About Andrew C. McCarthy

Andrew C. McCarthy is a bestselling author, a senior fellow at National Review Institute, and a contributing editor at National Review. A well known commentator on legal, national-security, and political affairs, he also writes regularly for PJMedia and The New Criterion.

Andy is a former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney in New York, best known for leading the prosecution against the Blind Sheik (Omar Abdel Rahman) and eleven other jihadists for waging a terrorist war against the United States – including the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and a plot to bomb New York City landmarks. After the 9/11 attacks, he supervised the U.S. attorney’s command-post near Ground Zero. He later served as an advisor to the Deputy Secretary of Defense.

He has written two New York Times bestsellers – Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad (2008) and The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America (2010). His latest book is Spring Fever: The Illusion of Islamic Democracy

You can follow him at Twitter (@Andrew C. McCarthy) and like him on Facebook.

Comments

  1. Manny Jakel says:

    Andy McCarthy is a kit more than that. He is the voice of AMERICA whom the people trust.
    He is the one of the few people from whom you can hear the truth.
    Without a doubt he has the best legal mind around today and can run circles around all the others.
    He is an inspiring writer in politics and the law.
    And whether it is the spring or any other season, he is great along with people like Andrew Bostom.
    In other words, i love him.

  2. Bill Ahrens says:

    Congratulations on your incredibly insightful piece about Obama the felon. Indeed, if tried as an ordinary citizen, he would be put away for decades and his story would be told for generations. I hope you are accepting numerous TV bookings so your story can pierce the consciousness of all our citizens so we never, ever forget what he stands for. And the lengths he is willing to go to deceive us.

  3. Leonard E. Cox says:

    Sir,
    In regard the Origination Clause and Obamacare, one does not have to resort to the Federalist Papers since concise minutes were taken of the arguments on this issue during the Constitutional Convention of 1787. I hope my memory serves me correctly when I state that Gerry of Virginia proposed, at that Convetion, that the Constitution contain a clause similar to our current Orgination Clause because this was the then practice in the House of Commons (many years later, this practice in England changed). The members at the Convention initially did not favor Gerry’s proposal, but before the Convention ended, Gerry’s proposal was adopted and his suggestion, based on the practice in the House of Commons, became our current Orgination Clause. See, The Miracle at Philidelphia: The Constitutional Convention of 1787 written by Bowen with forward by a SCOTUS Chief Justice. The minutes of that Convention clearly state the reasons behind the Orgination Clause, the history from which the Origination Clause arose and the goal of the Origination Clause. Juxtaposed with these minutes, the Federalist papers are “advertisements”.

  4. In the lawlessness-fix It was pointed out that Obamas waiver would not let the insurance companies legally off the hook, they would still be in violation of the law, just not subject to prosecution by the current administration, does that mean that in January all of the companies benefiting from employer mandate waivers would be in violation of the law and could be sued by their employees since they are not being provided insurance?

  5. Andy, I have become aware of your book, Faithless Execution, from your 06-03-14 interview on the Kelly File. As yet, I have only read a review. In spite of that, I extend thanks to you for stating the obvious and with suitable background and credentials to be credible. I share the view that wide TV exposure, and at greater length, could be pivotal in achieving widespread awareness. If a drumbeat of public consciousness takes hold and amplifies, it may become so deafening as to preempt the inevitable attempt to use the race card as defense. I might offer one thought for down the road: A constitutional amendment (or clarification) to enable impeachment of an entire administration. This option might apply where, along with the chief executive, a sufficient number of appointed team members may be found to be co-conspirators (acting independently within delegated authority) in wide-ranging and allegedly illicit programs and/or procedures (high crimes and misdemeanors) and/or unresponsive to oversight. If anything, the Obama administration has proven the Founding Fathers correct in fearing a chief executive who seems willing to consider checks and balances and laws as mere suggestions. The impression left is one of being content to pursue enigmatic, private policy interests (I can do what I want) as though synonymous with national interests; accountable to no one. However, like a python that keeps squeezing – even after its head is cut off, leaving a loyal and allegedly conspiring team in place after impeachment of a chief executive might do little to cease apparent pursuit of a vague domestic agenda (like wealth redistribution) and foreign agenda (like reduction of the U.S. to an indebted, passive, second-rate nation). In the future, if a chief executive is sufficiently disengaged, could his or her team’s questionable efforts continue with equal impact, as though impeachment of the chief executive had never happened? If so, can and should the Constitution be made ready to deal with such a possibility? Thanks again!

  6. Richard B. says:

    Andrew, we in the tea party and very conservative can get things changed.(good bye mr cantor). We do have some faith in you and Trey,…. To a point. We have been lied to for a long time by the polititions we thought we could trust. It’s not republican vs. Democrat! It’s not conservative vs. Liberal. It’s US. Vs. Them. I know for a fact and I will not rest till this story comes out. Go to westernjournalism.com/ botched kidnapping. Also on U-tube. When Obama went to Egypt, he promised the MB to get the Blind Sheik back. There is proof. I realize for this to leak out would mean that Obama and Clinton are guilty of involuntary manslaughter. Andrew, question: why is mr. Holder still receiving his pay? There must be a lot of fear in Washington. The people have had enough. Please do the right thing sir. Thank You, Richard

  7. Anonymous says:

    Andrew, Truth wins – carry on and keep it coming!!! Best wishes, Jim Harris and Tom Sheehan DEA ret.

  8. I see a lot of interesting content on your website.
    You have to spend a lot of time writing, i know how to save you a lot
    of work, there is a tool that creates readable,
    SEO friendly articles in couple of minutes, just search in google – k2 unlimited content

  9. Hi my friend! I want to say that this article is amazing, nice written and come with almost all vital infos.
    I would like to look extra posts like this .

  10. Wonderful post! We will be linking to this great article on our site.
    Keep up the good writing.

  11. Thanks for ones marvelous posting! I really enjoyed reading it, you will be
    a great author.I will remember to bookmark your blog and may come back in the foreseeable future.
    I want to encourage continue your great work,
    have a nice evening!

Trackbacks

  1. [...] Former Federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy has fortunately just written (NRO) a useful guide (click here) called “Sharia and Freedom.” [...]

  2. […] “dynamic element of Islam” today, former first World Trade Center (WTC) bombing prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy observed in his video address.  Contrary to the “very Politically Correct interpretation of […]

  3. […] “dynamic element of Islam” today, former first World Trade Center (WTC) bombing prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy observed in his video address.  Contrary to the “very Politically Correct interpretation of […]

  4. […] then write about, while discrediting a panel of distinguished experts that included Gabriel, Lopez, Andrew McCarthy – who prosecuted the case against the Blind Sheikh – Frank Gaffney, and […]

  5. […] then write about, while discrediting a panel of distinguished experts that included Gabriel, Lopez, Andrew McCarthy – who prosecuted the case against the Blind Sheikh – Frank Gaffney, and […]

  6. […] then write about, while discrediting a panel of distinguished experts that included Gabriel, Lopez, Andrew McCarthy – who prosecuted the case against the Blind Sheikh – Frank Gaffney, and […]

  7. […] then excoriate, while discrediting a panel of distinguished experts that included Gabriel, Lopez, Andrew McCarthy—who prosecuted the case against the Blind Sheikh, the World Trade Center bombing mastermind—and […]

  8. […] then excoriate, while discrediting a panel of distinguished experts that included Gabriel, Lopez, Andrew McCarthy—who prosecuted the case against the Blind Sheikh, the World Trade Center bombing mastermind—and […]

  9. […] then excoriate, while discrediting a panel of distinguished experts that included Gabriel, Lopez, Andrew McCarthy—who prosecuted the case against the Blind Sheikh, the World Trade Center bombing […]

  10. […] McCarthy is a lawyer, and based on the vocabulary, he seems to have written his book for other lawyers, which would […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s