Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Judicial Watch

by -

A mosque situated about an hour’s drive from the nation’s capital recently held a ceremony to honor a radical Islamist who murdered a beloved political figure in Pakistan for publicly chastising the Muslim country’s blasphemy laws and supporting a Christian woman. The facility, Gulzar E. Madina Mosque, sits in the Maryland suburb of Pikesville, roughly 50 miles from Washington D.C. and a dozen or so miles from Baltimore.

A Pakistani digital news publication covered the outrageous celebration and published a detailed account, including pictures and speeches delivered by radical clergy.

The event is officially known as an “Urs”, a Muslim celebration to commemorate the death anniversary of saints. In this case, the Maryland mosque was honoring an Islamist assassin named Mumtaz Qadri who shot the governor (Salman Taseer) of Punjab province in 2011 for speaking out against the nation’s abhorrent blasphemy laws. Qadri was the governor’s bodyguard and he shot him 28 times in Islamabad’s Kohsar Market in broad daylight, according to an international news report.

He was charged with terrorism and murder by an anti-terrorism court in Pakistan and was hanged in 2016. The execution ignited violent protests throughout Pakistan, where Islamist groups hailed Qadri as a hero. That’s hardly surprising for an Islamic south Asian country with an official law that bans the use of derogatory remarks about the holy prophet Mohammad. Violators are punished with death or life imprisonment.

But nearly 12,000 miles across the Atlantic, in the land of the free and the civilized, it’s downright unacceptable that these atrocities are praised. Nevertheless, that’s exactly what occurred at the Gulzar E Madina Mosque in Maryland earlier this week. In a Sunday “Urs” commemoration attended by dozens of people, including children and teenagers, the radical Islamist assassin was honored. The event had been advertised in the largest Urdu newspaper in the U.S., the Urdu Times, and a large crowd turned out for the festivities.

Among them was a New Jersey-based Islamic scholar named Syed Saad Ali who referred to Qadri as surpassing all warriors and blasted the crowd for not helping him while he was in jail, kissing the noose in love for Prophet Mohammed. “Qadri did everything for us and for the love of Islam and we could not even stand by him,” the fiery scholar told the crowd. “People say Islam teaches peace…I say Islam teaches us ghairat (honor). Who will now stand up?” Ali also glorified another Islamist assassin named Tanveer Ahmad, who stabbed a fellow British-Pakistani man to death in Scotland for posting blasphemous statements on social media.

Also, delivering the pro terrorist rhetoric at the U.S. mosque was a Baltimore-based imam named Ijaz Hussain, who said Qadri was not a terrorist and whoever says “we are with you O prophet cannot be a terrorist.” He proceeded to denounce American Muslim groups, such as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), for failing to act against those who commit blasphemy and praised free speech in the U.S. for allowing the terror-praising powwow to take place.

An unidentified speaker, whose photo is included in the article, took the podium and said this: “Whoever disrespects the Holy Prophet Muhammad is worthy of death, and even if disrespects indirectly he is still worthy of death. Even if someone asks for forgiveness it is not acceptable.”

It’s disgraceful that this sort of support for terrorist acts is glamorized and praised in the United States. Undoubtedly, eight years of Obama administration policies protecting Muslim rights and downplaying the connection between Islam and radical terrorism caused a lot of damage. Obama launched a government-wide Muslim rights initiative that forced federal agencies to go out of their way to accommodate Muslims and avoid offending them by, among other things, caving into their demands involving law enforcement anti-terrorism training considered offensive.

Read a Judicial Watch report on that here. Last year a Homeland Security Advisory Council recommended eliminating divisive Islamic terms like “jihad” and “sharia” to avoid “us versus them” in government anti-terror programs.

by -

Weeks after the House Minority leader blasted President Donald Trump for pledging to investigate voter fraud, a federal appellate court has ruled that a Peruvian immigrant can be deported from the U.S. for illegally voting in a federal election. The decision comes on the heels of a spat between Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi and the president.

The California Democrat accused Trump of making false claims of election fraud and said that undermining the integrity of our voting system is “really strange.” Most Democrats in Congress agree with the former House Speaker and strongly oppose an investigation, asserting it will limit access to voting.

Not surprisingly, the overwhelming majority of the mainstream media coverage promotes the Democrats’ inaccurate version of the facts. One news network referred to Trump’s voter fraud claims as “baseless” and simply an excuse to enact restrictive voting laws. Another wrote that “Trump’s ‘iIlegals voting’ comments are false and divisive,” calling voter fraud by undocumented immigrants “patently false.”

In an editorial titled “The Latest Voter Fraud Lie,” a mainstream newspaper writes that the “baseless claims continue to get converted into policy in the form of stricter voting laws like requiring prospective voters to show a photo ID…” A multitude of similar media reports have flooded the news wires in the week’s following Trump’s meeting with congressional leaders to address the issue.

This week’s appellate court ruling provides a jolt of reality that the media has chosen to ignore. Election fraud was a significant concern in 2008 and 2010, which is why Judicial Watch launched an election integrity project in 2012. The project is a legal campaign to force cleanup of voter registration rolls as well as monitor elections. As an example of the pervasive fraud, Judicial Watch uncovered that 1,046 aliens, or residents who are not U.S. citizens, were on the voter rolls in eight Virginia counties leading up to the 2016 presidential election.

If that rate of non-citizen registration held in the rest of Virginia’s counties, that would mean that about 6,500 non-citizens are registered to vote in the state. Additionally, Judicial Watch’s investigation found that 57,923 Virginians were registered to vote in at least one other state as well as 19 deceased individuals. Similar issues have been uncovered in several other states as part of Judicial Watch’s ongoing probe into election fraud.

The Latin American woman in the recent court ruling who voted illegally is hardly an isolated case. Her name is Margarita Del Pilar Fitzpatrick and she lied about being an American citizen on an Illinois Department of Motor Vehicle form. It was that easy. Fitzpatrick, a legal U.S. resident with three kids, voted in two federal elections in 2006 and claims that she had official approval to cast a ballot after presenting her Peruvian passport and green card.

An immigration judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals, the government’s highest administrative body for interpreting and applying immigration laws, determined that Fitzpatrick should be deported because non-U.S. citizens cannot vote in federal elections and can be removed from the country for doing so.

The Peruvian woman did not back down, appealing the decisions in federal court. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the two previous rulings in favor of deportation, though it acknowledged that Fitzpatrick “led a productive and otherwise-unblemished life in this country.” In its decision, the court states that the motor vehicle form sternly warns aliens not to check the U.S. citizen box and that Fitzpatrick is “literate in English and has no excuse for making that misrepresentation.”

Aliens are forbidden to vote in federal elections, the ruling says, adding that “another statute provides for the removal of aliens who vote in violation of either state or federal law.” During oral argument, the appellate judges inquired whether Fitzpatrick is the kind of person the Attorney General and Department of Homeland Security want removed from the United States. “The answer was yes,” the ruling states.

by -
The pace of government.

Judicial Watch today announced a hearing will be held Tuesday, February 7, 2017, regarding Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking records held by the FBI containing text messages and emails of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stored on the equipment of Datto Inc., a commercial data management company, as well as FBI records about the device and what materials were recovered on it (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:16-cv-02369)).  The case is before U.S. District Court Judge Randolph D. Moss.

At the previous hearing Tuesday, January 24, 2017, Trump administration lawyers for the FBI informed Judicial Watch and the court that it located 35 FBI records that concern the Datto device and that it may take up to two years to release the records.  In addition, the FBI recovered approximately 10,000 messages from the Datto device.  The messages were turned over to the State Department to be processed and released on its website.

Tomorrow’s hearing should address whether the Trump FBI will be able to slow walk the release of these records.

Judicial Watch’s lawsuit seeks:

  • All records, including but not limited to emails or text messages (SMSs, MMSs, BBMs, iMessages, etc.), discovered, recovered, retrieved from, or found on any Datto device, equipment, or hardware connected to or used to backup or support former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s clintonemail.com email system.
  • All records relating to the FBI’s efforts to discover, recover, retrieve, or find emails or text messages stored on the Datto device, equipment, or hardware …

Clinton reportedly was using an online backup service called Datto Inc. to create copies of her data during a time when she and her aides were improperly handling classified material. Datto’s website company promises data is “invincible, secure, and instantly restorable at any time.

Datto announced it had turned over a “hardware device” to the FBI, along with all Clinton emails the company had in its possession, possibly including Clinton’s deleted private emails:

“With the consent of our client and their end user, and consistent with our policies regarding data privacy, yesterday, Tuesday, October 6, Datto delivered a hardware device to the FBI containing all backed up data related to Platte Rivers Networks’ client known to be in its possession,” said the company.

The court hearing is scheduled for Tuesday morning.

by -

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton today made the following statement regarding the proposed change to House rules that would eliminate its Office of Congressional Ethics:

It is shameful that House Republicans are trying to destroy the Office of Congressional Ethics, the most significant ethics reform in Congress when it was established nearly a decade ago. This drive-by effort to eliminate the Office of Congressional Ethics, which provides appropriate independence and transparency to the House ethics process, is a poor way for the Republican majority to begin “draining the swamp.” The American people will see this latest push to undermine congressional ethics enforcement as shady and corrupt. The full House should seriously consider whether it wants to bear the brunt of public outrage and go through with the rule change this afternoon.

Background: Judicial Watch worked with then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Special Task Force on Ethics Enforcement to push for an independent body to help handle ethics investigations of House members. This effort led to the establishment of the Office of Congressional Ethics in 2008. Today’s proposed rule change by the House majority would eliminate the Office of Congressional Ethics and create a new entity under the complete control of the House Ethics Committee that is less transparent and subject to severe restrictions on any investigations of allegations of misconduct by House members.

by -

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding today’s ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in a case that would require Secretary of State John Kerry to seek the help of the attorney general in recovering additional Hillary Clinton emails:

The courts seem to be fed up with the Obama administration’s refusal to enforce the rule of law on the Clinton emails. Today’s appeals court ruling rejects the Obama State Department’s excuses justifying its failure to ask the attorney general, as the law requires, to pursue the recovery of the Clinton emails. This ruling means that the Trump Justice Department will have to decide if it wants to finally enforce the rule of law and try to retrieve all the emails Clinton and her aides unlawfully took with them when they left the State Department.

The appellate ruling reverses a decision in which the District Court declared “moot” a Judicial Watch’s lawsuit challenging the failure of Secretary of State John Kerry to comply with the Federal Records Act (FRA) in seeking to recover the emails of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other high level State Department officials who used non-“state.gov” email accounts to conduct official business (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. John F. Kerry (No. 16-5015)). According to the FRA, if an agency head becomes aware of “any actual, impending, or threatened unlawful removal . . . or destruction of [agency] records,” he or she “shall notify the Archivist . . . and with the assistance of the Archivist shall initiate action through the Attorney General for the recovery of [those] records.”

An appellate panel found:

Appellants sought the only relief provided by the Federal Records Act—an enforcement action through the Attorney General. But nothing the Department did (either before or after those complaints were filed) gave appellants what they wanted. Instead of proceeding through the Attorney General, the Department asked the former Secretary to return her emails voluntarily and similarly requested that the FBI share any records it obtained. Even though those efforts bore some fruit, the Department has not explained why shaking the tree harder—e.g., by following the statutory mandate to seek action by the Attorney General—might not bear more still. It is therefore abundantly clear that, in terms of assuring government recovery of emails, appellants have not “been given everything [they] asked for.” Absent a showing that the requested enforcement action could not shake loose a few more emails, the case is not moot.

In May 2015 Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the State Department failed to take action following a letter to Kerry “notifying him of the unlawful removal of the Clinton emails and requesting that he initiate enforcement action pursuant to the FRA,” including working through the Attorney General to recover the emails. Judicial Watch’s lawsuit subsequently was consolidated with a later lawsuit by Cause of Action Institute. This ruling reverses a January 2016 decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissing the case and remands it.

by -

A law enacted in the nation’s capital by a crackhead mayor to “protect African American youths from the stigma of lengthy prison sentences” has resulted in a pattern of violent offenders returning rapidly to the streets and committing more crimes.

A disturbing series published by Washington D.C.’s mainstream newspaper reveals that hundreds of criminals who received lenient sentences under the measure have gone on to rob, rape or kill.

The law, Youth Rehabilitation Act, was passed in 1985 under Mayor Marion Barry, who resumed his political career after serving time in prison. During his third term as D.C. mayor in 1990 Barry famously appeared in an FBI surveillance video smoking crack and subsequently got convicted on drug charges.

After completing his sentence, Barry was elected mayor again before successfully running for a city council spot. Barry’s legal troubles continued until his 2014 death, with tax evasion charges, illegally steering a bogus city contract to his girlfriend and taking a cut for himself and stalking a former lover.

Shortly before his death, Barry got busted for steering millions of District funds to dozens of his favorite groups, including at least six “nonprofits” founded by him.

Much like Barry’s political career survived a multitude of scandals and illegal behavior, his effort to protect fellow criminals has endured.

The measure was intended to give minority offenders a second chance by letting judges issue shorter sentences for violent crimes and allowing the convicts to erase their criminal record. “The original intent of the law was to rehabilitate inexperienced criminals under the age of 22,” the news story states.

Instead, it has enabled many to embark on crime sprees with little consequences. The newspaper investigation found that “hundreds have been sentenced under the act multiple times.” The law allows offenders to avoid mandatory prison time for certain violent gun crimes and gives judges the power to assign “rehabilitation” instead of jail.

In dozens of cases D.C. judges issued sentences below mandatory minimum laws crafted to deter violent crimes. “The criminals have often repaid that leniency by escalating their crimes of violence upon release,” the article states.

The frightening consequences of the 30-year-old D.C. law come in the aftermath of President Obama’s efforts to rehabilitate—rather than punish—criminals and lower federal prison sentences to reduce racial discrimination.

The administration asserts that minorities, especially blacks, are disproportionately incarcerated for longer periods, especially when it comes to drug-related offenses. So, the president signed a law that for the first time in decades relaxed drug-crime sentences he claimed discriminated against minority offenders.

The measure severely weakened a decades-old law enacted during the infamous crack cocaine epidemic that ravaged urban communities nationwide in the 1980s. Under Obama’s measure, the feds released thousands of drug convicts whose sentences were too long under the old guidelines.

Earlier this year a convicted crack dealer who left prison early as part of Obama’s mass release of federal inmates was indicted for fatally stabbing his ex-girlfriend and her two kids in Columbus, Ohio.

The gory crime drew national attention because the children, ages 7 and 10, were murdered to eliminate them as witnesses in the brutal massacre of their 32-year-old mother. The crack dealer, 35-year-old Wendell Callahan, should have been in jail when the crimes occurred.

Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

by -
secret service

The U.S. Secret Service has lost thousands of agency computers, radios, cell phones, weapons, credentials and vehicles since Islamic terrorists executed the worst attack in U.S. history, records obtained by Judicial Watch show.

The equipment was reported lost or stolen by the Secret Service, which claims to be one of the most elite law enforcement organizations in the world with responsibilities that include protecting, not only the president, but also national and visiting foreign leaders as well as conducting criminal investigations.

Judicial Watch requested the records under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) almost a year ago as part of an ongoing investigation into the scandal-plagued Secret Service. The information was finally provided this month and it most certainly depicts behavior unbecoming of an elite law enforcement agency.

Since 2001 dozens of weapons and pistols have gone missing, hundreds of agent badges and cell phones as well as scores of laptop and desktop computers and six agency motor vehicles. Labeled “lost and stolen assets” by the Secret Service, the records are broken down by year and type of equipment missing. Two categories are somewhat vague and neither includes records before 2009. One, titled “other equipment,” reveals the loss of 793 items since 2009. The other, listed as “office equipment,” shows the loss of 201 items during the same period.

The agency had an especially humiliating year in 2004 when 1,362 items were recorded as lost or stolen, the records show. Radio equipment led with 191 lost items in addition to 53 laptops, 53 desktop computers, 26 badges and 25 cell phones, among others.

In 2002 the Secret Service lost 1,179 items, including a disturbing number of weapons (69) and badges (40). Keep in mind that was the year following the 9/11 terrorist attacks! In 2014 the agency reported 1,032 items lost or stolen, among them hundreds of pieces of information technology equipment, 142 cell phones and a motor vehicle. In 2010 the records list 1,001 disappeared items, including dozens of badges, computers and cell phones.

Some of the categories are too general and don’t offer specific descriptions of the equipment, but enough information is provided in the records to illustrate the severity of the negligence. Except for 2013 the Secret Service has lost more than 100 information technology items every year since 2009. For the portion of 2016 that’s been reported, the agency has already lost eight badges. In 2015 it was 18 and in 2014 it lost 25 badges.

The Secret Service has been rocked by several scandals in the last few years, including one that Judicial Watch uncovered last summer. Known as “Operation Moonlight” and “Operation Moonshine,” agents were covertly redeployed from the White House compound to protect a close friend of the agency’s then director during a dispute with a neighbor.

Judicial Watch obtained government records containing details of the illicit operation, which occurred under former Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan. His good friend and administrative assistant at the time, Lisa Chopey, was embroiled in a discord with a neighbor in her rural community of La Plata, Maryland and the Secret Service surreptitiously redeployed agents assigned to guard the White House to protect Chopey and conduct undercover surveillance of the problematic neighbor.

Other Secret Service transgressions have made headlines in the last few years. Besides drunken agents plowing a government vehicle into a White House security gate, a dozen agents brought prostitutes to their hotel rooms during a 2012 world leaders’ summit attended by President Obama. A mainstream news outlet called the incident a debauchery that caused an uproar and surprised many who previously regarded Secret Service agents as a highly disciplined force of dark sunglasses, earpieces and unreadable facial expressions.

The Secret Service suffered another major blow when a psychologically disturbed man with a knife jumped over the White House fence and ran across the North Lawn, into the executive mansion and to the entrance of the East Room. Last year a drone flew over the White House and landed in an area that’s supposed to be secure. The device was described as a quadcopter drone and the Secret Service told media outlets that it crash-landed in a tree on the southeast side of the complex around 3 a.m.

by -
obama

After rolling out the welcome mat for central American illegal immigrants, the Obama administration is scrambling to halt the flow because government detention centers and charity shelters are overwhelmed with the bombardment of migrants.

In the fiscal year that ended in September, the U.S. Border Patrol detained 137,366 illegal aliens—women with children or minors—at the Mexican border who qualified to stay in the country under the president’s humanitarian crisis measure. That’s an eye-popping 90% increase from 2015, according to government figures.

In October, the first month of the new fiscal year, 46,195 individuals were apprehended on the southwest border compared to 39,501 in September and 37,048 in August, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) figures show. As a result, there are 41,000 individuals in immigration detention facilities, DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson revealed last week, when the number typically fluctuates between 31,000 and 34,000.

Johnson has authorized Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to acquire additional detention space for single adults “so that those apprehended at the border can be returned to their home countries as soon as possible.” Johnson added that the U.S. has engaged with a number of countries to repatriate their citizens more quickly.

The open borders frenzy has clearly backfired and the administration appears to be scrambling to contain the crisis it created. “Our borders cannot be open to illegal migration,” Johnson proclaimed just a few days ago in a DHS announcement. “We must, therefore, enforce the immigration laws consistent with our priorities. Those priorities are public safety and border security.” The DHS secretary continued: “Those who attempt to enter our country without authorization should know that, consistent with our laws and our values, we must and we will send you back.” Additionally, DHS has launched a campaign to scare migrants out of making the trek north with videos featuring traumatized illegal aliens who made it and are currently in U.S. custody. The government is trying to clean up its own mess.

The influx of central Americans came after the administration did a fantastic job promoting a special program—in English and Spanish—for illegal aliens from El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala who claim to flee violence.

Media outlets throughout Latin America reported it widely and madness ensued. When droves of central Americans started appearing at U.S. ports of entry along the Mexican border, the administration tried to slow the pace by creating a program to pre-screen candidates before making the journey.

Johnson said it was an alternative, safe and legal path to the United States for vulnerable individuals while combating human smuggling operations that had already brought in tens of thousands of illegal aliens. Officially this is known as Central American Minors (CAM) Refugee/Parole Program.

But it’s not just kids who qualify for the special parole, which is extended to those up to the age of 21. Family members are also eligible, including “unmarried children of the qualifying child or in-country parent who are under the age of 21” and members of the same household and economic unit as the qualifying child as well as the spouse of a remarried parent. How the U.S. government confirms any of this is anybody’s guess.

In some cases, immigration authorities require DNA tests to prove biological connections between children and parents and Uncle Sam picks up the tab for that.

The number of foreigners filing asylum applications has skyrocketed in the last year and is about 10 times higher than it was before Obama became president, the Washington D.C.-based Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) revealed last month. Citing figures obtained from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the nonprofit published a report stating that the increase in so-called credible fear claims follows a 2009 executive order that calls for such arrivals to be granted parole in the U.S. while they pursue asylum.

“Judging by current approval statistics from the immigration courts, ultimately few will be found qualified for asylum, but nearly all are allowed into the country, and they are not considered a priority for deportation under current policy,” CIS writes.

Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

by -
corruption

Years before Pennsylvania’s first Democrat and first female Attorney General got convicted of crimes, Judicial Watch helped expose the corrupt way in which she ran her public office. The state’s disgraced top prosecutor, Kathleen Kane, was hauled away from a courtroom in handcuffs this week after getting sentenced to 10 to 23 month in jail. In August, a jury found Kane guilty perjury and obstruction for illegally disclosing details from a grand jury investigation to retaliate against a political rival then lying about it under oath.

Philadelphia’s largest newspaper described Kane’s sentencing this week as “capping a spectacular downfall for a woman once seen as one of the state’s fastest-rising stars.” Kane’s first year in office was marked by political and public relations successes, the paper states, but it went downhill from there.

After “her star began to dim in 2014, she leaked confidential grand jury material to a newspaper in a bid to embarrass a political enemy, then lied about her actions under oath,” the story says. At this week’s five-hour sentencing hearing in Montgomery County the judge blasted Kane and rejected calls for leniency. The former prosecutor used and exploited her position to battle perceived enemies instead of focusing on the business of fighting crime, the judge, Wendy Demchick-Alley, said during the hearing.

The leak stems from a feud that Kane had with a former prosecutor in her office named Frank Fina, who Kane accused of planting a damaging media story. Before Kane got elected the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office ran a years-long, undercover sting operation that busted leading state Democrats embroiled in a bribery scheme. At the time the Attorney General was Republican Tom Corbett.

When Kane took office in 2013, she shut the operation down. Before Kane ended the investigation, sources familiar with the inquiry said, prosecutors amassed 400 hours of audio and videotape that documented at least four city Democrats taking payments in cash or money orders, and in one case, a $2,000 Tiffany bracelet.

Back In 2014 Judicial Watch testified before a Pennsylvania House State Government Committee investigating Kane for refusing to uphold Commonwealth laws that she didn’t agree with. Judicial Watch Attorney Michael Bekesha explained to the panel that Kane had consistently failed to honor her sworn oath to uphold the state’s constitution by, among other things, refusing to defend the state’s marriage laws and failing to prosecute elected officials for accepting cash and other gifts in exchange for political favors. Bekesha also pointed out to the committee that the State Ethics Commission concluded that the promotion of Kane’s sister to Chief Deputy Attorney General in the child predator section created a perception that the promotion was not free from Kane’s influence. “Attorney General Kane is lawless,” Bekesha testified, adding that just the appearance of impropriety or misbehavior damages the office.

Kane has close ties to the Clintons and she worked on Hillary’s 2008 failed presidential campaign. In 2012 Bill Clinton endorsed Kane for Attorney General over former Pennsylvania Congressman Patrick Murphy. At the time the former president said “Kathleen is a great Democrat who understands that an Attorney General’s job is to stand up for consumers and people,” according to a press release dug up by a news outlet this week. After winning the election and making history as the first woman and first Democrat to hold the office, Kane was considered a rising star in the Democratic Party. Some believed she had a bright future in the U.S. Senate. Instead, the disgraced Attorney General is going to jail and her license to practice law has been suspended.

by -
climate change

Climate change poses significant national security challenges for the United States and will create large-scale political instability, social disruption and food shortages, according to the nation’s intelligence agency.

It marks the latest of many dire government warnings under President Obama about the ills of global warming and this one comes from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), though the agency concedes it’s based on information provided by the famously corrupt United Nations (UN).

That the nation’s intelligence agency has blindly adopted the information as fact is almost more alarming than the warnings outlined in its 13-page report. The ODNI is the broad agency that serves as an umbrella for the intelligence community and advises the president so its assessments carry a lot of weight.

The ODNI is composed of more than a dozen spy agencies, including Air Force, Army, Navy, Treasury and Coast Guard intelligence as well as the CIA and FBI. This gives it tremendous credibility, which is probably why the UN-created Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is having the ODNI promote its seemingly outlandish findings. Like a good lapdog the ODNI obliged, promoting the questionable information of radical leftwing groups in the process.

The report even suggests that climate change can fuel terrorism by including these nuggets: “In 2015, insurgent groups in northern Mali exploited deepening desertification, worsened by persistent drought, to enlist locals in a “food for jihad” arrangement.”

Here’s another example that illustrates how terrorists benefit from climate change, according to the new intel report. “The terrorist group Al-Shabaab exploited the 2011-13 famine in Somalia to coerce and tax international aid agencies, and it withheld food from those it deemed uncooperative, according to Human Rights Watch.”

For the record, Human Rights Watch is a leftist group with questionable credibility when it comes to security matters so citing it as a source tying terrorism to global warming is almost comical.

As if the assertion that climate change enables terrorists wasn’t far-fetched enough, the ODNI also claims it will destabilize the entire world by risking human health, putting stress on military operations and negatively impacting investments and economic competitiveness.

Meat and dairy lovers beware; “Heatwaves threaten livestock directly and also reduce fertility, decrease milk production, and make them more vulnerable to disease,” the ODNI writes, citing UN science.

“Droughts, wildfires, and extended periods of reduced precipitation threaten pasture and food supplies, indirectly threatening livestock.”

As for health, extreme heat will contribute directly to deaths from cardiovascular and respiratory disease across the globe, particularly among the elderly, the report states.

Military operations worldwide will be negatively impacted because more frequent and intense natural disasters will strain the capacity of U.S. and allied armed forces to deliver humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, according to the ODNI.

As is the case in all global matters, the U.S. will carry most of the burden. “The US military may be called upon more frequently to respond to foreign crises if its counterparts in affected countries are overstretched, unable to handle their own crises or those in their neighborhood,” the report says.

Investments will be affected because “extreme weather events” will discourage investment in regions deemed vulnerable. “Infrastructure will be increasingly threatened by more extreme conditions in the near future, and freshwater from aquifers will be increasingly jeopardized by saltwater intrusion,” the ODNI writes.

“Expectations of future losses will almost certainly increase insurance premiums and payouts, and insurance rates may increase well before real effects are felt in regions deemed vulnerable.”

Additionally, the financial burden of responding to emergent climate trends and severe weather events, including the cost of efforts to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, will reduce financing available for other investments. “Increasing heat stress is likely to adversely affect agriculture, manufacturing, and other sectors requiring physical labor and could significantly contribute to GDP loss.” The Grim Reaper has come to town!

In the last few years President Obama has committed tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to combat climate change—especially in developing countries—through programs operated by the World Bank, the UN and a global initiative called Green Growth Action Alliance headed by a former Mexican president.

To justify the investment, the administration has created hysteria with a number of government-funded studies warning about the dangers of climate change. Among them are reports claiming that global warming will make food and water dangerous, cause mental illness, cancer and threaten national security. In fact, a consortium of Obama administration scientists from several government agencies—including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the State Department and National Institute of Environmental Health Science—have confirmed that global warming is one of the “most visible environmental concerns of the 21st century.”

One publicly-funded study claimed that the Washington D.C. area and surrounding government infrastructure will be virtually destroyed by global warming over the next century.

TRENDING STORIES

The former Penn State assistant coach, Jerry Sandusky was convicted of molesting several young boys, and now his son is convicted of similar crimes. Jeff...