Freed Dealer, Obama Released, Kills 3

Crack Dealer Freed Early Under Obama Plan Murders Woman, 2 Kids

JW: A convicted crack dealer who left prison early as part of the Obama administration’s mass release of federal inmates has been indicted by a grand jury for fatally stabbing his ex-girlfriend and her two kids in Columbus, Ohio. The gory crime drew national attention because the children, ages 7 and 10, were murdered to eliminate them as witnesses in the brutal massacre of their 32-year-old mother.

This week a grand jury in Franklin County returned a 10-count, death-penalty indictment against the ex-con, 35-year-old Wendell Callahan, for the triple murders. Callahan broke into his ex-girlfriend’s apartment and stabbed the three victims, according to a statement issued by Franklin County Prosecutor Ron O’Brien announcing the indictment. The bloody crime scene was discovered by the woman’s current boyfriend, who subsequently engaged in a fight with Callahan before he fled. The indictment includes charges of aggravated murder with prior calculation and design and aggravated murder of victims under the age of 13. “There are multiple charges regarding the three victim deaths because there are different methods to commit the crime of murder and the Prosecutor’s Office typically charges all methods”, O’Brien stated. Callahan is in jail on $3 million bail and is scheduled to be arraigned later this week.

Callahan should have been in jail when the crimes occurred, but he was released four years early because federal sentencing guidelines for crack dealers got reduced. The change is part of President Obama’s effort to reform the nation’s justice system as a way of ending racial discrimination. The initiative was technically launched back in 2010 when the president signed a measure that for the first time in decades relaxed drug-crime sentences he claimed discriminated against poor and minority offenders. This severely weakened a decades-old law enacted during the infamous crack cocaine epidemic that ravaged urban communities nationwide in the 1980s. As part of the movement the U.S. Sentencing Commission lowered maximum sentences for drug offenders and made it retroactive, leading to the early release of thousands of violent thugs like Callahan.

In November the administration began releasing 6,000 drug convicts coined “non-violent” offenders whose sentences were too long under the old guidelines. News reports quickly surfaced contradicting the administration’s assessment that the newly released convicts were not violent. Among them was the leader of a multi-million dollar operation that smuggled drugs from Canada to Maine. Prosecutors refer to the 29-year-old con as a “drug kingpin” who was one of “America’s Most Wanted.” Shortly before the administration’s mass release of drug convicts, federal prosecutors warned that drug trafficking is inherently violent and therefore the phrase “non-violent drug offenders” is a misnomer. The nation’s prosecutors also cautioned that reducing prison sentences for drug offenders will weaken their ability to bring dangerous drug traffickers to justice.

As if it weren’t bad enough that the administration is rewarding thousands of criminals with get-out-of-jail cards, huge amounts of taxpayer dollars are being spent on programs to help them find housing and jobs. In the aftermath of the mass release of federal prisoners Judicial Watch reported on two “re-entry” programs to ease the transition from jail. One received $1.7 million and ordered public housing facilities not to reject tenants with criminal records. The other allocated $20 million to the Department of Labor (DOL) to help ex-cons find work and thus end the “cycle of poverty, criminality and incarceration.”

More here including photos.

Hillary calls for sentencing reform too.

This all began in 2013 between Obama and Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch continues to carry the baton.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has announced a major shift in how the federal government plans to prosecute nonviolent criminals involved in drug crimes, with the aim of easing overcrowding in the nation’s prisons.

Holder outlined several policy changes in a speech to the American Bar Association meeting in San Francisco.

The attorney general said too many Americans go to prison for far too long and for no truly good law enforcement reason.  His main focus was low-level drug crimes that can often bring minimum mandatory sentences of five or 10 years in prison.

Holder says the federal government will now follow the lead of several states that emphasize drug treatment and community service programs as alternatives for non-violent drug offenders who are not associated with criminal gangs or drug cartels.

“Widespread incarceration at the federal, state and local levels is both ineffective and unsustainable,” he said. “It imposes a significant economic burden totalling $80 billion in 2010 alone and it comes with human and moral costs that are impossible to calculate.”

Prediction: An Extraordinary Plea Deal for Hillary et.al

Will a plea deal be enough to stop the formal Democratic Party nomination for President of the United States for Hillary? Understanding the waivers, the dismissiveness and the constant ‘witch-hunt’ diatribe, likely not. Hillary is not qualified to be president and should have her own security clearance stripped and permanently.

Yet, the political machinery is always running on 12 cylinders.

The lead person at the Department of Justice assigned to the Hillary servergate case is Richard S. Scott, whom by the way was the exact lawyer assigned to the General David Petraeus case. It is unknown who is leading the other investigations concerning Hillary’s circle of people that were her firewalls much less her email forwarding clerical types like Jake Sullivan, Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills.

 

It should also be noted that David Petraeus hired David E. Kendall to represent him, a lawyer whom by the way has been Hillary’s lawyer for decades.

When one examines the investigation and full case of David Petraeus, there are some, only some similarities to Hillary’s investigation. Yet, Petraeus did plea to one count, a violation of 18 U.S.C.{} 1924, which held a maximum term of one year in prison, $100,000 fine or both and no more than 5 years probation.

In the matter of Hillary Clinton, she never had a dot gov email while one was in fact offered to her and further, an exclusive computer was also offered to her to transmit any material, classified, secret or top secret, which was turned down. Instead, Hillary and her team chose to use an unencrypted server for countless email accounts to perform diplomatic government business as well as personal business and for sure business related to the Clinton Foundation.

The final release of emails belonging to Hillary of which the State Department was charged by a court to release is complete as of February 29, 2016.

State Department spokesman John Kirby told reporters Monday that one email was being withheld at the request of an unnamed law enforcement agency, but that no other emails were classified Secret or Top Secret. He noted that one email, previously classified Top Secret by the Intelligence Community Inspector General, was downgraded to Secret. The email pertains to North Korea’s nuclear program. But Kirby said 261 other emails released Monday were marked Secret and “confidential,” bringing the total to 2,050 emails that contain classified information. Two are being withheld as one deals directly with Barack Obama and the other was over intent of the use of the server itself and the FBI has taken ownership of that email.

***

In part from CNN: The State Department is furthermore being sued for the emails of top aides, and for the tens of thousands of emails Clinton deemed personal and didn’t turn over for review.

Clinton and her aides insist none of the emails she sent or received were marked as classified at the time they were sent, but over 1,800 have been retroactively classified during the State Department-ledpre-release review process.

This includes 22 emails upgraded to Top Secret — the highest level — and withheld by the State Department in full.

On a separate occasion, Clinton and Sullivan exchange emails on a set of “tps” — presumably talking points, which he’s trying to send to her on a secure fax line.

“If they can’t,” Clinton replies, “turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure.”

There’s no indication whether the talking point were classified, but the exchange led to criticism from Republican Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, a frequent Clinton critic, who called the chain “disturbing” and asked the former secretary to “come clean.”

Additional emails, on which Clinton was not copied, also shed light on how her email set-up was viewed at the State Department. Important to read the full CNN summary here.

*** 

What is most remarkable is this email from Hillary’s secret confidant Sidney Blumenthal to Hillary on Benghazi, Libya. It is exceptional the depth of his knowledge and control over events in Benghazi.

The January 25, 2013 email is here.

For: Hillary

From: Sid

Re: Libya security internal deliberations

SOURCE: Sources with direct access to the Libyan National Government, as well as the

highest levels of European Governments, and Western Intelligence and security services.

  1. As of January 24, 2013, while reviewing the decisions that are leading to the departure

of Western diplomatic and business personnel from Benghazi, Libyan Interior Minister Ashour

Shuwail informed Prime Minister Ali Zidan that national intelligence commander General Salim

Hassi and National Libyan Army (NLA) Chief bf Staff General Yousef Mangoush report that the

fighters of Ansar al sharia and their allied eastern militias located in the region between

Benghazi and the Egyptian border are gaining strength steadily. According to an individual with

excellent access to the new Libyan security services, Hassi’s officers believe that these

opposition militias have recovered from the government inspired popular attacks aimed at them

following the destruction of the United States Consulate in Benghazi on September 11, 2013. At

the same time Mangoush believes that the opposition militias have made real use of the time that

has past, and Ansar al sharia is stronger now than before the consulate attack with their

infrastructure enhanced by support from Islamist groups in the Sahel, including al Qa’ida in the

Maghreb (AQIM). The full 4 page email.

In summary, the matter of Hillary’s countless communications violations of U.S. code as well as the 2009 Barack Obama Executive Order is far and beyond that of General Petraeus, but the political machine is spinning. The FBI will turn in a criminal referral to the Department of Justice, yet the powers at Justice will  plea it for the sake of the Democrat party nominee Hillary Clinton.

Disgusting for sure.

 

 

Wall Street to Clinton Foundation: $40 Million

For what exactly? A question likely to never fully be answered…Unless we get the rest of ‘those’ emails.

Clinton Foundation Discloses $40 Million in Wall Street Donations

Hillary Clinton is facing more questions about her close ties to Wall Street financial institutions. Last week, the New York Times urged Clinton to release transcripts of her highly-compensated speeches to Wall Street firm Goldman Sachs.

Breitbart: The paid speeches are just a slim chapter of her relationship with financial titans. According to Clinton Foundation records, Wall Street financial institutions have donated around $40 million to the eponymous family foundation.

As a non-profit, the Clinton Foundation isn’t legally required to disclose its donors or contributions. The Foundation has publicly disclosed some contributions on its website. It only provides ranges for contributions, e.g. $1-5 million, and doesn’t detail when the contribution was made or for what purpose, if any.

Here’s the chart of contributions from Wall Street to the Clinton Foundation.

Four major Wall Street institutions stand out; Barclays, Barclays Capitol, Goldman Sachs and Citi. Each are listed as given between $1 million and $5 million to the Foundation. Citigroup, UBS, Banc of California and Bank of America are listed as giving up to $1 million to the Foundation.

All together, contributions from readily identifiable Wall Street institutions to the Foundation total somewhere between $11 million and $41 million in contributions. If we assume the donations fall in the middle of the ranges disclosed by the Clinton Foundation, the contributions would total just under $30 million.

As with most things involving the Clintons, the devil is in the details. This total of contributions does not include those made by individuals with strong Wall Street ties. It also does not necessarily represent the total amounts contributed to the Foundation from those donors listed. It only accounts for the donations which the Foundation has chosen to disclose.

The failure of the Foundation to include any information on the timing of the donations is especially worrisome. In terms of donor relationships, there is a real difference between a one-time gift of $1 million and an ongoing gift of $200,000 for 5 straight years. The total dollar amount may be the same, but an ongoing gift usually requires a more substantive relationship between the Foundation and the donor.

There is, of course, an added dimension to the timing issue with the Clintons. During the life of the Foundation, Hillary Clinton has been a US Senator, Secretary of State and two-time candidate for President.

When the Clinton Foundation discloses that the “Friends of Saudi Arabia” contributed $1-5 million, it begs the obvious question of when that donation was made. The specific date of that donation is particularly important, given Clinton’s considerable focus on the Middle East while she was Secretary of State.

It is also important to note that these contributions are completely seperate from the paid speeches made by Bill and Hillary Clinton. In 2013 alone, Hillary earned just over $3 million in paid speeches to financial firms and institutions.

These contributions, obviously, also don’t include direct contributions made by Wall Street institutions and individuals to either of Clinton’s Presidential campaigns.

In a recent Democrat debate, Clinton’s sole challenger, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) challenged her, “Can you really reform Wall Street when they are spending millions and millions of dollars on campaign contributions…And when they are providing speaking fees to individuals?”

He should have added that Wall Street has showered Clinton’s family foundation with millions in contributions.

Wall Street, and the financial industry generally, is not simply a special interest contributing to Clinton’s political ambitions. It is woven into the very fabric of the Clinton’s lives. It fuels her politial ambitions, provides employment to Bill and Hillary through generous speaking fees, and it underwrites a significant amount of the work undertaken by the family’s Clinton Foundation.

If the Clintons were any closer to Wall Street and financial firms, they would probably have to file SEC disclosures. They could very well be the first American family with their own Dodd-Frank regulation.

 

 

Hey Hilary and Cheryl, it is a Felony

Hoorah for Senator Grassley and..today February 29, 2016, the last official court ordered email document dump by the State Department is expected.

It is important to remember that a chain of email discussions included drone strikes.

Senior Clinton aide maintained top secret clearance amid email probe, letters show

FNC:

EXCLUSIVE: A senior Hillary Clinton aide has maintained her top secret security clearance despite sending information now deemed classified to the Clinton Foundation and to then-Secretary of State Clinton’s private unsecured email account, according to congressional letters obtained by Fox News.

Pictured left, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Pictured right, her former chief of staff Cheryl Mills.

Current and former intelligence officials say it is standard practice to suspend a clearance pending the outcome of an investigation. Yet in the case of Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s former chief of staff at the State Department, two letters indicate this practice is not being followed — even as the Clinton email system remains the subject of an FBI investigation.

In an Oct. 30, 2015, letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa — who has been aggressively investigating the Clinton email case — Mills’ lawyer Beth A. Wilkinson confirmed that her client “has an active Top Secret clearance.” The letter said previous reporting from the State Department that the clearance was no longer active was wrong and due to “an administrative error.”

A second letter dated Feb. 18, 2016, from the State Department’s assistant secretary for legislative affairs, Julia Frifield, provided additional details to Grassley about the “administrative error.” It, too, confirmed Mills maintained the top secret clearance.

The letters come amid multiple congressional investigations, as well as an FBI probe focused on the possible gross mishandling of classified information and Clinton’s use of an unsecured personal account exclusively for government business. The State Department is conducting its own administrative review.

Under normal circumstances, Mills would have had her clearance terminated when she left the department. But in January 2014, according to the State Department letter, Clinton designated Mills “to assist in her research.” Mills was the one who reviewed Clinton’s emails before select documents were handed over to the State Department, and others were deleted.

Dan Maguire, a former strategic planner with Africom who has 46 years combined service, told Fox News his current and former colleagues are deeply concerned a double standard is at play.

A sample of the emails released from last week, lots of gossip.

“Had this happened to someone serving in the government, their clearance would have already been pulled, and certainly they would be under investigation. And depending on the level of disclosure, it’s entirely possible they would be under pretrial confinement for that matter,” Maguire explained. “There is a feeling the administration may want to sweep this under the rug.”

On Monday, the State Department was scheduled to release the final batch of Clinton emails as part of a federal court-mandated timetable.

So far, more than 1,800 have been deemed to contain classified information, and another 22 “top secret” emails have been considered too damaging to national security to release even with heavy redactions.

As Clinton’s chief of staff, Mills was a gatekeeper and routinely forwarded emails to Clinton’s personal account. As one example, a Jan. 23, ‎2011 email forwarded from Mills to Clinton, called “Update on DR meeting,” contained classified information, as well as foreign government information which is “born classified.”

The 2011 email can be declassified 15 years after it was sent — indicating it contained classified information when it was sent.

Fox News was first to report that sworn declarations from the CIA notified the intelligence community inspector general and Congress there were “several dozen emails” containing classified information up to the most closely guarded government programs known as “Special Access Programs.”

Clinton has maintained all along that she did not knowingly transmit information considered classified at the time.

The U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual lays out the penalties for taking classified information out of secure government channels – such as an unsecured email system. While the incidents are handled on a “case by case” basis, the manual suggests the suspension of a clearance is routine while “derogatory information” is reviewed.

The manual says the director of the Diplomatic Security Service, “based on a recommendation from the Senior Coordinator for Security Infrastructure (DS/SI), will determine whether, considering all facts available upon receipt of the initial information, it is in the interests of the national security to suspend the employee’s access to classified information on an interim basis. A suspension is an independent administrative procedure that does not represent a final determination …”

Fox News has asked the State Department to explain why Mills maintains her clearance while multiple federal and congressional investigations are ongoing. Fox News also asked whether the department was instructed by the FBI or another entity to keep the clearance in place. Fox News has not yet received a response.

Hillary’s Email Pals Included the WH and SCOTUS Judges

Sheesh…..now what about the 30,000 emails about ah yoga and wedding plans…yeah, yoga sure Hillary. What about the emails from the White House to Hillary…ah all this transparency is well infectious eh?

Ever wonder why a Secretary of State needed to email, confer and be email pals with selected Supreme Court justices?

Hillary’s email account an open secret in Washington long before scandal broke

WashingtonTimes: Hundreds of people — from White House officials and titans of the mainstream media to senators, Supreme Court justices and many of her top colleagues at the State Department — could have known about Hillary Clinton’s secret email account, if only they’d cared to look closely enough.

Listed on some of the more than 28,000 messages Mrs. Clinton released so far are several White House chiefs of staff and a former director of the Office of Management and Budget, much of the rest of official Washington, and a number of people who had oversight of the State Department’s key operations and open-records obligations. President Obama was also on a series of messages, though the government is withholding those.

But just how widely disseminated Mrs. Clinton’s address was became clear in a single 2011 message from Anne-Marie Slaughter, who appeared to include Mrs. Clinton on a message alongside Supreme Court Justices Stephen G. Breyer and Elena Kagan, reporters Jeffrey Toobin, David Brooks, Fred Hiatt and Evan Thomas, CIA Director David H. Petraeus, top Obama aide Benjamin Rhodes and former White House counsel Gregory Craig.

 
Computer specialists said they would have had to know what they were looking for to spot Mrs. Clinton’s address, but it was there for anyone who did look — raising questions about how her unique arrangement remained secret for so long. It came to the public’s attention when news broke in March 2015 in The New York Times — after it was uncovered by a congressional investigation into the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack.

The State Department has since acknowledged that it did not search Mrs. Clinton’s messages in response to open-records requests filed under federal law, and federal District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan is prodding the department about how the situation got so out of hand.

“We’re talking about a Cabinet-level official who was accommodated by the government for reasons unknown to the public. And I think that’s a fair statement — for reasons unknown to the public,” the judge said at a hearing last week, where he decided to approve conservative legal group Judicial Watch’s request for discovery to pry loose more details about who approved the odd email setup and how it ducked the rules.
“All the public can do is speculate,” Judge Sullivan told the government lawyers who have been fighting to drag out the release of the messages Mrs. Clinton has turned over, and to prevent her from having to relinquish thousands of others. “You want me to say it’s done, but I can’t do that right now.”

The final batch of messages the State Department has in its custody — 2,000 of them — is due to be released Monday.

The facts have changed dramatically since the emails were first revealed and Mrs. Clinton insisted that she set up her unique arrangement out of “convenience” for herself and insisted no classified material was sent on the account.

Already, 1,782 messages have been deemed to contain classified material, and 22 of those messages contain “secret” information. Another 22 messages contain “top secret” material so sensitive that the government won’t even release any part of them, meaning they will remain completely hidden from the public.

Mrs. Clinton’s arrangement set off public policy and security debates. Analysts said her server was likely unprotected against any moderately sophisticated attack.

Although details remain sketchy as to what protection Mrs. Clinton used, analysts said having one person maintaining her server is no way to protect sensitive information from a hack. Christopher Soghoian, principal technologist at the American Civil Liberties Union, said there is no evidence that Mrs. Clinton was having her server tested by independent specialists — a major oversight.

“You cannot secure your server with one guy working part time,” Mr. Soghoian said.

That one person, Bryan Pagliano, who reportedly worked for Mrs. Clinton at the State Department and on the side as her server technician, asserted his Fifth Amendment right against incriminating himself in testimony to Congress last year.

Even if the server itself wasn’t compromised, Mr. Soghoian said, Mrs. Clinton was sending email over the broader Internet, where an enterprising opponent could have intercepted messages. If she had been using a State.gov account to email others within the government, that wouldn’t have been possible, he said.

There is no evidence that Mrs. Clinton was hacked, but analysts said that’s of little comfort. Even if the FBI doesn’t find evidence, it is not conclusive.

“Clinton’s use of unencrypted email left her vulnerable to nation states. There’s no amount of investigation the FBI can do to prove that didn’t happen,” Mr. Soghoian said.

Bob Gourley, co-founder of cybersecurity consultancy Cognitio, said the government has to assume Mrs. Clinton’s server was compromised, and he said it begs the question of why she declined to use a State.gov account and instead set up her own off-site server.

“All indications are this was not just a matter of convenience,” he said. “There’s no reason why she should have used her own server and go to all the trouble to do that unless she wanted to hide something.”

That something, Mr. Gourley believes, is the negotiating she did on behalf of the Clinton Foundation, founded by her husband, former President Bill Clinton. She helped lead the foundation as soon as she stepped down from the secretary’s job.

The security analyst said he suspects details of those negotiations are part of the 30,000 messages Mrs. Clinton indicated she sent during her time in office but that she declined to turn back to the State Department. The former secretary said those messages were personal business, such as scheduling yoga classes or arranging her daughter Chelsea’s wedding.

Judicial Watch is trying to get Mrs. Clinton to turn over those messages to the State Department, and that’s the case pending before Judge Sullivan.

“The big story on Monday is, wow, now we have reviewed about half of Mrs. Clinton’s reported records. Where’s the other half?” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “That’s what our discovery is about. Where’s the other half, and how can we find out so they can be retrieved and reviewed and released to the public?”

Mrs. Clinton says the Obama administration is overclassifying her messages. She says she would like all of the messages she returned to the government released, including presumably the 22 the government deems so “top secret” that they can’t be shared even in part.

She and her campaign have questioned the political motivations or conclusions of the inspectors general who have pushed for classification, to Judge Sullivan, whose order of discovery could force her aides to answer tough questions and could eventually lead to her having to return the rest of her emails.

Mr. Fitton said the questions Judicial Watch will ask during discovery include how the government supported her email server, why the folks who handled Freedom of Information Act open-records requests weren’t made aware of it, who else used it, what security precautions were taken and who approved it.

A Washington Times analysis of the more than 28,000 messages that have been released show dozens of State Department employees, from the lowest to the highest levels, were aware that Mrs. Clinton was using her unique arrangement to conduct government business.

The extensive awareness within the department struck Judge Sullivan.

“How on earth can the court conclude that there’s not, at a minimum, a reasonable suspicion of bad faith regarding the State Department’s response to this FOIA request?” he said at a hearing last week.

Mrs. Clinton’s successor, current Secretary of State John F. Kerry, was one of those who emailed with Mrs. Clinton on her secret account during his time in the Senate. He was one of a handful of senators The Times found who were pen pals with Mrs. Clinton.

Last week, Mr. Kerry tried to explain how he missed Mrs. Clinton’s behavior and told Congress he simply mailed the address he was given.

“I didn’t think about it. I didn’t know if she had an account, or what the department gave her at that point in time, or what she was operating with. I had no knowledge,” he told Rep. Darrell E. Issa, a California Republican who prodded him on the matter.

Stories about odd email practices have continued to dog Mr. Obama’s tenure. His former administrator at the Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa P. Jackson, used a secret agency email address to conduct government business, but the EPA says those messages were searched in open-records requests.

Defense Secretary Ashton Carter used a private address to conduct some government business in the first months after taking office. He said the practice was wrong and apologized for it.

Mr. Gourley, the cybersecurity specialist, said Mrs. Clinton’s practice went beyond that. He compared it to a phone, saying everyone has a home phone or personal cellphone, and even top government officials occasionally use it for official business. But in Mrs. Clinton’s case, she rejected an official government email account and used only her secret account.

“Those kinds of rules were just totally flouted by Clinton,” he said.