theodore M I R A L D I mpa ... editor, publisher, writer

Wednesday, May 24, 2017

Obama KNEW Gang Members Were Part of ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT Surge





 The Obama administration knowingly let in at least 16 admitted MS-13 gang members who arrived at the U.S. as illegal immigrant teenagers in 2014, a top senator said Wednesday, citing internal documents that showed the teens were shipped to juvenile homes throughout the country.
Sen. Ron Johnson, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, said a whistleblower turned over Customs and Border Protection documents from 2014 detailing the 16 persons who were caught crossing the border.
“CBP apprehended them, knew they were MS-13 gang members, and they processed and disbursed them into our communities,” Mr. Johnson, Wisconsin Republican, said.
The gang members were part of the surge of UAC, or “unaccompanied alien children,” as the government labels them, who overwhelmed the Obama administration in 2014, leaving Homeland Security struggling to staunch the flow from Central America.
Officials at the time said the children should be treated as refugees fleeing horrific conditions back home — though security analysts said the children were prime recruiting territory for gangs already in the U.S.
Mr. Johnson said the image of UAC as little children is misleading. Out of nearly 200,000 UAC apprehended between from 2012 to 2016, 68 percent were ages 15, 16 or 17 — meaning older teens. The majority were also male, making them targets for gang recruiting.
Mr. Johnson revealed the documents at a hearing on the dangers posed by MS-13.
Sen. Claire McCaskill, the ranking Democrat on the committee, said she wants to get rid of gangs, but criticized the release of the whistleblower documents, saying it may have hurt active investigations or otherwise dented efforts to get the gang members out of the country.
“I have concerns that these documents were released so quickly,” she said.
The UAC surge has long been suspected of providing a new pool of recruits for MS-13 and other gangs in the U.S., though the actual numbers are unclear.
There have been a series of anecdotal reports, however, of UAC who were placed into community schools and ended up taking part in violent gang activities.
Source>http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/may/24/whistleblower-dhs-knowingly-let-ms-13-gang-members/

The TRUTH About Trump’s ‘SAVAGE’ Cuts



 Post Editorial Board

Relax: President Trump’s new budget won’t leave people starving or bleeding in the streets.
Yes, it brought media hysteria: The plan would “drive millions” off food stamps, screamed an Associated Press story. It “cuts deeply into Medicaid and anti-poverty efforts,” cried the New York Times.
In fact, the budget’s $4.1 trillion in outlays amount to 21.3 percent of the economy — more than in any of the last four Obama years and in line with much of the past few decades.
And the cuts would just bring some anti-poverty programs closer to pre-2009 levels.
Take food stamps: In 2007, 26 million people got them. Add in all the other government programs, soup kitchens and various charities, and no one really had to go hungry back then.
Yet by last year, the program covered 44 million — with outlays up from $33 billion to $71 billion. Trump wants to trim that by about $19 billion a year, to $52 billion — still higher than when Obama took office. He’d also have states pay an added amount, in hopes that, with skin in the game, they’ll help root out fraud.
Let’s face it: The program has veered out of control. In 1969, just 2.9 million people, 1.5 percent of Americans, got food stamps. By 2008, it was 9 percent; last year, 14 percent. (Even Amazon accepts them now.)
Trump wants able-bodied adults with no dependent kids to work in order to qualify for the stamps. Smart: That’ll help encourage independence. And with the economy improving, fewer still should need them.
Similar logic justifies his other cuts, such as his $800 billion over 10 years for Medicaid — a program originally meant for the poor that, post-Obama, now covers nearly one out of every four Americans.
Trump’s ultimate goal, to slice $3.6 trillion from $53.5 trillion in planned spending over 10 years and balance the budget, is laudable. Americans should applaud it, not smear it as a heartless hit on the “hungry.”
Source>http://nypost.com/2017/05/23/the-truth-about-trumps-savage-cuts/

REGIME CHANGE by Any Other Name?

Truth or consequences? Obama skated for far worse misdeeds.

Image result for Regime Change by Any Other Name? Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447864/trump-critics-left-right-want-him-removed


VICTOR DAVIS HANSON

Election machines in three states were not hacked to give Donald Trump the election. There was never a serious post-election movement of electors to defy their constitutional duties and vote for Hillary Clinton. Nor, once Trump was elected, did transgendered people begin killing themselves in alarming numbers. Nor were there mass resignations at the State Department upon his inauguration. 

Nor did Donald Trump seek an order to “ban all Muslims” from entering the U.S. Instead, he temporarily sought a suspension in visas for everyone, regardless of religion, from seven Middle Eastern states that the Obama administration had earlier identified as incapable of properly vetting travelers to the U.S. The first lady did not work for an elite escort or prostitute service. She never said that she and young Barron Trump would not be moving to the White House. Barron does not have autism. Trump’s father never ran racist ads as a supposed candidate in a purported political campaign. 

Kellyanne Conway denies that in a private conversation between segments on MSNBC, she privately remarked to hosts that she had to take a shower after working for Trump. Donald Trump never suggested to the Mexican president that the U.S. was going to invade Mexico. Nor did Trump plan to mobilize the National Guard to send back illegal aliens. He did not remove a Martin Luther King bust from the White House. There was no evidence that he ever promised to ease Russian sanctions (much less that he promised the Russians he would be “flexible” after he was elected). He did not short the FBI of resources to conduct an investigation into supposed Russian collusion. He did not go to Moscow and watch prostitutes in his bed urinate where Barack Obama had previously slept. His deputy attorney general did not threaten to resign over the Comey firing. 

We have no idea whether Trump really gets two scoops of ice cream while limiting his guests to one. And we have no idea whether Trump really gets two scoops of ice cream while limiting his guests to one, or pads around in a bathrobe in the early evening, or cannot find the light switch in the White house. Yet all that is what daily we hear and read. Meanwhile . . .  Fake news crowds out real news. Here is what we do not read much about: North Korea, long appeased, could well send missiles against our allies, perhaps even with nuclear payloads. Afghanistan is at a crux and will either implode or need more American troops. China’s role is in the balance, and it may or may not help defang North Korea. The greatest tax- and health-reform packages in years are now in the hands of Congress. 

Executive orders have revolutionized the domestic energy industry and achieved a stunning and historic reduction in illegal immigration. The stock market is soaring, employment is up, and confidence in the economy has returned. Wall Street seems to dip only on talk of impeaching Donald Trump. Commensurate Worry? And here is what no longer troubles us at all. In 2008, candidate Barack Obama used back channels to communicate flexibility to the Iranians (as in the later assurance he gave, on a hot mic, to the Russians), which may have helped undermine the ongoing Bush-administration negotiations with Iran. Hillary Clinton set up an illegal server, distributed classified information in an illegal and unsecured fashion, lied about it, and destroyed thousands of e-mails central to an investigation — and got off without an indictment. In the 2016 election, the head of the DNC conspired to massage the debates and help swing the nomination to the Clinton campaign. The prior attorney general of the United State met with the spouse of a presidential candidate under investigation, in a stealthy conversation on an airport tarmac, did not inform officials of that meeting until the get-together was discovered by a reporter, semi-recused herself under pressure only to turn over her prosecutorial discretion to the head of the FBI, in a fashion that was both improper and perhaps unconstitutional. 

We do not hear how exactly Russian interests at Uranium One obtained market control over 20 percent of U.S. uranium holdings, or the connections between Uranium One and their prior multimillion-dollar donations to the Clinton Foundation, or that the Podesta Group had numerous financial dealings with Russian interests, or that Bill Clinton received $500,000 in 2010 from Russian oligarchic interests while his wife was secretary of state — ten times more than what Michael Flynn was alleged to have received. We know now that many of the elements of the Iran Deal, the most important foreign-policy decision in the last 20 years, were designed to circumvent Senate ratification and hinged on secret ancillary agreements. We know now that many of the elements of the Iran Deal, the most important foreign-policy decision in the last 20 years, were designed to circumvent Senate ratification and hinged on secret ancillary agreements. 

We know that unnamed intelligence officials during the Obama administration surveilled likely political opponents, unmasked their identities, leaked them to the press, either under the assumption that such skullduggery would not surface, or on the pretext that such monitoring was ordinary and involved national security. We know that Obama’s director of National Intelligence lied under oath to Congress without ramifications. We know that a high IRS official subverted her duties for political purposes in a manner intended to alter the 2012 campaign, took the Fifth Amendment, refuses to testify further before Congress, and faces no consequences other than a plush, taxpayer-funded retirement. Trump Agonistes Of course, a media-targeted Donald Trump is weaponizing his enemies by his characteristic blunderbuss approach in interviews. Of course, in anger and without political experience, he tweets too much and says things better left unsaid. Of course, at 70, he has an in-your-face character that is unlike any other president’s and also unlikely to change. He mixes freely truth, rumor, and innuendo.  

And of course his superb appointments and Reaganesque approach to foreign affairs, energy production, tax reform, and deregulation are all threatened by his own team’s inability to deal with a dishonest and largely corrupt Washington and New York media. So Trump boasted and talked trash with the Russians? Terrible and stupid, no doubt. Worse than what Franklin Roosevelt communicated to Winston Churchill about the mass-murdering Stalin? (“I tell you that I think I can personally handle Stalin better than either your Foreign Office or my State Department. Stalin hates the guts of all your top people. He thinks, he likes me better, and I hope he will continue to do so.”) Was Trump more Machiavellian than was Obama, with his “it’s important for him to give me space” requests to Vladimir Putin when he met President Medvedev before the 2012 election and apparently banked his reset policy on his ability to get away with misinforming the public? All that said, none of the above is a reason to impeach, or remove on medical grounds, an elected president, or to suggest that he resign less than four months into office. 

Yet we hear exactly that not only from the progressive, in-the-street Left, but from many of the Never Trump Right. In some sense, we are watching a sort of mass hysteria characteristic of pet-rock or hula-hoop democracy. (It reminds one not so much of the mob that went after Socrates –Trump is no Socrates — but of the mad fury of the French Revolution or the high-water point of the 1950s John Birch movement) The ‘Resistance’ The “Resistance” peddled the yarn that the election tabulations were electronically rigged; then it was an appeal to electors not to do their constitutional duties; then it was reduced to street theater and demonstrations; then it turned to desperate deep-state leaks and media blitzes; now it’s mere hysteria. The effort to remove the president is conducted by the New York Times, the Washington Post, the wire services, and the major networks. 

And we have seen nothing like it in our time. In the last six months, Americans have been told quite falsely so many untruths about the Trump administration by their news agencies that for all practical purposes, there is no such thing as a media as we once knew it. Journalists are not shy about their prejudices. In some cases — James Rutenberg, Jorge Ramos, and Christiane Amanpour — they have admitted their view that the duty of the new media in the era of Trump is not to stay disinterested, but to become political opponents. Some have been exposed as colluding with Hillary Clinton’s campaign in an effort to prevent Trump’s election victory; they tried to keep those efforts secret because they knew what they were doing was unethical and self-interested. A second effort to achieve a Trump removal is conducted by pop-culture celebrities — who make the Dixie Chicks’ anti-Bush furor of 2003 now look mild. This opposition is waged in a way that would have ruined careers if directed at Barack Obama. 

Madonna dreams on Inauguration Day of blowing up the White House. Don Cheadle wanted Trump to die in grease fire. Snoop Dogg videotapes his mock execution of a Trump lookalike. Martha Stewart poses flipping the finger to a picture of Trump while flashing the Victory sign to a photo of the felon and former pimp Snoop Dogg. Icon Robert De Niro said eloquently of Trump: “He’s a punk, he’s a dog, he’s a pig, he’s a con, he’s a bullsh** artist.” The efforts to demonize and thus delegitimize and so emasculate Trump have reached sick new heights. On cable television, Bill Maher jokes that Trump’s daughter fellates her father; on national television, Steven Colbert laughs that Trump fellates Vladimir Putin. Mutatis mutandis: 

Both would have been fired for suggesting the same about the Obama first family. Ad nauseam Trump is compared to Hitler by the likes of Ashley Judd and Chris Matthews. Hillary Clinton announces she is part of the “Resistance,” a reference supposedly to the French maquis who sought to ambush Vichy officials and SS patrols during the Nazi occupation of France. The Democratic party — now bereft of political control in most state legislatures and governorships, as well as in the Senate, the House, the presidency and the Supreme Court — has modeled its opposition on 1960s street theater. More than 60 congressional representatives refused to go to the Inauguration. Some call for Trump’s impeachment; others refuse to hold hearings, block nomination appointments, and demand special prosecutors. The California head of the party leads group chants of “F*** Trump” with extended middle fingers. 

The Never Trump right has gone from criticism to outright hysteria and is now calling for impeachment or removal on medical incapacity. The subtext of these latest demands is that a Mike Pence — a wonderful man who did not run for president and would never have been elected if he had run — might assume the presidency and return the Republican party to its former supposedly sober and judicious custodians who, after the proper catharsis, might resume their Washington–New York stewardship of the GOP. For these Trump critics, a defeat along the lines of 2008 and 2016 is far preferable to a 2016 victory. Being praised for being good losers is always preferable to being ostracized for being poor winners. The Obama Standard I thought — and so wrote — that Barack 

Obama subverted the Constitution when he refused to enforce federal laws concerning the ACA mandate, illegal immigration, and contractual provisions of the Chrysler bankruptcy. I felt Obama, as a candidate and a president-elect, was unethically signaling both the Russians and the Iranians through back channels that he would soon be flexible, even as George Bush was conducting foreign policy as our president. I thought President Obama had no constitutional right to strong-arm Boeing, the Little Sisters of the Poor, or the small Gibson Guitar company. His administration flat-out lied about the Benghazi catastrophe, the Bowe Bergdahl swap, the Iran Deal, and the chemical-weapons depots of Bashar al-Assad. 

The Obama administration endangered U.S. security by yanking peacekeepers out of Iraq for a cheap campaign talking point, by destroying Libya without a follow-up plan, by setting faux red lines and deadlines, by allowing China to create an artificial island base to adjudicate trans-Pacific sea traffic, by appeasing and resetting relations with Vladimir Putin, and by turning a blind eye to North Korean stepped-up aggression. When the president of the United States promises the Russians that he will be more flexible after an election, the message is that he soon plans to do things that, if known, would likely cost him a victory with the American voters. 

Obama high-fived the bin Laden raid to the extent of revealing classified protocols and turning over to pet reporters and Hollywood filmmakers some of the trove of bin Laden’s al-Qaeda communications. Obama high-fived the bin Laden raid to the extent of revealing classified protocols and turning over to pet reporters and Hollywood filmmakers some of the trove of bin Laden’s al-Qaeda communications, in hopes of advancing party-line narratives. His administration helped ruin the reputations of the IRS and the VA. His DOJ went after an obscure video maker and the journalist Dinesh D’Souza largely for reasons of political reprisal and deterrence. His team ordered illegal surveillance of AP reporters and Fox News’s James Rosen; it may well have surveilled and unmasked political opponents and leaked their names to the media. Obama invited a felon with a parole ankle bracelet into the White House and praised a visiting rapper whose latest album cover celebrated the murder of a white judge, whose corpse was being toasted over by rappers. 

Obama was degreed but not educated; he could not pronounce “corpsmen,” had no idea how many states there were in the Union, and thought Hawaii was in Asia and the Falklands Islands off the coast of India. The media demurred — based in some cases on the finery of Obama’s pants crease or his rhetorical ability to cause electrical sensations in one’s leg — and announced him a god, the smartest president ever to enter office. Obama himself in 2008 buffoonishly announced his power to lower global temperatures and the seas, and declared himself more adroit than all his own political handlers and aides in all of their respective jobs. Obama’s deputy national-security adviser admitted that the administration had misled the press on the Iran Deal by creating an artificial “echo chamber” among media naïfs. Obama’s comments about Trayvon Martin and the Skip Gates affair were incendiary and in line with his campaign smears about the clingers or his calls to supporters to take a gun to a knife fight and “get in their face.” 

And yet, for all that and more, Barack Obama certainly did not warrant articles of impeachment; he was not unhinged, nor did he offer any evidence of medical incapacity. He would not deserve to have his family smeared with jokes about incest or autism. Any Madonna-like talk of blowing him up in the White House would have been obscene, perhaps illegal, and probably grounds for prosecution. We are now watching insidious regime change, aimed at removing the president of the United States not because of what he has done so far, but because of his personality and what he might do to the Obama agenda — and because for a variety of cultural reasons, our elite simply despises his very being.

Source>http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447864/trump-critics-left-right-want-him-removed


PODESTA: 'ALT-RIGHT' Media COLLUDING with RUSSIA

Says Gingrich 'disgusting' for asking questions about Seth


 Rich murder



 CHARLIE SPIERING


Hillary Clinton’s former campaign chief John Podesta attacked the First Amendment rights of the free press as he continued to spin his conspiracy theory of Russia colluding with American news websites to damage Democrats.

During a conversation with the Washington Post’s Karen Tumulty, he cited the “participation and the support of the alt-right media,” naming “guys like Sean Hannity” and “disgusting” Newt Gingrich for helping spread “fake news” to hurt Democrats. He specifically criticized Hannity and Gingrich for asking questions about DNC staffer Seth Rich’s murder and whether or not it had a connection with Wikileaks.
Podesta explained that it was one more example of how the Russians were “very active in propagating and distributing fake news, working with these alt-right sites in conjunction with them.” He also cited an “echo system” created by the Russians that raised the social media profile of articles that were damaging to Democrats.
He pointed out that “legitimate sites” like the Washington Post and the New York Times suffered, as other “alt-right” websites got more traction during the election.
Podesta blamed websites in the United States for publishing emails from Emmanuel Macron during the French presidential election to influence the outcome.
“The first reports of them came from U.S. alt-right sites back into France,” he said. “This is a global phenomena.”
He praised the French media for helping censor the information to stop it from damaging Macron’s campaign.
“I think unfortunately for us, but maybe fortunately for the world, I think the French press was more sensitive to it,” he said, praising them for helping Macron “win by a landslide” after censoring their reporting on the hacked emails.
He suggested that the American media should have done the same things with his leaked emails.
“I didn’t feel like that really happened last fall … the mainstream U.S. press was much more interested in the gossip,” he said.
Podesta warned the media about Russia’s efforts to use the emails to hurt Democrats, pointedly directing them to be more responsible. He suggested that the media should have helped the Clinton campaign fuel the Russian angle, instead of reporting on his emails.
“I think if you contextualize it — if you say that ‘The Russians are coming,’ and ‘The Russians are here’ — that can give people a sense of that they need to be more careful in the way they assess what they’re hearing and what they’re seeing and what’s being peddled,” he said.
He described the period of leaks as “the Soviet days” and griped that the “low burn” of email stories helped revive questions about Clinton’s own private emails.
“We hadn’t put it to bed completely,” he admitted.
Source>http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/05/23/john-podesta-alt-right-media-like-sean-hannity-colluding-with-russia/

Pope Urges Trump to Work for PEACE





Angus Mackinnon and Ella Ide


Vatican City (AFP) - Pope Francis urged Donald Trump to use his US presidency to promote peace around the world as the two leaders swapped sparring for smiles in their first face-to-face meeting, at the Vatican on Wednesday.
Trump's audience with the 80-year-old pontiff, a keenly-anticipated highlight of his first overseas tour, lasted just under half an hour and concluded with both men beaming, for the cameras at least.
"He is something," the president later said of his host. "We had a fantastic meeting."
The Vatican described the discussions as "cordial" and stressed the two men's joint opposition to abortion and shared concern for persecuted Christians in the Middle East.
There was no mention from either side of the two men's profound differences on climate change, migration, the death penalty and other issues.
Trump told his host as he left: "Thank you. Thank you. I won't forget what you said."
The pope had presented Trump with a medallion engraved with an olive tree, the international symbol of peace.
"I give it to you so you can be an instrument of peace," he said in Spanish. "We can use peace," Trump replied.
In a lighter moment, Francis referred to Trump's imposing bulk by asking his wife Melania, "What do you feed him on? Potica?" - a reference to a calorie-laden cake from Slovenia, Melania's country of birth.
Trump presented the pope with several gifts, including a collection of first editions by Martin Luther King and a bronze sculpture.
Francis gave Trump copies of the three major texts he has published as pope, including one on the environment which urges the industrialised world to curb carbon emissions or risk catastrophic consequences for the planet.
Trump, who has threatened to ignore the Paris accords on emissions and described global warming as a hoax, vowed to read them.
- History of spats -
In the last year, the two men have swapped jibes and debated on subjects ranging from migration to unbridled capitalism, as well as the environment.
A Vatican statement highlighted "the joint commitment in favour of life, and freedom of worship and conscience."
Since his November election, Trump has pleased the Catholic hierarchy by axing rules protecting tax-funded financing of family planning clinics that offer abortions.
Melania, who is a Catholic, and daughter Ivanka were both dressed all in black with lace veils, in keeping with traditional protocol that is no longer obligatory for visiting female dignitaries.
The audience took place in the private library of the Apostolic Palace, the lavish papal residence that Francis does not use, having opted instead for modest lodgings in a guesthouse for visiting clerics.
Afterwards, the Trumps were given a private tour of the Sistine Chapel and St Peter's Basilica.
The president then called on Italy's president and met briefly with Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni. "We're loving Italy very much," Trump said at that stop. "It was an honour to meet the pope."
Melania meanwhile visited a children's hospital and Ivanka met women trafficked from Africa for the sex trade on a visit to the St Egidio religious community.
Team Trump was due in Brussels on Wednesday afternoon for meetings with EU and NATO officials before returning to Italy for the G7 summit in Sicily on Friday and Saturday.
- Jumbo-sized SUV -
Francis and Trump's past spats include the pope describing plans for a border wall with Mexico as not Christian and Trump evoking a possible Islamist attack on the Vatican which would make the pontiff glad to have him as president.
But there have also been conciliatory moves. In 2013, Trump tweeted that "the new pope is a humble man, very much like me" while Francis had promised to judge the man not the image.
Wednesday's meeting nevertheless provided a reminder of their differences in style, Trump arriving at the Vatican in a jumbo-sized SUV that couldn't have been further removed from the modest Fiats and Fords Francis prefers.
Trump's Vatican visit was the third leg of his overseas trip, after stops in Saudi Arabia and Israel and the Palestinian territories.
"No president has ever visited the homelands and holy sites of the Jewish, Christian, and Muslims faiths all on one trip," said US National Security Advisor HR McMaster. Trump was bringing "a message of tolerance and of hope to billions," he said.
The high-profile trip has diverted attention from Trump's domestic pressures over alleged campaign collusion with Russia.
With his poll numbers at a record low, he will be hoping for a boost after rubbing shoulders with the popular pope.

Source>https://www.yahoo.com/news/smiles-public-least-trump-meets-pope-073451117.html

So, the FATE of the Republic Rests on Trump’s Choice of Adjectives?




 ANALYSIS/OPINION:


Have you heard the latest scandal involving President Trump?
During a speech in Saudi Arabia, Mr. Trump applauded Middle East leaders for a series of steps they have taken to confront radical Islamic terrorism.
“Of course, there is still much work to be done,” he went on. “That means honestly confronting the crisis of Islamic extremism and the Islamists and Islamic terror of all kinds. We must stop what they’re doing to inspire, because they do nothing to inspire but kill.”
Can you believe it?
I demand a special counsel, council or counsel — oh whatever! — to look into this immediately!
Hearings! Hold hearings and demand those in attendance of the speech appear to testify! What did the president say and when did he say it?
Did the president have a secret recording system installed that possibly captured the entire speech?
What were the conversations President Trump had with the Russians before he gave the speech? Did the Russians pay Mr. Trump to say that?
I dare say, it is high time we discuss the real possibility of, you know, the “I-word!” You know? Impeachment!
Remember, in scandals like these, it is always the coverup that is so much worse than the original crime.
Speechgate! Wordsgate! Radical Islamic terrorismgate!
Right away, White House officials went on defense.
“He’s just an exhausted guy,” leaked somebody from the White House traveling with the president.
Yeah, well, “exhausted” doesn’t explain away Russian involvement in this matter and the potential secret recording of the speech and the need for a special prosecutor and congressional hearings.
And by “exhausted,” is this White House official suggesting in some way that Mr. Trump has gone “low energy” on us after running an entire presidential campaign defeating low-energy politicians?
Despite the wall-to-wall coverage of the speechgate scandal in Saudi Arabia, it was hard to pinpoint what exactly was, shall we say, the very worst, most odious and pernicious specific aspect of this scandal.
Trump diverted slightly from his prepared remarks in using ‘Islamic’ rather than ‘Islamist,’” one media outlet gamely explained. “After remaining largely on script, that diversion caught the attention of many listeners who were curious to see whether Trump would use the phrase.”
Or maybe this one is “Grammargate” or “Dictiongate” or maybe “Phraseologygate.”
Whatever you want to call it, it is just scandalous.
Mr. Trump went on to urge all people to stand together “against the murder of innocent Muslims, the oppression of women, the persecution of Jews and the slaughter of Christians. Religious leaders must make this absolutely clear: Barbarism will deliver you no glory. Piety to evil will bring you no dignity.
“If you choose the path of terror, your life will be empty, your life will be brief, and your soul will be fully condemned,” Mr. Trump told his Muslim audience.
These lines, apparently, did not amount to a scandal, according to reports.
Meanwhile, a radical Islamic terrorist detonated a suicide bomb as a packed concert theater was emptying Monday night in Manchester, England. More than 20 innocents, including an 8-year-old girl, were killed.
So, the fate of the Republic rests on Trump’s choice of adjectives?
Source>http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/may/23/the-fate-of-the-us-rests-on-trumps-choice-of-adjec/

Manchester Bombing Yields 3 ARRESTS




Three suspects were rounded up in Manchester Wednesday in connection with Monday's deadly concert bombing, as British authorities raced to prevent another attack that could be imminent.
British officials gave the green light to an operation that could deploy up to 3,800 troops to assist police, The Guardian reported. The operation would allow armed officers to leave their posts for patrols in key areas, according to the newspaper.
Multiple law enforcement agencies swept through Manchester in a bid to head off a follow-up to the suicide bombing at an Ariana Grande concert that killed 22 other people. Officials also raised the number of wounded Wednesday to 119.
The Islamic State has claimed responsibility for the attack, and the suicide bomber, Salman Abedi, is unlikely to have acted alone, officials said. In fact, investigators said he may have acted as a "mule," hauling a shrapnel-packed explosive device that somebody else built, the BBC reported.
Abedi had been known to security forces "up to a point," Home Secretary Amber Rudd said.
Prime Minister Theresa May Wednesday chaired a meeting of her emergency security cabinet group, known as COBRA, to review intelligence reports about Abedi and concerns that he might have had outside support.
Britain raised its threat level to "critical," which May said meant an attack could come at any time.
Dr. Zuhdi Jasser weighs in
Police raided Abedi's house, using a controlled explosion to blast down the door. Neighbors recalled him as a tall, thin young man who often wore traditional Islamic dress and did not talk much.
Police also raided and searched a property elsewhere in Manchester where Abedi's brother Ismail is thought to have lived. A 23-year-old man has also been arrested as part of the investigation but officials have released no details about him.
British soldiers have been deployed in place of police officers to guard high-profile sites such as Buckingham Palace and Parliament.
Abedi was born in Britain to a Libyan family, grew up in Manchester's southern suburbs and attended the local Salford University for a time.
Officials are probing how often Abedi had traveled to Libya, which has seen an eruption of armed Islamist groups since dictator Moammar Gadhafi was overthrown and killed in 2011.
France's interior minister said Abedi is believed to have traveled to Syria and had "proven" links with the Islamic State group.
Minister Gerard Collomb said Wednesday on BFM television that British and French intelligence have information that Abedi had been to Syria. He did not provide details, and said it's unclear whether Abedi was part of a larger network of attackers.
British officials have not commented on whether Abedi had links to ISIS or other extremist groups.
In addition to those killed in the concert attack, 64 people are being treated for their wounds, Jon Rouse of the Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Partnership said Wednesday.
He said some of the reported 59 wounded had been discharged, but that the number of patients being treated had increased due to "walking wounded" who came in hours after the attack. Rouse said many of those hospitalized had serious wounds that would require "very long term care and support in terms of their recovery."
Soldiers were replacing armed police on Wednesday at sites like Buckingham Palace, 10 Downing Street and Parliament.  London Police Commander Jane Connors said the goal is to "make our city as hostile an environment as possible for terrorists to plan and operate."
She said police will also be ready to respond quickly to any incidents with armed officers, and have added more armed police walking patrols
Collomb, who spoke with May after the attack, said the two countries should continue cooperating closely on counterterrorism efforts despite Britain's pending exit from the European Union.
Source>http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/05/24/manchester-police-make-3-more-arrests-as-uk-terror-level-remains-at-critical.html

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

Obama Intel Agency SECRETLY Conducted ILLEGAL Searches on Americans for Years

Image result for Obama intel agency secretly conducted illegal searches on Americans for years


John Solomon and Sara Carter

The National Security Agency under former President Barack Obama routinely violated American privacy protections while scouring through overseas intercepts and failed to disclose the extent of the problems until the final days before Donald Trump was elected president last fall, according to once top-secret documents that chronicle some of the most serious constitutional abuses to date by the U.S. intelligence community.

More than 5 percent, or one out of every 20 searches seeking upstream Internet data on Americans inside the NSA’s so-called Section 702 database violated the safeguards Obama and his intelligence chiefs vowed to follow in 2011, according to one classified internal report reviewed by Circa.

The Obama administration self-disclosed the problems at a closed-door hearing Oct. 26 before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that set off alarm. Trump was elected less than two weeks later.


The normally supportive court censured administration officials, saying the failure to disclose the extent of the violations earlier amounted to an “institutional lack of candor” and that the improper searches constituted a “very serious Fourth Amendment issue,” according to a recently unsealed court document dated April 26, 2017.
The admitted violations undercut one of the primary defenses that the intelligence community and Obama officials have used in recent weeks to justify their snooping into incidental NSA intercepts about Americans.

The FISA court opinion

Circa has reported that there was a three-fold increase in NSA data searches about Americans and a rise in the unmasking of U.S. person’s identities in intelligence reports after Obama loosened the privacy rules in 2011.

Officials like former National Security Adviser Susan Rice have argued their activities were legal under the so-called minimization rule changes Obama made, and that the intelligence agencies were strictly monitored to avoid abuses.
The intelligence court and the NSA’s own internal watchdog found that not to be true.

“Since 2011, NSA’s minimization procedures have prohibited use of U.S.-person identifiers to query the results of upstream Internet collections under Section 702,” the unsealed court ruling declared. “The Oct. 26, 2016 notice informed the court that NSA analysts had been conducting such queries inviolation of that prohibition, with much greater frequency than had been previously disclosed to the Court. The American Civil Liberties Union said the newly disclosed violations are some of the most serious to ever be documented and strongly call into question the U.S. intelligence community’s ability to police itself and safeguard American’s privacy as guaranteed by the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment protections against unlawful search and seizure.

“I think what this emphasizes is the shocking lack of oversight of these programs,” said Neema Singh Guliani, the ACLU’s legislative counsel in Washington. “You have these problems going on for years that only come to the attention of the court late in the game and then it takes additional years to change its practices.

“I think it does call into question all those defenses that we kept hearing, that we always have a robust oversight structure and we have culture of adherence to privacy standards,” she added. “And the headline now is they actually haven’t been in compliacne for years and the FISA court itself says in its opinion is that the NSA suffers from a culture of a lack of candor.” The NSA acknowledged it self-disclosed the mass violations to the court last fall and that in April it took the extraordinary step of suspending the type of searches that were violating the rules, even deleting prior collected data on Americans to avoid any further violations.

“NSA will no longer collect certain internet communications that merely mention a foreign intelligence target,” the agency said in the statement that was dated April 28 and placed on its Web site without capturing much media or congressional attention. In question is the collection of what is known as upstream “about data”about an American that is collected even though they were not directly in contact with a foreigner that the NSA was legally allowed to intercept.

The NSA said it doesn't have the ability to stop collecting ‘about’ information on Americans, “without losing some other important data. ” It, however, said it would stop the practice to “reduce the chance that it would acquire communication of U.S. persons or others who are not in direct contact with a foreign intelligence target. The NSA said it also plans to “delete the vast majority of its upstream internet data to further protect the privacy of U.S. person communications.”

Agency officials called the violations “inadvertent compliance lapses.” But the court and IG documents suggest the NSA had not developed a technological way to comply with the rules they had submitted to the court in 2011.

Officials "explained that NSA query compliance is largely maintained through a series of manual checks" and had not "included the proper limiters" to prevent unlawful searches, the NSA internal watchdog reported in a top secret report in January that was just declassified. A new system is being developed now, officials said.

The NSA conducts thousand of searches a year on data involving Americans and the actual numbers of violations were redacted from the documents Circa reviewed.

But a chart in the report showed there three types of violations, the most frequent being 5.2 percent of the time when NSA Section 702 upstream data on U.S. persons was searched. The inspector general also found  noncompliance between 0.7 percent and 1.4 percent of the time involving NSA activities in which there was a court order to target an American for spying  but the rules were still not followed. Those activities are known as Section 704 and Section 705 spying.

Review | The NSA inspector general's highly redacted chart showing privacy violations.
\
The IG report spared few words for the NSA’s efforts before the disclosure to ensure it was complying with practices, some that date to rules issued in 2008 in the final days of the Bush administration and others that Obama put into effect in 2011.
“We found that the Agency controls for monitoring query compliance have not been completely developed,” the inspector general reported, citing problems ranging from missing requirements for documentation to the failure to complete controls that would ensure “query compliance.”

The NSA’s Signal Intelligence Directorate, the nation’s main foreign surveillance arm, wrote a letter back to the IG saying it agreed with the findings and that “corrective action plans” are in the works.

Source>http://circa.com/politics/barack-obamas-team-secretly-disclosed-years-of-illegal-nsa-searches-spying-on-americans

Israel WON, So Can the Palestinians Give Up VICTIM Status

Image result for Middle East reality check: Israel won, and so can the Palestinians if they give up victim status


Jim Hanson

Israel won. That sums up the more than half a century conflict between the Palestinians and Israel. They won the wars, they won the peace, and they won the prosperity.  So, it’s time for them to act like it, and more importantly it’s time for the Palestinians to accept they lost.

We have somehow gotten past the custom in war to fight to a decisive point and then have the losing side submit. Only a few years before the Palestinians began their decades-long losing streak, the Italians, Germans and Japanese surrendered unconditionally to end World War II. They left behind their failed attempts at conquest and consequently they were treated to the benevolence of the Allies and a rebuilding process that turned them into modern nations.

The Palestinians, on the other hand, have maintained belligerence and failure to even accept the existence of Israel in any meaningful way. Their Arab friends have made multiple attempts to destroy Israel and failed each time. Then the Palestinians switched to terrorism as a strategy and turned their proto state into an international pariah. This profound failure to comprehend their profound failure to destroy Israel has kept them in perpetual victim status.

Hundreds of billions of dollars in aid have flowed into the Palestinian territories. Some studies show it to be 25 times more per capita than was spent to rebuild Europe after World War II. Yet there is little in the way of progress and the standard of living is unacceptable. There are still “refugee” camps that have stood for decades. Their state of perpetual grievance has prevented them from using this largesse to build an actual state. This all stems from the failure to accept the uncomfortable and painful fact — they lost.

If they were to do so, they could rededicate themselves to the challenge of giving their people quality of life rather than a false hope they will somehow drive the Israelis out of Israel or exercise a right of return that is not a right by any meaningful standard. That didn’t happen before Israel became a nuclear state and certainly won’t now. So, a reality check and the recognition that their best bet is to rebuild not refit for more failed aggression.

Both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas have visited President Donald Trump who  seems set on brokering a deal even saying, “It’s something that I think is, frankly, maybe not as difficult as people have thought over the years.” Some tough love will go a long way toward jump-starting the process. Israel is a powerful and prosperous nation state and the Palestinian territories are not, there is no reason to treat them as equals.

This does not mean the Palestinians should be treated as lesser from a human perspective. But Israel has been denied that basic tenet of the aftermath of war, to the victor go the spoils. They have not even asked for spoils, they simply wish to be left to live in peace.  Let the Palestinians accept that and make the assurances they accept Israel’s existence as a Jewish state, and Palestine can begin the actual path to nationhood.

They can expect an even greater wealth of assistance from all the same countries and organizations that have been sending aid to them in their quasi war camp status. And the energy, lives and treasure they have wasted in a failed effort to destroy Israel can now be spent building their own homeland.

Source>http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/05/23/middle-east-reality-check-israel-won-and-so-can-palestinians-if-give-up-victim-status.html