Obama Hid Climate Change Money in all Agencies

Posted on March 16, 2017March 16, 2017 by Denise Simon

Primer: Even the Pentagon and General Mattis are part of the Climate Change supporters.

Secretary of Defense James Mattis has asserted that climate change is real, and a threat to American interests abroad and the Pentagon’s assets everywhere, a position that appears at odds with the views of the president who appointed him and many in the administration in which he serves.

In unpublished written testimony provided to the Senate Armed Services Committee after his confirmation hearing in January, Mattis said it was incumbent on the U.S. military to consider how changes like open-water routes in the thawing Arctic and drought in global trouble spots can pose challenges for troops and defense planners. He also stressed this is a real-time issue, not some distant what-if.

“Climate change is impacting stability in areas of the world where our troops are operating today,” Mattis said in written answers to questions posed after the public hearing by Democratic members of the committee. “It is appropriate for the Combatant Commands to incorporate drivers of instability that impact the security environment in their areas into their planning.” More here from ProPublica.

*** Obama’s Climate Change policy is here.

In November 2014, President Obama announced the United States’ intention to contribute $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to reduce carbon pollution and strengthen resilience in developing countries. The U.S. contribution builds on a bipartisan history of U.S. leadership to support climate action and will leverage public and private finance to avoid some of the most catastrophic risks of climate change. The strong U.S. pledge helped increase the number and ambition of other countries’ contributions and our leadership helped propel initial capitalization of the fund to over $10 billion, a threshold seen by stakeholders as demonstrating serious donor commitment.

*** Image result for obama white house climate change

To Protect Climate Money, Obama Stashed It Where It’s Hard to Find

Bloomberg: President Donald Trump will find the job of reining in spending on climate initiatives made harder by an Obama-era policy of dispersing billions of dollars in programs across dozens of agencies — in part so they couldn’t easily be cut.

There is no single list of those programs or their cost, because President Barack Obama sought to integrate climate programs into everything the federal government did. The goal was to get all agencies to take climate into account, and also make those programs hard to disentangle, according to former members of the administration. In some cases, the idea was to make climate programs hard for Republicans in Congress to even find.

“Much of the effort in the Obama administration was to mainstream climate change,” said Jesse Keenan, who worked on climate issues with the Department of Housing and Urban Development and now teaches at Harvard University. He said all federal agencies were required to incorporate climate-change plans into their operations.

The Obama administration’s approach will be tested by Trump’s first budget request to Congress, an outline of which is due to be released Thursday. Trump has called climate change a hoax; last November he promised to save $100 billion over eight years by cutting all federal climate spending. His budget will offer an early indication of the seriousness of that pledge — and whether his administration is able to identify programs that may have intentionally been called anything but climate-related.

Read more: Trump Said to Drop Climate Change From Environmental Reviews

The last time the Congressional Research Service estimated total federal spending on climate was in 2013. It concluded 18 agencies had climate-related activities, and calculated $77 billion in spending from fiscal 2008 through 2013 alone.

But that figure could well be too low. The Obama administration didn’t always include “climate” in program names, said Alice Hill, director for resilience policy on Obama’s National Security Council.

“Given the relationship that existed with Congress on the issue of climate change, you will not readily find many programs that are entitled ‘climate change,’” Hill, who is now a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, said in an interview. At the Department of Defense, for example, anything with the word climate would have been “a target in the budget process,” she said.

The range of climate programs is vast, stretching across the entire government.

The Department of Agriculture created “climate hubs” to help farmers and ranchers cope with extreme weather. The Department of Health and Human Services began analyzing the effects of climate change on occupational safety. The Bureau of Reclamation started a program called “West-Wide Climate Risk Assessments,” measuring changes to water supply and demand. The Bureau of Indian Affairs created the Tribal Climate Resilience Program. The Agency for International Development created a program to help “glacier-dependent mountain areas” deal with the risk of those glaciers melting.

In other cases, agencies expanded existing programs to account for global warming. In 2012, the Federal Highway Administration made climate-adaptation projects eligible for federal aid. Last year, the Department of Housing and Urban Development awarded $1 billion through its Community Development Block Grant program to projects protecting against climate change-related natural disasters.

Meanwhile, a handful of lesser-known offices saw their funding increase while Obama was in office. The budget for NASA’s Earth Science program increased 50 percent, to $1.8 billion. Funding for the U.S. Global Change Research Program, which is mandated by Congress to report every four years on the state of climate change, rose 45 percent to $2.6 billion. At the National Science Foundation, the geosciences program almost doubled to $1.3 billion.

Republican Demands

Republicans noticed, and tried to force the administration to offer a tally of climate funding. Last December, senior House Republicans sent a letter to Obama’s budget director, demanding that his office report how much federal money had gone toward climate programs in fiscal years 2015 and 2016.

Any cuts may face opposition in Congress, as Democrats and some Republicans support the spending, especially that to help communities withstand floods, hurricanes or droughts associated with climate change. Wednesday, a group of 17 Republicans announced their support for climate science — and policy measures to address it.

“Budget cuts to programs — or elimination of entire agencies — designed to help stem the costs of climate change will only hurt ranchers, agriculture producers, and coastal communities already experiencing the impacts of this global challenge,” Christy Goldfuss, managing director of the Council on Environmental Quality in Obama’s White House, said by email.

‘Gravy Train’

Some in Trump’s party now urge him to use his authority to find those programs, and take them apart.

“The Trump Administration needs to defund the entire apparatus of the climate change federal funding gravy train,” said Marc Morano, a former Republican staffer for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. “In order to dismantle the climate establishment, agencies and programs throughout the federal government need to be targeted.”

“The climate funding has spread to almost every aspect of the federal government with sometimes wacky results,” said Morano, who doubts global warming and runs the website climatedepot.com. He cited one example of a Department of Transportation query about the link between climate change and fatal car crashes.

Others argue that the spread of climate programs throughout the federal government simply reflects the evolving nature of the risk.

“It is irresponsible not to examine the possibilities and understand our sensitivity to them,” said Ed Link, a former director of research and development for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers who led the forensic analysis of Hurricane Katrina’s effect on New Orleans. If federal agencies stop doing that work, he said by email, “shame on them.”

America First – A Budget Blueprint to Make America Great Again

Posted on March 16, 2017March 16, 2017 by Denise Simon

Read the proposed budget here from the White House.

CrayNews

Reuters: President Donald Trump will ask the U.S. Congress for dramatic cuts to many federal programs as he seeks to bulk up defense spending, start building a wall on the border with Mexico and spend more money deporting illegal immigrants.

In a federal budget proposal with many losers, the Environmental Protection Agency and State Department stand out as targets for the biggest spending reductions. Funding would disappear altogether for 19 independent bodies that count on federal money for public broadcasting, the arts and regional issues from Alaska to Appalachia.

BusinessInsider

Trump’s budget outline is a bare-bones plan covering just “discretionary” spending for the 2018 fiscal year starting on Oct. 1. It is the first volley in what is expected to be an intense battle over spending in coming months in Congress, which holds the federal purse strings and seldom approves presidents’ budget plans.

Congress, controlled by Trump’s fellow Republicans, may reject some or many of his proposed cuts. Some of the proposed changes, which Democrats will broadly oppose, have been targeted for decades by conservative Republicans.

In addition to the fiscal year 2018 request, a copy of a supplemental budget for fiscal year 2017 obtained by Reuters shows the administration plans to ask for $30 billion for the Department of Defense and $3 billion for the Department of Homeland Security.

The funds would be allocated this year to cover procurement of military technology such as F-35 fighter aircraft and drone systems, begin construction on the U.S.-Mexico border wall and increase detention space for migrants. Congress likely will consider the supplemental request by April 28, when the current regular funding expires.

Moderate Republicans already have expressed unease with potential cuts to popular domestic programs such as home-heating subsidies, clean-water projects and job training.

OPEN FOR DISCUSSION

Trump is willing to discuss priorities, said White House budget director Mick Mulvaney, a former South Carolina congressman who made a name for himself as a spending hawk before Trump plucked him for his Cabinet.

“The president wants to spend more money on defense, more money securing the border, more money enforcing the laws, and more money on school choice, without adding to the deficit,” Mulvaney told a small group of reporters during a preview on Wednesday.

“If they have a different way to accomplish that, we are more than interested in talking to them,” Mulvaney said.

Democrats criticized the proposal as lacking in detail and said it would be devastating to American families.

“President Trump is not making anyone more secure with a budget that hollows out our economy and endangers working families,” said House of Representatives Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi. “Throwing billions at defense while ransacking America’s investments in jobs, education, clean energy and lifesaving medical research will leave our nation weakened.”

Trump wants to spend $54 billion more on defense, put a down payment on his border wall, and breathe life into a few other campaign promises. His initial budget outline does not incorporate his promise to pour $1 trillion into roads, bridges, airports and other infrastructure projects. The White House has said the infrastructure plan is still to come.

The defense increases are matched by cuts to other programs so as to not increase the $488 billion federal deficit. Mulvaney acknowledged the proposal would likely result in significant cuts to the federal workforce.

“You can’t drain the swamp and leave all the people in it,” Mulvaney said.

The Department of Homeland Security would get a 6.8 percent increase, with more money for extra staff needed to catch, detain and deport illegal immigrants.

WALL MONEY

Trump wants Congress to shell out $1.5 billion for the border wall with Mexico in the current fiscal year – enough for pilot projects to determine the best way to build it – and a further $2.6 billion in fiscal 2018, Mulvaney said.

The estimate of the full cost of the wall will be included in the full budget, expected in mid-May, which will project spending and revenues over 10 years.

Trump has vowed Mexico will pay for the border wall, which the Mexican government has flatly said it will not do. The White House has said recently that funding would be kick-started in the United States.

The voluminous budget document will include economic forecasts and Trump’s views on “mandatory entitlements” – big-ticket programs like Social Security and Medicare, which Trump vowed to protect on the campaign trail.

Trump asked Congress to slash the EPA by $2.6 billion or more than 31 percent, and the State Department by more than 28 percent or $10.9 billion.

Mulvaney said the “core functions” of those agencies would be preserved. Hit hard would be foreign aid, grants to multilateral development agencies like the World Bank and climate change programs at the United Nations.

Trump wants to get rid of more than 50 EPA programs, end funding for former Democratic President Barack Obama’s signature Clean Power Plan aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions, and cut renewable energy research programs at the Energy Department.

Regional programs to clean up the Great Lakes and Chesapeake Bay would be sent to the chopping block.

Community development grants at the Housing Department – around since 1974 – were cut in Trump’s budget, along with more than 20 Education Department programs, including some funding program for before- and after- school programs.

Anti-poverty grants and a program that helps poor people pay their energy bills would be slashed, as well as a Labor Department program that helps low-income seniors find work.

Trump’s rural base did not escape cuts. The White House proposed a 21 percent reduction to the Agriculture Department, cutting loans and grants for wastewater, reducing staff in county offices and ending a popular program that helps U.S. farmers donate crops for overseas food aid.

$2900.00 per Acre or Condemned, Border Wall Order

Posted on March 16, 2017March 16, 2017 by Denise Simon

Primer: This notice did not come from the new Trump administration, it was generated by the Loretta Lynch Department of Justice on behalf of the Department of Homeland Security. This is known as a ‘Declaration of Taking Notice.

The nearly 2,000-mile southern border is composed of federal, state, tribal and private lands. There are 632 miles of federal or tribal land — 33 percent — and the other 67 percent, most of which is in Texas, is private or state-owned, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO). The Washington Post points out that the president would need Congress to pass a bill to acquire the tribal lands for his wall. More here.

Texans Receive First Notices of Land Condemnation for Trump’s Border Wall

The government offered $2,900 for 1.2 acres near the Rio Grande. If Flores chooses not to accept the offer, the land could be seized through eminent domain.

Observer: The week before Donald Trump’s inauguration, Yvette Salinas received a letter she had been dreading for years: legal notice that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) wants to build a border wall on her family’s land in Los Ebanos. The 21-page document, entitled a “Declaration of Taking,” is addressed to her ailing mother, Maria Flores, who owns the property with her siblings. The letter offers Flores $2,900 for 1.2 acres near the Rio Grande. If she chooses not to accept the offer, the land could be seized through eminent domain. “It’s scary when you read it,” Salinas says. “You feel like you have to sign.”

Jen Reel The ribbon left by the DHS in 2008 to note where the border wall would enter on Aleida Flores’ land still remains.

The 16-acre property has been in the family for so long that none of them can remember the year it was acquired. Salinas only knows they’ve had it for five generations. Her uncle runs a few head of cattle on the property, which lies not far from Los Ebanos’ most famous attraction, a hand-drawn ferry that shuttles cars and their passengers across the river to Mexico.

This is not the first time the federal government has wanted to seize the land for a border wall. In the wake of the Secure Fence Act of 2006, the Bush administration put up 110 miles of border fencing, much of it on private land in Texas. In 2008, Salinas’ family received a condemnation notice offering them the same low, low price of $2,900. Others in Los Ebanos were mailed similar notices.

***

But nature and time were on their side. Los Ebanos is squeezed into a bend in the Rio Grande, and lies entirely in the river’s floodplain. A treaty between the United States and Mexico forbids building any structures in the floodplain that could push floodwaters into surrounding communities.

***

Jen Reel The map given to Flores in 2008 by the DHS showing their proposed fence acquisition tract on Flores’ land.

Salinas’ family held off on signing the condemnation letter. As time passed, building a wall in Los Ebanos seemed less likely, because of the treaty and because the Obama administration made wall-building less of a priority. In the meantime, Aleida Garcia, Salinas’ cousin, said the government has increased security in the area by adding more surveillance, which she prefers to Trump’s proposed 30-foot wall. “Even if they build a wall, people will still come,” said Garcia. “What’s helped us tremendously and is less expensive is the technology — the aerostat balloons, the ground sensors and even boots on the ground.”

But Los Ebanos appears to be a prime target for the Trump administration. The surveying and planning work has already been done, and the Secure Fence Act authorizes more border fencing to be built. And in 2012, the United States half of the International Boundary and Water Commission, a binational organization tasked with managing the U.S.-Mexico water treaty, capitulated to lobbying by DHS and agreed to a wall in the floodplain.

Salinas says her family doesn’t want to give up their land, and they are consulting with lawyers to decide what to do next. But fighting the federal government could mean spending years in court. If they lose, DHS could take their land. Salinas, who is 29, says it makes her sad that the family’s legacy could be divided by an ugly wall that will cause problems for Los Ebanos. “We don’t want this wall — the town is pretty much united on that,” says Salinas. “But we don’t want to get sued by the U.S. government either.”

Sidley Austin an Agent Firm for the Russian ‘Garchs’?

Posted on March 13, 2017March 13, 2017 by Denise Simon

Sidley Austin Reps Clinton Confidante in Benghazi Probe

Former DAG James Cole appears with Sidney Blumenthal for depo in House investigation.

Sidney Blumenthal, a longtime Clinton family friend, on Tuesday sat for a closed-door deposition in the House over his communications with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton around the time of the 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya. James Cole, a former deputy attorney general under Eric Holder Jr. who is now a partner in Sidley Austin’s Washington office, represents Blumenthal.

*** Then this in a snippet:

The complaint, filed in October, names Sidley Austin and partner Edward McNicholas, alleging that they assisted one Joseph Garcia in securing millions in investments from a woman named Carrie Birkel. Birkel is looking to recover $1.5 million from the lawyers. Birkel claims that she had millions to invest after she got her $10 million divorce settlement — a divorce precipitated by Garcia providing her, unsolicited, with compromising photos of her husband, before introducing her to McNicholas, who vetted divorce lawyers for her on a $25,000 retainer.

As the complaint states:

Birkel’s claims arise out of a truly bizarre set of circumstances that would seem more appropriate for an episode of “Law and Order” than in reality.

Indeed.

Garcia, who is serving a 37-month sentence for similar activity, is a curious character by all accounts:

Garcia and his wife used multiple aliases to go along with numerous Social Security numbers. While peddling phony investments, Garcia would only reference his time as a Navy SEAL; the details were confidential. And he instructed his family to always have “go bags” packed should they need to flee one of the many lavish homes they rented across the country. More here.

***

For the confirmation hearing for Loretta Lynch, Statement of David B. Barlow ,Partner, Sidley Austin LLP made an endorsing and glowing recommendation for her.

Okay, so Sidley Austin is a very big and weird law firm with clear power in Washington DC, so what?

Well, let’s bring in the Russian lobby operation shall we? Sidley is the law firm of record to influence Congress and the White House against sanctions and political cover. The lobby agreement was generated by VTB Bank with Sidley Austin.

You can read the full document/agreement here.

In part from VOA:

The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) reported in April that suspicious payments made by “Putin’s cronies may have, in some cases, been intended as payoffs, possibly in exchange for Russian government aid or contracts.”

The secret documents suggested that much of the money originally came from a bank in Cyprus, the ICIJ said, “that, at the time, was majority-owned by the Russian state-controlled VTB Bank.”

The documents also showed dozens of transactions, over more than a decade, involving people or companies linked to Putin, who has been in power at the Kremlin since 2000. Among those identified in the document were Putin’s longtime friend, cellist Sergei Roldugin, and the wife of Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov.

Putin has admitted there were transactions between him and Roldugin, but said there was no evidence of illegal activity.

Roldugin has dismissed any suggestion that he was either a custodian or a conduit for Putin’s money or assets.

*** Back in 2014:

VTB Bank and Bank of China today signed an Agreement on Cooperation in the presence of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping.

The agreement was signed by First Deputy President and Chairman of VTB Bank Management Board Vasily Titov and Bank of China President Chen Siqing.

Under the agreement, the banks plan to develop their partnership in a number of areas, including cooperation on ruble and renminbi settlements, investment banking, inter-bank lending, trade finance and capital-markets transactions.

Vasily Titov said :”The signing of the agreement underscores VTB Group’s ongoing drive to grow its business in Asia, and will help facilitate the development of bilateral trade and economic relations between Russia and China, which have always been reliable partners.”

***

The Russian state-controlled bank VTB confirmed that its websites had been targeted by a cyber attack. The VTB is the second largest bank in the country. In December of 2016, Security Affairs reported:

Last week the Russian intelligence service FSB revealed that an unnamed foreign power is planning to undermine Russian Banks with cyber attacks and PSYOPS via social media.

According to the Russian intelligence, a group of servers in the Netherlands and leased to the Ukrainian web hosting firm BlazingFast were ready to launch an assault next Monday.

“Russia’s domestic intelligence agency, the Federal Security Service (FSB), said that the servers to be used in the alleged cyber attack were located in the Netherlands and registered to a Ukrainian web hosting company called BlazingFast.” reported the Reuters.

“The attack, which was to target major national and provincial banks in several Russian cities, was meant to start on Dec. 5, the FSB said in a statement.”

A few hours after the announcement made by the FSB, the Russian Central Bank confirmed that hackers have stolen 2 billion rubles, roughly 31 million US dollars, from accounts at the Russian central bank.

The Russian authorities haven’t disclosed the identity of the alleged threat actor behind the attack.

The Russian bank industry was recently hit by a string of cyber attacks, a few day ago experts from Kaspersky Lab revealed that at least five of Russia’s largest banks were targeted by massive DDoS attacks.

The attacks were powered by devices located in 30 countries across the world, including the United States.

The Russian Government was accused by Washington of interference in the recent US Presidential Election.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security have issued a joint security statement to accuse the Russian government of a series of intrusions into the networks of US organizations and state election boards involved in the Presidential Election.

“The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process” reads the statement.

There is more to the Obama administration and decisions than we know. This matter of cyber intrusions, sanctions, lawyers, Russian interference will not go away any time soon.

C’mon Trump, Americans are Still Angry

Posted on March 13, 2017March 13, 2017 by Denise Simon

Hey President Donald, how about assigning a leader to a whistleblower task force that coughs up the goods on the Obama administration.

In the past eight years we have almost forgotten all the fraud, collusion, deception and nefarious work of the previous administration and how far reaching those operations were. We still want consequences….why? If left unchallenged, rather unexposed, those operatives will dig in deeper and with wild abandon. The media cannot be left out of this whistleblowing mission either. Complicity and political behavior modeling by the left will only gain traction if not forced into the sunlight.

Trump pledged to restore law and order, voters should know how far afield the law was fractured under the Obama administration.

Much in the news is the Russian intrusion into our election infrastructure, which did happen without dispute. Altering the vote count or influencing voters to cast votes to a preferred candidate did NOT happen, such there is no evidence. The Russians have a history of such intrusions beyond the United States including Ukraine, Germany and Europe. The U.S. intelligence agencies warned of forced log-ins long before the November election. Now British intelligence is making the same warnings.

A particular item that requires a whistleblower headline is how the Obama White House interfered in the election process in Israel paying operatives to remove Netanyahu from power. Hello Trump team, can you expose more details on this please? We already know about Jeremy Bird, but we want the full story and in the end, we want punishment.

Some items that need attention and exposure are noted below but this list is hardly complete. In fact you are invited to add to the list in the comments section.

We need to know the culprits, the money, the facts and the rest of the stories on many scandals. This is the moment now leading into the building mid-term elections, but mostly due to the DNC being led by two terrifying people Tom Perez and Keith Ellison. The DNC, DNCC, Center for American Policy and others are houses of UnAmerican activities, if we even remember what America is and should be anymore.

There is no better source or investigator than Trevor Louden. He helped us with his movie, ‘Enemies Within’ as he laid the foundation for the viewers to take the baton and run to expose more.

Congress has an ‘oversight committee’ that does investigate and expose countless cases yet it is time consuming and burdensome given scheduling, subpoenas, testimony and document requests. Then we have Judicial Watch that is doing great work using the legal machinery, but all reliance cannot be placed there.

The Trump White House has this lifetime opportunity to own the headlines, the stories of connected events and provide the full account of scandals and people that today are left still with unanswered question.

Here are some samples Mr. President we need to know more about, begin here with the whistleblowing now that your administration is in power with access.

The matter of Fast and Furious, the gun-running operation to Mexico was never fully told. Did Kevin O’Reilly ever cooperate and provide testimony, when in the middle of the scandal he was suddenly deployed to Iraq?
Judicial Watch just obtained almost 7000 documents relating to the IRS targeting scandal. Exactly why is John Koskinen still the commissioner and has anyone moved to sue Lois Lerner in civil suits? Is there evidence of White House collusion including some members of Congress?
What is the rest of the story when it comes to new solar/energy businesses launched with government loan guarantees that have gone belly up? Who is responsible, what did it really cost the taxpayer and are any monies recoverable? How about the DoJ investigations where some financial reports were altered?
Benghazi stands on its own..
Who at the Department of Energy is responsible for the lead in the water in Flint, Michigan and polluting the Colorado river?
With the ransom money given to Iran and the side deals all but forgotten of the Iranian nuclear deal, how much is still out there to be uncovered and reported? What more do we need to know about Ploughshares, NIAC, Ben Rhodes and John Kerry?
We have new leadership at the Veterans Administration. Great now how about exposing the hidden case files, the corruption of the unions, jailing those that falsified status reports and got big bonuses? The VA Inspector General has done some great work so far, but who in leadership is going down for the never-ending issues at the VA?
Can we have a team that reveals the ‘slush funds’ from the ‘stimulus money’ and who is guilty in both parties that scammed the taxpayers?
Clearly there is more to know about Obama’s amnesty and his DACA program. Who was behind it, how much money was involved? Are judges being paid off? Who gets grants to sponsor children and illegals and how much money was spent in transportation of people all over the country hiding the from the legal system?
Obamacare is a major topic, what more do we need to know such that it is being used to blame democrats and repeal the law? How about HHS contracts, sharing patient databases with outside agencies and foreign governments? What about cyber security, what about paying off big pharma and insurance companies?
Where are we with the Clinton Foundation and the emails to Hillary’s private server that included Obama emails and the computer belonging to Huma Abedin? Is anyone still at the State Department still providing the Clinton operation cover? Can Patrick Kennedy or John Kerry be prosecuted?
What is the rest of the story of Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch on corporate fines for violations and company officials not going to prison?
The Department of Justice maintained a victims fund which selectively paid surviving family members in cases of attacks and murder victims. Why was Obama personally involved and how was it decided who got money and how much?
The DoJ funded leftist organizations. Two examples were National Council of La Raza, the National Community Reinvestment Coalition and the National Urban League.
Obama and his team negotiated with the Taliban. What is the real truth, how much money did we give the terror organization and where are the Taliban 5 released from Gitmo today?
Several on the Democrat side of the House of Representatives hired a rogue team of IT professionals that were not vetted and had access to computer systems and passwords causing more national security threats. Why? Who was fired, who is responsible? Are there more we don’t know about?

Once again, this is hardly a comprehensive list, we must know more. We want consequences. build the case, tell us what we need to know going forward.