Wednesday, March 11, 2015

Feds have 6.5M Social Security numbers for people 112 years old, and up


The Social Security Administration (SSA) has 6.5 million Social Security numbers for people 112 years old and up on file, allowing for "thousands of instances of potential identity theft" or fraud, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) warns.
Even though there are only roughly 35 people aged 112 years or older living worldwide, the SSA has millions of active SSNs for supercentenarians on its Numident, which can be used by others to receive benefits.
"In September 2013, a New York resident, believed to be the world's oldest living man, died at age 112," the OIG said in a report released last week. "According to the Gerontology Research Group, as of October 2013, only 35 known living individuals worldwide had reached age 112."
"We matched the 6.5 million SSNs against SSA's [Earnings Suspense File] ESF and E-Verify systems and identified thousands of instances of potential identity theft or other fraud," they said.
Nearly 70,000 of those SSNs were used to report $3.1 billion in wages between 2006 and 2011.
"One SSN appeared on 613 different suspended wage reports, and 194 additional SSNs appeared on at least 50 suspended wage reports that SSA received during this 6-year period," the OIG said. "Individuals can commit various types of fraud against the government by reporting earnings under deceased individuals' SSNs."
As of September 2014, the SSA was still issuing benefit payments to 266 people who were using a SSN that said they were born before June 16, 1901.

NAACP battles Latino groups over push to open public schools for non-English speakers


A plan that would dedicate two public high schools in suburban Washington to immigrants and second-generation students struggling with English is pitting black and Hispanic communities -– usually allies -- against one another.
The Prince George’s County, Md., chapter of the NAACP is strongly opposing the plan -- which would take effect next school year, and cover about 800 students having English language difficulties -- claiming it will pull resources from other students and unfairly redistribute them to Hispanic students. Some critics go so far as to compare the plan to segregation.
“It’s a slap in the face,” Bob Ross, president of the Prince George’s County branch of the NAACP, told FoxNews.com.
Ross believes the proposal to open two new schools violates the landmark 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision that ruled separate schools for black and white students violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
“It risks turning Prince George’s County into a segregated school system,” Ross said, adding that he realizes the need for better education in the county but believes it should not come at the cost of existing students.
Latino advocacy group CASA de Maryland sees it differently. The group, which has pushed for the schools, argues that it’s not a violation of the Constitution because the schools are not mandatory and are being built to provide options to immigrants
“If we are saying all [English-language-learning] students must go to these schools, that’s one thing. But we are not,” Tehani Collazo, senior director of schools and community engagement at CASA, told FoxNews.com.
Collazo said Ross’ comments that the schools would take away opportunities from some students and reward others doesn’t add up.
“We see these students as Prince George’s County students,” she said. “They are eligible for an education. The charge that funds are being taken away is a false charge because they are all of our students. They deserve access – full access – to a quality education.”
Kevin Maxwell, CEO of Prince George’s County Public Schools which are moving ahead with the school plans later this year, agrees.
“Like the many that already exist across the country, the International Schools are schools of choice,” he said in a written statement to FoxNews.com. “They are built on an innovative and proven model that will help support the needs of our most struggling group of learners – English Language Learners.”
He added that the schools focus “on providing opportunity for all of our students no matter their country of origin, race, creed or status.”
The schools are expected to open with 100 9th graders and make room for another 100 students each year until the schools hit their capacity of 400 students each. The CASA International School at Largo High will operate as a school within a school. The Langley Park school, about a 20-minute drive from Largo, will likely operate as a standalone.
The schools will be funded in part by a $3 million Carnegie Corporation grant. The rest will come from the state and local funding.
Despite the intense controversy, the facilities are not unprecedented. The schools themselves will be fashioned like other CASA-Internationals Community Schools currently operating in New York and California.
In New York, 64 percent of students at the CASA schools graduated in four years, compared with 45 percent of similar students with language barriers in other city schools, the organization said.
The move highlights tensions in Prince George’s County between the community’s black and Hispanic populations. According to the most recent U.S. Census data, blacks make up 65.1 percent of the county’s population while Hispanics make up 16.2 percent.
A recent study by CASA – used in their pitch for the two new high schools -- found that 82 percent of students living in the Langley Park school district are at risk of dropping out of high school. The Latino and immigrant advocacy group says there are “serious challenges” with education in the area and argues that opening these schools would help lower attrition rates.
Ross said his organization was initially notified after an angry parent of a public school student brought it to his attention. He also believes that if the schools are allowed to operate it will create an even bigger rift in the community between the two groups and blames CASA for fueling the tension.
“We don’t want to fight,” Ross said. “You’re causing a black-brown fight in the community and the fact is, we need programs to be inclusive for all our children.”
Despite the pushback, both schools are on schedule to open their doors in a few months. Ross says he’s not giving up.
“Everybody has dreams. You are living the American dream,” Ross said of the CASA organization. “What’s wrong with pushing to secure it for everyone?”
The next step for the NAACP is a March 26 meeting with Prince George’s County Executive Rushern L. Baker III. Calls to Baker’s office for comment were not returned.
Ross also says the chapter will “go into community action mode” which he describes as organizing rallies and demonstrations.

Hill Republicans blast Clinton's email explanation


Republican leaders expressed incredulity Tuesday at Hillary Clinton's explanation regarding her use of a personal email account during her tenure as secretary of state, with one GOP congressman calling her remarks "not plausible."
In making her first public comments since the scandal broke last week, Clinton, a potential candidate for the presidency in 2016, acknowledged that it "would have been better" to have used an official government account -- but said she used the personal one as a "matter of convenience."
She also briefly addressed her use of a private email server, but said it contains personal communications between her and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, and vowed to keep it private.
Clinton made her remarks Tuesday afternoon at the United Nations following an event on women's empowerment.
But if Clinton's goal was to calm the controversy, she was apparently unsuccessful.
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus called Clinton's press conference "completely disingenuous" in a statement released late Tuesday.
"If she had an ounce of respect for the American people, she would have apologized for putting our national security at risk for 'convenience,'" Priebus said. "She would've agreed to hand over her secret server to an independent arbiter. And she would’ve reassured the nation that her influence is not for sale to foreign governments. She did none of that."

A spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner said the press conference "raised more questions than it answered."
“Secretary Clinton didn’t hand over her emails out of the goodness of her heart – she was forced to by smart, determined, and effective oversight by the House Select Committee on Benghazi," Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said. "The American people deserve the truth.”
Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., head of the House Benghazi committee seeking her emails, also said there were unanswered questions, and said Clinton would be called to appear before the committee to discuss her role on the night of the 2012 attack and her use of a personal email account while serving as secretary of state.
"If possible, I have more questions now than I did this time yesterday," Gowdy told Greta Van Susteren Tuesday on "On the Record."
"I have no interest in her yoga routine. Trust me," Gowdy said, a reference to one of Clinton's descriptions about the contents of her personal emails. "I have no interest in that. But I have every interest in public record, whether it's related to Libya or not, and I have no interest in her personal attorney determining what is a public record and what is not a public record."
Gowdy said he wants to see Clinton turn her server over to a third-party arbiter who can determine which docments should be public and which should remain private.
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., called Clinton's explanation's "not plausible."
"Her statement did little to answer the many legitimate questions about the mishandling of these emails, including the security risks involved with her use of a non-government server for official communications," Issa said in a statement. "She also did not explain why she believed she had the right, for two years, and over the course of multiple investigations, to keep these e-mails from Congress, from the press, and from the American people."
And Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said he and other committee members would continue to investigate whether Clinton violated the Federal Records Act.
But Democratic Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings said he hoped the House Select Committee on Benghazi would turn its attention back to the attacks "instead of attempting to impact the 2016 presidential campaign."
"If Republicans still want additional assurances that all official government records have been produced, they can follow standard practice and ask this secretary -- and previous secretaries -- to sign certifications under oath," he said in a statement.

Grim new ISIS video appears to show child executing alleged Mossad spy


A baby-faced executioner who looks to be no older than 12 appears to kill an Israeli Arab who confesses to being a Mossad spy in the latest stomach-turning video released by ISIS.
The 13-minute clip was released via Twitter Tuesday evening, and shows a seated man identified by his family as 19-year-old Muhammad Said Ismail Musallam calmly confessing to having been recruited by the Jewish State's spy agency, even stating how much he was paid.
Musallam, from East Jerusalem, is believed to be the alleged Mossad spy ISIS claimed last month to be holding, and who was interviewed in the terror organization's February edition of its online magazine, Dabiq.
In the interview, Musallam says he was enlisted into the Mossad by a Jewish neighbor who worked as a police officer.
“The use of a child executioner is significant because ISIS is demonstrating the “growing” Caliphate and that they are raising their next generation of warriors now.”- Veryan Khan, Terrorism Research & Analysis Consortium
"He came one day and asked me to work with Israeli intelligence," Musallam said in the interview. "I told him I would think about it, and then went and asked my father and brother what they thought. They both encouraged me to do it and told me that it was a very good job. They told me there was a lot of money in it, and that you could advance to higher positions. I knew at that point that they themselves were working as spies."
According to Musallam, the Mossad wanted him to infiltrate ISIS and provide information about the location of weapons, bases and the names of Palestinians fighting with the terror group.
Musallam says on the video he was caught because he "began acting in a manner that was not typical of a muhajir despite the training (he) had received from the Mossad."
Musallam's father told Haaretz his son was not a spy and had joined ISIS willingly several months ago. Experts have speculated Musallam may have tried to flee the group and was accused of spying and executed as punishment.
One of the most frightening aspects of the video, according to Veryan Khan, editorial director of the Florida-based Terrorism Research & Analysis Consortium, is the threat at the end made against specific Mossad agents, which in addition to providing their names in English and Arabic on a “hit list,” also lists their home addresses and maps of their locations.
A similar threat was issued against Jordanian pilots in a video of Jordanian pilot Lt. Muath al-Kaseasbeh, 26, being burned alive, which was released in February.
While the Mossad are notable targets, ISIS makes an international appeal in the video, Khan said.
“In this video, ISIS appeals to the Palestine people saying ‘we haven’t forgotten your plight’ and issues a call to French speaking fighters, saying ‘Your voice is powerful within the state, and your foreign fighters hold key glamorous positions.’ To the English speaking audience, they seek potential recruits and political leaders. To Israel, they say “You are not safe, we know who you are and where you live.”
Israeli security officials said they were aware of the video but could not confirm that it was authentic.
Near the end of the video, a man speaking in French issues threats against Jews in France, before the boy moves in front of the kneeling hostage and shoots him in the forehead with a pistol.
The boy, who shouts "Allahu Akbar," then shoots Musallem four more times as he lies on the ground.
In January, ISIS released a video in which a young Kazakh boy was shown executing two Russian men accused of spying.
“Since 2015, Islamic State has been pushing hard its “cub” training program and we’ve seen a significant up tick in ‘graduation’ photo journals, training facilities and one other foreign fighter child executioner,” Khan said. “The use of a child executioner is significant because ISIS is demonstrating the “growing” Caliphate and that they are raising their next generation of warriors now.”

Tuesday, March 10, 2015

Ferguson Cartoon


Former SEALs chaplain could be kicked out of Navy for Christian beliefs


A chaplain who once ministered to Navy SEALs could be thrown out of the military after he was accused of failing “to show tolerance and respect” in private counseling sessions in regards to issues pertaining to faith, marriage and sexuality, specifically homosexuality and pre-marital sex, according to documents obtained exclusively by Fox News.
Lt. Commander Wes Modder, who is endorsed by the Assemblies of God, has also been accused of being unable to “function in the diverse and pluralistic environment” of the Naval Nuclear Power Training Command in Goose Creek, S.C.
“On multiple occasions he discriminated against students who were of different faiths and backgrounds,” the Chaplain’s commanding Officer Capt. Jon R. Fahs wrote in a memorandum obtained by Fox News.
Modder told me he was devastated by the accusations. He believes charges have been trumped up.
Modder is a highly decorated, 19-year veteran of the military. Prior to becoming a Navy chaplain, he served in the Marine Corps.  His assignments included tours with the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit and Naval Special Warfare Command – where he served as the Force Chaplain of the Navy SEALs.
His record is brimming with accolades and endorsements – including from Capt. Fahs.
In Modder’s most recent review, Fahs declared that the chaplain was “the best of the best,” and a “consummate professional leader” worthy of an early promotion.
So how did Chaplain Modder go from being the “best of the best” to being unfit for service in the U.S. military in a span of five months?
The Navy did not return my calls seeking comment – so all we can do is rely on their written accusations and evidence.
Michael Berry, a military veteran and attorney with Liberty Institute a law firm that specializes in religious liberty cases is representing Modder. He accused the military of committing a gross injustice against the chaplain in a letter to the Navy. He told me they will respond forcefully and resolutely to the allegations – which they categorically deny.
“We are starting to see cases where chaplains have targets on their backs,” Berry said. “They have to ask themselves, ‘Do I stay true to my faith or do I keep my job?’”
He said Modder is being punished because of his Christian faith.
“They want chaplains to be glorified summer camp counselors and not speak truth and love into people’s lives,” Berry told me. “There are some anti-religious elements in our military. Anytime somebody wants to live their faith out – there are people who say that is offensive.”
Modder told me he was devastated by the accusations. He believes charges have been trumped up.
“The military now wants a 2.0 chaplain instead of a legacy chaplain,” Modder said. “They want a chaplain to accommodate policy that contradicts Scripture.”
Modder’s troubles started on Dec. 6 when an assistant in his office showed up to work with a pair of Equal Opportunity representatives and a five-page complaint documenting grievances against the chaplain.
The lieutenant junior grade officer went on to detail concerns about Moody’s views on “same-sex relationships/marriages, homosexuality, different standards of respect for men and women, pre-marital sex and masturbation.”
Modder said the young officer had only been working with him for about a month and would constantly pepper him with questions pertaining to homosexuality. He had no idea that the officer was in fact gay – and married to another man.
“His five page letter of complaint was unconscionable,” Modder said. “He said I had a behavioral pattern of being anti-discriminatory of same sex orientation.”
The chaplain was not even given a chance to defend himself. He was immediately removed from duties and told to clean out his office.
“It was insulting and it was devastating,” Modder said. “I felt discriminated against. How could something like this happen at this stage of my career?”
Zollie Smith, the executive director for the Assemblies of God, U.S. Missions, told me they stand firmly behind the chaplain.
“We stand behind him 100 percent,” he said.
In hindsight, Berry believes the officer was setting up his client – and in doing so may have committed a crime.
“I believe some of what the lieutenant has alleged could constitute a military crime – false statements – taking what the chaplain said and twisting or misconstruing it – in an attempt to get the chaplain punished,” he said. “He abused the position he was placed in as a chaplain’s assistant.”
He believes the officer may have gained access to private counseling file
“To be clear, Chaplain Modder does not dispute that during private, one-on-one pastoral care and counseling sessions, he expressed his sincerely held religious belief that: sexual acts outside of marriage are contrary to Biblical teaching; and homosexual behavior is contrary to Biblical teaching; and homosexual orientation or temptation, as distinct from conduct, is not sin,” Berry said.
Modder said many Americans may be shocked to discover how much military culture has changed over the past few years.
“This new generation is very secular and very open sexually,” he said. “The values that the military once held – just like the Boy Scouts of America – are changing. The culture wants this. Culture is colliding with truth. That’s at the heart of this.”
Modder recalled an incident that occurred when he first arrived on the base. He was about to deliver the invocation at a graduation ceremony when the captain pulled him aside.
“He looked at me and said, ‘Hey chaplain – do not pray in Jesus’ name,’” he recalled.
Modder said he understands the firestorm he is about to enter – but he remains resolute.
“Every fiber in my being wants to run away from this – but if I do I’m not being obedient to the Lord,” he told me. “I need to stand up for righteousness and this is something I cannot walk away from.”
The reality is that many other chaplains could find themselves in Chaplain Modder’s shoes. The Roman Catholic church and the Southern Baptist convention have nearly identical positions on the issues that the Navy found problematic with Modder.
“It’s going to be a hard road for me,” he said. “But it’s what God has called me to do.”
Ultimately, it’s about leaving a legacy and setting an example for his family – his wife and four young children.
The day he was relieved of his duties, Chaplain Modder’s 14-year-old son tagged along to help pack up his dad’s office. A few senior enlisted men were there as well.
As they were driving away, the boy told his father that the enlisted men had spoken to him.
“They told my son that ‘you can be proud of your father because he’s keeping the faith,’” Modder said. “The whole command knows that Chaplain Modder is keeping the faith.”

VA administrator used doll photos to mock veterans' mental problems in email


A social worker at an Indianapolis Veteran Affairs clinic was disciplined earlier this year after sending emails to colleagues that contained photos of an elf figurine posed to mock the mental health problems of combat veterans.
Robin Paul, who manages the Roudebush Veteran Affairs Medical Center’s Seamless Transition Integrated Care Clinic, on Dec. 18 sent an email with photos showing an elf pleading for Xanax and hanging himself with an electrical cord, according to The Indianapolis Star, which broke the story. A spokeswoman for the facility, Julie Webb, said the matter was dealt with in January, but declined to say what action, if any, was taken.
“Management was made aware of the situation a month and a half ago and addressed it at the time,” Webb told FoxNews.com. “Ms. Paul apologized. She has helped to build the clinic up and this was an error in judgment that does not reflect the Indianapolis Veterans Affairs’ commitment to providing high-quality health care to our veterans.”
“It is a slap in the face to our recent and past veterans suffering from mental health issues every single day.”- Ken Hylton, American Legion
Paul could not be reached for comment, but told The Indianapolis Star that she was sorry in an email the hospital’s public affairs department sent on her behalf.
“I would like to sincerely apologize for the email message and I take full responsibility for this poor judgment,” Paul wrote in the email. “I have put my heart and soul into my work with Veterans for many years. I hold all veterans and military personnel in the highest regard and am deeply remorseful for any hurt this may have caused.”
One email, addressed to “IND STICC Team” and obtained by The Indianapolis Star, contained the subject line, “Naughty Elf in the STICC clinic.”
“So, photos have appeared that indicate that the STICC clinic may have been invaded,” it read. “Looks like this magical character made his way through a few areas.”
One photo showed the elf giving a female doll a gynecological exam, and bore the caption: “Trying his skills as a primary care provider (doing a pap).”
Another showed the elf next to a sticky note with the words, “Out of XANAX — please help!” That caption read, “Self-medicating for mental health issues when a CNS would not give him his requested script.”
A third photograph showed the elf hanging from a strand of Christmas lights, with the caption: “Caught in the act of suicidal behavior (trying to hang himself from an electrical cord).”
News of the email is the latest in a series of black eyes for the massive agency, which has been under fire for facilities that altered their books to hide the number of patients who died while awaiting appointments.
The latest controversy drew outrage from veterans groups.
“It is a slap in the face to our recent and past veterans suffering from mental health issues every single day,” Ken Hylton, commander of the Indiana Department of the American Legion, told the newspaper, adding that Paul should be fired.
Pete Hegseth, CEO of Concerned Veterans of America and a Fox News contributor, agreed.
"While this shameful act may be an isolated incident, what’s not isolated are the almost daily reports that feed the perception that VA leadership are detached from the urgent challenges facing returning veterans,” Hegseth said. “But it’s even more troubling that Ms. Paul’s shockingly poor judgment did not merit immediate firing. She should have been fired the minute such poor judgment was discovered and failing to do so only reinforces VA's track record of failing to hold its employees accountable."
Paul remains employed at the hospital and continues to manage the clinic, earning an annual salary of $79,916, according to the Star.

Danish lawmakers propose Mohammad cartoons in school textbooks


A new proposal in Denmark could result in the Charlie Hebdo shooting and cartoons of the Islamic Prophet Mohammad being taught in schools.
The country’s opposition leaders are in agreement that the controversial cartoons first printed in Jyllands-Posten newspaper should appear in school textbooks, The Washington Post reports. Both the Conservative People's Party and Danish People's Party, the latter commanding the third-largest level of support in Denmark, have voiced their support for the idea.
”It would be natural for the cartoons to become part of the material that the teachers can choose to use," Conservative People’s Party spokeswoman Mai Mercado told DR Nyheder.
Jyllands-Posten first sparked controversy in September 2005 after publishing a series of 12 cartoons of the prophet Mohammad, including one particularly controversial image showing the prophet wearing a bomb in place of a turban. While the cartoons inspired many artists – including some working at Charlie Hebdo – to draw their own Mohammad cartoons, the newspaper encountered a backlash, as well. Since then, the newspaper has received a number of death threats.
While the two parties both agree that teaching about the attacks is important, their support comes in varying degrees.The Conservative People’s Party believes that teachers should be free to choose whether or not to reprint the cartoons in textbooks and that they should be taught in history class. The Danish People’s Party believes the teaching of the cartoons should be mandatory, and that the subject should be part of religious studies, according toThe Post..
There are already reportedly many Danish schools that teach courses using the cartoons in the latter years of secondary schools, although it is not obligatory.
Dennis Hornhave Jacobsen, president of the Danish Association of History and Social Studies Teachers, believes teaching the cartoons in class is a bad idea because “it could end any real discussion about the nature of freedom of expression, because there are children in schools who believe the Muhammad cartoons are objectionable and the discussion will stop there.”
Additionally, Claus Hjortdal of Denmark's Headmaster Association told the BBC that he believes publishing the images will lead to bullying.
"One can easily talk about it without showing the images," he said.

Boko Haram gains new power by aligning with ISIS, say experts

Only a Coward Hides behind a Mask.

By joining ISIS, Nigerian-based Islamic terror group Boko Haram has likely gained unprecedented power, resources and reach, according to intelligence experts.
Boko Haram, which has driven some 3 million people from their homes in northeast Africa over the last five years, slaughtering whole villages, taking women and children slaves, and setting off lethal explosions in densely populated areas, made the announcement it was joining the Middle Eastern group on March 7 on an audio track translated into French and English. Leading terror experts in the U.S. and Africa said the announcement to become a part of ISIS, a group that has horrified the world by beheading, crucifying, stoning, pushing to their death and even burning alive innocent civilians across Syria, Iraq, Libya, Algeria, the Sinai Peninsula, and other parts of the Middle East, has far greater implications than just being a mere symbolic act.
“Boko Haram has entered the realm of international jihadism, and by so doing will gain prestige among the vast supporters of Islamic State.”- Veryan Khan, Terrorism Research & Analysis Consortium
“Boko Haram has entered the realm of international jihadism, and by so doing will gain prestige among the vast supporters of Islamic State,” said Veryan Khan, editorial director of Terrorism Research & Analysis Consortium (TRAC).
Conversely, ISIS, also known as Islamic State, will gain its first real step into Africa beyond mere cells, individual loyalties, and smaller less well-known groups, she said.
“Given the fact that Boko Haram not only controls large swaths of territory, holds hundreds and hundreds of hostages, and is the most successful terror operation out of Africa right now, ISIS has gained a real foothold,” Khan said.
The Islamic State must officially accept Boko Haram's “bay’ah” or pledge of allegiance to the Islamic State, though it is unlikely that ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi will deny it, considering his strategy of world expansion and control, said Jasmine Opperman, TRAC Director of African Operations.
Islamic State's focus remains Syria and Iraq but as seen in Libya, Africa will not escape the Islamic State's search for ever wider presence.
ISIS has flourished where there is weak governance and instability, and Africa has many such areas that could be seen as "lucrative markets,” Opperman said.
“When the ISIS accepts the pledge it will be a clear message to other groups such as Ansaru, AQIM and al-Shabaab to join,” Opperman said. “That will allow an expansion into north and central Africa similar to what was seen since June 2014 in Iraq.”
The pledge also will elevate the profile of Boko Haram’s leader, Abubakar Shekau, attention that “Shekau so desperately seeks,” Khan said, comparing him to “witch doctor – part voodoo/part radical Islam,” but noting he has had an image “makeover” in recent weeks.
“By Boko Haram pledging to the Islamic State, Shekau has secured a safe haven for Boko Haram's leadership. Even if the current Nigerian offensives are to succeed, a temporary escape could be made to another IS stronghold from where Boko Haram's life cycle can be maintained irrespective of distance,” Khan said.
Boko Haram’s pledge could be an attempt at seeking quick fixes to two areas they are currently struggling with, namely, recruitment and access to arms, Opperman said.
“Boko Haram is now part and parcel of the ISIS-aligned international jihadist threat,” Opperman said. “Any deterring operation will have to take into account Boko Haram, and that means greater international involvement in an area already overwhelmed by foreign presence and interests.”
While the pledge doesn’t hand the reigns of evil completely to ISIS, “ISIS will provide a strategy and directly guide on who to target, where to target and how to target,” Khan said.
The official pledge follows news FoxNews.com first reported March 2 that Boko Haram appeared to have aligned its media production, social media and execution style videos with ISIS, even placing the signature ISIS black flag in its videos on its military-style tanks.

Firestorm erupts over GOP letter challenging Obama's power to approve Iran nuclear deal


A political firestorm erupted late Monday after an open letter from Republican senators to Iran's leaders challenged President Obama's ability to strike a permanent nuclear deal with Tehran.


Vice President Joe Biden strongly denounced the letter in a statement saying the missive "offends me as a matter of principle" and was "beneath the dignity of an institution I revere."
"In thirty-six years in the United States Senate, I cannot recall another instance in which senators wrote directly to advise another country — much less a longtime foreign adversary — that the president does not have the constitutional authority to reach a meaningful understanding with them," Biden said in his statement.
The letter signed by Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and 46 of his colleagues warned Tehran that any nuclear deal needs congressional approval in order to last beyond President Obama's term and pointed out that without that step, all Iran would be left with is a "mere executive agreement" between President Obama and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
The letter added, "We hope this letter enriches your knowledge of our constitutional system and promotes mutual understanding and clarity as nuclear negotiations progress."
In a response posted on the website of Iran's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Foreign Minister Javad Zarif dismissed the GOP letter as "mostly a propaganda ploy."
"It is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history," Iran's top diplomat added.
President Obama himself compared the Senate Republicans to reactionary members of Iran's government, saying "I think it's somewhat ironic that some members of Congress want to make common cause with the hardliners in Iran. It's an unusual coalition."
Cotton defended the letter in an interview with ABC News, saying "It's the job of the president to negotiate but it's the job of Congress to approve ... We're simply trying to say that Congress has a constitutional role to approve any deal, to make sure that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon. Not today, not tomorrow, not ten years from now.
"We're on the verge of a deal that could allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon in as little as ten years, so it's important that Iran realize that Congress will not allow that outcome to happen," the senator added.
The letter does not include the signature of Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Action on any new legislation challenging the administration's strategy would be likely to begin with him.
White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said earlier Monday that "the rush to war, or at least the rush to the military option, that many Republicans are advocating is not at all in the best interest of the United States."
With Cotton presiding over the Senate, Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Republicans were driven by animosity toward Obama and unwilling to recognize that American voters had twice elected him president. Reid said that even at the height of Democrats' disagreement about the war in Iraq with former President George W. Bush, they would not have sent a letter to former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
"Republicans don't know how to do anything other than juvenile political attacks against the president," Reid said as Cotton listened.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., called the White House's objections to the letter "a tempest in a teapot." Congress obviously will want a voice in any deal with Iran, McCain told reporters, suggesting the Democrats' protests might be "a diversion from a lousy deal."
The Obama administration believes it has authority to lift most trade, oil and financial sanctions that would be pertinent to the nuclear deal in exchange for an Iranian promise to limit its nuclear programs. For the rest, it needs Congress' approval. And lawmakers could approve new Iran sanctions to complicate matters.
"As the the authors of this letter must know, the vast majority of our international commitments take effect without Congressional approval," Biden said. The vice president cited "diplomatic recognition of the People’s Republic of China, the resolution of the Iran hostage crisis, and the conclusion of the Vietnam War" as three such commitments.
The U.S. is negotiating alongside Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia in an effort to reach agreement on the framework of a permanent agreement by the end of this month. Negotiations are due to resume next week in Switzerland. Officials say the parties have been speaking about a multi-step agreement that would freeze Iran's uranium enrichment program for at least a decade before gradually lifting restrictions. Sanctions relief would similarly be phased in.

Monday, March 9, 2015

White House, NYT leave Bushes out of lead photos from Selma march



The decision by The New York Times to run a front-page image on Sunday of President Obama -- and family -- leading a march to mark the 50th anniversary of the Selma civil rights clashes, while leaving out of the image former President George W. Bush and his wife Laura apparently was mirrored in the "official White House photo" of the event. 
The official White House blog's Sunday entry on the Alabama march led with a similar image, focusing on Obama and his family, as well as civil rights figures, but leaving out the Bushes.
Both images show Obama walking alongside Georgia Democratic Rep. John Lewis, and even Al Sharpton, as they led thousands across the Edmund Pettus Bridge.
The White House blog does acknowledge in the caption that the Bushes were there, and the photo at the bottom of the page includes them off to the side.
Part of the problem may have been the staging of the event itself.
Basil Smikle Jr., a Democratic strategist and former advance team member for the Clinton White House, noted that the Bushes were not standing directly next to the Obamas. He told Fox News he would have liked to see both presidents together, at least in the New York Times photo.
"Both presidents should have been close together," he said.  
Regardless, the Bushes were standing but a few feet away from the first family and were included in other photos.
It's unclear whether the Times, which ran its own photo, cropped out the former president in that picture, or simply chose to run an image that didn't include him.
Still, the decision drew criticism on Monday.
"This is a stunning example of media bias," said Deneen Borelli, a Fox News contributor and outreach director for the conservative FreedomWorks.
The Associated Press also ran a variety of photos after they crossed the bridge, some of which show the Bushes and some of which do not. However, it appears the AP did not run photos showing Bush, before they marched across the bridge.
The Times' article on the event did mention the Bushes' attendance, after the jump. The article notes that in 2006, he signed the reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act.
FoxNews.com has reached out to The New York Times and the White House for comment.

Jihadi Cartoon


McConnell vows no debt default as deadline nears


Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Sunday that the Republican-controlled Congress won’t allow the government to default as the Treasury Department quickly approaches its so-called “debt ceiling.”
“I made it clear after November that we won’t shut down the government or default on debt,” the Kentucky Republican told CBS’ “Face the Nation.”
McConnell’s promise came two days after Treasury Secretary Jack Lew told Capitol Hill that the government loses its authority after March 15 to borrow money to cover approved congressional spending and that his agency would have to resort to “extraordinary measures” as a short-term solution.
To be sure, McConnell acknowledged after winning a tough midterm election bid that voters were tired of an ineffective Congress that too often teetered on shutting down the government over bipartisan issues.
“I hear your concerns,” McConnell said in his victory speech.
Still, Congress came perilously close in recent weeks to at least partially closing the Department of Homeland Security when Republicans tried to tie funding for the agency to efforts to roll back President Obama’s executive actions on immigration.
Lew told Congress on Friday that he will start using the package of emergency measures he has used in the past to keep the federal government from going over the debt limit next week.
The debt limit has been suspended for the past year, meaning that Treasury could borrow as much as it needed to keep the government running. But the limit will go back into effect on March 15 at whatever level of debt exists at that point.
The nation's debt currently stands at $18.1 trillion.
Treasury can employ certain accounting measures to buy time to keep the government operating without facing a costly default on the nation's debt.
In his letter to congressional leaders on Friday, Lew said he would use the first of those measures on March 13, two days before the debt limit will be re-imposed.
Lew said he would stop issuing on March 13 special-purpose Treasury debt that can be purchased by state and local governments to assist them in financing such activities as construction projects.
The Congressional Budget Office, in a report last week, estimated that the various measures Lew can employ could put off the date the debt ceiling will have to be raised until October or November.
McConnell also told CBS on Sunday that Congress will handle the issue “over a period of months” and that he has a responsibility to work with President Obama, despite their political differences.
He also said he is “very optimistic” about potential compromises with Obama on some issues.
“The American public wants us to look at what we can agree on,” McConnell said.
It was a standoff over the debt limit in August 2011 that prompted the first-ever downgrade of the nation's credit rating by Standard & Poor's, and in October 2013 there was a 16-day partial government shutdown.
"Only Congress is empowered to increase the nation's borrowing authority and I hope that Congress will address this matter without controversy or brinksmanship," Lew said in his letter. "I respectfully ask Congress to raise the debt limit as soon as possible."
While GOP lawmakers have given no indication when they will take up legislation to increase the debt ceiling, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi on Friday urged them to move quickly, warning that an unprecedented default by the government on its debt obligations would severely harm the economy by causing consumer and business interest rates to soar.
"There is no reason that the Republican Congress should not act immediately to take the prospect of a catastrophic default off of the table," she said in a statement. "Failure to act would have savage impacts on American families."

Dempsey: Some Iraqi troops show up for training ill-prepared


Some Iraqi army units in line for U.S.-led training to fight the Islamic State group are showing up ill-prepared, the top American general said Sunday.
Gen. Martin Dempsey, speaking to reporters aboard this French aircraft carrier in the northern Persian Gulf not far from Iran's coast, said he sees no reason to send more U.S. military trainers or advisers at this time. More, broadly, he defended the pace of the overall military campaign in Iraq.
"Right now we don't need more advisers on the ground," Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said with his French counterpart, Gen. Pierre de Villiers, at his side on the hangar deck of the de Gaulle.
"We've got trainers and advisers that are waiting for some of the Iraqi units to show up, and when they've shown up -- a handful of them -- they've shown up understrength and sometimes without the proper equipment. The Iraqi government can actually fix that themselves."
The crux of the U.S.-led coalition's strategy for dislodging IS from Iraq is  this: degrade the militants' fighting power and resources through limited airstrikes against positions in northern and western Iraq, as well as in Syria; train and advise underperforming Iraqi security forces; and press the Iraqi government to take firmer steps to reconcile with the disaffected Sunnis.
"This is going to require some strategic patience," Dempsey said.
He said the military part of the conflict could be concluded "in the foreseeable future." The underlying problems -- failures in Iraqi governance and a disaffected Sunni population -- probably will take longer to resolve.
Dempsey spent the day aboard the de Gaulle to highlight U.S.-French military cooperation and to discuss strategies for combating IS in Iraq. He planned to visit Iraq next to discuss the campaign with government leaders and U.S. military commanders.
France is flying a variety of missions into Iraq from aboard the de Gaulle, which began operating in the northern Gulf on Feb. 23 and is scheduled to remain for eight weeks.
Dempsey watched as four French Rafale attack aircraft roared off the carrier's deck en route to Iraq, and later he observed four Super Etendard fighters land after returning from a mission.
French officials said they are flying 12 to 15 missions a day, including intelligence and surveillance flights, airstrikes and close air support missions in coordination with Iraq ground troops. Dempsey said that makes the French a valued partner in a conflict that has about 20 countries flying various air missions but only three conducting maritime operations.
Dempsey arrived aboard the de Gaulle on a U.S. Navy C-2 Greyhound twin-engine aircraft. After meetings with de Villier and other French and American officers, he was catapulted off the carrier in the C-2 for a return flight to a U.S. Navy station in Bahrain. Earlier Sunday he met with Bahrain government officials.
While they met aboard the de Gaulle, an American aircraft carrier, the USS Carl Vinson, pulled to within about 1,000 yards. The two carriers have been coordinating their air operations in what Dempsey called a sign of increased U.S.-French military cooperation around the world. In an unusual arrangement, the French carrier is under the operational control of the Americans as part of the IS campaign.
Dempsey was asked by reporters to respond to criticism by some that the U.S. is not using air power aggressively enough in Iraq and Syria. Dempsey said there are valid reasons for limiting the pace of the bombing while other aspects of the conflict are addressed.
"Carpet bombing through Iraq is not the answer," he said, adding that IS fighters have adapted since the U.S.-led bombing began in Iraqi in August.
"This is not an enemy that is sitting around in the open desert waiting for me to come find it and either use U.S. or French aircraft to attack it," Dempsey said. "They did some of that in the beginning and paid the price. So the enemy has adapted and they have developed tactics and techniques that make them a little more difficult to find."
Dempsey said the intensity and scale of the bombing campaign is necessarily limited by a need to avoid civilian casualties and to ensure the best possible intelligence is collected before striking targets.
"We are very precise because the very last thing we want to do is create a condition of civilian casualties on the ground, which would add to these competing narratives about taking sides and it being a religious issue, and Christianity and Islam. And so we have a responsibility to be very precise in the use of air power, and that means it takes time" to build the proper intelligence picture before striking.
"If I had more targets and I could be precise, we could produce more effects on the ground," he added.

GOP Senate battles for Congress to have vote in Iran nuclear deal as talks resume, deadlines near

This is going to turn out Bad.

Democrats and Republicans sparred Sunday over congressional involvement in the Iran nuclear agreement, as President Obama attempted to assure critics that the U.S. won’t accept a bad deal.
The debate intensified as the United States and five other world powers are set to resume negotiations next week with Iran to stop the country from pursuing and achieving a nuclear weapon. The goal of Secretary of State John Kerry and the other negotiators is to agree on the framework of a deal before April toward a final agreement by June 30.
Obama told CBS' "Sunday Morning" that the U.S. would "walk away" from nuclear talks with Iran if there's no acceptable deal and that any agreement must allow Western powers to verify that Tehran isn't going to obtain an atomic weapon.
"If we don't have that kind of deal, then we're not going to take it," he said.
Obama also said the U.S. and others still would have "enough time to take action," if Iran “cheated.”
Iran says their program is peaceful and exists only to produce energy for civilian use.
The GOP-led Congress wants to be able to vote on a final deal before it’s accepted, with Senate leaders trying to figure out whether they can pass legislation on the issue with enough votes to override a presidential veto.
“The Iranian parliament will get to say yes or no on this deal,” Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, a Republican member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told “Fox News Sunday.” “I think the United States Congress should have that exact same input into the process.”
Johnson said a bill cosponsored by Illinois GOP Sen. Mark Kirk and New Jersey Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez addresses that issue and that the Senate is scheduled to begin working on the legislation in the coming days.
Florida Sen. Bill Nelson, a Democratic on the Senate Armed Services Committee, told "Fox News Sunday" that he will reserve action until the administration announces on March 24 whether the negotiations were successful. And he argued that the Kirk-Menendez bill deals only with congressional sanctions that have already been imposed on Iran.
The general outline of a proposed deal purportedly includes intrusive inspections, a freeze on sensitive nuclear activity for at least 10 years and a cap on centrifuges and enriched uranium.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell insists that Congress has a chance to review and vote on any deal. But he acknowledged Sunday that he doesn't have the support yet to override a threatened veto by Obama.
"I'm hoping we can get 67 senators to assert the historic role of the Senate and the Congress in looking at matters of this magnitude,” the Kentucky Republican told CBS’ “Face the Nation.” “Obviously, the president doesn't want us involved in this. But he's going to need us if he's going to lift any of the existing sanctions. And so I think he cannot work around Congress forever.”
Last week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, before a joint meeting of Congress, argued against the proposed deal, suggesting Iran could easily resume its pursuit of a nuclear weapon after such a relatively short wait and that other Arab nations will follow in Tehran’s footsteps.
Roughly 50 Capitol Hill Democrats boycotted the address, arguing it undermined the efforts of the administration, which was not advised about Netanyahu’s invitation by House Speaker John Boehner.
Among the most outspoken was California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
She told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that Netanyahu’s speech was “arrogant” and said he shouldn’t “trash” a potential deal before it’s completed.

Top Senate Democrat urges Clinton to address private email controversy


The top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee urged former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to give a full explanation of why she used a private e-mail account for all her official correspondence during her four years as America's top diplomat.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., told NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday that Clinton "needs to step up and come out and say exactly what the situation was," adding that from "this point on, the silence is going to hurt her."
Feinstein is the first major Democrat to urge Clinton to share details of the account's contents, some of which have been subpoenaed by a special House committee investigating the 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
Clinton, thought to be the near-unanimous frontrunner for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, has kept mostly silent on the private e-mail story, which was first reported by the New York Times last Monday. Her use of the account may violate federal rules requiring officials to keep all their communications for record-keeping purposes. The controversy grew later in the week when the Associated Press reported that the account's server had been traced to an Internet service registered to her Chappaqua, N.Y. home.
This past week, Clinton said in a Twitter message that she had asked the State Department to make public all emails she had previously turned over to them, a total of approximately 55,000 pages. However, The Times reported that those messages previously had been selected by members of her staff and were not a complete record of her four years at Foggy Bottom.
She did not address the issue in her most recent public appearance Saturday night during an event in Coral Gables, Florida, for the Clinton Global Initiative University.
Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., the chairman of the Benghazi committee, told CBS' "Face The Nation" "there are gaps of months and months and months" in the emails the committee had previously received. "It's not up to Secretary Clinton to decide what's a public record and what's not," Gowdy said.
"We're not entitled to everything," Gowdy continued. "I don't want everything. I just want everything related to Libya and Benghazi."
For his part, President Obama said Sunday that he first learned of Clinton's private account through news reports. He went on to praise Clinton for requesting the release of the 55,000 pages of e-mail by the State Department, called her "an outstanding public servant" and defended his administration's record on transparency.

Sunday, March 8, 2015

Black Hole Cartoon


Does House Minority Leader Pelosi really hold all of the cards?


In late 2006, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., had a decision to make. Democrats had just captured control of the House in the midterm elections and she would soon become the first female speaker of the House.
One question weighing on Pelosi was whether she would maintain her smaller, hodge-podge office suite overlooking the Library of Congress on the east side of the Capitol -- or move into the more commodious digs featuring a vast panorama of the National Mall and Washington Monument on the west side of the building.
Then-House Speaker Denny Hastert, R-Ill., would soon be out the door.
And though Democrats held the House majority for more than 40 years, for the latter half of the 20th century, Democratic speakers -- including the late Sam Rayburn, Texas; Tip O’Neill, Mass.; and Tom Foley, Wash. -- mostly opted for the diminutive offices.
Out of tradition, Democrats ceded the capacious suites to Republicans despite their minority status. The better offices became the Speaker’s Office when the GOP captured the House in the historic 1994 midterms.
Should Pelosi remain in the smaller offices as homage to fellow Democratic speakers? Or should she upgrade to the new suite?
She consulted with O’Neill’s granddaughter, Catlin O’Neill, who at the time was an aide.
“It was sentimental and Catlin said ‘It’s OK. Move the office. The family wants you in the Speaker’s Office,’” Pelosi recounted to the Washington Post in 2007. And so Pelosi abandoned the Democratic rabbit warren on the west side of the building, matriculating to the anchor property on the Capitol’s East Front.
As strange as it may seem, Pelosi may feel a bit like her Democratic predecessors Rayburn, O’Neill and Foley these days. She now inhabits the cramped quarters now reserved for the minority as House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, enjoys the roomier acreage.
But after recent congressional exercises just to pass a bill to avoid a shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security, one wonders who really commands the most votes in the House now.
The case-in-point came a week ago Friday, hours before the DHS funding would expire. House Republicans insisted on latching a provision onto the spending plan to block President Obama’s immigration executive action. The gambit couldn’t get through the Senate. After multiple failed procedural votes, senators zapped an amended DHS measure back to the House. The new bill funded DHS through September 30 but dropped the immigration provisions.
House Republicans balked and refused the altered bill. Instead, they voted to form a conference committee to work out differences between the bodies. Meanwhile, DHS funding swung in the balance. The Senate mailed the House a three-week DHS spending bill to avoid a shutdown. Some House conservatives protested because the bill lacked the immigration executive order provisos. And Democrats voted no too, preferring a full-year of funding.
With DHS funding set to expire in just seven hours, House Republicans generated 191 yeas for that bill. But 217 yeas are needed these days for passage. With their majority, Republicans can only lose 28 of their own before turning to Democrats. Only 12 Democrats voted aye.
The bill failed.
Democrats were happy to vote yes on a “clean” DHS bill bereft of the immigration policy riders for the rest of the government’s fiscal year, but not for one that limped along for just a few weeks. Pelosi and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md., implored their members to vote nay.
“House Republicans have painted themselves into a corner,” said Pelosi at the time. “I’m just saying to the speaker, get a grip. Get a grip on the responsibility we have.”
The vote infuriated Republicans who voted yes. A senior House GOP leadership source said they knew the vote was “going sideways” ahead of time. The source said rank-and-file members were “super-mad” at those who didn’t take one for the team and vote yea, feeling hung out to dry.
Without Democratic assistance, Republicans were cooked. And DHS was defunded in a matter of hours. With Obama’s blessing, Pelosi offered Democratic votes to Boehner to overcome the impasse.
The minority leader then crafted a “Dear Colleague” letter addressed to House Democrats. Pelosi thanked them for their “cooperation” on the failed DHS vote. But this time asked for yeas on a “seven-day patch.” She told Democrats a yes vote would “assure that we will vote for full funding next week.
An hour later, the House voted on the interim spending bill, approving it 357 to 60. A coalition of 183 Republicans and 174 Democrats voted yes. But Democrats were the key. The Department of Homeland Security was funded for a week.
But that wasn’t much time. And Monday night, it became clear that the Senate couldn’t handle the House’s wish to form a conference committee. The Senate prepped to send the “clean” DHS bill back to the House. And that’s when Boehner moved -- knowing Democrats could bail out recalcitrant Republicans and not shutter DHS.
“Imagine if, God forbid, another terrorist attack hits the United States,” said Boehner to House Republicans at a Tuesday morning conclave, according to a source.
Boehner told Republicans he continued to be “outraged and frustrated” at the president’s immigration maneuvers. But he said the decision to forge ahead and fund DHS was “the right one for this team and the right one for the country.”
Maybe so. Not many of Boehner’s members would buy it. And that’s where Pelosi would swoop in. The GOP wouldn’t secure 191 yeas like they did on the three-week spending bill last week. They’d need Democratic assistance. A source suggested the GOP would cobble together a group of Republicans who were either in the leadership, held committees chairmanships, served on the Appropriations Committee or were moderates. Democrats would take up the slack. In early 2013, the House approved a $50 billion aid bill for victims of Hurricane Sandy 241-180. But only 49 GOPers voted yes. Last February, the House voted to raise the debt limit 221-201. A scant 28 yeas came from Republicans with minority Democrats hauling most of the freight.
The House voted 257-167 to fund DHS, but only 75 Republicans voted yes. Again, it was Democrats who largely advanced the measure despite their minority status.
“Our members had the courage to say, ‘I don’t want the government to be shut down. But I’m not falling for this three-week plan,’” trumpeted Pelosi.
Pelosi persuaded her members to hold out for full-year fiscal funding. After several acrimonious days, the House voted for what Pelosi demanded.
So who is really in charge here? Boehner or Pelosi? Especially since big fights await on the debt limit, funding highway construction programs and avoiding a government shutdown in the fall. Democratic votes will be crucial to assist Republicans. Was Pelosi a “de facto speaker?"
“If there’s ever an oxymoron it is ‘de facto speaker.’ You’re either speaker or you’re not,” insisted Pelosi.
But on DHS funding, it was Pelosi who controlled the game. And because of the disarray on the GOP side of the aisle, the bill only passed when Pelosi offered her members to vote for the plan Democrats wanted.
The debate time allocation on the bill reflected internal House fissures. For the standard hour of debate, Republicans received 20 minutes of time, Democrats 20 minutes and opponents 20 minutes. This mirrors the “coalition” approach which appears to be essential to operate the House these days.
“The problem is, I don’t see a path to victory with what (opponents) are looking at,” chirped Rep. Mike Simpson, an Idaho Republican and Boehner ally who managed the spending plan for the GOP. “It will lead to a close-down of the Department of Homeland Security and that is not a victory. That is very dangerous.”
Conservatives weren’t quite done with their machinations even as the final bill came to the floor. Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., launched a final dilatory maneuver, objecting to the House setting aside an oral reading of the 96-page Senate amendment which struck the immigration provisions. House procedure dictates that all bills and such amendments are read aloud. It’s a vestige from the days before Xerox when there was often only a sole copy of legislation. The only way lawmakers could learn about a bill was to hear its content read from the dais.
Massie required House Reading Clerk Susan Cole to read the amendment for 20 minutes (she stopped once to sip water) before abandoning his protest and allowing the House to consider the Senate changes.
“It’s time to move forward and stop playing these silly games,” said Rep. Charlie Dent, R-Pa. “It is time for the House to move past the corrosive pattern of self-imposed cliffs and shutdowns and get to the work that the American people expect us to address.”
But Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, railed against the GOP’s gambit.
“Since December, the outcome has been baked into the cake,” said Cruz. “Capitulation was the endpoint.”
Soon Congress must wrestle with the onerous issue of reimbursing physicians who treat Medicare patients. A failure to act could slash doctors’ payments by 25 percent. Lawmakers must adopt a budget. The Highway Trust Fund is bankrupt. They must keep the entire government open come October and also raise the debt limit. Each fight increases in level of difficulty. Perhaps the only way Republicans can move major agenda items is to rely on Democrats. This isn’t new. Boehner has had to rely on Democrats to pass almost every major bill since he assumed the speakership -- ranging from the debt ceiling to avoiding a government shutdown.
Pelosi flexed her muscles on the DHS bill and got her way. There could be a repeat of that phenomenon on big votes this year.
On Friday, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew wrote to Congress, saying the government will technically hit the debt ceiling next week. But the general consensus is that lawmakers might not have to move until autumn. Regardless, Lew beseeched “Congress to raise the debt limit as soon as possible.”
Pelosi quickly dashed off a follow-up statement:
“The treasury secretary’s letter is another reminder of the consequences of Republicans’ culture of crisis. There is no reason that the Republican Congress should not act immediately to take the prospect of a catastrophic default off of the table,” said the California Democrat.
If history is our guide, it’s hard to consider a scenario where Democrats aren’t again asked to carry the water on this issue and other issues, in lieu of the GOP majority.
Pelosi’s is certainly no longer the House speaker or a “de facto” speaker. She operates out of the smaller office suite and doesn’t have the power to bring bills to the floor yet the numbers to pass measures with only Democratic votes. Still, there was a time when Tip O’Neill and Tom Foley toiled in that very office while making sure the House trains ran on time. And it’s a circumstance not unlike the one in which Pelosi finds herself now.

UC Irvine reverses American flag ban


The Star-Spangled Banner will once again wave at the University of California, Irvine, after student government leaders nixed a bid to ban the American flag from a campus lobby.
Members of the executive cabinet of the Associated Students of UC Irvine met Saturday in an emergency session to reverse the flag ban.
CLICK HERE TO FOLLOW TODD FOR CONSERVATIVE NEWS AND CONVERSATION
“Our campus is patriotic and proud,” student government President Reza Zomorrodian told me. “We did something right for our campus.”
Zomorrodian, said he was furious that a handful of student legislators pushed through the ban.
“Our campus stands with the flag,” he said.
On March 3, student legislator Matthew Guevara authored a bill to remove the American flag, along with all other flags, from the lobby of a campus building housing their offices. Click here to read my original column.
Guevara said he wanted to make the university a more “culturally inclusive” place by banning Old Glory.
“Designing a culturally inclusive space aims to remove barriers that create undue effort and separation by planning and designing spaces that enable everyone to participate equally and confidentially,” read the resolution.
The student government’s decision created a firestorm of national outrage from alumni, current students and the university’s administration.
“This misguided decision was not endorsed or supported in any way by the campus leadership, the University of California, or the broader student body,” read a statement posted online by the university. “The views of a handful of students passing a resolution do not represent the opinions of the nearly 30,000 students on this campus, and have no influence on the policies and practices of the university.”
They also tweeted a photograph showing the Stars & Stripes were still posted at the taxpayer-funded university.
As for the student government association’s flag, that will be rehoused on Monday, Zomorrodian said.
Guevara and his band of cohorts could not be reached for comment. They aren’t talking publicly and Zomorrodian said he hasn’t been able to locate them. But when he does - he plans on giving them an earful, he said.
Zomorrodian said he was especially offended that they banned the flag because he is a first generation American.
“That’s why the flag is special to me,” he said. “I was born here. My parents came here as immigrants.”
That makes him proud to be an American, and to stand up for the flag.
“This country has been great to our family,” he said.
The university’s administration should also be commended for their swift condemnation of the flag ban. It’s refreshing to see there are still educators who still love the land of the free, the home of the brave.
If nothing else, this episode has shown the nation that the University of California, Irvine has hundreds, if not thousands, of young men and women who love our nation.
I was especially pleased to hear that a member of the university’s ROTC volunteered to stand guard over Old Glory — just in case someone tried to snatch it in the dark of night.
God bless America, friends.



  Matthew Guevara Idiot of the Year.





Ex-Iranian hostages agree with Bibi: Tehran can't be trusted

American Tied Up and in Blindfold.

They dealt with the Iranian regime first-hand more than three decades ago, when it was founded in an act of war against the U.S., and several survivors of the hostage crisis say the idea of the U.S. negotiating with an unrepentant Tehran makes their blood boil.
For 444 days, the 52 Americans were held prisoner in the U.S. Embassy by the student revolutionaries that would help usher in the hard-line Islamic theocracy that remains in place today. Many of the hostage takers and guards held key roles in the Iranian government then and continue in important positions today.
“I think it’s very naive because the Iranians talk out both sides of their mouth,” said Clair Cortland Barnes, 69, of Leland, N.C, who was a 34-year-old communications officer at the time he was taken hostage. “Their actions betray their conversations. Their conversations say one thing and then they do something else.'
“They have an agenda that is to wipe out Israel and take over America,” he added.
“I think it’s very naive because the Iranians talk out both sides of their mouth.”- Clair Cortland Barnes, former Iranian hostage
The U.S., along with the other four permanent members of the United Nations Security Council -- Russia, China, United Kingdom and France -- as well as Germany,  are negotiating a deal that could end international sanctions against Iran in return for assurances it will not pursue nuclear weapons. Iran’s history of disguising its pursuit of nuclear weapons, as well as its rhetoric against the U.S., Israel and the West in general, make any deal that comes from the talks suspect, said hostages.
Barnes' sentiment was shared by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who in a speech to the U.S. Congress that he delivered against the wishes of the Obama administration, characterized Iran as the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism and said the regime has "proven time and again that it cannot be trusted."
“Iran’s regime poses a great threat not only to Israel, but also to the peace of the entire world,” railed Netanyahu, who also said he does not "believe that Iran’s radical regime will change for the better after this deal.”
David Roeder, a former U.S. Air Force lieutenant colonel who was attached to the U.S. Embassy when it was overrun by students seeking to overthrow the U.S.-backed Shah of Iran, said the details of the deal that have so far leaked out -- details the U.S. has not confirmed -- make it sound like Iran is being rewarded for bad behavior.
“It doesn’t seem like this is a good deal for the U.S.,” said Roeder, who is now 72 and retired in North Carolina. "It seems as if we are paying a lot of money and not getting much of a return.”
Roeder and other hostages believe they have a right to legal damages from the Iranian assets that are already being released after being frozen for years following the hostage crisis. The former hostages are represented by attorney Thomas Lankford, of Alexandria, Va.
“Most of them were tortured horribly," Lankford said of the hostages. "Even [though some were] soldiers, no war experience can prepare you for what they endured.”
Lankford said Americans who spent more than a year as captives of a regime that remains in place cannot be expected to trust it in negotiations.
“There’s a large degree of mistrust," Lankford said. "It’s hard for many of them to know what’s in those discussions.”
There is more to earning a place at the negotiating table with the U.S. and world powers than simply paying the hostages a settlement, said Donald Cooke, who was the embassy's vice consul when he was taken hostage. Iran must own up to the criminal violence in which the current regime was forged, he said.
“If they want to negotiate, they have to deal with the issue of the hostage taking, which the current government is still responsible for," said Cooke, 61, of Maryland. “The Iranian government has to take responsibility or you can't take them seriously in any negotiations.”
Like several of the former hostages, Cooke said he watched the Israeli prime minister's speech with keen interest.
“Benjamin Netanyahu had a good point when he spoke to Congress," Cooke said. "Any negotiation should not be about technical issues. The negotiation should be about changing behavior, and it is not.”
Former U.S. Marine Rodney “Rocky” Sickmann, 57, of St. Louis, was a 22-year-old guarding the embassy in Tehran when his life was changed forever.
"I truly believe that the war on terrorism started on Nov. 4, 1979, when I was a young Marine standing guard at the embassy," he said. "I was only 30 yards away from that fence when they came over it. They used Iranian women as shields when they broke in because they knew we’d stand down.”
Like other survivors, he believes Iran has never answered for its actions.
“They have never been held accountable for what they’ve done to us," Sickmann told FoxNews.com, recounting how he was tied to a chair for days while held by the Iranians. "How do you trust a government that publicly says Israel needs to be eliminated? Anyone should understand why Israel needs to be concerned."
Not all of the surviving hostages believe participating in talks with Iran is a bad idea. Kathryn Koob, who was 41 at the time of the crisis, and was in Tehran serving as director of the Iran-America society, a nonprofit organization established by the U.S. government to strengthen educational and community ties between the two countries, said talking is better that not talking.
“I am glad to see that that is happening,” said Koob, who lives in Waterloo, Iowa, and was one of just two females held hostage by the Iranians. “I think it’s terribly important to engage with all countries in the world, including Iran.
The U.S. has not had formal diplomatic relations with Iran since the crisis, but Koob said the talks, along with a thaw in U.S. relations with Cuba, are a heartening sign.
“Diplomacy does not mean agreement,” Koob said. “I think discussion is better than doing nothing. You can’t accomplish anything by not speaking to a country and pretending they’re not there.”

CartoonDems