Wednesday, February 19, 2014

$100 Billion in Improper Welfare Payments Uncovered

$100 Billion in Improper Welfare Payments Uncovered

Written by 
Recent news that the federal government spent $100 billion improperly caused barely a ripple in light of the government's enormous budget and the continuous flow of revelations of such waste and corruption that have provided journalists with full-time careers in tracking them down and writing about them.
One hundred billion dollars is less than three percent of the federal government’s annual budget, and most observers are probably happy that the misspending isn’t any worse than that.
The $100 billion waste was discovered by two such journalists at National Review when they uncovered an unheralded report from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that tracked “high-error” programs — those that waste at least $750 million a year — and discovered that just these 13 programs waste more than $100 billion every year. The top three, not surprisingly, are all healthcare related: Medicare Fee-for-Service reimbursements, Medicaid payouts to the states, and Part C of Medicare Advantage (which includes the prescription drug program) were responsible for nearly $62 billion of the “improper” payments.
Government waste, however, is vastly greater than just that uncovered at National Review. For example, there is last year's foreign aid package to Egypt that contained 16 F-16 fighter jets and 200 Abrams tanks. The aid was highly criticized as being gifts to an enemy, which sounds accurate, give that Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi was widely quoted as reminding his citizenry:
Dear brothers, we must not forget to nurse our children and grandchildren on hatred towards those Zionists and Jews, and all those who support them.
They must be nursed on hatred. The hatred must continue.
That, of course, would be the United States, the giver of those gifts.
Then there is the waste discovered by Michael Snyder, writing at The Economic Collapse blog, who is forever creating lists of ways the government is working to undermine the country’s economy. In one of his latest lists, “66 Crazy Ways that the U.S. Government Is Wasting Your Hard-Earned Money,” Snyder has a field day counting those ways:
• Leaving $7 billion worth of military equipment behind in Afghanistan
• Spending $384,949 to have Yale University scientists do a study on sexual conflict among ducks
• Giving $1.5 million to a Boston Hospital to find out why three-quarters of lesbians in the United States are overweight
• Spending $27 million to teach Moroccans how to make pottery
And so on.
There’s also Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), who virtually guaranteed himself a lifetime job in the Senate (until announcing his retirement voluntarily last month), with the annual publication of his ”Wastebook,” which cited 100 of the more egregious ways the government wastes taxpayer monies.
The Heritage Foundation listed its top 10 examples of wasteful government spending which included
• Spending $100,000 on an outhouse on an Alaskan trail, noting (with picture included) that it “includes a single toilet with no internal plumbing.”
• Building a million-dollar bus stop in Arlington, Virginia with heated floors that don’t work
• Giving $125,000 to a 3-D printer company promising to provide plans on how to make pizza-by-printer at home
And so on.
There’s even a website — The Waste List — which simply lists, page after page, how the feds manage to bilk taxpayers endlessly in projects bordering on the edge of sanity.
Perhaps the most outrageous of all the big spenders, however, is the First Family. Last summer the Obamas visited Africa on a trip with costs estimated to approach $100 million. As Fox News recounted:
Among the related costs will be fighter jets; hundreds of Secret Service agents; a Navy ship with a full trauma center; and military cargo planes to bring 56 vehicles including 14 limousines and three trucks loaded with sheets of bulletproof glass to cover the windows of the hotels where the first family will stay.
Happily, the Obamas decided at the last minute to forgo a safari, which would have included the expense of bringing along a team of sharp shooters in case one of the Obamas ventured too close to danger.
And that’s just one trip. In 2011, the total cost of catering to the First Family’s every whim came to $1.4 billion. This included the biggest staff, with the highest wages of any administration in history — 469 of them — with half making more than $100,000 a year, including a dog handler for First Dog Bo. First Lady Michelle spent $10 million on her own vacations in just one year.
So, per capita at least, the biggest wastrels in Washington live in the White House.
A graduate of Cornell University and a former investment advisor, Bob is a regular contributor to The New American magazine and blogs frequently at www.LightFromTheRight.com, primarily on economics and politics. He can be reached at badelmann@thenewamerican.com.

House Benghazi report relied on recalled book

Interview of author put '60 Minutes' in hot water

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
CBS News reporter Lara Logan interviews 'Morgan Jones' in '60 Minutes' feature
The recently released House Armed Services Committee report on Benghazi utilized a controversial book that was recalled by its publisher, WND has found.
The footnotes in the report cite “The Embassy House” book that landed the CBS News show “60 Minutes” in hot water after it uncritically aired an interview with the co-author, who at the time used the pseudonym Morgan Jones.
Questions were raised about the veracity of Jones’ statements, including his whereabouts during the attack, after it was revealed Jones gave conflicting information to the FBI and in an unsigned incident report.
The 31-page House report released Feb. 11 says that in addition to information provided by the military, the House committee “considered information gathered by other Congressional committees or appearing in the public domain.”
Aaron Klein’s “Impeachable Offenses: The Case to Remove Barack Obama from Office” is available, autographed, at WND’s Superstore
The footnote to the statement cited “the since discredited book by ‘Morgan Jones’ and Damien Lewis, ‘The Embassy House: The Explosive Eyewitness Account of the Libyan Embassy Siege by the Soldier Who Was There.’”
Also cited in the same footnote was other public domain material, including a New York Times article and another Benghazi book titled “Under Fire.”
Jones’ book was not mentioned anywhere else in the report. It is unclear which aspects of the book were taken into consideration by the House Armed Services Committee.
While some may be quick to attempt to discredit the House investigation based on its admitted consideration of Jones’ book, others may see the move as vindicating some of the information contained in “The Embassy House.”
The book raises significant questions about the inadequate security at the Benghazi compound.
One of the main issues in the work is the State Department’s use of armed members of the February 17 Martyrs Brigade militia as a quick-reaction force stationed inside the U.S. Special Mission grounds instead of American forces.
The Brigade acted under the umbrella of the al-Qaida-linked Ansar al-Sharia terrorist group, which was implicated in the Benghazi attack.
“60 Minutes” reporter Lara Logan issued an on-air apology and took a leave of absence after reports surfaced that Jones, whose real name is said to be Dylan Davies, provided conflicting accounts of his whereabouts during the Benghazi attack.
Threshold Editions, a subsidiary of Simon & Schuster, recalled the book and recommended bookstores pull the work.
Davies was the manager of the unarmed Libyan guards that provided external security at the U.S. compound via the Blue Mountain Group private security contract firm.
The Washington Post reported details of a Blue Mountain Group incident report it claimed was submitted by Davies to Blue Mountain three days after the attack. The report differed from the story Davies told in his book and in his CBS interview.
The incident report has been widely cited in media as evidence Davies is not credible.
Davies told the Daily Beast he did not write the report and has never seen it. The report was not signed by anyone.
Over the weekend, sources in the FBI reportedly told CBS and other news agencies that Davies also gave them a version of events that differs significantly from his public descriptions.
The Blue Mountain incident report, written in the first person allegedly as told by Davies, stated he returned to his villa immediately after the attack. Davies writes in his book, however, he attempted to reach the Benghazi compound but couldn’t do so because of Ansar al-Sharia roadblocks.
The Blue Mountain report has Davies stating he learned of Ambassador Chris Stevens’ death from a Blue Mountain guard who had secretly gone to the hospital and had taken a photo of the ambassador’s body. Davies writes in his book, however, he was the guard who infiltrated the hospital and verified Stevens was dead.
With additional research by Joshua Klein.

New York’s NRA membership nearly doubles in wake of SAFE Act

New York’s NRA membership nearly doubles in wake of SAFE Act

Ranks of New York affiliate nearly double

Gun-rights advocates hold signs as they demonstrate outside the Capitol in Albany a year ago in opposition to the New York SAFE Act. Gun-rights advocates hold signs as they demonstrate outside the Capitol in Albany a year ago in opposition to the New York SAFE Act. Associated Press
on February 3, 2014 - 11:42 AM
, updated February 3, 2014 at 12:01 PM
ALBANY – As gun-rights and gun-control groups continue to argue over the effects of the New York SAFE Act, one consequence is clear: Membership in the state affiliate of the National Rifle Association has soared since the law was enacted a year ago.
Tom King, president of the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, said the NRA headquarters in Washington recently informed him his state affiliate has now surpassed Texas and California to become the largest state chapter in the nation.
The NRA affiliate saw its membership rise from 22,000 statewide to 41,000 since the SAFE Act was approved in January 2013, King said.
While he said his group has had regular membership growth over the years, “It has grown exponentially faster than it ever has before, and it can only be attributed to the SAFE Act,’’ he said.
“I think it sends a message to all the anti-gun politicians, all the politicians sitting on the fence, that yes, if they thought that we were quiet and this was going to go away without anyone paying any more attention to it, they were just flat-out wrong,’’ King said Monday.
In addition, King said members and nonmembers have donated $200,000 to his organization in the past year to help fund its legal challenge to the gun-control law that was proposed by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo in the aftermath of the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut. Individual membership in the NRA affiliate in New York costs $25 a year.
“The Second Amendment is alive and well in New York State.’’ King said. He said the growth has come from all geographic areas of New York.
“I think it’s their way of saying, ‘We’re here, we’re growing, and we’re not going to give up on this fight,’ ’’ he said of the new membership growth. “And if I were some of these New York State Republican senators who voted for this and haven’t done anything about it since, I’d be worried because there’s a lot of angst out there, and it’s all pointed at them,’’ King said.
email: tprecious@buffnews.com

New voter regret poll: How many Obama voters say they would do it again?

New voter regret poll: How many Obama voters say they would do it again?

Photo credit: igorvitale.org
Photo credit: igorvitale.org
According to the latest Economist/YouGov.com poll some Obama voters are sorry for what they have done.
The Washington Examiner reported:
Given a chance to do it all over again, only 79 percent of those who voted for President Obama would vote for him again and 71 percent of Obama voters now inclined to vote for somebody else “regret” their vote to reelect the president, according to a new poll.
The poll found that Obama would lose enough votes in a rematch with Mitt Romney that the Republican would win. “90 percent of people who voted for Romney would do it again, compared to only 79 percent of Obama voters who would,” said the poll.
poll2
Love it or hate it, Cadillac’s new ad creates big political controversy
do you regret

2 former Navy SEALs found dead aboard ship at center of ‘Captain Phillips’ saga


2 former Navy SEALs found dead aboard ship at center of ‘Captain Phillips’ saga

Two former Navy SEALs working as security contractors aboard the Maersk Alabama were found dead Tuesday aboard the container ship, a day after it was docked near an island northeast of Madagascar, according to the Trident Group, the security firm that employed the men.
Authorities identified the two men as Jeffrey Reynolds and Mark Kennedy, both 44.
Details of the contractors' deaths remain unclear, but they were not on watch and did not die while performing a security operation, Tom Rothrauff, the president of the Trident Group, said. He said an initial assessment of the scene did not suggest any foul play.
A spokesman from the shipping line only confirmed that two people had been found dead, citing the ongoing investigation. The U.S. Coast Guard is investigating the matter.
The Maersk Alabama was featured in the movie 'Captain Phillips,' which was based on a pirate hijacking off the coast of Somalia in 2009. Phillips' ordeal galvanized the attention of the U.S. public to the dangers of operating merchant ships in the Horn of Africa, one of the busiest and most precarious sea lanes in the world.
Only seven months after the Phillips' saga, Somali pirates attacked the ship again but were repelled by gunfire and a high-decibel noise device on the container ship.
The Trident Group was established in April 2000 by U.S. Navy Special Operations Personnel, according to its website.
The Maersk Alabama had been docked in Victoria, Seychelles, which is an archipelago in the Indian Ocean.
The Associated Press contributed to this report

New York City Muslim pleads guilty to building homemade bombs to attack soldiers, police, George Washington Bridge


New York City Muslim pleads guilty to building homemade bombs to attack soldiers, police, George Washington Bridge

2 Comments
Once again a “a normal guy” goes savage when he becomes a devout Muslim. But we are attacked and smeared when pointing this out, and the bloody jihad rages on here and abroad. What has to happen to shake people out of their fatal delusions? Screen Shot 2014-02-19 at 2.05.29 PM
New York City: Muslim pleads guilty to building homemade bombs to attack soldiers, police, George Washington Bridge Thanks to Robert Spencer, February 19, 2014
Jose Pimentel’s Muslim name is Muhammad Yusuf. That is the name he uses since he converted to Islam. Why does the mainstream media persist in calling him by his slave name? The mainstream media would find it racist and disrespectful to call Muhammad Ali “Cassius Clay” or Kareem Abdul-Jabbar “Lew Alcindor,” right? Why isn’t it racist and disrespectful to continue to call Muhammad Yusuf “Jose Pimentel”? Is it because Muhammad Ali and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar are revered, beloved figures, while Muhammad Yusuf reflects poorly upon his adopted religion, having plotter to commit mass murder in its “defense”?
Muhammad Yusuf’s mother said: “My son was a normal American guy. He did what young people do. Then he became a Muslim and he changed.” AP, however, here gives no hint whatsoever of the motive for his terrorism plot; it is standard journalistic practice to minimize discussion of motive when writing about an Islamic jihad plot, but this story gives no hint that Muhammad Yusuf was a Muslim at all, let alone a would-be jihad mass murderer.
“Man pleads guilty in NYC pipe bomb terrorism plot; was accused of targeting police, soldiers,” from the Associated Press, February 19:
NEW YORK – A New York City man charged with building homemade bombs to attack soldiers, police or even the George Washington Bridge has pleaded guilty to a terrorism charge.
Jose Pimentel entered the plea Wednesday to attempted criminal possession of a weapon as a crime of terrorism. It was less than a week before his scheduled trial in a rare state-level terrorism case.
The 29-year-old has been promised a sentence of 16 years in prison. He would have faced a minimum of 15 years to life if convicted of the top charge, a high-level weapons possession offense as a terrorism crime.
Jury selection had been due to start Monday.
Authorities called the case a dramatic example of the threat of homegrown, one-person terrorism plots. Pimentel’s lawyers have portrayed it as an example of overzealous policing in the years since Sept. 11.
Screen Shot 2014-02-19 at 2.07.32 PM
Print This Post Print This Post

Perkins: There's More Evidence That God Is Behind Natural Disasters Than There Is For Climate Change

Perkins: There's More Evidence That God Is Behind Natural Disasters Than There Is For Climate Change

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council alleged yesterday that people who agree with the scientific consensus regarding evolution and climate change are actually out of step with modern science.
Perkins, who has previously professed belief in Young Earth Creationism (the belief that the earth is only several thousand years old), said on Washington Watch that “the theory of evolution just doesn’t work when you consider all the holes, look at the fossil record, the molecular isolation, transitional difficulties, irreducible complexity, cyclical change, genetic limits, there are just so many holes and flaws in the evolutionary theory.”
He later compared the supposed problems with evolution to the purported flaws in climate science: “I remember a few years ago, it might have been Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson, made a reference to a hurricane or a storm being an act of God — it’s interesting that’s how we refer to some of these things in our insurance policies — they were ridiculed, saying ‘how dumb can you be?’ Well, there’s more to back that up than to say what’s happening in our environment, our climate, is because of people driving Suburbans or coal-fired power plants.”

Renew America: Don't 'Allow Obama's Half-Blackness To Take Down America'

Renew America: Don't 'Allow Obama's Half-Blackness To Take Down America'

A columnist for Alan Keyes’ Renew America, which has launched a campaign to impeach President Obama, claims that Republicans shouldn’t fear bringing impeachment charges against Obama because he’s not really black.
“Barack Obama is mulatto,” Sylvia Thompson writes. “If you think about it, this nation has not yet elected, in the true sense, a black president. The first American black president will be someone like former presidential candidate Herman Cain or former Congressman Allen West.”
Thompson claims that Republicans won’t impeach Obama because of the “fear of being branded racist. If Obama is black, he is therefore untouchable, and that thinking is detrimental to this nation.”
Instead, Republicans should emphasize “his equal portion of whiteness and oppose that part of him,” as “it would be an unconscionable act of defeatism to allow Obama’s half-blackness to take down America.”
If you agree with talk radio host Rush Limbaugh, who says Obama will never be impeached because he is the first black president, then that is a problem. It is time for this nation to stop ignoring a full fifty percent of Barack Obama's heritage and claiming that he is "black," as though his mother, grandparents (who reared him) and an entire family lineage did not exist. If you think about it, this nation has not yet elected, in the true sense, a black president. The first American black president will be someone like former presidential candidate Herman Cain or former Congressman Allen West. These are men whose heritage goes back to not simply Africans, but specifically Africans brought to America centuries ago. That is a distinction, in my view, worth emphasizing, given the paralysis inflicting the nation over how to deal with Barack Obama.

Obama is a mixed-race person. His father was an African from the East African country Kenya, and his mother was of Caucasian European descent. That means Barack Obama is mulatto. Look it up if the word is unfamiliar to you.

I make this point in the hope of moving at least a few souls out there beyond the barrier that prevents them from criticizing and actively fighting this man, who is hell-bent on destroying the country. The utter impotence of Republican leadership in Congress; the seemingly servile behavior of the Supreme Court (Justice John Roberts' contortive route to approving Obamacare); the few other-than-leftist media outlets, whose commentators soft-pedal around every unlawful move that Obama makes; all stem, in my view, from fear of being branded racist. If Obama is black, he is therefore untouchable, and that thinking is detrimental to this nation.

I have always thought that Obama was chosen by the Left and groomed for politics so as to be used as a tool. There is nothing outstanding about him other than his ability to speak smoothly, and that skill is merely a factor of being reared among educated people. I think that the architects of his development and eventual thrust upon the political scene surmised that the brown skin (no matter that he got it from a foreign African and not an American black father) would make him sufficiently black to foil criticism from white Americans. These background masterminds also knew that as he advanced their leftist agenda, some Americans would raise holy hell. A surefire way to dampen that resistance would be to play the race card. And, sadly for America, the scheme has worked well.



For those who cannot quite move beyond Obama's blackness, I strongly urge that you at least consider his equal portion of whiteness and oppose that part of him, if it is easier for you to do so. It behooves the rest of us to support the efforts of Dr. Keyes and other Americans seeking solutions, such as those who are suing Obama for specific infractions against his oath of office. Whatever you do, vow that you will not cave to the Left's seeming victory over this nation. It would be an unconscionable act of defeatism to allow Obama's half-blackness to take down America.

Filed Under

Larry Klayman crows on NSA win: ‘We hit the mother lode’

Larry Klayman crows on NSA win: ‘We hit the mother lode’

Larry Klayman is pictured. | AP Photo
'It was the biggest decision in the context of the government in my lifetime.' | AP Photo
Larry Klayman’s long journey in the legal wilderness appears to be over.
Klayman, the conservative legal activist well-known in Washington political circles a decade ago for his no-holds-barred court battles against the Clinton administration, was thrust back into the spotlight Monday after he obtained the first major ruling from a federal judge that the National Security Agency’s surveillance program was constitutionally flawed.

Text Size

  • -
  • +
  • reset

Krauthammer on NSA ruling

In 90 secs: What's driving the day

“We hit the mother lode,” an elated Klayman said Monday, indulging in some of the hyperbole he became known for during his 1990s crusades. “It was the biggest decision in the context of the government in my lifetime. This is the most outrageous invasion of constitutional rights I’ve seen in my life.”
In recent years, the once-prominent Klayman has been associated with a series of causes at the fringe of the conservative movement, arguing that President Barack Obama is a closet Muslim and likely was born in Kenya. The legal gadfly has also struggled personally, drawing a public reprimand by the Florida Bar for his slowness in repaying a client after declaring himself flat broke just three years ago.
(Also on POLITICO: Judge: NSA phone program likely unconstitutional)
However, in winning the ruling Monday from U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon in Washington, the eccentric Klayman and his often comically shoestring conservative organization Freedom Watch effectively beat to the punch — and the headlines — a slew of better known civil liberties groups who have spent years fighting the NSA’s surveillance efforts.
“You got to keep punching. You never give up,” Klayman said when asked about the string of defeats he suffered before connecting on Monday.
NSA surveillance efforts have been the target of litigation for years, well before details of the operations of the programs became public and long before Klayman jumped into the legal fray over the issue.
(Also on POLITICO: NSA ruling fallout hits White House)
A lawsuit the American Civil Liberties Union filed on behalf of Amnesty International and others in 2008 made it all the way to the Supreme Court last year, but was thrown out in February in a 5-4 decision that found the plaintiffs lacked adequate proof their communications had been tracked or monitored by the government.
Former NSA contractor Edward Snowden changed that landscape a few months later by leaking a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court document confirming that Verizon was ordered to turn over to the government a huge volume of so-called metadata on calls placed through its network.
That leak, which appeared via the Guardian newspaper of Britain on June 5, sent NSA critics back to court.
On June 11, the ACLU — a Verizon customer — filed a lawsuit in Manhattan on the group’s own behalf.
(Also on POLITICO: NSA ruling wins cheers on Hill)
On July 16, the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed suit in San Francisco on behalf of an agglomeration of groups, including anti-drug and gun rights organizations, as well as Greenpeace and Unitarian church groups.
But the indefatigable Klayman had already won the race to the courthouse. On June 6, just a day after the Guardian report, Klayman filed suit in Washington on his own behalf and on behalf of two clients — Charles and Mary Ann Strange, parents of a Navy cryptologist killed with a SEAL team in a disastrous helicopter crash in Afghanistan in 2011.
The suit led to a Nov. 18 hearing in front of Leon. Some reporters showed up expecting a perfunctory court session peppered with some outlandish claims by the always-colorful Klayman. Indeed, there were plenty of those.
(PHOTOS: NSA spying: 15 great quotes)
Klayman said he and Charles Strange were being targeted by the government because of their claims relating to Strange’s son Michael’s death, which include a complaint that a Muslim imam cursed the dead SEAL team members during a ceremony at Dover Air Force Base.
“My colleagues have received text messages I never sent,” Klayman told the judge. “I think they’re messing with me,” he said, referring to the government.
Klayman implored the judge to rule against the NSA program not only on legal grounds but to avert what the conservative gadfly said was a violent revolution on the verge of breaking out due to the federal government’s unbridled use of power.
“We live in an Orwellian state,” Klayman said, warning that citizens angry about surveillance were about to “rise up.”
(Also on POLITICO: NSA probe: Snowden can still do damage)
If litigation fails, “the only alternative is for people to take matters into their own hands,” he told Leon.
At another point, Klayman said he understood Snowden’s reluctance to return to the United States — the former contractor, he said, was likely to be killed if he came back.
Leon didn’t speak about a revolution in his ruling Monday, but he may have echoed Klayman at one juncture by calling the NSA’s technological capabilities “almost-Orwellian.”
While Klayman’s more provocative comments at the hearing prompted eye-rolling among some in the audience — and certainly differed from the way an ACLU lawyer would have presented the case — the conservative attorney did tick through the legal precedents.
(Also on POLITICO: Krauthammer: Snowden not vindicated)
And both the judge and the Justice Department seemed to take the case seriously, though Leon gave few signs he was mulling a major public blow to the surveillance effort. In fact, the judge spent much of the hearing suggesting he had no authority to step into the case.
Klayman emerged in the 1990s as a kind of conservative legal foil to the Clinton administration, filing a series of lawsuits through his group Judicial Watch over what he deemed corruption. The group’s cases focused on issues like the White House’s receipt of FBI background files on the previous administration’s appointees and the role politics played in selecting participants in trade missions.




Klayman’s legal fusillade often seemed less focused on winning than on making the cases as painful as possible for the administration, usually by seeking broad discovery of administration records and by forcing current and former administration officials to appear in depositions. Clinton aides like Harold Ickes and George Stephanopoulos spent hours in videotaped sessions in front of Klayman, with one involving questions about whether Stephanopoulos used a pen to take notes on set in his subsequent job at ABC News.
Klayman’s techniques were immortalized in the TV drama “The West Wing.” In the show, based on the Clinton White House, a lawyer named Harry Klaypool from a group called Freedom Watch uses a deposition to grill White House officials about drug use.

Text Size

  • -
  • +
  • reset
Klayman signaled Monday that as a result of Leon’s ruling prying inquiries will soon get under way in the NSA case.
“We’re heading to discovery. We’ve got an entree into the NSA,” he said.
In 2003, Klayman split with Judicial Watch. The breakup was acrimonious and, entirely unsurprisingly, wound up in contentious litigation.
After leaving the group, Klayman himself struggled to find traction. In 2004, he ran for the Republican nomination to a U.S. Senate seat in Florida. He came in seventh, with 1 percent of the vote. (Former Housing Secretary Mel Martinez scored the GOP nod with 45 percent of the vote, and ultimately won the seat.)
After the unsuccessful Senate bid, Klayman founded Freedom Watch, adopting the fictional name used by his “West Wing” character.
But he wound up taking run-of-the-mill criminal cases as well as unusual civil ones, like a former Washington Times editorial page editor’s suit against the paper over claims he was coerced to attend Unification Church services.
In 2007, Florida woman Natalia Humm alleged that Klayman took a $25,000 retainer and failed to work on her criminal case. He claimed the complaint was without merit but offered to settle with the woman for $5000. He was slow to pay the money, however, claiming “dire” financial distress caused by the economic downturn — money trouble that he contended forced him to live out of his office at one point.
In 2011, the Florida Supreme Court publicly reprimanded Klayman for his delay in paying the ex-client back. The result, reached via a consent judgment, preserved his law license.
Still, through Freedom Watch, Klayman has filed a series of cases against the Obama administration. One suit filed in 2009 charged that the White House had a “de facto” advisory committee of outsiders on health reform which met in secret in violation of federal law. A judge rejected the administration’s initial effort to have the case thrown out but finally nixed the suit in March of this year.
Klayman filed a similar lawsuit on behalf of Freedom Watchin January, challenging the Obama administration’s outreach in connection with the gun-related policy proposals crafted in the wake of the deadly 2012 shooting spree at a Connecticut elementary school. That suit ran into trouble after government lawyers questioned why it was filed in federal court in central Florida.
Klayman told the court that Freedom Watch had moved its “national headquarters” from Washington, D.C. to Ocala, Fla. However, a Justice Department filing in May said the new headquarters “is evidently a P.O. Box in [a] UPS store” in that city. A judge tossed the case in June, citing “improper venue,” and just last month rejected a request to reinstate the case.
Klayman’s foray into NSA litigation almost encountered a similar fate before its success on Monday. In October, Leon scheduled a scheduling conference in the case on two days notice, prompting Klayman — who said vaguely that he had “preexisting obligations in Los Angeles”— to ask to appear by phone. Leon denied the request.
Klayman then asked for a few days delay, which the judge also denied without comment. The conference went forward on Halloween without Klayman or anyone representing the plaintiffs, but — based on Monday’s ruling — his case apparently didn’t suffer for it.
“This is a fantastic decision,” Klayman said. “Our hats go off to Judge Leon, who did a courageous thing…This wasn’t on behalf of Larry Klayman. This was on behalf of the American people. I feel we’re in a revolutionary state. If the courts step in and start protecting people, hopefully, we can avoid that.”
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story inaccurately described Michael Strange’s Navy work.

Race Card Alert: Al Sharpton Invokes Slavery as a Rationale to Increase Minimum Wage

Race Card Alert: Al Sharpton Invokes Slavery as a Rationale to Increase Minimum Wage

Al-Sharpton
Al Sharpton has been known to say some shocking things in his race baiting for ‘justice’. However, what he said after a meeting on Tuesday with black civil rights leaders and Barack Obama at the White House may just be the most outlandish claim that Sharpton has ever made.

Following the meeting, Sharpton stepped up to the microphone and had his moment in the spotlight. He chose that moment to make the following claim in support of an increase of the minimum wage.
“What must be weighed in any analysis, CBO and others, is that blacks suffer disproportionately from having to do work and not get the kind of wages that we need. This is a central concern in our community. It’s not just having a job; but having wages that are guaranteed to provide for our families. We had full employment in the black community during slavery. We just didn’t have wages. So we don’t want just a job, we want a job that pays, and pays so that we can take care of our families.” 
So, there you have it. Black people should not be expected to better themselves and learn a skill, trade, or in any way further their education in an effort to make a better living for themselves and their family. According to Sharpton, whatever work blacks do, they should get the wage that the need. He draws upon slavery as an example of when blacks had ‘full employment’. They simply weren’t paid, period. Now, because of slavery, blacks should have a job that pays them what they need.
It would be curious to see whether any of the black civil rights leaders brought up the increase in unemployment for blacks that has occurred since Obama took office during their meeting with the president. Under Obama, unemployment among blacks increased from 10.6% under Bush to 12.9%. For black youth, it is far worse with 38% being unemployed compared to 21% of overall youth unemployment. But, when you have the Congressional Black Caucus Chairman Emanuel Cleaver stating that they are giving Obama leeway because he is black, but would have marched on DC by now had these conditions occurred under a white president, we should expect nothing but silence and capitulation.

Justice Group Warns of Obama Plan to Put Government Monitors in Newsrooms

Justice Group Warns of Obama Plan to Put Government Monitors in Newsrooms

US-President-Barack-Obama-looks-through-binoculars-towards-North-Korea-from-Observation-Post-Ouellette-in-South-Korea-772222




(Info Wars) – The American Center for Law and Justice is warning of an Obama administration plan to place government monitors in newsrooms via an FCC proposal that could turn every major news network and newspaper into little more than a state media mouthpiece.
FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai recently lifted the lid on a shocking White House proposal entitled ‘Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs’ that would dispatch researchers from the federal agency “to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run.”
According to Pai, the program is about “pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories.” In other words – the fairness doctrine on steroids.
FAX BLAST SPECIAL: Impeach Obama NOW!
“That’s right, the Obama Administration has developed a formula of what it believes the free press should cover, and it is going to send government monitors into newsrooms across America to stand over the shoulders of the press as they make editorial decisions,” writes the ACLJ’s Matthew Clark, noting that the plan would also extend to newspapers, which the FCC doesn’t even have any business being involved with.
Distrust in mainstream media has been on a steady decline for years, with a recent Gallup poll confirming that just 23 per cent of Americans trust the institution of television news. This lack of confidence has driven ratings down, with MSNBC losing almost half of its viewers over the course of just 12 months, shedding 45 per cent of its audience. CNN also lost 48 per cent of its viewers over the same time period.
The United States’ world ranking in terms of freedom of the press also recently fell to number 46, below the likes of South Africa, Slovenia and Lithuania.
Earlier this month, the New York Times’s own writers told a newspaper that NY Times opinion pieces are now seen as “irrelevant” and have no impact on public discourse whatsoever.
The FCC’s attempt to police newsrooms is a desperate attempt to redress the fact that, as Hillary Clinton admitted, the Obama administration is “losing the information war” to other news sources whose audiences are growing.
However, those alternative news outlets are not growing because of slick propaganda, they are stealing audience share from the mainstream because they at least try to act in an adversarial role to the state rather than being a conduit for its talking points.
“Every major repressive regime of the modern era has begun with an attempt to control and intimidate the press,” warns Clark, adding, “It’s hard to imaging anything more brazenly Orwellian than government monitors in newsrooms.”
http://www.infowars.com/justice-group-warns-of-obama-plan-to-put-government-monitors-in-newsrooms/

U.S. ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul stepping down

U.S. ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul stepping down

The U.S. Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul is shown. | AP Photo
McFaul announced his departure in a blog post on Tuesday. | AP Photo
After two years at the post, U.S. ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul said he plans to step down at the end of the month.
The longtime Stanford University professor had been a part of the president’s Russia team for five years, and will depart just after the Winter Olympics in Sochi wrap up.

Text Size

  • -
  • +
  • reset
McFaul shared news of his departure in a blog post Tuesday morning, citing a need to reunite his family.
“I love my job here,” he wrote. “It has been a tremendous honor to represent my country in Russia, and I made this decision with a heavy heart.”
(Also on POLITICO: McFaul assailed by Russia's Foreign Ministry)
McFaul’s wife, Donna, and two sons went home to California this past summer for his son’s schooling.
“He and his wife decided that after seven months of living on opposite ends of the globe, it is time for the family to be reunited,” the embassy said in a statement.
Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes said in a statement that the president was grateful for McFaul’s service, citing accomplishments with START , negotiations with Iran, and resupplying troops in Afghanistan.
(Also on POLITICO: Olympics worries build)
“From the White House to Spaso House, Mike helped shape policies that advanced America’s interests,” Rhodes said. “Mike has been tireless in advocating for the universal values that America stands for around the world, reaching out to civil society, and recognizing the right of every voice to be heard.”
An avid user of social media, McFaul tweeted about his decision Tuesday:

YES THEY IS A LIGHT I HOPE THIS NASTY ASS WHORE GETS GANGED RAPE LIKE THEY DID TO STEVENS Obama Nominates Oprah As Ambassador to Russia

Obama Nominates Oprah As Ambassador to Russia

Feb 18, 2014
p112013lj-0323President Obama nominated Oprah Winfrey to serve as ambassador to Russia today.
In a written statement, the White House said the veteran broadcaster has been selected to replace Russian policy expert Michael McFaul, who announced last week that he was stepping down after little more than a year on the job.
"Oprah Winfrey is an accomplished businesswoman and a cultural icon," the statement reads. "Although she started with nothing, now this captivating entertainer is worth billions of dollars.
"Achieving her success took an enormous amount of intelligence, tenacity and grit. All of these skills will serve her well representing America’s interests in Moscow as the next U.S. ambassador.
"Since she left The Oprah Winfrey Show in 2011, Ms. Winfrey has been searching for a way to give back to the American people. Using her considerable communications skills to resolve geopolitical conflicts will further cement her legacy as one of America's greatest national treasures."
If confirmed by the Senate, Winfrey will become one of America's highest profile diplomats and the first African-American to serve as ambassador to a major world power. Confirmation hearings are expected to begin next week.
The Obama administration has been under fire in recent weeks for choosing under-qualified campaign donors to represent U.S. diplomatic interests in key countries around the world.
At recent hearings the incoming ambassadors to Argentina and Iceland admitted they had never been to those countries. Meanwhile, America’s next ambassador to Beijing admitted that he’s "not a China expert."
The issue is said to have provoked considerable discord between the State Department, who would prefer career diplomats to serve as ambassadors and the White House, which uses ambassadorships to reward campaign donors for their contributions.
Oprah was one of the biggest donors to Obama's campaign, and even traveled with the president on the campaign trail. While the White House admits that her lack of diplomatic training will be a handicap, they will be sending some extra assistance to compensate.
"We realize that Ms. Winfrey lacks foreign policy experience and will need some help performing her duties in Moscow,” says White House chief of staff Dennis McDonough. "That’s why we’re also sending Montel Williams and Jerry Springer.
"Mr. Springer is an expert in conflict resolution and should really come in handy with regards to Syria and Chechnya . And Mr. Williams is a fantastic spokesman for any product. American foreign policy is proud to receive his endorsement."
In Moscow, reaction to the appointment has been mixed, with some saying the choice of an entertainer is a sign of disrespect. Others, however, greeted the news sarcastically.
"I think she’ll do fine," says Natalya Simonova, a university student. "Everyone in Russia loves black people."

House Chairman: Obama admin ‘OBSTRUCTED’ review of veteran benefit program

House Chairman: Obama admin ‘OBSTRUCTED’ review of veteran benefit program

obamabarack_091613getty




(Daily Caller) – The House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs chairman Rep. Jeff Miller accused the Obama administration of obstructing the work of a veteran group trying to investigate unprocessed veteran benefit claims.
The Obama administration’s Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) blocked American Legion experts from conducting a full review of the VBA office in Seattle late last month, according to a letter Rep. Miller sent to VA Secretary Eric Shinseki obtained by The Daily Caller.
Miller is now mandating that House Veterans Affairs Committee staff accompany the American Legion on future VA review assignments “until further notice.”
FAX BLAST SPECIAL: Impeach Obama NOW!
The obstruction allegedly occurred during one of the American Legion’s Regional Office Action Review (ROAR) visits, a 15-year practice. As The Daily Caller has extensively reported, hundreds of thousands of veteran benefit claims remain backlogged at VA, leaving veterans suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder and other ailments waiting for due payments.
“It was brought to my attention that the Veterans Benefits Administration has newly obstructed the Legion’s ROAR efforts,” Miller wrote. “At a recent site visit to the Seattle Regional Office, it was alleged that Allison A. Hickey, Under Secretary for Benefits, limited the Legion’s ability to fruitfully conduct its visit, converse with claims processing staff, and thoroughly review disability benefits claims in accordance with its long standing practice.”
“Consequently, effective immediately and until further notice, staff of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs will attend and report upon all ROAR visits of The American Legion,” Miller wrote. “The recent actions of the Veterans Benefits Administration are perceived as deliberate and retaliatory, and I caution that any obstruction to external review of VBA’s work product is contrary to both transparency and governmentaccountability; it will not be tolerated under a pretense of workload management.”
“I will continue to monitor this situation,” Miller wrote.
Allison A. Hickey became Under Secretary for Benefits in June 2011 after working for Accenture, the consulting company that now serves as prime contractor for the Obamacare website.
http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/19/house-chairman-obama-administration-obstructed-review-of-veteran-benefit-program/

FOR A MORE COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF THE CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY, PLEASE CLICK HERE.


FOR A MORE COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF THE CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY, PLEASE CLICK HERE.
The Cloward-Piven Strategy
By Richard Poe
DiscoverTheNetworks.org
2005


First proposed in 1966 and named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, the Cloward-Piven Strategy
seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

Inspired by the August 1965 riots in the black district of Watts in Los Angeles (which erupted after police had used batons to subdue an African American man suspected of drunk driving), Cloward and Piven published an article titled "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty" in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation. Following its publication, The Nation sold an unprecedented 30,000 reprints. Activists were abuzz over the so-called "crisis strategy" or "Cloward-Piven Strategy," as it came to be called. Many were eager to put it into effect.

In their 1966 article, Cloward and Piven charged that the ruling classes used welfare to weaken the poor; that by providing a social safety net, the rich doused the fires of rebellion. Poor people can advance only when "the rest of society is afraid of them," Cloward told The New York Times on September 27, 1970. Rather than placating the poor with government hand-outs, wrote Cloward and Piven, activists should work to sabotage and destroy the welfare system; the collapse of the welfare state would ignite a political and financial crisis that would rock the nation; poor people would rise in revolt; only then would "the rest of society" accept their demands.

The key to sparking this rebellion would be to expose the inadequacy of the welfare state.
Cloward-Piven's early promoters cited radical organizer Saul Alinsky as their inspiration. "Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules," Alinsky wrote in his 1971 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system's failure to "live up" to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist "rule book" with a socialist one.

The authors noted that the number of Americans subsisting on welfare -- about 8 million, at the time -- probably represented less than half the number who were technically eligible for full benefits. They proposed a "massive drive to recruit the poor onto the welfare rolls."  Cloward and Piven calculated that persuading even a fraction of potential welfare recipients to demand their entitlements would bankrupt the system. The result, they predicted, would be "a profound financial and political crisis" that would unleash "powerful forces for major economic reform at the national level."

Their article called for "cadres of aggressive organizers" to use "demonstrations to create a climate of militancy." Intimidated by threats of black violence, politicians would appeal to the federal government for help. Carefully orchestrated media campaigns, carried out by friendly, leftwing journalists, would float the idea of "a federal program of income redistribution," in the form of a guaranteed living income for all -- working and non-working people alike. Local officials would clutch at this idea like drowning men to a lifeline. They would apply pressure on Washington to implement it. With every major city erupting into chaos, Washington would have to act.
This was an example of what are commonly called Trojan Horse movements -- mass movements whose outward purpose seems to be providing material help to the downtrodden, but whose real objective is to draft poor people into service as revolutionary foot soldiers; to mobilize poor people en masse to overwhelm government agencies with a flood of demands beyond the capacity of those agencies to meet. The flood of demands was calculated to break the budget, jam the bureaucratic gears into gridlock, and bring the system crashing down. Fear, turmoil, violence and economic collapse would accompany such a breakdown -- providing perfect conditions for fostering radical change. That was the theory.

Cloward and Piven recruited a militant black organizer named George Wiley to lead their new movement. In the summer of 1967, Wiley founded the National Welfare Rights Organization (NWRO). His tactics closely followed the recommendations set out in Cloward and Piven's article. His followers invaded welfare offices across the United States -- often violently -- bullying social workers and loudly demanding every penny to which the law "entitled" them. By 1969, NWRO claimed a dues-paying membership of 22,500 families, with 523 chapters across the nation.

Regarding Wiley's tactics, The New York Times commented on September 27, 1970, "There have been sit-ins in legislative chambers, including a United States Senate committee hearing, mass demonstrations of several thousand welfare recipients, school boycotts, picket lines, mounted police, tear gas, arrests - and, on occasion, rock-throwing, smashed glass doors, overturned desks, scattered papers and ripped-out phones."
These methods proved effective. "The flooding succeeded beyond Wiley's wildest dreams," writes Sol Stern in the City Journal. "From 1965 to 1974, the number of single-parent households on welfare soared from 4.3 million to 10.8 million, despite mostly flush economic times. By the early 1970s, one person was on the welfare rolls in New York City for every two working in the city's private economy." As a direct result of its massive welfare spending, New York City was forced to declare bankruptcy in 1975. The entire state of New York nearly went down with it. The Cloward-Piven strategy had proved its effectiveness.  The Cloward-Piven strategy depended on surprise. Once society recovered from the initial shock, the backlash began. New York's welfare crisis horrified America, giving rise to a reform movement which culminated in "the end of welfare as we know it" -- the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, which imposed time limits on federal welfare, along with strict eligibility and work requirements. Both Cloward and Piven attended the White House signing of the bill as guests of President Clinton.

Most Americans to this day have never heard of Cloward and Piven. But New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani attempted to expose them in the late 1990s. As his drive for welfare reform gained momentum, Giuliani accused the militant scholars by name, citing their 1966 manifesto as evidence that they had engaged in deliberate economic sabotage. "This wasn't an accident," Giuliani charged in a 1997 speech. "It wasn't an atmospheric thing, it wasn't supernatural. This is the result of policies and programs designed to have the maximum number of people get on welfare."

Cloward and Piven never again revealed their intentions as candidly as they had in their 1966 article. Even so, their activism in subsequent years continued to rely on the tactic of overloading the system. When the public caught on to their welfare scheme, Cloward and Piven simply moved on, applying pressure to other sectors of the bureaucracy, wherever they detected weakness.
In 1982, partisans of the Cloward-Piven strategy founded a new "voting rights movement," which purported to take up the unfinished work of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Like ACORN, the organization that spear-headed this campaign, the new "voting rights" movement was led by veterans of George Wiley's welfare rights crusade. Its flagship organizations were Project Vote and Human SERVE, both founded in 1982. Project Vote is an ACORN front group, launched by former NWRO organizer and ACORN co-founder Zach Polett. Human SERVE was founded by Richard A. Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, along with a former NWRO organizer named Hulbert James.

All three of these organizations -- ACORN, Project Vote and Human SERVE -- set to work lobbying energetically for the so-called Motor-Voter law, which Bill Clinton ultimately signed in 1993. The Motor-Voter bill is largely responsible for swamping the voter rolls with "dead  wood" -- invalid registrations signed in the name of deceased, ineligible or non-existent people -- thus opening the door to the unprecedented  levels of voter fraud and "voter disenfranchisement" claims that followed in subsequent elections.

The new "voting rights" coalition combines mass voter registration drives -- typically featuring high levels of fraud -- with systematic intimidation of election officials in the form of frivolous lawsuits, unfounded charges of "racism" and "disenfranchisement," and "direct action" (street protests, violent or otherwise). Just as they swamped America's welfare offices in the 1960s, Cloward-Piven devotees now seek to overwhelm the nation's understaffed and poorly policed electoral system. Their tactics set the stage for the Florida recount crisis of 2000, and have introduced a level of fear, tension and foreboding to U.S. elections heretofore encountered mainly in Third World countries. 
Both the Living Wage and Voting Rights movements depend heavily on financial support from George Soros's Open Society Institute and his Shadow Party, through whose support the Cloward-Piven strategy continues to provide a blueprint for some of the Left's most ambitious campaigns.

FOR A MORE COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF THE CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY, PLEASE CLICK HERE

Glenn Beck Is Done With America: 'I'm Really Considering Burning The Flag'

Glenn Beck Is Done With America: 'I'm Really Considering Burning The Flag'

Whatever America once was and once stood for and once represented, Glenn Beck said on his radio program today, that it is all over ... and he really doesn't even care anymore if they just burn Washington, DC and all of its monuments to the ground.
"I will tell you this," he bellowed, "the country, the institution, what that flag, those buildings that the flag flies over, what the flag is becoming, what it means to the rest of the world, I DON'T KNOW! I don't care!"
No matter what happens though, Beck proclaimed that he was never going to change and would give his life in defense of the Constitution, if necessary.
"Shoot me in the head if you have to," he said, "you're not changing me."
Saying that he despises them, by which he means progressives who are responsible for everything that is wrong in the world, Beck said he is working on becoming entirely indifferent to them, so much so that "I don't really care" if they were to burn down the entire city of Washington, DC and the Capitol Building and the White House and all the monuments.
"I don't care," he shrugged. "I don't care. I'm not about the buildings, I'm not about the flag, I'll burn the flag every day. In fact, I'm really considering burning the flag. I may do a show really super soon where I burn the flag. And if you don't like it, then maybe you should figure out what the flag means."
While he vowed to defend the Constitution to his last breath, Beck said "I'll burn the flag every day of the week":

House of Cards’ Star Decides ‘D.C. Is More Corrupt Than Hollywood’ After ‘Senior’ Obama Official Told Her This

House of Cards’ Star Decides ‘D.C. Is More Corrupt Than Hollywood’ After ‘Senior’ Obama Official Told Her This

Actress Robin Wright, who plays Claire Underwood on the hit Netflix production “House of Cards,” proclaimed in a recent Q&A with Capitol File magazine that “D.C. is more corrupt than Hollywood.”
The February issue of Capitol File. (Photo by Andrew Eccles.)
The February issue of Capitol File. (Photo by Andrew Eccles.)
One of the details that caused her to arrive at such a conclusion reportedly came from a “senior person” in the Obama administration, who told her that — like on the show — reporters really do sleep with their D.C. sources.
That apparently wasn’t all she learned while researching what goes on in Washington, D.C., while researching her role as a powerful politician’s wife. She just didn’t reveal everything she was told.
“D.C. is more corrupt than Hollywood. It really is. It’s more sleazy than Hollywood… how much infidelity goes on,” Wright said.
The entire second season of “House of Cards” was released exclusively on Netflix last week and has received very positive reviews.
Featured image via Jordan Strauss/Invision/AP

Nukes Transferred And Top Nuclear Commanders Fired

Nukes Transferred And Top Nuclear Commanders Fired

October 12, 2013, by Ken Jorgustin

top-nuclear-commanders-fired
This is unprecedented. When I first read of the firing of Navy Vice Admiral Tim Giardina (Second-in-command of the country’s nuclear arsenal), I wondered what was ‘really’ going on. But now, just 2 days later, Major General Michael Carey (in charge of all U.S. Air Force nuclear missiles) has also been fired.
Two of our top nuclear commanders have just been fired.
Does this ring any of your alarm bells?


On Wednesday, OCT-9, the second-in-charge at U.S. Strategic Command, was fired.
Strategic Command oversees the military’s nuclear fighter units, including the Navy’s nuclear-armed submarines and the Air Force’s nuclear bombers and nuclear land-based missiles. It is based at Omaha, Neb.
On Friday, OCT-11, the Air Force fired the general in charge of its nuclear missiles.
The command of the 20th Air Force, is responsible for three wings of intercontinental ballistic missiles — a total of 450 missiles at three bases across the country.

“Two senior defense officials with knowledge of the allegations…spoke only on condition of anonymity…told the AP that (the allegations) are at least partly related to alcohol use.”
While the suspension and firings were evidently not intended to become known to the public, the cover story being used for the firings are alleged gambling and alcohol use according to the Associated Press and subsequent reports from the Washington Post, the Daily Mail, and others.

COINCIDENCE?
The initial suspension of Vice Admiral Giardina occurred on SEP-3 according to a SEP-28 report from the Daily Mail.
Curiously and alarmingly, reports have leaked out of an apparent secret nuclear weapons transfer which allegedly occurred on SEP-3.
“A high level source inside the military has now confirmed to us that Dyess Air Force base is actively moving nuclear warheads to the East Coast of the United States in a secret transfer…” reported by Anthony Gucciardi, a writer, analyst, who recently contributed the report to infowars.com.
According to the high level military source, who has a strong record of continually being proven correct in deep military activity, the Dyess Air Force Commander authorized unknown parties to transfer the nuclear warheads to an unknown location that has been reported to be South Carolina, where the warheads will then be picked up and potentially utilized.
-infowars.com

Also on SEP-3, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said in response to blocking Iran from developing nuclear weapons, “…those nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists could result in a bomb coming to Charleston Harbor,” according to a report from CBS-Charlotte.
COINCIDENCE?


Who did the firing?
Gen. James Kowalski, commander of Air Force Global Strike Command.
Who is the replacement?
Kowalski selected the vice commander of Air Force Global Strike Command, Maj. Gen. Jack Weinstein to replace Major General Michael Carey.


There are LOTS of questions surrounding this unprecedented situation, including,
Is Weinstein now their ‘yes’ man?
Was a false flag event averted?
Is there a terrible false flag event in the works?
Were Vice Admiral Giardina and Major General Carey not playing ball?
Given that the administration has also fired many other generals lately, are they paranoid/concerned of some sort of military coup? Or are they cleaning house to fill with yes-men?
Some say that there is no such thing as coincidence. With all that occurred on SEP-3, what did (does) it really mean?
Are you prepared for a nuclear false-flag event?