Secret US spy program targeted Americans' cellphones

The Justice Department is scooping up data from thousands of cellphones through fake communications towers deployed on airplanes, a high-tech hunt for criminal suspects that is snagging large number of innocent Americans, according to people familiar with the operations.
The U.S. Marshals Service program, which became fully functional around 2007, operates Cessna aircraft from at least five metropolitan-area airports, with a flying range covering most of the U.S. population, according to people familiar with the program.
Planes are equipped with devices—some known as “dirtboxes” to law-enforcement officials because of the initials of the Boeing Co. unit that produces them—which mimic cell towers of large telecommunications firms and trick cellphones into reporting their unique registration information.
The technology in the two-foot-square device enables investigators to scoop data from tens of thousands of cellphones in a single flight, collecting their identifying information and general location, these people said.
People with knowledge of the program wouldn’t discuss the frequency or duration of such flights, but said they take place on a regular basis.
A Justice Department official would neither confirm nor deny the existence of such a program. The official said discussion of such matters would allow criminal suspects or foreign powers to determine U.S. surveillance capabilities. Justice Department agencies comply with federal law, including by seeking court approval, the official said.
The program is the latest example of the extent to which the U.S. is training its surveillance lens inside the U.S. It is similar in approach to the National Security Agency’s program to collect millions of Americans phone records, in that it scoops up large volumes of data in order to find a single person or a handful of people. The U.S. government justified the phone-records collection by arguing it is a minimally invasive way of searching for terrorists.

Obama won't budge on Keystone ahead of House vote

The King has Spoken.

President Obama would not budge on the Keystone pipeline ahead of a key House vote on Friday, indicating during a press conference that he wants to let a review process run its course even as lawmakers threaten to send a bill fast-tracking the project to his desk.
The president spoke during a joint press conference in Burma with opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi. As the House prepares to vote on the pipeline -- and the Senate is set to vote next week -- Obama made clear his position has not changed. 
Obama said his administration believes the project should be judged on the basis of whether it accelerates climate change. Obama also insisted the pipeline would not be a “massive jobs bill” and would have no effect on U.S. gas prices.
The looming vote will mark the ninth time it has been voted on in the House as lawmakers look to finally secure approval of the delayed proposal after numerous environmental reviews, legal challenges to its route and politics. 
But the pipeline was only put on the lame-duck Congress agenda because Louisiana Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu pushed it on the Senate side -- in an apparent effort to not only boost the energy industry, but boost her own re-election bid in a tough runoff next month. Landrieu’s race for re-election goes to a runoff next month against GOP-hopeful Bill Cassidy. Landrieu is considered an underdog in that election.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest, traveling with Obama in Myanmar, told reporters that the president takes a "dim view" of legislative efforts to force action on the project. Earnest stopped short of threatening a veto, but reiterated Obama's preference for evaluating the pipeline through a long-stalled State Department review.
Obama has repeatedly ordered such reviews under pressure from environmental groups, who say the project would contribute to climate change.
Senate Republicans and several moderate Democrats have pushed for the project to be approved for years, and backers of the project got a major win after Republicans took control of the Senate. Supporters say the construction of the pipeline would create tens of thousands of jobs.
But the project divides Democrats, with environmentalists in opposition while some unions as well as energy-state and business-minded lawmakers support it.
The Sierra Cub issued a statement opposing the measure, as did Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., who urged Obama to veto the bill if it reaches his desk.
Supporters of the measure appeared to have at least 58 of the 60 votes they would need for approval next week. That included all 45 Republicans as well as 13 Democrats, among them Delaware Sen. Tom Carper, whose office confirmed his support during the day.
Another obstacle in the pipeline is getting approval for it to go through Nebraska.
The administration has put off announcing any decision pending a Supreme Court ruling in Nebraska on a challenge to the law that allowed the route of the pipeline to be set.
The Nebraska Supreme Court's decision is expected before the end of the year.
That case involves a lawsuit filed by landowners and activists opposed to the project who are seeking to overturn a 2012 state law that allowed Republican Gov. Dave Heineman to approve the pipeline's route through the state.

Fox News weighing decision on keeping Mike Huckabee

Ben Carson is off the Fox News payroll. Is Mike Huckabee next?
The former Arkansas governor, who won the Iowa caucuses in 2008, has been careful not to do anything that would shatter his status as a network contributor.
But some of his political moves have prompted a reevaluation.
Bill Shine, Fox’s executive vice president for programming, said in a statement:
“We are taking a serious look at Governor Huckabee’s recent activity in the political arena and are evaluating his current status. We plan on meeting with him when he returns from his trip overseas.”
The scrutiny was probably inevitable after Fox dropped Carson as a contributor on Friday. The trigger there was the Baltimore physician’s plan to run an hourlong infomercial on local stations as a prelude to a possible presidential run.
I addressed the development on Sunday’s “Media Buzz”: “This was a smart move by Fox. Because a guy who is more or less running for president shouldn't be on a network payroll. Which means Fox also faces a decision about former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee who is openly weighing a White House run as well.”
That got plenty of pickup, but the day of reckoning was inevitable. Huckabee, who hosts a Saturday night program, went through a similar dance in the 2012 cycle before deciding to stick with Fox rather than mounting a second presidential campaign.
The Washington Post reported today that Huckabee “is reconnecting with activists and enlisting staff to position himself in a growing field of potential Republican presidential candidates.” In fact, the Baptist preacher is leading a group of more than 100 pastors and Republican insiders from early primary states on an overseas jaunt to such locations as Poland and Britain.
Huckabee has also formed a nonprofit political advocacy group, America Takes Action.
Is he on the verge of running? “His heart is into it,” Huckabee’s daughter Sarah told the Post.
Asked about his Fox connection, Huckabee told the paper: “I have to be very careful about this” because he has “obligations in broadcasting.” He added that “I am not doing anything official at this point.”
Fox is obviously a great platform for a potential Republican contender. In an interview last week, Bill O’Reilly told Huckabee: “You must be happy because you, Paul, Rand Paul and Jeb Bush are all about 11 percent in the Real Clear political who Republicans would like to see run. That's taking Mitt Romney out of the equation. If Romney gets in, then he becomes the favorite. So, you know, it looks to me like you have a decent shot if you want to go to be president.”
Huckabee responded: “Well, I think it's quite a ways away to make that decision, but, you know, it's kind of comforting to know that at least there are 11 percent of the people that would like it.”
In 2011, Fox cut ties with two contributors, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, as they took steps to jump into the GOP primaries. Some network insiders said then that they were uncomfortable with Huckabee’s role. And he was conscious of the situation, saying: "If I run, I walk away from a pretty good income.”
The issue is a familiar one in cable news, going back to the days when Pat Buchanan kept returning to CNN after his presidential campaigns.
The Post says Huckabee has been sounding out potential consultants, including his former campaign manager Chip Saltsman. “According to Huckabee’s associates, the Fox News show may not be a runaway national success, but it has been useful to Huckabee’s political brand, keeping him in front of Republican primary voters but not turning him into a political celebrity whose every move draws attention.”
But now it may be drawing so much attention that both sides have to make a decision.

Source: Obama to announce 10-point immigration plan via exec action as early as next week

EXCLUSIVE: President Obama is planning to unveil a 10-part plan for overhauling U.S. immigration policy via executive action -- including suspending deportations for millions -- as early as next Friday, a source close to the White House told Fox News. 
The president's plans were contained in a draft proposal from a U.S. government agency. The source said the plan could be announced as early as Nov. 21, though the date might slip a few days pending final White House approval. 
Obama was briefed at the White House by Homeland Security officials before leaving on his Asia-Pacific trip last week, Fox News has learned. 
The plan contains 10 initiatives than span everything from boosting border security to improving pay for immigration officers. 
But the most controversial pertain to the millions who could get a deportation reprieve under what is known as "deferred action." 
The plan calls for expanding deferred action for illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children -- but also for the parents of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents. 
The latter could allow upwards of 4.5 million illegal immigrant adults with U.S.-born children to stay, according to estimates. 
Critics in the Senate say those who receive deferred action, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, receive work authorization in the United States, Social Security numbers and government-issued IDs.
Another portion that is sure to cause consternation among anti-"amnesty" lawmakers is a plan to expand deferred action for young people. In June 2012, Obama created such a program for illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children, entered before June 2007 and were under 31 as of June 2012. The change would expand that to cover anyone who entered before they were 16, and change the cut-off from June 2007 to Jan. 1, 2010. This is estimated to make nearly 300,000 illegal immigrants eligible. 
One of the architects for the president's planned executive actions at DHS is Esther Olavarria, the late Sen. Ted Kennedy's former top immigration lawyer. 
Under the changes, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers also would see a pay raise in order to "increase morale" within the ICE workforce. 
DHS also is planning to "promote" the new naturalization process by giving a 50 percent discount on the first 10,000 applicants who come forward, with the exception of those who have income levels above 200 percent of the poverty level. 
Tech jobs though a State Department immigrant visa program would offer another half-million immigrants a path to citizenship. This would include their spouses as well. 
The other measures include calls to revise removal priorities to target serious criminals for deportation and end the program known as "Secure Communities" and start a new program. 
The planning comes as immigrant advocates urge Obama to act. As lawmakers returned for a lame-duck session, Democrats in Congress on Wednesday implored Obama to take executive action. 
"We're begging the president. Go big. These [illegal immigrants] are a plus to our nation. Mr. President, please. You said you were going to do something. Do it. Act now," said Rep. Juan Vargas, D-Calif. 
House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer said: "I join with my colleagues in urging the president to take action. What he needs to do is give immediate relief to families who are being wrenched apart and living in fear." 
Angela Maria Kelley, vice president for immigration policy at the Center for American Progress, touted deferred action as a "tried and true component of immigration policy used by 11 presidents, 39 times in the last 60 years." 
She said for many undocumented immigration who have been here for years, "there is no line for people to get into." 
Obama has vowed to act in the absence of congressional action and has claimed that congressional action could still supersede his executive steps. 
In a recent op-ed in Politico, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said Congress would stop Obama from taking executive action by adding language explicitly barring money from being used for that purpose. "Congress has the power of the purse. The President cannot spend a dime unless Congress appropriates it," Sessions wrote. He also pointed out that similar language in the past has prevented the president from closing the Guantanamo Bay prison camp.

Yet another video shows ObamaCare architect disparaging voter intelligence

Yet another video has surfaced of ObamaCare architect Jonathan Gruber crediting the passage of the health care bill in part to American voters’ lack of intelligence.
The Daily Caller posted the third video Wednesday of the MIT professor, this time speaking at the University of Rhode Island in 2012.
Gruber was discussing the law’s so-called "Cadillac tax,” which he said was helped along by “hero” then-Sen. John Kerry. The “Cadillac tax” mandates that insurance companies be taxed rather than policy holders. He said that taxing individuals would have been “politically impossible,” but taxing the companies worked because Americans didn't understand the difference.
“So basically it's the same thing,” he said. “We just tax the insurance companies, they pass on higher prices that offsets the tax break we get, it ends up being the same thing. It's a very clever, you know, basic exploitation of the lack of economic understanding of the American voter.”
The new video follows a second tape played on Fox News' "The Kelly File” Tuesday that showed Gruber speaking on a similar topic at an October 2013 event at Washington University in St. Louis.
Referring to the "Cadillac tax,” he said: "They proposed it and that passed, because the American people are too stupid to understand the difference."
This was similar to remarks he made at a separate event around the same time in 2013. In a clip of that event, Gruber said the "lack of transparency" in the way the law was crafted was critical. "Basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass," he said.
After the first tape surfaced -- prompting Republican outrage -- Gruber went on MSNBC to express regret. On Tuesday, he said: "I was speaking off the cuff and I basically spoke inappropriately, and I regret having made those comments."
But after Fox News played the second tape, GOP lawmakers said it proves what they've been saying all along.
"It confirms people's greatest fear about the government," Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., told Fox News on Wednesday. "Remember, it was Nancy Pelosi who said first you have to pass it before you get to find out what's in it."
As Congress returns for a lame-duck session, on the heels of midterm elections where Republicans won control of the Senate, GOP leaders say they will try once again next year to repeal the law -- or least change its most controversial provisions.

Keystone pipeline re-emerges as political football as Landrieu, GOP rival call for vote

The lame-duck Congress has been in session a matter of hours, and the Keystone pipeline already is a political football.
Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., facing a tough runoff election next month, on Wednesday called for a vote on a bill approving the long-delayed project -- in an apparent bid to flex her clout on Capitol Hill. The Senate approved her request and teed up a vote for next Tuesday.
 Republicans responded swiftly to Landrieu's maneuvering, scheduling a vote in the House on Thursday on an identical bill sponsored by Rep. Bill Cassidy.
The back-and-forth amounts to a continuation of their bitter Senate campaign, with one of the most controversial energy projects in America caught in the middle. The TransCanada-built pipeline, which would cross over an aquifer in Nebraska, has been held up for six years by environmental and other concerns. 
White House spokesman Josh Earnest, traveling with President Obama in Burma, told reporters that the president takes a "dim view" of legislative efforts to force action on the project. Earnest stopped short of threatening a veto, but reiterated Obama's preference for evaluating the pipeline through a long-stalled State Department review. Obama has repeatedly ordered such reviews under pressure from environmental groups, who say the project would contribute to climate change. 
Landrieu, who is thought to be trailing Cassidy ahead of their Dec. 6 runoff election, wants to deliver a win for the energy industry by pushing Keystone. The measure was one she co-sponsored with Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., back in May. 
“We can pass the Keystone pipeline and answer the frustrations of the American people,” she said. “So they could rest next and say, oh my gosh the senators of the United States of America have ears and they have brains and they have hearts and they heard what we said and we can do this.” 
But the timing immediately raised Republican suspicions. 
Cassidy noted that the House has passed pro-Keystone legislation eight times, and "the Senate did not consider any of the eight." After Landrieu called for a vote, Cassidy and GOP leaders in the House said they would vote Thursday on a Cassidy-authored Keystone bill. 
"I hope the Senate and the president do the right thing and pass this legislation creating thousands of jobs," Cassidy said in a statement. "After six years, it’s time to build."
The legislative tug-of-war came a day after aides first said that Senate Democrats were considering bringing the pipeline to a vote in order to boost Landrieu ahead of the runoff election. (The two rivals are heading to a runoff because neither got more than 50 percent of the vote last week.) The pipeline is a popular project in oil industry-heavy Louisiana, and Landrieu has touted her support of the pipeline and her tenure as chairwoman of the Senate energy committee in her campaign.
On the Senate floor on Wednesday, Landrieu insisted she was not trying to gain political points, and said she didn’t even care if her name stayed on the bill. 
“I didn’t come here to see my name in lights,” she said. “I came to fight for jobs for my state.”
She also seemed to take credit for Cassidy's House bill, calling it "identical" to the legislation she co-sponsored.
However, Cassidy told Fox News' Greta Van Susteren that his rival's assertion that politics were not involved was obviously untrue. 
"I have to smile when Sen. Landrieu says politics are not involved," he said on "On the Record." "Clearly (Senate Majority Leader Harry) Reid did not care about the 40,000 jobs that would be created for families which are struggling, but he does care about Sen. Landrieu’s job. So finally he is going to take the bill up. I don’t think the president cares about those 40,000 people."
Senate Republicans and several moderate Democrats have pushed for the project to be approved for years, and backers of the project got a major win after Republicans took control of the Senate. Supporters say the construction of the pipeline would create tens of thousands of jobs. 
Landrieu said in an evening press conference that she does not have a commitment from Obama that he would sign the bill should it reach his desk, but she is "hopeful."
"We believe the bill we drafted could receive support in the House of Representatives and get the president's signature," she said.
Landrieu is facing a tough battle to keep her job after nearly 20 years in office. A Real Clear Politics average of recent polls has the senator trailing her rival by nearly 5 points ahead of the election on Dec. 6.

Ocean of People Cartoon

GOP adds another Senate seat as Sullivan wins Alaska

Republican candidate Dan Sullivan defeated Democratic incumbent Sen. Mark Begich in Alaska’s U.S. Senate race Wednesday.
The win gives the GOP eight Senate pickups in the midterm elections. The party is also seeking a ninth seat in Louisiana’s runoff in December.
Sullivan ran a confident campaign, ignoring the debate schedule Begich established and setting his own terms.
He pledged to fight federal overreach, talked about energy independence and at seemingly every opportunity, sought to tie Begich to President Barack Obama and Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, who are unpopular in Alaska.
Begich complained that Sullivan offered little in the way of proposals for what he would do as senator.
Earlier Tuesday, election workers began counting absentee ballots and early indications were Sullivan maintained an 8,100 vote advantage over Begich. It proved to be true later that night.
With roots in Alaska, Sullivan recently served as the state’s natural resource commissioner. He also had spent seven years in the military and worked in Washington as assistant secretary of state. He returned to Alaska in 2009 and was appointed attorney general by former Gov. Sarah Palin.
Sullivan emerged from a hard-fought, three-way GOP primary to take on Begich, who had token opposition. Begich focused during that race on bolstering his homespun image, casting himself as an independent thinker unafraid to stand up to Obama, with a record of working across party lines, including with Alaska's senior senator, Republican Lisa Murkowski. Murkowski, who backed Sullivan after the primary and is in line to chair the Senate energy committee now that Republicans have taken over the Senate, told Begich to knock it off.
Ads denouncing the two candidates became a hot-button issue toward the end of the campaign.
One Bergich ad, seen as a turning point in the race, painted Sullivan as soft on crime. It featured a man identified as a former Anchorage police officer standing outside the home where an elderly couple was beaten to death and a family member sexually abused in 2013. It ended with the man saying Sullivan should not be a senator.
The ad, which Sullivan responded to with one of his own, was pulled following a demand from an attorney for the victims' family.
Sullivan will still receive criticism over his residency, his support of a permitting bill that critics said would have limited public participation in the state's permitting process and his stance on abortion.

What's next for ObamaCare?

Now that the midterm elections – featuring ObamaCare as a key issue – are over, the big question is what’s next for the president’s health care plan.
"ObamaCare was an issue for the candidates, it was an issue for the voters, and the voters are going to expect the people they elected to do something about ObamaCare," said health economist John Goodman.
But what? House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, made clear the House will start with repeal and replace. "And so the House next year, I'm sure will move to repeal ObamaCare because it should be repealed," Boehner said recently. "It should be replaced with common sense reforms that respect the doctor-patient relationship."
Some analysts say a simple repeal would cause problems because it would take insurance away from 10-15 million people.
"So if you repeal it, you're going to have to replace it with something," Goodman said. "And repeal and replace is just another way of saying we're going to change ObamaCare into something different and better."
Jim Capretta of the Ethics and Public Policy Center added, "you need to not only say you're against the ACA ( Affordable Care Act), but you're going to need to have a replacement plan to show people you have a better way of providing people with health insurance coverage."
Many Republicans want a new plan to replace the current one. Most of them would include tax subsidies -- in one case, up to about $72,000 a year for a family of four, to buy any insurance plan they want without the restrictions of ObamaCare.
They would also guarantee coverage of pre-existing conditions, allow children under 26 to stay on their parents' plans, and scale back many of the taxes in ObamaCare.  
But there's also bipartisan support to replace parts of the current law. 
Just after the elections, Sen.Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., the presumed next Senate Majority Leader, said, "there are pieces of it that are deeply, deeply unpopular with the American people. The medical device tax, which has exported an enormous number of jobs. The loss of the 40-hour work week. Big, big mistake."
That is an issue also raised by unions, which complain that many employees are being shifted to less than 30 hours, so that employers are not required to provide insurance.
"A lot of employers reduce hours to avoid the mandate. A lot of them are outsourcing and using contract labor and temporary labor," Goodman said. "I think you might find a lot of support for simply getting rid of the employer mandate."
As for the medical device tax, 79 Senators from both parties are on record as opposing it, including key liberals.
Republicans also could act to guarantee that everyone who has an existing plan can keep it.
"I think that's the kind of thing that actually would be hard for many Democrats to oppose and resist because the president himself promised it,"Capretta noted.

ObamaCare architect says lack of transparency helped law pass, cites 'stupidity of the American voter'

 

 PLAY VIDEO

 ObamaCare architect Jonathan Gruber said that lack of transparency was a major part of getting ObamaCare passed, and that it was written in such a way as to take advantage of "the stupidity of the American voter." 
Gruber, the MIT professor who served as a technical consultant to the Obama administration during ObamaCare’s design, also made clear during a panel quietly captured on video that the individual mandate, which was only upheld by the Supreme Court because it was a tax, was not actually a tax.
“This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. Okay, so it’s written to do that.  In terms of risk-rated subsidies, if you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in – you made explicit healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed… Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass… Look, I wish Mark was right that we could make it all transparent, but I’d rather have this law than not.” 
[The video was from an Oct. 17, 2013 event hosted by the University of Pennsylvania.]