Obama DID Veto Defense Bill, Losing 40,000 Troops

Posted on October 23, 2015October 23, 2015 by Denise Simon

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.”

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.

Smoking Gun in Hillary/Benghazi Hearing Was Chelsea

Posted on October 22, 2015October 22, 2015 by Denise Simon

The first attack happened and Hillary left the State Department and went home. While at home she had people telling her people were missing and dying. If one of your diplomatic posts was attacked would you leave the office and go home? When questioned about being alone at home during the attack, Hillary laughed.

But, Chelsea knew first the Benghazi attackers were Ansar al Sharia…..then Hillary told the same to the Libyan and Egyptian government…..oh then those pesky talking points about the video was the other track at the same time where the White House was calling YouTube while brave and fighting Americans were still on the roof and 2 at the mission post had already died.

Attkisson: Within hours of the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Clinton emailed her daughter, Chelsea, that Americans had died at the hands of an al-Qaeda like group. Al-Qaeda is the Islamic extremist terrorist group that was led by Osama bin Laden. Clinton also informed Egypt’s prime minister and Libya’s president that the attacks were “preplanned” and “had nothing to do with” an anti-Islamic video posted on YouTube.

That is perspective and real when the Democrats whined all day about how much money has been spent on the Gowdy Benghazi Commission. Isn’t live priceless? Not so much with those Democrats.

All the Democrats are claiming victory today as is Hillary’s team as she never had a meltdown. But real details and facts don’t matter except to those seeking and finding the truth in verified evidence.

Post Qaddafi, Hillary took a play it by ear posture in Libya, hence the lack of email traffic on the topic as noted with visual stacks of emails today in the hearing.
The people in Libya and especially Ambassador Chris Stevens did not have Hillary’s email address and actually never spoke to her by phone after he was sworn in as Ambassador, replacing Ambassador Cretz who was removed from the country due to WikiLeaks cables. Perhaps Ambassador Stevens should have just coordinated more security by asking Blumenthal, as he was forced to responded to forwarded emails by Hillary, that originate by Sidney Blumenthal.
Oh, Hillary NEVER had a computer at the State Department.
While the attack was going on, Hillary issued an official written statement that it WAS an attack, but what about that video thing that went on for weeks including Susan Rice on all the Sunday talk shows?
One of the security contractors was operating in Libya without a contract and license.
There were more than 600 requests for more security, none got to Hillary? No country summary went to Hillary discussing Libya as a failing country?
Benghazi was originally a temporary mission, soon to be a permanent facility, so she never signed a waiver exempting Benghazi from meeting security standards mandated by law.
Congressman Pompeo of Kansas asked Hillary about Marc Turi and the weapons bound for the Transnational Council. Her response was she knew nothing about Turi or the weapons, but that discussion and the list of weapons were in her emails.
No one was disciplined or fired over Benghazi failures.
Chris Stevens was my friend but he never asked me for an increase in security, he couldn’t as he had no way to contact me other than go through my people at the State Department.

In closing, Hillary’s entire legal team handled the email sorting and the servers, she said she had no role. Did those lawyers all have security clearance to do that? Nah….and so it goes.

Stingray and Warrantless Cell Phone Tracking Policy

Posted on October 21, 2015October 21, 2015 by Denise Simon

DHS issues stingray policy and answers to Oversight Committee

SCMagazine: The Department of Homeland (DHS) followed the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) lead on Wednesday with the release of its cell-site simulator, or “stingray,” policy.

The policy, as the agency wrote, “provides guidance and establishes common principles for the use of cell-site simulators across DHS.” The policy applies to the “use of cell-site simulator technology inside the United States in furtherance of criminal investigations,” the memorandum states.

Primarily, the policy hits on a required search warrant before operating a stingray device. In the past, the government has been derided for picking up innocent citizens’ data while they’re sharing public spaces with criminal investigation targets.

The majority of cases will require prosecutors to obtain a search warrant supported by probable cause; however, in exigent circumstances under the Fourth Amendment, such as situations where law enforcement’s needs are “so compelling that they render a warrantless search objectively reasonable” the warrant requirement can be waved. Exceptional circumstances are also exempt from a mandatory warrant. These instances often occur when obtaining a search warrant is “impracticable,” such as when Secret Service agents are protecting the president.

As far as data collection, data must be deleted as soon as the target is identified and no less than once every 30 days.

The policy release was accompanied by a hearing at the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The representatives asked for clarification from both DHS and the DOJ on their stingray use and rules.

When Rod Blum (R-Iowa) probed about how agents would be reprimanded if they didn’t follow these policies, both the DOJ and DHS said individuals would be left to the agencies’ idea of appropriate punishment, but employees would definitely be held accountable.

“As with any technology procedure within an agency if individuals violate their agency’s orders they’re accountable to their agencies and subject to discipline,” said Elana Tyrangiel, principal deputy assistant attorney general, Office of Legal Policy at DOJ.

To ensure their policies are followed, both agencies instated an auditing procedure with designated executive-level contacts serving as direct lines of contact.

Secret Service allowed to use warrantless cellphone tracking

WASHINGTON (AP) – A new policy allows the Secret Service to use intrusive cellphone-tracking technology without a warrant if there’s believed to be a nonspecific threat to the president or another protected person.

Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Seth M. Stodder described to a House subcommittee Wednesday the department’s policy on the use of cell-site simulators.

Civil libertarians and privacy advocates have long expressed concern about the suitcase-size devices, known as Stingrays, which mimic cell-towers to scoop up electronic data that can be used to locate nearby phones and identify their owners. The devices don’t listen in to phone calls or capture text messages, Stodder said.

The policy the department unveiled this week is similar to the one announced in September by the Justice Department, which includes the FBI.

Federal law enforcement officers are required to get a warrant signed by a judge before using Stingrays, except under emergency “exigent circumstances” meeting the constitutional standard for probable cause under the Fourth Amendment, but when there is no time to get a warrant.

Stodder cited the example of kidnappings, such as a recent case where Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers used a Stingray to help locate and rescue a 6-year-old girl being held hostage by human smugglers in Arizona.

But Stodder said another allowed exception under the policy would let the Secret Service use Stingrays in “exceptional circumstances” without meeting the legal threshold for probable cause. In such cases, using the devices would require direct approval from “executive-level personnel” at Secret Service headquarters and the U.S. attorney for the relevant jurisdiction.

Asked whether that essentially granted a blanket exception for the Secret Service, Stodder said that the exemption would not be used in routine criminal probes, such as a counterfeiting investigation.

“The key exception that we envision is the Secret Service’s protective mission,” Stodder said. “In certain circumstances where you could have an immediate threat to the president and you have cryptic information, our conclusion in drawing the line between security and privacy here is to err on the side of protection.”

Stodder added that such information could be “a cryptic email or something like that” indicating a security threat to the president where agents would lack the time or the information to determine probable cause, “but you need to locate that person.”

Cell-site stimulators have been used for years by both state and federal law enforcement agencies, who tout them as a vital tool to catch fugitives and locate suspects. But privacy groups and some lawmakers have raised alarms about the secrecy surrounding its use and the collection of cellphone information of innocent bystanders who happen to be in a particular neighborhood or location.

Stodder could not immediately say how many times department law-enforcement officers had used Stingrays without warrants in recent years.

Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., said Wednesday the newly announced guidelines are a good first step, but added that the policy still lacks transparency and provides overly broad permission for Stingrays to be used without warrants. The new federal policies also don’t apply to state and local law enforcement agencies that have purchased Stingrays, sometimes through the use of federal grants. More here.

WikiLeaks Posts the Hacked Emails of CIA Director

Posted on October 21, 2015October 21, 2015 by Denise Simon

Yet another Obama administration placeholder that was using a private email for sensitive material.

Of particular note is the partially written summary on Iran from 2009, which appear to be the genesis and words the White House used to justify normalizing relations with the rogue nation. John Brennan was applying to obtain high security clearance to enter the Obama White House before 2009 and later assuming the role of the chief of the CIA.

*** “The United States has no choice but to find ways to coexist — and to come to terms — with whatever government holds power in Tehran,” Brennan said in the three-page memo. He added that Iran would have to “come to terms” with the U.S. and that “Tehran’s ability to advance its political and economic interests rests on a non-hostile relationship with the United States and the West.”

In the memo, Brennan advised Obama to “tone down” rhetoric with Iran, and swiped at former President George W. Bush for his “gratuitous” labeling of Iran as part of a worldwide “axis of evil.” Brennan also said the U.S. should establish a direct dialogue with Tehran and “seek realistic, measurable steps.” Although he didn’t specifically call for the regime of financial sanctions that the Obama administration, along with Europe, Russia and China, pushed against Iran, Brennan told the president-elect to “hold out meaningful carrots as well as sticks.” ***

In part, a deeper look at the text is as follows:

The Conundrum of Iran

Iran will be a major player on the world stage in the decades ahead, and its actions and

behavior will have a major and enduring impact on near- and long-term U.S. interests on

a wide variety of regional and global issues. With a population of over 70 million, xx

percent of the world’s proven oil reserves, a geostrategic location of tremendous

(enviable?) significance, and a demonstrated potential to develop a nuclear-weapons

program, the United States has no choice but to find a way to coexist—and to come to

terms—with whatever government holds power in Tehran. At the same time, the Iranian

Government also must come to terms with Washington, as Tehran’s ability to advance its

political and economic interests rests on a non-hostile relationship with the United States

and the West.

There are numerous hurdles that stand in the way of improved U.S.-Iranian relations, but

none is more daunting than the theocratic regime’s nearly 30-year track record of

engaging in transnational terrorism, both directly and indirectly, to advance its

revolutionary agenda. Tehran’s proclivity to promote its interests by playing the terrorist

card undermines its standing as a responsible sovereign state and calls into question

virtually all of its actions, even when pursuing legitimate political, economic, and

strategic interests. While the use of terrorism(*footnote on definition) is reprehensible

and of serious concern irrespective of the source, the wielding of the terrorism club by a

nation state such as Iran is particularly alarming and insidious because of the ability of a

government to use its instruments of national power to support, conceal, facilitate, and

employ terrorist violence. Specifically, a sovereign government has the ready ability to

provide all of the logistical requirements—e.g. the fabrication of official documentation,

explosives, and weapons; the protected use of diplomatic facilities, staff, and pouches;

and the provision of expertise, funding, and targeting intelligence—that can be used to

great effect to plan and carry out successful terrorist attacks. Too often, and for too long,

Iran has excelled at such activities.

An anonymous teen hacker claimed to have stolen a handful of files from CIA Director John Brennan’s private email account, U.S. officials reported on Monday.

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, send them to WikiLeaks.

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)