Department of Homeland Security director Alejandro Mayorkas is assembling a 45-day “independent security review” of the attempted assassination of Donald Trump on July 13. For this task Mayorkas selected:
Chief David Mitchell, the former superintendent of Maryland State Police and former Secretary of the Department of Public Safety and Homeland Security for the State of Delaware;
Mark Filip, a former federal judge and Deputy Attorney General to President George W. Bush; Ms. Frances Townsend, former Homeland Security Advisor to President George W. Bush; and former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. Her stint in that job gives the people cause to wonder.
Following the lead of President Obama, Napolitano expunged the word “terrorism” from the DHS lexicon and purged experts showing the connection between militant Islam and terrorism. On Napolitano’s watch, the DHS published:Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment. In effect, the DHS targeted Americans dedicated to their constitutional rights as domestic terrorists and violent extremists. This is the same shift going on in the Biden-Harris Administration.
Napolitano also began releasing detainees from immigration jails and distorted the numbers. She claimed the border was more secure than ever and resisted state efforts to stem illegal crossings. Napolitano’s tenure at DHS, according to Sen. Jeff Sessions, was “defined by a consistent disrespect for the rule of law.” Consider also Napolitano’s reign as president of the University of California, starting in 2013.
Under the California Civil Rights Initiative (Proposition 209), approved by voters in 1996, state universities cannot impose racial and ethnic preferences in admissions. Napolitano, who was never an educator, criticized the measure as abarrier to “diversity.” Napolitano made the University of California a sanctuary, founding and funding theUC Center for Undocumented Student Legal Services, and ruling that UC campus police would not cooperate with federal authorities.
While hiking tuition, Napolitano secretly amassed aslush fund of $175 million, which she spent on perks for staff and UC chancellors. State auditor Elaine Howle reported that Napolitano’s office “intentionally interfered” with their investigators. At one UC Regents meeting, students shouted “Arrest Napolitano!” and “Janet must go!” Napolitano was never held accountable andremained in the UC post until August 2020.
Before serving as Obama’s DHS boss, Napolitano was governor of Arizona. In that post she appointedScott Bales, her former campaign attorney, to the state supreme court. Gov. Napolitano alsovetoed billsaimed at fighting illegal immigration, which she further enabled at the DHS.
A University of Virginia law alum, Janet Napolitano made her public debut in the 1991 campaign to keep Clarence Thomas off the U.S. Supreme Court. Anita Hill accused Thomas of sexually harassing her and Napolitano represented Hill in the matter. After a conversation with Napolitano, Hill witness Susan Hoerchner suddenly had amemory lapseabout the date of alleged harassment in the office.
If Napolitano wielded any influence that would be subornation of perjury, a felony, but the attorney refused to answer senators’ questions. As one report said, “it would be a grave injustice if the Democratic majority allows Napolitano to keep her secret and become a federal law enforcement official.”
Janet Napolitano has zero experience in the intelligence field but in May of 2022 Joe Biden appointed her to thePresident’s Intelligence Advisory Board,which provides “with an independent source of advice on the effectiveness with which the Intelligence Community is meeting the nation’s intelligence needs and the vigor and insight with which the community plans for the future.”
DHS boss Mayorkas now appoints Napolitano for an independent review of the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump, currently a Republican candidate for the presidency. If the people thought Janet Napolitano was the worst possible choice, and that the “independent” review will turn out to be a whitewash or coverup, it would be hard to blame them.
