive impacts on U.S. satellites. Russia’s space weaponry may be able to disrupt or degrade U.S. communications and navigation through GPS, block the U.S.’s view of satellite imagery or even destroy certain satellites, according to the DIA.

A mockup of the Russian GLONASS-K satellite navigation system. (Kirill Kukhmar/TASS via Getty Images)

On July 23, the U.S. Space Command announced it had evidence that Russia had tested a new “space-based anti-satellite weapon” — technology the Russian Defense Ministry had said was designed to run tests on its own space equipment.

Gen. John Raymond, commander of the U.S. Space Command and the U.S. Space Force chief of space operations, had previously warned about similar activities. “This is further evidence of Russia’s continuing efforts to develop and test space-based systems, and consistent with the Kremlin’s published military doctrine to employ weapons that hold U.S. and allied space assets at risk,” he said in a statement at the time.

Christopher Ford, a senior State Department official, condemned that Russian test as an example of “Russia’s hypocritical advocacy of outer space arms control, with which Moscow aims to restrict the capabilities of the United States while clearly having no intention of halting its own counter space program — both ground-based anti-satellite capabilities and what would appear to be actual in-orbit anti-satellite weaponry.”

Later in July, however, officials from the Departments of State, Defense and Energy as well as the National Security Council met with Russian counterparts for a lengthy discussion about space policy and security, and “expressed interest in continuing these discussions and improving communications.”

Cover thumbnail image: ImageBank/Getty Images

Source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/sources-russian-aggression-against-us-intelligence-satellites-sparks-congressional-briefing-214104043.html

The post Sources: Russian aggression against U.S. intelligence satellites sparks congressional briefing first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The U.S. is monitoring intelligence that suggests North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong Un, is in grave danger after undergoing a previous surgery, according to a U.S. official with direct knowledge.

A second source familiar with the intelligence told CNN that the US has been closely monitoring reports on Kim’s health.

Kim recently missed the celebration of his grandfather’s birthday on April 15, which raised speculation about his well-being. He had been seen four days before that at a government meeting.

Another U.S. official told CNN Monday that the concerns about Kim’s health are credible but the severity is hard to assess.

•  Read more: Seoul says Kim Jong Un handling North Korea affairs as usual 

Daily NK, an online newspaper based in South Korea that focuses on North Korea, reports that Kim reportedly received a cardiovascular system procedure on April 12.

Kim received the cardiovascular system procedure because of “excessive smoking, obesity, and overwork,” according to the news site, and is now receiving treatment in a villa in Hyangsan County following his procedure.

After assessing that Kim’s condition had improved, most of the medical team treating him returned to Pyongyang on April 19 and only part of them remained to oversee his recovery situation, according to the news site. CNN is unable to independently confirm the report.

A South Korean source told CNN Monday that the country’s top leaders are very much aware of reports about Kim’s health status but cannot independently verify details published by Daily NK. The source acknowledged that Kim’s issues related to weight and smoking are well known but made clear they are waiting for more information.

South Korea’s Presidential Blue House said in a statement provided to reporters that they have nothing to confirm on reports about Kim’s health and that “no unusual signs” have been detected inside North Korea.

South Korea’s Unification Ministry and Defense Ministry have given a “no comment.”

The National Security Council and Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined to comment when reached by CNN on Monday. CNN has also reached out to the CIA and the State Department for comment.

In the meantime, U.S. officials have been reaching out to North Korean experts — particularly those who have studied the Kim regime — to talk about contingency planning, a third source familiar with the communications told CNN.

Still, the situation remains murky as gathering intelligence out of North Korea is notoriously difficult — one of the most challenging targets for US intelligence.

North Korea tightly controls any information surrounding its leader, who is treated almost like a deity within the country. His absences from official state media often spark speculation and rumors about his health. North Korea has no free press and is often a black hole when it comes to the country’s leadership. Analysts are heavily reliant on scanning state media dispatches and watching propaganda videos for any semblance of a clue.

Kim last appeared in North Korean state media on April 11. April 15 — North Korea’s most important holiday, the anniversary of the birth of the country’s founding father, Kim Il Sung — came and went without any official mention of Kim Jong Un’s movements.

Experts are unsure of what to make of Kim’s absence from any festivities celebrating his grandfather. When North Korean leaders have not shown up to these important celebrations in the past, it has portended major developments. But it has also turned out to be nothing.

“There have been a number of recent rumors about Kim’s health (smoking, heart, and brain). If Kim is hospitalized, it would explain why he wasn’t present on the important April 15th celebrations,” said Bruce Klingner, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation and former CIA deputy division chief for North Korea. “But, over the years, there have been a number of false health rumors about Kim Jong-un or his father. We’ll have to wait and see.”

Kim Jong Il’s absence from a parade celebrating North Korea’s 60th anniversary in 2008 was followed by rumblings that he was in poor health. It was later revealed he had a stroke, after which his health continued to decline until his death in 2011.

Kim Jong Un disappeared from the public eye for more than a month in 2014, which also prompted speculation about his health. He returned sporting a cane, and days later South Korean intelligence said that he had a cyst removed from his ankle.

“It’s easy to be wrong on this one,” said John Delury, a professor of international relations at Yonsei University in Seoul.

Still, with concerns about Kim’s health mounting, the state of U.S.-South Korean relations has U.S. officials worried, sources tell CNN.

On Monday, President Donald Trump said the two countries have a “great relationship,” but added he wants them to pay more for the U.S. presence in the country. The two countries have missed multiple deadlines for those negotiations. And now in-person negotiations are hindered because of the coronavirus pandemic.

This is a breaking story and has been updated with additional reporting.

Source: https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/u-s-monitoring-intelligence-that-north-korean-leader-is-in-grave-danger-after-surgery-1.4904798

The post U.S. monitoring intelligence that North Korean leader is in grave danger after surgery first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

“Did anyone ever ask you to bribe or extort anyone at any time during your time in the White House?” House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes, R-Calif., asked at one point in Tuesday’s afternoon hearing.

Former National Security Council (NSC) aide Tim Morrison: “No.”

Former U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Kurt Volker: “No.”

Later, Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., covered similar ground in asking the witnesses about Trump’s fateful July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky: “Mr. Morrison, you were on that call, and there was no quid pro quo, correct? No bribery? No extortion?”

“Correct,” Morrison replied in response to each question.

“And, Ambassador Volker, I presume you got a readout of the call. … Was there any reference to withholding aid? Any reference to bribery? Any reference to quid pro quo? Any reference to extortion?”

“No, there was not,” Volker replied, again and again.

The answers underscored a problem facing House Democrats as their impeachment inquiry continued into its second week of public hearings: With more witnesses testifying, more soundbites have emerged that may help Republicans and the Trump campaign argue that the proceedings were politically motivated theater, long in the works and foreshadowed openly by Democrats for months, if not years.

Morrison, in another key moment, testified Tuesday afternoon that he understood the transcript of Trump’s call with Ukraine’s leader wound up on a highly secured and classified computer system due to an “administrative error” — not, as Democrats have alleged because the president wanted to hide his conversation.

And, Volker testified repeatedly that he never received any indications at all that there was an improper quid pro quo with Ukraine, in which the Trump administration allegedly sought a probe of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter in exchange for military aid.

As the hearing concluded, President Trump tweeted, “A great day for Republicans, a great day for our Country!”

Ohio GOP Rep. Jim Jordan told Fox News, “This was a very good day for Republicans, for our president.”

“Kind of hard to prove a corrupt quid pro quo theory when the key U.S. policy people, plus the Ukrainians, were never aware of such an arrangement,” Texas GOP Rep. Dan Crenshaw added late Tuesday, noting that Ukraine’s president has said he felt no pressure from Trump to open any probes. “Can we go back to governing now, that’d be great thanks.”

Donald J. Trump@realDonaldTrump

A great day for Republicans, a great day for our Country!

Morrison and Volker’s testimony was sought by the GOP, and the two undercut Democrats’ poll-tested claims of White House “bribery” and a cover-up. But, they also raised new questions concerning the administration’s use of the little-discussed code-word-level system that ordinarily held sensitive national-security information. Back in September, a senior Trump administration official acknowledged that White House lawyers directed moving the transcript of the call to the secure system, noting that several of Trump’s previous phone calls with foreign leaders had leaked to the media.

FLASHBACK: LEAK OF VERBATIM TRUMP CALL WITH AUSTRALIA LEADER PROMPTS WHITE HOUSE TO INCREASE SECURITY MEASURES

Morrison previously testified behind closed doors that senior NSC lawyer John Eisenberg had relayed to him that his secretary accidentally put the transcript in the classified system. Morrison said Eisenberg wanted to “restrict access” to the transcript, but maintained that the secretary had apparently misinterpreted that instruction.

“It was represented to me that it was a mistake,” Morrison testified Tuesday, saying he tried to “pull up the package in our system” but was prevented from doing so. When he asked why the transcript was unavailable, he testified that he was “informed it had been moved to the higher classification system” at Eisenberg’s direction. Then, Eisenberg told Morrison that he “gave no such direction” and that it was an “administrative error,” according to Morrison.

Ambassador Kurt Volker, left, former special envoy to Ukraine, and Tim Morrison, a former official at the National Security Council are sworn in to testify before the House Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Nov. 19, 2019, during a public impeachment hearing of President Donald Trump’s efforts to tie U.S. aid for Ukraine to investigations of his political opponents. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

---

Morrison said to the best of his knowledge, there was no “malicious intent” in the decision to move the transcript to the compartmentalized system, and all essential personnel retained access to the transcript even after it was moved.

Later in the day, Volker made clear he had not seen anything to support Democrats’ contention that Trump improperly withheld foreign aid to Ukraine as a means of forcing an investigation into the Bidens’ dealings in the country.

Instead, Volker suggested — in a moment that the Trump campaign reposted on social media — that Trump’s general hesitation to provide foreign aid, especially to corrupt countries, was the prevailing justification for holding up aid to Ukraine temporarily.

Asked again whether he saw any evidence that Trump had committed “bribery” — the term Democrats have taken to using after focus groups indicated that it would help them sell impeachment to voters — Volker was unequivocal that he had not. In fact, Volker said, Trump never linked any probe of Burisma or the Bidens to any military aid. Hunter Biden sat on Burisma’s board while his father spearheaded Ukraine policy as vice president.

“I have only seen an allegation of bribery in the last week,” Volker said. “I was never involved in anything that I considered to be bribery at all or extortion.”

In one remarkable moment, Volker contradicted a media headline; asked about a Daily Mail story claiming he had “walked back” his testimony and had “now learned” there was a link between U.S. aid and Biden probe, Volker refuted the website outright.

Volker also said he didn’t initially realize the connection between a Trump-sought investigation of Burisma and the Bidens, given that Burisma was seen as a symbol of Ukraine’s endemic corruption problem.

EXPLOSIVE DOJ FILING OUTLINES STRZOK’S ‘SECURITY VIOLATIONS’ AMID AFFAIR — AND HOW COMEY CAME TO DISCLOSE THE WEINER EMAILS

Hunter Biden was a board member of the Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma Holdings, which had been under investigation before then-Vice President Joe Biden pressured Ukraine to fire the prosecutor in charge. In his call with Zelensky, Trump suggested the Ukrainians look into the circumstances of the prosecutor’s termination, including Joe Biden’s boast that he had the prosecutor fired by threatening to withhold $1 billion in critical aid. “Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution, so if you can look into it…It sounds horrible to me,” Trump said.

In a lengthy opening statement, Volker said he didn’t have any problem with pushing Ukraine to open an investigation into Burisma or corruption.

“It has long been U.S. policy under multiple administrations to urge Ukraine to investigate and fight internal corruption,” Volker said.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent similarly testified behind closed doors last month that he had qualms about Hunter Biden’s lucrative role on the board of Burisma.

However, Volker said he felt a discussion of investigations was “inappropriate” in a July meeting between Ukrainian and U.S. officials at the White House. Volker confirmed others’ testimony that Trump’s European Union ambassador, Gordon Sondland, raised the investigations “in a generic way,” and that then-national security adviser John Bolton immediately ended the meeting.

The meeting happened two weeks before Trump’s momentous summer phone call with Zelensky.

Volker, who resigned in September after becoming embroiled in the scandal, added that he didn’t “understand” at the time that an investigation of Burisma “was tantamount to investigating Vice President Biden.”

“I saw them as very different – the former being appropriate and unremarkable, the latter being unacceptable,” Volker said. “In retrospect, I should have seen that connection differently, and had I done so, I would have raised my own objections.”

Volker added: “The allegations against Vice President Biden are self-serving and non-credible.”

Volker went on to say that during a September dinner with top Ukrainian official Andriy Yermak, he’d discouraged Ukraine from trying to prosecute the country’s previous president. Volker says he warned it would sow deep societal divisions.

Volker said Yermak quipped in response, “You mean like asking us to investigate Clinton and Biden?” Volker claimed he didn’t “quite understand” the head-turning remark and was “kind of puzzled” by it.

Both Volker and Morrison previously gave closed-door interviews to the inquiry: Volker provided investigators with a package of text messages with Sondland and William Taylor, the U.S. chargé d’affaires for Ukraine, who said he grew alarmed at the possible linkage of the investigations to the aid.

For his part, Morrison, who served as the NSC’s senior director of European and Russian affairs, told lawmakers Trump didn’t want tax dollars funding Ukrainian corruption and remarked that he wasn’t concerned Trump’s calls with Ukraine’s leader were tied to his political interests.

Morrison resigned from the NSC last month. In his testimony Tuesday, he said he left on his “own volition” and made the decision “before I decided to testify.”

The testimony from Volker and Morrison followed five hours of testimony earlier in the day with the NSC’s Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and Vice President Pence aide Jennifer Williams, who were each critical of Trump’s conversation with Zelensky.

In a particularly remarkable moment, Vindman testified that he was asked to serve as Ukraine’s defense minister three times — but repeatedly denied the offers — when he traveled to Kiev for the inauguration of Ukraine’s president. Oleksander Danylyuk, the former Chairman of the National Security and Defence Council in Ukraine, reportedly said on Tuesday the offer was “clearly a joke.”

Among the biggest revelations Tuesday morning came when Vindman acknowledged communications with an unnamed intelligence official — during an at-times tense exchange with Republicans, immediately raising apparent questions over whether he could have been a source of information for the anonymous whistleblower who reported the call.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., interjected to express concern that Republicans were trying to out the whistleblower through the questioning. After consulting his attorney, Vindman said, “Per the advice of my counsel, I’ve been advised not to answer the specific questions about members of the intelligence community.”

National Security Council aide Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman is sworn in to testify before the House Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Nov. 19, 2019, during a public impeachment hearing of President Donald Trump’s efforts to tie U.S. aid for Ukraine to investigations of his political opponents. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

---

Still, Vindman told lawmakers, “I do not know who the whistleblower is.”

That claim didn’t hold water with Republicans and prompted Donald Trump Jr. to accuse Vindman of perjury. “I’d like them to be treated like I would be if I lied to Congress,” he told Fox News late Tuesday.

On the whole, Vindman was largely critical of Trump’s call with Zelensky, describing the investigation “demand” as “improper.” At one point, Vindman described his reaction to Trump’s call as one of “shock.”

“Frankly, I couldn’t believe what I was hearing,” he testified. “In certain regards, my worst fear of how our Ukraine policy could play out was playing out.”

However,  Vindman was caught in an apparent contradiction late in the day by Republican Ohio Rep. Brad Wenstrup. Vindman testified earlier in the day that he did not discuss his concerns about Trump’s July phone call with Morrison, his superior because he was unavailable.

But, under questioning from Wenstrup, Morrison confirmed that Vindman had given him edits of the transcript of the call, on the same day that Vindman testified Morrison was unreachable.

“Frankly, I couldn’t believe what I was hearing.”

— NSC’s Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, concerning Trump’s July call with Ukraine’s leader

Arizona GOP Rep. Paul Gosar offered a blunt assessment of Vindman’s testimony, tweeting: “I think people need a reminder:  the democrats said they would impeach starting in December 2016–before @realDonaldTrump was even sworn in.  This is a hearing looking for a reason. It’s corrupt and immoral.  The dude in the uniform is a seditionist.”

Morrison, meanwhile, also said he had heard others express concern that Vindman was a leaker, and could not be trusted with key information. Asked about that allegation, Vindman read from a glowing performance review that described him as an exemplary officer.

The other morning witness, Williams, also expressed concern about Trump’s call with Zelensky, saying, “I found the July 25th phone call unusual because, in contrast to other presidential calls I had observed, it involved discussion of what appeared to be a domestic political matter.”

Until Tuesday, none of the witnesses who have testified at the public hearings had first-hand knowledge of the president’s thinking, which Republicans have used to cast doubt on Democrats’ allegations, but Vindman, Williams, and Morrison all listened in on Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky.

TRUMP SLAMS PELOSI AS ‘GROSSLY INCOMPETENT’ FOR TRADE DEAL HANDLING, CALLS IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY A ‘KANGAROO COURT’

Morrison said his understanding was that Trump generally was skeptical of foreign aid, and wanted to make sure that taxpayers were “getting their money’s worth.”

“The president was concerned that the United States seemed to bear the exclusive brunt of security assistance to Ukraine,” Morrison said. “He wanted to see the Europeans step up and contribute more security assistance.”

The impeachment inquiry has focused on a possible link between military aid to Ukraine and investigations sought by Trump pertaining to the Bidens and Democrats. The questions arose after the July 25 phone call led to a whistleblower complaint alleging that Trump was trying to pressure Ukraine into helping him.

“As we have heard from other witnesses, when Joe Biden was considering whether to enter the race for the presidency in 2020, the president’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, began a campaign to weaken Vice President Biden’s candidacy by pushing Ukraine to investigate him and his son,” Schiff said in his opening statement.

Nunes opened his remarks by welcoming people to “Act Two of today’s circus,” dismissing the inquiry as a partisan exercise.

WATCH: VINDMAN CORRECTS CONGRESSMAN WHO DIDN’T USE HIS FORMAL MILITARY TITLE

“It’s an ambitious attack to deprive the American people of their right to elect a president that the Democrats don’t like,” Nunes said. “The chairman of this committee claims that democracy is under threat. If that’s true, it’s not the president who poses the danger.”

Morrison, though, suggested the impeachment brouhaha was predictable partisan politics as usual.

“I feared at the time of the call on July 25th how its disclosure would play in Washington’s political climate,” Morrison said in his opening statement. “My fears have been realized.”

Fox News’ Chad Pergram and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

---

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ex-ukraine-envoy-nsc-official-testify-in-second-round-of-impeachment-testimony

[Disclaimer]

The post Morrison, Volker undercut claims of ‘quid pro quo,’ ‘bribery’ and ‘cover-up’ in pivotal day of testimony first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The post Venezuela: Nicolás Maduro’s demise is ‘irreversible’, Trump adviser says first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

A new online threat from ISIS supporters encourages jihadists to target critical infrastructure, with the suggestion of bombing power stations.

The image shows a faceless figure in a black hoodie with the Islamic State flag holding a bomb with a lit fuse with transmission towers and lines in the background. Along the power lines is the phrase “Just Terror” — the ISIS slogan for lone jihadist operations — and blood-spattered ground.

The poster directs jihadists to “make a surprise for the Crusaders.”

The infrastructure threat is uncommon in ISIS propaganda, which has focused more on knife, vehicle or gun attacks in crowded areas such as festivals or music venues. Suggested targets have ranged from well-fortified locations, such as the U.S. Capitol or UN Security Council, to soft targets with little symbolic significance.

At the end of last month, another ISIS-allied media group encouraged jihadists to “kill the infidels in ways which no one else ever used” including “electricity” among methods such as snakes, poison gas, poisoned arrows, and wild animals.

A December report from the National Infrastructure Advisory Council, a panel established by President Bush after the 9/11 attacks composed of industry executives along with state and local government officials, warned that “increasing threats — whether severe natural disasters, cyber-physical attacks, electromagnetic events, or some combination — present new challenges for protecting the national power grid and recovering quickly from a catastrophic power outage.”

The report also noted that America’s foes could take advantage of chaos after a natural disaster to attack energy systems. Attacks on critical infrastructure could also be a combination of cyber attack and physical attack, further complicating the response and expanding the damage.

“The United States should respond to this problem in two overarching ways: 1) design a national approach to prepare for, respond to, and recover from catastrophic power outages that provides the federal guidance, resources, and incentives needed to take action across all levels of government and industry and down to communities and individuals; and 2) improve our understanding of how cascading failures across critical infrastructure will affect restoration and survival,” the panel said, requesting the National Security Council join with lead agencies to prepare a report on steps being taken to address the threat.

Source: https://pjmedia.com/homeland-security/new-isis-threat-tells-jihadists-to-bomb-electrical-infrastructure/

The post New ISIS Threat Tells Jihadists to Bomb Electrical Infrastructure first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The post Helsinki summit between Trump and Putin runs long first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The post Pres Trump to Unveil National Security Strategy Today first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The proposal was prepared by Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, national security adviser H.R. McMaster and other top officials, and presented to Trump at a National Security Council meeting on Friday, the sources said.

It could be agreed and made public before the end of September, two of the sources said. All of the sources are familiar with the draft and requested anonymity because Trump has yet to act on it.

In contrast to detailed instructions handed down by President Barack Obama and some of his predecessors, Trump is expected to set broad strategic objectives and goals for US policy but leave it to US military commanders, diplomats and other US officials to implement the plan, said a senior administration official.

“Whatever we end up with, we want to implement with allies to the greatest extent possible,” the official added.

The White House declined to comment. The plan is intended to increase the pressure on Tehran to curb its ballistic missile programs and support for militants, several sources said.

“I would call it a broad strategy for the range of Iranian malign activities: financial materials, support for terror, destabilization in the region, especially Syria and Iraq and Yemen,” said another senior administration official.

The proposal also targets cyber espionage and other activity and potentially nuclear proliferation, the official said.

The administration is still debating a new stance on a 2015 agreement, sealed by Obama, to curb Iran’s nuclear weapons program. The draft urges consideration of tougher economic sanctions if Iran violates the 2015 agreement.

The proposal includes more aggressive US interceptions of Iranian arms shipments such as those to Houthi rebels in Yemen and Palestinian groups in Gaza and Egypt’s Sinai, a current official and a knowledgeable former US official said.

The plan also recommends the United States react more aggressively in Bahrain, whose Sunni Muslim monarchy has been suppressing majority Shiahs, who are demanding reforms, the sources said.

In addition, US naval forces could react more forcefully when harassed by armed speed boats operated by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Iran’s paramilitary and espionage contingent, three of the sources said.

US ships have fired flares and warning shots to drive off IRGC boats that made what were viewed as threatening approaches after refusing to heed radio warnings in the passageway for 35 percent of the world’s seaborne petroleum exports.

US commanders now are permitted to open fire only when they think their vessels and the lives of their crews are endangered. The sources offered no details of the proposed changes in the rules, which are classified.

The plan does not include an escalation of US military activity in Syria and Iraq. Trump’s national security aides argued that a more muscular military response to Iranian proxies in Syria and Iraq would complicate the US-led fight against Islamic State, which they argued should remain the top priority, four of the sources said.

Mattis and McMaster, as well as the heads of the US Central Command and US Special Forces Command, have opposed allowing US commanders in Syria and Iraq to react more forcefully to provocations by the IRGC, Hezbollah and other Iranian-backed Shiah militias, the four sources said.

The advisers are concerned that more permissive rules of engagement would divert US forces from defeating the remnants of Islamic State, they said.

Moreover, looser rules could embroil the United States in a conflict with Iran while US forces remain overstretched, and Trump has authorized a small troop increase for Afghanistan, said one senior administration official.

A former US official said Hezbollah and Iranian-backed Shiah militias in Iraq have been “very helpful” in recapturing vast swaths of the caliphate that Islamic State declared in Syria and Iran in 2014.

US troops supporting Kurdish and Sunni Arab fighters battling Islamic State in Syria have been wrestling with how to respond to hostile actions by Iranian-backed forces.

Source: https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2017/09/12/trump-to-weigh-more-aggressive-us-strategy-on-iran/

The post Trump to weigh more aggressive US strategy on Iran first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.