ODNI Report on Released Gitmo Detainees

Posted on September 14, 2016September 14, 2016 by Denise Simon

In an attempt to prevent the closure, Congress is now voting on a bill preventing further transfers of inmates until a new defense policy bill is passed.

Currently, 61 detainees still remain at the detention camp, following the release of 15 in August, the largest single transfer under the Obama administration. Additionally, 16 others have been cleared for transfer.

Summary of the Reengagement of Detainees Formerly Held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

Wednesday, September 14, 2016

From the Office of the Director of National Intelligence:

Summary of the Reengagement of Detainees Formerly Held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

The Director of National Intelligence submits this summary consistent with direction in the Fiscal Year 2012 Intelligence Authorization Act, Section 307, which states:

(a) “The Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, shall make publicly available an unclassified summary of,

(1) intelligence relating to recidivism of detainees currently or formerly held at the Detention Facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, by the Department of Defense; and

(2) an assessment of the likelihood that such detainees will engage in terrorism or communicate with persons in terrorist organizations.

(b) Updates – Not less frequently than once every 6 months, the Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and the Secretary of Defense, shall update and make publicly available an unclassified summary consisting of the information required by subsection (a) and the number of individuals formerly detained at Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who are confirmed or suspected of returning to terrorist activities after release or transfer from such Naval Station.”

Section 307 (a) (1) Intelligence relating to recidivism of detainees currently or formerly held at the Detention Facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, by the Department of Defense.

**

Reengagement of Former Guantanamo Bay (GTMO) Detainees as of 15 July 2016

Total Pre-22 January 2009a Post-22 January 2009

Detainees Transferred 693* 532 161

Confirmed of Reengaging 122 of 693 (17.6%) 113 of 532 (21.2%) 9 of 161 (5.6%)**

Dead – 30 of 122 29 1

In custody – 25 of 122 25 0

Not in custody – 67 of 122 59 8

Suspected of Reengagingb 86 of 693 (12.4%) 75 of 532 (14.1%)** 11 of 161 (6.8%)**

Dead – 3 of 86c 2 1

In custody – 18 of 86 18 0

Not in custody – 65 of 86 55 10

a Executive Order 13492 was signed on January 22, 2009 to determine the disposition of the 240 detainees then remaining at the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

b The Defense Intelligence Agency assesses five additional detainees are suspected of reengagement.

c Due to a coding error this number was previously reported as 4.

*An additional nine detainees died while at GTMO, and one was transferred to New York for trial, was convicted, and is now imprisoned in Colorado.

**Each of these categories includes detainees who were transferred pursuant to a court order.

Section 307 (a) (2) An assessment of the likelihood that such detainees will engage in terrorism.

Based on trends identified during the past eleven years, we assess that some detainees currently at GTMO will seek to reengage in terrorist or insurgent activities after they are transferred. Transfers to countries with ongoing conflicts and internal instability as well as recruitment by insurgent and terrorist organizations could pose problems. While enforcement of transfer conditions may deter reengagement by many former detainees and delay reengagement by others, some detainees who are determined to reengage will do so regardless of any transfer conditions, albeit probably at a lower rate than if they were transferred without conditions.

Section 307 (a) (2) An assessment of the likelihood that such detainees will communicate with persons in terrorist organizations.

Former GTMO detainees routinely communicate with each other, families of other former detainees, and previous associates who are members of terrorist organizations. The reasons for communication span from the mundane (reminiscing about shared experiences) to the nefarious (planning terrorist operations). We assess that some GTMO detainees transferred in the future also will communicate with other former GTMO detainees and persons in terrorist organizations. We do not consider mere communication with individuals or organizations—including other former GTMO detainees—an indicator of reengagement. Rather, the motives, intentions, and purposes of each communication are taken into account when assessing whether the individual has reengaged.

Definition of “Terrorist” or “Insurgent” Activities. Activities such as the following indicate involvement in terrorist or insurgent activities: planning terrorist operations, conducting a terrorist or insurgent attack against Coalition or host-nation forces or civilians, conducting a suicide bombing, financing terrorist operations, recruiting others for terrorist operations, and arranging for movement of individuals involved in terrorist operations. It does not include mere communications with individuals or organizations—including other former GTMO detainees—on issues not related to terrorist operations, such as reminiscing about shared experiences at GTMO, communicating with past terrorist associates about non-nefarious activities, writing anti-US books or articles, or making anti-US propaganda statements.

Definition of “Confirmed” Activities. A preponderance of information which identifies a specific former GTMO detainee as directly involved in terrorist or insurgent activities. For the purposes of this definition, engagement in anti-US statements or propaganda does not qualify as terrorist or insurgent activity.

Definition of “Suspected” Activities. Plausible but unverified or single-source reporting indicating a specific former GTMO detainee is directly involved in terrorist or insurgent activities. For the purposes of this definition, engagement in anti-US statements or propaganda does not qualify as terrorist or insurgent activity.

Who is Stopping the Giveaway of the Internet?

Posted on September 14, 2016September 14, 2016 by Denise Simon

Stop Obama’s Internet giveaway

Ending ICANN could lead to censorship

By Jenny Beth Martin – – Wednesday, September 14, 2016

WashingtonTimes: The development and maintenance of the open Internet has been one of the greatest boons to the enhancement of free speech and free commerce since time began. But if the Obama Administration has its way, both will be threatened in the very near future – unless Congress acts by the end of this month to block the Obama Internet Give-Away. Will it?

Russia, China and Iran don’t have a First Amendment, and their governments regularly clamp down on free speech. So why would we want to end American protection of the open Internet and transfer it to Moscow, Beijing and Tehran instead?

On Oct. 1, the Obama administration plans to end the U.S. Government contract with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN. Doing so would kick off a transition that could irreparably harm the open Internet, leading to censorship abroad that could, quite realistically, lead to censorship right here in the United States. Under this transition of Internet oversight, China, Russia and Iran, which have all demonstrated their contempt for Internet freedom by blocking websites and restricting Internet access to their own citizens, would be newly empowered to block specific websites from users all over the world, including in the United States.

Let’s back up.

The Internet was originally launched as a project of the U.S. Defense Department’s Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) in the 1960s. Then, in the 1980s, access to ARPANET was expanded courtesy of U.S. taxpayer-funded grants via the National Science Foundation, and, eventually, the Internet as we know it was developed.

So U.S. taxpayers paid for the creation, and development, and maintenance of the Internet. It is, in a very real sense, American property.

Article IV of the U.S. Constitution reads in part: “The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States …”

So under what authority, exactly, does President Obama claim the authority to make a decision on the disposition of a U.S. property – to wit, the Internet – without explicit permission from Congress?

Perhaps as important a question to ask is, where in the world are congressional leaders on this, and why are they not screaming bloody murder about yet another executive overreach by this overreach-hungry president?

Enter Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who has introduced S. 3034, the Protecting Internet Freedom Act. Rep. Sean Duffy of Wisconsin has introduced a companion bill, H.R. 5418, in the House. The bills would simply prohibit the Commerce Department from moving forward on its plan unless it first wins congressional approval.

Similar legislation blocking the transfer of domain registration authority has been included in the government’s annual funding bills for the last few years. The current prohibition expires on Sept. 30. If that prohibition – embodied nicely in the Cruz-Duffy legislation – is not enacted again before Oct. 1, the administration believes it can do whatever it wants.

Cruz believes otherwise, and will be chairing a hearing of his Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts on Wednesday morning to examine the subject further. The hearing, entitled “Protecting Internet Freedom: Implications of Ending U.S. Oversight of the Internet,” will begin at 10 AM.

Moreover, Cruz wants to add the provisions of his bill to the upcoming Continuing Resolution, the one piece of legislation Congress must pass and send to the president before September 30. That’s a smart play on his part.

And it would be a smart play on the part of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan to agree to add it. They’re already going to have a tough enough time winning votes for passage from among the more conservative elements of their respective GOP caucuses; adding the Cruz-Duffy provision blocking the proposed Obama Internet Give-Away would add a sweetener that could woo enough conservatives to allow the measures to pass without the leaders’ having to move left in search of Democrat votes.

And would Harry Reid or Barack Obama be so determined to give away U.S. control over the Internet that they’d be willing to shut down the government to get their way? Is that a fight either one of them would want to play out in public just five weeks before a crucial election?

Most importantly, though, Ryan and McConnell should move on the Cruz-Duffy legislation simply because it’s the right thing to do.

The Internet was conceived, built, developed, and grown to fruition long before Barack Obama became president. It was done at the hands of U.S. scientists and engineers, working with funds taken from U.S. taxpayers. The Internet is U.S. property. President Obama has no authority to give it away without explicit authority granted him by the U.S. Congress.

Sen. Cruz and Rep. Duffy understand that. Do leader McConnell and Speaker Ryan?

Illegal Immigrant Children in US Gangs and Slavery

Posted on September 14, 2016September 14, 2016 by Denise Simon

Unaccompanied minors swelling ranks of American gangs, say experts

FNC: surge of unaccompanied children coming across the southern border could be swelling the ranks of one of America’s most dangerous gangs, either as fresh recruits or hardened sleepers, according to federal authorities.

Some 227,149 unaccompanied children have been apprehended at the border over the last six years, according to the U.S. Border Patrol. They remain in federal custody until a sponsor can be located, at which time they are often sent to communities where they are ripe for recruitment by Latin gangs such as the infamous MS-13.

“Our safety standards have increased,” Andrea Helling, spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, told FoxNews.com. “In the last few months screening procedures of children and sponsors has increased in their intensity which we hadn’t done previously.”

Federal law requires the Department of Homeland Security transfer children under 18 to the custody of Helling’s agency until they are released to an appropriate sponsor, usually a relative, while their immigration cases are adjudicated. Some observers say that, at the least, the process sends a steady stream of loosely supervised youths lacking in language and coping skills right into the waiting arms of criminal gangs. At worst, the unaccompanied minors were already initiated into the gangs before they arrived at the border.

MS-13 is believed to be among the largest street gangs on New York’s Long Island, and more than 250 members have been convicted on federal felony charges since 2003. Federal prosecutors there have pinned more than 20 murders on the violent gang.

Meanwhile, over the last year, Long Island has received 2,093 unaccompanied children, and between October 2013 and July 2016, all of New York received 12,478 children from Central America. The overwhelming majority of the kids are not criminals and likely have competent sponsors. But some are.

In June 2015, MS-13 members and El Salvadoran immigrants Jose Cornejo, 17, Bryan Larios, 18 and Joel Escobar, 17, all of Brentwood, N.Y. were charged with the brutal rape of a 16 year-old girl on a local golf course.

Earlier this week, Joshua Guzman, 15, was shot and killed in the Long Island city of Hempstead. While not an unaccompanied immigrant, the boy’s father, Raul Guzman, told Newsday his son was under pressure to join a gang. Police believe his murder may be related.

“We’re looking at the possibility,” said Lt. Richard LeBrun, spokesman, Nassau County Police Department, that Guzman’s murder could be gang related.

MS-13 has a foothold in numerous other communities, where unaccompanied minors are being sent. Texas, which has seen a spike in MS-13 crime has received 15,999 over the same period. The 2015 Texas Department of Public Safety Gang Threat Assessment found MS-13 boasts some 800 members, and authorities explicitly blamed the flood of unaccompanied children being placed in the state.

“The influx of illegal alien gang members crossing the border into Texas in 2014, along with reports of extremely violent murders committed by its members in the Houston area, positions the gang as one of the most significant gang threats in the state for this upcoming year,” the report stated.

Other areas that have seen an influx in MS-13 crime are Maryland, Texas, and Virginia. Fairfax County, Va. has seen a 160 percent increase in MS-13 related incidents through April compared to the previous year.

Helling said HHS is looking more closely at the sponsors who step forward to take custody of the minors.

“Our responsibility is providing a safe place for these children,” she said.

She said that high-risk children who may have been identified as gang members by DHS would likely be placed in either a staff secure or secure-juvenile detention facility. But even if they are not gang members when they come into the U.S., the risk remains that they could fall prey to recruitment efforts.

****

The other part of the story, the dark side of America:

Human Trafficking—Exploitation of Illegal Aliens

ISSUE BRIEF | AUGUST 2016

FairUS.org: The large and persistent influx of illegal aliens contributes to an environment of vulnerability and abuse. Wherever the law fails to hold people accountable, crime will flourish. The federal government’s failure to effectively address the illegal alien dilemma creates and perpetuates an environment in which exploitation runs rampant.

It is estimated that 17,000 to 19,000¹ foreign nationals are trafficked into the United States each year. Trafficking is the recruitment and possible transport of persons within or across boundaries by force, fraud, or deception for the purpose of exploiting them economically. Victims are lured with false promises of good jobs and better lives, and then forced to work under brutal and inhuman conditions. Victims of trafficking are exploited for purposes of commercial sex, including prostitution, stripping, pornography live-sex shows and other acts. However, trafficking also takes place as labor exploitation, including domestic servitude, sweatshop factories, agricultural work and more. After drug dealing, human trafficking is tied with the illegal arms industry as the second largest criminal industry in the world today, and it is the fastest growing.

While anyone can become a victim of trafficking, illegal aliens are highly vulnerable to being trafficked due to a combination of factors, including lack of legal status and protections, limited language skills and employment options, poverty and immigration-related debts, and social isolation. They are often victimized by traffickers from a similar ethnic or national background, on whom they may be dependent for employment or support in the foreign country.

The information below, taken from news and government sources, demonstrates the prevalence of human trafficking in the United States and the precarious nature many illegal aliens face. American immigrants seek opportunities far better than these nightmares, but often fall victim to a flawed immigration enforcement system. Human trafficking violates the promise that every person in the United States is guaranteed basic human rights. A critical strategy in ending human trafficking is better enforcement of our immigration laws and improved federal-local cooperation in law enforcement.

Examples of Human Trafficking in the United States

June 2016 — Aroldo Castillo- Serrano was sentenced to more than 15 years in prison for his part in smuggling Guatemalan workers, including minors, and making them work 12 hour days. They were forced to live in cramped conditions and were made to pay off a significant debt incurred by Castillo-Serrano. Ana Angelica Pedro Juan was also sentenced to 10 years in prison for her part in the operation.

January 2015 — Rafael Alberto Cardena-Sosa was sentenced to serve 15 years in prison for participating in a family run sex trafficking organization. His family member, Carmen Cadena, pleaded guilty and faces a maximum sentence of five years in prison. The two family members are responsible for luring young women and girls from Mexico and illegally smuggling them into the United States. They then imposed a smuggling debt and forced them into prostitution with physical force and death threats.

January 2015—Three brothers, Jorge, Ricardo and Leonel Estrada-Tepal pled guilty to sex trafficking charges. The Mexican nationals illegally transported females from Mexico to the United States and forced them to work as prostitutes in various cities. They face sentences ranging from a minimum of ten years behind bars to a maximum of life in prison.

September 2014—Charles Marquez was sentenced to life in federal prison for recruiting women in Mexico by placing an advertisement in Ciudad Juarez offering jobs in the United States. Once recruited, he harbored them in motels and forced them into prostitution. He worked with Martha Jimenez Sanchez who faces up to ten years in prison after pleading guilty. Sanchez was released on bond and is awaiting sentencing.

May 2013 — German Rolando Vicente-Sapon, an illegal alien, was sentenced to more than 15 years in federal prison for illegally smuggling and trafficking a 14 year old Guatemalan girl to Chattanooga, TN for $2,000 and coercing her into having sex. He will be deported after completing his prison sentence.

March 2013 — Susan Lee Gross was sentenced to 30 months in prison for her role in using a massage parlor as a front for a prostitution house. She transported women to work as prostitutes at her parlor and laundered the proceeds. Gross made them travel to various places around the United States. The women were originally from Korea and some were unlawfully present in the United States. Most lacked language and employment skills.

March 2013 — Moonseop Kim, who was illegally in the country, pleaded guilty to illegally transporting women from South Korea into Mississippi for financial gain with a sex trafficking organization. He posted an internet ad offering Korean female escort services. He is facing a maximum penalty of 10 years in federal prison as well as a deportation following the completion of his prison term.

July 2012 — Omelyan Botsvynyuk and Stepan Botsvynyuk were convicted of recruiting workers from Ukraine and forcing them to work through physical violence and threats of sexual assault. The victims never received compensation, but were rather instructed to work until their debts, ranging from $10,000 to $50,000, were paid off. They told victims that their families would be kidnapped and forced into prostitution if anyone attempted to escape. The two brothers were found guilty and received sentences of life plus 20 years in prison and 20 years.

October 2011 — Edk Kenit and Choimina Lukas pleaded guilty to document servitude and labor trafficking. The Micronesian couple recruited the victim from their home country to become their domestic servant. When she arrived, the couple took her passport in order to compel the victim to work for them. The couple prevented the victim from having friends, going out of the house or participating in social gatherings.

January 2011 — Lucinda Lyons Shackleford was indicted on charges of forced labor and document servitude (The withholding of an individual’s legal documents). He promised to take care of the victim after placement from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Family Reunification Program, but instead forced him to engage in various types of labor. Shackleford failed to provide him with adequate food or any form of payment for his labor.

Endnotes

Shandra Woworuntu, “My life as a sex-trafficking victim,” BBC News, March, 2016, ; Trafficking in Persons Report, 2007, U.S. Department of State.

Check Out Guccifer 2.0 New DNC Docs and List, Sheesh

Posted on September 14, 2016September 14, 2016 by Denise Simon

The new DNC Chair, Donna Brazile is fretting over this document dump:

Raising an alarm over virus threats to computer systems, Interim Democratic National Committee Chair Donna Brazile cautioned users of documents, which were released in the latest DNC hack, according to PJ Media.

Brazile alleged that the hack was carried out by the infamous Russian hacker Guccifer and warned there could be “potential malware risk” while downloading the documents.

“The DNC is the victim of a crime — an illegal cyberattack by Russian state-sponsored agents who seek to harm the Democratic Party and progressive groups in an effort to influence the presidential election,” Brazile declared in a statement Tuesday, USA Today reported.

“We have been anticipating that an additional batch of documents stolen by Russian agents would be released. Our legal team is now in the process of reviewing these private documents, and attempting to confirm their authenticity, as it is common for Russian hackers to forge documents. According to Reuters, a link to the documents was posted on WikiLeaks’ Twitter account and attributed to alleged hacker Guccifer 2.0, Politico reported.

The documents were released during a presentation on Tuesday from a person speaking on behalf of Guccifer 2.0 at a London cyber security conference, the report said. More from NewsMax here.

New Guccifer 2.0 Leaks – Pay for Play – Top DNC Donors Were Awarded Federal Posts Following Donations

On Tuesday night Guccifer 2.0 dropped 600MB worth of new “DNC Documents.” From Reddit:

Julius Genachowski pays DNC $3,494,919, ’09-13 Chairman of the FCC

Richard M. Lobo’s Wife, Caren Lobo, Donated $716,000 To DNC. Obama Then Nominated Richard Lobo For Director Of The International Broadcasting Bureau.

Robert A. Mandell pays DNC $1,121,250, June 2011, President Obama named Mandell the Ambassador to Luxembourg

Katherine Gehl $1,025,000: Board of Director of OPIC (Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), the U.S. Government’s development finance institution) nominated by Obama, confirmed by Senate in 2011

Tony West. 1.059 million for the deputy attorney general position

Alexa Wesner raised $483.100 for the DNC in 2008, then became Ambassador to Austria in 2013

Bruce J. Oreck pays DNC $1,136,613, US ambassador to Finland 2009 to 2015

Crystal Nix-Hines Donated $600,000 To The DNC And Then Was Nominated By President Obama To The Position Of United States Permanent Representative To The United Nations Educational, Scientific And Cultural Organization With The Rank Of Ambassador.

Jane Hartley Donated $605,000 To DNC And Then Was Nominated By Obama To Serve Concurrently As The U.S. Ambassador To The French Republic And The Principality of Monaco.

2 Ambassadors had maxed out contributions of $28,500 1 year+ they received appointments. Eileen Donahoe (UN) and Bill Kennard (EU).

John Roos term as ambassador to Japan concluded in August 2013,In April of 2014 John Roos forms The Roos Group LLC. The Roos Group is focused on strengthening ties between Silicon Valley and Japan in areas that include cross-border investment, venture capital, corporate growth, and the promotion of innovation and entrepreneurship. John Roos donated 2 million, and he’s now running a company that sounds like its making a lot more then 2 million with what its doing

Effective Merger Between the DNC and Obama’s Organizing for America
https://i.sli.mg/I5Z0k6.jpg
OFA is an internet research firm. If the PACs and DNC are colluding and preventing competition for other Internet research firms by providing direct access, wow. Obama showing a lot of corruption here. OFA and DNC systems hosted on same account. Possible campaign finance law violation
https://i.sli.mg/4Oi85w.jpg
More evidence of possibly illegal collusion between DNC and OFA via Blue State Digital
https://i.sli.mg/EasQ4C.jpg
ACORN was shut down because of the kind of collusion that OFC and DNC are engaging in https://i.sli.mg/ZWBPBC.jpg
Freddie/Fannie were used by ACORN to target Red districts 4 Sub prime loans to turn them Blue prompting the housing crash
http://dailysignal.com/2008/10/29/the-acorn-fanniefreddie-connection/
Memo to Tim Kaine when he was DNC chair/Virginia Governor. Shows more OFA/DNC collusion
https://i.sli.mg/bDC1Ft.jpg
More collusion between Kaine/DNC and OFA. Involvement in New Jersey 2009 gubernatorial race
https://i.sli.mg/aDdwhQ.jpg

List of donors
https://i.sli.mg/wZrcZq.jpg

If this isn’t pay for play, I don’t know what is

Starting to see the pattern?

1 Matthew Berzun … Ambassador to UK
2 Julius Genachowski … Former chairman to FCC
3 Frank Sanchez…. Under secretary of commerce
8 Kirk Wagner… Ambassador to Singapore
9 Alan Solomont … Ambassador to Spain
11 John Roos… Ambassador to Japan
12 Nicole Avant… Ambassador to Bahamas
13 Eileen Chamberlain Donahoe … Ambassador to the UN
16 Steve Westly – CFO of California
17 Don Beyer – Ambassador to Switzerland
21 Don Gips – Ambassador to South Africa
22 Howard Gutman – Ambassador to Belgium
24 Cynthia Stroum – Ambassador to Luxembourg
27 Mark Gilbert – Ambassador to New Zealand
31 Norm Eisen – Ambassador to Czech Republic
37 Bruce Oreck – Ambassador to Finland
43 Tony West – deputy Attorney General
45 Bill Kennard – Ambassador to EU

DNC plan to destroy the GOP House majority through nonstop litigation.
https://i.sli.mg/vHJiK3.jpg

The DNC was planning to overturn the GOP House majority by using Latinos as a wedge.
https://i.sli.mg/g5uFiB.jpg

The Democrats have secret links to companies that produce legislative redistricting software
https://i.sli.mg/j0chwp.jpg

DNC plot to steal GOP House seats in Texas. https://i.sli.mg/fXNrsd.jpg

DNC planned for anti-white ethnicity based gerrymandering prior to 2010 elections
https://twitter.com/basedmattforney/status/775832131897622528
If the GOP hadn’t won in 2010, the Dems would have gerrymandered a permanent majority for the next 2 election cycles https://twitter.com/basedmattforney/status/775832529354055680

Leaks contained donor credit card info. DNC did not protect. This is illegal.

Memo to Obama deputy CTO Mike Conlow from 2010 shows plan for manipulating information online
https://i.sli.mg/Jh4dkf.jpg

Early voting is designed to skew elections in Dems’ favor. North Carolina used as laboratory
https://i.sli.mg/ZOP2Bf.jpg

DNC starting a National Person Database https://i.sli.mg/Z63sVL.jpg

Collusion with CNBC/Wall Street? There’s a folder named “CNBC” in the DNCleak with info on stocks https://i.sli.mg/Kb43or.jpg

It appears that they were trading stocks on earnings days in 2011 which is quite alarming. These are days that stock prices move the most. If based on insider trading information, this is HUGE!

In the earnings excel file. Bill Clinton just happened to give a speech to one of the companies – Jeffries Group https://i.sli.mg/Uze60F.png
Clinton speeches should be cross referenced with the rest
OK so some of these companies in the earnings play spreadsheet seem to be up to some reeeeaaallly shady stuff regarding lobbying. There could really be something highly illegal here https://i.sli.mg/ke0KeH.png

The DNC may have been invested in Smith and Wessons earnings for Q3 2011. Coincidentally Obama brought in new gun control laws that July.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/07/11/obama-s-new-gun-control-regulations-exclusive.html

Koss was also listed. They settled a class action lawsuit right after earnings were reported in Oct 2011

Ok this is getting really illegal now.
Pike Electric recieved a contract from Clinton chaired MCC for 17.9 million dollars in 2011
https://i.sli.mg/NTDytN.png

The earnings file has dates and ER(earnings) of companies in 2011, before they are released to the public – credit to fellow trader /u/Simon_Inaki and /u/MuricaFirst for their help
FDX: 9/22/11 Confirmed Q112 $1.46

FDX had $1.46

The earnings file on the right is companies listed in a spreadsheet contained in the leaks. The DNC was getting pre-release earnings numbers from these companies so they could trade on insider information. The file is from 2011 and deals with the upcoming earnings released by those companies to the public. Pike was awarded a contract by Clinton for almost 18 million, who then supply the dnc with pre release earnings numbers they can trade on prior to the public release. This is insider trading and makes the DNC members who trade based on this spreadsheet a shit load of money. The Stock Act wasn’t implimented until 2012…after these trades would have been made.

HUGE!
One document specifies how the state swap program is run. Basically, this allows a DNC API to exchange and update data between states’ voter rolls twice a year!

This is how purges happen, this is how voters are targeted and registrations switched, or voters made invalid due to any number of changes by this automated system. This is how Bernie Sanders voters got removed from voter rolls and party affiliations switched. Excerpt from the document:

Swap Summary
After this agreement is negotiated with the ASDC, it is a contract between the DNC and individual states. The DNC is not bound by it in any state that does not sign.
Definitions
• Public Data- Data from government agencies and all other data included in the voter file that does not constitute Proprietary Data.
• DNC Proprietary Data- Data appended or acquired by the DNC, including appended enhancements such as consumer information, political IDs, and models.
• State Party Proprietary Data- Data appended to the public record by the state party or campaigns and organizations in the state.

Data being swapped
State Party Provides:
• State Party Voter File
• Any State Party Proprietary Data collected.
DNC Provides:
• Phone and NCOA matches;
• DNC Proprietary Data relating to registered voters in that state;
• Modeling created or attained by the DNC for that State and appended to records of voters in that state, accompanied by an explanation of the purpose and effectiveness of the model;
• Training of State Party personnel in the use of the above information;
• All information collected or obtained by the DNC concerning partisan or Democratic candidate ID’s in State Party’s state, including information on all persons who have moved into State Party’s state.
• The DNC will maintain and give the State Party access to VoteBuilder, the national Voter Activation Network online platform
Frequency of Swap
This exchange shall take place 2 times each year, and will include this information for an additional new registrant update each year.

Basically, the DNC voting software is not just a database, it is a hydra of servers that update voter information and can pass updated information at the state level with a short explanation (such as voter moved, re-registered, etc.) even when those events didn’t really happen

Corruption Undermined US Mission in Afghanistan

Posted on September 14, 2016September 14, 2016 by Denise Simon

Report: Corruption Substantially Undermined US Mission in Afghanistan

VOA/WASHINGTON — Widespread corruption in Afghanistan has substantially undermined U.S. efforts to rebuild the county, according to a report released Wednesday

The U.S. government’s Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) John Sopko said corruption has fueled grievances against the Afghan government and channeled material support to the insurgency from the beginning of Operation Enduring Freedom.

Sopko’s report says corruption remains an enormous challenge to security, political stability, and development, and urges the U.S. mission to make anticorruption efforts a top priority.

The report offers a number of recommendations for implementing a U.S. interagency anticorruption strategy in Afghanistan.

Although the United States injected tens of billions of dollars into the Afghan economy, it contributed to the growth of corruption by being slow to recognize the magnitude of the problem, the role of corrupt patronage networks, and the ways in which corruption threatened core U.S. goals. It said certain U.S. policies and practices exacerbated the problem.

‘Endemic’ problem

The report titled, “Corruption in Conflict: Lessons from the U.S. Experience in Afghanistan,” quoted Ambassador Ryan Crocker, who re-opened the U.S. Embassy in Kabul soon after the September 11, 2001, attacks and served again as ambassador in 2011-2012 (and who is a member of Broadcasting Board of Governors which oversees U.S. international broadcasting, including the Voice of America) as saying that “the ultimate point of failure for our efforts … wasn’t an insurgency. It was the weight of endemic corruption.”

“The corruption lens has got to be in place at the outset, and even before the outset, in the formulation of reconstruction and development strategy, because once it gets to the level I saw, it’s somewhere between unbelievably hard and outright impossible to fix,” Crocker said.

****

The report is 164 pages, but here is some help with the conclusions:

Our study of the U.S. experience with corruption in Afghanistan finds:

1. Corruption undermined the U.S. mission in Afghanistan by fueling

grievances against the Afghan government and channeling material

support to the insurgency.

2. The United States contributed to the growth of corruption by injecting

tens of billions of dollars into the Afghan economy, using flawed oversight

and contracting practices, and partnering with malign powerbrokers.

3. The U.S. government was slow to recognize the magnitude of the problem,

the role of corrupt patronage networks, the ways in which corruption

threatened core U.S. goals, and that certain U.S. policies and practices

exacerbated the problem.

4. Even when the United States acknowledged corruption as a strategic

threat, security and political goals consistently trumped strong

anticorruption actions.

5. Where the United States sought to combat corruption, its efforts

saw only limited success in the absence of sustained Afghan and

U.S. political commitment.

Thumb through the report here.

Summary:

Billions in US taxpayer money filled the pockets of Afghan warlords, bolstered the drug trade and fed corruption during effort to rebuild the country after the war

Federal watchdog released damning report into post-war efforts by US
Was based on the ‘lessons’ needed to be learned from military operations
They injected billions into economy without knowing extent of corruption
The money ended up in hands of criminals, some with ties to the Taliban
Multi-million dollar villas were built for the corrupt individuals
While programs meant to actually rebuild the country were undermined
A top diplomat Ryan Crocker said: ‘The ultimate point of failure for our efforts wasn’t an insurgency. It was the weight of endemic corruption’
He added that the failures in the system are ‘almost impossible to fix’