Which six people connected to White House have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood?

April 25, 2012

Writer

Glenn interviewed Frank Gaffney, founder and president of the American Center for Security Policy as well as former Assistant Secretary in the Defense Department under Ronald Reagan, on radio this morning about the rise of radical Islam and the threat it poses to the United States. More importantly, he discussed the legal implications that any politicians and journalists could face if they were found to have knowledge of treason against the United States.

Gaffney explained, "The technical term for it, the statutory criminal prohibition on it in the U.S. code is something called misprision of treason and what that fancy term means is if somebody either knows or had reason to know that seditious activity is underway, seditious activity like trying to overthrow the government of the United States or destroy Western civilization from within, for example, that is a criminal offense under our laws and should be treated as such."

"And it appears in the code right next to, you know, sedition because it's meant to say you can't let this kind of thing happen and not do something about it without being culpable yourself."

Gaffney said that there were six people connected to the White House who "on the basis of just the open source information had extensive ties themselves to the Muslim Brotherhood."

He added that at best these six people are ignorantly being manipulated by the Muslim Brotherhood and their agenda, or at worst going along with it willingly.

Who were the six individuals? You can find out tonight on Rumors of War 3: Target US on GBTV

Interview Transcript:

GLENN: Frank Gaffney is on the phone. He's part of this special. He was ‑‑ what were you? The assistant deputy Department of Defense? What were you? Secretary? What was that title?

GAFFNEY: It was an assistant ‑‑ I acted as an assistant secretary in the defense department under Ronald Reagan. Beck okay. And Frank, you have ‑‑ you've been on the show a million times, you've got tons of credibility in this kind of stuff. When I'm watching this special last night, I was shocked, and I'm ‑‑ I keep up on the news. I don't necessarily ‑‑ you know, I'm not somebody who misses a lot of stuff. I had no idea how much trouble we were in.

GAFFNEY: And if you don't, you can imagine how much further down the power curve most Americans are. And I just want to say, I thought Joe Weasel and your team, Glenn, did just an absolutely superb job.

GLENN: Thank you.

GAFFNEY: Of pulling this complex subject together in a highly accessible way and with what I think of as really, apart from myself, the best people in the country on the subject. And it's a real public service, and I very much hope that your listeners will tune in.

If I may, we have a kind of adjunct to your program that I'd also like to encourage them to take a look at because you've given them sort of a primer there but for a deeper drill‑down on how much trouble we're in and why and what we can do about it, we've just launched a new video course that is accessible via the Internet. It is available for free, ten‑part course at MuslimbrotherhoodinAmerica.com. And I hope that the combination of the two could really transform this from a country that is sleepwalking ‑‑

GLENN: Frank.

GAFFNEY: ‑‑ at the moment when a people who are waging a stealthy kind of jihad against us are getting away with it.

GLENN: We had a president who said he's going to start ‑‑ we're going to start helping small businesses through the Muslim Brotherhood. And then also that the war on terror is over because if you were going to be in Al‑Qaeda ‑‑ we've killed all the bad guys. And if you were going to be in Al‑Qaeda, now you pretty much know that you don't have to go there. You've got a different way of going instead of blowing yourself up. You can go through the Muslim Brotherhood and legitimate organizations.

GAFFNEY: Legitimate Islamism is the way a State Department official put it. And Glenn, what we're getting at in this course is that it's not an accident that we have the president of the United States and for that matter the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense and the secretary of the Homeland Security department and the attorney general of the United States or the Director of National Intelligence, even the national administrator all queueing increasingly to policy directions, to, you know, broad guidelines that are directing us to conform to the dictates of the Muslim Brotherhood. And why this is so important to understand, again why Rumors of War is such a service is that if you recognize that the Muslim Brotherhood's own stated mission in the United States is to destroy Western civilization from within by our hands, it's pretty clear, at least if you've got a lick of sense. Fortunately I know your listening audience does and I think most Americans still do, you're going to recognize this is crazy for us to be helping these guys.

GLENN: So I was watching the part about the Muslim Brotherhood and all the people that Obama has appointed and all the things that we're doing, and it's, Frank, it's shocking. And I paused it because I was watching the rough draft of it, what, yesterday, and I paused it and I looked at my staff and I said, "I'm sorry, but our president is an unindicted co‑conspirator. There's just no way these guys don't know all of this stuff. " Is there?

GAFFNEY: The course that we've prepared I think makes it unmistakably clear, at least just on the basis of common sense. And recognize you're like me dealing with what's in the public domain. This is not all of the information that's out there that, you know, congressional oversight committees could subpoena or, you know, extract on the basis of serious investigations, not the kind of information that inspectors general in these various departments could generate, not the kind of thing that, you know, criminal prosecutions could generate. But just on the basis of what's in the public domain, Glenn, we ‑‑ what we've got here at a minimum are useful idiots, as the Soviets used to say, people who are being put in the service of this Muslim Brotherhood civilization jihad agenda unwittingly, haplessly, but to the great benefit of our enemies. And at worse, what we have here is something that I think we've talked about on the show before. The technical term for it, the statutory criminal prohibition on it in the U.S. code is something called misprision of treason and what that fancy term means is if somebody either knows or had reason to know that seditious activity is underway, seditious activity like trying to overthrow the government of the United States or destroy Western civilization from within, for example, that is a criminal offense under our laws and should be treated as such. And, you know, Glenn, when we ‑‑

GLENN: Oh, hang on. I've got to write that down because I'm going to ‑‑ if Romney gets in, I'm going to be pushing for many members of the press to be tried ‑‑ what is the name of that?

GAFFNEY: Misprision, m‑i‑s‑p‑r‑i‑s‑i‑o‑n, misprision of treason. And it appears in the code right next to, you know, sedition because it's meant to say you can't let this kind of thing happen and not do something about it without being culpable yourself. And when you look at the six people we've identified, and I think there's some correlation to the ones you've looked at, the six people we've identified who either are in the Obama administration, in the White House, in the State Department or elsewhere, the people who are serving on advisory committees, in official capacities at the Department of Homeland Security and FBI and elsewhere, people who are being used for Muslim outreach by various agencies, six people who it is possible to show on the basis of just the open source information had extensive ties themselves to the Muslim Brotherhood, well, these folks are, I'm afraid, very much a part of the problem that we're confronting that's keeping us witless, willfully blind or, worse, actively submitting to the Muslim Brotherhood agenda in America.

GLENN: So let me go this because we also talk about in the special about the border and it is probably the biggest expose on the border I have seen on television. Let me go ‑‑ play Clip 1, please. This is Zach Taylor, former border guard agent and what he says he witnessed himself on the border. Here it is. You have Clip 1? Sara? You have Clip 1? He talks here about capturing of Syrian terrorists at the southern border and how that was treated and ‑‑

VOICE: And one worrying about daylights and border patrol agents caught a group of Middle Eastern people there. In the group, they did not catch the whole group, which is common. In the group they did catch were three people from Syria and some people from Yemen. And they brought them to the station. I was the supervisor on duty that day. And one of the agents called me into one of the write‑up rooms and said, this guy claimed he came here from Syria to be a terrorist. Says, you need to talk to him. So I went in there and I talked to the guy for quite a while. And he convinced me that he was serious, that he came here to engage in terrorism. He didn't know what type, what he was going to be expected to do but he was on his way to Chicago, Illinois.

GLENN: We let that guy go. Frank, there seems to be an uptick on connections between the drug cartels and Islamic terrorists. There is an uptick in Iran's activity in Venezuela. They just signed a deal to put missiles, Iranian missiles in Venezuela. And all of this stuff seems to be moving at a more rapid pace. Are we approaching an event, do you think? Your time in the defense DERNTHS is this, does this feel like event, events are coming?

GAFFNEY: Well, it is interesting we're having this conversation of course, Glenn, on the day that the Supreme Court is weighing the question of whether somebody should enforce the law, if the federal government is not going to do it, the State of Arizona should do it as they have asked to be able to do it. They've passed a law in the formal democratic process to do. And in the absence of that especially, I think we're looking at an event or a series of events.

We know, according to congressman Pete King who shares, as you know, the Homeland Security committee in the House that there are hundreds, as you know, hundreds of Hezbollah operatives in the United States right now.

GLENN: I think he said 200 just in New York.

GAFFNEY: Yeah. These are people who are presumably good to go, if the order is given to launch terrorist attacks against us. Heavens knows how many others of Al‑Qaeda or Hamas or other stripes the al‑Quds force of Iran, for example, are also either here or preparing to take the, you know, easy, well, relatively easy route into our country across a porous southern border without proper enforcement that imposes real obstacles to them doing it.

And here's the kicker: If you add to that violent jihad the prospect of it, the distinct possibility that we will find these guys killing Americans in the future, perhaps not so distant, as they have in the past, you add on top of that this other kind of jihad, not so much nonviolent but previolent jihad that actually we're helping to build to, according to the phase plan we talked earlier about the strategic plan of the Muslim Brotherhood, there was also a phased plan introduced into evidence in the Holy Land Foundation trial, Glenn, and what the phase plan says is you use these stealthy techniques until the point where you're able to seize control of the government. So it is all about building the violence, and under the doctrine of sedition ‑‑ of Sharia as we've discussed before, under that doctrine if they sense we are being submissive, their doctrine says they must redouble their effort to make us feel subdued; in other words, bring on the violence. So you put all this together and there's a, I think a very high probability, not just a possibility, probability that we will see death and destruction meted out at the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood and its other Islamist associates inside the United States, not just somewhere else, and it will be in part our own fault because we have been witlessly blind and we have been submitting, we have been encouraging, we've been enabling.

GLENN: Frank, I appreciate it. We'll see you tonight.

GAFFNEY: Sure.

GLENN: Frank Gaffney who is part of this documentary, Rumors of War III, really important documentary. I ask you as a 9/12 project or a Tea Party, gather your friends together. Get to watch it together. There's a live portion of this hour‑long documentary that will make your hair fall out. Hour‑long documentary on what we're facing. You'll understand the Muslim Brotherhood. You'll have a pretty good idea. And when you hear that anybody in the White House say, "Oh, Muslim Brotherhood," you'll know. You'll know they're lying to you. Ask the border and how this all ties together and the steps that people have tried to take to protect us and who's thwarting it. Rumors of War III tonight at 7:00, then an hour‑long special after that where we get together with all the players and we'll take your questions. You can tweet the questions during the broadcast when you're watching it or right after, and we'll address them live tonight, GBTV, my regular show at 5:00, which is powerhouse, and then real news and then 7:00 is the beginning of the special.

STU: Yeah, you can tweet your questions with the hashtag Rumors of War. Also to remind you you've got a two‑week free trial. So if you want to try it, this is probably a good time to try it because you'll get the documentary and you'll get the after discussion and everything else, see if you like it.

GLENN: Yeah. Rumors of War III tonight, 7:00, GBTV.

Shocking Christian massacres unveiled

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?

Should Starbase become its own city?

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Did Trump's '51st state' jab just cost Canada its independence?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.

Glenn's Show Prep