Hillary’s 2016 game plan: Control the media


Hillary’s 2016 game plan: Control the media

An unknown artist placed a poster on a traffic signal in front of the building where Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign offices are located, Sunday, April 12, 2015 in the Brooklyn borough of New York. A top adviser to Clinton

An unknown artist placed a poster on a traffic signal in front of the building where Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign offices are located, Sunday, April 12, 2015 in the Brooklyn borough of New York. A top adviser to Clinton

– – Sunday, April 12, 2015

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

In early 2007, the mainstream political pundits were already falling in line, predicting that Hillary Rodham Clinton would be her party’s presidential nominee for an election still nearly two years hence.

Hillary was The Chosen One. The pundits said she was unstoppable: She had the “Clinton Machine” behind her — the ruthless team of operatives and dirt-diggers who twice put her husband into office — as well as tens of millions of email addresses and, of course, access to hundreds of millions of dollars at the snap of her fingers.

She lost. Badly. But she didn’t just lose. While selling herself as the mature candidate whom Americans could trust to handle properly that emergency “3 a.m. phone call,” she got her hat handed to her by a 47-year-old with more experience as a community organizer than a U.S. senator, a job he’d held only since 2004.

Americans didn’t love Barack Obama. And most probably didn’t fall for his tripe about “hope” and “change” and a post-partisan presidency. They simply didn’t like — and didn’t trust — Hillary.

More, though, the media decided it was time for a change. Instead of a professional politician — an old and tired face — the mainstream media put its muscle behind the up and comer. When reports emerged in March 2008 that Mrs. Clinton had lied about taking hostile fire from snipers during a March 1996 visit to U.S. troops at Tuzla Air Base in Bosnia, the press pummeled her.

There was a new Chosen One. And while she stayed on for two more months, Mrs. Clinton was done. The media had decided — they bailed on her to support the man whose victory would be the historic election of “the first black president.” On June 7, she quit the race.

Now, she’s back — with a whole new bag of lies. But this time she has a plan: She’ll control the media — and she’s already putting her plan into action.

Before her Sunday announcement, Team Hillary held private dinners with media bigs. Off the record, of course. Attending were ABC’s Diane Sawyer, David Muir and George Stephanopoulos, who was Bill Clinton’s White House communications director (and also the guy who created the “war on women” narrative the press used against Republican Mitt Romney in 2012). Also wining and dining were CBS’s Norah O’Donnell and NBC’s Savannah Guthrie, who recently attacked Sen. Rand Paul and repeatedly talked over him during a contentious interview (which, as you can predict, led to MSM charges that Mr. Paul hates women).

MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough (once a Republican lawmaker) was there, as were several reporters from CNN, and, as always, Mike Allen of the liberal Politico website.

The New York City dinner came a night after MSM “journalists” dined in D.C. at the home of John Podesta, a top Clinton adviser and soon to be Hillary’s campaign chairman. Attending that off-the-record dinner were reporters from “The New York Times, The Washington Post, Politico, The Wall Street Journal, The Associated Press, Bloomberg, McClatchy, Reuters and several major TV networks,” according to The Huffington Post.

While munching on a shrimp appetizer and homemade cookies with a selection of wine and beer — “including, appropriately, Brooklyn Lager” — the HuffPost said, Hillary wowed the reporters, who no doubt felt special to have been picked for the high-level conclave.

And so, Operation Hillary 2016 has begun. She needs the media to push the same message they did last time: This election is historic, “the first female president,” blah blah blah. And so, the MSM will push that meme for the next 18 months.

Mrs. Clinton has given them their marching orders — attack the Republicans, protect and exalt me. And they’ll ignore all the lies, unlike last time. Look already how the MSM has dismissed the Benghazi debacle, or Mrs. Clinton deleting 33,000 emails from her secret server. This time, she truly is the Chosen One.

But there’s a simple problem: Just as in 2008, voters still don’t like her, and they sure don’t trust her. They gave Mr. Obama the benefit of the doubt; they won’t do so for Mrs. Clinton. She doesn’t know yet, but she’s going to lose again. Badly.

Clinton to face tough questions on Benghazi, email scandal with 2016 bid


Clinton to face tough questions on Benghazi, email scandal with 2016 bid

It's worse than Nixon's Watergate

It’s worse than Nixon’s Watergate

The days of answering softball questions at paid speaking engagements have ended for former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who will face a slew of tough questions that she has sidestepped for months now that she has formally announced her bid for the Democratic presidential nomination.

She will have to wrestle with a broad range of topics — from foreign policy issues, such as how she would handle the Islamic State terrorist army that grew up on her watch as secretary of state,   *(Remember how she said that America left Al Qaida in the cold? After America used them to get rid of the Soviet Union from Afghanistan.. here is a picture on how friendly she is with these groups)

Hillary Clinton who is a SAINT trying her best to secure the Americans from Terrorist........ what an  irony....

Hillary Clinton who is a SAINT trying her best to secure the Americans from Terrorist…….. what an irony….

to domestic priorities pushed by her Democratic Party’s liberal base, including whether she is willing to crack down on big Wall Street banks that have been major donors to her campaigns.

The former first lady, senator and top diplomat also must field questions on matters of ethics, including being pressed to more fully address an email secrecy scandal and a potential conflict of interest with the Clinton Foundation accepting foreign donations while she served as secretary of state.

Mrs. Clinton has begun taking steps to distance herself from the Clinton Foundation. That likely will not deflect questions about whether donations from wealthy interests in foreign countries influenced her actions at the State Department or even may sway her decisions if she succeeds in her quest for a return trip to the White House.

At a press conference last month, Mrs. Clinton attempted to allay the furor over her exclusive use of a private email account hosted on a private server in her home for conducting official business as secretary of state, a practice that may have violated federal open records laws.

But her explanation that it was simply more convenient for her to mingle personal and government email didn’t settle the controversy, which only deepened when she revealed that she had wiped clean the server, destroying all the emails except those selected by her team to be turned over to the State Department. Also, some of her explanations, such as not wanting to carry multiple devices, rang hollow or proved false upon investigation.

Questions persist about why she didn’t turn over her emails when she left the State Department in early 2013, how she selected the roughly 63,000 emails from her tenure to destroy and why she erased the server memory amid the scandal.
*(Even Nixon did not dare to erase the tapes of Watergate)

Mrs. Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, have weathered a lifetime of political scandals. Still, her responses to these ethical issues and how she handles other criticism as she navigates the campaign trail once again will test her character.

“Presidential elections are not just about issues and partisan politics, they are character tests about specific candidates at specific moments in history,” said Democratic campaign strategist Craig Varoga, who previously worked on Mr. Clinton’s 1996 reelection team and for former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, who is preparing to challenge Mrs. Clinton for the Democratic nomination.

“Americans are divided down the middle, in a foul mood and think the country’s going to hell in a handbasket. Hillary’s greatest strength is her experience, but every one of her opponents will try to use that experience against her,” said Mr. Varoga. “The candidate who eventually wins in November 2016 will be the one who does the best job of showing that he or she has the experience to be steady and strong, but also has the temperament to take the country in a new direction.”

Indeed, many of the questions swirling around Mrs. Clinton arose from her four years as American’s top diplomat under President Obama.

She remains a key figure in the probe by the House Select Committee on Benghazi, which is investigating the 2012 terrorist attacks on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Libya that killed U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

The attacks, and the Obama administration’s response to them — including initially blaming them on a spontaneous riot over an anti-Islam YouTube video — left an indelible black mark on Mrs. Clinton’s record as secretary of state. She could be called to publicly testify before the Benghazi committee in the middle of the campaign and answer questions about her role in the episode, as well as her secretive handling of emails. *(We know she was involved in the murder of the late Ambassador Stevens and three military men.”)

Mrs. Clinton also will perform a careful balancing act as she defends the actions of the Obama administration that she served, while breaking with Mr. Obama to demonstrate that she’s her own woman and offers voters something new.

She will encounter criticism of her dealings with Russia, symbolized by the embarrassing “reset” policy. But she will also have to offer a new vision for dealing with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who led his country’s takeover of Crimea and continues to sow unrest in eastern Ukraine with disregard for U.S. sanctions and admonishments.

“Now, if this sounds familiar, it’s what Hitler did back in the ‘30s,” Mrs. Clinton said last month at a fundraiser in California, comparing Mr. Putin’s moves to those of the Nazi German dictator who started World War II, reported the Long Beach Press-Telegram.

Despite the stinging rhetoric, Mrs. Clinton has yet to offer a strategy to confront Mr. Putin.

On another foreign policy front, Mrs. Clinton likely will have to elaborate on her views of Mr. Obama’s decision to release five terrorist leaders from the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in exchange for the Taliban returning captive Sgt. Bowe Berghdal, whom the Army later charged with desertion.

Mrs. Clinton defended Mr. Obama’s decision in June, before the charges were brought but amid widespread speculation that Sgt. Berghdal had abandoned his post and sought out the Taliban.

“It doesn’t matter how they ended up in a prisoner-of-war situation,” Mrs. Clinton told ABC News. “It doesn’t matter. We bring our people home.”

She will have to revisit the issue now that she’s a candidate and Sgt. Berghdal faces a court-martial on charges of desertion and misconduct in the face of the enemy.

Mrs. Clinton must take stands on U.S. spy agencies’ massive domestic surveillance programs and America’s use of drones to kill terrorist suspects — and, sometimes, Americans — overseas.

She has called Mr. Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran a “step in the right direction.” But she will be asked about her plans to deal with Iran in the future, and she will be pressed about how she would restore the U.S. relationship with Israel, which has been badly damaged under Mr. Obama’s tenure.

Some of the most pointed questions will come from her own party, as Democratic activists push Mrs. Clinton to the left and prod her to adopt the populist agenda championed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren, including expanding Social Security benefits, creating “debt-free college” and breaking up Wall Street banks.

Mrs. Warren, Massachusetts Democrat, so far has resisted calls to enter the presidential race, but she represents an ominous presence on the sidelines as Mrs. Clinton begins her run.

Hillary Clinton’s biggest challenge at the outset is reassuring the Democratic grass roots that she can represent them,” said veteran Democratic strategist Joe Trippi. “Look for her to proactively talk about issues like Wall Street, wages and equality as a result.”

Still, he said that any divide within the Democratic Party would quickly repair itself in response to attacks by Republicans, especially on issues that party activists view as partisan, such as Benghazi.

“That will only solidify her base of support in the Democratic Party and make her an even more formidable candidate in November 2016,” said Mr. Trippi.

Mrs. Clinton faces criticism from the left over her cozy relationship with Wall Street. Three of the four top donors throughout Mrs. Clinton’s political career — Citigroup, Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase — are among the same megabanks that liberals want to bust up.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign launch is an opportunity to make clear to Americans that she will campaign on big, bold, economic populist ideas like debt-free college, expanding Social Security, clean energy jobs and reforming Wall Street,” said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which is pulling Democratic candidates to the left.

“The battle over the direction of the Democratic Party is coming to an end — the Elizabeth Warren wing has won, and the battle of big versus small ideas is here. Americans are ready for boldness,” he said. “We hope Hillary Clinton thinks big and takes on powerful interests on behalf of everyday working families. Progressives will continue working to put big, bold, economic populist ideas at the center of the national conversation.”

In my opinion who ever votes for Clinton is putting another nail to the coffin of America. America started loosing control from the era of Bush senior showing that the agencies have gone rogue with kidnapping leaders, then came B.Clinton were he completely embarrassed the White House with Lewinsky sex scandal and balkanized Yugoslavia and the beginning of the small groups of terrorists trained of course by the Rogue agencies and Private war companies. Then comes Bush junior dummier than a gold-fish orchestrated with his father & other warlords the collapse of the twin towers so that he could invade Iraq and Afghanistan. Americans seem that they have no memory of the loss of soldiers in the thousands. After the Bushes comes Obama with Hillary Clinton engaging in an illegal wars in LIBYA, SYRIA, UKRAINE both are responsible for the failed state in Libya the cold blood murder of  Qaddafi leader of the Libya and the late Ambassador Stevens with three American Soldiers and hiding emails to the fact. I believe America needs a change and has to stop voting between these two parties which are sold out to corporate companies and govern with the corporate agendas. 

HILLARY CLINTON’S LATEST SCANDAL ONLY THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG


HILLARY CLINTON’S LATEST SCANDAL ONLY THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG

hillary stevens2e0c9bb1c7c99150d1f951f62e0f878bBy NWV Senior Political News Writer, Jim Kouri
Posted 1:00 AM Eastern

Wow Hillary picking her nose! Didn’t they tell her that when picking your nose you will find no oil!!!!

In an exclusive news report, this reporter described another suspicious link in a chain of events following the Benghazi massacre that cost the lives of four Americans including the U.S. ambassador to Libya. However, with the latest Hillary Clinton firestorm regarding an authorized – possibly illegal – use of a non-State Department email system including a privately installed Internet server, that Examiner story may be part of the latest in a long line of Hillary Clinton’s deceptions.

While still serving as Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton’s staff were involved in “hanky panky” as part of damage control for their boss prior to her appearance before lawmakers investigating the Benghazi terrorist attack that occurred on Sept. 11, 2012. They were instructed to set aside any documents that would hurt Clinton politically and not turn them over to the Accountability Review Board (ARB) that was investigating the alleged missteps by the Obama administration especially those by the State Department, according a report on Monday by former CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson.

While Hillary Clinton and her husband Bill were hobnobbing with Democrats in Iowa, a former Clinton assistant, Ray Maxwell revealed to reporters that State Department cronies beholding to Secretary Clinton were instructed to sift through documents in a “secret” operation conducted in the headquarters’ basement. The goal was to exclude anything that might point to Clinton’s mismanagement of embassy security especially in nations that were involved in conflicts with radical Muslims such as Egypt, Iraq and Libya.

During Clinton’s tenure, Maxwell was a high-ranking deputy in the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs (NEA), which was ordered to collect any and all documents regarding the Benghazi terrorist attack.

According to Maxwell, Hillary Clinton’s top assistant was allegedly present during the after-hours document review. But Maxwell wasn’t assigned to help in the hanky panky occurring in the Sunday document caper, he said. Maxwell’s description of what he saw — boxes full of government documents — reminds many observers of Hillary Clinton’s days as a First Lady during the Whitewater investigation. That incident in 1996 created a controversy that was quickly dismissed by the news media that all but covered up the story.

Did Hillary Clinton aides withhold damaging Benghazi documents? During a Monday morning appearance on Fox News Channel, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, identified the Hillary Clinton confidants who were allegedly present during the basement hanky panky. He named Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s chief of staff, who was President Bill Clinton’s attorney during his impeachment ordeal. Rep. Chaffetz also named Deputy Chief of Staff Jake Sullivan, who actually worked for both Hillary Clinton’s and Barack Obama’s presidential campaigns.

According to documents obtained by former Justice Department prosecutor Larry Klayman, Secretary Clinton and her closest staff members were the likely source of the security leaks to New York Times reporter David Sanger. Klayman also said the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) documents show that those leaks were coordinated with the Obama White House’s national security team, which included Susan “Benghazi” Rice and Iranian-born Valerie Jarrett.

“What should outrage Americans is the fact that not only is there a concerted effort to minimize the seriousness of Clinton’s email scandal, but this woman is running a campaign to become the Commander in Chief of the U.S. military forces, intelligence agencies and law enforcement departments,” said former Marine intelligence operative and police detective Michael Snopes. “If a CIA or FBI operative ever did half of what Hillary has been accused of, they would be suspended pending an intense investigation and probably fired or worse – they’d be locked up in prison,” Snopes added.

The media feeding frenzy over the alleged unlawful use by Hillary Clinton of a non-government email system is having an impact on other allegations against the presidential wannabe. On Tuesday, a former Department of Justice prosecuting attorney said that he believes then-Secretary of State Clintonprobably using her unofficial and illegal email system — was complicit in the leaking of classified intelligence regarding military operation plans formulated by Prime Minister Banjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) to destroy Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

In a Washington Post front page news story on March 2, 2015, reporter Anne Gearan intimated that the likely reason for the release of Israel’s plans to a New York Times reporter was intended to hurt the Israeli’s war plans, since President Barack Obama and his staff — including his top advisor Valerie Jarrett, herself born in Iran — believed Israel was willing and had the technical and strategic expertise to launch a preemptive sneak attack on Iran in order to eliminate their nuclear threat.

Ms. Gearan wrote: “Hillary Rodham Clinton used a private e-mail account for her official government business when she was secretary of state and did not routinely preserve and turn over those e-mails for government records collection, the State Department said Monday.” She also wrote: “It was not clear why Clinton, a potential 2016 presidential candidate, created the private account. But the practice appears to bolster long-standing criticism that Clinton and her husband, former president Bill Clinton, have not been transparent.”

 

Hillary bloodied Bill Clinton, forcing him to get stitches after learning of Monica Lewinsky affair


Hillary bloodied Bill Clinton, forcing him to get stitches after learning of Monica Lewinsky affair

 

Hillary and Bill Clinton (Associated Press)

Hillary and Bill Clinton (Associated Press)

 

By: Dave Boyer

Just as Hillary Rodham Clinton is preparing to launch her presidential campaign, a new behind-the-scenes book about life at the White House is providing a fresh look at her bitter fights with husband-President Bill Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky affair, including a bloody clash in the first couple’s bedroom.

“There was blood all over the president and first lady’s bed,” writes former White House reporter Kate Anderson Brower. “A member of the residence staff got a frantic call from the maid who found the mess. Someone needed to come quickly and inspect the damage. The blood was Bill Clinton‘s. The president had to get several stitches to his head.”

“The Residence: Inside the Private World of The White House,” is due out Tuesday from publisher Harper, but excerpts began making the rounds Monday. Ms. Brower is a former reporter for Bloomberg News.

Stories circulated after the 1998 fight in the White House that Mrs. Clinton had brained her husband with a lamp in a fury over the revelations of his sexual affair with Miss Lewinsky, a White House intern. But according to the book, White House staff surmised that Mrs. Clinton hit her husband with one of the dozens of books that she kept on her bedside table.

Mr. Clinton “insisted that he’d hurt himself running into the bathroom door in the middle of the night,” Ms. Brower writes. “But not everyone was convinced. ‘We’re pretty sure she clocked him with a book,’ one worker said. … The incident came shortly after the president’s affair with a White House intern became public knowledge … And there were at least twenty books on the bedside table … including the Bible.”

A spokesman for Mrs. Clinton didn’t respond to a request for comment.

In another passage of the book, White House florist Ronn Payne recalled witnessing a bitter argument between the first couple.

“He was coming up the service elevator … as the Clintons argued viciously with each other. … [H]e heard the first lady bellow ‘goddamn bastard!’ at the president – and then he heard someone throw a heavy object across the room,” Ms. Brower wrote. “The rumor among the staff was that she threw a lamp. The butlers, Payne said, were told to clean up the mess. In an interview with Barbara Walters, Mrs. Clinton made light of the story … ‘I have a pretty good arm … If I’d thrown a lamp at somebody, I think you would have known about it.’ … ‘You heard so much foul language’ in the Clinton White House, [Payne] said. …”

Mrs. Clinton would console herself about her husband’s affair by ordering White House pastry chef Roland Mesnier to bake her favorite mocha cakes.

Miss Lewinsky said she had sexual relations with Mr. Clinton from November 1995 to March 1997. But the affair was no surprise to White House staff, who saw the president alone with the intern so often that they began gossiping when they had a “Lewinsky sighting.”

Mr. Clinton was punished by his wife in other ways.

“For three or four months in 1998,” Ms. Brower writes, “the president slept on a sofa in a private study attached to their bedroom on the second floor. Most of the women on the residence staff thought he got what he deserved.”

And long before the controversy about Mrs. Clinton’s private email server during her tenure as secretary of state, the book says that the Clintons were obsessed with secrecy. The Clintons had the White House phone system’s circuitry rewired so they wouldn’t have to call each other through a switchboard.

“The Clintons’ preoccupation with secrecy made relations with the staff ‘chaotic’ for their entire eight years in office, [retired White House Usher Skip] Allen said,” Ms. Brower writes. “At least one residence worker, Florist Wendy Elsasser, attributes their anxiety to parental concerns: ‘I think protecting Chelsea may have had a lot to do with, for lack of a better term, their standoffishness with the staff.’”

In researching the book, Ms. Brower interviewed more than 100 workers at the White House residence, as well as presidential aides and first family members.

Mrs. Clinton is expected to announce her 2016 presidential bid later this month. She is adding to the press team for the anticipated campaign, selecting Karen Finney to serve as strategic communications adviser and senior spokeswoman, and Oren Shur as director of paid media, CNN reported Monday.

Ms. Finney served as deputy press secretary to Mrs. Clinton when she was first lady, and also worked on Mrs. Clinton’s campaign for the Senate in 2000. She has been a host on MSNBC.

The Clintons aren’t the only first family examined in the book. Ms. Brower writes about John F. Kennedy’s well-known infidelities at the White House, including swimming naked in the pool with female staffers.

President Jimmy Carter’s three adult sons were known for smoking marijuana from bongs at the White House. Staff said Mr. Carter and his family wept for two weeks straight after he lost his bid for re-election in 1980.

A White House usher, Nelson Pierce, recalls witnessing Nancy Reagan berate President Reagan as he stood in their room because she was angry that he was watching the 11 p.m. news instead of going to bed.

President George H.W. Bush and first lady Barbara Bush are remembered by the White House employees as their favorite first couple. Staffers said the Bushes treated them like family and encouraged them to go home early.

And White House employees say President Obama and first lady Michelle Obama have had a relatively distant relationship with the staff.

Usher Worthington White recalls bringing papers to their room on Mr. Obama’s first night in office, and hearing he new president say, “I got this, I got this. I got the inside on this now.” Then, “the music picked up, and it was Mary J. Blige.”

The Obamas — the first lady wore sweat pants and a T-shirt — were dancing to Blige’s hit, “Real Love.”

“‘I bet you haven’t seen anything like this in this house, have you?” Mr. Obama said as they danced.

“‘I can honestly say I’ve never heard any Mary J. Blige being played on this floor,’ Mr. White replied,” according to the book.

clinton10828018_830776306992976_2873480194207447096_o

A Democratic Muslim Brotherhood Is A Deadly Mirage


A Democratic Muslim Brotherhood Is A Deadly Mirage

by Richard Galustian

Supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood and ousted Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi hold a copy of the Koran and Mursi’s picture at Talaat Harb Square, in Cairo, January 25, 2015. REUTERS/Mohamed Abd El Ghany

 

It may come as a surprise to many Americans that the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) has enjoyed strong support both from the United States and Britain for many years. It is, after all, an organization rejected as fanatical by the vast majority in the Muslim world.

Washington and London’s support stems in part from the belief that the MB represents “moderate Muslims.” Amidst today’s critical debate over extreme Islam and radical politics, both countries regard the MB as a “reasonable” alternative platform for promoting democracy.

It is a mistake of epic proportions.

There are two other salient reasons MB operates with impunity and with the implicit protection of the U.S. and the UK.

The first is money. Lots of it. America and Britain give MB’s global misdeeds a pass in order to ingratiate themselves with the wealthiest of benefactors — Qatar. Qatar is massively rich and massively active in both countries, investing in real estate, hotels, airline links, and media. Qatar brags of its $35 billion U.S. investment. Its $700 million built the new Washington City Center. In the UK, Qatar invested over $33 billion. Projects there include Europe’s tallest office block, the Shard.

Business and politics are inextricably linked and Qatar money funds a variety of Mid-East political factions. This includes Muslim Brotherhood parties in Libya and Egypt, the latter of which is home to ousted MB president Mohamed Morsi.

The second reason is that President Barack Obama and Prime Minister David Cameron are desperate to retain a strong voice in the Middle East and North Africa region. Long before President Obama’s presidency, Washington think tanks were churning out pro-MB policy papers calling for the DC establishment to accept the MB as the “voice of reason.” President Obama apparently heeded the call, and with gusto, symbolically opening up the White House to MB supporters in the United States.

What both the U.S. and the UK fail to realize is that the Brotherhood is no friend to them and certainly no friend to democracy. As is the historical precedent with similar national socialist organizations, the Brotherhood is happy to use democracy to ascend to power, but once there, has no interest in reciprocity.

Egypt is a good case in point. Before being removed from power, the MB was deep into the forced Islamization of the country. It failed, miserably. The great majority of Egyptians had come to loathe Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood, and especially the direction they were taking the country. Those who condemn Morsi’s 2013 ouster as a military coup d’etat are misinformed. It was, in reality, a massively public rejection and overthrow.

(None will soon forget, either, the outrageous but “true-color” outbursts of the Muslim Brotherhood’s spiritual leader, Yousef al-Qaradawi, concerning Hitler’s “appropriate” punishment of Jews.)

It’s happening in Libya as well, albeit in a slightly different fashion. After being overwhelmingly rejected in last year’s elections, the Brotherhood’s political wing, the Justice and Construction Party, turned to violence to force the exile of the legitimate government. Its members in the previous parliament have reconstituted themselves in a rump legislature, refusing to accept there were free and fair elections and claiming they are still in power in Tripoli. Delusional and intransigent, but entirely in character.

Libya’s Muslim Brotherhood has effectively propelled that country into civil war. And Libyans are dying in large numbers, in part thanks to support from Washington and London, both of whom have adopted the puzzling view that the MB holds a political legitimacy on par with those who were actually chosen by the people.

For its part, the MB is careful not to identify itself as an extreme rightwing organization, but it cannot hide the truth. The MB is a classic national socialist movement, possessed of an ideology that it is determined to force upon hundreds of millions of non-accepting Muslims.

What is both ironic and tragic is that in working with the MB, and trying to force the Brotherhood on a region that does not want it, the U.S. and the UK are ensuring they themselves will be rejected by the very people they want to continue to influence.

It is already happening. In Libya, the democratically elected parliament and the government are taking an increasingly wary approach to London and Washington, who they see as having betrayed them. The Saudi-led Arab coalition’s decision to launch airstrikes on Yemen without first consulting or even notifying the U.S. or London is just the latest example of the West’s waning influence.

So it would seem then that Washington and London’s decision to use the MB as a midwife to appeal to former and/or future al-Qaeda/ISIS supporters on the strength of its supposed “moderate Muslim” credentials is ill-advised and thoroughly counterproductive.

As alliances shift in the Middle East and North Africa, the U.S. and the UK are losing ground and missing the obvious. The MB is fractured. Its ‘Dawa faction’ is becoming ever more radicalized by pro-ISIS and al-Qaeda groups. The MB in Libya and in Jordan epitomize that progression.

By helping and harboring an undemocratic and politically toxic MB, the U.S. and the UK are doing the very thing that they have spent so many years attempting to prevent: allowing sovereign states to become safe havens for international terror groups.

The United States and Britain must stop looking for the moderate Muslim in the MB: It is a deadly mirage.