Photo Credit: Breitbart Members of the House and the Senate delivered 2 million petitions to Congress, opposing the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Trade Promotion Authority (TPA).
The ranking Democrat of the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), says that “if there is ever a time in American history that we have got to stand up for the American worker and not for corporate greed—today is that day and the TPP is that issue. The facts are very clear… the TPP follows in the footsteps of other disastrous trade agreements.” Sanders adds:
Over and over again—we were told by corporate America and their representatives about all of the jobs that these trade agreements would create. And over and over again… the proponents of unfretted free trade were wrong. Bill Clinton promised that NAFTA would create a million jobs in 5 years, in fact it lost 700,0000 jobs. We were promised that PNTR with China would create hundreds of thousands of jobs. Instead it has lead to the loss of over 2 million jobs. And on and on it goes. Everybody knows that the great middle class of this country is disappearing and one of the major reasons is a disastrous set of trade policies, which force America workers to compete with workers around the world who make pennies an hour.
The TPP and TPA proposals that President Obama has negotiated in complete secrecy have unified members from both the Republican and Democratic parties against the trade agreement. (Read more from “We the People: Millions of Petitions Delivered to Congress to Stop TPP” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-04 03:29:522016-04-11 11:00:25We the People: Millions of Petitions Delivered to Congress to Stop TPP
President Obama once confided to a top adviser that he believes he is “the closest thing to a Jew that has ever sat in this office.”
In an interview by an Israeli TV station, former Obama adviser David Axelrod recalled the president venting in a moment of contemplation about criticisms that he doesn’t support Israel strongly enough, JPupdates.com reported.
“You know, I think I am the closest thing to a Jew that has ever sat in this office,” the president told Mr. Axelrod. “For people to say that I am anti-Israel, or, even worse, anti-Semitic, it hurts.”
White House press secretary Josh Earnest endorsed the sentiment Tuesday, saying Mr. Obama gave a heartfelt speech at a Jewish synagogue in Washington last month that expressed “the kinds of common bonds and common values that are embodied in his administration that are [also] advocated by the Jewish community” . . .
“The world of politics everywhere is divided into two categories: the first and more common is the people who run for public office because they want to be somebody,” Mr. Axelrod said. “A smaller group is made of respectable people who run for public office because they want to do something – something positive. Shape the future in a positive way. I think Benjamin Netanyahu completely falls in the first category. He is a great politician. He knows what he needs to do to get through the next election. But it seems to me that Israel has to think about what they need to do to get through the next generation.” (Read more from “Obama: I Am the Closest Thing to a Jew That Has Ever Sat in the Oval Office” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-03 03:45:172016-04-11 11:00:26Obama: I Am the Closest Thing to a Jew That Has Ever Sat in the Oval Office
Photo Credit: AP News My Way By Jack Gillum, Eileen Sullivan and Eric Tucker. The FBI is operating a small air force with scores of low-flying planes across the country carrying video and, at times, cellphone surveillance technology — all hidden behind fictitious companies that are fronts for the government, The Associated Press has learned.
The planes’ surveillance equipment is generally used without a judge’s approval, and the FBI said the flights are used for specific, ongoing investigations. In a recent 30-day period, the agency flew above more than 30 cities in 11 states across the country, an AP review found.
Aerial surveillance represents a changing frontier for law enforcement, providing what the government maintains is an important tool in criminal, terrorism or intelligence probes. But the program raises questions about whether there should be updated policies protecting civil liberties as new technologies pose intrusive opportunities for government spying.
U.S. law enforcement officials confirmed for the first time the wide-scale use of the aircraft, which the AP traced to at least 13 fake companies, such as FVX Research, KQM Aviation, NBR Aviation and PXW Services. Even basic aspects of the program are withheld from the public in censored versions of official reports from the Justice Department’s inspector general.
“The FBI’s aviation program is not secret,” spokesman Christopher Allen said in a statement. “Specific aircraft and their capabilities are protected for operational security purposes.” Allen added that the FBI’s planes “are not equipped, designed or used for bulk collection activities or mass surveillance.” (Read more from “FBI Behind Mysterious Surveillance Aircraft Over US Cities” HERE)
Police Arrest Robbery Suspect After Tracking With Drone
By Cassidy McDonald. The robbery suspect who was arrested with the help of a police drone on Sunday also stole a running car from a Near West Side coffee shop, police said.
Marquis Meki Isiah Phiffer, 21, of Monroe, was arrested on tentative charges operating a car without the owner’s consent, eluding an officer and robbery.
Around 1:15 p.m., a 50-year-old Madison man told police he stopped at EVP Coffee, 555 S. Midvale Blvd., and left his Subaru Outback running in the parking lot because he only planned to be inside for a few minutes. (Read more from this story HERE)
There’s now another issue with the controversial water rule proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers.
The Environmental Protection Agency wants you to think there’s a lot of support for the proposed water rule that seeks to give the agency and the Army Corps jurisdiction over almost every water. Reportedly, the agency may cite this “overwhelming” support when it releases its final rule any day now.
In March, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, “We have received over 1 million comments, and 87.1 percent of those comments we have counted so far—we are only missing 4,000—are supportive of this rule.”
[Listen to the author describe the EPA’s fraudulent actions in trying to deceive Americans into supporting the agency’s naked power grab]
Before proponents (the agency, Army Corps, and perhaps some of their friends and family members) get too excited, the pronouncement of support is misleading.
McCarthy failed to mention the Environmental Protection Agency engaged in controversial activities to help get support for the rule. Some have claimed these activities may even be illegal.
McCarthy failed to mention the Environmental Protection Agency engaged in controversial activities to help get support for the rule. Some have claimed these activities may even be illegal.
For example, the agency used a Thunderclap campaign to drum up support using social media. “We hope you’ll support our clean water proposal. To help you do that, and get your friends to also voice their support, we’re using a new tool called Thunderclap; it’s like a virtual flash mob.” The message was sent to about 1.8 million people.
The agency also has used social media in other ways to help promote the rule.
According to The New York Times, “Late last year, the EPA sponsored a drive on Facebook and Twitter to promote its proposed clean water rule in conjunction with the Sierra Club.”
The Environmental Protection Agency also developed a video to promote the rule, asking the question “Do you choose clean water?” As if critics of the rule want dirty water. On top of this, McCarthy has dismissed some public concerns about the rule as “ludicrous” and “silly.”
As seen through these examples, the Environmental Protection Agency has been acting more like an advocacy group than a federal agency that is supposed to welcome comments from all sides. It has tried to influence the comments that were received. When the agency uses its massive resources to get support for its rule, it shouldn’t be a surprise when it receives comments that support the rule.
After receiving heat about these questionable actions, the agency defended itself by claiming, “Our goal is to inform and educate. We encourage folks from all perspectives to participate so we can understand more, learn more and finalize a stronger rule.”
An agency isn’t educating when it’s actively trying to gain support for its rule and using numerous social media outlets to advocate. Suggesting support for the proposed rule is the same as supporting clean water isn’t education; it’s rhetoric.
The agency isn’t encouraging folks from all perspectives to participate when the head of the agency calls some public concerns ludicrous and silly. The message to the public is don’t even bother expressing criticism because we will either mock it or ignore it.
Of course, the number of comments isn’t supposed to matter anyway. As the agency itself states, “The comment process is not a vote—one well-supported comment is often more informative to the agency than a thousand form letters.” In fact, most of the comments were form letters (there were more than 1 million mass mail comments).
McCarthy also fails to mention opposition to the rule is massive. Groups representing farmers, ranchers, small businesses, manufacturers, homebuilders, mining companies, counties, cities and state legislators, as well as individuals, state officials and other groups have submitted substantive comments expressing opposition to the rule. In other words, there is widespread opposition rarely seen to a proposed rule.
The rulemaking process is supposed to be open and welcoming for the public. It should not be gamed by an agency.
If we are talking about support for a rule, form letters don’t provide any answers, and the agency knows this. These desperate actions by the agency are understandable (not justified) when their rule is one of the most widely reviled in recent memory. (See “EPA’s Shocking Actions to Gain Support for Its Water Rule”, originally posted HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-03 03:41:202016-04-11 11:00:27EPA’s Outrageous Actions to Gain Support for Its Water Rule [+video]
Photo Credit: Over the past 18 months, Obama has paid Iran $700 million a month to come to the negotiations table and string along the West with promises of dismantling their nuclear program. This may sound like an exaggeration – it’s not. In addition to paying them what will amount to $12 billion in unfrozen assets by the end of June, Obama has ceded half of the Middle East to the Iranian hegemony, including control of critical international waterways, as well as the security of Israel.
So what is the return on Obama’s investment?
Not only has Iran refused to dismantle its program or even allow weapons inspectors on any relevant nuclear sites, a new report from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reveals that Iranian nuclear fuel stockpiles expanded by 20% since negotiations began in November 2013. You might call this investment the ‘Solyndra of the Middle East,’ except that this is not a joke; it’s an existential threat to global security.
This is the grand lie of the entire negotiations. Proponents of negotiations are giving off the impression that there is no harm in trying to forge a deal and that sanctions will not be lifted unless they abide by the terms of the Joint Plan of Action (JPA) laid out by the P5+1 nations on November 24, 2013. The reality is that Iran has already benefited from a smorgasbord of preliminary sanctions relief for the past 18 months. They have everything to gain and nothing to lose by continuing to blow through deadlines and dragging out these specious negotiations.
It is for this reason that the element of time is so important to Iran, Obama, the phony “Hawkish” Democrats, and AIPAC. The longer they can drag out negotiations the more Iran and Obama benefit, while Senate Democrats and AIPAC can express tacit concern, albeit continue to delay sanctions or any meaningful step to curtail the immoral appeasement of Iran.
There is already a quiet consensus growing among the political class to allow the June 30 deadline to expire without any action. And in fact, the reckless Corker-Cardin bill implicitly blesses a tardy agreement by establishing dates of faux congressional approval well into September.
Well, the time is up and the dangerous negotiations must end now. June 30 was the final promised deadline after failing to meet three other timelines. Unless Iran agrees by June 30 to completely dismantle its nuclear program and allow inspectors at any installation, Republicans must immediately defund negotiations and move to reinstate and strengthen all existing sanctions. Forget about removing additional sanctions.
A Republican Party committed to actually protecting our national security would hold the 10 Democrat sponsors of the Kirk-Menendez sanctions bill accountable for failing to fulfill their promises. The 10 Democrats (Menendez, Schumer, Blumenthal, Peters, Casey, Cardin, Coons, Manchin, Donnelly, and Stabenow) signed onto sanctions well over a year ago, yet continued to allow Obama to negotiate away sanctions relief for terror and miss several deadlines. In January, they committed to voting for the sanctions bill in the event that Iran failed to accede to a preliminary framework on March 24 and a final agreement by June 30.
March 24 has come and gone without an agreed upon a framework, yet nobody has held them accountable. How can Republicans allow them to play ‘Lucy and the Football’ for the 4th time after June 30?
To this day, Rep. Ed Royce (R- CA), Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has not moved a single Iran bill through committee, even though Republicans can easily pass a solid bill out of the chamber with a simple majority and pressure Senate Democrats to fulfill their stated commitments. Why would Democrats and their protectors at AIPAC ever feel the pressure to move off their current double-game of protecting Obama while sounding an alarmed tone on Iran – if Republicans fail to pursue them and make them choose sides once and for all?
In addition to passing standalone bills to hold Democrats accountable, conservatives can use the “State-foreign Ops” appropriations bill to cut off funding for negotiations. They can also use the pending NDAA to force policy changes on Iran.
Time is of the essence. There is no reason we should be paying the Iranians – a regime that killed and incapacitated thousands of our soldiers in Iraq – billions of dollars so they can expand their nuclear stockpiles, grow their military power, and control even greater parts of the Middle East.
In the coming weeks, Republicans will be pushing Obama’s trade deal, the Ex-Im Bank, and a massive highway bill with much alacrity – along with a slew of “suspension bills” on issues nobody even understands. Is it too much to ask that they muster the same urgency about one of the biggest threats to national security? (See “Obama Drops Iran Sanctions, Nuclear Stockpile Increases 20%”, originally posted HERE)
By Brad Heath. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration more than tripled its use of wiretaps and other types of electronic eavesdropping over the past decade, largely bypassing federal courts and Justice Department lawyers in the process, newly obtained records show.
The DEA conducted 11,681 electronic intercepts in the fiscal year that ended in September. Ten years earlier, the drug agency conducted 3,394.
Most of that ramped-up surveillance was never reviewed by federal judges or Justice Department lawyers, who typically are responsible for examining federal agents’ eavesdropping requests. Instead, DEA agents now take 60% of those requests directly to local prosecutors and judges from New York to California, who current and former officials say often approve them more quickly and easily.
Drug investigations account for the vast majority of U.S. wiretaps, and much of that surveillance is carried out by the DEA. Privacy advocates expressed concern that the drug agency had expanded its surveillance without going through internal Justice Department reviews, which often are more demanding than federal law requires.
Wiretaps — which allow the police to listen in on phone calls and other electronic communications — are considered so sensitive that federal law requires approval from a senior Justice Department official before agents can even ask a federal court for permission to conduct one. The law imposes no such restriction on state court wiretaps, even when they are sought by federal agents. (Read more from “DEA Eavesdropping Tripled, Bypassed Federal Courts” HERE)
Judge Probes Destruction of Evidence in NSA Leak Prosecution
By Marisa Taylor. A federal judge is investigating allegations that the government may have improperly destroyed documents during the high-profile media leak investigation of National Security Agency whistleblower Thomas Drake.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Stephanie Gallagher’s inquiry was launched after Drake’s lawyers in April accused the Pentagon inspector general’s office of destroying possible evidence during Drake’s criminal prosecution, which ended almost four years ago, McClatchy has learned.
In a May 13 letter, Gallagher told Justice Department lawyers that the judge who had presided over the case asked her to evaluate the allegations from Drake’s lawyers “for further investigation and to make recommendations as to whether any action by the court is warranted or appropriate.”
The allegations raise new questions about a prosecution that had been excoriated by the presiding judge after the Justice Department’s case against Drake unraveled and resulted in the former senior NSA official pleading guilty to a misdemeanor charge.
As a result of the controversial prosecution, Drake became a symbol of the dangers whistleblowers can face when they help the media, Congress and government watchdogs investigate wrongdoing at intelligence agencies. (Read more from this story HERE)
While the Senate is embroiled in a heated debate over the extension of NSA surveillance, nobody is focusing on the more serious issue at hand. No amount of surveillance –constitutional or not – can defend against the avoidable, but currently suicidal, immigration policies in which security threats are brought here in the first place.
There is perhaps nothing more counterintuitive about U.S. foreign policy than the massive increase in refugees from Islamic civil wars in the Middle East – at a time when we are engaging in foreign interventions under the guise of protecting our homeland.
Conservative Review has already detailed numerous cases of refugees being arrested for engaging in terror activities and the torrent of immigrants from the Middle East who have attempted to go fight for the Islamic State in Syria. With all of the apocalyptic rhetoric on display in Washington in light of the shutdown of NSA surveillance for two days, is anybody concerned about all the security threats that are needlessly admitted to this country on a daily basis?
Assuming the NSA is legitimately focused only on stopping terror attacks, who do you think is under surveillance? While a number of Middle Eastern immigrants are peaceful like any other group, almost all of the Islamic terror threats will invariably emanate from this growing population.
Consider this for a moment: Iraq is saturated with Sunni and Shiite Jihadist elements, yet each group is able to claim refugee status if they can show they are persecuted based on their minority status in a given neighborhood. Ironically, radical elements of both Sunnis and Shias have been admitted to places like Bowling Green, Kentucky, and there are now stories of violence erupting between them! The indifferent politicians are literally bringing all of the woes from the Middle East to our shores.
From fiscal year 2007 through April 30, 2015, the U.S. has resettled 134,314 Iraqis via the refugee program and the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program, the overwhelming majority being Muslim and evenly divided between Sunni and Shia. For the first half of fiscal year 2015, as the debate over surveillance has heated up, we’ve continued to admit more people from volatile Islamic countries (data from the Refugee Processing Center):
8229 from Iraq, roughly 6640 have been Muslim – evenly split between Sunnis and Shiites
4993 from Somalia
9000 from Burma, but 1,649 are Muslim, mostly the Rohingya. Although a predominantly Buddhist country, a large share of refugees from Burma are Muslims.
As I noted last week, the SIV program – designed to bring in contractors and translators from Iraq and Afghanistan – has turned out to be just as problematic as the refugee program. Yet, Democrats slipped in a provision to the NDAA that would add 3,000 more Afghanis to the SIV program.
Additionally, a group of 14 Democrat senators are now calling on the administration to admit a whopping 65,000 refugees from the Syrian civil war. By my count, 865 Syrians have been admitted as refugees since fiscal year 2012, roughly corresponding with the start of the civil war. While the number seems small, it is growing rapidly and several thousand more are in the pipeline. More importantly, almost all of them have been Muslims, despite the fact that Christians face the most credible fear of persecution and have the least risk when it comes to vetting for security risks.
The call for admitting so many Syrian refugees is a prima facie threat. As with any civil war, there are thousands of innocent civilians being killed. However, this is a complex tangled web with hostilities between Assad’s regime, Hezbollah, al-Nusra (Al Qaeda in Syria), Islamic State, Muslim Brotherhood, and the Islamic Front. There is no way to sort out this mess without needlessly letting in security risks.
Time and again, our political class has failed us by letting in persecutors under a program designed to protect those being persecuted. The refugee resettlement program has essentially been reoriented towards a Muslim resettlement operation. According to data compiled by the State Department, Arabic is by far the most commonly spoken language by recent refugees. The third most commonly spoken language on the list? Somali.
There are undoubtedly plenty of Muslims who are being persecuted in the Middle East, but it is becoming harder and harder to untangle the web of disparate radical groups that are at war with each other, yet have the ability to obtain refugee status. There are countless Muslim refugees in Syria and Iraq who have been legitimately displaced from their homes but who harbor the same radical Islamic views as those conquering their neighborhoods.
It is not the job of America to gratuitously incur risk without the absolute certainty that refugees will not endanger our national security. With the unprecedented growth in Muslim immigration and unparalleled generosity of our refugee program over the past decade, there is no downside to exercising more caution as the Middle East continues to erupt in rampant upheaval.
It’s time to confront a simple reality. The best way to prevent homegrown terror while simultaneously protecting against government overreach into personal privacy is not to blithely import security risks in the first place. There will obviously always be a need for the NSA and FBI to have robust, yet constitutional, tools to combat and preempt terror threats. Yet, to focus on those tools while welcoming the problems of the Middle East through lax immigration is completely dyslexic. But leave it to our politicians to propose the worst solution to any impending problem. (See “A Bigger Threat Than an Expiring PATRIOT Act? This” HERE)
[Here’s a recent interview with this article’s author:]
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-02 03:00:322016-04-11 11:00:28A Massive Threat to US Security, Much Bigger Than Expiring PATRIOT Act [+video]
In March, the federal government removed the latest vaccine injury court statistics—more than a year’s worth of data—from one of its publicly reported charts. It was an abrupt departure from the normal practice of updating the figures monthly.
Wiping the latest data means the “adjudication” chart on a government website no longer reflects the recent, sharp rise in court victories for plaintiffs who claimed their children were seriously injured or killed by one or more vaccines.
Since January of 2014, twice as many victims have won court decisions than the previous eight years combined. In these court decisions, a judge ruled the evidence showed vaccines “more likely than not” caused the plaintiff’s injuries . . .
Since its inception in 2013, the “adjudication” chart included monthly, updated totals. But shortly after publishing the March 2015 chart, the government removed the 2015 and 2014 data, reverting back to outdated statistics from 2013 . . .
HRSA says vaccine makers had no influence over the decision to revert to older data. The agency said it did so to synch up with a statistic the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) provides for the same chart that is only current through 2013: the number of vaccine doses distributed in US. (Read more from “Government Wipes Recent Vaccine Injury Data From Website” HERE)
The Department of Justice is concentrating on “far-right” groups in a new study of social media usage aimed at combatting violent extremism.
The Justice Department’s National Institute of Justice (NIJ) awarded Michigan State University $585,719 for the study, which was praised by Eric Holder, the former attorney general, earlier this year.
“There is currently limited knowledge of the role of technology and computer mediated communications (CMCs), such as Facebook and Twitter, in the dissemination of messages that promote extremist agendas and radicalize individuals to violence,” according to the NIJ grant. “The proposed study will address this gap through a series of qualitative and quantitative analyses of posts from various forms of CMC used by members of both the far-right and Islamic extremist movements.”
The study draws more upon right-wing forums than upon the corners of the web inhabited by Islamist extremists.
“We will collect posts made in four active forums used by members of the far-right and three from the Islamic Extremist community, as well as posts made in Facebook, LiveJournal, Twitter, YouTube, and Pastebin accounts used by members of each movement,” the grant said. (Read more from “Justice Department Studying ‘Far-Right’ Social Media Use” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-02 02:59:422016-04-11 11:00:29Justice Department Studying ‘Far-Right’ Social Media Use
World famous comedian and movie star Vince Vaughn came out with a double barrel defense of gun rights during a recent interview, calling for guns in schools and arguing the Second Amendment is intended to defend against “the supreme power of a corrupt and abusive government.”
The star of the new season of the hit HBO series “True Detective,” outlined his pro-gun views during an interview with British GQ, which released excerpts of the sit down June 1. Vaughn — who has outlined his distinctly libertarian views in recent press sit-downs — stands in sharp contrast to many of his Hollywood colleagues who call for bans on firearm ownership.
“We have the right to bear arms to resist the supreme power of a corrupt and abusive government,” Vaughn told British GQ. “It’s not about duck hunting; it’s about the ability of the individual. It’s the same reason we have freedom of speech. It’s well known that the greatest defense against an intruder is the sound of a gun hammer being pulled back” . . .
“Take mass shootings. They’ve only happened in places that don’t allow guns,” Vaughn explained, mirroring arguments from noted gun crime researcher Dr. John Lott. “In all of our schools it is illegal to have guns on campus, so again and again these guys go and shoot up these f***ing schools because they know there are no guns there.” (Read more from “Huge Hollywood Actor Is as pro Gun as It Gets” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-02 02:53:272016-04-11 11:00:30Huge Hollywood Actor Is as Pro Gun as It Gets
