Posts

White House May Be Looking to Make NSA Wiretapping Permanent

/0 Comments/in , /by

The White House is reportedly seeking to make a temporary surveillance law, that enabled the National Security Agency to collect cell phone metadata in bulk, permanent in December, even though the NSA has abandoned the program.

The Washington Post and Greenwich Time both report that the White House has been discussing plans to extend a 2015 revision to the USA Patriot Act, which allowed the NSA to collect “metadata” from Americans’ cell phones without warrants.

The program, revealed by then-NSA contractor Edward Snowden, was designed to help the NSA ferret out Americans who had contact with terror cells abroad, and collected basic information about millions of telephone calls made between Americans at home and abroad.

Snowden, of course, is now living in exile in Russia after revealing the metadata collection program, then known as PRISM, to journalists from The Guardian. Snowden had come into contact with information about the program while working for a string of defense contractors who either helped develop or administer the program.

At the time PRISM was revealed, the government contended that the metadata collection program did not require law enforcement to pursue individual warrants since the information gleaned from the program didn’t contain details of what was said in the calls themselves — just date, time, duration, and destination information. Several courts, over the years, have disagreed, chipping away at the program and the government’s self-given blanket permission to spy on American citizens, but only when the plaintiff has provided proof that they were the subject of a warrantless NSA wiretap. (Read more from “White House May Be Looking to Make NSA Wiretapping Permanent” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Pelosi Is Outraged at Leaked Plan From Trump Admin to Punish ‘Sanctuary Cities’

/0 Comments/in , /by

A plan to retaliate against the political foes of the president by busing illegal immigrants to ‘sanctuary cities’ was leaked by whistleblowers on Thursday, and Democrats are outraged.

“The extent of this administration’s cynicism and cruelty cannot be overstated,” said Ashley Etienne, a spokeswoman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

“Using human beings — including little children — as pawns in their warped game to perpetuate fear and demonize immigrants is despicable,” she concluded. . .

The plan was revealed in the Washington Post, which relied on anonymous sources in the administration, but it was confirmed by a statement from the White House. . .

The report says administration officials pressured the Department of Homeland Security to implement the plan twice in order to pressure political enemies of President Donald Trump, but they resisted. (Read more from “Pelosi Is Outraged at Leaked Plan From Trump Admin to Punish ‘Sanctuary Cities'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

White House Blames New York’s Sanctuary City Stance After Illegal Alien Bites ICE Officer’s Finger Off

/0 Comments/in , /by

The White House condemned New York City’s sanctuary stance after an illegal immigrant bit off an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent’s finger.

“New York’s dangerous ‘sanctuary’ policies are directly responsible for the egregious and violent harm suffered by this courageous ICE officer,” White House deputy press secretary Hogan Gidley told The Daily Caller Wednesday.

On Mar. 14, court papers revealed that Cristopher Santos Felix was charged with assault. The New York Post reported that Felix entered the U.S. in June 2015 on a visitor’s visa. Officers went to his home 11 days prior to arrest him for staying in the U.S., “’longer than his legal authorization permitted.’” The officers took off the handcuffs, allowing Felix to put on some clothing.

Felix, “became combative,” struggling with the officers in his bedroom. When an officer tried to restrain him, the suspect bit his ring finger off. . .

“Communities are safer when law enforcement works together, yet sanctuary city policies continue to hinder the coordination needed to keep dangerous criminals off our streets,” the spokeswoman said. “The officer’s injury was the direct, foreseeable and entirely avoidable result of New York’s criminal alien sanctuary policies. Proponents of sanctuary policies claim they make communities safer, but in many cases they are causing more harm than good.” (Read more from “White House Blames New York’s Sanctuary City Stance After Illegal Immigrant Bites ICE Officer’s Finger Off” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

FBI Foils Terror Plot on White House

/0 Comments/in , /by

Federal law enforcement officials announced on Wednesday that authorities foiled a terror plot against the White House and other government buildings in Washington, D.C.

. . .

U.S. Attorney B.J. Pak said that federal authorities, including the Atlanta Joint Terrorism Task Force, had been investigating (the alleged terrorist), 21, for a year after receiving the tip.

“(The alleged terrorist) is charged as the result of a year-long investigation by FBI Atlanta’s Joint Terrorism Task Force,” said Chris Hacker, Special Agent in Charge of FBI Atlanta. “We want to thank the Forsyth County Sheriff Office and Gwinnett County Police Department for assisting us with his arrest. The investigation is continuing, but at this stage it is believed (the alleged terrorist) was acting on his own.”

The AJC notes that “(the alleged terrorist) allegedly said he planned to travel to ‘hijra,’ a term said to refer to Islamic State territory.” . . .

WXIA-TV reported: “(The alleged terrorist)has been charged with violating Title 18USC 844(f)(1), an ‘attempt to damage by means of an explosive any building owned, possessed, or leased by the United States or any department or agency thereof, or any institution or organization receiving federal financial assistance.'”

(Read more from “FBI Foils Terror Plot on White House” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Bolton: U.S. Withdrawal From Syria Will Happen Under One Condition

/0 Comments/in , /by

On Sunday, White House national security advisor John Bolton made it clear the United States’ withdrawal from Syria is conditional. America needs to know Turkey will not target the U.S.’s Kurdish allies once our troops are removed, the Wall Street Journal reported.

From WSJ:

President Trump’s order to withdraw U.S. troops is a “cause-and-effect mission” that requires certain assurances from various players in the region before it can be executed, said Mr. Bolton, the first administration official to outline the conditions for withdrawal.

His comments marked the first public acknowledgment from the White House that the safety of Kurdish allies is being considered as part of its pending withdrawal plan, but it also indicates that a quick withdrawal was unlikely given challenging regional dynamics.

. . .

“Timetables or the timing of the withdrawal occurs as a result of the fulfillment of the conditions and the establishment of the circumstances that we want to see,” Bolton said. “It’s not the establishment of an arbitrary point for the withdrawal to take place as President Obama did in the Afghan situation…the timetable flows from the policy decisions that we need to implement.” (Read more from “Bolton: U.S. Withdrawal From Syria Will Happen Under One Condition” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

White House Going Wobbly on Border Wall Shutdown? Trump Needs to Keep His Promise

/0 Comments/in , /by

Tuesday morning on Fox News, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders gave President Donald Trump a way to save face should he cave to Democrats on funding for a border wall.

Democrats have so far refused the president’s demands for $5 billion in wall funding, a compromise from the $25 billion needed to complete construction of wall on the southern border. Congress must pass a spending bill by midnight Friday to keep the government fully operational and Democrats have only agreed to fund $1.6 billion as part of a continuing resolution to keep spending at current levels.

Sanders suggested that if Congress refuses to appropriate the full $5 billion, the president can look elsewhere for those funds and sign a bill that will keep the government open.

“We have other ways that we can get to that $5 billion that we will work with Congress if they will make sure that we get a bill passed that provides not just the funding for the wall, but there is a piece of legislation that’s been pushed around that Democrats voted 26-5 out of committee that provides roughly $26 billion in border security, including $1.6 billion for the wall,” Sanders said. “That’s something that we would be able to support as long as we can couple that with other funding resources that help us get to the $5 billion.”

She did not get specific about those “funding resources.” In truth, the administration’s ability to move money around is limited without congressional approval, which Trump will be hard pressed to receive once the Democrats assume control of the House of Representatives.

Yet Sanders said the president is committed to border security and does not want to shut the government down.

“We don’t want to shut down the government, we want to shut down the border from illegal immigration, from drugs coming into this country, and make sure we know who’s coming and why they’re coming, and that’s what the president is focused on,” Sanders added later.

That statement contradicts President Trump, who last week proclaimed he would be “proud” to shut down the government for border security. But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and other Republican leaders have been urging the president to avoid a government shutdown. Possibly, Trump is acquiescing to the demands of Republican congressional leaders.

Here’s the deal: If Trump signs a spending bill without the full downpayment on wall funding to avoid a government shutdown, he breaks repeated promises to fight for border security but he’ll blame the failure on Democrats and claim his administration is working around Congress. Going this route likely means no wall funding before the 202o election. If Trump keeps his promise, the government will shut down this weekend and Republicans and Democrats will continue negotiations as the media hysterically reports on the government being “shut down” while in reality less than 10% of the government stops working.

To score a win Trump and the GOP need to make a unified argument for border security. Trump should deliver an address to the nation on the hundreds of thousands of criminal convictions of illegal immigrants made in FY2018 and on the illicit drug crisis fueled by international drug cartels taking advantage of our weak borders. Trump ought to demonstrate how a wall works and how Democrats are threatening public safety by refusing to fund the wall. Trump should follow through with the shutdown threat and spend every single day of the shutdown single-mindedly hammering the Democrats until they either give in or keep the government closed indefinitely.

Short of this strategy, what exactly will change in the next two years? A Democratic House will not approve wall funding, or any other of Trump’s priorities. If the case is made to the American people that Republicans should be in control of the House again and Trump is reelected with a GOP majority in 2020, how will anything be different from the past two years of GOP control with no wall funding? Trump has repeatedly given in to demands from Congress to keep the government open and so far he has nothing to show for it. Enough is enough.

If Trump wants the wall, it’s shutdown or bust. If he’s unwilling to fight, he should tell the American people he can’t win and let them find someone else who will. (For more from the author of “White House Going Wobbly on Border Wall Shutdown? Trump Needs to Keep His Promise” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

5 Jaw-Dropping Moments From Trump’s WILD Meeting With Pelosi and Schumer

/0 Comments/in , , /by

President Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., had a wild meeting at the White House Tuesday, when a debate over government funding for a border wall spontaneously erupted in front of the press and ended with Trump vowing to take the blame for a potential government shutdown.

Kicking things off, Trump welcomed the press to the meeting and discussed the issues they would talk about. The tone was set when Trump joked to Schumer about wall funding being “easy” and Schumer snidely corrected him, “It’s called funding the government, Mr. President.”

Trump predicted that he might not come to an agreement with the Democratic leaders. Calling on Pelosi to say something, she said the government “should not have a Trump shutdown.”

That set the president off.

Trump was eager to defend his position, arguing that he has the votes for a wall in the House but that Schumer’s Senate Democrat obstructionism is blocking wall funding in the Senate. Pelosi did not want to have this debate in front of the press.

Disagreements intensified. An argument over whether strong border security necessitates a physical wall devolved into squabbles over the state of the economy and over the margin of victory for Democrats and Republicans in the 2018 midterms.

At one point, Schumer shot at Trump: “When the president brags that he won North Dakota and Indiana, he’s in real trouble.”

Schumer and Pelosi repeatedly stated that they had come in “good faith” to prevent a government shutdown. But Trump had had it with both of them. The president insisted on funding for a wall and vowed to take the blame for a government shutdown, if that’s what it takes.

So what did we learn?

First, Trump and the Democratic leaders are living in different realities on wall funding. There’s likely not much room for compromise there. The Democrats got what they want when Trump said he’d take the blame for a shutdown. Trump got what he wanted by putting them on the spot in front of television cameras. After this performance, it’s hard to imagine either side backing down from a government shutdown.

Second, Pelosi and Schumer do not want this debate to air in front of the press. It’s harder to cast Trump as a villain when he’s in the same room insisting on protecting Americans from violent criminal illegal aliens and drug-pushing gangs.

Third, though the media hate this president because he insults them, he once again proved he is the most transparent and media-friendly American president in living memory. Can you imagine any other president allowing this debate to play out in front of the press? (For more from the author of “5 Jaw-Dropping Moments From Trump’s Wild Meeting With Pelosi and Schumer” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Jim Acosta Is the Reason We Have Stupid Warning Labels

/0 Comments/in , /by

Following the legal saga of #AcostaGate, the White House has now put out some ground rules for journalists.

It’s pretty simple: Journalists get one question when called upon, follow-ups are at the discretion of the president or White House official giving the press conference, and when it’s no longer your turn, you hand the microphone over. It’s so simple a kindergartner could grasp it. This short set of protocols seem to be basic rules of conduct for a reasonable human being.

However, most reasonable people wouldn’t conduct themselves like a self-important showboat, as Acosta did at the November 7 White House press conference. No, we’re dealing with a different standard here. It’s the same kind of standard that requires warning labels on products that seem silly, but probably exist because someone did something stupid and then sued when things went badly.

Most people in this world don’t need to be told that packages of peanuts might set off peanut allergies or that they shouldn’t use cleaning chemicals as body wash. For everyone else, there’s a warning label to inform them of how to handle themselves like a functional human being without adverse effects from their behavior.

Yes, it seems there’s always “that guy” who does something that requires either a special safety label, a new rule, or a company-wide safety briefing in its aftermath. For the White House press corps, Jim Acosta is that guy. (For more from the author of “Jim Acosta Is the Reason We Have Stupid Warning Labels” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

White House Responds to Federal Judge Ruling Jim Acosta’s Press Pass Must Be Restored

/0 Comments/in , /by

The White House has released a statement after a federal judge ordered the White House to temporarily return CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta’s press pass in an initial victory for the news network’s lawsuit against the Trump administration.

“Today, the court made clear that there is no absolute First Amendment right to access the White House. In response to the court, we will temporarily reinstate the reporter’s hard pass. We will also further develop rules and processes to ensure fair and orderly press conferences in the future.”

“There must be decorum at the White House,” press secretary Sarah Sanders said.

Federal Judge Timothy J. Kelly, a Trump appointee, on Friday granted CNN’s request for a temporary restraining order restoring Acosta’s “hard pass” — which permits access to the White House grounds — after CNN had argued Acosta’s First and Fifth Amendment rights had been violated by the suspension of his press pass.

Kelly did not rule on CNN’s underlying case. He did say that CNN and Acosta are likely to win their case with the argument that their Fifth Amendment rights to due process were violated by the White House.

“Indeed whatever process occurred within the government is still so shrouded in mystery that the government could not tell me at oral argument who made the initial decision to revoke Mr. Acosta’s press pass,” Kelly said. Though the White House provided written reasons for revoking Acosta’s pass after the fact, Kelly ruled that “these belated efforts were hardly sufficient to satisfy due process.”

He described his ruling as “very limited” and left open an avenue to remove Acosta’s pass with due process.

“We are gratified with this result and we look forward to a full resolution in the coming days. Our sincere thanks to all who have supported not just CNN, but a free, strong and independent American press,” CNN and Acosta said in a statement.

Acosta’s hard pass was suspended on November 7 after he refused to surrender his microphone at a White House press conference and touched a White House aide who attempted to take the mic away. White House press secretary Sarah Sanders accused Acosta of “placing hands on a young woman just trying to do her job as a White House intern.”

In a later statement, Sanders said Acosta’s pass had been pulled because he refused to allow time to other reporters and criticized Acosta’s unprofessional behavior.

CNN also argues that Acosta’s First Amendment rights were violated because the White House revoked his pass based on the “content” and “viewpoint” of his speech. The judge may consider the merits of CNN’s First Amendment argument in a ruling to come.

For now, Acosta gets his press pass back. (For more from the author of “White House Responds to Federal Judge Ruling Jim Acosta’s Press Pass Must Be Restored” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

CNN Prepares to Sue the White House

/0 Comments/in , /by

The rumor mill is swirling. Reports are coming in that CNN and their Chief White House Correspondent, Jim Acosta, are preparing to sue the Trump administration over the revocation of Acosta’s permanent press credentials, commonly referred to as a “hard pass.”

Former ABC News reporter and anchor Sam Donaldson appeared Sunday on CNN’s “Reliable Sources” with Brian Stetler and said he believed a lawsuit had already been filed, The Washington Examiner reported. . .

According to Floyd Abrams, a constitutional law expert who appeared on Stetler’s show, CNN should sue the Trump administration over the issue.

“I think it’s a really strong lawsuit. I can understand CNN being reluctant to sue because the president keeps saying CNN is the enemy of me, and CNN might have reluctance to have a lawsuit titled ‘CNN vs. Donald Trump.’ That said, yes, I think they should sue,” Abrams said. “This is going to happen again. It’s likely to happen again. So whether it’s CNN suing or the next company suing, someone is going to have to bring a lawsuit. And whoever does is going to win unless there’s some sort of reason.”

The alleged lawsuit is the latest in a string of incidents involving CNN’s Jim Acosta. On Wednesday, the White House pulled his permanent press pass after determining that he was inappropriate during a press conference earlier in the day. Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the Trump administration won’t stand for “a reporter placing his hands on a young woman just trying to do her job as a White House intern.” (Read more from “CNN Prepares to Sue the White House” HERE)