Pentagon tells Senate it won't demote retired Gen. Petraeus

 

The government should be embarrassed to even talk about Petraeus especially when Hillary Clinton has done far worst. They're letting her run for President of the United States of America.

The Pentagon says it will not demote retired Army Gen. David Petraeus, who pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified information while CIA director, an incident stemming from an affair with his biographer.
"The Army completed its review of his case and recommended no additional action," Stephen C. Hedger, assistant defense secretary for legislative affairs, wrote the Senate Armed Services Committee on Friday. Given that review, Hedger said Defense Secretary Ash Carter "considers this matter closed."
The Associated Press obtained a copy of the letter Saturday. The Pentagon had no further comment.
Media reports had surfaced that indicated the Pentagon was considering downgrading Petraeus to a three-star general. Such a move, if taken, would have reduced his retirement salary.
In response, committee leaders urged Carter not to demote Petraeus, saying the retired officer had "admitted his guilt and apologized for his actions."
At a committee hearing on Jan. 21, President Barack Obama's nominee to be the Army's top civilian official said he believed no further action should be taken against Petraeus.
Petraeus resigned from the CIA in November 2012 after an extramarital affair with biographer Paula Broadwell. He pleaded guilty last year to a misdemeanor count of unlawful removal and retention of classified materials.
He was spared prison as part of his plea and was given two years' probation by a judge who faulted him for a "serious lapse in judgment."
Petraeus admitted that he loaned Broadwell eight binders containing highly classified information regarding war strategy, intelligence capabilities and identities of covert officers. Petraeus kept the binders in an unlocked desk drawer at his home, instead of a secure facility that's required for handling classified material.
When initially questioned by the FBI, he denied having given Broadwell classified information, but in his plea deal he avoided being charged with making a false statement.

Charity watchdog reportedly places Wounded Warrior Project on its watch list

Maybe Bill O'Reilly should take time off from bashing Donald Trump and check out what the staff is doing with this project?

The Wounded Warrior Project, the charity for wounded veterans, has been placed on Charity Navigator’s watch list over accusations of using donor money toward excessive spending on conferences and parties instead of on recovery programs, according to CBS News.
According to the charity’s tax forms, obtained by CBS News, spending on conferences and meetings increased from $1.7 million in 2010, to $26 million in 2014, which is the same amount the group spends on combat stress recovery.
Charity Navigator is a watchdog organization that evaluates charities in the U.S.
Army Staff Sergeant Erick Millette, who returned from Iraq in 2006 with a bronze star and a purple heart, told CBS News he admired the charity’s work and took a job with the group in 2014 but quit after two years.
"Their mission is to honor and empower wounded warriors, but what the public doesn't see is how they spend their money," he told CBS News.
Millette said he witnessed lavish spending on staff, with big “catered” parties.
Two former of employees, who were so fearful of retaliation they asked that CBS News not show their faces on camera, said spending has skyrocketed since Steven Nardizzi took over as CEO in 2009, pointing to the 2014 annual meeting at a luxury resort in Colorado Springs.
"He rappelled down the side of a building at one of the all hands events. He's come in on a Segway, he's come in on a horse,” one employee told CBS News.
About 500 staff members attended the four-day conference in Colorado, which CBS News reported cost about $3 million.
"Going to a nice fancy restaurant is not team building. Staying at a lavish hotel at the beach here in Jacksonville, and requiring staff that lives in the area to stay at the hotel is not team building," he told CBS News.
Marc Owens, a former director of the IRS’ tax exempt organizations, was asked to review the charity’s tax documents by CBS News. He told CBS he “couldn’t tell the number of people that were assisted” through the organization.
Wounded Warriors Project has been questioned over how it spends more than $800 million it has raised over the last four years, but has strongly rejected the claims of the CBS report.
The charity’s CEO has yet to comment on the report.

Dems borrow from athlete's playbook, trash talk GOP on 2016 races

Biden expected to announce 2016 decision

 

Athletes talk smack. It’s part of the game. A psyche job on opponents. Some of the best in all sports run their mouths as well as they run the court.
Prior to the three-point contest at the 1986 NBA All-Star Game, Larry Bird didn’t say a word during the shoot-around. He just stared at his competitors. Finally, the Boston Celtic opened up.
“I’m just looking to see who’s going to finish second,” Bird finally professed before shooting the lights out of the gym, winning the contest going away.
Muhammad Ali relentlessly taunted opponents with rhymes and parables before boxing matches, including his threat to George Foreman that he would “float like a butterfly and sting like a bee.”
Baseball legend Dizzy Dean may have been the original
sports trash-talker. “It ain’t braggin’ if you can back it up,” gloated the Hall of Fame pitcher.
There’s derision and jeering in politics, too. Donald Trump can undoubtedly match Seattle Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman stride-for-stride with incendiary taunts.
But most political derision is muted. Calculated. Tailored for public-consumption in an effort to tilt the playing field and spin voters and journalists.
But despite the packaging, some silver-tongued pols chirp with rhetoric so inflammatory it would make Deion Sanders wince. And now, Democrats are doing most of the warbling.
Democrats are on the offensive because they can’t wait to start murmuring about Trump or Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, if Republicans select either as their presidential nominee.
That’s not to say the GOP doesn’t have plenty of material on hand if Democrats give their presidential nod to either Hillary Clinton or Sen. Bernie Sanders, Vermont independent.
But Democrats view Trump and Cruz as ticking time bombs with whom they’d relish engaging on the national stage.
House Democrats huddled the past few days at their annual issues retreat in Baltimore. President Obama and Vice President Biden delivered keynote addresses. And they talked a little political trash.
“We may have been given a gift from the Lord in the presidential race,” said Biden in his remarks. “I don’t know who to root for more. Cruz, Bush or what’s that guy’s name?”
In his speech, Obama also stayed away from “what’s that guy’s name,” too. But it was clear who the president had in his sights.
“We’re not going to build progress with a bunch of phony tough talk and bluster and over-the-top claims that just play into ISIL’s hands,” he said, referring to the Islamic State terror group.
“We’re not going to strengthen our leadership around the world by allowing politicians to insult Muslims or pit groups of Americans against each other.”
New Mexico Rep. Ben Ray Lujan, is chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the national organization devoted to electing Democrats to the House.
He has the daunting job this election cycle as the House contests certainly favor Republicans. But Lujan didn’t hesitate to skewer Trump’s absence Thursday night at the Fox GOP presidential debate in Des Moines, Iowa.
“I had to watch two different television sets to be able to get the full debate,” Lujan quipped. “That’s a side show we’re seeing.”
Biden took aim at House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., during the retreat.
“Paul Ryan is a lovely guy,” Biden chimed. “He gave us such a gift. He passed the Ryan budget.”
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., picked up the chatter there.
The Ryan budget, she said, “offers the clearest contrast. It’s something that Ryan is very proud of.
So he takes pride in that budget. We see a great contrast there in terms of how they want to diminish Social Security, ‘voucher-ize’ Medicare, block grant Medicaid … , give tax cuts to (the) high-end, cut education.”
What does all of this mean? Democrats, like Bird and Ali and Dean, are trying to climb into the heads of voters -- and Republicans.
You voted for the Ryan budget? And now Ryan’s not just chairman of the House Budget Committee but speaker of the House? Great. We’ll be happy to point out that you back Ryan. You voted for the Ryan budget and are now on the stump defending Trump? Have at it.
And it also gins up Democrats and could get them to the polls.
This is psychological warfare.
But does it make much difference?
At the presidential level? Perhaps. In Senate races? Yes. Republicans now hold the majority in the Senate but must defend a challenging map.
Republicans have multiple, vulnerable senators facing reelection in swing states. But how about flipping the House?
“In ’06, nobody thought we would win. In ’10, people really didn’t think at this point that the Republicans would win,” Pelosi said. “We had a tide and they had a tide. And we can have a tide again. Some of it will depend who the presidential candidate is.”
Pelosi went on to add that she “didn’t know” whether Democrats could capture the House this fall. But she said she was “absolutely certain we’ll have it in three years.”
The number of special elections in an off-year like 2019 on which Democrats appear to be banks remains unclear. But that’s what Pelosi said. 2019.
And will there be a tide? Well, prep that with trash talk and egg on the other side. Then goad them. And sometimes in politics, it’s best to dampen expectations. Deliberately suppress a forecast. Feign skepticism.
At the same time, Democrats are doing more than trash talking. They are eyeing the water crisis in Flint, Mich., as a potential wedge.

Certainly, members of both parties are concerned about the catastrophe. But there’s an opportunity for Democrats. Flint is an economically-troubled town with a majority of African-American residents.
Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., declared that “there is no doubt in my mind” that race played a part in addressing the city’s water issue.
Rep. Dan Kildee, D-Mich., speculated that it would not have taken “very long at all” to fix a problem with contaminated public water if had happened in a “wealthy part of Michigan” that was home to supporter for Republican Gov. Rick Snyder.
The GOP-led House Oversight Committee scheduled a hearing on the issue including officials from the Environmental Protection Agency and Flint’s former director of emergency services but not Snyder.
“Governor Snyder and his administration’s policies led to this man-made crisis and he must testify so that the whole truth can be found,” Kildee protested.
Rep. G.K. Butterfield, a North Carolina Democrat and chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, dashed off a letter to the Oversight panel that demanded Snyder be summoned to testify.
“The governor has admitted harm, numerous missteps and seemingly has a blatant disregard for the care of the citizens of Flint,” he wrote. “Governor Snyder has been a central figure in the decision-making process that led to the water crisis and to that end should be invited to testify.”
Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., accused Snyder of tweaking the law to install an emergency manager instead of a mayor to save costs and operate Flint. Therefore, Peters thinks Snyder bares some responsibility.
“An elected mayor is going to listen to his or her citizens about this,” Peters said. “The city council … did not have power.”
Democrats are pushing to attach a $600 million amendment to an energy-modernization bill now moving through the Senate to fix contaminated pipes and provide health assistance to those in Flint exposed to the unsafe water.
But Senate Republican leaders aren’t ready to move yet. Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas, raised concerns about setting a precedent. He said the federal government could then be on the hook for other infrastructure problems across the country.
“We all have sympathy of what’s happened to Flint. But this is primarily a local and a state responsibility,” he said while acknowledging some people will likely exploit the issue for political purposes.
New York Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer disagreed, saying, “This is as much a national crisis as a hurricane or a tornado or a flood.”
Of course, Democrats are daring Republicans to vote against Flint or not call Snyder to testify. They believe they can turn that against the GOP in an election year.
And that’s the ultimate form of political trash talking: speaking at the ballot box.
But as Dizzy Dean said, “It ain’t braggin’ if you can back it up.”

Cruz campaign criticized over mailers sent to potential Iowa voters

Cruz campaign's new ads go after Rubio instead of Trump

 

 

The campaign for Republican presidential contender Ted Cruz was slammed on Saturday because of a mailer that was sent out to potential Iowa voters that seemed designed to look like an official notice warning recipients about “low voter turnout in your area.”
The Cruz campaign’s mailer also contained the recipient’s voting history, a grade for their history and that of several of their neighbors.
“Your individual voting history as well as your neighbors’ are public record,” the mailer read. “Their scores are published below, and many of them will see your score as well. CAUACUS ON MONDAY TO IMPROVE YOUR SOCRE and please encourage your neighbors to caucus as well. A follow up notice may be issued following Monday’s caucuses.”
Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate took exception to the flier, saying it is “not in keeping in the spirit of the Iowa caucuses.” He added that Cruz’s campaign “misrepresents Iowa election law.” There’s “no such thing as an election violation related to frequency of voting,” he said.
Pate’s comments didn’t seem to deter Cruz’s attitude about the mailers as he brushed off the fuss, saying “I will apologize to nobody for using every tool we can to encourage Iowa voters to come out and vote.”
Matt Schultz, the campaign’s Iowa state chairman, reiterated to The New York Times that the use of mailers isn’t uncommon to try and increase voter turnout.
“Our mailer was modeled after the very successful 2014 mailers that the Republican Party of Iowa distributed to motivate Republican voters to vote, and which helped elected numerous Republican candidates during that cycle,” Schultz added.
Similar fliers were also mailed out during the 2012 presidential race to encourage potential voters to vote for Barack Obama, according to the Independent-Journal Review. Those mailers were also met with similar scrutiny.
“These kind of mailers are fraught with risk,” Republican strategist Rick Wilson told the paper. “They do work, but the social pressure stuff has got to be subtle. This, on the other hand, is like a sledgehammer.”

Iran Cartoons

Trump Takes Victory Lap in New Hampshire After Iowa Debate Snub

A day after Donald Trump skipped the final Republican debate before the Iowa caucuses, he said the decision played out well for a candidacy that has made bypassing political norms its stock in trade.

Trump said during a rally in a New Hampshire ballroom that his competing event in Iowa raised $6 million for veterans’ causes. As a bonus, he said it garnered coverage in newspapers across the U.S.

The billionaire's decision came after a feud with debate sponsor Fox News and moderator Megyn Kelly, with whom Trump tangled in the party's first debate. Fox said the Trump campaign threatened Kelly during negotiations.

“When somebody doesn’t treat you properly, you’ve got to be tough, got to be strong, and you’ve got to stick up for yourself,” Trump told a capacity crowd of more than 700 at the Radisson Hotel Nashua, where Republicans attacked him less than a week before. “I did something risky and I think it turned out well. I’m on the front page of every paper.”
The event was a rare Granite State appearance by a candidate as the center of U.S. political gravity is Iowa, whose Monday caucuses are the first voting in the 2016 White House race. He opened the 50-minute speech by saying he was operating on “absolutely no sleep” and would return to Iowa right after.
Trump has a flurry of rallies planned in coming days in Dubuque, Clinton, and Davenport. He's scheduled to return to New Hampshire for a Feb. 2 rally and heads to Arkansas the following day.
During his speech—no questions from the audience and no protesters—Trump also went hard at U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, his biggest competition in Iowa.
Trump accused Cruz of not fully disclosing loans from Goldman Sachs and Citibank during his Senate campaign to better appear as a populist without Wall Street ties. “He's no Robin Hood,” Trump said. He also said as a self-funding candidate, he's the only one in the race who isn't beholden to special interests. Through Sept. 30, Trump had self-funded a third of his campaign while individual contributors gave the other two-thirds, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.
The morning after Cruz faced tough questioning from Kelly over his changing stances on legalization for undocumented immigrants, Trump hit Cruz over his former dual citizenship in Canada.
Cruz's birth there to an American mother has led Trump to question his eligibility to serve as president under the Constitution's “natural born citizen” clause. The issue has never been settled in court, but Cruz and many legal experts say he clears the bar.

“He got pummeled last night and they didn't even mention that he was born in Canada,” Trump said. “When you're born in Canada you're not supposed to be running for president of the United States. Prime minister of Canada, no problem.”

He added: “Ted Cruz is an anchor baby in Canada.”

Iran Claims to Have ‘Shooed Away’ a U.S. Warship That Was 7,000 Miles Away in Norfolk at the Time

A U.S. Navy warship which Iran claims to have chased away from a naval exercise in the Persian Gulf this week was at the time more than 7,000 miles away – in its home port of Norfolk, Virginia.
Iranian state media have been reporting that an Iranian Navy warship on Wednesday sent a warning to the USS Mtereyon, which Iran claims was sailing near its annual military exercises near the Strait of Hormuz, and that as a result of the warning the guided missile cruiser “left the region immediately.”
In the reports, some of which also carried photos of the Monterey, military officials claimed the U.S. vessel was evidently attempting to spy on the exercises.
But a spokesman for the Bahrain-based U.S. Fifth Fleet, Cmdr. Kevin Stephens, said not only was the Monterey not in the Gulf at the time of the alleged incident, it was “in her home port of Norfolk, Virginia.”
(The Monterey’s Facebook page features photos of a re-enlistment ceremony –in downtown Norfolk on Thursday.)
The semi-official Fars news agency reported that “a U.S. Navy warship on Wednesday morning received a serious warning from several Iranian destroyers to keep away from their drill zone near the Strait of Hormuz.”
“The USS Monterey (CG 61), a Ticonderoga-class cruiser, was sailing near the Strait of Hormuz where the Iranian forces were staging the main phase of the Velayat 94 massive wargames,” it said.
“According to the Iranian Army, the U.S. warship left the region immediately after receiving the warning.”
Fars quoted Iran Navy chief Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayari as saying the U.S. ship had evidently been trying “to come close to get informed of our moves and capabilities.”
The incident was reported by several other Iranian outlets, including the state news agency Tasnim, which said the Iran Navy “shooed away a U.S. warship and a fighter jet that had been approaching the drill zone.”
“He [Sayari] said the Americans were given warnings twice not to approach the drill area, once by a naval patrol aircraft and another time by the Navy’s Alborz destroyer,” said Tasnim, which did not identify the U.S. ship involved.
Fifth Fleet spokesman Stephens said Iran had given standard announcements about closing areas for live firing during its annual Velayat exercise but disputed the claims that any U.S. ship had changed course or conduct as a result.
“Iran has announced closure areas for live fire events associated with its exercise. This is a common practice for any navy conducting such training at sea,” he said. “Our forces similarly announce closure areas for our training events. We do not consider such announcements to be ‘orders.’
“No U.S. units took any action as a result of what the Iranian Navy might have characterized as a warning,” Stephens added. “We did have units who heard the closure area announcements but it did not cause them to alter their planned course or schedule.”
‘… recent events notwithstanding’
Stephens said the Fifth Fleet did not view Iran’s exercise as cause for concern.
“While the exercise may increase the probability for U.S. Navy forces to have interaction with Iranian warships, U.S. Navy forces are routinely approached by Iranian warships as they operate in the region, with the majority of all interaction by the Iranians conducted in a safe and professional manner recent events notwithstanding,” he said.
The Iranian claims came a fortnight after Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) personnel detained 10 U.S. Navy sailors and two small patrol vessels for around 14 hours, exploiting the incident for propaganda purposes by disseminating photos and video footage showing the sailors kneeling on a deck at gunpoint, hands clasped behind their heads.
The images were highlighted on supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s social media accounts, and a top military officials claimed later that U.S. military jets had been rapidly withdrawn from the area during the incident after being threatened with “hellfire.”
Secretary of State John Kerry engaged with his Iranian counterpart to ensure the incident was resolved quickly, and later was sharply criticized by some Republican senators after thanking the authorities in Tehran for their help.

Lawsuit: Public school forced my child to convert to Islam

A public high school has been accused of radical Islamic indoctrination by forcing children to profess the Muslim statement of faith, ordering them to memorize the Five Pillars of Islam and teaching that the faith of a Muslim is stronger than the average Christian, according to a federal lawsuit filed Wednesday. 
Thomas More Law Center filed the lawsuit on behalf of John and Melissa Wood. They accuse La Plata High School in Maryland of subjecting their teenage daughter to Islamic indoctrination and propaganda. And when Mr. Wood complained – the school banned him from campus.
Click here to join Todd’s American Dispatch – a must-read for Conservatives! 
“Defendants forced Wood’s daughter to disparage her Christian faith by reciting the Shahada, and acknowledging Mohammed as her spiritual leader,” Thomas More president Richard Thompson said.
The Shahada is the Islamic Creed, “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.”
The Thomas More Law Center said that for non-Muslims, reciting the statement is sufficient to convert one to Islam.
“The course also taught false statements such as Allah is the same God worshipped by Christians and Islam is a ‘religion of peace,’” Thompson said.  
Good grief. It sounds as if somebody turned La Plata High School into a taxpayer-funded Madrassa.
A spokesperson for Charles County Public Schools told me they have not seen the lawsuit and declined to comment.
Also named as defendants were the Charles County Board of Education, principal Evelyn Arnold and vice-principal Shannon Morris.

Evelyn Arnold. earnold@ccboe.com.

Shannon Morris
Vice Principal
smmorris@ccboe.com

The lawsuit, filed in federal court, alleges that students spent only one day studying Christianity and two weeks studying Islam.
“During its brief instruction on Christianity, Defendants failed to cover any portion of the Bible or other non-Islamic religious texts, such as the Ten Commandments,” the lawsuit states. “Instead, the class included disparaging remarks about Christianity and the Pope.”
Students were also allegedly instructed that “the Islamic religion is a fact while Christianity and Judaism are just beliefs.”
“Such discriminatory treatment of Christianity is an unconstitutional promotion of one religion over another,” Thompson said.
“United States Supreme Court precedent does not create a double standard that allows for the promotion of Islam in our public schools while disallowing and silencing teachings of Christianity and Judaism,” the lawsuit states.
According to copies of classroom assignments, the school taught that “Most Muslims’ faith is stronger than the average Christian.”
They also instructed students that Islam is a peaceful religion and they treated conquered nations with kindness and respect.
On a side note, I’m sure there are plenty of Syrian and Iraqi Christians who would love to weigh in on that classroom lesson.
The school also served as apologists for the Islamic faith, according to a hand out titled, “Islam Today.”
“Nowhere in the Koran does it say you will go to paradise if you martyr yourself with a suicide bomb,” the handout stated. “Important: The majority of Muslims do not live this way.”
The school also instructed students on jihad “a holy war waged on behalf of Islam as a religious duty; a personal struggle in devotion to Islam especially involving spiritual discipline.”
If La Plata High School wanted to teach children about jihad, they should’ve replayed the video footage of what happened on September 11, 2001 – or the Boston Marathon bombing – or the San Bernardino massacre or the Chattanooga attacks.
The incidents alleged in the lawsuit occurred during the 2014-15 school year.
Wood, who is a Marine veteran, called the school on Oct. 22, 2014 to voice his alarm over his daughter’s assignments. He requested his daughter be allowed to opt-out of the lessons and be given an alternative assignment.
The following day the vice principal told Wood that his daughter was required to take the class and would receive “zeros” on any incomplete assignments even if the assignments violated the family’s religious beliefs and heritage.
It’s unclear what was said in the telephone conversations – but on Oct. 24^th Wood was notified by the school’s resource officer that he would no longer be allowed on school property – for any reason whatsoever.
Wood contends in the lawsuit that he never threatened any physical harm against the school or anyone in the school.  The lawsuit alleges the ban is unfounded and retaliatory.
Folks, our public schools have become indoctrination centers – promoting Islam and marginalizing every other religion. I’ve reported on similar incidents across the country.
Why hasn’t the Freedom From Religion Foundation weighed in? What about the American Civil Liberties Union? Their silence is peculiar.
I suspect their reaction would have been a bit different had La Plata High School been baptizing children and forcing them to memorize John 3:16.
Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary, heard on hundreds of radio stations. His latest book is "God Less America: Real Stories From the Front Lines of the Attack on Traditional Values." Follow Todd on Twitter@ToddStarnes and find him on Facebook.

Clinton email headaches grow as State Dept. confirms ‘top secret’ files, delays final release

FBI going directly to intel agencies in Clinton email probe

Hillary Clinton’s email headaches grew Friday as the State Department confirmed several emails under review contain information too “top secret” to release in any form – while at the same time delaying the release of thousands of other pages.
The department released roughly 1,700 pages of emails Friday evening. But the latest developments fueled Republican allegations – just three days before the Iowa caucuses – that Clinton was “irresponsible” in her email use, and that the department she used to lead is still trying to protect her by dragging out the process until after the start of primary contests.
Fox News first reported earlier Friday that some emails were “too damaging” to national security to release.
The State Department formally announced Friday afternoon that seven email chains, found in 22 documents, will be withheld “in full” because they, in fact, contain “Top Secret” information. In addition, a spokesman said another 18 emails between President Obama and Clinton will be withheld for now – but they are “not classified” and will be released eventually.
Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon pushed back, though, criticizing the intelligence community for flagging those emails.
"We firmly oppose the complete blocking of the release of these emails,” he said in a statement. "This appears to be over-classification run amok. We will pursue all appropriate avenues to see that her emails are released in a manner consistent with her call last year."
The more than 1,000 pages that were released, though, are a fraction of the total remaining number.
Among the 1,670 pages released Friday evening, 242 emails were upgraded to classified; 11 of which were considered 'secret'.
One email from January 2013 included intelligence from three other government agencies, the Defense Intelligence Agency, National Reconnaissance Office and National Geospatial Intelligence Agency. The NRO and NGA are both satellite and mapping agencies, with which the State Department does not have jurisdiction over classification of information.
The agency that generates the intelligence, owns the information, and therefore has final say on classification.
The latest batch of released emails also contained a few examples of some State Department employees not understanding the classification system and its protocols.
On April 25, 2012 Clifford Hart, then U.S. special envoy for six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear program, sent an email that reads, "sensitive but unclassified" but is then heavily redacted and classified.
In a court filing Thursday night, the State Department said it would not make the Jan. 29 release deadline -- and about 7,000 pages still needed to be sent out for “interagency consultation.” The agency acknowledged these pages had been “missed” and not sent out for review earlier.
The filing drew Republican complaints.
“The notion that a months-long process could be hit with 11th hour delays reeks of political favoritism designed to hide the ball from voters on the eve of early state voting,” Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement. “Voters deserve to know the facts before they cast their ballots, not after.”
The Iowa caucuses are Monday, followed by the New Hampshire primary a week after that, and Clinton is locked in a tight race for the Democratic presidential nomination with Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. The first four contests will be over by the end of February.
The department, though, in part tried to blame the blizzard for the delay.
“Since discovering its oversight, State has moved diligently to process the documents and send them to the appropriate agencies for review, a process that was interrupted by the blizzard that struck Washington, D.C. over the weekend,” the agency noted in the filing, which asked for a 30-day extension.
The agency has produced some 43,000 pages of emails in last several months. There were two dumps totaling 6,000 in January. While hundreds of these documents were retroactively classified, Fox News first reported that this included emails classified at a level beyond “top secret.”
A Jan. 14 letter from Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III to senior lawmakers said a review identified “several dozen” additional classified emails -- including specific intelligence from “special access programs (SAP),” which indicates a level higher than “top secret.”
In an interview with NPR, Clinton claimed the latest IG finding doesn’t change anything and suggested it was politically motivated. She has claimed that the emails found on her private server and email were “innocuous” and never classified at the time.
But after the State Department confirmed some emails are so secret they’re being withheld in full, Republicans seized on the announcement.
“We now know Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email account during her tenure at the State Department wasn’t just negligent, it was completely dangerous,” Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said in a statement. “To put our country in danger for personal convenience is arrogant and irresponsible — and it’s illegal.
She should face the same consequences that any federal employee who behaved similarly would face, including criminal prosecution.”
An FBI investigation remains underway into Clinton’s email practices.
Asked Friday whether Clinton would not be indicted, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said it does not appear the investigation is headed in that direction.
But a law enforcement source close to the DOJ investigation pushed back on those remarks, telling Fox News the investigation is still very much ongoing – and a decision has not been made on the matter one way or the other.
Meanwhile, State Department spokesman John Kirby reiterated Friday that the 22 documents in question were “not marked classified at the time they were sent.”
But he said the State Department will look at “whether they were classified at the time they were sent.”
He said: “These emails will be denied in full, meaning they will not be produced online on our FOIA website. In response to a FOIA request, it is not unusual to deny or withhold a document in full. We are not going to speak to the content of these documents.”

Disgust for Debbie Wasserman Schultz Ignites Wave of Election Year Bipartisanship

Debbie Wasserman Schultz speaks to reporters in the spin room after the democratic presidential debate on January 17 in Charleston, S.C.

Democrats and Republicans are beginning to agree on one thing: their disdain for Democratic National Committee Chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
On The Kelly File, Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly recently confronted Ms. Wasserman Schultz over allegations that South Carolina Republican Governor Nikki Haley was chosen for the State of the Union response because she’s a woman.
“Why couldn’t she have been picked because she’s smart, she’s savvy, she presents well, she’s articulate and she’s a great spokesman for the Republicans?” Ms. Kelly asked. Ms. Wasserman Schultz dodged the question—resorting to attacks Ms. Haley, alleging she is unpopular in South Carolina because of the damage she has done to the state.
“This woman is a terrible person. I watch her on television. She’s a terrible person,” Donald Trump said in an interview on Sirius XM’s Breitbart News Daily. “And in all fairness, she negotiated a great deal for Hillary [Clinton] because they gave Hillary all softballs… Every ball was a softball. And in fact, the other candidates weren’t even allowed to talk up against her.”

Ms. Wasserman Schultz has assaulted her own party for years.

The “softball” to which Mr. Trump was referring is the obvious bias Ms. Wasserman Schultz has for Ms. Clinton—the former co-chair of Ms. Clinton’s 2008 campaign has been unable to maintain the impartiality during the 2016 Democratic presidential primaries. The debate schedule Ms. Wasserman Schultz established has been criticized by both Sanders and Clinton supporters for the lack of exposure it provides candidates. The second Democratic debate, airing on a Saturday night in November, drew the lowest ratings of any primary debate this campaign cycle—that is, until the third Democratic debate (also on a Saturday night) which had even lower ratings.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz defended the limited number of debates and their schedule as a strategic effort to garner maximum exposure for candidates. In an interview with CNN, she explained, “I did my best to make sure—along with my staff and along with my debate partners—to come up with a schedule that we felt was going to maximize the opportunity for voters to see our candidates.” If doing her “best” means ignoring complaints from DNC vice chairs that there were too few debates (scheduled on nights when they competed with popular football games), then her “best” is not good enough.
Thanks to Ms. Wasserman Schultz’s schedule, the second debate aired at the same time the nationally ranked and undefeated Iowa Hawkeyes played the Minnesota Golden Gophers, and the third debate aired while the Dallas Cowboys faced off against the New York Jets. Great strategy.
Criticism for Ms. Wasserman Schultz was further elevated when she suspended the Sanders campaign’s access to voter databases as punishment for a data breach. After the Sanders camp filed a lawsuit, she rescinded the suspension.
Ms. Wasserman Schultz has assaulted her own party for years. In 2013, Politico reported she planned to accuse President Obama with allegations of sexism and anti-Semitism if he attempted to replace her as DNC chair. According to White House staffers, Mr. Obama has avoided Ms. Wasserman Schultz since she assumed position as DNC chair in 2011. Tim Kaine, the previous DNC Chair, has a monthly lunch with the President.
Pressure is rising from her own party—particularly Mr. Sanders’ supporters—to resign. In the last Democratic debate, as he walked on stage, Mr. Sanders’ tense and insincere greeting with Ms. Wasserman Schultz said everything.
Despite the lack of debate exposure, Mr. Sanders is polling to win the Democratic presidential nomination against Ms. Clinton—whom Ms. Wasserman Schultz expected no one to even run against. In April 2015, she told the Sun-Sentinel, “Secretary Clinton is arguably one of the most qualified people—assuming she announces her candidacy—who have ever run for president. I was proud to support her in 2008. Of course, as DNC chair, I will neutrally manage our primary nomination contest, assuming we have one.”