Former Obama Officials Suggest European Allies Expel American Diplomats

Two former Obama administration officials suggested that America’s European allies should punish President Donald Trump for withdrawing from the Iran deal and levying additional sanctions on the Islamic republic.

The European Union and individual European countries are obligated to take aggressive steps to preserve the Iran deal, in order to avoid becoming Trump’s “doormat,” Steven Simon and Jonathan Stevenson argued in an op-ed that ran in The New York Times Thursday. Both Simon and Stevenson were directors on former President Barack Obama’s National Security Council (NSC).

“The European Union could, for instance, announce the withdrawal of member-states’ ambassadors from the United States. Isn’t this what states do when diplomatic partners breach solemn agreements, expose them to security risks and threaten to wreak havoc on their economies? That is, after all, what the administration is threatening to do by courting the risk of a Middle Eastern war and applying secondary sanctions to European companies,” they argued. “Depending on the American response, European capitals might even follow up with expulsion of American ambassadors.”

“It would be hard to fault these moves as irresponsible, given that they would not impair vital security functions like intelligence-sharing and law enforcement coordination. They would, however, symbolize a stark diplomatic breach that could extend to other areas in which the Trump administration needs allied support,” the former Obama officials wrote. “Thus, the White House would face the first hard choice in this whole process: a full-blown crisis in trans-Atlantic relations. If the administration’s next move were to impose secondary sanctions on Europe, the Europeans could slap its own penalties on American multinational corporations, which in turn would place additional pressure on the White House.”

Simon and Stevenson conceded it would be “radical” for Europe to sanction American companies in order to protect the Iran deal, but claimed that “it would arise in response to correspondingly egregious American behavior.”

Obama himself sharply and publicly criticized Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Iran deal — breaking with precedent that presidents refrain from criticizing their successor. The former president and former first lady Michelle Obama have publicly slammed Trump a dozen times since they left the White House.

http:// dailycaller.com/2018/05/12/obama-officials-european-allies-iran-deal/

>>1393998

I just checked, I have it here.

Records of the National Security Council [NSC]

https:// www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/273.html

Another National Security Council resignation, as Bolton cleans house

Another member of the White House's National Security Council resigned Thursday, as newly-installed national security adviser Ambassador John Bolton cleans house during his first week in the administration.

Deputy national security adviser Ricky Waddell resigned from his post Thursday, the White House said.

“Rick will be leaving and his departure date has yet to be confirmed,” a White House official said in a statement.

Waddell, an Army reserve major general, joined the NSC in May 2017, following President Trump’s first deputy national security advisor K.T. McFarland’s exit.

Waddell reported directly to H.R. McMaster, who resigned as national security adviser last month.

Waddell’s resignation follows a slew of other departures this week: NSC spokesman Michael Anton resigned Sunday, White House homeland security adviser Thomas Bossert resigned Monday, and deputy national security adviser Nadia Schadlow resigned Tuesday.

Bolton, who was appointed last month and had his first day at the White House Monday, is said to be “cleaning house” at the NSC, according to a White House source.

A national security source also told Fox News that Bolton is considering a merger of the NSC and Homeland Security Council (HSC) within the White House. Currently, the NSC and HSC staff function as separate bodies, with their own meetings and policy issues, but share a staff.

Under the George W. Bush administration, the HSC and NSC worked as separate staffs. During the early years of the Obama administration, HSC and NSC merged, but later split.

The NSC primarily focuses on U.S. foreign policy and nuclear proliferation, while the HSC focuses on national defense-related issues like terrorism and border security.

If Bolton does merge the HSC and NSC, the bodies would hold joint meetings on mutually-agreed upon issues, and provide joint policy recommendations to the president, a national security source told Fox News.

Bolton has previously served in the administrations of presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush, and served as a Bush lawyer during the 2000 Florida recount. Bolton served as a U.S. permanent representative to the United Nations from 2005 to 2006, and as undersecretary of state for arms control and international security from 2001 to 2005.

The position of White House national security adviser does not require Senate confirmation. Bolton has been a controversial pick for Trump, who has drawn criticism from Democrats since his appointment.

Bolton is now Trump’s third national security adviser—replacing McMaster, who replaced Michael Flynn.

http:// www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/12/another-national-security-council-resignation-as-bolton-cleans-house.html

>>1394124

God Bless and Protect the Q Team !

>>1394266

I think so.

I know this is old, but I believe it's a good description of who, what, where, when, and why of what our POTUS is dealing with. History lesson if you will.

https:// www.defenseone.com/ideas/2016/04/whats-wrong-obamas-national-security-council/127802/

This is why Q exists today (Great for Normies) This is dated 1994, however given the current world we are all a witness to, I believe this can be appreciated by most here. Too long to post all. link below.

The Shadow Government

Secret Rule

It is becoming increasingly apparent to American citizens that government is no longer being conducted in accordance with the U.S. Constitution, or, within states, according to state constitutions. While people have recognized for more than 150 years that the rich and powerful often corrupt individual officials, or exert undue influence to get legislation passed that favors their interests, most Americans still cling to the naive belief that such corruption is exceptional, and that most of the institutions of society, the courts, the press, and law enforcement agencies, still largely comply with the Constitution and the law in important matters. They expect that these corrupting forces are disunited and in competition with one another, so that they tend to balance one another.

Mounting evidence makes it clear that the situation is far worse than most people think, that during the last several decades the U.S. Constitution has been effectively overthrown, and that it is now observed only as a façade to deceive and placate the masses. What has replaced it is what many call the Shadow Government. It still, for the most part, operates in secret, because its control is not secure. The exposure of this regime and its operations must now become a primary duty of citizens who still believe in the Rule of Law and in the freedoms which this country is supposed to represent.<1>

Restoring Constitutional Governance

The restoration of constitutional governance need not require a violent revolution, and we should avoid violence if possible. It can be brought about in much the way it happened in the Soviet Union. This involves several elements:

(1) Exposure ("glasnost"). The Shadow Government, even more than the old Soviet regime, depends on secrecy. Uncover it and it loses most of its power. We need to end black budgets, require the declassification of most classified documents, especially those pertaining to UFOs and aliens, and adopt and enforce sunshine laws to require full disclosure of not just meetings and agreements among officials, but also among major organizations of all kinds which may exercise an undue influence on political decisions. We must also require independent audits of all such organizations.

(2) Restructuring ("perestroika"). We need to enforce strengthened anti-trust laws to break up large enterprises into many competing firms, not just two or three, and forbid interlocking directorates, beginning with the broadcast media and the press. Intelligence and law enforcement agencies need to be broken up into several competing ones, which can serve as effective checks on abuses by one another.

(2) Infiltration and defection. We need to get patriots inside key organizations and encourage insiders to become patriots. The most important are military and law enforcement organizations, whose members must be conditioned to come over to the side of the people if there is a confrontation. We must also provide effective protection for whistleblowers.

(3) Harassment. Lawsuits. Liens. Freedom of Information Act requests. Surveillance of principals. Local prosecution of federal agents.

(4) Local organization and publicity. Revive the constitutional Militia on the Swiss model<12>, set up independent investigation teams, alternative newspapers, talk radio, alert networks. We need to inform the public on what is happening, and to reach those who now are all too willing to trust the government to protect them.

(5) Civil disobedience and nonviolent resistance. Protest demonstrations. Tax protests. Defiance of unconstitutional laws. Refusal of juries to convict.<13>

(6) Armed resistance. This must involve non- provocative, but firm, defense of persons from illegal abuses, and exclusion of illegal governmental actions from local areas, county by county, state by state, with insistence on constitutional compliance.

(7) Transition plan. The oligarchy cannot be expected to come up with a plan for an orderly return to constitutional governance. The process must be conducted carefully, to avoid a disastrous collapse.<14We will need some constitutional amendments, to make legal some of the things the national government can do best. The government needs to end budget deficits and acquire the stock of the Federal Reserve.<15>

http:// www.constitution.org/shad4816.htm