Month: November 2016

Statement by The Honorable Mike Rogers on the Selection of Rep. Mike Pompeo as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency

November 18, 2016

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: jordana@mikerogers.com
202-629-4083

Washington, D.C. – “President-elect Donald J. Trump has made an excellent choice for the next Director of the CIA.

Congressman Mike Pompeo is a friend of mine and a friend of the intelligence community. Once confirmed, his military and legal backgrounds will serve him well in one of the United States government’s most demanding jobs.

As Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, I watched how Mike Pompeo worked. Smartly, deliberately, and quietly. That ethos will fit in perfectly at CIA.”

####

Statement in Response to Pat Caddell

November 17, 2016

Andy Keiser, Spokesperson to The Honorable Mike Rogers

“The mainstream media twisted Mike Rogers’ words and the findings of the Benghazi report to protect Hillary Clinton.  Mike Rogers lambasted Hillary Clinton and supported Donald Trump on television and radio for the past 18 months.  The implication that he is soft on Hillary Clinton is absurd.

It is time that all media fact check their stories for accuracy. The House Intelligence Committee has jurisdiction over the nation’s 17 intelligence agencies, not the State or Defense Departments. The House Intelligence Committee Benghazi report said that Hillary Clinton dismissed repeated threat warnings and denied requests for additional security in eastern Libya, thereby placing U.S. personnel at unnecessary risk.  It also found that Clinton perpetuated an inaccurate story that matched the Administration’s misguided view that the United States was nearing a victory over al-Qa’ida. Consequently, Congressman Rogers voted to create The Benghazi Select Committee to pursue further investigation into those failures.

Further, the House Intelligence Committee investigation into Benghazi was STRICTLY an intelligence investigation.  The Committee interviewed every single member of the intelligence community who was in the fight in Benghazi.

Further, Caddell’s comments are completely inaccurate and slanderous.  There is absolutely no merit to this conspiracy story.  Media must be held accountable to pushing such erroneous stories. “His wife” had no involvement with companies protecting the embassies or any embassy at that time. There was absolutely no conflict of interest.  Caddell’s comments are patently proven to be false.  Specious and untrue accusations should not be tolerated in this important debate.”

Response to The Weekly Standard

November 16, 2016

From Andy Keiser, spokesperson for The Honorable Mike Rogers

Mike Rogers lambasted Hillary Clinton on television and radio for 18 months.  The implication by the “Never Trump” Weekly Standard that he is soft on Hillary Clinton is absurd.

The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence’s (HPSCI) investigation into Benghazi was STRICTLY an intelligence investigation.  The Intelligence Committee has jurisdiction over the nation’s 17 intelligence agencies, not the State Department.  The Foreign Affairs Committee has jurisdiction over the State Department.  The HPSCI report certainly didn’t clear Hillary Clinton of wrongdoing, instead it pointed out numerous failures at the State Department and Congressman Rogers voted to create The Benghazi Select Committee to pursue further investigation into those failures.

The Chairman’s Additional Views submitted as part of the Benghazi report, which was approved UNANIMOUSLY, stated:

“Senior State Department officials [I.E. Hillary Clinton] dismissed repeated threat warnings and denied requests for additional security in eastern Libya, thereby placing U.S. personnel at unnecessary risk. 

Senior U.S. officials [I.E. Hillary Clinton] perpetuated an inaccurate story that matched the Administration’s misguided view that the United States was nearing a victory over al-Qa’ida. 

The Administration’s failed policies [I.E. Hillary Clinton] continue to undermine the national security interests of the United States.”

Chairman Rogers’ OpEd in The Hill after the report was submitted stated:

The Obama administration’s White House and State Department actions before, during, and after the Benghazi terrorist attack on September 11, 2012, ranged from incompetence to deplorable political manipulation in the midst of an election season.

The State Department ignored numerous, consistent intelligence warnings about the threat environment in Benghazi and was woefully unprepared to operate in a high threat environment like Benghazi. 

For months after the attacks, senior White House officials, including President Obama, grossly misled the American people about what happened and why.  I believe that they did this to further their own inaccurate view that they had al Qa’ida “on the run”; and with an election looming they did not want to be responsible for a terrorist attack on their watch.

HPSCI interviewed every single member of the intelligence community who was in the fight in Benghazi.  Because it is not within its jurisdiction, HPSCI did not interview Department of State or Department of Defense personnel.  That is why Congressman Rogers voted to create the Benghazi Select Committee, to further look into the unconscionable Obama Administration failures in those areas.

Finally, Mike Rogers has repeatedly called all of the CIA personnel on the ground in Benghazi heroes.  Were it not for their actions, every single American would have been killed that tragic night on September 11, 2012.

For months, Mike Rogers did everything in his power to elect Donald Trump, while the Weekly Standard did everything in its power to defeat him.

Response to Judicial Watch’s Who Was Mike Rogers and Dick Morris’ Lunch Alert

November 16, 2016

From Andy Keiser, spokesperson for The Honorable Mike Rogers

“Mike Rogers lambasted Hillary Clinton on television and radio for 18 months.  To try to imply that he is soft on Hillary Clinton is absurd.

The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence’s (HPSCI) investigation into Benghazi was STRICTLY an intelligence investigation.  The Intelligence Committee has jurisdiction over the nation’s 17 intelligence agencies, not the State Department.  The Foreign Affairs Committee has jurisdiction over the State Department.  The HPSCI report certainly didn’t clear Hillary Clinton of wrongdoing, instead it pointed out numerous failures at the State Department and Congressman Rogers voted to create The Benghazi Select Committee to pursue further investigation into those failures.

The Chairman’s Additional Views submitted as part of the Benghazi report, which was approved UNANIMOUSLY, stated:

“Senior State Department officials [I.E. Hillary Clinton] dismissed repeated threat warnings and denied requests for additional security in eastern Libya, thereby placing U.S. personnel at unnecessary risk. 

Senior U.S. officials [I.E. Hillary Clinton] perpetuated an inaccurate story that matched the Administration’s misguided view that the United States was nearing a victory over al-Qa’ida. 

The Administration’s failed policies [I.E. Hillary Clinton] continue to undermine the national security interests of the United States.”

Chairman Rogers’ OpEd in The Hill after the report was submitted stated:

The Obama administration’s White House and State Department actions before, during, and after the Benghazi terrorist attack on September 11, 2012, ranged from incompetence to deplorable political manipulation in the midst of an election season.

The State Department ignored numerous, consistent intelligence warnings about the threat environment in Benghazi and was woefully unprepared to operate in a high threat environment like Benghazi. 

For months after the attacks, senior White House officials, including President Obama, grossly misled the American people about what happened and why.  I believe that they did this to further their own inaccurate view that they had al Qa’ida “on the run”; and with an election looming they did not want to be responsible for a terrorist attack on their watch.”

If Mike Rogers was trying to whitewash something, he didn’t do a very good job.

There is absolutely no merit to the salacious, conspiracy part of this “story.”  Mike and Kristi Rogers are sought-after experts who happen to work in a similar field.  Both have worked in difficult environments on behalf of the country they love – Mike for the United States Army and FBI in Chicago.  Kristi – serving her country for the Department of Defense in Iraq.  Last time I checked, that is called patriotism.”

Rogers Statement on The Trump Transition Team

November 15, 2016

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: jordana@mikerogers.com
202-629-4083

Washington, D.C. – “These past six months, it has been an honor to serve as National Security Senior Advisor to the Trump transition team.

It was a privilege to prepare and advise the policy, personnel and agency action teams on all aspects of the national security portfolio during the initial pre-election planning phase.  Our work will provide a strong foundation for the new transition team leadership as they move into the post-election phase, which naturally is incorporating the campaign team in New York who drove President-elect Trump to an incredible victory last Tuesday.

I was proud of the team that we assembled at Trump for America to produce meaningful policy, personnel, and agency action guidance on the complex national security challenges facing our great country.

My team and I are pleased to hand off our work to my friend and former colleague, Vice President-elect Mike Pence, Executive Director Rick Dearborn, the Trump family, and the stellar new leadership team.

America’s challenges domestically and overseas are so enormous that we needed to move in a drastically different direction for our country.  The American people felt that, and made a historic choice that shocked the political and media establishment.  It was my pleasure to take to the national television and radio airwaves to highlight the stark choice between the bold change represented by President-elect Trump and the dangerous status quo represented by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

I look forward to continuing to provide advice and counsel as needed to the incoming Trump administration as they work to make America great again.”

Editor’s Note: The Honorable Mike Rogers formerly served as a United States Army officer, an FBI special agent and Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.  He is currently a CNN National Security Commentator and Host and Executive Producer of Declassified: Untold Stories of American Spies

###

Can Special Forces defeat ISIS in Syria and Iraq?

November 11, 2016

 

by Mike Rogers

(CNN) President Obama said his current strategy on ISIS is working and that the death of 129 people in Paris is a “setback.” He also said ISIS is contained, despite ISIS claiming credit for the downing of a Russian airliner over Egypt, the death of dozens in a bombing in Beirut, and the other 31 successful global attacks by ISIS and its affiliates this year.

The recent announcement by the White House that not more than 50 special operations forces will be dispatched to help coordinate the fight against ISIS was heralded by some as evidence of the administration’s seriousness on the issue. As CNN reported, this represented “the most significant escalation of the American military campaign against [ISIS].” Unfortunately, enthusiasm must be tempered by reality. Though it was a very small step in the right direction, it does not represent a grand strategy.

Time after time, military advisers have said special operations forces are not a cure-all. And we have bombed ISIS in Syria for over a year, yet three of their deadliest attacks have happened in the last three weeks.

To understand how special operations forces are properly used, and where they can be successful, it’s necessary to rewind the clock and examine Iraq at the peak of special operations-led actions there in the mid-2000s.

Under Gen. Stanley McChrystal, U.S. Joint Special Operations Command developed a system that linked forceful action with immediate processing of intelligence and real time analysis. Special operators launched missions at dusk and continued all night; hitting one safe house after another, analyzing the information gained in one strike and launching subsequent raids based on what they found, in hours.

How was this operational tempo achieved? First, the United States was working with the full support, consent and backing of the elected Iraqi government. The U.S. dominated the battle space, there was relatively sizable local support, and these teams enjoyed full air support, including medical evacuation, in the event an operation went poorly.

Similar conditions in Syria do not exist — Bashar al-Assad’s government forces represent a threat, and are not supportive of any foreign intervention except for that of Russia and Iran, and the United States does not dominate the battle space.

Where ISIS operates, it operates with near impunity. While there is often local hatred of Assad or ISIS, much of the allied ground support in the region actually comes from Kurds, not Sunni Muslim Syrian locals.

So if a similar operational tempo is not an option in Syria, and major Syrian domestic support is unlikely to emerge, what can the special operations forces achieve?

The administration said these troops are intended to advise and train local forces — Syrian Arabs, Kurds and other groups. Teams may be able to launch limited strikes against high-value targets in Iraq and Syria, and augment these Syria- and Iraq-based forces during their raids. It is likely these troops will also act as forward air controllers and observers, directing strikes launched from Turkey and elsewhere against ISIS positions.

Will this be enough to defeat ISIS? It’s a start, but it is unlikely. We have been sporadically bombing Raqqa and other ISIS strong points for more than a year, and still ISIS has recently ramped up external attacks. To a large extent, relying on proxy forces presents us with quality control problems as well as divergent long-term interests.

Tactical successes, such as snatching an ISIS oil minister or engaging in airstrikes, will not be enough if they are not translated into operational momentum paired with an overarching plan. A minimal number of special operations forces can achieve a great deal but they are incapable of achieving strategic success. Like airstrikes, they are tools that are supposed to be used in executing a strategy, but they are not a strategy in and of themselves.

Special forces committed to the fight must be accompanied by better on-the-ground intelligence operations, combined with constant targeting and degradation of ISIS leadership, and a more robust disruption of the ISIS logistics chain, executed simultaneously in Iraq and Syria.

Read full piece at CNN.com here: http://cnn.it/1S7bFXe