Visit Counter

Wednesday, September 30, 2015

FBI refuses to cooperate in Hillary Clinton email server probe

Let me give you a little warm up to the story below. This is starting to smell like the FBI investigation of the IRS scandal.

Anybody remember this?
Rep. Jim Jordan DESTROYS FBI Director Mueller on IRS Targeting Scandal

Video 153

The IRS scandal is a very big deal yet FBI Director Mueller can't name who the lead investigator is nor how many people are working the case? Does anyone find that odd? What was more pressing consuming his time than the IRS scandal? To this day not one TeaPartier was ever contacted by the FBI. 

This is what I think transpired:

In 2010 the TeaParty was a force to be reckoned with. Anybody remember Barry mocking them waving an imaginary teabag around? 

Video 154

In the 2010 House of Representatives election the Democrats were obliterated. 63 seats went from Democrat to Republican. The highest loss of a party in a House midterm election since 1938!!!

Barry was really pissed. Even went on TV and said “we got shellacked”. Shortly thereafter he started getting visits in the WH from the IRS. My eyes popped when I saw the total number. After the election and just before the IRS scandal broke there was a whopping 357 documented visits! They explained it away saying this had all to do with the implementation of ObamaCare. Maybe…not all of it. I think Barry, shall we say, sowed the seed in these meeting with the IRS. He wanted to destroy the TeaParty who he blamed for the House flipping Republican. His operatives Miller, Lois Lerner, among others got to work targeting conservative in particular the TeaParty. 

This from Wikipedia:

Over the two years between April 2010 and April 2012, the IRS essentially placed on hold the processing of applications for 501(c)(4) tax-exemption status received from organizations with "Tea Party", "patriots", or "9/12" in their names. While apparently none of these organizations' applications were denied during this period, only 4 were approved. During the same general period, the agency approved applications from several dozen presumably liberal-leaning organizations whose names included terms such as “progressive”, “progress", "liberal", or "equality".

(Imagine--same scenario Bush administration targeting liberals. Think it might have been a different outcome?)

Over that period of time Learner and her crew got a little, lets say, “over zealous” targeting conservatives. It reached the boiling point and they knew they could no longer keep a lid on it. In early May 2013, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration released an audit report confirming that the IRS used inappropriate criteria to identify potential political cases, including organizations with Tea Party in their names. Stop right here. Didn't they just break the law? I have no proof but I bet Barry cooked this up. The Treasury Inspector General releases this bombshell story and Barry shorty thereafter goes on the air and gives us a bullshit story about "two low-level rogue employees in Cincinnati" and proclaims how “outraged” he is and "he's going to get to the bottom of it". So why was this bombshell story released in this manner? Better coming from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration... than James Rosen breaking the story at FOX News!

Boehner once warned. "My question isn't about who's going to resign. My question is about who’s going to jail over this scandal." So where are we today after countless investigations? Not one person was fired or went to jail. Learner as far as I know retired with a full pension in the neighborhood of $180,000 a year.

Barry on O'Reilly

Video 155

Barry was right it wasn't a smidgen it was a boatload!

 We have all heard the stories missing emails, hard drives wiped clean, etc. But this should really shine a light on it. The odds of seven different hard drives failing in the same month (like what happened at the IRS when they received a letter asking about emails targeting conservative and pro Israeli groups) is 37 to the 7th power = 1 in 78,664,164,096. (that’s over 78 Billion) In other words, the odds are greater that you will win the Florida Lottery 342 times than having those seven IRS hard drives crashing in the same month!

It also doesn’t even mention the fact that these hard drives crashed right after people were demanding to see the emails, making the odds that much more preposterous.  Barry's tentacles creep into the IRS and the FBI. Both are a cess pool of corruption. 

Even Helen Keller could see it. 


The FBI refused to cooperate Monday with a court-ordered inquiry into former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s email server, telling the State Department that they won’t even confirm they are investigating the matter themselves, much less willing to tell the rest of the government what’s going on.

Judge Emmet G. Sullivan had ordered the State Department to talk with the FBI and see what sort of information could be recovered from Mrs. Clinton’s email server, which her lawyer has said she turned over to the Justice Department over the summer.

The FBI’s refusal, however, leaves things muddled.

“At this time, consistent with long-standing Department of Justice and FBI policy, we can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any ongoing investigation, nor are we in a position to provide additional information at this time,” FBI General Counsel James A. Baker wrote in a letter dated Monday — a week after the deadline the Justice Department had set for the FBI to reply.

Judicial Watch, a conservative public interest law firm that is pursuing at least 16 open records cases seeking emails from Mrs. Clinton and her top aides, said at this point it’s not even clear what Mrs. Clinton provided, since all that’s been made public at this point are the former secretary of state’s public comments and some assertions, made through her lawyer, to the State Department.

Judicial Watch is prodding the courts to try to delve more deeply into Mrs. Clinton’s emails, and the group said a number of questions persevere about both Mrs. Clinton and top aides such as Huma Abedin, who did public business on an account tied to the server Mrs. Clinton maintained.

“We still do not know whether the FBI — or any other government agency for that matter — has possession of the email server that was used by Mrs. Clintonand Ms. Abedin to conduct official government business during their four years of employment at the State Department,” Judicial Watch said.

“We also do not know whether the server purportedly in the possession of the FBI — an assumption based on unsworn statements by third parties — is the actual email server that was used by Mrs. Clinton and Ms. Abedin to conduct official government business during their four years of employment at the State Department or whether it is a copy of such an email server. Nor do we know whether any copies of the email server or copies of the records from the email server exist,” the group said in its own court filing Monday afternoon.

Judicial Watch did release more than 50 pages Monday of emails it obtained from Ms. Abedin’s account on Mrs. Clinton’s server, and said it was clear she was talking about “sensitive” topics that shouldn’t have been discussed on an insecure account.

Many of those were details of Mrs. Clinton’s movements overseas, such as hotels she was staying at.

“These emails Judicial Watch forced out through a federal lawsuit show that Huma Abedin used her separate account to conduct the most sensitive government business, endangering not only her safety but the safety of Hillary Clinton and countless others,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

He questioned what reason Ms. Abedin — who did maintain an account,, on servers — would have for using the other account for important business. Mrs. Clinton said she kept only one account, the one on the server, because it was more convenient, but that reasoning does not appear to apply to Ms. Abedin.

The State Department is making all of Mrs. Clinton’s emails public under order of Judge Rudolph Contreras. But the department has said it won’t make all of the emails public from Ms. Abedin or other top Clinton aides Cheryl Mills or Philippe Reines. Instead the department only plans to release those messages specifically requested in open records demands.

Mrs. Clinton turned over about 30,000 email messages in December, while her aides turned over more than 100,000 pages between them, with the final set only being returned, by Ms. Abedin, earlier this month, the departmentsaid in court filings.

Without those documents in hand, the State Department has been unable to do full and complete searches in response to subpoenas, congressional inquiries or Freedom of Information Act requests.

The State Department has asked for dozens of cases to be put on hold while it tries to get a single judge to coordinate all of its searches in more than two dozen cases. But the people requesting the records have objected, and say the State Department has nobody to blame but itself.

“The State Department acts as if Ms. Abedin’s and Ms. Mills’ documents fell from the sky on the eve of the State Department’s production deadline, but that is not remotely the case,” Citizens United, one of the plaintiffs who has sued under the FOIA, said in a filing late last week.

Citizens United says the State Department missed its own deadline for producing Ms. Mills’ and Ms. Abedin’s documents.

The Obama administration countered that it went above and beyond its duties under the law by asking Ms. Abedin and Ms. Mills to return their records and then to search them in response to open records requests. The State Department says it’s moving as quickly as possible, but says the sheer number of documents — and the number of requests for them — calls for a stay in most cases.

But of the 26 requests where the State Department has sought to halt proceedings, six have already been denied. Only one has been granted, one was granted in part and denied in part by the same judge, and another is being held in abeyance.

The State Department told one of the federal judges Monday that it’s facing nearly 100 different open records lawsuits — not all of them related to Mrs. Clinton’s email server — that have stretched officials to their limit.

Monday’s FBI letter underscores the tangled situation Mrs. Clinton’s emails have produced. The letter was addressed to Mary McLeod, a lawyer at the Justice Department, which oversees the FBI — and which means, in effect, that the FBI is refusing to talk to its own parent department about the matter.

Mr. Baker pointedly noted in his letter that he was aware the response would be submitted to the court, which would presumably make it public.

Earlier this month the Justice Department, in another pleading, insisted Mrs. Clinton didn’t do anything wrong in being the one who decided which of her messages were official business records that must be returned to the government and which were purely personal and able to be expunged.

Judicial Watch said that raises thorny questions for a department that is supposedly investigating Mrs. Clinton.

Last week Sen. John Cornyn, the second-ranking Republican in the Senate, called for Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch to name a special counsel to oversee the investigation, citing too many potential conflicts of interest.


And who appointed Loretta E. Lynch? If I'm not mistaken the House and the Senate has the power to by-pass Lynch and appoint a special prosecutor. Why don't they do it?


Tuesday, September 29, 2015

Planned Parenthood Chief Faces G.O.P. Critics at Congressional Hearing

"Ms. Richards said the videos were edited by the activists to mislead..."

Really...that's going to be hard to prove after this came out!

Forensic Analysis of Videos Exposing Planned Parenthood Finds “No Evidence of Manipulation”

They got her dead to rights with the analysis from Coalfire Systems. But watch, Republicans will figure out a way to f--- it up.


Cecile Richards, the president of Planned Parenthood, listened to an opening statement of Representative Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio, at the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on Tuesday.

WASHINGTON — The embattled president of Planned Parenthood on Tuesday angrily disputed what she called “outrageous accusations” by Republicans that her organization profits from the sale of fetal tissue, telling Congress that the charges are “offensive and categorically untrue.”

In testimony before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, the president, Cecile Richards, faced off against conservative lawmakers who are seeking to strip federal funding from Planned Parenthood after videos released by anti-abortion activists purported to show officials from the health group trying to sell fetal tissue. It was her first appearance before Congress since the issue exploded in July.

Ms. Richards said the videos were edited by the activists to mislead, and she insisted that Planned Parenthood sells only a small amount of fetal tissue and recoups only reasonable expenses as allowed by the law.

“The latest smear campaign is based on efforts by our opponents to entrap our doctors and clinicians into breaking the law — and once again our opponents failed,” Ms. Richards said.

The appearance by Ms. Richards before the House committee underscored a broader fight between the parties over Planned Parenthood as the clock ticks on a government shutdown that will begin on Thursday if a stopgap spending bill cannot be passed. While the funding fight is ostensibly about abortion and fetal tissue, the subtext is politics: Republicans perceive Planned Parenthood as a well-oiled, well-funded machine promoting Democratic candidates.

Tuesday’s hearing quickly became contentious as Republican lawmakers assailed the organization as more a political advocacy organization that wastes federal money than a health care group that deserves to receive taxpayer dollars.

Representative Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio, called the videos “barbaric and repulsive” and accused Planned Parenthood of what he called a “repulsive game” that included shifting government funding from Congress to Democratic politicians. He said lawmakers should shift federal money away from Planned Parenthood and to other health care priorities.

“Take the money from the guys doing the bad things, and give it to the ones who aren’t,” Mr. Jordan said.

Representative Jason Chaffetz, Republican of Utah and chairman of the committee, opened the hearing with a tearful commentary about the death of his mother to breast cancer, and the death of his father to cancer as well. He said he felt strongly that federal money should be shifted away from Planned Parenthood so it could go to other health care research.

But he quickly moved to attack Planned Parenthood as a wasteful organization. He accused the group of spending millions on political activities, lavish parties, travel, and health care expenses overseas, and repeatedly noted that Ms. Richards earned an annual salary of more than $500,000.

“That has absolutely nothing to do with providing health care to women,” Mr. Chaffetz said, “It’s a political activity.”

Ms. Richards and Democratic lawmakers came to the group’s defense, accusing the Republican lawmakers of using “highly edited videos” and misleading information about Planned Parenthood to advance a political agenda.

Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, Democrat of New York, lamented what she called a “relentless campaign” by her Republican colleagues against Planned Parenthood.

“Make no mistake: Despite what we hear, Republicans are doubling down on their war against women,” Ms. Maloney said, adding later, “We need to recognize this fight for what it is — it’s about banning a woman’s right to choose.”

Later, Ms. Maloney accused Mr. Chaffetz of “beating up on a woman, our witness, for making a good salary.” She noted that Ms. Richards oversaw a large health care provider and said that she found Mr. Chaffetz’s comments about her salary “totally inappropriate and discriminatory.”

For her part, Ms. Richards repeatedly insisted that no federal money is used to pay for abortion services, and she said that most of the federal funding to her organization — about $400 million per year — comes through Medicare reimbursements for health care services provided to women.

In response to questions from Mr. Chaffetz, Ms. Richards insisted that she does not manage the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, a political lobbying group that she said is managed as a separate organization. Mr. Chaffetz pointed out that Ms. Richards received $31,000 last year for services provided to the fund, but Ms. Richards said, “I don’t directly manage, no sir.”

Ms. Richards also clashed with Mr. Jordan over a video apology that she issued just days after the video about fetal tissue first emerged. Mr. Jordan insisted that she must have believed the contents of the video were true if she apologized for them.

Ms. Richards said that she apologized because she thought it was “inappropriate” that the doctor in the video had a “clinical discussion, in a nonconfidential, nonclinical setting.”


State Dept: Clinton email storage safe not secure for some messages

If the State Department was a safe it would look something like this. 

Their annual budget, of which Kerry is now Secretary, is a whopping $56 billion! All you have to do is read the first paragraph in the article below to realize the ineptness of the State Department. They can't be responsible enough to give Killary's lawyer an adequate safe? 

So in the scheme of things if Kerry's State Department can't provide something as minuscule as a secure safe how in the world can you possibly convince me they have all the bases covered in something much more complex...the Iranian deal! This is the same Kerry right? I'm not comparing the Clinton's to Iran. But they do share a commonality. Both are known liars which the State Department should have anticipated.

Oh...and it states in this article Killary "apologized". 

Actually she said, "I'm sorry for the confusion". Which in essence means...I'm totally legit.. you're just to stupid to understand.


WASHINGTON – The State Department has told Senate investigators that it didn't provide Hillary Rodham Clinton's lawyer with a secure-enough safe to read now-highly classified material from her homebrew email server because it didn't anticipate that the messages would be deemed so secret.

In July, State Department officials installed a safe at the office of attorney David Kendall after the government determined some of Clinton's emails may have contained classified information. But it said last week the safe wasn't suitable for so-called top secret, sensitive compartmented information, known as TS/SCI, which the government has said was found in some messages.

Assistant Secretary of State Julia Frifield wrote to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley on Sept. 22 that "while the safe was suitable for up to (top secret) information, it was not approved for TS/SCI material" because the material wasn't held in a facility set up for discussing highly secret information, known as a SCIF, or sensitive compartmented information facility.

Those questions were not an issue at the time the safe was installed because "there was no indication that the emails might contain TS or TS/SCI material," Frifield wrote in the letter obtained by The Associated Press. Kendall has a top secret security clearance.

The State Department's letter underscores how even the nation's diplomatic apparatus didn't anticipate Clinton, a Democratic presidential candidate, would have sent or received such highly sensitive information on her private email server while secretary of state. Questions about her use of such a server have at times dominated her White House run.

Kendall and a Clinton spokesman did not immediately return messages seeking comment Monday.

"It shows how badly the wires were crossed" between the State Department, which didn't anticipate any of the emails would be top secret, and the intelligence community, which decided they were classified, said Steven Aftergood, a government secrecy expert at the Federation of American Scientists.

The State Department also said it was unaware of whether anyone's security clearances were suspended pending an investigation into possible improper handling of classified information, one of several questions posed by Grassley, R-Iowa. Such an action is not uncommon amid such classification reviews, said Bradley Moss, a Washington lawyer who deals regularly with security clearance matters.

The AP in March first discovered that Clinton ran her server off an Internet connection traced to her Chappaqua, New York, home. Clinton later confirmed she operated the server for convenience but did not provide details on how well the basement server was backed up or how adequately it was protected from hackers.

Since then, the State Department has indicated through Freedom of Information Act releases of Clinton's emails that dozens of messages that passed through her private server were later deemed classified. Most messages released so far have been marked "confidential," the lowest level of U.S. government classification.

But two emails, although not marked classified at the time they were sent, have since been slapped with a "TK" marking, for the "talent keyhole" compartment, suggesting material obtained by spy satellites, according to the inspector general for the intelligence community. They also were marked "NOFORN," meaning information that can only be shared with Americans with security clearances.

One email included a discussion of a U.S. drone strike, part of a covert program that is nevertheless widely known. A second conversation could have improperly referred to highly classified material, but it also could have reflected information collected independently, U.S. officials who have reviewed the correspondence told the AP.

Clinton has since apologized for using a private server and said she's provided copies of all the messages she was required to turn over. She reiterated in a recent interview that she didn't "send or receive any material marked 'classified.' We dealt with classified material on a totally different system. I dealt with it in person."

Since earlier this year, government investigators — and her political adversaries in particular — have focused on Clinton's email practices that effectively bypassed government-run systems. Also potentially at issue is whether Clinton withheld any work-related emails from the roughly 30,000 messages she provided to the State Department.

The AP is one of several organizations that have sued the State Department for records during her tenure, including emails to and from Clinton and her former top aides.


Monday, September 28, 2015

Barry puts the "Cuban Missile Crisis" in Netanyahu's lap

The Cuban Missile Crisis took place in October 1962. JFK (rightfully so) refused to allow Russian missiles armed with nuclear warheads only 90 miles of the coast of southern Florida. Now fast forward to 2015.  To put things in perspective just suppose for a moment Cuba is Iran. With those demographics and even though we have a plethora of assholes in Congress both Republican and Democrat, stupidity running rampant, it would seem unconscionable this deal with Iran would have ever seen the light of day.

Now put yourself in Netanyahu's shoes. 

Tehran, Iran to Tel Aviv, Israel


988 miles 

Barry has deliberately boxed him into a corner as this map would indicate. 

This graph shows approximately how far along Iran is in their ballistic missile program. Once they develop a nuclear warhead (if they haven't done so already) Iran could hit Israel just by moving the missile sites closer to the Iranian border or locating them in Iraq, Syria, or deploying them to Hezbollah and Hamas in Lebanon!

Clinton almost word-for-word...the same shit Barry touted about the Iranian deal.

How does that saying go again...those who do not learn from history..

From the horse's mouth.

I don't see any other choice but for Israel to attack Iran and destroy their nuclear weapon sites. Next question. 

Whose side will Barry be on?


Bill Clinton says Republicans, media at fault for wife’s email woes

Yeah... and it was Orrin Hatch's semen on Monica's dress!

John McCain set up Killary's email account.
Chuck Grassley the server.
And Boehner sent here an iPhone.

So how come we're not investigating Republicans?

Can we expect any less from the spouse of the woman who argued what “is” is? Columnist Charles Krauthammer said it best when he noted last week, “Nothing Hillary says ever is true three weeks later.”


WASHINGTON (AP) — Former President Bill Clinton blamed Republicans and the media for the controversy surrounding his wife’s use of a private email server as secretary of state, arguing that GOP rivals want to focus on political hype to undercut her presidential campaign.

“I have never seen so much expended on so little,” Clinton said in an interview to be aired Sunday, describing the email furor as resulting largely from the GOP’s “full-scale frontal assault” on Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton. Excerpts of the interview on “CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS” were released on Saturday.

“The other party doesn’t want to run against her. And if they do, they’d like her as mangled up as possible,” Clinton said.

Republicans have raised questions about thousands of emails that she has deleted on grounds that they were private in nature, as well as other messages that have surfaced independently of Hillary Clinton and the State Department.

Bill Clinton likened the email controversy to questions over the Whitewater land deal that he faced during his 1992 presidential campaign. Saying the furor was more politics than substance, Clinton argued that his wife has been open in answering questions and will bounce back from a decline in the polls.

“She said she was sorry that her personal email caused all this confusion. And she’d like to give the election back to the American people. And I trust the people. I think it will be all right,” he said.

Clinton added that the news media also played an inappropriate role in his wife’s troubles.

“You know, at the beginning of the year, she was the most admired person in public life,” he said. “What happened? The presidential campaign happened. And the nature of the coverage shifted from issue-based to political.”

Clinton taped the interview on Thursday. On Friday, the Obama administration discovered a chain of emails that Hillary Rodham Clinton failed to turn over when she provided what she said was the full record of her work-related correspondence as secretary of state, officials told The Associated Press. Their existence challenges her claim that she has handed over the entirety of her work emails from the account.


Sunday, September 27, 2015

They won't get it until the Statue of Liberty is replaced by a mosque

Ben Carson's warning: Radical ideology out to destroy us

By Cal Thomas

“Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits.” (Matthew 7:15-16)

Major newspaper editorials and some columnists have their knickers in a twist over remarks by Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson.

Appearing last Sunday on “Meet the Press,” Carson was asked by host Chuck Todd whether he believes Islam is consistent with the Constitution.

“No, I don’t,” he said. “I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation.” Asked whether he could vote for a Muslim for Congress, Carson said Congress is a different story, but that it “depends on who that Muslim is and what their policies are.”

Carson critics are quick to mention Article VI of the Constitution, which prohibits a “religious test” for office, but that means no one can be barred from office because of their faith; it does not and could not prevent citizens from voting for or against someone for religious reasons.

Two years ago, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom reported 10 of the 15 “worst violators of religious freedom” in the world are nations in which Islam is the dominant religion.

If you prefer the thoughts of a cultural icon, consider what singer Art Garfunkel said. As reported on, Garfunkel noted that Muslims are transforming Europe. He referenced “Reflections of the Revolution in Europe,” a 2009 book by Christopher Caldwell, which argues “mass immigration by Muslims is altering the culture of Europe because of their reluctance to join the culture of their new homelands.” The book claims Muslims do not so much enhance European culture as supplant it, and are “patiently conquering Europe’s cities, street by street.”

Is that bigotry or reality? Is it bigotry to quote what various Islamic leaders say are their intentions when it comes to establishing a worldwide caliphate and replacing the U.S. Constitution with Sharia Law, or is it a warning we should take seriously and respond to as we would react to any other invasion?

“Mina” (not her real name to protect her family) is a U.S. citizen and longtime friend who was born in Tehran and still has family there. She wrote me about the intentions of the mullahs and their nuclear deal with the U.S. and five other nations: “The mullahs are buying time ... (to) finish their nuclear program. Americans underestimate these people. It will be Hezbollah, ISIS, or al-Qaida doing their dirty work. They will give them the nuclear bomb. They are very shrewd. They’ll sit back and watch.”

More proof


Barry puts his foot down on Chinese hacking

Jinping was so terrified of Barry the minute he returned to China he put an immediate ban on all U.S. hacking!

Seriously, do you think Barry, in-between the egg rolls and Wonton soup, had the balls to even bring up…"hacking". I doubt it. How do you sit down to eat with someone who you know unequivocally is sabotaging the country? I see Barry as just another head of cattle taken to the slaughterhouse. Jinping's got to be thinking...WOW..they even entertain us while we're fucking them. 

Wouldn’t you like to be a fly on the wall if it were Trump?


Meanwhile away from the Pomp and Circumstance of Stupidity... at least someone is trying to put a stop to it.

A pair of cyber security sleuths discovered the identity of a Chinese military hacker.

Attribution is difficult in cyberspace. But it's not impossible.

A report this week from the threat intelligence company ThreatConnect and research firm Defense Group, Inc., shows just how effective good old-fashioned detective work can be. The two paired up, issuing a convincing report that allegedly identifies a Chinese military hacker by face and name: one Mr. Ge Xing, a Thai politics expert and member of Unit 78020 of the People's Liberation Army of China, a reconnaissance division.

Fortune spoke to Wade Baker, VP of strategy and analytics at ThreatConnect who worked on the report, a couple of days ago. Initially, his team was tipped off to Ge's alleged illicit activities when they discovered a connection between his social media user names and a malicious domain linked to a hacking campaign targeting China's neighbors in the South China Sea. Each operated under the same alias: "greensky27."

Following that lead, Baker's team continued to dig, looking for more clues, more evidence that might implicate the possible, albeit unassuming, hacker. Eventually, they struck upon a damning correlation: Whenever Ge absconded on vacation, the hacking campaign's infrastructure went dark. "That's what sealed the deal," Baker says. (You can read about that bit in chapter four of the report.)

Ge is, of course, a person. He is, as the Wall Street Journal describes him, "a new father and avid bicyclist who drives a white Volkswagen Golf sedan and occasionally criticizes the government." There are pictures of him online. He has a family, a job, hobbies. He is not just another faceless cyberthief.

"What I find extremely interesting is that you have this man and machine blend that shows you both sides of the adversary," Baker said of the report. "A lot of people forget that there's a person writing that malware, a person controlling that command and control infrastructure."

We should not forget this point. The so-called cyber world does not exist in a vacuum. It has very real, human operatives. Someone pulls the strings.


Worse than Black Friday at Walmart

Hajj stampede death toll rises to 769

Muslims perform symbolic stoning of the devil by throwing stones at three pillars. The pilgrims then shave their heads, perform a ritual of animal sacrifice, and celebrate the three-day global festival of Eid al-Adha

Looks like the devil won this time.


Friday, September 25, 2015

Boehner Resigns

Thank You God

Get rid of him next.


The double dip

On a tip from Phil McCafferty

Hillary Clinton personally signed deal that let top aide collect two salaries

Hillary Rodham Clinton personally signed the controversial deal in 2012 that let her top aide Huma Abedin simultaneously work for the State Department and a private New York firm with deep ties to the Clinton family, according to records made public Thursday.

The State Department emails released to select congressional committees and the watchdog group Judicial Watch also show that almost immediately after Ms. Abedin got permission to work in New York for the Teneo Group, she tried to get the federal government to pay the cost of her commuting back and forth to Washington to serve as a senior adviser to Mrs. Clinton, who was then the secretary of state.

“I need to come down to state tomorrow. Can state start paying for my travel since ny is now my base?” Ms. Abedin asked in an email to a top State Department administrative official on March 27, 2012, around the time her deal to become a special government employee (SGE) was struck.

Just four days earlier, Mrs. Clinton personally signed an agreement that let Ms. Abedin, one of her most trusted aides, transition from being her deputy chief staff and a former federal employee, to an SGE, the equivalent of a contractor with special privileges.

The change freed Ms. Abedin also to work simultaneously in the private sector for the Teneo Group, a consulting firm in New York run by top Clinton confidant Doug Band, where Bill Clinton also collected a salary as a paid adviser.

State officials said Thursday night they did not immediately know whether Ms. Abedin got taxpayer reimbursement for her travel costs.

Sen. Charles Grassley, Iowa Republican and Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, has been investigating whether Ms. Abedin’s simultaneous work for both State and Teneo created improper conflicts of interest while allowing her to “double dip” on salaries.

Federal investigators also have concluded that Ms. Abedin billed for more hours than allowed for an SGE contractor, according to investigative documents obtained by The Washington Times.

Ms. Abedin’s lawyer, Miguel Rodriguez, has denied she did anything wrong and accused Mr. Grassley of a political witchhunt.

He did not return a call Thursday seeking comment from the Times.

But documents first reported earlier this month by the Times show the State Department’s own internal investigator believed Ms. Abedin might have engaged in embezzlement via inaccurate time sheets and concluded she was overpaid by about $10,000 in federal salary.

And the new documents further support questions Mr. Grassley has posed to the Obama administration.

For instance, the senator asked weeks ago whether Ms. Abedin was ever reimbursed by taxpayers so she could travel between her private job in New York and her federal job in Washington.

Mr. Grassley also has questioned whether the deal with Ms. Abedin really met the requirements for a special government employee status. One of those requirements is that someone’s work as a contractor be different enough from the original job to warrant giving the person contractor status.

But the documents released Thursday show Ms. Abedin told State officials she planned to do the same type of work as an SGE as she did as deputy chief of staff.

“MY NEW POSITION IS THE SAME AS MY OLD POSITION,” Ms. Abedin wrote in all caps to a State Department colleague on June 5, 2012.