Tuesday, July 5, 2016

State Department under fire for Clinton-related records delays


Just five months before the presidential election, the State Department is under fire in courtrooms over its delays in turning over government files related to Hillary Clinton's tenure as secretary of state.
In one case, the agency warned it needed a 27-month delay, until October 2018, to turn over emails from Clinton's former aides, and the judge in another case, a lawsuit by The Associated Press, wondered aloud whether the State Department might be deliberately delaying until after the election.
"We're now reaching a point where there's mounting frustration that this is a project where the State Department may be running out the clock," said U.S. District Court Judge Richard J. Leon. The judge said he was considering imposing penalties on the agency if it failed to meet the next set of deadlines he orders. Leon wondered aloud at one point whether he might impose penalties for again failing to deliver records on time. He mused about "a fine on a daily basis" or "incarceration."
"I can't send the marshals, obviously, out to bring in the documents, at least they wouldn't know where to go, probably," Leon said.
Secretary of State John Kerry and other officials have said they are committed to public transparency, vowing that the State Department will improve its practices under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act. Last year, after an inspector general's audit harshly critical of the agency, Kerry appointed a "transparency coordinator," Janice Jacobs, and said the agency would "fundamentally improve our ability to respond to requests for our records."
But in three separate court hearings last week, officials acknowledged that their records searches were hobbled by errors and new delays and said they need far more time to produce Clinton records. In other cases where the agency has already reached legal agreements with news organizations and political groups, the final delivery of thousands of records will not come until months after the November election — far too late to give voters an opportunity to analyze the performance of Clinton and her aides.
State Department spokesman John Kirby blamed the spiraling delays on mounting requests for more files. "These requests are also frequently more complex, and increasingly seeking larger volumes of documents requiring more time, more resources and frankly, more interagency coordination," Kirby said.
The State Department said in court that it had miscalculated the amount of material it expected to process as part of a public records lawsuit from Citizens United, a conservative interest group. In basic searches of 14,000 pages of records, officials failed to include the "to" and "from" lines of the messages, missing many possible records.
"These delay tactics by the Obama administration look like nothing more than an assist to former Secretary Clinton," said the group's president, David Bossie.
The AP had better luck asking for files about the role Clinton or her aides played in a 2011 decision allowing the British defense contractor BAE Systems plc to avoid being barred from government work and instead pay a $79 million fine. The AP received some records, but last week, the judge said he will likely order the State Department to turn over remaining files in September instead of mid-October, as the agency proposed.
Government lawyers said they need to review thousands of pages and allow the files to be examined by BAE's lawyers in case the company identifies proprietary material that would need to be censored.
"I'm not going to set them for October, two weeks before the election, that's ridiculous," Leon said.
In a third court case, the Gawker.com news site was told by State Department lawyers last week that the agency had failed to provide at least 100 email attachments from Philippe Reines, a Clinton aide who used a private account to send work-related messages. Gawker and the agency agreed that the State Department would turn over the missing material by September.
Also last week, during another legal proceeding involving Huma Abedin, Clinton's closest aide and her former deputy chief of staff, Abedin said she "was never asked to search my emails for anything related to FOIA when I was at State."
Logs of requests showed that Abedin's emails had been sought at the time by reporters for Gawker, Huffington Post and other organizations.
Kirby told the AP that he could not comment on whether Abedin's files were properly searched during Clinton's tenure. But he added that "we have acknowledged that historically we did not have a consistent practice for searching emails in the Office of the Secretary."

Republican delegate revolt grows in effort to sidetrack Trump nomination


A determined insurgency among some of the delegates to the Republican National Convention is growing, a last ditch effort to sidetrack the nomination of Donald Trump.
The efforts focus on fighting state laws and party rules that bind delegates from states with winner-take-all primaries on the first ballot at the upcoming national convention.
"If we were in a position where we didn't have a divisive or a controversial candidate going into Cleveland we probably would have been ok," explains Arizona GOP delegate Jarrod White. Like several states, Arizona law requires delegates to vote for the primary winner, who in this case happens to be Trump.
White is part of an organization calling itself "Free the Delegates"which is calling on delegates to vote at the convention as their conscience dictates.
Arizona Republican Party Chairman Robert Graham will have none of it.
"I have the law and the rules on my side,” he said. “And it's not to be unfair it's just to manage this entire process and maintain a professional decorum."
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
Graham says delegates who have decided they can't support the presumptive nominee as promised, should step aside in lieu of an alternate delegate. "Let somebody who's enthusiastically engaged in the process to go and participate."
“That's him saying, you know, 'sit down and be quiet,'" White says. "That's not who we are as grass roots activists."
"Here in Arizona there's a lot of infighting within the statewide GOP," comments a bemused Sheila Healy, Executive Director of the Arizona Democratic Party. "I would say it's uh, it's not unhelpful for our cause," she adds with a hearty laugh.
Yet the Arizona GOP is certainly not alone when it comes to conflict over presumptive nominee Donald Trump.
On the other side of the country, a lawsuit filed in federal district court in Richmond on Friday, June 24 seeks to declare Virginia's delegate binding law unconstitutional.
The suit lists Virginia delegate Carroll (Beau) Correll, a former Ted Cruz supporter, as lead plaintiff. But his attorney David Rivkin explains it was, "brought on behalf of all of the delegates, Democrat and Republican, from Virginia."
The lawsuit seeks a temporary injunction before the conventions start, and asks that Virginia's law ultimately be stricken down as a violation of First Amendment rights to free speech and association.
"There are approximately 20 other states that have such binding laws in various versions,” Rivkin points out, predicting that a win in Virginia, "...in effect will tell everyone in the nation that these types of binding laws are unconstitutional.”
Yet another group calling on GOP delegates to vote for someone, anyone, other than Trump in the first round has released a television ad. The spot by Delegates Unbound called "Follow Your Conscience" shows clips of Ronald Reagan and Trump side by side making starkly contrasting comments. The 30 second spot ends with the written words, "GOP Delegates: follow your conscience."
In the face of these efforts to take the nomination away from him, Trump reminds Fox News that the largest number of primary voters in history got him where he is today.
"Listen I have millions of people out there, almost 14 million to be exact that will be extremely unhappy if that happens,” he said.
The GOP official heading the RNC's permanent Rules Committee agrees.
"I wasn't a Trump supporter to begin with," Bruce Ash says while explaining why he sent a letter (link to letter here, i will include a pdf attachment to my email) calling on his fellow members to take a firm stand against the dump Trump campaign.
In the letter Ash implores, "We at the RNC must stand by our presumptive nominee's side and defend against all who would threaten our legitimacy as a national party. What is more important than anything else is uniting and defeating Hillary Clinton in 2016.”
Arizona delegate Talmage Pearce, also affiliated with the Free the Delegates group, says uniting to defeat Hillary is now secondary.
"If Donald Trump does become the nominee and loses to Hillary Clinton, and (yet) we're able to accomplish what we're able to accomplish, by freeing the delegates and allowing them to vote their conscience, that's something we can be proud of."
Arizona's Chairman Graham points out that all of Arizona's delegates knew the rules going in.
"At the very beginning of our state convention we have a vote on our rules. It was unanimous...and guess what one of the rules are? That they need to sign the pledge.”
Arizona's 2016 Republican National Convention Delegate and Alternate Delegate Pledge of Support reads in part, "...do hearby pledge my vote and support for the nominee who received the greatest number of votes in the Arizona Presidential Preference election..."
"So if they go there and try to change the rules," Graham says, "they are deceiving a million three hundred thousand voters that voted openly. They should actually let that weigh in on their conscience."
He assures Fox News that, "The state of Arizona will announce 58 votes for Donald Trump," at the GOP convention. And if any delegates, "try to disrupt that or do anything along those lines the RNC has told us in writing that they will credit 58 votes to Mr. Trump."
Unhappy delegates like White, remain undeterred. "I don't think we're going to lose at the convention and I think it's going to be a historic moment."

VP vetting? Trump meets with Sen. Joni Ernst


Donald Trump on Monday spent part of his July 4th with Sen. Joni Ernst -- fueling speculation that the Iowa freshman senator could be on the short list of his vice presidential picks.
Ernst told Fox News they had a "good conversation," adding, "I will continue to share my insights with Donald about the need to strengthen our economy, keep our nation safe, and ensure America is always a strong, stabilizing force around the globe."
Earlier, Trump tweeted, "I look forward to meeting (Ernst) today in New Jersey. She has done a great job as Senator of Iowa!"
Over the weekend, Trump met with Indiana Gov. Mike Pence and his wife, though a Pence spokesman said "nothing was offered."
The spokesman, Marc Lotter, added, "The governor had warm, productive meetings with the Trumps." He declined to say where the Saturday meeting was held. Pence is running for re-election against Democratic former state House Speaker John Gregg.
Trump and Pence discussed Pence's policies during his term as governor which began in 2013, Lotter said. He also declined to discuss Pence's level of interest in the position, echoing a comment from Pence last week that he did not want to talk about "a hypothetical."
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
Trump tweeted Monday about his Saturday meeting with Pence.
"Spent time with Indiana Governor Mike Pence and family yesterday. Very impressed, great people!” Trump tweeted.
As Pence and his wife arrived for a concert Sunday night at Conner Prairie, a history park in Fishers, the governor again declined to discuss whether he was interested in the position. He reiterated his support for Trump's candidacy and said the Trumps "couldn't have been more kind and gracious" during the meeting.
Trump has never held public office and is considering a small group of political veterans as potential running mates.
People with direct knowledge of Trump's vetting process say the list includes Pence, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions.
In addition to serving as governor, Pence served in the U.S. House of Representatives for 12 years.
He also at one time had his own presidential ambitions but last year ruled out a run after his popularity fell in the wake of criticism over his handling of the state's religious objections law.

Monday, July 4, 2016

Happy 4th Of July Catoons






Clinton's supporters, potential veeps defend presumptive nominee on emails, Benghazi, FBI probe

Rep. Becerra talks Clinton email probe, Benghazi report
Top Hillary Clinton supporters blanketed the TV airwaves Sunday, trying to build voter trust for the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee amid her evolving email controversy and other issues, while also appearing to audition for the role of vice president.
“She understands that she's got to earn people's trust,” California Democratic Rep. Xavier Becerra said of Clinton on “Fox News Sunday.” “She's going to work very, very hard to do that. And I give her credit for saying that she's made some mistakes.”
Becerra was one of four Democratic lawmakers purportedly on Clinton’s vice presidential short list to appear on the Sunday morning talk shows.
He deferred on the question about being vetted for the job by saying, “That's a question that has to be asked of Secretary Clinton. … We’ll see.”
Becerra was joined on the Sunday shows by New Jersey Sen. Corey Booker (CNN,) Labor Secretary Tom Perez (NBC) and Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown (ABC.)
Clinton appears qualified to become president, considering she is a former first lady, secretary of state and U.S. senator for New York.
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
However, her campaign has been slowed from the start by questions about her trustworthiness.
Such questions date back to the Clinton administration and more recently are about donors to the Clinton Foundation and Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state -- including the 2012 Benghazi terror attacks and her use of a private email server for official correspondence while at the State Department.
A Gallup survey released Friday found 27 percent of Americans don’t trust Clinton.
On Saturday, Clinton was interviewed by the FBI regarding the agency’s investigation into whether her using a personal server for official communication violated government rules regarding the handling of classified information.
Earlier last week, her husband, former President Bill Clinton, held an impromptu meeting with Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who will decide whether to bring criminal charges in the FBI probe.
Even Lynch acknowledge the meeting “cast a shadow” over the investigation. She also said that she “fully expects” to accept the recommendations of the FBI director and career prosecutors.
However, a Justice Department spokeswoman clarified Lynch’s remark by telling Yahoo News that “the attorney general will be the ultimate decider.''
Also last week, Republicans on the special committee investigating the attacks on a U.S. outpost in Benghazi, Libya, issued a final report on the matter that concluded Clinton as secretary of state and others in Obama administration told the public that the attacks were inspired by an anti-Islam video, despite eyewitness accounts that they were terror attacks.
U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the attacks.
Booker told CNN’s “State of the Union” that the FBI interview was merely “routine” and that Clinton being indicted over the emails is “just not going to happen.”
“We're going to be seeing an investigation closing up,” he said. “And I think she, like most Americans, wants this thing to be concluded and so we can move beyond it and focus on the real issues of this campaign.”
Booker dismissed the Clinton-Lynch conversation as little more than a chat about grandchildren and golf.
“This is nothing that in any way undermines this case,” said Booker, who also deferred to the Clinton campaign regarding a question about being a potential 2016 running mate. “I know a lot of it is coming from the Trump campaign … trying to whip up conspiracy theories.”
Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown, another potential Clinton running mate, told ABC’s “This Week” that he doesn’t think Clinton will be indicted.
“I'm not worried. I see what Clinton has done,” he said. “She's always been willing to talk. The story that is missing is what we don't know about (presumptive GOP presidential nominee) Donald Trump.”
He called the Clinton-Lynch encounter “unfortunate” and focused his answers on criticizing Trump and touting Clinton’s knowledge on key issues, including the future of the U.S. auto industry.
“She clearly understands these issues, and she talks in great depth about them in individual interviews and rallies. You get none of that from Donald Trump,” said Brown, also deferred to the Clinton campaign regarding a question about being a potential running mate.
Trump said this weekend on Twitter about the FBI investigation: "It was just announced -- by sources -- that no charges will be brought against Crooked Hillary Clinton. Like I said, the system is totally rigged!"
Labor Secretary Tom Perez on Sunday also showed his potential to be a good running mate in attacking the general election rival.
“Donald Trump is a fraud. He's the outsourcer in chief. And listening to him talk about how he's going to put America first again, he spent his entire career putting his own profits first,” said Perez who has already joined Clinton on the campaign trail, in part to bring progressives around to her trade policy.
Perez, in the pre-taped interview Friday with NBC’s “Meet the Press,” even responded to a vice president question by touting Clinton over Trump.
“Trump is such a volatile individual, and what I have seen working with Secretary Clinton is that she is a steady hand,” he said. “And I think she is exercised sound judgment throughout.”

Spokesman: Indiana governor had 'warm' meeting with Trump


Indiana Gov. Mike Pence and his wife met with Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and his wife Saturday as Trump considers potential running mates, but a Pence spokesman told Fox News on Sunday that "nothing was offered."
"The Pences enjoyed spending a warm and productive time with the Trumps," Pence campaign spokesman Marc Lotter told Fox News. "They talked about policies that are working in Indiana and the future of this country."
Pence is running for re-election against former Democratic state House Speaker John Gregg.
Asked whether Trump and Pence had discussed the possibility of Pence becoming Trump's running mate, Lotter said "nothing was offered." Lotter declined to discuss Pence's level of interest in the position, echoing a comment from Pence last week that he did not want to comment on "a hypothetical."
Lotter referred other questions to Trump's campaign, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Trump has never held public office and is considering a small group of political veterans as potential running mates.
The latest headlines on the 2016 elections from the biggest name in politics. See Latest Coverage →
People with direct knowledge of Trump's vetting process say the list includes Pence, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions.
In addition to serving as governor, Pence served in the U.S. House of Representatives for 12 years.
He also at one time had his own presidential ambitions but last year ruled out a run after his popularity fell in the wake of criticism over his handling of the state's religious objections law.

Suicide attack carried out near US diplomatic site in Saudi Arabia


A suicide bomber carried out an attack early on Monday near a U.S. diplomatic site in the western Saudi city of Jiddah, according to the Interior Ministry.
The ministry said the attacker detonated his suicide vest when security guards approached him near the parking lot of a hospital. The attacker died and two security men were wounded with minor injuries, according to the ministry statement, which was published by the state-run Saudi Press Agency. Some cars in the parking lot were damaged.
Interior Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Mansour al-Turki was quoted in the statement as saying the attacker caught the attention of the security guards, who noticed he was acting suspiciously at an intersection located on the corner of the heavily fortified U.S. Consulate in Jiddah, located by the Dr. Soliman Fakeeh Hospital. Most of the consulate's staff had reportedly moved offices to a new location.
The U.S. Embassy in Saudi Arabia confirmed there were no casualties or injuries among the consular staff. The embassy said it remains in contact with Saudi authorities as they investigate the attack.
No one immediately claimed responsibility for attack.
The Interior Ministry did not specify if it there are indications the bomber intended to target the U.S. diplomatic compound, saying an investigation was underway to determine his identity.
A 2004 al-Qaida-linked militant attack on the U.S. Consulate in Jiddah killed five locally hired consular employees and four gunmen. The three-hour battle on the compound came amid a wave of al-Qaida attacks targeting Westerners and Saudi security posts.
More recently, Saudi Arabia has been a target of Islamic State group attacks that have killed dozens of people. The extremist Sunni group views the Western-allied Saudi monarchy and government as heretics. Saudi Arabia is part of the U.S.-led coalition fighting the Islamic State group in Iraq and Syria.
In June, the Interior Ministry reported 26 terror attacks had taken place in the kingdom in the last two years. Local affiliates of the IS group have targeted minority Shiites and security officials.
Monday's attack comes just days before the end of the holy month of Ramadan, during which observant Muslims fast daily from dawn to dusk.
The U.S. Embassy regularly issues advisory messages for U.S. citizens in Saudi Arabia. In a message issued Sunday and another one issued after the attack Monday, the embassy urged Americans to "remain aware of their surroundings, and take extra precautions when travelling throughout the country." It also advised citizens to "carefully consider the risks of traveling to Saudi Arabia."

Fourth of July 2016: What the Founders ask of us

President Abraham Lincoln
When clicking on the fox news web site I came upon this article which had a small picture of the founding fathers of America. But when you go to the actual article it only shows a picture of Lincoln and not the Founding Fathers. Is the fox news network afraid to show the photo because the founding fathers were a bunch of old white guys and they do not want offend anyone? Fair and Balanced or once again political correctness gone crazy?

Founding Fathers

Founding Fathers
And now here is the article:

It is remarkable that Abraham Lincoln never delivered a Fourth of July speech.
The closest he came was on July 10, 1858, in Chicago during one of the famous Lincoln-Douglas debates, when Lincoln spoke of the Founders as “iron men.” He remarked how, every July 4, Americans celebrate those “iron men” and their extraordinary achievement, because we are “historically connected” with it.
Lincoln meant this literally. He was speaking to those who were old enough to remember the Founders from their youth and those descendants of the Revolutionary generation.
But then Lincoln spoke about another set of Americans, the ones whose families came here after the great Revolution was over. In a word, immigrants. Of these, Lincoln said:
“If they look back through this history and trace their connection with those days by blood, they find they have none. They cannot carry themselves back into that glorious epoch and make themselves feel that they are part of us, but when they look through that old Declaration of Independence, they find that those old men say that, ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,’ and then they feel that the moral sentiment taught in that day evidences their relation to those men, that it is the father of all moral principle in them, and that they have a right to claim it as though they were blood of the blood, and flesh of the flesh, of the men who wrote that Declaration, and so they are.”
And so we are. None of us fought at Bunker Hill or Lexington or Concord. None of us endured famine, cold, or the impact of a musket ball. None of us signed our names to a document that made us traitors, fit to be hung.
Yet, despite all that, we are still Americans, and the Fourth is still our celebration, because we hold dear the “moral sentiment” for which those iron men fought and died — “That all men are created equal.”
Lincoln would fight and die for it, too.
Lincoln reassures us that this alone is enough to form that “historical connection” with men who in all other things bear no relation to us. Or, as he puts it: “That is the electric cord in that Declaration that links the hearts of patriotic and liberty-loving men together, that will link those patriotic hearts as long as the love of freedom exists in the minds of men throughout the world.”
As this speech was delivered in response to Stephen Douglas, a congressman from Illinois, Lincoln connects the “electric cord” in the Declaration with the question of slavery.
“If one man says [the Declaration] does not mean a negro, why not another say it does not mean some other man?”
In a few short paragraphs, Lincoln eviscerates Douglas’ contention that the ideals of the Declaration were reserved for only the true descendants of the American Revolution. It is remarkable that there was a time when Lincoln’s idea, now so central to our American mindset, was not dominant.
And yet we find our present culture riven by a hypersensitive strain of identity politics. We are told, even by some who belong to Lincoln’s party, that we should provide this group of Americans with one kind of government handout and that group with another.
We are told that we must “speak to” a certain group of Americans in a certain way or else lose their vote. We are told that skin color or sex  determines whether a group is more or less deserving of government perks. If one disagrees, one is shouted down as a racist, bigot, or chauvinist.
Yet Lincoln would disagree. The Founders would disagree as well. And so must all whose connection with that great and glorious generation of “iron men” consists of embracing an ideal that was meant to be taken literally; namely, that all men are created equal.
But it is not enough to believe this. We must do more than reread those words this Fourth of July in between the barbeques and fireworks. We must do what the Founders did, and what Lincoln did in his own time, and fight against the insidious notion that those words mean other than what they say.
Lincoln believed the Founders asked this of him and his generation. It is what the Founders ask of us still.

CollegeCartoons 2024