Saturday, August 17, 2013

Verizon Rewarded for Records Release With $10 Billion Government Contract

Print Version
Source: The New American
Verizon Rewarded for Records Release With $10 Billion Government Contract
Verizon’s willingness to give the federal government unfettered access to its customers’ phone records is paying off handsomely for the telecommunications giant.
Verizon announced on August 16:
The U.S. Department of the Interior has selected Verizon to participate in a $10 billion, 10-year contract to provide cloud and hosting services. This is potentially one of Verizon's largest federal cloud contracts to date.
Verizon is one of 10 companies that will compete to offer cloud-based storage, secure file transfer, virtual machine, and database, Web, and development and test environment hosting services. The company is also one of four selected to offer SAP application hosting services.
Each of the 10 agreements awarded under the Foundation Cloud Hosting Services contract has a potential maximum value of $1 billion.
Put simply, not only has Verizon not suffered a loss of customers since revelations of its collusion with the National Security Agency’s dragnet surveillance of millions of Americans’ phone records, but now the company is being paid billions for its cooperation.
The press release issued by Verizon boasts of its buddy-buddy relationship with departments of the federal government.
"Verizon has a history of successfully providing advanced networking and security solutions to the Department of the Interior," said Susan Zeleniak, senior vice president, public sector markets, Verizon Enterprise Solutions. "The Foundation Cloud Hosting Services contract represents an expansion of Verizon's engagement with the department and will enable it to leverage Verizon's significant cloud investments and expertise to help the department achieve its long-term objectives."
Verizon's participation in the construction of the Panopticon is well known.
According to a court order labeled "TOP SECRET," federal judge Roger Vinson ordered Verizon to turn over the phone records of millions of its U.S. customers to the National Security Agency (NSA).
The order, issued in April by the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and leaked on the Internet by the Guardian (U.K.), compels Verizon to provide these records on an “ongoing daily basis” to hand over to the domestic spy agency “an electronic copy” of “all call detail records created by Verizon for communications (i) between the United States and abroad; or (ii) wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls.”
This information includes the phone numbers involved, the electronic identity of the device, the calling card numbers (if any) used in making the calls, and the time and duration of the call.
In other words, if you are a Verizon customer, your detailed phone records secretly have been handed over — and will continue to be handed over — to NSA agents.
This wholesale dragnet of personal electronic communication data proves beyond dispute that the Obama administration is keeping millions of Americans under constant surveillance regardless of whether the targets are suspected of committing crimes.
In other words, millions of innocent Americans have had their call records shared with a federal spy agency in open and hostile defiance of the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee of “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,” and “no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
What is reasonable? Legally speaking, “the term reasonable is a generic and relative one and applies to that which is appropriate for a particular situation.”
Even if the reasonableness threshold is crossed, though, there must be a warrant and suspicion of commission or intent to commit a crime. Neither the NSA nor Verizon has asserted that even one of the millions whose phone records were seized fits that description.
Again, the government has made no attempt to demonstrate that any of those whose phone records have been seized are suspected of committing some crime. It is a plain and simple violation of the Fourth Amendment in the hope of finding something that one day might be found to qualify as suspicious. That is putting the cart of culpability before the horse of the Constitution, and it should not be abided by the American people.
How far are the citizens of this Republic willing to let the federal surveillance apparatus go toward constructing a Panopticon? At this accelerated rate of construction, how long until every call, every text, every e-mail, every online message, and every movement fall under the all-seeing eye of federal overlords?
When contacted by The New American, a spokesman for Verizon declined to comment on his company’s compliance with the order.
Such a demur is expected in light of the provision of the order which prohibits Verizon, the FBI, or the NSA from revealing to the public — including the Verizon customers whose phone records now belong to the Obama administration — that the data is being given to the government.
Glen Greenwald of the Guardian (U.K.) details the data being seized by the NSA:
The information is classed as "metadata", or transactional information, rather than communications, and so does not require individual warrants to access. The document also specifies that such "metadata" is not limited to the aforementioned items. A 2005 court ruling judged that cell site location data — the nearest cell tower a phone was connected to — was also transactional data, and so could potentially fall under the scope of the order.
While the order itself does not include either the contents of messages or the personal information of the subscriber of any particular cell number, its collection would allow the NSA to build easily a comprehensive picture of who any individual contacted, how and when, and possibly from where, retrospectively.
Greenwald’s accurate analysis raises a couple of very important questions.
First, why would agents of the federal government willingly violate the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution by seizing phone logs of millions of innocent Americans?
As quoted by Greenwald, the Cato Institute’s Julian Sanchez remarked, “We've certainly seen the government increasingly strain the bounds of 'relevance' to collect large numbers of records at once — everyone at one or two degrees of separation from a target — but vacuuming all metadata up indiscriminately would be an extraordinary repudiation of any pretence [sic] of constraint or particularized suspicion.”
Can anyone doubt that?
Readers should recall that as required by provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments of 2008 (FISA) and the Patriot Act (as amended in 2005), the Department of Justice revealed to Congress in April the number of applications for eavesdropping received and rejected by the FISA court.
To no one’s surprise (least of all to the architects and builders of the already sprawling surveillance state), the letter addressed to Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev.) reports that in 2012, of the 1,789 requests made by the government to monitor the electronic communications of citizens, not a single one was rejected.
That’s right. The court, established specifically to judge the merits of applications by the government to spy on citizens, gave a green light to every government request for surveillance.
Not content to be a mere formality for electronic surveillance, the FISA court (officially called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court) also held the coats of the FBI while that agency carried out the searches and seizures set out in 212 applications.
Perhaps the most disturbing take-away from the leak of this secret court document ordering Verizon to hand over customer call logs and other data to a federal surveillance agency is the fact that the government considers the protections of the Fourth Amendment to be nothing more than a "parchment barrier" that is easily torn through. The Obama administration regards the Constitution — as did the Bush administration before it — as advisory at best.
Far from running scared from repercussions from its betrayal of customers’ privacy and constitutional protections of the right of people to be free from unwarranted searches and seizures, Verizon's August 16 statement demonstrates the sort of brazen boasts that are the prerogative of those under the protections of government.
Posted by at No comments:

This Really is Big Brother: The Leak Nobody's Noticed

This McClatchy piece (written by some of the same people who got the Iraq war run-up story so right while everyone else got it wrong) is as chilling to me as anything we've heard over the past few weeks about the NSA spying. In fact, it may be worse:


Even before a former U.S. intelligence contractor exposed the secret collection of Americans’ phone records, the Obama administration was pressing a government-wide crackdown on security threats that requires federal employees to keep closer tabs on their co-workers and exhorts managers to punish those who fail to report their suspicions.
President Barack Obama’s unprecedented initiative, known as the Insider Threat Program, is sweeping in its reach. It has received scant public attention even though it extends beyond the U.S. national security bureaucracies to most federal departments and agencies nationwide, including the Peace Corps, the Social Security Administration and the Education and Agriculture departments. It emphasizes leaks of classified material, but catchall definitions of “insider threat” give agencies latitude to pursue and penalize a range of other conduct.
Government documents reviewed by McClatchy illustrate how some agencies are using that latitude to pursue unauthorized disclosures of any information, not just classified material. They also show how millions of federal employees and contractors must watch for “high-risk persons or behaviors” among co-workers and could face penalties, including criminal charges, for failing to report them. Leaks to the media are equated with espionage.
“Hammer this fact home . . . leaking is tantamount to aiding the enemies of the United States,” says a June 1, 2012, Defense Department strategy for the program that was obtained by McClatchy.

When the free free press, explicitly protected in the bill of rights becomes equivalent to an "enemy of the United States" something very, very bad is happening.
The administration says it's doing this to protect national security and that it is willing to protect those who blow the whistle on waste, fraud and abuse. But that is not how the effect of this sort of program is going to be felt. After all, it's being implemented across the federal government, not just in national security:
The program could make it easier for the government to stifle the flow of unclassified and potentially vital information to the public, while creating toxic work environments poisoned by unfounded suspicions and spurious investigations of loyal Americans, according to these current and former officials and experts. Some non-intelligence agencies already are urging employees to watch their co-workers for “indicators” that include stress, divorce and financial problems.

“It was just a matter of time before the Department of Agriculture or the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) started implementing, ‘Hey, let’s get people to snitch on their friends.’ The only thing they haven’t done here is reward it,” said Kel McClanahan, a Washington lawyer who specializes in national security law. “I’m waiting for the time when you turn in a friend and you get a $50 reward.”
The Defense Department anti-leak strategy obtained by McClatchy spells out a zero-tolerance policy. Security managers, it says, “must” reprimand or revoke the security clearances – a career-killing penalty – of workers who commit a single severe infraction or multiple lesser breaches “as an unavoidable negative personnel action.”
Employees must turn themselves and others in for failing to report breaches. “Penalize clearly identifiable failures to report security infractions and violations, including any lack of self-reporting,” the strategic plan says.
The Obama administration already was pursuing an unprecedented number of leak prosecutions, and some in Congress – long one of the most prolific spillers of secrets – favor tightening restrictions on reporters’ access to federal agencies, making many U.S. officials reluctant to even disclose unclassified matters to the public.
The policy, which partly relies on behavior profiles, also could discourage creative thinking and fuel conformist “group think” of the kind that was blamed for the CIA’s erroneous assessment that Iraq was hiding weapons of mass destruction, a judgment that underpinned the 2003 U.S. invasion.
I don't know about you, but that does not sound like freedom. In fact, it sounds like something else entirely to me.
This government paranoia and informant culture is about as corrosive to the idea of freedom as it gets. The workplace is already rife with petty jealousies, and singular ambition--- it's a human organization after all. Adding in this sort of incentive structure is pretty much setting up a system for intimidation and abuse.
And, as with all informant systems, especially ones that "profile" for certain behaviors deemed to be a threat to the state, only the most conformist will thrive. It's a recipe for disaster if one is looking for any kind of dynamic, creative thinking. Clearly, that is the last these creepy bureaucrats want.
This is the direct result of a culture of secrecy that seems to be pervading the federal government under president Obama.  He is not the first president to expand the national security state , nor is he responsible for the bipartisan consensus on national security or the ongoing influence of the Military Industrial Complex.This, however, is different. And he should be individually held to account for this policy.:
Administration officials say the program could help ensure that agencies catch a wide array of threats, especially if employees are properly trained in recognizing behavior that identifies potential security risks.
“If this is done correctly, an organization can get to a person who is having personal issues or problems that if not addressed by a variety of social means may lead that individual to violence, theft or espionage before it even gets to that point,” said a senior Pentagon official, who requested anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to discuss the issue publicly.
[...]
“If the folks who are watching within an organization for that insider threat – the lawyers, security officials and psychologists – can figure out that an individual is having money problems or decreased work performance and that person may be starting to come into the window of being an insider threat, superiors can then approach them and try to remove that stress before they become a threat to the organization,” the Pentagon official said.
The program, however, gives agencies such wide latitude in crafting their responses to insider threats that someone deemed a risk in one agency could be characterized as harmless in another. Even inside an agency, one manager’s disgruntled employee might become another’s threat to national security.
Obama in November approved “minimum standards” giving departments and agencies considerable leeway in developing their insider threat programs, leading to a potential hodgepodge of interpretations. He instructed them to not only root out leakers but people who might be prone to “violent acts against the government or the nation” and “potential espionage.”
The Pentagon established its own sweeping definition of an insider threat as an employee with a clearance who “wittingly or unwittingly” harms “national security interests” through “unauthorized disclosure, data modification, espionage, terrorism, or kinetic actions resulting in loss or degradation of resources or capabilities.”
“An argument can be made that the rape of military personnel represents an insider threat. Nobody has a model of what this insider threat stuff is supposed to look like,” said the senior Pentagon official, explaining that inside the Defense Department “there are a lot of chiefs with their own agendas but no leadership.”
The Department of Education, meanwhile, informs employees that co-workers going through “certain life experiences . . . might turn a trusted user into an insider threat.” Those experiences, the department says in a computer training manual, include “stress, divorce, financial problems” or “frustrations with co-workers or the organization.”
An online tutorial titled “Treason 101” teaches Department of Agriculture and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration employees to recognize the psychological profile of spies.

A Defense Security Service online pamphlet lists a wide range of “reportable” suspicious behaviors, including working outside of normal duty hours. While conceding that not every behavior “represents a spy in our midst,” the pamphlet adds that “every situation needs to be examined to determine whether our nation’s secrets are at risk.”
The Defense Department, traditionally a leading source of media leaks, is still setting up its program, but it has taken numerous steps. They include creating a unit that reviews news reports every day for leaks of classified defense information and implementing new training courses to teach employees how to recognize security risks, including “high-risk” and “disruptive” behaviors among co-workers, according to Defense Department documents reviewed by McClatchy.
“It’s about people’s profiles, their approach to work, how they interact with management. Are they cheery? Are they looking at Salon.com or The Onion during their lunch break? This is about ‘The Stepford Wives,’” said a second senior Pentagon official, referring to online publications and a 1975 movie about robotically docile housewives. The official said he wanted to remain anonymous to avoid being punished for criticizing the program.
The emphasis on certain behaviors reminded Greenstein of her employee orientation with the CIA, when she was told to be suspicious of unhappy co-workers.
“If someone was having a bad day, the message was watch out for them,” she said.
Some federal agencies also are using the effort to protect a broader range of information. The Army orders its personnel to report unauthorized disclosures of unclassified information, including details concerning military facilities, activities and personnel.
The Peace Corps, which is in the midst of implementing its program, “takes very seriously the obligation to protect sensitive information,” said an email from a Peace Corps official who insisted on anonymity but gave no reason for doing so.
Granting wide discretion is dangerous, some experts and officials warned, when federal agencies are already prone to overreach in their efforts to control information flow.
The Bush administration allegedly tried to silence two former government climate change experts from speaking publicly on the dangers of global warming. More recently, the FDA justified the monitoring of the personal email of its scientists and doctors as a way to detect leaks of unclassified information.
Posted by at No comments:

Obama’s crackdown views leaks as aiding enemies of U.S.

WASHINGTON — Even before a former U.S. intelligence contractor exposed the secret collection of Americans’ phone records, the Obama administration was pressing a government-wide crackdown on security threats that requires federal employees to keep closer tabs on their co-workers and exhorts managers to punish those who fail to report their suspicions.
President Barack Obama’s unprecedented initiative, known as the Insider Threat Program, is sweeping in its reach. It has received scant public attention even though it extends beyond the U.S. national security bureaucracies to most federal departments and agencies nationwide, including the Peace Corps, the Social Security Administration and the Education and Agriculture departments. It emphasizes leaks of classified material, but catchall definitions of “insider threat” give agencies latitude to pursue and penalize a range of other conduct.
Government documents reviewed by McClatchy illustrate how some agencies are using that latitude to pursue unauthorized disclosures of any information, not just classified material. They also show how millions of federal employees and contractors must watch for “high-risk persons or behaviors” among co-workers and could face penalties, including criminal charges, for failing to report them. Leaks to the media are equated with espionage.
“Hammer this fact home . . . leaking is tantamount to aiding the enemies of the United States,” says a June 1, 2012, Defense Department strategy for the program that was obtained by McClatchy.
The Obama administration is expected to hasten the program’s implementation as the government grapples with the fallout from the leaks of top secret documents by Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor who revealed the agency’s secret telephone data collection program. The case is only the latest in a series of what the government condemns as betrayals by “trusted insiders” who have harmed national security.
“Leaks related to national security can put people at risk,” Obama said on May 16 in defending criminal investigations into leaks. “They can put men and women in uniform that I’ve sent into the battlefield at risk. They can put some of our intelligence officers, who are in various, dangerous situations that are easily compromised, at risk. . . . So I make no apologies, and I don’t think the American people would expect me as commander in chief not to be concerned about information that might compromise their missions or might get them killed.”
As part of the initiative, Obama ordered greater protection for whistleblowers who use the proper internal channels to report official waste, fraud and abuse, but that’s hardly comforting to some national security experts and current and former U.S. officials. They worry that the Insider Threat Program won’t just discourage whistleblowing but will have other grave consequences for the public’s right to know and national security.
The program could make it easier for the government to stifle the flow of unclassified and potentially vital information to the public, while creating toxic work environments poisoned by unfounded suspicions and spurious investigations of loyal Americans, according to these current and former officials and experts. Some non-intelligence agencies already are urging employees to watch their co-workers for “indicators” that include stress, divorce and financial problems.
“It was just a matter of time before the Department of Agriculture or the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) started implementing, ‘Hey, let’s get people to snitch on their friends.’ The only thing they haven’t done here is reward it,” said Kel McClanahan, a Washington lawyer who specializes in national security law. “I’m waiting for the time when you turn in a friend and you get a $50 reward.”
The Defense Department anti-leak strategy obtained by McClatchy spells out a zero-tolerance policy. Security managers, it says, “must” reprimand or revoke the security clearances – a career-killing penalty – of workers who commit a single severe infraction or multiple lesser breaches “as an unavoidable negative personnel action.”
Employees must turn themselves and others in for failing to report breaches. “Penalize clearly identifiable failures to report security infractions and violations, including any lack of self-reporting,” the strategic plan says.
The Obama administration already was pursuing an unprecedented number of leak prosecutions, and some in Congress – long one of the most prolific spillers of secrets – favor tightening restrictions on reporters’ access to federal agencies, making many U.S. officials reluctant to even disclose unclassified matters to the public.
The policy, which partly relies on behavior profiles, also could discourage creative thinking and fuel conformist “group think” of the kind that was blamed for the CIA’s erroneous assessment that Iraq was hiding weapons of mass destruction, a judgment that underpinned the 2003 U.S. invasion.
“The real danger is that you get a bland common denominator working in the government,” warned Ilana Greenstein, a former CIA case officer who says she quit the agency after being falsely accused of being a security risk. “You don’t get people speaking up when there’s wrongdoing. You don’t get people who look at things in a different way and who are willing to stand up for things. What you get are people who toe the party line, and that’s really dangerous for national security.”
Obama launched the Insider Threat Program in October 2011 after Army Pfc. Bradley Manning downloaded hundreds of thousands of documents from a classified computer network and sent them to WikiLeaks, the anti-government secrecy group. It also followed the 2009 killing of 13 people at Fort Hood, Texas, by Army Maj. Nidal Hasan, an attack that federal authorities failed to prevent even though they were monitoring his emails to an al Qaida-linked Islamic cleric.
An internal review launched after Manning’s leaks found “wide disparities” in the abilities of U.S. intelligence agencies to detect security risks and determined that all needed improved defenses.
Obama’s executive order formalizes broad practices that the intelligence agencies have followed for years to detect security threats and extends them to agencies that aren’t involved in national security policy but can access classified networks. Across the government, new policies are being developed.
There are, however, signs of problems with the program. Even though it severely restricts the use of removable storage devices on classified networks, Snowden, the former NSA contractor who revealed the agency’s telephone data collection operations, used a thumb drive to acquire the documents he leaked to two newspapers.
“Nothing that’s been done in the past two years stopped Snowden, and so that fact alone casts a shadow over this whole endeavor,” said Steven Aftergood, director of the non-profit Federation of American Scientists’ Project on Government Secrecy. “Whatever they’ve done is apparently inadequate.”
U.S. history is replete with cases in which federal agencies missed signs that trusted officials and military officers were stealing secrets. The CIA, for example, failed for some time to uncover Aldrich Ames, a senior officer who was one of the most prolific Soviet spies in U.S. history, despite polygraphs, drunkenness, and sudden and unexplained wealth.
Stopping a spy or a leaker has become even more difficult as the government continues to accumulate information in vast computer databases and has increased the number of people granted access to classified material to nearly 5 million.
Administration officials say the program could help ensure that agencies catch a wide array of threats, especially if employees are properly trained in recognizing behavior that identifies potential security risks.
“If this is done correctly, an organization can get to a person who is having personal issues or problems that if not addressed by a variety of social means may lead that individual to violence, theft or espionage before it even gets to that point,” said a senior Pentagon official, who requested anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to discuss the issue publicly.
Manning, for instance, reportedly was reprimanded for posting YouTube messages describing the interior of a classified intelligence facility where he worked. He also exhibited behavior that could have forewarned his superiors that he posed a security risk, officials said.
Jonathan Pollard, a former U.S. Navy intelligence analyst sentenced in 1987 to life in prison for spying for Israel, wasn’t investigated even though he’d failed polygraph tests and lied to his supervisors. He was caught only after a co-worker saw him leave a top-secret facility with classified documents.
“If the folks who are watching within an organization for that insider threat – the lawyers, security officials and psychologists – can figure out that an individual is having money problems or decreased work performance and that person may be starting to come into the window of being an insider threat, superiors can then approach them and try to remove that stress before they become a threat to the organization,” the Pentagon official said.
The program, however, gives agencies such wide latitude in crafting their responses to insider threats that someone deemed a risk in one agency could be characterized as harmless in another. Even inside an agency, one manager’s disgruntled employee might become another’s threat to national security.
Obama in November approved “minimum standards” giving departments and agencies considerable leeway in developing their insider threat programs, leading to a potential hodgepodge of interpretations. He instructed them to not only root out leakers but people who might be prone to “violent acts against the government or the nation” and “potential espionage.”
The Pentagon established its own sweeping definition of an insider threat as an employee with a clearance who “wittingly or unwittingly” harms “national security interests” through “unauthorized disclosure, data modification, espionage, terrorism, or kinetic actions resulting in loss or degradation of resources or capabilities.”
“An argument can be made that the rape of military personnel represents an insider threat. Nobody has a model of what this insider threat stuff is supposed to look like,” said the senior Pentagon official, explaining that inside the Defense Department “there are a lot of chiefs with their own agendas but no leadership.”
The Department of Education, meanwhile, informs employees that co-workers going through “certain life experiences . . . might turn a trusted user into an insider threat.” Those experiences, the department says in a computer training manual, include “stress, divorce, financial problems” or “frustrations with co-workers or the organization.”
An online tutorial titled “Treason 101” teaches Department of Agriculture and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration employees to recognize the psychological profile of spies.
A Defense Security Service online pamphlet lists a wide range of “reportable” suspicious behaviors, including working outside of normal duty hours. While conceding that not every behavior “represents a spy in our midst,” the pamphlet adds that “every situation needs to be examined to determine whether our nation’s secrets are at risk.”
The Defense Department, traditionally a leading source of media leaks, is still setting up its program, but it has taken numerous steps. They include creating a unit that reviews news reports every day for leaks of classified defense information and implementing new training courses to teach employees how to recognize security risks, including “high-risk” and “disruptive” behaviors among co-workers, according to Defense Department documents reviewed by McClatchy.
“It’s about people’s profiles, their approach to work, how they interact with management. Are they cheery? Are they looking at Salon.com or The Onion during their lunch break? This is about ‘The Stepford Wives,’” said a second senior Pentagon official, referring to online publications and a 1975 movie about robotically docile housewives. The official said he wanted to remain anonymous to avoid being punished for criticizing the program.
The emphasis on certain behaviors reminded Greenstein of her employee orientation with the CIA, when she was told to be suspicious of unhappy co-workers.
“If someone was having a bad day, the message was watch out for them,” she said.
Some federal agencies also are using the effort to protect a broader range of information. The Army orders its personnel to report unauthorized disclosures of unclassified information, including details concerning military facilities, activities and personnel.
The Peace Corps, which is in the midst of implementing its program, “takes very seriously the obligation to protect sensitive information,” said an email from a Peace Corps official who insisted on anonymity but gave no reason for doing so.
Granting wide discretion is dangerous, some experts and officials warned, when federal agencies are already prone to overreach in their efforts to control information flow.
The Bush administration allegedly tried to silence two former government climate change experts from speaking publicly on the dangers of global warming. More recently, the FDA justified the monitoring of the personal email of its scientists and doctors as a way to detect leaks of unclassified information.
But R. Scott Oswald, a Washington attorney of the Employment Law Group, called the Obama administration “a friend to whistleblowers,” saying it draws a distinction between legitimate whistleblowers who use internal systems to complain of wrongdoing vs. leakers, who illegally make classified information public.
There are numerous cases, however, of government workers who say they’ve been forced to go public because they’ve suffered retaliation after trying to complain about waste, fraud and abuse through internal channels or to Congress. Thomas Drake, a former senior NSA official, was indicted in 2010 under the Espionage Act after he disclosed millions of dollars in waste to a journalist. He’d tried for years to alert his superiors and Congress. The administration eventually dropped the charges against him.
The Pentagon, meanwhile, declined to answer how its insider threat program would accommodate a leak to the news media like the Pentagon Papers, a top-secret history of U.S. involvement in Vietnam that showed how successive administrations had misled the public and Congress on the war.
“The danger is that supervisors and managers will use the profiles for ‘Disgruntled Employees’ and ‘Insider Threats’ to go after legitimate whistleblowers,” said the second Pentagon official. “The executive order says you can’t offend the whistleblower laws. But all of the whistleblower laws are about retaliation. That doesn’t mean you can’t profile them before they’re retaliated against.”
Greenstein said she become the target of scrutiny from security officials after she began raising allegations of mismanagement in the CIA’s operations in Baghdad. But she never leaked her complaints, which included an allegation that her security chief deleted details about safety risks from cables. Instead, she relied on the agency’s internal process to make the allegations.
The CIA, however, tried to get the Justice Department to open a criminal case after Greenstein mentioned during a polygraph test that she was writing a book, which is permitted inside the agency as long as it goes through pre-publication review. The CIA then demanded to see her personal computers. When she got them back months later, all that she’d written had been deleted, Greenstein said.
“They clearly perceived me as an insider threat,” said Greenstein, who has since rewritten the book and has received CIA permission to publish portions of it. “By saying ‘I have a problem with this place and I want to make it better,’ I was instantly turned into a security threat,” she said. The CIA declined to comment.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/06/20/194513/obamas-crackdown-views-leaks-as.html#storylink=cpy
Posted by at No comments:

166 Articles of Impeachment against Obama



166 Articles of Impeachment against Obama

Filed under Barack Obama 684 comments
Share on delicious Share on stumbleupon Share on email Share on print Share on raiseyourvoice Act Now!     2.6K
By PETER PATON

Resolved, That Barak Hussein Obama, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:

There is a growing groundswell within American Republican and Tea Party ranks that impeachment proceedings should be initiated against President Obama on a whole list of violations of the Constitution and the War Powers Act
Congressmen Allen West of Florida (R-Florida) and Darrell Issa (R- California) have consistently and loudly criticized the president for overstepping the political mark and bypassing Congress’s approval on a whole range of dubious policies and issues:and the recent Obama attack on the Supreme Court of Justice and the Russian ” Open Mic ” gaffe on National Security, leads to one question: Is Barack Obama making his own case for impeachment? Obama did not become the Democratic nominee for President without the help of several leaders of the Democratic Party who knew that he was not eligible for office
Listed below are the One Hundred and Sixty Six  Articles of Impeachment.
1. Appointment of a “shadow government” of some 35+ individuals termed “czars” who are not confirmed by the Senate and respond only to the president, yet have overarching regulatory powers – a clear violation of the separation of powers concept. Obama bypassed the Senate with many of his appointments of over 35 “czars.”
2. No congressional support for Libyan action (violation of the War Powers Act ). Obama lied to the American people when he said that there were no US troops on the ground in Libya and then later said they were only “logistical troops.” Obama violated the War Powers Act of 1973 by conducting a war against Libya without Congressional authorization.
3. Betraying of allies ( Israel and Great Britain. Obama has placed the security of our most trusted ally in the Middle East, Israel, in danger while increasing funding to the Palestinian Authority (Fatah, just another Islamic terrorist group) whilst they have enjoined a reconciliation pact with long-standing terrorist group Hamas and the disclosure of British nuclear secrets to the Russians in the Start Treaty.  Obama gave missile codes to British Trident missiles to Russia.
4. Backdoor implementation of the DREAM Act which would grant 22 million illegals amnesty. Obama passed the Dream Act through an executive order, bypassing Congress again. DREAM is: Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors
5. Telegraphing troop reductions to enemies – against the consult of his experienced field commanders – while embracing negotiations with our enemy, the Taliban, and recognizing another, the Muslim Brotherhood.
6. Betrayal of Arizona. Obama brought a federal lawsuit against a sovereign state, Arizona, seeking to protect its citizens from this threat of mass illegal immigration
7. Obama’s Failure to enforce U.S. law, the Defense of Marriage Act. He’s stripped America of its moral base by his support for homosexuality and the attack on marriage between a man and a women Obama allows the DOJ to refuse to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act.
8. Support of an inept and incompetent attorney general who has failed to prosecute voter intimidation cases (New Black Panther Party), initiated a dangerous gun-smuggling program (Operation Fast and Furious) – which resulted in deaths to one of our own law enforcement agents. Obama allowed Operation Fast and Furious to occur, which allowed hundreds of Mexican nationals and Border Agent Brian Terry to be murdered with illegal arms given out by the ATF and DOJ.
9. Increasing the regulatory burden on American business through bypassing the legislative process with his executive branch agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration.
10. Failure to take the steps necessary to secure our borders and stem the flow of illegal immigration, termed as “repel invasions” in our United States Constitution in Article 1, Section 8 and Article 4, Section 4. Obama has failed to defend US soil in Arizona as Mexican troops bring illegals and drugs into the USA, crossing the border doing so. This is a direct violation of Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution.
11. Inappropriately commanding the release of strategic oil reserves and providing Brazil $2 billion for its offshore oil exploration.
12. Illegally soliciting funds from within the White House ($5 dinner video fundraiser). The unalienable rights endowed to us by the Creator; life, liberty, and the pursuit (not guarantee) of happiness – are being threatened by the Obama administration. This current government has abridged the consent of the governed and that whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends. It is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it.
13.Taking on the Supreme Court’s power of judicial review with a preemptive striking against justices who might contemplate an unfavorable ruling on ObamaCare.
14.”Open Mic ” gaffe in which he explained Russian President Dimitri Medvedev that he’d have more “flexibility” to sacrifice American security after his re-election
15. Occidental College Transcripts Reveals Obama Claimed Foreign Citizenship to Get Scholarship? http://tinyurl.com/czldzx8
16. Obama’s secret back channel Nuclear deal with Iran, a sworn enemy of America and our Allies
17. Obama’s holding direct talks with our avowed enemy the Taliban
18. Barack Hussein Obama’s Ineligibility to be POTUS because he was born in Kenya
19. Obama and his Administration leaking previously classified information about our intelligence communities’ efforts to slow down Iran’s march to nuclear weaponry.
20. Obama destabilized Western Ally Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, and allowed the Militant  and Anti West Muslim Brotherhood to take over the Egyptian Regime, posing a mortal threat to our Ally Israel and our own Western assets and interests in the region. Obama instigated a revolution in Egypt against an ally in the War on Terror.
21. Obama has appointed Muslim Brotherhood advisers, enemies of the State, to the White House. Aid and comfort to the Muslim Brotherhood is TREASON per Article 3 Sec III of the US Constitution.. http://tinyurl.com/3x88l2s
22. Obama bypassing Congress again by Executive Decree to allow Illegal Immigrants to remain and vote in America for partisan electoral purposes and reasons.
23. Obama selling citizenship to criminals in direct opposition to Federal Law.
24. Obama admin assisted Egypt in remilitarizing the Sinai, “something forbidden by the Camp David Accords” http://is.gd/nDwdbl
25. Obama has attempted to compel religious institutions to pay for abortion services — a clear violation of First Amendment rights
26. Obama apologizing on 9/11 day to our sworn Islamist enemies, the Salafists, the same day these terrorists massacred the American Ambassador and three other American officials in the Benghazi Embassy, Libya. and ramsacked and looted the Cairo Embassy in Egypt.
27. Obama spending billions in aid on America´s enemies, while disregarding the needs of the US.
28. Obama is directly responsible for the many wars and murders of Christians in the Middle East
29. Obama has financially ruined this country, and his actions are leading to the demise of the dollar. President Obama is either an idiot or he is purposely trying to destroy the American economy.
30. Obama is hollowing out our military, and destroying our intelligence gathering capability.
31. Obama, aka Barry Soetoro deliberately concealed his true illegal background to be POTUS, TRUTH out: why #Obama records sealed FOREIGN student ID http://twitpic.com/aufduf  Can we trust Pres. who games system – lies
32. Criminal cover up by the White House over BengaziGate, where four Americans, including Ambassador Stevens were murdered by Islamic Extremists.
33. #CANDYGATE Collusion with CNN Moderator Candy Crowley at the 2nd Debate  to cover up BengaziGate  The Candy-Obama Controversy : Get the Transcript’  http://amsp.ec/1P1Dyy
34. Obama’s Illegal Foreign Campaign money.
35. Obama Administration defining the Fort Hood Terrorist Act as a Workplace Accident, which gave succour and comfort to our enemies.
36. The Border-gate arms deal offense that resulted in the death of a border patrol agent as well as numerous innocent Mexican civilians.
37. Suspected organized and widespread election fraud engineered by Agents of the Obama Regime at the November 6th Presidential Election.
38. Obama and unrepentant terrorist William Ayers misappropriated over 300 million dollars in donations meant for the education of Chicago’s minority students. They routed the money to Obama’s community activist buddies who then tried to turn the students in radicals. The program was a total failure.
39. Obama, as an Illinois State Senator, redirected tens of millions in Illinois tax dollars to Valerie Jarrett and Tony Rezko, to provide housing for low income families. They returned the favor with political donations. The housing units were built with cheap materials and labor and are uninhabitable after a mere 10 years of use.
40. Obama accepted millions in illegal campaign contributions from foreign credit cards after the credit card filters used to screen out foreign money, was switched off. This also allowed domestic donors, who were over the legal limit, to contribute more.
41. Obama and Secretary of State Clinton’s efforts to bring the US under the UN’s Small Arms Treaty are direct violations of the Second Amendment of the US Constitution.
41. Obama attempted to move control of the Census Bureau from the Commerce Department to the White House, to be managed by then Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel.
42. Obama had provided under the radar amnesty to illegal immigrants by allowing ICE Director John Morton to prohibit ICE officers from enforcing US immigration laws.
43. Obama allowed USAG Holder to ignore the violation of US immigration laws in the sanctuary cities, i.e.,San Francisco, etc.
44. Obama illegally fired the IG Walpin for investigating Obama’s buddy, Mayor Kevin Johnson (Sacramento), for fraud (850K) with AmeriCorps.
45. Obama is in contempt of Federal court for his illegal oil drilling moratorium in the Gulf…
46. Obama spent a month as the UN Security Council Chair in 2009, which raises the question of his conflict of interest between the US and the UN. This is also likely a violation of his Oath of Office as the UN conflicts with our Constitution on many levels, i.e., LOST, UN Small Arms ban, etc.
47. Obama signed an EO in December 2009 that allows Interpol to operate in the US without oversight by Congress, courts, FBI, or local law enforcement.
48. Obama and Secretary of  State Clinton misappropriated, er, used $23 million in US taxpayer funds to help Obama’s homeland of Kenya move to a communist nation where the freedom of speech, private property rights, and other rights are subservient to “social justice”. This includes the fact that the Kenyan constitution adopted Sharia Law, which violates the basic human rights of women.
49. Obama was likely involved with then Governor Rod Blagojevich to try and sell his Illinois Senate seat, i.e., pay to play. Jesse Jackson Jr is under investigation for it and it appears that Valerie Jarrett might also have been involved.
50. Obama ran a website that asked Americans to report on other Americans, in the area of ObamaCare, using whitehouse.gov and taxpayer money to do so. He repeated this with AttackWatch.
51.   Obama got onto the Indiana ballot through voter fraud in 2008.
52. Obama sealed all of his records that would show that he is possibly an illegal president, that he is feloniously using a false SSN, that his draft registration number is false, that his Fulbright award was falsely awarded as Obama claimed foreign student status, and that his student aid was falsely obtained.
53. Obama violated the Constitution by firing the GM CEO.
54. Obama violated bankruptcy laws by forcing GM bondholders to accept millions of dollars in losses of money that they were legally entitled to.
55. Obama violated bankruptcy laws by awarding the UAW with a share of GM and Chrysler during their bankruptcy proceedings.
56. Obama bought votes for ObamaKare with acts like, “Cornhusker Kickback”, “Louisiana Purchase” and the DoI increasing water allocations toCalifornia’sCentral Valley. This brought in the votes of Dennis Cardoza and Jim Costa, both Democrat holdouts.
57. Obama lied about Americans being able to keep their healthcare coverage if they wanted to. ObamaKare is already forcing them out of their current coverage.
58. Obama attempted to bribe Joe Sestak with a job offer in order to get him to drop out of the Senate race against Arlen Specter.
59. Obama bypassed Congress and told the EPA to set carbon emission standards.
60. Obama forced BP to pony up a $20 billion slush fund to compensate Gulf Coast businesses and residents affected by the BP oil spill. It was administered by one of Obama’s political appointees and there is NO Congressional oversight.
61. Obama did nothing to Holder (abetted a felony) when Holder refused to prosecute two New Black Panther Party members for brandishing weapons in front of a voting location in Filthadelphia. A direct violation of the voters Civil Rights.
62. Obama bypassed the Senate with a recess appointment of Donald Berwick as the head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Violates policy.
http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?postid=273766
63. Obama illegally fired Sherry Sherrod from the USDA over remarks she made at an NAACP meeting in March 2010. He violated her due process.
64. Obama violated contractual law when his regime cancelled 77 oil field development contracts previously approved by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, under Bush 43’s administration. This keeps us from extracting from 2-3 TRILLION barrels of oil.
65. Obama used the DHS to determine the political affiliation of Americans making FOIA requests about the Regime. This led to requests being stalled, lost, etc.
66. Obama acted in April 2009, at the G20 meeting, to expand the Special Drawing Rights, that now gives the IMF more control over the US economy.
67. Obama issued an EO on July 12, 2011, attempting to restrict the Second  Amendment rights of US citizens in Texas, California, New Mexico and Arizona.
68. Obama’s allowed the FCC to assume authority over the internet, in direct violation of a federal appeals court that DENIED the commission that authority. In December, the FCC voted and passed the first federal regulations on internet traffic.
69. Obama allows the DHS/TSA to routinely violate the 4th/5th Amendment rights of Americans at airports, train stations, and VIPER checkpoints.
70. Obama allows the DOJ in 2009 to stop enforcing federal drug laws in regards to marijuana.
71. Obama attempted to bypass Congress and raise the Debt Ceiling by “reinterpreting” the 14th Amendment.
72. Obama just bypassed the Senate AGAIN by appointing Richard Cordray to a new unconstitutional agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Violates policy.
http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?postid=273766
73. Obama deprived the due process of two U.S.citizens, Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan, by assassinating them via a CIA drone attack in Yemen on Sept. 30, 2011. This also raises the question of an act of war against Yemen for firing into a sovereign nation. Obama said in 2008: “No. I reject the Bush Administration’s claim that the President has plenary authority under the U.S. Constitution to detainU.S.citizens without charges as unlawful enemy combatants.”
74. Obama allowed Education Secretary Arne Duncan to grant waivers to No Child Left Behind however, this is a law enacted by Congress and neither Obama nor Duncan have the authority to authorize that.
75. Obama allowed the bailouts to grant money without the authority to do so. “No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law.” Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7U.S.Constitution
76. Obama allowed Operation Castaway to occur, which allowed firearms laws to be broken through coercion of legal gun dealers.
77. Obama bypassed the Senate to appoint three people to the National Labor Relations Board. (Naturally, they’ll all be Obomobots) Violates policy.
http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?postid=273766
78. Obama twenty three illegal Executive Orders to impose a Gun Grab, which is a direct violation of the Second Amendment.
79.  Providing aid and comfort to the enemy by announcing the date for unilateral withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan. Thereby providing the impetus for the escalation of the green on blue attacks
80. Obama by announcing the date for unilateral withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, thereby triggered the disintegration of the green respect that had been a goal of the training mission.
81. Obama deliberately interfering in the elections of our chief ally in the Middle East, Israel to try and influence the result.
82. Obama supplying the Muslim Brotherhood and Egypt with F16 Jets and 220 Abram Tanks, sworn enemies of the USA and our Chief Ally Israel.
83. Obama nominating a Muslim John Brennan to be Director of the CIA,when America is at War with Radical Islamic Terrorists.
84. Obama nominating Chuck Hagel, a sworn enemy of our Chief Ally Israel, to be Secretary of Defense
85. Obama and Holder breaking Constitutional Law, by introducing Drone attacks on Americans.
86. Obama is using his Executive Decree to allow 80,000 Muslims to enter America next year, and 100,000 Muslims  for the next five years.
87. The Obama administration failed to enforce a century-old law meant to prevent immigrants from taking root in the U.S. only to live on the government dole
88. The Obama administration’s release of hundreds and potentially thousands of illegal-alien criminals from U.S. detention centers
89. The sequester is actually a plot by Obama to cut defense spending and transfer money to “ACORN-like” groups that would help elect Democratic candidates.
90. The Obama administration’s allegedly revealing his political opponents’ private tax information to the media.
91. Obama allowing the third Saudi Bomber in Boston be deported to Saudi Arabia – Arch Terrorist Osama Bin Laden’s son
92. Obama Will Not Charge Boston Jihad Bombers as Enemy Combatants
93. White House Link to Illegal Taping of Sen. McConnell
94. Allowing Islamic Terror Group the Taliban to flourish and operate on American soil.
95. The Obama Government has been caught promoting the delivery of taxpayer-funded welfare benefits to foreigners – “These disclosures further confirm the fact that the Obama administration cannot be trusted to protect our borders or enforce our immigration laws. And the coordination with a foreign government to attack the policies of an American state is contemptible,”
96. Agents of the Obama Regime conspired in 2008 to get Obama’s name illegally put on the Indiana Primary Ballot.
97. Obama Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel Involved In Massive Vote Fraud Scandal? http://j.mp/15QrBsb 
98. TREASON…Obama Government Hired Al Qaeda to Defend the Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi?
99. Obama Military Considers Stopping Christians from Proselytizing
100. The Sequester is actually a plot by Obama to cut defense spending and transfer money to “ACORN-like” groups that would help elect Democratic candidates.
101. The IRS Scandal and Victimization and Targeting of the T Party and other Conservative Groups by the Obama Regime
102. 30 American Navy Seals killed when they flew into an ambushed landing zone, because Obamas Rules of Engagement precluded pre-bombing the Landing Zone
103. THE DOJ WIRETAPPED OVER 100 AP JOURNALIST.  The Obama’s DOJ secretly obtained 2 months of telephone records of reporters and editors for The AP http://www.activistpost.com/2013/05/obama-administration-secretly-spied-on.html … THEY STOLE THE ELECTION IMPEACH NOW
104.  EPA waives fee requests for friendly groups, denies conservative groups –
105. Sebelius fundraising ‘arguably an even bigger issue’ than Iran-Contra
106. Obama Betrays Israel: Secret Base Revealed israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=4549 …
107. Obama and Holder secretly and illegally wiretapped and snooped on American’s Cell Phones, E Mails in Covert Prism Project.
108.  Destruction Of NASA From The Inside’: Obama Lets Chinese Spies Steal Top Secret Weapons Technology? http://is.gd/NoCzHc 
109. OBAMA DISARMING AMERICA. More Treason? Obama, Putin to sign new deal on reducing nuclear threat http://nbcnews.to/16e18ly
110. The Obama Regime hosting Islamic Terrorist Sheikh Abdulla bin Bayyah at the White House.
111.  Secret $8 billion Treasonous Deal between Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood http://egyptdailynews.com/news%20selling%20Sinai.htm …
112. The Obama Regime leaked Intelligence that our Ally Israel had bombed a Syrian Military Port
113. Obama supplying hundreds of armored cars to to Listed Terrorist Organization Hezbollah.
114. The Obama Regime deliberately leaked Classified Information about our Ally Israel, secretly attacking the Syrian Port Latakia.
115. Obama engaging in Evil Race Baiting over the Trayon Affair, fanning the Flame sof Racism, and trying to provoke a Second American Civil War.
116. Obama is subject to Military Court Martial under the UCMJ at Section 906, Article 106. Impersonation of a Public Official,Usurpation,Fraud
117. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) officials ordered subordinates not to talk to congressional investigators about their investigation into illicit hiring practices and related whistle blower retaliation allegations, under orders from the Obama Regime
118. The U.S. Military Has Awarded Contracts to our sworn enemy Al-Qaeda In Afghanistan http://sageofquay.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/the-us-military-has-awarded-contracts.html …
119. Dozens of CIA operatives on the ground during Benghazi attack – Treasonous cover up by the Obama Regime
120. The Regime of President Barack Obama has enabled
the intelligence community to disclose our Ally Israe’si military operations against
the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad.
http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/01/exclusive-dozens-of-cia-operatives-on-the-ground-during-benghazi-attack/ …
121. Unelected White House Special Adviser Valerie Jarrett, Comm in Chief. VJ key decision-maker night of #Benghazi attack http://conservativereport.org/benghazi-valerie-jarrett-cic/ …
122. U.S. Army won’t suspend contracts with Al Qaeda-tied companies, citing “due process rights” http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/08/in-other-words-they-may.html … TREASON! TREASON! GET IT.
123. Is Army “Takeover” of the National Guard Constitutional? | Charleston Voice http://chasvoice.wordpress.com/2013/07/13/is-army-takeover-of-the-national-guard-constitutional/ …
124. Obama broke the law by revealing sealed indictment in Benghazi attack? http://www.examiner.com/article/did-obama-break-the-law-by-revealing-sealed-indictment-benghazi-attack …
125. Obama Conspired With Tech Giants To Create US Surveillance State http://wp.me/p3zsfI-6CE
126. #OBAMA #DHS #NAPOLITANO SINCE 2009 RELEASED 8000 CRIMINAL CONVICTED ILLEGALS INTO OUR POPULATION #IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE!!
+ 40 ADDITIONS Courtesy of David Cain
http://conservingthenation.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/sample-articles-of-impeachment.html

I.   Treason

  • He signed the National Defense Resource Preparedness Executive Order on March 16, 2012, which claims to give him and his Cabinet Secretaries the power to confiscate private property, including food and water resources, to own and run American businesses, and to run utility companies if there is any “potential threat to the security of the United States”.  As stated by this website, “Any enactment of law by the executive is made in Excess of Jurisdiction and is by definition treason.”
18 U.S.C. Section 1. “Whenever a judge acts where he/she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason.” U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 .Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821)“Any judge or attorney who does not report such judges for treason as required by law may themselves be guilty of misprison of treason,” 18 U.S.C. Section 2382.
    • His Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, part of the U.S. Treasury Department, delivered a large number of weapons to known Mexican drug gangs, resulting in the deaths of more than 200 U.S. Citizens under the program “Fast and Furious”.
    • He made multiple attempts to force the bankruptcy of this nation’s energy suppliers, and he made multiple public statements that bankrupting our coal companies was his explicit goal.  This is economic terrorism committed by someone who has an affirmative Constitutional duty to find and stop all forms of terrorism.

II.   Failure to Protect our National Security

The President ordered Immigration and Customs Enforcement not to deport anybody who didn’t fit their criteria.  Because of this breach of our national security, millions of people are coming here illegally, not being arrested, not being put in jail, and not being deported.
As reported by Fox News on August 2nd (this is just the first four paragraphs of their story):
A veteran Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent is facing suspension after he refused to release an illegal immigrant who was not considered a priority target under the Obama Administration’s new immigration enforcement policies, according to documents provided exclusively to Fox News.
“They’re punishing law enforcement officers who are just trying to uphold U.S. law,” said Chris Crane, president of the National ICE Council. Crane is a union representative acting on the unidentified officer’s behalf.
The officer under fire is an 18-year law enforcement and military veteran.
On March 27 he and another officer were conducting surveillance on a vehicle in Newark, Del. with plates that were registered to a criminal alien target. During the surveillance, they observed an individual get into the vehicle. The person was detained, questioned and taken to an ICE office so that his fingerprints could be run through a federal database.
Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/ice/2012/08/02/ice-agent-faces-suspension-arresting-illegal-alien#ixzz23kxfxMly
This is a link to a similar story on the website for “Californians for Population stabilization”.
This is a link to a similar story on the website for “American Renaissance”.
U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) put a news release on his official website dated August 3 demanding an explanation from the Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement as to why they would give a three-day suspension to an ICE agent for doing his job.
The following 4+ minute video was uploaded by Senator Sessions:

III.   Failure to Guarantee First Amendment Religious Liberty

  • He is trying to force Catholics who work in hospitals to perform abortions.
Note 1: Regardless of your own beliefs about the ethics of abortion, Catholics have a Constitutionally guaranteed right to have their own beliefs and to practice their own religion.
Note 2: With his hand on a Bible, he swore to “support and defend the United States Constitution” on the day he took office.
Note 3: Catholic Archdioceses and other Catholic institutions across the country have filed lawsuits against the Federal Government to try to protect religious freedom for Catholics.  Quoting a May 21, 2012 story in the New York Times, “For most religious organizations, the mandate takes effect in August 2013.”
  • An order from the U.S. Army Chief of Chaplains, later rescinded, that prohibited military chaplains from reading a letter in their pulpits.   The letter was addressed to all Catholics and written by Catholic Archbishop Timothy Broglio.  The President is the Commander-in-Chief and has command over everybody in the U.S. Army, including the Chief of Chaplains.
  • Air Force intolerance towards Christians.  [07-30-12 Addendum.  At a military base in Afghanistan, soldiers were ordered to take down a cross in front of a chapel, and they were ordered to fly a rainbow-colored flag to show what this country stands for.]
  • Policy Memo 10-015, dated September 14, 2011, from Col. Callahan, Commander of the Walter Reed Medical Center, which prohibited any visitor to a patient’s room from bringing a Bible or any religious article (such as a cross or rosary beads) with him.

IV.   Establishment of a Religion (Islam)

    • In 2010, Barak Obama gave the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) a very unusual mission.  He told them to reach out to the Muslim world.This is a clear violation of the first amendment to the United States Constitution. Congress is explicitly prohibited from trying to pass a law that makes Islam, or any other religion for that matter, the national religion. Individual Americans have the Constitutionally-guaranteed right to practice their own individual religion within the limits that the U.S. Supreme Court establishes.The Supreme Court hasn’t put many restrictions on the practice of religion, either.  In fact, many challenges to unusual religious practices have been denied by the court over the years, resulting in people having a lot of freedom to worship in their own unusual ways.

  • Despite the many prohibitions on Christians who are serving this nation in the U.S. military, the U.S. Air Force is recruiting military chaplains from the Muslim Brotherhood.  These are the first two paragraphs of an article published on April 28, 2013 by The Clarion Project.  The links are theirs.
The U.S. Air Force has confirmed to The Clarion Project that it paid nearly $5,000 for advertisements in the magazine of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism-financing trial that was also labeled a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity by the government. The Air Force said it would continue to consider paying ISNA for ads.
An advertisement for the U.S. Air Force Chaplain Corps is in the March-April issue of Islamic Horizons, ISNA’s magazine. ClarionProject.org asked the Air Force about the advertisement and included facts about ISNA.

V.  Deliberate economic sabotage

Here are the first four paragraphs of an article published April 25, 2013 by the Daily Caller.  All of the links were in the original article.
The Department of Agriculture, via the Mexican government, assures potentially ineligible immigrants that they can still apply for food stamps on behalf of their eligible children without giving information about their immigration status, according to documents released Thursday by Judicial Watch.
A USDA Spanish language flyer provided to the Mexican Embassy, according to Judicial Watch, reads that if potentially ineligible immigrants want to obtain benefits for their children they “need not divulge information regarding your immigration status in seeking this benefit for your children.”
The Daily Caller has reported extensively about the USDA/Mexico partnership that seeks to promote taxpayer-funded nutrition assistance among eligible Mexican Americans, Mexican nationals and migrant communities in America.
“USDA and the government of Mexico have entered into a partnership to help educate eligible Mexican nationals living in the United States about available nutrition assistance,” the USDA explains in a brief paragraph on its “Reaching Low-Income Hispanics With Nutrition Assistance” web page. “Mexico will help disseminate this information through its embassy and network of approximately 50 consular offices.”

VI.  Actions Taken without Constitutional Authority


A. The Appointment of Executive Branch Officials without the Advice and Consent of the Senate (thanks, Glenn Beck, for your research)
  1. Richard Holbrooke, Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan
  2. Jeffrey Crowley, Director of the Office of National Aids Policy
  3. Ed Montgomery, Director of Recovery for Auto Communities and Workers
  4. Alan Bersin, Assistant Secretary for International Affairs and Special Representative for Border Affairs
  5. Ron Bloom, Counselor to the Secretary of the Treasury
  6. Dennis Ross, Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for the Central Region (encompasses the Middle East, the Gulf, Afghanistan, Pakistan and South Asia)
  7. Todd Stern, Special Envoy for Climate Change
  8. Lynn Rosenthal, White House Advisor on Violence Against Women
  9. Paul Volker, Chairman of the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board
  10. Carol Browner, Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change
  11. Joshua DuBois, Director of the Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships
  12. Jeffrey Zients, Chief Performance Officer
  13. Cameron Davis, Special advisor to the U.S. EPA overseeing its Great Lakes restoration plan
  14. Van Jones, Special Adviser for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation at the White House Council on Environmental Quality
  15. Daniel Fried, Special Envoy to oversee the closure of the detention center at Guantanamo Bay
  16. Nancy-Ann DeParle, Counselor to the President and Director of the White House Office of Health Reform
  17. Vivek Kundra, Federal Chief Information Officer
  18. Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence
  19. George Mitchell, Special Envoy for Middle East Peace
  20. Kenneth Feinberg, Special Master on Executive Pay
  21. Cass R. Sunstein, Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
  22. John Holdren, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and Co-Chair of the President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology
  23. Earl Devaney, Chair of the Recovery Act Transparency and Accountability Board
  24. J. Scott Gration, Special Envoy to Sudan
  25. Herb Allison, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Stability
  26. John Brennan, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counter-Terrorism
  27. Adolpho Carrion, Jr., White House Director of Urban Affairs
  28. Guy Samore, White House Coordinator for Weapons of Mass Destruction, Security and Arms Control
B. The Use of Military Forces to Fight the Government of Libya without a Congressional Declaration of War and Unauthorized by the War Powers Resolution.Articles on the subject in:

VII.  Larceny and Fraud

From June 21-27, 2011, a group of 21 people, including Michelle Obama, her two daughters, her staff, and their Secret Service escorts, flew on a converted Boeing 757 on a  private vacation trip to South Africa and  Botswana.  President Obama did not go on this trip.  It was a private vacation trip for his wife and their two daughters.  The cost of the airplane, fuel, and the Air Force crew alone was over $400,000, and that doesn’t include any of the costs of ground transportation, lodging, food, or their security after they arrived.
Judicial Watch asked for the documentation of this trip but the documents were not released until they filed a lawsuit against the Air Force.  Judicial watch eventually did obtain the passenger manifest and other documents.  It showed that Malia and Sasha were falsely listed on the passenger manifest as “senior staffers”.  Malia, the older of the two daughters, turned 14 this year.  The Judicial Watch website, linked above, has a link to a PDF of the actual passenger manifest and the expense report, so you can read it for yourself.
The U.S. Treasury was later sent a bill for the trip.  The Treasury should never have paid for this trip.  It was a private family vacation for his wife and their two daughters, not official Presidential business.  The invoice that the Obama family sent to the Treasury contained false information, and this, plus his monetary gain (avoiding having to pay for the trip himself) constitutes FRAUD under Title 18, Section 47 of he U.S. Code.The President could even be prosecuted under the Federal larceny statute, which is 18 U.S.C. 641.  When he sent an invoice to the U.S. Treasury, and when he ordered the Treasury to pay the invoice, he was illegally taking more than $400,000 that belonged to the United States.  Stealing money from the people you’re supposed to govern is something that dictators often do.

VIII.   Violation of a Federal Court Order

In March 2009, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) decided to publish, in the Federal Register, the official source for all Federal Regulations, a “proposed rule” concerning the internet.  Here’s a statement from the FCC Chairman on the subject.  Here’s an October 23, 2009 article in the National Law Journal discussing the proposed rule.On April 6, 2010, the Federal Appeals Court for the District of Columbia Circuit decided a case titled Comcast Corporation vs. The Federal Communications Commission.  The three-judge court rendered a unanimous decision against the FCC.  Here’s the text of the 36-page Appeals Court decision, in PDF format.  This is an NBC news story about the decision.In May 2010, the FCC ignored the court order and decided to regulate internet access anyway.  Here’s the Wall Street Journal story about it, dated May 5th.  Here’s a similar story in an online technology-focused journal called Electronista.In December 2010, the FCC voted to approve rules for the internet.  Their grounds were a different law than the one they relied on when they tried to regulate Comcast.  Here’s the final rule, as published in Regulations.gov.  A PDF version is available on that web page  Here’s a story about the FCC decision in Wired Magazine.  The FCC’s “grounds” don’t affect their legal standing in  terms of the court order.  If they take any action that is prohibited by the court order, they’re in violation of it.On January 20, 2011, Verizon filed a lawsuit against the FCC to force them to stop their “net neutrality” rule.  Here’s a story in the Washington Post.  Here’s a similar story in the Seattle Times.In April 2011, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to repeal the FCC regulation regarding internet access.  Here’s the Fox News story.  Here’s a similar story from the Reuters News Service.On September 28, 2011, Verizon filed a lawsuit against the FCC.  The Free Press also filed their own lawsuit, based on the rule that had recently been published in the Federal Register.On July 31, 2012, Verizon settled with the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau and signed a Consent Decree.  Here’s the FCC announcement, in PDF format.  Under the terms of the settlement, Verizon agreed to pay $1.25 million for violating the terms of a purchase of part of the broadcast spectrum called the “C Block”.
Note: individuals and companies that sign such agreements do not admit fault or guilt.  They simply agree to take specific actions, possibly including the payment of a fine, and in return, the other party, typically a regulator, agrees to halt any further investigation of the individual or company.
Despite the fact that one company signed their Consent Decree, the FCC still violated the Order of the Federal Appeals Court, by doing something that the court told them unanimously that they could not do.  Barak Obama, as the head of every Executive Branch agency, is responsible for this violation.

IX.  Contempt of The United States Congress

  • The use of Executive Orders to make laws.  Under our Constitution, which he swore to support and defend when he took office, laws are made by the House and the Senate, not by the President.
“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”
  • Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta told a Senate Armed Services Committee congressional hearing on March 7, 2012 that he could order the military to engage the military forces of other countries if he received the permission of the United Nations, even if he didn’t have the permission of the U.S. Congress.

X. Contempt of the United States Supreme Court, which oversees all other Federal Courts.

  • A Federal Judge ruled on February 3, 2011 that the Obama Administration acted in contempt of an outstanding court order.
Misdemeanors, as an alternative to a “high crime” as a basis for an impeachment?  You can start with the pro-labor bias of the National Labor Relations Board, which
UNKNOWN: How many exact other violations of Obama’s Oath of Office.
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Peter Paton is an International PR and Strategic Adviser.
Follow Peter on Twitter @pjpaton
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)