Jonathan M. Saenz, Esq., is the President of Texas Values, a nonprofit group dedicated to preserving and advancing a culture of family values in the state of Texas.

Prior to leading Texas Values, Jonathan headed the Liberty Institute offices at the Texas Capitol in Austin where he served as Director of Legislative Affairs and Attorney for Liberty Institute. He frequently presents research, analysis, and testimony before the Texas Legislature, State Board of Education, and other government entities on various issues affecting faith, family, and freedom.

Jonathan believes in religious liberty, the sanctity of human life, family values, and constitutional rights and has been involved in numerous court cases, including cases before the Texas Supreme Court and the United State Supreme Court. Mr. Saenz helped lead the State Board Education battle to prevent censorship in the Science classroom and protect strong Social Studies & History teaching. He was instrumental in the passage of Texas laws to protect religious liberty, Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, “Under God” in the Texas pledge, the Sonogram Bill, and many others. He has helped lead efforts to defend against attacks on parental rights, marriage, the elected State Board of Education, and abstinence sex education in the state of Texas.

In Enhanced Interrogation, Mitchell now offers a first-person account of the EIT program, providing a contribution to our historical understanding of one of the most controversial elements of America's ongoing war on terror. Readers will follow him inside the secretive "black sites" and cells of terrorists and terror suspects where he personally applied enhanced interrogation techniques. Mitchell personally questioned thirteen of the most senior high-value detainees in U.S. custody, including Abu Zubaydah; Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, the amir or "commander" of the USS Cole bombing; and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind behind the September 11, 2001, terror attacks--obtaining information that he maintains remains essential to winning the war against al-Qa'ida and informing our strategy to defeat ISIS and all of radical Islam.

From the interrogation program's earliest moments to its darkest hours, Mitchell also lifts the curtain on its immediate effects, the controversy surrounding its methods, and its downfall. He shares his view that EIT, when applied correctly, were useful in drawing detainees to cooperate, and that, when applied incorrectly, they were counter-productive. He also chronicles what it is like to undertake a several-years-long critical mission at the request of the government only to be hounded for nearly a decade afterward by congressional investigations and Justice Department prosecutors.

According to one of the world's most deadly and infamous terrorists, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, President George W. Bush wiped out plans for other imminent attacks by quickly invading Afghanistan after 9/11/2001.

According to a new book detailed by The Federalist and former Bush staffer Marc Thiessen, KSM admitted during enhanced interrogation the President's swift "shock-and-awe" action not only thwarted plans for follow up attacks to 9/11, but changed Al Qaeda's entire strategy.

Is political Islam in America’s best interests? This question should be central to our strategy of fighting ISIS and Islamist terrorism in general. Yet it’s one that many political leaders would rather not answer, because of our politically correct climate. But since Trump’s transition team announced last week that it’s considering retired Gen. James Mattis for secretary of defense, this reluctance might fade.

In a speech given at the Heritage Foundation last year, Mattis spoke about America’s position vis à vis political Islam. Rather than equivocating on the matter in order to avoid saying something uncomfortable or politically incorrect, Mattis simply pointed out that America needs to make a decision about its stance toward this ideology.

Muslims working in the State Department, Defense Department, and intelligence agencies like the CIA wonder if, with the election of Donald Trump, they should quit their jobs.

The employees are on edge about everything from retaining their security clearances to the possibility of discriminatory treatment under Trump, whose top aides include known peddlers of conspiracy theories about Islamists infiltrating the U.S. government.

"I feel apprehensive," a Muslim intelligence official told POLITICO. "I fear that – whatever white power movement or equivalent all of a sudden feels empowered by the president-elect, whatever tidbits of that community make their way into government – at the most basic level people who are brown, Middle Eastern, Muslim or Sikh or whatever will either be looked at with a lens of suspicion or concern, or something more overt may take place."