Category Archives: Legislation

Senator Feinstein’s Loyalty to China First

Posted on by

Now, this is the woman that concocted the while Dr. Ford v. Brett Kavanaugh chaos event in Washington DC and refused to hand that pesky letter over to Chairman Grassley…

Personally, she should be brought up before the Senate Ethics Committee, it would be a gesture for sure but then we could have a Senate vote of no confidence in Di-Fi…another gesture, but tactics nonetheless.

Meanwhile:

Senator Cruz is not well liked by many Democrats in the Senate because he exposes them, that is if anyone is listening. It was not too long ago that Ben Shapiro published in his DailyWire that Senator Cruz proposed some legislation to rename a road and Feinstein earnestly objected. Hah, it is an interesting story found here.

Related reading: Chinese spy who defected tells all

Now, just before that, a scandal that went away real fast was that lil miss Dianne had an American aide working for the Chinese (read spy) on her payroll for years. BUT, that was not the first time the FBI came knocking on her door for much the same reason. Really you say? Yes….

Only back in 1997 as explained by the LATimes: federal investigators have detected that the Chinese government might attempt to seek favor with Feinstein. Last year, she was one of six members of Congress who received warnings from the FBI that China might try to improperly influence them through illegal campaign contributions.

The article has another interesting paragraph: At the same time, far from the spotlight, Feinstein’s husband, Richard C. Blum, has expanded his private business interests in China–to the point that his firm is now a prominent investor inside the communist nation.

For years, Feinstein and Blum have insisted that they maintained a solid “firewall” between her role as an influential foreign policy player and his career as a private investor overseas.

But such closely coinciding interests are highly unusual for major figures in public life in Washington. And now, as controversy heats up over improper foreign influence in the U.S. political process, the effectiveness of the firewall between those interests could be called into question.

Firewall eh?

SAN FRANCISCO SHANGHAI SISTER CITIES photo

Well there is this other thing in California called the ‘California Asia Business Council’. See Di-Fi’s husband in the photo?

Asia Night 203 back row in the middle

Recipients of Cal-Asia’s prestigious New Silk Road Award include: Ms. Weili Dai, President and Co-founder of Marvell Technology Group; Dr. Chong Moon Lee, Founder, Diamond Multimedia; The Asia Foundation (presented to Dr. David Arnold, President); Alexander D. Calhoun, Senior Counsel, Squire Sanders & Dempsey; Daniel K. H. Chao, Chairman of Bechtel Greater China (retired); John S. Chen, Chairman, CEO, and President of Sybase; Hon. Dianne Feinstein, US Senator; Dr. Ta-Lin Hsu founder and chairman of H&Q Asia Pacific; C. Richard Kramlich, chairman and co-founder of New Enterprise Associates; G. Paul Matthews, Founder, Matthews International Capital Management; Dr. William F. Miller, SRI International, Stanford, and Silicon Valley visionary; Hon. George P. Shultz, Former Secretary of State; Washington SyCip, Founder of SGV & Co. and “Asia’s Wise Business Owl”;   Amb. Linda Tsao Yang, former US Director, Asian Development Bank.

(Senator Feinstein got an award….firewall?)

 

Cal-Asia’s Mission
…is to promote commerce between the U.S. and Asia. We are proud to have received two awards for our efforts from the US Department of Commerce.

Other Cal-Asia News

–Foreign Direct Investment in ASEAN
–APEC Meetings for 2015 started in January in Hanoi and will culminate with the Manila summit. Meeting locations and dates: APEC Events Calendar. General info on APEC outcomes, plans: http://www.apec.org/

—EXIM BANKReport to the U.S. Congress on the Export-Import Bank of the United States and global export credit competition, 2014
–OECD list of export credit agencies
—Asian ExIm Banks

Ah, but there is more:

SAN FRANCISCO, May 4, 2017 — Richard C. Blum, founder and chairman of Blum Capital Partners, delivers remarks at Asia Society Northern California’s Fourteenth Annual Dinner.

Going back to 2009 and swell company here at this event:

April 23, 2009 – Blum Center Groundbreaking with Vice President Al Gore. (Peg Skorpinski)The groundbreaking ceremony for the new home of the Blum Center will take place on Thursday, April 23 at 1:30 pm PST – with Center Founder and UC Regents Chair Richard C. Blum joined by Former Vice President Al Gore, UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau, College of Engineering Dean S. Shankar Sastry, and University of California President Mark Yudof. The ceremony will be followed by a reception where faculty and students will present a wide range of innovations aimed at making lasting change for the nearly three billion people that live on less than two dollars a day.

That Center is for developing countries like China….really? Yup…interesting, there are more friends…

Four years ago, Mr. Blum founded the Global Economy and Development Center at The Brookings Institution and the Brookings Blum Roundtable Conference, to develop policy research and new strategies to alleviate poverty. He is also a trustee and a member of the executive committee of The Carter Center, founded by former President Jimmy Carter, and serves on the boards of William J. Clinton Foundation and The Wilderness Society.

More?

Feinstein and Shanghai Mayor Jiang Zemin reportedly visited each other regularly in the 1980s, with Jiang once spending Thanksgiving in San Francisco with Feinstein and her husband. Jiang supposedly danced with Feinstein during one such visit, which surely must have been a propaganda coup for the CCP a la Ted Kennedy and the Soviets.

The Federalist has an interesting summary, yet this stuck out:

In a June 2010 interview with the Wall Street Journal covering a trip to China in which she met with old pals Jiang and former premier Zhu Rongji, Feinstein seemed to further downplay and even alibi the Tiananmen Square massacre:

I think that was a great setback for China in the view of the world. And I think China has also – as we would – learned lessons from it.

It just so happens I was here after that and talked to Jiang Zemin and learned that at the time China had no local police. It was just the PLA [People’s Liberation Army]. And no local police that had crowd control. So, hence the tanks.

Clearly none of that made good sense. But that’s the past. One learns from the past. You don’t repeat it. I think China has learned a lesson.

That year, Feinstein also challenged the Obama administration’s $6.4 billion arms sale to Taiwan, calling it a “substantial irritant” to U.S.-China relations. Be sure and read all of Ben Weingarten’s piece here.

Camp Trump in Poland?

Posted on by

The left’s heads are already exploding on that one and yet the White House is seriously considering the offer.

A major invitation has been presented by Poland to the United States that includes an investment by Poland of $2 billion for a U.S. military base in the country. Poland wants more arms and they are launching more advanced military projects. The threat to Poland? Yuppers….Russia.

In photos: Polish President Andrzej Duda visits White ...

President Andrzej Duda, of Poland visited the White House to nurture and advance the relationship between the two countries. The offer and investment to/for the United States was made last May and there is major urgency given the annexation of Crimea and the constant aggression of Russian in the whole region. Poland by the way has been paying more that the required share, which is 2% of GDP to NATO.

Beyond just a military base, Poland is including hospitals, schools and gyms for all military personnel and families. The formal offer was made to the United States Congress. The Defense Minister for Poland has made an official visit to the U.S. previously to make this offer and joint military policy.

Meanwhile, it was just a few days ago that Secretary of Defense Mattis condemned Russia for doing influence peddling in Macedonia. Russia is meddling in the voting and election process in Skopje. Pro-Russian groups have been dispatched to Macedonia to even plant the seed of Macedonia changing the name of the country to North Macedonia….huh really?

Yes, and Russia has swooped into Macedonia with major disinformation campaigns and the U.S. has given the tiny country $5 million in security assistance annually for decades.

Further, the joint military games between China and Russia have alarmed many countries including the United States where the Air Force is taking an aggressive posture.

Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson on Monday called for growing the Air Force from its current size of 312 operational squadrons to 386 by 2030, as it prepares for a possible conflict against a major nation such as China or Russia.

This 24 percent increase in squadrons is the centerpiece of the service’s “Air Force We Need” proposal, which has been in the works for six months. This proposal seeks to lay out what it would take for the Air Force to fight a peer adversary and win, as well as defend the homeland, provide a credible nuclear deterrent, counter a medium-sized rogue nation that might try to take advantage of the Air Force’s focus on the major adversary, and fight violent extremists such as the Taliban and the Islamic State.

This follows the National Defense Strategy that the Pentagon unveiled earlier this year, which is structured around the need to shift away from the violent extremist fight and instead focus on deterring or fighting nations with significant, well-developed militaries.

In her keynote address at the Air Force Association’s Air, Space, Cyber Conference, Wilson referenced the massive Russian military exercises launched last week, involving more than 300,000 of their troops, and China’s unveiling of its first aircraft carrier and its ongoing militarization of islands in the South China Sea to extend its long-range bombers’ reach.

“We must see the world as it is,” Wilson said. “That was why the National Defense Strategy explicitly recognizes that we have returned to an era of great power competition.”

Kamala Harris Led the Disdain for ‘That Book’

Posted on by

Listening carefully to each of the Democrats during the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearing was quite revealing. Many prefaced their questions with statements challenging Judge Kavanaugh on his fealty to the Constitution. Senator(s) Coons, Booker, Harris, Whitehouse and others proved their hypocrisy and disdain for The Founders, The Federalists, The Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society calling those organizations highly partisan.  The moral standards and beliefs of the Democrats were applied conveniently as a weapon in countless exchanges during the past several days of the hearings.

In fact, The Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society was branded often as contentious organizations, right-winged and in some cases radical. Hummm

About ‘that book’ though: Personally, I was struck how Brett Kavanaugh held his pocket edition of the Constitution almost as a his lifeline and how worn out it was. His loyalty and allegiance to the Constitution was quite refreshing and mostly reassuring.

When it comes to the Federalists, they were a group of supporters to the Constitution that were diligent to the assurance of a decentralized system of government. Many of Judge Kavanaugh’s 300 plus decisions were based on that very concept and applying the law as passed by Congress.

What about those demands for documents?

Oh, what about this?

Or this?

Ahem…

If Senator Coons has know Brett Kavanugh for thirty years….why all the challenge then? Watch this video and tally the statements made by the Senator that turned out to be untrue in 11 minutes.

Outside the mainstream? Exactly what does that mean? Anyone? Uphold or undermind the founding principles? Really?

About this Security Clearance Mess

Posted on by
  1. There are many levels to having security clearance.
  2. Having clearance does not automatically grant access to classified information as a result of position, rank or title.
  3. Having any level of security clearance also includes a required signature to a non-disclosure agreement.
  4. Based on information, job duty or other stipulations, clearance has limitation including a ‘need to know’ basis.
  5. Clearance can be and is in many cases a temporary condition for people in and outside of government.
  6. Former DNI, James Clapper made the last and most recent modifications to security clearance access in January of 2017 at the behest of former President Obama. It is 27 pages and can be read here.
  7. All people with any type or level of security clearance includes ‘public trust’.
  8. There is an outside/contracted agency that performs the investigation of personnel applying for clearance.

Security Clearance Process Infographic - ClearanceJobs

Eligibility for access to classified information, commonly known as a security clearance, is granted only to those for whom an appropriate personnel security background investigation has been completed. It must be determined that the individual’s personal and professional history indicates loyalty to the United States, strength of character, trustworthiness, honesty, reliability, discretion, and sound judgment, as well as freedom from conflicting allegiances and potential for coercion, and a willingness and ability to abide by regulations governing the use, handling, and protection of classified information. A determination of eligibility for access to such information is a discretionary security decision based on judgments by appropriately trained adjudicative personnel. Eligibility will be granted only where facts and circumstances indicate access to classified information is clearly consistent with the national security interests of the United States. Access to classified information will be terminated when an individual no longer has need for access.

Security clearances are subject to periodic re-investigation every 5 years. The individual will submit an updated security package and another background investigation will be conducted. The investigation will again cover key aspects of the individual’s life, but will start from one’s previous background investigation.

***

Meanwhile, there are now an estimated 177 signatures on the list rebuking President Trump’s removal of former CIA Director John Brennan.

Was Admiral McRaven a hack with his response? Yuppers.   Watch the interview here.

Trump Admin Seeking Global Cyber Dominance

Posted on by

Finally!

https://archive.org/services/img/2007NSAProceduresUsedToTargetNonUSPersons Archivo:Presidential-policy-directive 20.pdf - Wikipedia ...

President Trump signed an order that reverses the classified rules and cyber processes from the Obama administration, known as IVE PPD 20. It was signed in October 2012, and this directive supersedes National Security Presidential Directive NSPD-38. Integrating cyber tools with those of national security, the directive complements NSPD-54/Homeland Security Presidential Directive HSPD-23.

Per WikiPedia:

After the U.S. Senate failed to pass the Cybersecurity Act of 2012 that August,[12] Presidential Policy Directive 20 (PPD-20) was signed in secret. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) filed a Freedom of Information Request to see it, but the NSA would not comply.[13] Some details were reported in November 2012.[14] The Washington Post wrote that PPD-20, “is the most extensive White House effort to date to wrestle with what constitutes an ‘offensive’ and a ‘defensive’ action in the rapidly evolving world of cyberwar and cyberterrorism.”[14] The following January,[15] the Obama administration released a ten-point factsheet.[16]

On June 7, 2013, PPD-20 became public.[15] Released by Edward Snowden and posted by The Guardian,[15] it is part of the 2013 Mass Surveillance Disclosures. While the U.S. factsheet claims PPD-20 acts within the law and is, “consistent with the values that we promote domestically and internationally as we have previously articulated in the International Strategy for Cyberspace”,[16] it doesn’t reveal cyber operations in the directive.[15]

Snowden’s disclosure called attention to passages noting cyberwarfare policy and its possible consequences.[15][17] The directive calls both defensive and offensive measures as Defensive Cyber Effects Operations (DCEO) and Offensive Cyber Effects Operations (OCEO), respectively.

President Trump has taken this action to aid not only the military, but it would work to deter foreign actors, impede election influence and apply new penalties for violations. There have been high worries by officials due to electric utilities and the brute cyber attacks.

***

Some lawmakers have raised questions in recent months about whether U.S. Cyber Command, the chief agency responsible for conducting offensive cyber missions, has been limited in its ability to respond to alleged Russian efforts to interfere in U.S. elections due to layers of bureaucratic hurdles.

The policy applies to the Defense Department as well as other federal agencies, the administration official said, while declining to specify which specific agencies would be affected. John Bolton, Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, began an effort to remove the Obama directive when he arrived at the White House in April, the official said.

As designed, the Obama policy required U.S. agencies to gain approval for offensive operations from an array of stakeholders across the federal government, in part to avoid interfering with existing operations such as digital espionage.

Critics for years have seen Presidential Policy Directive 20 as a particular source of inertia, arguing that it handicaps or prevents important operations by involving too many federal agencies in potential attack plans. But some current and former U.S. officials have expressed concern that removing or replacing the order could sow further uncertainty about what offensive cyber operations are allowed.

One former senior U.S. official who worked on cybersecurity issues said there were also concerns that Mr. Trump’s decision will grant the military new authority “which may allow them to have a domestic mission.”

The Obama directive, which replaced an earlier framework adopted during the George W. Bush administration, was “designed to ensure that all the appropriate equities got considered when you thought about doing an offensive cyber operation,” said Michael Daniel, who served as the White House cybersecurity coordinator during the Obama administration. “The idea that this is a simple problem is a naive one.”  More here from the WSJ.