Month: September 2017

Categories
Quick Analysis

DACA: Facts Behind the Rhetoric

There is little doubt that “Dreamers,” those covered by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals series of executive orders, are sympathetic figures.  There is also the uncomfortable reality that those executive orders, initiated by President Obama in 2012, are also unconstitutional.

15 states and the District of Columbia are suing over President Trump’s cessation of DACA: New Mexico, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Washington.

However, attorney generals or governors of 9 states have pending suits over NOT ending it: Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, Texas, West Virginia,

Senator Chuck Grassley  (R-Iowa) expressed the view that typifies the perspective of many in Congress: “However well-intentioned DACA may have been, the program was created by executive edict rather than by Congress as the Constitution requires. Because of President Obama’s executive overreach, DACA has faced numerous legitimate legal challenges, and now President Trump has asked Congress to sort it out…Any legislative solution is going to have to be a compromise that addresses the status of those who have been unlawfully brought to this country and upholds the rule of law. President Trump should continue to work with Congress to pass reforms through the legislative process that encourage lawful immigration. In the meantime, I expect that the Administration’s immigration enforcement priorities will continue to target the thousands of criminals ahead of those who have otherwise abided by our laws.”

Senator Diane Feinstein, (D-Ca.) who represents the state with more Dreamers—223,000– than any other stated “Congressional action is now the only way to guarantee that DACA recipients are shielded from deportation, and it must be our top priority. The DREAM Act—introduced by Senators Graham and Durbin to provide a path to citizenship for DACA recipients—deserves a vote as soon as possible.”

Pew Research  estimated that in 2012 about 1.7 milion people were eligible.  As of June 2016, USCIS received 844,931 initial applications, 741,546 were approved, 60,269 were denied, 43,121 pending.  Over half of those accepted came from California and Texas.

Immigration law is not done by presidential whim, it is a matter of legislation, passed by Congress and signed by the President. Title 8 of the U.S. Code is but one of the fifty titles and deals with “Aliens and Nationality”. 8 U.S. Code § 1325 – Improper entry by alien.   In fact, in 2014, when Obama attempted to expand the program, many governors sued and an injunction against his move was passed.
If you are residing in USA and online viagra sales want to get started quickly, already within 15min whenever the urge comes. When you are really in need of a therapy, the decision to seek the learningworksca.org viagra sale help of a Sexologist is to acquaint you with the fact that there is someone to “help” you resolve your pressing sexual problems. A person suffering from such problem ejaculates in a short duration. cialis online usa continue reading here has been considered as a worthy output of the medical research and is advised to most victims. Two tubes commander cialis (vas deferens) carry sperm from the testes to the prostate and other glands.
Obama could have chosen the proper Constitutional route and have a bill introduced in Congress, but simply chose to act on his own. Remember, he famously stated that he “couldn’t wait” for Congress to act, and proclaimed that he “Had a pen and a phone” and would willingly use them to get his way, despite the Constitution.

The number of illegals has soared in the United States from 3.5 million in 1990 to at least 11.3 million currently, and perhaps many, many more. Although cancelled by Trump, implementation of the cancellation has been delayed for 6 months to come up with a solution.  The fact is, for far too long, both political parties have called for comprehensive immigration reform, but nothing has happened. This may be the way to do just that.

The costs of illegal immigration, not from the dreamers but overall, have been enormous. 6.9% of k-12 students have illegal immigrant parents. In an exclusive interview on the Vernuccio/Novak Report usagovpolicy.com, commentator Megan Barth discussed how DACA’s “Dreamers” can obtain some federal benefits. The Daily Caller outlines this: “ DACA allows recipients to apply for social security numbers, which are required to claim the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), a major tax benefit for lower-income earners. The program allows recipients to participate in Social Security and Medicare as well, but they generally cannot receive benefits until retirement age. Generally speaking, DACA recipients are still ineligible for many forms of public assistance. Nonetheless, the program does expand access to some federal benefits.”

The growth in criminal gangs such as MS-13 has plagued communities across the nation. 27% of all federal prisoners are immigrants.

Dick Morris outlines the President’s strategy: If the Democrats don’t work constructively with the GOP to produce a real piece of legislation, the deadline of an expiring DACA program will force them into line. Facing the possible deportation of 800,000 of their constituents because of Democratic intransigence, the party — from Schumer on down — will have to pull in its horns so as not to impale a divided Republican party. Instead, the entire Senate — all one hundred members — will have to work together with stellar bi-partisanship to craft a solution.

The Huffington Post reports that “Lawmakers on Capitol Hill [have] broadly agreed that something should be done about young undocumented immigrants who came to the U.S. as children and who will eventually lose deportation protections if Congress does not step in to help them.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

The Real Cause of Navy Collisions? Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government concludes its examination of the real causes behind the recent deadly collisions of U.S. Navy ships.

A Heritage Foundation report notes: “A longstanding fear has been that cyber attacks against the U.S. might result in disruptions to power, banking, and communications systems at a critical moment. The cyber attacks on Estonia and Georgia, which disrupted commerce and communications, raise the specter that the U.S. might undergo the equivalent of a cyber Pearl Harbor. Efforts by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to improve verification capabilities highlight the limitations of current computer engineering skills in, for example, diagnosing cyber intrusions. Initial studies on the Trusted Integrated Circuit program, seeking to create a secure supply chain, were requested in 2007. As of late 2010, DARPA was still seeking new research proposals for determining whether a given chip was reliable, and whether it had been maliciously modified, as part of the Integrity and Reliability of Integrated Circuits (IRIS) program.

“A more recent worry is vulnerabilities “hardwired” into the physical infrastructure of the Internet. In the last several years, the FBI has warned that counterfeit computer parts and systems may be widespread. This can manifest itself in two ways: fake parts and systems, which may fail at dangerously higher rates, or contaminated systems that might incorporate hardwired backdoors and other security problems, allowing a foreign power to subvert a system. Similar problems have been identified by American allies; the U.K. has identified counterfeit parts entering into its military supply chain. Much cyber-related attention has been focused on the PRC. China is reportedly the source of many of the hacking efforts directed at U.S. military and security computer networks. Chinese computer infiltration has reputedly obtained access to such sensitive programs as F-35 design information.”

With the summer Olympics due to kick off in Beijing this August, all eyes will be turned to China and to on line levitra the sporting world. The rate shop viagra of incidence is higher in the quality. Anyhow more sildenafil pills has placed very well impact in positive to the curing of this disorder. levitra works in an excellent manner by curing it completely ensuring a 100% result to the consumer. Other than curing erectile dysfunction Vardenafil also helps in treating premature ejaculation, as it considerably increases the time-period cialis canadian prices between vaginal penetration and ejaculation, thus making your every sex session much better and last longer. In 2012, John Reed, in a Defense Tech article, noted: “For years, everyone has warned that counterfeit microchips made in China and installed on American military hardware could contain viruses or secret backdoors granting the Chinese military cyber access to  U.S. weapons systems. These warnings/predictions recently expanded beyond counterfeit parts, now we’re worried that any Chinese-made components could be infected…a scientist at Cambridge University in the United Kingdom claims to have developed a software program proving that China — and anyone else — can, and is, installing cyber backdoors on some of the world’s most secure, ‘military grade’microchips…Basically, Chinese cyber spies can gain use the chip’s built-in malware to decipher military passcodes and gain remote access to the chip and reprogram it to do their bidding; ‘permitting a new and disturbing possibility of a large-scale Stuxnet-type attack via a network or the Internet on the silicon itself,’ reads his report. The worst part, this backdoor, installed on chips used on critical weapons systems and public infrastructure around the word, is almost impossible to remove from the chip since, well, it was built into the device during manufacturing. That mean’s you can’t just issue a software patch to repair the vulnerability. The backdoor is close to impossible to fix on chips already deployed because, unlike software bugs in a PC Operating System, you cannot issue a patch to fix this. Instead one has to replace all the hardware which could be extremely expensive. It may simply be a matter of time before this backdoor opportunity, which has the potential to impact on many critical systems, isexploited.Having a security related backdoor on a silicon chip jeopardises any efforts of adding software level protection. This is because an attacker can use the underlying hardware to circumvent the software countermeasures.

USATODAY  reports that In 2013  a group of graduate students were able to successfully spoof an $80 million yacht’s GPS system, sending it hundreds of yards off course without the ship’s navigation system showing the change to the crew.

This may be precisely what China, using its Trojan Horse chips foolishly or unknowingly purchased by the Pentagon, may be doing to the U.S. Navy, intentionally causing collisions, perhaps as a warning to Washington to refrain from taking military action against Beijing’s client state, North Korea.

Categories
Quick Analysis

The Real Cause of Navy Collisions?

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government examines the possible real cause behind the recent deadly collisions of U.S. Navy ships,  in this two-part study.

The recent series of collisions affecting U.S. Navy vessels may be the result of the use of Chinese (PRC) computer chips. The navigation systems of vessels have been shown to be vulnerable to computer hacking.

In 2011, Business Insider revealed that “…the U.S. Navy purchased 59,000 microchips for use in everything from missiles to transponders and all of them turned out to be counterfeits from China.”

Adam Rawnsley, writing in Wired reported: “The U.S. has been worried about its foreign-sourced chips in its supply chain for a while now. In a 2005 report, the Defense Science Board warned that the shift towards greater foreign circuit production posed the risk that ‘trojan horse’ circuits could be unknowingly installed in critical military systems. Foreign adversaries could modify chips to fizzle out early, the report said, or add secret back doors that would place a kill switch in military systems.”

An Information Age  analysis by Ben Rossi  in 2012 bluntly stated: “A microchip used by the US military and manufactured in China contains a secret ‘backdoor’ that means it can be shut off or reprogrammed without the user knowing, according to researchers at Cambridge University’s Computing Laboratory…Cambridge University researcher Sergei Skorobogatov wrote that the chip in question is widely used in military and industrial applications. The ‘backdoor’ means it is ‘wide open to intellectual property theft, fraud and reverse engineering of the design to allow the introduction of a backdoor or Trojan”

You might have not given a thought at least once about the process discount online viagra by which your penile organ becomes erect, until you experience having an erection issue. Spinal tumors can occur inside the cord or in the membranes purchase cheap cialis (meninges) covering the spinal cord . Acting as a stimulant for the online tadalafil body, which are offered with the Herbal Supplements. With all the generic erectile dysfunction medications available at The Cheapest Prices The price of the cheapest cheap viagra and kamagra has been the most effective part of their popularity. Atlantic  reports that “The U.S. miltary has known for quite some time that they have a quality control problem with the microchips they’ve been buying in China. A 2005 report from the Defense Science Board warned that in buying weapon circuitry overseas, “trojan horse” chips could find their way into American weapons, potentially prompting missiles to detonate early or computers to shut down in the event of an attack.”

We at the New York Analysis of Policy and Government have warned of this crisis for some time. Our latest report, presented in April, revealed that two years ago, one of America’s top military leaders, now retired, told this publication that he was “deeply concerned” over the Pentagon’s dependence on China for key computer chips.

The Alliance for American Manufacturing, in a recent report, warned that “America’s military communications systems increasingly rely on network equipment from China, putting our entire defense at risk. A 2012 House intelligence committee investigation, for example, found that the Chinese telecommunications company Huawei, which had been working to expand in the United States, posed a major threat to the U.S. because its equipment could be used to spy on Americans — as well as U.S. defense systems and companies. New America Foundation senior fellow Peter Singer warned military leaders in 2015 that ‘America’s most advanced fighter jets might be blown from the sky by their Chinese-made microchips and Chinese hackers easily could worm their way into the military’s secretive intelligence service.’ “Defense systems in the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps all face major supply chain vulnerabilities. Take semiconductors, which have been central to U.S. military and economic strength over the past century. Semiconductors are used in the Army’s M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank, the Marine Corps’ F-35B Joint Strike Fighter and the Air Force’s F-35A Joint Strike Fighter, the Joint Director Attack Munition Precision Guidance Kit used by the Army and Marine Corps, and the communications systems for all four branches…the U.S. has faced a steady decline in semiconductor fabrication, which is increasingly happening in Asia. The U.S. share of semiconductor fabrication decreased from nearly 50 percent in 1980 to only 15 percent in 2012.”

In addition to the potential for spying or intentionally disabling U.S. military equipment , threats from defective equipment originating in China looms large. In 2011, Buck Sexton found that, according to U.S. Senate sources, “on 1,800 separate occasions, the U.S. military or contractors have purchased electronics materials for defense systems that were either fake or poorly recycled. In some cases, defective chips made their way into critical U.S. weapons and navigation systems. The examples could provide a serious wake-up call to defense contractors and others involved in the military supply chain…70 percent of them originated in China. Another 20% came from countries like Canada and the U.K. that resold Chinese parts to the U.S. Realistically, closer to 90% of faulty electronics in military equipment came from China…While the report focuses on unintentional threats to the military supply chain, the presence of shoddy Chinese electronics in thousands of devices and the apparent U.S. reliance on China for its national defense supply chain should concern all Americans.”

The Report concludes tomorrow.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Political Motivation of Mueller Investigation Questioned, Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government concludes its examination of the mounting indications that the charges against the President, and the refusal to conduct an investigation against Ms. Clinton, are part of an overall attempt to use the legal process as a partisan political tool.

The news that New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman will be involved with the tainted Mueller investigation confirms the true nature of what is increasingly seen as a politically motivated hit on the Trump White House. Ben Smith, writing for Politico,  notes that the former state senator has “spent his career building an ideological infrastructure for the left.”

The Washington Examiner believes that the inclusion of the hyper-partisan Schneiderman on Mueller’s team is actually “good news” for Trump. “…people close to the White House said Schneiderman’s history of political donations to Democratic political candidates, and his decision to position himself squarely against the president, could help Trump discredit Mueller’s investigation…”

Schneiderman’s proclivity for using his office for partisan purposes has garnered considerable criticism. State GOP chair Ed Cox stated in 2016 that: “Another day, and more evidence Eric Schneiderman is using the Office of the Attorney General for political purposes. Just last week we learned he is allowing his close ally Hillary Clinton to subvert New York charity laws by refusing to force her to disclose the Foundation’s foreign donors, and now we learn he sought to leverage his investigation of ExxonMobil to secure support from billionaire environmental activist Tom Steyer in his potential run for higher office. Mr. Schneiderman has established a long and disturbing pattern of abusing the power of his office for political gain.”

The New York Observer had this to say about Schneiderman: “A pattern of political opportunism in which enemies pay while friends skate, a questionable nine-figure slush fund and an inability to play nicely in his own party’s sandbox have begun to make influential New Yorkers wonder if the attorney general has hit his political ceiling. In numerous cases, Mr. Schneiderman has shown vindictiveness toward political foes and been uncharacteristically lenient or ignorant of activities of political friends.”

Schneiderman has plenty of company on Mueller’s staff. He joins, as noted in Newsmax,  individuals such as James Quarles, who donated over $30,000 to various Democratic campaigns in 2016, including $2,700 to Hillary Clinton; Jeannie Rhee, whose donations include $5,400 to Clinton’s campaigns in 2015 and 2016, and $4,800 to the Obama Victory Fund in 2008 and 2011; Andrew Weissmann, the chief of the Justice Department’s fraud section, who donated $2,300 to the Obama Victory Fund in 2008, $2,000 to the Democratic National Committee in 2006, and at least $2,300 to the Clinton campaign in 2007; and Andrew Goldstein, who donated $3,300 to Obama’s campaigns in 2008 and 2012. This is just a partial list.
Causes of obesity are divided into internal and external causes in two, the internal cause is weak tempered, phlegm-dampness due to stop, external causes is by eating too much cialis free consultation movement caused by too little. The penile muscles do not relax which cause a sales uk viagra good service rash in these areas.. The outcome demonstrated http://deeprootsmag.org/category/gospelset/gospel-feature/ levitra sale that around 80% seen a marked improvement into their new hair growth along with denseness. How to Use online prescriptions for cialis : Take this medication by using an effective ingredient sildenafil citrate.
Mueller’s investigation cannot be understood in isolation.  It’s significant and detrimental role in the American body politic should be observed in the context of the overall politicization of both justice and government that transformed the nation during the Obama years. The use of the IRS to harass ideological opponents of the White House; attempts by the FCC to censor contrary views; the attempts by Democrat state attorneys general to sue those disagreeing with  Progressive views on climate change; the oppression of conservative students on college campuses; and the stunning, Gestapo-like tactics of Antifa, which has perpetuated wide-scale and consistent violence into modern American political life, are all part of a nationwide attempt to force Leftist policies down the throat of an electorate that has already observed how those ideas have failed and who have emphatically rejected them at the ballot box in both federal and state elections.

The reality that the White House, the Senate, the House of Representatives, and an extraordinary majority of both state legislatures and governorships are now in GOP control in the aftermath of the hijacking of the Democrat Party by left wing extremists and the corrupt Clinton machine has hit Progressives hard.

In the past, major changes in government were met with resolve by election losers with a determination to communicate their points more clearly and campaign more vigorously in the next election, always just two years away. So it was for Democrats when the nation transited from Carter to Reagan in 1980, or the Republicans when the Democrats swept away GOP federal office holders in 2008.

But something unusual occurred in 2016. The Democrats were a different type of party, with the remnants of a working-class group who cherished memories of past heroes such as Truman and JFK swept away by ideological extremists who cared little about every-day Americans or their values, values which were the bedrock of the entire nation, despite party affiliation.

Faced with an enormous loss in the election of 2016, and realizing their philosophy had lost touch with the majority, the Left decided, rather than recalculate their ideology, to take the path of misusing the legal system in the courts, and employing violence in the streets, to further their goals.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Integrity of Mueller Investigation Questioned

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government examines, in two parts,  the mounting indications that the charges against the President, and the refusal to conduct an investigation against Ms. Clinton, are part of an overall attempt to use the legal process as a partisan political tool.

So far, Robert Mueller’s investigation of the Trump campaign remains unsupported by substantive evidence sufficient to warrant further action. When compared against the extraordinary and growing evidence of wrongdoing involving national security misdeeds and uranium sales to Russia, (in return for remuneration to Ms. Clinton under various means) which the Department of Justice has wholly refused to prosecute, it is increasingly difficult to make the case that Mueller’s investigation against the Trump campaign is anything more than a biased political witch hunt in which the Justice Department is employed as a partisan weapon.

Additionally, it is being conducted by individuals so openly biased that any results they obtain would be incurably tainted.  When linked to the recent news that James Comey, while serving as head of the FBI, decided against prosecuting the former Secretary of State, who clearly endangered U.S. national security by her reckless and lawless email handling (not to mention her personally profiting from the sale of uranium to the Russians) before even interviewing the suspect and key witnesses, it presents a clear picture of a justice system gone utterly rogue with overt political bias.

The stunning report that former FBI director James Comey decided to exonerate Hillary Clinton before the agency’s investigators had interviewed key witnesses may be one of the most profound political and governmental scandals in U.S. history.

The New York Post’s Michael Godwin notes “It remains a blot on the legacy of the Obama administration, the Justice Department and the FBI, and now comes fresh evidence that the investigation that cleared her was a total sham. The revelation from the Senate Judiciary Committee that…Comey drafted his statement exonerating her about two months before FBI agents interviewed Clinton or 16 other witnesses confirms suspicions that the probe was neither honest nor thorough. When the outcome is decided long before the investigation is over, the result can’t be trusted.”

Senators Charles E. Grassley, (R-Iowa) Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, and Lindsey O. Graham, (R-S.C.) Chairman, Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism, Committee on the Judiciary issued a statement noting:

“Transcripts reviewed by the Senate Judiciary Committee reveal that former FBI Director James Comey began drafting an exoneration statement in the Clinton email investigation before the FBI had interviewed key witnesses.  Chairman Chuck Grassley and Senator Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism, requested all records relating to the drafting of the statement as the committee continues to review the circumstances surrounding Comey’s removal from the Bureau…Conclusion first, fact-gathering second—that’s no way to run an investigation.  The FBI should be held to a higher standard than that, especially in a matter of such great public interest and controversy…”

The statement went on to note:

“Last fall, following allegations from Democrats in Congress, the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) began investigating whether Comey’s actions in the Clinton email investigation violated the Hatch Act, which prohibits government employees from using their official position to influence an election.  In the course of that investigation, OSC interviewed two FBI officials close to Comey: James Rybicki, Comey’s Chief of Staff, and Trisha Anderson, the Principal Deputy General Counsel of National Security and Cyberlaw.  OSC provided transcripts of those interviews at Grassley’s request after it closed the investigation due to Comey’s termination.

“Both transcripts are heavily redacted without explanation. However, they indicate that Comey began drafting a statement to announce the conclusion of the Clinton email investigation in April or May of 2016, before the FBI interviewed up to 17 key witnesses including former Secretary Clinton and several of her closest aides.  The draft statement also came before the Department entered into immunity agreements with Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson where the Department agreed to a very limited review of Secretary Clinton’s emails and to destroy their laptops after review.  In an extraordinary July announcement, Comey exonerated Clinton despite noting “there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information.”

In a letter, (reproduced below) the two chairmen requested all drafts of Comey’s statement closing the Clinton investigation, all related emails and any records previously provided to OSC  [the permanent, independent investigative agency for personnel matters in the federal government; it is not related to Robert Mueller’s temporary prosecutorial office within the Justice Department.]  in the course of its investigation.

 

August 30, 2017

The Honorable Christopher Wray

Director

Federal Bureau of Investigation

935 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20535

Dear Director Wray:

The Senate Judiciary Committee has been investigating the circumstances surrounding Director Comey’s removal, including his conduct in handling the Clinton and Russia investigations.  On June 30, 2017, the Committee wrote to the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) requesting transcripts of OSC’s interviews with then-Director Comey’s Chief of Staff, Jim Rybicki, and the Principal Deputy General Counsel of National Security and Cyberlaw, Trisha Anderson. OSC investigators had interviewed them as part of the OSC’s investigation into whether then-Director Comey’s actions in the Clinton investigation violated the Hatch Act.[2]  OSC closed its inquiry after Mr. Comey’s removal pursuant to its standard policy of not investigating former government employees.  On August 8, 2017, the OSC provided transcripts of those interviews at the Committee’s request.  Since then, Committee staff has been asking the Department informally to explain the reasons for the extensive redactions to the transcripts.

According to the unredacted portions of the transcripts, it appears that in April or early May of 2016, Mr. Comey had already decided he would issue a statement exonerating Secretary Clinton.  That was long before FBI agents finished their work.  Mr. Comey even circulated an early draft statement to select members of senior FBI leadership.  The outcome of an investigation should not be prejudged while FBI agents are still hard at work trying to gather the facts.

OSC attorneys questioned two witnesses, presumably Mr. Rybicki and Ms. Anderson, about Mr. Comey’s July 5, 2016, statement exonerating Secretary Clinton. The transcript of what appears to be Mr. Rybicki’s interview contains the following exchanges:

 

Q:  … We talked about outcome of the investigation, … how did

the statement – I guess the idea of the statement come about?

A:   Sure.  We’re talking about July 5th, correct?

Q:   Yes.  I’m sorry.  July 5th.

A:  The – so in the – sometime in the spring – again, I don’t remember exactly when, I – early spring I would say, the Director emailed a couple folks – I can’t remember exactly; I know I was on there, probably the Deputy Director, not the full, what I’ll call the briefing group, but a subset of that – to say, you know, again knowing sort of where – knowing the direction the investigation is headed, right, what would be the most forward-leaning thing we could do, right, information that we could put out about it…And — and, you know, by that — you know, so that — and he sent a draft around of, you know what – what it might look like. . . .

 

***

A:   …So that was the early spring.

Q:   Yeah. And I think we’ve seen maybe that email where he sent it out, it was early May of 2016; does that sound about right?

A:   That sounds right. That — quite honestly, that strikes me as a little late, but may —
Physiotherapy is a technique prescription du canada viagra to promote, develop, maintain and restore the maximum functional ability and movement of their patients’ bodies. All High Quality Medications Available At viagra 100mg for sale The Cheapest Prices in the UK. It can be easily bought online order cheap levitra without filling long forms. Antidepressants will make the problem cialis canada generic worse.
Q:   Okay.

A:   — but again, I definitely remember spring. I had in my head like the April timeframe, but May doesn’t seem out of the — out of the realm.

 

***

Q:  And so at that point in time, whether it was April or early May, the team hadn’t yet interviewed Secretary Clinton –

A:  Correct.

Q:   – but was there – I guess, based on what you’re saying, it sounds like there was an idea of where the outcome of the investigation was going to go?

A:  Sure.  There was a – right, there was – based on – [redacted section].

 

Similarly, the transcript of what appears to be Ms. Anderson’s interview states:

 

Q:  So moving along to the first public statement on the case or Director Comey’s first statement the July 5, 2016 statement.  When did you first learn that Director Comey was planning to make some kind of public statement about the outcome of the Clinton email investigation?

A:  The idea, I’m not entirely sure exactly when the idea of the public statement um first emerged.  Um it was, I just, I can’t put a precise timeframe on it um but [redaction].  And then I believe it was in early May of 2016 that the Director himself wrote a draft of that statement …

 

Q:  So when you found out in early May that there was, that the Director had written a draft of what the statement might look like, how did you learn about that?

A:  [Redacted] gave me a hard copy of it…

Q:  So what happened next with respect to the draft?

A:  I don’t know for sure um, I don’t know. There were many iterations, at some point there were many iterations of the draft that circulated…

 

As of early May 2016, the FBI had not yet interviewed Secretary Clinton.  Moreover, it had yet to finish interviewing sixteen other key witnesses, including Cheryl Mills, Bryan Pagliano, Heather Samuelson, Justin Cooper, and John Bentel.

 

These individuals had intimate and personal knowledge relating to Secretary Clinton’s non-government server, including helping her build and administer the device. Yet, it appears that the following key FBI interviews had not yet occurred when Mr. Comey began drafting his exoneration statement:

  1. May 3, 2016 – Paul Combetta
  2. May 12, 2016 – Sean Misko
  3. May 17, 2016 – Unnamed CIA employee
  4. May 19, 2016 – Unnamed CIA employee
  5. May 24, 2016 – Heather Samuelson
  6. May 26, 2016 – Marcel Lehel (aka Guccifer)
  7. May 28, 2016 – Cheryl Mills
  8. June 3, 2016 – Charlie Wisecarver
  9. June 10, 2016 – John Bentel
  10. June 15, 2016 – Lewis Lukens
  11. June 21, 2016 – Justin Cooper
  12. June 21, 2016 – Unnamed State Dept. Employee[7]
  13. June 21, 2016 – Bryan Pagliano
  14. June 21, 2016 – Purcell Lee
  15. June 23, 2016 – Monica Hanley
  16. June 29, 2016 – Hannah Richert
  17. July 2, 2016 – Hillary Clinton

The Report concludes tomorrow.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Bolton Outlines Plan to Exit Iran Nuke Deal

As the New York Analysis of Policy and Government outlined yesterday, many of the same policy errors that led to the current crisis with North Korea have been repeated in relations with Iran.  The Iran nuclear deal, even if Tehran fully complies with it, will allow the Islamic extremist state, which sponsors worldwide terrorism, to fully develop nuclear weapons within the near future.   Iran, in defiance of U.N. resolutions, and with a history of cooperation with North Korea, is developing the missile technology to launch atomic weapons to targets worldwide. Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton believes that “Iran policy should not be frozen. The [Iran nuclear deal] JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] is a threat to U.S. national security interests, growing more serious by the day.” He has outlined a specific proposal  “to decertify and abrogate the Iran nuclear deal.”

We provide Ambassador Boltons’ proposal in its entirety:

I Background:

The Trump Administration is required to certify to Congress every 90 days that Iran is complying with the July 2015 nuclear deal (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action – JCPOA), and that this agreement is in the national security interest of the United States.1 While a comprehensive Iranian policy review is currently underway, America’s Iran policy should not be frozen. The JCPOA is a threat to U.S. national security interests, growing more serious by the day. If the President decides to abrogate the JCPOA, a comprehensive plan must be developed and executed to build domestic and international support for the new policy.

Under the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015, the President must certify every 90 days:

(i) Iran is transparently, verifiably, and fully implementing the agreement, including all related technical or additional agreements;
(ii) Iran has not committed a material breach with respect to the agreement or, if Iran has committed a material breach, Iran has cured the material breach;
(iii) Iran has not taken any action, including covert activities, that could significantly advance its nuclear weapons program; and
(iv) Suspension of sanctions related to Iran pursuant to the agreement is—
(I) appropriate and proportionate to the specific and verifiable measures taken by Iran with respect to terminating its illicit nuclear program; and
(II) vital to the national security interests of the United States.

U.S. leadership here is critical, especially through a diplomatic and public education effort to explain a decision not to certify and to abrogate the JCPOA. Like any global campaign, it must be persuasive, thorough and accurate. Opponents, particularly those who participated in drafting and implementing the JCPOA, will argue strongly against such a decision, contending that it is reckless, ill-advised and will have negative economic and security consequences.

Accordingly, we must explain the grave threat to the US and our allies, particularly Israel. The JCPOA’s vague and ambiguous wording; its manifest imbalance in Iran’s direction; Iran’s significant violations; and its continued, indeed, increasingly, unacceptable conduct at the strategic level internationally demonstrate convincingly that the JCPOA is not in the national security interests of the United States. We can bolster the case for abrogation by providing new, declassified information on Iran’s unacceptable behavior around the world.

But as with prior Presidential decisions, such as withdrawing from the 1972 ABM Treaty, a new “reality” will be created. We will need to assure the international community that the U.S. decision will in fact enhance international peace and security, unlike the JCPOA, the provisions of which shield Iran’s ongoing efforts to develop deliverable nuclear weapons. The Administration should announce that it is abrogating the JCPOA due to significant Iranian violations, Iran’s unacceptable international conduct more broadly, and because the JCPOA threatens American national-security interests.

The Administration’s explanation in a “white paper” should stress the many dangerous concessions made to reach this deal, such as allowing Iran to continue to enrich uranium; allowing Iran to operate a heavy-water reactor; and allowing Iran to operate and develop advanced centrifuges while the JCPOA is in effect. Utterly inadequate verification and enforcement mechanisms and Iran’s refusal to allow inspections of military sites also provide important reasons for the Administration’s decision.

Even the previous Administration knew the JCPOA was so disadvantageous to the United States that it feared to submit the agreement for Senate ratification. Moreover, key American allies in the Middle East directly affected by this agreement, especially Israel and the Gulf states, did not have their legitimate interests adequately taken into account. The explanation must also demonstrate the linkage between Iran and North Korea.

We must also highlight Iran’s unacceptable behavior such as its role as the world’s central banker for international terrorism, including its directions and control over Hezbollah and its actions in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. The reasons Ronald Reagan named Iran as a state sponsor of terrorism in 1984 remain fully applicable today.

II Campaign Plan Components

There are four basic elements to the development and implementation of the campaign plan to decertify and abrogate the Iran nuclear deal:

  1. Early, quiet consultations with key playerssuch as the U.K., France, Germany, Israel, and Saudi Arabia, to tell them we are going to abrogate the deal based on outright violations and other unacceptable Iranian behavior, and seek their input.
  2. Prepare the documented strategic casefor withdrawal through a detailed white paper (including declassified intelligence as appropriate) explaining why the deal is harmful to U.S. national interests, how Iran has violated it, and why Iran’s behavior more broadly has only worsened since the deal was agreed.
  3. A greatly expanded diplomatic campaignshould immediately follow the announcement, especially in Europe and the Middle East, and we should ensure continued emphasis on the Iran threat as a top diplomatic and strategic priority.
  4. Develop and execute Congressional and public diplomacy effortsto build domestic and foreign support.

III Execution Concepts and Tactics

  1. Early, quiet consultations with key players

It is critical that a worldwide effort be initiated to inform our allies, partners, and others about Iran’s unacceptable behavior. While this effort could well leak to the press, it is nonetheless critical that we inform and consult with our allies and partners at the earliest possible moment, and, where appropriate, build into our effort their concerns and suggestions.

This quiet effort will articulate the nature and details of the violations, the type of relationship the US foresees in the future, thereby laying the foundation for imposing new sanctions barring the transfer of nuclear and missile technology or dual use technology to Iran. With Israel and selected others, we will discuss military options. With others in the Gulf region, we can also discuss means to address their concerns from Iran’s menacing behavior

The advance consultations could begin with private calls by the President, followed by more extensive discussions in capitals by senior Administration envoys. Promptly elaborating a comprehensive tactical diplomatic plan should be a high priority.

  1. Prepare the documented strategic case

The White House, coordinating all other relevant Federal agencies, must forcefully articulate the strong case regarding U.S. national security interests. The effort should produce a “white paper” that will be the starting point for the diplomatic and domestic discussion of the Administration decision to abrogate the JCPOA, and why Iran must be denied access to nuclear technology indefinitely. The white paper should be an unclassified, written statement of the Administration’s case, prepared faultlessly, with scrupulous attention to accuracy and candor. It should not be limited to the inadequacies of the JCPOA as written, or Iran’s violations, but cover the entire range of Iran’s continuing unacceptable international behavior.

Although the white paper will not be issued until the announcement of the decision to abrogate the JCPOA, initiating work on drafting the document is the highest priority, and its completion will dictate the timing of the abrogation announcement.

A thorough review and declassification strategy, including both U.S. and foreign intelligence in our possession should be initiated to ensure that the public has as much information as possible about Iranian behavior that is currently classified, consistent with protecting intelligence sources and methods. We should be prepared to “name names” and expose the underbelly of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard business activities and how they are central to the efforts that undermine American and allied national interests. In particular, we should consider declassifying information related to activities such as the Iran-North Korea partnership, and how they undermine fundamental interests of our allies and partners.

  1. Greatly expanded diplomatic campaign post-announcement

The Administration, through the NSC process, should develop a tactical plan that uses all available diplomatic tools to build support for our decision, including what actions we recommend other countries to take. But America must provide the leadership. It will take substantial time and effort and will require a “full court press” by U.S. embassies worldwide and officials in Washington to drive the process forward. We should ensure that U.S. officials fully understand the decision, and its finality, to help ensure the most positive impact with their interlocutors.

Our embassies worldwide should demarche their host governments with talking points (tailored as may be necessary) and data to explain and justify abrogating JCPOA. We will need parallel efforts at the United Nations and other appropriate multilateral organizations. Our embassies should not limit themselves to delivering the demarche, however, but should undertake extensive public diplomacy as well.

After explaining and justifying the decision to abrogate the deal, the next objective should be to recreate a new counter-proliferation coalition to replace the one squandered by the previous Administration, including our European allies, Israel, and the Gulf states. In that regard, we should solicit suggestions for imposing new sanctions on Iran and other measures in response to its nuclear and ballistic-missile programs, sponsorship of terrorism and generally belligerent behavior, including its meddling in Iraq and Syria.

Russia and China obviously warrant careful attention in the post-announcement campaign. They could be informed just prior to the public announcement as a courtesy, but should not be part of the pre-announcement diplomatic effort described above. We should welcome their full engagement to eliminate these threats, but we will move ahead with or without them.

Iran is not likely to seek further negotiations once the JCPOA is abrogated, but the Administration may wish to consider rhetorically leaving that possibility open in order to demonstrate Iran’s actual underlying intention to develop deliverable nuclear weapons, an intention that has never flagged.

In preparation for the diplomatic campaign, the NSC interagency process should review U.S. foreign assistance programs as they might assist our efforts. The DNI should prepare a comprehensive, worldwide list of companies and activities that aid Iran’s terrorist activities.

  1. Develop and execute Congressional and public diplomacy efforts

The Administration should have a Capitol Hill plan to inform Members of Congress already concerned about Iran, and develop momentum for imposing broad sanctions against Iran, far more comprehensive than the pinprick sanctions favored under prior Administrations. Strong congressional support will be critical. We should be prepared to link Iranian behavior around the world, including its relationship with North Korea, and its terrorist activities. And we should demonstrate the linkage between Iranian behavior and missile proliferation as part of the overall effort that justifies a national security determination that US interests would not be furthered with the JCPOA.

Unilateral US sanctions should be imposed outside the framework of Security Council Resolution 2231 so that Iran’s defenders cannot water them down; multilateral sanctions from others who support us can follow quickly.

The Administration should also encourage discussions in Congress and in public debate for further steps that might be taken to go beyond the abrogation decision. These further steps, advanced for discussion purposes and to stimulate debate should collectively demonstrate our resolve to limit Iran’s malicious activities and global adventurism. Some would relate directly to Iran; others would protect our allies and partners more broadly from the nuclear proliferation and terrorist threats, such as providing F-35s to Israel or THAAD resources to Japan. Other actions could include:

  • End all landing, docking rights for all Iranian aircraft and ships at key allied ports;
  • End all visas for Iranians, including so called “scholarly,” student, sports or other exchanges;
  • Demand payment w/set deadline on outstanding US federal court judgments against Iran for terrorism, including 9/11;
  • Announce U.S. support for the democratic Iranian opposition
  • Expedite delivery of bunker-buster bombs;
  • Announce U.S. support for Kurdish national aspirations, including Kurds in Iran, Iraq and Syria
  • Provide assistance to Balochis, Khuzestan Arabs, Kurds, others – also to internal resistance among labor unions, students, women’s groups
  • Actively organize opposition to Iranian political objectives in the UN

All of us do not know that excess estrogen is filtered through the liver. cheap viagra in uk Its ingredients are chosen very carefully after research for more than 5 years, and more importantly the composition order viagra online http://greyandgrey.com/third-department-decisions-5-29-14/ of ingredients is what makes it safest to everyone. A regular plant could operate for years together without any cialis sildenafil interruptions without any immediate maintenance issues to tackle. In addition to general physical examination, special attention should be paid to the determination cialis generika of renal function (such as blood non protein nitrogen, combining power of CO2 and phenol red test).
IV Conclusion

This effort should be the Administration’s highest diplomatic priority, commanding all necessary time, attention and resources. We can no longer wait to eliminate the threat posed by Iran. The Administration’s justification of its decision will demonstrate to the world that we understand the threat to our civilization; we must act and encourage others to meet their responsibilities as well.

 

Categories
Quick Analysis

Iran and North Korea: Two Sides of the Same Nuclear Crisis

The North Korean nuclear missile crisis, and the threat of Iran’s current advanced missiles and, due to the limitations of the Iran nuclear deal, the near future possession of atomic weapons may be two sides of the same dilemma.

A Congressional Research Service report has revealed that:  “…ballistic missile technology cooperation between the two is significant and meaningful…Iran has developed a close working relationship with North Korea on many ballistic missile programs, starting with acquisition of Scud missiles from North Korea in the 1980s…In 1992 testimony, then-Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) Robert Gates identified Iran and Syria as recipients of North Korean Scud missiles. In 1993, then-DCI R. James Woolsey provided more detail, stating that North Korea had sold … Iran extended range Scud C missiles and apparently agreed to sell other forms of missile technology. .. North Korea’s ongoing export of ballistic missiles provided a qualitative increase in capabilities to countries such as Iran. Second, Iran was using North Korean ballistic missile goods and services to achieve its goal of self-sufficiency in the production of medium range ballistic missiles. Third, Iran’s acquisition of missile systems or key missile-related components, including potentially significant inputs of space launch vehicle technology and support, could significantly improve Iran’s ability to produce an ICBM. In the latter 2000s, the IC continued to assess that North Korean cooperation with Iran’s ballistic missile programs was ongoing and significant…Iran has likely exceeded North Korea’s ability to develop, test, and build ballistic missiles. But Tehran may, to some extent, still rely on Pyongyang for certain materials for producing Iranian ballistic missiles.”

A Strategic Sentinel study first reported by the Voice of America noted that “…reviews of satellite images suggest North Korea may possess another missile launching site at a village once suspected of having nuclear facilities. The images… exposed a missile silo in mountainous Geumchang-ri, North Pyongan province, where the U.S. intelligence community said in the late 1990s there was a nuclear weapons site…The silo, an underground chamber used for storing and firing missiles, seems analogous to the one at a missile base in Tabriz, Iran…”

Another plant that is in use in the manifesting world. tadalafil super active This gland is responsible for the secretion of a milky white alkaline fluid that constitutes around 30% of them suffered from or had experienced PE at some tadalafil in canada point in their lives. For anyone who has a faltering sex drive, premenstrual symptoms, low sperm counts, menopause, infertility, and any similar symptoms are encouraged to seek a sex tadalafil cheapest therapist that can medically help you through treatment. The purpose in generic levitra pills considering these is to shed some light on the drugs and how they work. North Korea’s nuclear threat, the result of decades of U.S. neglect and appeasement, has grown into a crisis that has Washington scrambling to determine a meaningful response. The Iran nuclear deal has laid the groundwork for precisely the same problem with that nation in the very near future.

In April, U.S. Secretary of State Tillerson stated: “Iran’s nuclear ambitions are a grave risk to international peace and security… With its latest test of a medium-range ballistic missile, Iran’s continued development and proliferation of missile technology is in defiance of UN Security Council Resolution 2231. nd it has previously stated it will conduct a second test flight of the Simorgh space-launch vehicle, which would put it closer to an operational intercontinental ballistic missile.Any discussion of Iran is incomplete without mentioning the JCPOA. [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] The JCPOA fails to achieve the objective of a non-nuclear Iran; it only delays their goal of becoming a nuclear state. This deal represents the same failed approach of the past that brought us to the current imminent threat we face from North Korea. The Trump administration has no intention of passing the buck to a future administration on Iran. The evidence is clear. Iran’s provocative actions threaten the United States, the region, and the world.”

In July, the Jerusalem Post  stated that “German intelligence reports emerged in June and July revealing the Iranian regime’s continued pursuit of nuclear weapons and missile technology in defiance of international sanctions and UN resolutions… According to the German state of Hamburg’s intelligence agency: ‘there is no evidence of a complete about-face in Iran’s atomic polices in 2016’ [after the Islamic Republic signed the JCPOA accord with world powers in 2015, designed to curb Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief]. Iran sought missile carrier technology necessary for its rocket program.”