Category Archives: government fraud spending collusion

High Risk: National Security Personnel in Foreign Own Buildings

Posted on by

 FBI St. Louis  Little Rock

Oh Donald, Mr. President sir…you’re the expert here….need an immediate executive order on this one. By the way, don’t stay in the Waldorf Astoria any more, perhaps don’t go to movie theaters either if you’re concerned for personal reasons.

First on CNN: Report finds national security agencies at risk in foreign-owned buildings

Washington (CNN)US law-enforcement agencies are at risk of being spied on and hacked because some of their field offices are located in foreign-owned buildings without even knowing it, according to a new government report.

The report by the Government Accountability Office, which was obtained by CNN and is due to be released later Monday, reveals that a number of FBI, Homeland Security, Secret Service and Drug Enforcement Agency offices across the country are housed in space leased from firms based in China and other nations.
Experts told the GAO that the agencies could be vulnerable to espionage and cyber intrusions because the foreign owners could gain unauthorized access to the properties, be able to secretly install surveillance equipment, and have knowledge of building systems like heating, ventilation and electronics which could facilitate hacking.
The General Services Administration, which handles leasing for many federal agencies, is renting space in 20 buildings from foreign owners — and its investigators were unable to identify who the property owners for about one-third of the government’s more than 1,400 “high-security leases.”
Nine of the 14 agencies the GAO contacted were unaware the building space they were using was foreign owned.
“It’s an eye opener,” Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, told CNN about the report. “Certainly our security professionals should know who owns the piping in the buildings that they occupy.”
Chaffetz, along with Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Illinois, and Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, called for the GAO review.
The chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee said he doesn’t necessarily think the agencies should be barred from leasing office space from foreign owners, but added that he would feel “much more comfortable if they’re at least aware.”
Currently, the GSA is not required to determine whether a building is foreign owned when it is considering whether to lease space.
Among the report’s findings were that DEA, Homeland Security and Secret Service offices in Little Rock, Arkansas, Jacksonville, Florida, and Shreveport, Louisiana, along with an FBI office in St. Louis, Missouri, were leased from “Gemini Investments” — a company based in China.
The GAO report noted that Chinese-owned properties were of particular concern because the country has been linked to numerous instances of hacking.
After the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in Manhattan was sold to Chinese investors, then-President Barack Obama didn’t stay there, as had long been the custom of US presidents, with security concerns being one of the factors.
Other federal offices listed in the study are located in buildings owned by companies in Canada, Israel, the United Kingdom, Germany, South Korea and Japan.
GAO investigators talked to officials who assess foreign investments in the US, as well as real estate representatives, who warned about the potential danger.
” … (L)easing space in foreign-owned buildings could present security risks such as espionage, unauthorized cyber and physical access to the facilitates, and sabotage,” the report said. “For example, a DHS foreign investment official said that potential threat actors could coerce owners into collecting intelligence about the personnel and activities of the facilities when maintaining the property.”
The report also noted other possible “insider threats,” referring to “disgruntled employees, contractors, or other persons abusing their position of trust” who pose a “significant threat” to building access.
But this doesn’t mean that the threats have materialized. Chaffetz said he was unaware of any specific instances where sensitive information had been compromised. The report also said two real estate representatives determined it wasn’t a security risk to lease foreign-owned space.
“One of the representatives said that access at high-security facilities is strictly controlled, including access by the owners, and that passive investors in properties do not have access to the buildings,” the report said.
In addition to hacking and espionage, the report also cautioned that renting from foreign owners presented the possibility of the US agencies becoming unwittingly involved in money laundering, since real estate purchases are often used to conceal the criminal source of the investment funds.
The report recommended that the GSA should start informing the agencies if their space is foreign owned, so they can put the necessary security precautions in place. The GSA said it agreed with the recommendation.
“I hope this is a wake-up call,” Chaffetz said.

DHS 2016 Report on Immigration Numbers, Staggering

Posted on by

This report is the year end 2016 of immigration statistics. While anything the Department of Homeland Security under Napolitano or Johnson ever published is suspect, using the numbers they provided is bad enough. It certainly spells out how ugly the world is country by country and the report tell us how bad it is, while one must consider other Western nations have similar reports. This report is over 100 pages and the pages are number by category by year. The reality is staggering.

 

Yearbook_Immigration_Statistics_2015

Statistical data on immigration have been published annually by the U S government since the 1860s Over the years, the federal agencies responsible for reporting on immigration have changed, as have the content, format, and title of the annual publication Currently, immigration data are published in the Yearbook of Immigration Statistics by the Office of Immigration Statistics in the Policy Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security.

The globe has lost all equilibrium and the professionals estimate for this condition to remain for the next ten years. We have yet to have a top down discussion on actually stabilizing countries one by one. And then there is the question of affordability. Can nations continue to finance war, nation building, and chasing terror indefinitely?

Meanwhile, President Trump has called for a ‘safe zone’ in Syria for Syrians seeking protection. He has called for this area to be protected by U.S. Marines. Hummm

*** President Trump envisions using the U.S. military, in conjunction with the State Department, to establish and protect refugee camps in Syria and neighboring countries, according to a draft executive order outlining several steps the new administration intends to take with hopes of preventing future terrorist attacks on American soil.

First obtained and published Wednesday by The Huffington Post, the document alludes to Trump’s controversial calls to prevent people fleeing the war-torn country from entering the United States, and it indicates he wants to see a plan by late April. The objective is to establish “safe zones” — both inside Syria and in neighboring countries — that will be used to “protect vulnerable Syrian populations” while they “await firm settlement” either elsewhere in Syria or in other countries.

Trump wants Defense Secretary James Mattis to coordinate the effort with his counterpart at the State Department, expected to be Rex Tillerson, who is pending Senate confirmation.

executive order terrorA draft executive order circulating on social media Wednesday indicates the U.S. military could be used to establish and secure refugee camps in Syria. (Via Twitter)
A Defense Department official was unable to verify the document’s authenticity. “And even if I were, they appear to be drafts,” said Eric Pahon, a spokesman at the Pentagon. “DoD does not comment on pre-decisional draft documents.” A State Department spokesman referred questions to the White House.

On Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer did not directly address the document but said Trump would discuss the issue at length in the near future.

“The president has talked extensively about extreme vetting,” he said. “And you’ll see more action this week on keeping America safe. This has been something he talked about in the inaugural address. He talked about it in the campaign.

“Allowing people who are from a country that has a propensity to do us harm, [we need] to make sure that we take the necessary steps, to ensure that the people who come to this country, especially areas that have a higher degree of concern, that we take the appropriate steps to make sure that they’re coming to this country for all the right reasons.” More here.
*** Where did this concept come from?

BEIRUT (AP) — The Latest on the Syrian conflict (all times local):

12:20 p.m.

A Turkish official says his country has always supported the idea of safe zones in Syria but would need to review any U.S. plans before commenting.

U.S. President Donald Trump is directing the Pentagon and State Department to produce a plan for safe zones in Syria within 90 days, according to a draft executive order he is expected to sign this week.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Huseyin Muftuoglu told reporters that Turkey has “seen the reports on a request for a study on the safe zone,” adding that “what is important is to see the result of these studies.”

He pointed to the Syrian city of Jarablus, where thousands of Syrians have returned after Turkish-backed opposition forces drove out the Islamic State group, as a good example of what can be achieved.

___

11:15 a.m.

The Kremlin says a U.S. plan for safe zones in Syria should be thoroughly considered.

Asked to comment on a draft executive order that President Donald Trump is expected to sign this week, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, underlined the importance to “thoroughly calculate all possible consequences” of the measure. He noted Thursday that “it’s important not to exacerbate the situation with refugees.”

While suspending visas for Syrians and others, the order directs the Pentagon and the State Department to produce a plan for safe zones in Syria and the surrounding area within 90 days.

Safe zones, proposed by both Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton during the campaign, were considered by the Obama administration years ago and ruled out, in part because of Russia’s air campaign in Syria.

Top Policy People, Mass Exodus at State Dept.

Posted on by

 Rex Tillerson was there at Foggy Bottom getting a lay of the landscape, when the resignations turned in last week became effective today as there was a walk out. And YES, the most corrupt official at the State Department remaining after John Kerry left is Patrick Kennedy, and he is gone too…YIPPEE.

 

It is real awesome that Victoria Nuland has left too.

CBS: State Department posts occupied by other career diplomats have also been left vacant. Victoria Nuland is one of the people leaving. Nuland was the Assistant Secretary of State responsible for Russia and Eurasia Policy at the State Department, and is known for her hardline view on Russia. Linda Etim, a political appointee handling USAID and African affairs, has also left the State Department.

The State Department’s entire senior management team just resigned

WaPo: Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s job running the State Department just got considerably more difficult. The entire senior level of management officials resigned Wednesday, part of an ongoing mass exodus of senior foreign service officers who don’t want to stick around for the Trump era.

Tillerson was actually inside the State Department’s headquarters in Foggy Bottom on Wednesday, taking meetings and getting the lay of the land. I reported Wednesday morning that the Trump team was narrowing its search for his No. 2, and that it was looking to replace the State Department’s long-serving undersecretary for management, Patrick Kennedy. Kennedy, who has been in that job for nine years, was actively involved in the transition and was angling to keep that job under Tillerson, three State Department officials told me.

Then suddenly on Wednesday afternoon, Kennedy and three of his top officials resigned unexpectedly, four State Department officials confirmed. Assistant Secretary of State for Administration Joyce Anne Barr, Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs Michele Bond and Ambassador Gentry O. Smith, director of the Office of Foreign Missions, followed him out the door. All are career foreign service officers who have served under both Republican and Democratic administrations.

Kennedy will retire from the foreign service at the end of the month, officials said. The other officials could be given assignments elsewhere in the foreign service.

In addition, Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security Gregory Starr retired Jan. 20, and the director of the Bureau of Overseas Building Operations, Lydia Muniz, departed the same day. That amounts to a near-complete housecleaning of all the senior officials that deal with managing the State Department, its overseas posts and its people.

“It’s the single biggest simultaneous departure of institutional memory that anyone can remember, and that’s incredibly difficult to replicate,” said David Wade, who served as State Department chief of staff under Secretary of State John Kerry. “Department expertise in security, management, administrative and consular positions in particular are very difficult to replicate and particularly difficult to find in the private sector.”

Several senior foreign service officers in the State Department’s regional bureaus have also left their posts or resigned since the election. But the emptying of leadership in the management bureaus is more disruptive because those offices need to be led by people who know the department and have experience running its complicated bureaucracies. There’s no easy way to replace that via the private sector, said Wade.

“Diplomatic security, consular affairs, there’s just not a corollary that exists outside the department, and you can least afford a learning curve in these areas where issues can quickly become matters of life and death,” he said. “The muscle memory is critical. These retirements are a big loss. They leave a void. These are very difficult people to replace.”

Whether Kennedy left on his own volition or was pushed out by the incoming Trump team is a matter of dispute inside the department. Just days before he resigned, Kennedy was taking on more responsibility inside the department and working closely with the transition. His departure was a surprise to other State Department officials who were working with him.

One senior State Department official who responded to my requests for comment said that all the officials had previously submitted their letters of resignation, as was required for all positions that are appointed by the president and that require confirmation by the Senate, known as PAS positions.

“No officer accepts a PAS position with the expectation that it is unlimited. And all officers understand that the President may choose to replace them at any time,” this official said. “These officers have served admirably and well. Their departure offers a moment to consider their accomplishments and thank them for their service. These are the patterns and rhythms of the career service.”

Ambassador Richard Boucher, who served as State Department spokesman for Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, said that while there’s always a lot of turnover around the time a new administration takes office, traditionally senior officials work with the new team to see who should stay on in their roles and what other jobs might be available. But that’s not what happened this time.

The officials who manage the building and thousands of overseas diplomatic posts are charged with taking care of Americans overseas and protecting U.S. diplomats risking their lives abroad. The career foreign service officers are crucial to those functions as well as to implementing the new president’s agenda, whatever it may be, Boucher said.

“You don’t run foreign policy by making statements, you run it with thousands of people working to implement programs every day,” Boucher said. “To undercut that is to undercut the institution.”

By itself, the sudden departure of the State Department’s entire senior management team is disruptive enough. But in the context of a president who railed against the U.S. foreign policy establishment during his campaign and secretary of state with no government experience, the vacancies are much more concerning.

Tillerson’s job No. 1 must be to find qualified and experienced career officials to manage the State Department’s vital offices. His second job should be to reach out to and reassure a State Department workforce that is panicked about what the Trump administration means for them.

Cruz and Poe Introduce Legislation for States to Reject Refugees

Posted on by

There is some additional help coming from the Trump administration as President Trump is likely to issue and sign executive order on immigration that will impact visa holders from Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. These are worn torn countries where hostilities continue with terror organizations. An issue that still remains however that Trump has not addressed is the asylum seekers.

S. 2363 (114th): State Refugee Security Act of 2015

A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to permit the Governor of a State to reject the resettlement of a refugee in that State unless there is adequate assurance that the alien does not present a security risk and for other purposes. The 2 page text is here.

New bill from Cruz, Poe would let states reject refugees

WT: Republicans in the House and Senate have introduced legislation that would give governors the power to reject federal efforts to resettle refugees in their states.

The bill from Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. Ted Poe, both of Texas, is a reaction to years of growing GOP frustration with the Obama administration’s aggressive effort to take in refugees and resettle them across the country. Republicans continue to have doubts that refugees can be vetted to ensure they aren’t Islamic State terrorists.

The State Refugee Security Act would require the federal government to notify states at least 21 days before they seek to settle a refugee. Under the bill, if a state governor certifies that the federal government hasn’t offered enough assurances that the refugee does not pose a security risk, the state can block the resettlement effort.

Poe said the Obama administration’s “open door policy” has forced states to take on refugees without these guarantees, and said states need a way to opt out.

“Until the federal government can conduct thorough security screenings and confirm that there are no security risks, Congress should empower states to be able to protect their citizens by refusing to participate in this program,” he said.

Cruz said the first obligation of the president is to keep Americans safe, and said the bill would be a step in that direction.

“I am encouraged that, unlike the previous administration, one of President Trump‘s top priorities is to defeat radical Islamic terrorism,” he said. “To augment the efforts of the new administration, this legislation I have introduced will reinforce the authority of the states and governors to keep their citizens safe.”

****

The Trump White House also has not addressed the issue of criminal deportation of foreign nationals. Each foreign inmate is known to cost the taxpayer an estimated $21,000 per year. Enforcement and removal operations of those illegal foreign nationals now falls to the newly confirmed DHS Secretary Kelly.

FY 2015 ICE Immigration Removals

In addition to its criminal investigative responsibilities, ICE shares responsibility for enforcing the nation’s civil immigration laws with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). ICE’s role in the immigration enforcement system is focused on two primary missions: (1) the identification and apprehension of criminal aliens and other removable individuals located in the United States; and (2) the detention and removal of those individuals apprehended in the interior of the U.S., as well as those apprehended by CBP officers and agents patrolling our nation’s borders.

In executing these responsibilities, ICE has prioritized its limited resources on the identification and removal of criminal aliens and those apprehended at the border while attempting to unlawfully enter the United States. This report provides an overview of ICE Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 civil immigration enforcement and removal operations. See FY 2015 ICE Immigration Removals Statistics

Expectations of a quick solution and immediate movement to address the immigration matter are misplaced as this will be a long slog of an operation and will take the coordination of several agencies including the U.S. State Department which is presently operating without a Secretary until Rex Tillerson is confirmed and sworn in. The fallout will include a diplomatic challenge which is many cases does need to occur, however other nations such as China and Russia will step in to intrude on the process including those at the United Nations level, falling into the lap of the newly confirmed U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley.

Reviving the Holman Rule is Not Enough, Government Employees

Posted on by

But it is a start to bring back this rule…

The Holman Rule

The Holman rule (Rule XXI clause 2), which had its inception in
the 44th Congress, underwent various modifications between 1876 and
1911. At times it was dropped completely. The full text is here.

TWS: The Washington Post reports that House Republicans have revived an obscure rule that could prove to be the most significant civil service reform in decades:

House Republicans this week reinstated an arcane procedural rule that enables lawmakers to reach deep into the budget and slash the pay of an individual federal worker — down to $1 — a move that threatens to upend the 130-year-old civil service.

The Holman Rule, named after an Indiana congressman who devised it in 1876, empowers any member of Congress to propose amending an appropriations bill to single out a government employee or cut a specific program.

The use of the rule would not be simple; a majority of the House and the Senate would still have to approve any such amendment. At the same time, opponents and supporters agree that the work of 2.1 million civil servants, designed to be insulated from politics, is now vulnerable to the whims of elected officials.

It’s interesting that the Post frames this move in a way that’s sympathetic to federal workers, as if being “vulnerable to the whims of elected officials” is unduly threatening. Most Americans in the workplace are, in fact, vulnerable to the whims of their employers, and it takes a lot less than a literal act of Congress to have their pay cut or lose their job for poor performance.

And there can be no question that federal workers have far too many civil service protections. After the IRS held a press conference admitting that they had improperly targeted conservative groups, Lois Lerner, the IRS official deemed most responsible, didn’t face any meaningful consequences. Instead it was revealed that she recently received $129,000 in bonuses and retired with an annual pension that could possibly exceed $100,000.

Even after Lerner left, John Koskinen, the new interim head of the IRS, ignored congressional subpoenas as the IRS destroyed evidence relating to the investigation of Lerner and engaged in egregious stonewalling. It’s pretty clear that the IRS was in no way fearful of suffering any consequences for persecuting thousands of ordinary Americans and flouting Congress.

And last year, the New York Times reported that “at most three” Department of Veterans Affairs employees lost their jobs after it was revealed that widespread incompetence at the VA was killing sick veterans. There are several other examples of intolerable behavior by federal workers going largely unpunished, and tolerating malfeasance has broad policy implications for Republicans specifically and good governance generally:

Democrats have long understood personnel is policy. For decades, the administrative state has continued to extend its reach. So long as the people enforcing our laws and regulations are union liberals with broad immunity, the rule of law will depend on those individuals’ views and choices.

To address the systemic problem, the GOP has to reclaim Congress’s oversight power and push for sweeping civil service reforms. Without them, no significant conservative policy overhaul will ever be implemented, and Americans will be increasingly subject to a complex web of unaccountable and unconstitutional administrative fiefdoms.

For ordinary Americans, the only thing controversial here that federal workers are essentially impossible to punish or fire, even though the average federal compensation is $123,160, or 76 percent more than the private-sector average of Joe Taxpayer at $69,901. Reviving the Holman Rule was a smart move by House Republicans, and we should hope they start using it, because there are lots of federal workers who aren’t worth paying a dollar, let alone 123,160 of them.

****

Ethics questions for two sets of government employees:

Members of Congress

The ethical conduct of the elected members of Congress is prescribed by either the House Ethics Manual or the Senate Ethics Manual, as created and revised by the House and Senate committees on ethics.

Executive Branch Employees

For the first 200 years of U.S. government, each agency maintained its own code of ethical conduct. But in 1989, the President’s Commission on Federal Ethics Law Reform recommended that individual agency standards of conduct be replaced with a single regulation applicable to all employees of the executive branch.

In response, President George H.W. Bush signed Executive Order 12674 on April 12, 1989, setting out the following fourteen basic principles of ethical conduct for executive branch personnel:

  1. Public service is a public trust, requiring employees to place loyalty to the Constitution, the laws and ethical principles above private gain.\
  2. Employees shall not hold financial interests that conflict with the conscientious performance of duty.
  3. Employees shall not engage in financial transactions using nonpublic Government information or allow the improper use of such information to further any private interest.
  4. An employee shall not, except as permitted … solicit or accept any gift or other item of monetary value from any person or entity seeking official action from, doing business with, or conducting activities regulated by the employee’s agency, or whose interests may be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of the employee’s duties.
  5. Employees shall put forth honest effort in the performance of their duties.
  6. Employees shall not knowingly make unauthorized commitments or promises of any kind purporting to bind the Government.
  7. Employees shall not use public office for private gain.
  8. Employees shall act impartially and not give preferential treatment to any private organization or individual.
  9. Employees shall protect and conserve Federal property and shall not use it for other than authorized activities.
  10. Employees shall not engage in outside employment or activities, including seeking or negotiating for employment, that conflict with official Government duties and responsibilities.
  11. Employees shall disclose waste, fraud, abuse, and corruption to appropriate authorities.
  12. Employees shall satisfy in good faith their obligations as citizens, including all just financial obligations, especially those—such as Federal, State, or local taxes—that are imposed by law.
  13. Employees shall adhere to all laws and regulations that provide equal opportunity for all Americans regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or handicap.
  14. Employees shall endeavor to avoid any actions creating the appearance that they are violating the law or the ethical standards set forth in this part. Whether particular circumstances create an appearance that the law or these standards have been violated shall be determined from the perspective of a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts.

The federal regulation enforcing these 14 rules of conduct (as amended) is now codified and fully explained in the Code of Federal Regulations at 5 C.F.R. Part 2635. Part 2635.

Over the years since 1989, some agencies have created supplemental regulations that modify or supplement the 14 rules of conduct to better apply to the specific duties and responsibilities of their employees.

Established by the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, the U.S. Office of Government Ethics provides overall leadership and oversight of the executive branch ethics program designed to prevent and resolve conflicts of interest.

The Overarching Rules of Ethical Conduct

In addition to the above 14 rules of conduct for executive branch employees, Congress, on June 27, 1980, unanimously passed a law establishing the following
general Code of Ethics for Government Service. Signed by President Jimmy Carter on July 3, 1980, Public Law 96-303 requires that, “Any person in Government service should:”

  • Put loyalty to the highest moral principles and to country above loyalty to persons, party, or Government department.
  • Uphold the Constitution, laws, and regulations of the United States and of all governments therein and never be a party to their evasion.
  • Give a full day’s labor for a full day’s pay; giving earnest effort and best thought to the performance of duties.
  • Seek to find and employ more efficient and economical ways of getting tasks accomplished.
  • Never discriminate unfairly by the dispensing of special favors or privileges to anyone, whether for remuneration or not; and never accept, for himself or herself or for family members, favors or benefits under circumstances which might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing the performance of governmental duties.
  • Make no private promises of any kind binding upon the duties of office, since a Government employee has no private word which can be binding on public duty.
  • Engage in no business with the Government, either directly or indirectly, which is inconsistent with the conscientious performance of governmental duties.
  • Never use any information gained confidentially in the performance of governmental duties as a means of making private profit.
  • Expose corruption wherever discovered.