Ben Carson has yet Another Bizarre Problematic Solution

Posted on by

While Dr. Ben Carson appears to take the lead in the polls in Iowa over Donald Trump, it remains important to listen carefully to words spoken by Carson when it comes to solutions to issues. This one is quite problematic.

Rather than Lois Lerner, previously at the IRS who was operating as a punishment wing for free speech at the IRS, seems Ben Carson thinks the Department of Education does it, regardless of how radical that speech may be. Things are getting very twisted.

Ben Carson: let’s have the Department of Education go after “extreme political bias”

by Taylor Millard at HotAir

Dr. Ben Carson has a rather awful (and I mean awful) idea for the Department of Education: have it become the thought police for colleges and universities! Carson made the suggestion during an interview yesterday on Glenn Beck’s show. Here’s the interview right before Beck answers the question, plus I’ve transcribed Carson’s answer below.

“It would be to monitor our institutions of higher education for extreme political bias and deny federal funding if it exists.”

Carson’s a smart guy, he’s a retired neurosurgeon and has had a movie made about him starring Cuba Gooding Jr.(which is pretty cool). But this idea is just repugnant. If a Democrat proposed it, the Right would be up in arms over this. It’s not the federal government’s job to monitor political speech! This might as well be Section Two of the Sedition Act all over again, which is posted below.

SEC. 2. And be it farther enacted, That if any person shall write, print, utter or publish, or shall cause or procure to be written, printed, uttered or published, or shall knowingly and willingly assist or aid in writing, printing, uttering or publishing any false, scandalous and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame the said government, or either house of the said Congress, or the said President, or to bring them, or either of them, into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them, or either or any of them, the hatred of the good people of the United States, or to stir up sedition within the United States, or to excite any unlawful combinations therein, for opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States, done in pursuance of any such law, or of the powers in him vested by the constitution of the United States, or to resist, oppose, or defeat any such law or act, or to aid, encourage or abet any hostile designs of any foreign nation against United States, their people or government, then such person, being thereof convicted before any court of the United States having jurisdiction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars, and by imprisonment not exceeding two years.

Yes, there are leftists in education who do their best to indoctrinate students into thinking the government should be involved in everyone’s business, whether it be how much people get paid or redistribution of wealth. Yes, free speech is being silenced on campus by “trigger warnings” and “free speech zones” and a litany of other ridiculous ideas. But wanting to have the Department of Education become speech monitors to make sure it’s not “extreme political bias” is not the way to fight back. The way to fight back is to slowly get conservative and libertarian teachers into teaching positions (whether it’s history, philosophy, government, law, what have you), have them challenge students, and make them think. The Right needs to slowly take over (or at least balance out) the Left in education. This means thinking long-term, not looking towards the government to do a quick fix.

But here’s the bizarre thing; just seconds before Carson’s Department of Education answer he discusses how he doesn’t want national standards for education because, “the closer education is to home, the better the education is.” This completely flies in the face of what he wants the Education Department to do when it comes to colleges and universities. It’s like he’s saying he’s perfectly fine with local education, as long as it’s not run by people who have “extreme political bias” and he doesn’t even define what that means. This goes against the “secure the Blessing of Liberty to ourselves” written in the Constitution and it’s completely unenforceable unless Carson wants to put microphones or cameras in every classroom to monitor what’s being said. That’s the only way the Department of Education (or universities) would be able to monitor what’s going on. There’s no guarantee that would work either, because universities could consider bribing the “extreme political bias” police to make sure no professor gets kicked out. If it’s left up to the university administration itself, then all they have to do is say, “No extremists here,” unless there’s going to be an extreme political bias hotline to investigate anonymous complaints of that sort of thing. That would cause even more of a waste of taxpayer dollars.

Probably the biggest problem with Carson’s idea, outside of the entire unconstitutional part, is it’s the type of directive which can come back to hurt conservatives and libertarians. Carson is promising under his administration the Department of Education would probably only go after leftists, who have “extreme political bias.” But what happens if a Democrat comes into power after Carson? Would that Democrat use the “extreme political bias” directive to force out people who might be conservative or libertarian? If someone says they think “trigger warnings” are a bad idea, would the university they work for be forced to fire them or turn them over to the thought police for “reeducation”? Carson’s idea is just completely short-sighted, and it’s unfortunate because the guy isn’t an idiot. He’s a very smart man and a good guy who’s got a great story. But this is one of those ideas he should toss in the incinerator and hope no one else steals it. The Left operates the war on free speech. There’s no reason for the Right to get involved in it unless it’s to defend those who are speaking.

 

Lois Lerner Goes Free ~ Impeach Loretta Lynch

Posted on by

Per the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Press Release:

Chairman Chaffetz Responds to DOJ’s Investigation of the IRS

Published: Oct 23, 2015
  

WASHINGTON—Today, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) issued the following statement after the Department of Justice announced there will be no charges against former Internal Revenue Service (IRS) official Lois Lerner, and the investigation will be closing:

“This announcement is a reminder that the Obama administration continues to refuse to hold anyone accountable at the IRS. Over two years ago, TIGTA conducted an audit confirming the IRS was targeting conservative organizations because of their political beliefs. While DOJ may have closed its investigation, as a coequal branch of government, Congress will continue to seek accountability for the American people. A clear message must be sent that using government agencies to stifle citizens’ freedom of speech will not be tolerated. If the administration won’t send that message, Congress will.”

Background:

Earlier this year, Chairman Chaffetz, along with 51 members of Congress sent a letter to President Obama calling for the removal of IRS Commissioner John Koskinen. Additionally, the Oversight Committee released a video outlining a timeline of key events in the targeting scandal.

*** in 2014 from Judicial Watch, in part:

IRS Had “Secret Research Project” For Conservative Donor Lists

Judicial Watch continues to blow the lid off of the Obama administration’s increasingly feeble attempts to cover up its deliberate targeting of conservative groups by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the months leading up to the 2012 presidential election. And the latest batch of emails JW has obtained in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit portrays an agency potentially willing to go to any lengths to bring down the president’s political opponents – including misusing the private, confidential information of those who dared contribute to the groups the IRS had targeted.

But, we really shouldn’t be surprised, should we? This is an administration whose chief executive has repeatedly acted as if he is above the law. All he needs to govern, he claims, is “a pen and a phone.” His IRS agency, it turns out, has put both to extensive use in harassing and hamstringing conservative organizations – and, perhaps, even individuals it thought might have had a negative impact the president’s efforts to retain office in 2012.

On September 4, we released a new batch of IRS email documents revealing that under former IRS official Lois Lerner, the agency seems to acknowledge having needlessly solicited donor lists from non-profit political groups. According to a May 21, 2012, memo from the IRS Deputy Associate Chief Counsel: “such information was not needed across-the-board and not used in making the agency’s determination on exempt status.” Outrageously, it wasn’t until one year later, on May 10, 2013, that Lerner finally conceded that the requests for donor names were “not appropriate, not usual.” (These remarks by Lerner were staged and were the first IRS admission of its improper targeting of Obama’s perceived enemies.)

Not surprisingly, the new documents JW obtained also reveal that 75% of the groups from which the lists were solicited were apparently conservative, with only 5% being liberal. So, Lerner and her IRS collaborators knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that the donor lists they had wrongly solicited would be filled with the names of those who had opposed the Obama policies.

These new smoking gun documents came in response to a court order from our October 2013 FOIA lawsuit (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Internal Revenue Service (No. 1:13-cv-01559)) filed against the IRS after the agency unlawfully refused to respond to four FOIA requests dating back to May 2013. The emails are contained in the sixth batch of documents the IRS has been forced to produce in response to the Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit. Much more here.

Why the U.S. Will Continue Funding the Palestinian Authority

Posted on by

BDS in London is taking part in the protests and violence in Israel.

WashingtonExaminer: With all the recent yet constant violence in Jerusalem and the West Bank in Israel, the culprit for the incitement and bloody conflict is at the hands of the Palestinians. The United States for years has provided funding and will continue to do so even with Israel’s blessing. The ‘why’ is even more terrifying.

Why the U.S. won’t cut off aid to Palestinians

Lawmakers want to reduce or eliminate the $500 million a year in aid and security assistance the United States gives to the Palestinian Authority amid evidence that its leaders are inciting violence against Israelis.

While that might be satisfying in some ways, concerns that a cutoff would make the situation worse are likely to win out. Israeli officials oppose such a move, fearing that it may cause the Palestinian Authority to collapse.

“Israel doesn’t want a collapse because it will collapse in Israel’s lap,” David Makovsky, director of the Project on the Middle East Peace Process at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Thursday.

Still, the problem of anti-semitic incitement in Palestinian society, much of it officially created and encouraged, remains a serious obstacle to a peaceful settlement of the basic conflict with Israel and the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state.

The issue is at the center of talks this week between Secretary of State John Kerry and leaders in the region, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Jordanian King Abdullah II.

“We have to stop incitement, we have to stop the violence. And I think it’s critical,” Kerry said before his meeting Thursday with Netanyahu in Berlin. He’s set to meet with Abbas and Abdullah on Saturday.

The Foreign Affairs Committee on Thursday adopted a bipartisan resolution calling on Abbas to “discontinue all official incitement and exert influence to discourage anti-Israel and anti-semitic incitement in Palestinian civil society.”

It also directs the State Department to track and publicize incidents of incitement by Palestinian authorities.

But there’s a bipartisan desire in Congress for a more active U.S. approach to the problem. At a hearing before Thursday’s vote, experts gave lawmakers options besides an aid cutoff.

“The problem is we’ve been condemning incitement for decades but we never do anything about it.” said Elliott Abrams, a former top adviser in the Reagan and George W. Bush administrations, who argued for targeting the personal finances of Palestinian leaders who incite violence, and barring them from the United States.

Abbas “keeps doing it because he never pays a price for doing it,” Abrams said. “It’s a very cynical game. And as long as he pays no price, he’ll keep it up.”

He and others also suggested U.S. officials target the Palestinian Liberation Organization, which is dominated by Abbas’ Fatah movement, by closing its office in Washington and cutting off funding to incitement activities.

The PLO is “a bloated and opaque organization that has consistently stymied democracy,” said Jonathan Schanzer, vice president for research at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.

The United States also needs to think beyond the leadership of Abbas, who’s in the tenth year of a four-year term largely because there are no good alternatives to his rule, and nurture a new generation of Palestinian leaders, he said. More here.

The genesis of the recent violence per Congressional testimony:

by: Foundation for Defense of Democracies

A Third Intifada?

Mr. Chairman, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has flared again. The violence can best be characterized as a concerted campaign of knife attacks against Israeli civilians and military personnel, peppered with other attempts at vehicular homicide and even bombings. Since October 1, eight Israelis have been killed while dozens have been wounded in no less than 44 attacks.  It’s unclear yet whether we can call this a third intifada. For it to be characterized as such, it would require the full backing of Palestinian leaders across the political spectrum. Despite the incitement of both the Fatah and Hamas factions, it’s safe to say that neither has committed fully to an all-out conflict right now with Israel. I will explain below why they are holding back.

Temple Mount Tensions

Mr. Chairman, the Palestinian narrative right now focuses on their rage over purported Israeli attempts to change the status quo on the Temple Mount/Haram ash-Sharif, the site holy to both Jews and Muslims. There are troubling signs that this unrest was premeditated. Indeed, it looks like the resumption of the unrest that erupted in June 2014 before last summer’s 50-day war between Israel and Hamas. The name given to the unrest, then as today, was the “Jerusalem Intifada.” The epicenter of that violence, then as today, was the Temple Mount.

The Temple Mount is one of the thorniest issues in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. It is a deeply meaningful and holy site to both Muslims and Jews. Keeping the peace at this site has been a delicate issue since Israel conquered the Old City in 1967. The Israelis control the territory, but they have allowed for Jordan, with input from Palestinian religious authorities, to administer the site.  For years, Israeli law prohibited Jews from praying on the site, but Israel’s Supreme Court overruled this in 1993.  In recent years, the number of Jews that have gained access to the site during hours proscribed by Israel and the administering authorities has increased. This includes some Israeli politicians and religious groups who seek to assert Israeli sovereignty.  But according to Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, access to the Temple Mount compound is still overwhelmingly Muslim. Indeed, over the last year, there have been approximately four million entries by Muslims, 200,000 by Christians, and just 12,000 by Jews.

To be clear, the status quo has not changed. Israel controls access to the site as a means to maintain the delicate peace, but it does not involve itself in matters of religious practice or prayer. Yet, over the last year, a disturbing pattern has developed. Palestinian elements, apparently led by the PLO, have led an effort to stoke religious tensions at the sensitive site with wild reports that Israel is trying to “Judaize” or undermine Muslim rights to pray there. At the forefront of this campaign to foment hate is WAFA, a news agency effectively controlled by the PLO. As one Arab newspaper noted, WAFA is one of the Palestinian “governmental media institutions.”

In January of this year, the chairman of the PLO’s Jerusalem Affairs Department, Ahmed Qurei, warned of an Israeli plan to register the al-Aqsa Mosque as an Israeli state property to be officially run by the so-called Tabu (land registration) office. The Al-Aqsa Foundation for Endowment and Heritage (AFEH) claimed this was setting the stage for a Jewish synagogue over parts of the holy Mosque. Qurei further stated that Israel was “Judaizing” the mosque and re-building the “alleged” Jewish Temple. “This is the most serious [action taken by Israel] that jeopardizes the future of the holy city,” he said.

The following month, WAFA cited Qurei warning about assessments made by Israeli engineers and contractors for new archeological excavations under the Temple Mount. In a press release, Qurei said that the Israeli government was trying to “empty the area [of] its indigenous citizens as a prelude to take over the land for the sake of settlement expansion.”  The PLO news agency, WAFA, added to the tensions claiming that nearly a thousand Israelis “stormed” the al-Aqsa compound during the previous month.

In March, WAFA issued a report stating that Jewish settlers were preparing to storm the al-Aqsa compound. The report alleged, “Jewish groups that define itself by the name of the alleged ancient Temple are preparing for the Jewish holiday Passover by mobilizing the largest number of settlers to enter Al-Aqsa Mosque and perform religious prayers in its yards.”  This was followed by a report that Israeli police, “physically assaulted and beat up [a ten-year-old girl], who along with other worshipers chanted religious slogans against a group of Jewish fanatics who entered the Mosque to perform religious rituals.”

The wild and unsubstantiated charges continued through the spring. WAFA in April claimed that, “Jewish settlers…broke into Al-Aqsa Mosque Compound through [the Dung Gate] bridge, and toured its yard under the heavy protection of Israeli police units.” In May, the PLO mouthpiece claimed several Palestinians were arrested “at the gates of al-Aqsa Mosque compound in the Old City for chanting religious slogans to fend off settlers’ attempts to tour the mosque’s yards. The two elders…were physically assaulted by the police before they were arrested.”

During the summer, the Palestinian leadership called for an emergency Islamic summit “in light of latest Israeli escalations at al-Aqsa mosque compound in Jerusalem.”  This came on the heels of reports that Israel had seized land adjacent to the eastern wall of the al-Aqsa mosque,  and that settlers were continuing “attacks against al-Aqsa mosque,”  and insulting the Prophet Mohammed while on the al-Aqsa compound.

In September, Mahmoud Abbas complained to the UN General Assembly that, “extremist Israeli groups are committing repeated, systematic incursions upon Al-Aqsa Mosque, aimed at imposing a new reality and dividing Al-Haram Al-Sharif.”  Soon after, Hamas declared a “day of rage” in the West Bank. Several Palestinians were wounded in clashes with Israelis.  Abbas took this as a cue to warn of an “intifada that we don’t want” if escalations at al-Aqsa continue.

As violence gripped Jerusalem, WAFA continued to complain that, “Jewish fanatics resumed their provocative visits to al-Aqsa Mosque.”  The rhetoric has only increased, fanning the flames of conflict as Palestinians have taken to lone-wolf style attacks to stab Israelis on the streets.

In an effort to calm tensions, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently ordered police to prevent Israeli ministers and members of Knesset from entering the Temple Mount.  The Israelis continue to make it clear that even when Jews visit the Temple Mount, they are not to pray there. Israeli security personnel enforce this strictly. However, the PLO continues to fan the flames of conflict. Their problem appears to be the very presence of Israelis and Jews on the Temple Mount.

– See more at: http://www.defenddemocracy.org/testimony/words-have-consequences-palestinian-authority-incitement-to-violence#sthash.h7XR057c.dpuf

 

 

WikiLeaks Publishes Second Round of CIA Directors Emails

Posted on by

Most interesting is CIA Director John Brennan’s early email address rolodex list. Mr. Brennan apparently was a big user of Craig’s list, had deep contacts with academia and even sent flowers.

CIA Director John Brennan emails

Today, 21 October 2015 and over the coming days WikiLeaks is releasing documents from one of CIA chief John Brennan’s non-government email accounts. Brennan used the account occasionally for several intelligence related projects.

John Brennan became the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency in March 2013, replacing General David Petraeus who was forced to step down after becoming embroiled in a classified information mishandling scandal. Brennan was made Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism on the commencement of the Obama presidency in 2009–a position he held until taking up his role as CIA chief.

According to the CIA Brennan previously worked for the agency for a 25 year stretch, from 1980 to 2005.

Brennan went private in 2005-2008, founding an intelligence and analysis firm The Analysis Corp (TAC). In 2008 Brennan became a donor to Obama. The same year TAC, led by Brennan, became a security advisor to the Obama campaign and later that year to the Obama-Biden Transition Project. It is during this period many of the Obama administration’s key strategic policies to China, Iran and “Af-Pak” were formulated. When Obama and Biden entered into power, Brennan was lifted up on high, resulting in his subsequent high-level national security appointments.

If you have similar official documents that have not been published yet, submit them to WikiLeaks.

Published on 22nd October 2015

Afghanistan-Pakistan Executive Summary

Recommendations for a USG strategy in the Afghanistan-Pakistan (AF-PK) region. (7. November 2008, Author: SAA)

Download PDF or view HTML version.

Preface Memo to ExSum

A draft report from Louis Tucker, Minority Staff Director to Vice Chairman Christopher Bond, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, outlining the recommendations of the previous document. (7 November 2008, Author: Louis Tucker)

Download PDF or view HTML version.

Contacts

A list of contacts as stored in the AOL email account of John Brennan. It mostly contains email addresses (people in active email exchange with the account holder) as well as some Instant-Messenger IDs (AIM).

Download original TXT.

Published on 21st October 2015

John Brennan Draft SF86

“National Security Position” form for John Brennan. This form, filled out by Brennan himself before he assumed his current position, reveals a quite comprehensive social graph of the current Director of the CIA with a lot of additional non-govermental and professional/military career details. (17 November 2008, Author: John Brennan)

Download PDF or view HTML version.

The Analysis Corporation

FAX from the General Counsel of the CIA to the Goverment Accountability Office about a legal quarrel between the CIA and “The Analysis Corporation”. TAC seems to have lost a tender for a US watchlist-related software project to a competitor. Issues seem to revolve around “growth of historical data” and “real-time responsiveness” of the system. (15 February 2008, Sender: CIA, Office of General Counsel, Larry Passar)

Download PDF or view HTML version.

Draft: Intel Position Paper

Challenges for the US Intelligence Community in a post cold-war and post-9/11 world; a calling for inter-agency cooperation, a ten-year term for the Director of the CIA and the Director of National Intelligence. It also demands the autonomy of the Intelligence Community, that it “… must never be subject to political manipulation and interference.” An unfinished paragraph is titled “Damaging Leaks of Classified Information”. (15 July 2007, Author: John Brennan)

Download PDF or view HTML version.

The Conundrum of Iran

Recommendations to the next President (assuming office in Jan. 2009) on how to play the figures on the U.S.-Iranian Chessboard (18 November 2007, Author: John Brennan)

Download PDF or view HTML version.

Torture

Letter from Vice Chairman Bond, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, to his fellow board members with a proposal on how to make future interrogation methods “compliant” and “legal”. Instead of listing all allowed methods, every kind of interrogation should be considered compliant, as long as it is not explicitly forbidden by the “Army Field Manual” (AFM). (May 2008)

Download PDF or view HTML version.

Torture Ways

A bill from July 2008 called “Limitations on Interrogation Techniques Act of 2008” explicitly list the forbidden interrogation techniques mentioned in the previous document and can be considered a direct implementation of the recommendations of Christopher Bond. (31 July 2008)

Download PDF or view HTML version.

Obama DID Veto Defense Bill, Losing 40,000 Troops

Posted on by

While the media was consumed with Hillary Clinton’s testimony before the Gowdy Benghazi Commission, another important event took place and it included Barack Obama’s famous pen. He vetoed the$612 billion Defense bill, stating it was full of gimmicks and did not allow him the money or pathway to close Guantanamo.

Has anyone in the Obama administration bothered to consider what our adversaries are doing with their military like China and Russia much less Iran?

In part from FNC:

Four years after Congress passed and Obama signed into law strict, across-the-board spending limits, both parties are eager to bust through the caps for defense spending. But Obama has insisted that spending on domestic programs be raised at the same time, setting off a budget clash with Republicans that has yet to be resolved.

To side-step the budget caps, known in Washington as sequestration, lawmakers added an extra $38.3 billion to a separate account for wartime operations that is immune to the spending limits. The White House has dismissed that approach as a “gimmick” that fails to deal with the broader problem or provide long-term budget certainty for the Pentagon.

Obama also rejects the bill as written due to provisions making it harder for him to transfer suspected terror detainees out of the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, a key campaign promise that Obama is hard-pressed to fulfill before his term ends. The White House has also expressed concerns over provisions preventing military base closures and funding equipment beyond what the military says it needs.

A deeper consequence for the military:

FreeBeacon: The Army has disclosed that it has cut 80,000 soldiers since 2010 and plans to reduce the force by another 40,000 by the end of 2017, bringing the total active number of troops to 450,000, according to a report to Congress that was recently released under a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

“Nearly every Army installation will experience reductions of some size,” according to the report, which was obtained and released by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS).

It warns of a “permanent reduction of sizable numbers of members of the Armed Forces,” which translates to a 21 percent total cut across the board.

“Significant structure cuts at overseas installations have already occurred,” according to the report.

The Army will be forced to further cut its budget in 2018 and beyond, according to the report

“These force structure reductions and the resulting impacts on installation populations could be significant to both military communities and to the defense posture of our nation.”

At least six Army installations will see their forces cut by more than 1,000 soldiers, according to the report. These include Fort Benning in Georgia, Fort Bliss in Texas, Fort Hood in Texas, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Alaska, Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Washington, and Schofield Barracks in Hawaii.

The continuing cuts come as the military faces massive and ongoing budget cuts that have not only reduced the forces but have also impacted the purchase and maintenance of military hardware.

While experts have expressed concerns about the United States’ ability to combat threats across the globe on multiple fronts, the Army maintains that the reduced force will not harm its abilities.

“The Army will continue to be a force that can deploy and sustain capabilities across the range of military operations anywhere in the world on short notice,” according to the report.

Still, “force structure reductions and the resulting impacts on installation populations could be significant to both military communities and to the defense posture of our nation,” the Army says in the report.

An additional number of posts in the civilian Army workforce will also be eliminated by 2019, the report states.

The report includes an evaluation of the “the local economic, strategic, and operational consequences of the reductions at” the six installations mentioned above.

The cuts were spread “broadly” across the force “in terms of geography and organizationally,” according to the report. “There simply was not one segment of the Army that could sustain the entirety of the cuts.”

Screen Shot 2015-10-22 at 1.43.35 PM

Soldiers will likely experience an interruption in their lives, though the Army is seeking to minimize this.

“The Army will employ all possible measures to minimize personnel turbulence (to both Soldiers and their Families) associated with the force structure reductions on the six installations in question,” the report states. “There will be instances where Soldiers (and Families) will depart an installation on an accelerated timeline.”

Local economies also will be impacted by the cuts. These include direct losses from government contract service jobs that will be cut, as well as “indirect job losses that would occur in the community because of a reduction in demand for goods and services.”

Meanwhile, President Obama vetoed on Thursday a massive defense spending bill that would fund military operations across the globe and provide troops with a pay raise.