Executive Departments 3

[Smash!]

If anyone had any doubts that orange fuckface intends to become a dictator here's the proof.

[Howl]

16 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

That's just the way his boss, Putin, wants it.

Notice how the recent tsunami of different shit (Epstein! racism!  Whatever happened last week!) has totally eclipsed the Russia issue?  

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"Many USDA workers to quit as research agencies move to Kansas City: ‘The brain drain we all feared’"

Spoiler

Two research agencies at the Agriculture Department will uproot from Washington, D.C., to Kansas City in the fall. But many staffers have decided to give up their jobs rather than move, prompting concerns of hollowed-out offices unable to adequately fund or inform agricultural science.

About two-thirds of the USDA employees declined their reassignments, according to a tally the department released Tuesday. Ninety-nine of 171 employees at the Economic Research Service, an influential federal statistical agency, will not move. At the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, which manages a $1.7 billion portfolio in scientific funding, 151 of 224 employees declined to relocate.

Jack Payne, University of Florida’s vice president for agriculture and natural resources, warned that the hemorrhage of employees will devastate ERS and NIFA. “This is the brain drain we all feared, possibly a destruction of the agencies,” Payne said.

Workers who agreed to move must do so by Sept. 30, although USDA has not established permanent office space and has not said whether the agencies will be located on the Missouri or Kansas side of the Kansas City area. Workers who were asked to move but declined “will be separated by adverse action procedures,” per letters the employees received in June.

The department expects relocation numbers may “fluctuate” until the Sept. 30 cutoff, according to a statement provided by USDA. “These anticipated ranges were taken into account in the department’s long-term strategy, which includes both efforts to ensure separating employees have the resources they need as well as efforts to implement an aggressive hiring strategy to maintain the continuity of ERS and NIFA’s work.”

Tim Cowden, president of the Kansas City Area Development Council, which advocated for the relocation to Kansas City, said in a statement that “just over 36 percent of those given the option to relocate have accepted, which is very strong for any HQ relocation. We remain committed to working with all USDA employees interested in relocating to KC.”

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.), along with Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-Mo.) and Rep. Sam Graves (R-Mo.), was an early supporter of the move to Kansas City. Cleaver said in a statement he empathized “with not wanting to uproot your family.” But if the move “has to happen,” he said, “then Kansas City is the best place in America for these agencies’ new home,” because it can “fill the void with competent and qualified individuals.”

“This kind of staff loss will completely gut the ERA and NIFA, and will ultimately prevent the USDA from conducting critical research that helps grow the food our families eat,” Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) told The Washington Post.

Sonny Ramaswamy, the NIFA director from 2012 to 2018, said he was aware of $50 million in grants, slated to be distributed over the next three months, for research areas identified as priorities in the 2018 farm bill. Those grants would have funded studies into subjects as diverse as disease-resistant cotton in Mississippi and hail-damaged corn in Nebraska.

Now, that science is “not going to happen,” Ramaswamy said, because the planned move has disrupted the agency. A senior NIFA scientist familiar with the grants, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid professional retaliation, confirmed that these grants are on hold and in danger of never being distributed.

NIFA, when fully staffed, employs about 400 people. As it becomes more diminished, the agency’s ability to review grant proposals, manage awards or hold grant recipients accountable is threatened, Ramaswamy said. He predicted tens of millions of dollars in grant funding will be in jeopardy. Most money earmarked for NIFA grants, if unspent, returns to the Treasury Department.

Katherine Smith Evans, the ERS administrator from 2007 to 2011, reviewed a list of employees who are leaving. Four of five economists working on bees and pollination at ERS have left or will leave, she said. Ten of 12 economists working on trade and international development have retired, already left or plan to do so. None of the farm finance and tax experts will remain with the agency. “I agree with people who say it will take 10 years to recover,” Smith Evans said.

Gale Buchanan, the USDA chief scientist and undersecretary for research, education and economics in the George W. Bush administration, said employees face “an almost impossible task” by trying to do their jobs with reduced numbers.

The decision process, he said, has been flawed. “I could live by whatever blue-ribbon committee recommended to do to address some of the concerns the secretary had,” Buchanan said. But, he added, “you don’t just pull an idea out of the air and, for some political reason, make a decision.”

The agencies were understaffed even before Tuesday’s tally of those who will not relocate. Employees at the agencies quit in large numbers before the department issued reassignment letters. In early June, vacancy rates at the agencies were around 20 to 25 percent.

“Both agencies already have experienced significant losses of skilled personnel, beginning back when the proposed move was announced,” Payne said. “The percentage of employees moving is even smaller when the denominator is the full staff level.” During fiscal year 2018, ERS had 320 employees. Unless a wave of new hires fills the deserted desks, by this fall, ERS will be half the size it was two years ago.

When Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue announced the relocation in August, he said it would “provide more streamlined and efficient services.” A cost-benefit analysis released by the department in June suggests moving to Kansas City will save up to $300 million over 15 years.

An organization of economists, the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, disputed the projected savings; the move may cost taxpayers money, the group said, because the analysis overestimated the expense of retaining the agencies in the capital and did not calculate the value of lost research.

 

[fraurosena]

Trump has, of course, found yet another swamp creature... not so difficult, as they're buzzing around him like meatflies* do around manure.

*meat-flies are literally known as shit-flies in Dutch, which sounds rather more apt

[GreyhoundFan]

This is not good: "Trump to nominate Eugene Scalia, the son of the late Supreme Court justice, as his next secretary of Labor"

Spoiler

President Trump announced Thursday that he plans to nominate Eugene Scalia, the son of late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, as his next Labor secretary — succeeding Alexander Acosta, who announced his resignation last week amid an uproar over an old plea deal he struck with a wealthy financier facing a new round of sex trafficking charges.

“I am pleased to announce that it is my intention to nominate Gene Scalia as the new Secretary of Labor. Gene has led a life of great success in the legal and labor field and is highly respected not only as a lawyer, but as a lawyer with great experience working with labor and everyone else,” Trump said Thursday night in a pair of tweets. “He will be a great member of an Administration that has done more in the first 2 1 /2 years than perhaps any Administration in history!”

Scalia, one of the late justice’s nine children, is a veteran attorney well-versed in regulatory matters who served as the top lawyer for the Labor Department under the George W. Bush administration. He is a partner at Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher, a Washington law firm, specializing in administrative law and bringing with him deep experience in challenging federal regulations.

After his tenure as the solicitor for the Labor Department, Scalia was hired by Wal-Mart Stores in 2005 to defend the merchandise giant in court as it faced lawsuits accusing it of illegally firing corporate whistleblowers.

Scalia, whose family is revered among conservatives, is likely to face little trouble getting confirmed in the Republican-controlled Senate and already has his legions of admirers in the chamber.

One major booster on Scalia’s behalf was Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), who privately spoke to a number of top administration officials — including presidential son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner, Attorney General William P. Barr, White House counsel Pat Cipollone and acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney — about nominating Scalia to the Labor job, according to a GOP official familiar with the discussions. Scalia served as a special assistant to Barr during his previous tenure as attorney general under President George H.W. Bush.

The White House had also asked senators for their feedback on Scalia for the Labor position, according to another official familiar with the deliberations.

Cotton praised Scalia as “an outstanding lawyer” in a statement late Thursday. “I’m confident he’ll be a champion for working Americans against red tape and burdensome regulation as Labor Secretary.”

Cotton spoke to Trump on Wednesday about nominating Scalia for the job and suggested the president bring in the lawyer for a private meeting. The White House had started considering Scalia for the job as the scrutiny over Acosta’s plea deal began to intensify last week, according to another person familiar with the deliberations, as the administration searched for a fallback option for Acosta should he leave his post.

Trump and Scalia, accompanied by Cotton, Mulvaney and other senior White House staff, met privately at the White House on Thursday afternoon, when the offer was made and Scalia accepted the nomination.

The people spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal White House deliberations.

The procedure by which Scalia had been installed to his Labor job also drew controversy more than a decade ago. President George W. Bush used a recess appointment in January 2002 to tap Scalia — who faced opposition from labor unions — for the solicitor post to circumvent the Senate, then controlled by Democrats. Bush then extended his tenure by designating him as acting solicitor, which kept him in the job until Republicans took control of the Senate and could more easily confirm Bush’s picks.

Democrats signaled that once again, Scalia would face resistance from the left.

“Workers and union members who beloved candidate Trump when he campaigned as pro-worker should feel betrayed,” said Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) of Scalia’s expected nomination.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

Sigh. "Trump administration planning changes to U.S. citizenship test"

Spoiler

If you were to take the test to become a U.S. citizen tomorrow, you might be asked to name one of five U.S. territories, or two of the rights contained in the Declaration of Independence, or to provide the correct number of amendments to the Constitution.

The naturalization test is a crucial part of an immigrant’s journey to becoming an American. And, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, it is meant not just as a measure of U.S. civics knowledge, but also as a reason to study and absorb the principles, values and functions of the U.S. government, including the rights and responsibilities that come with citizenship.

(Question No. 49: What is one responsibility that is only for United States’ citizens? Answer: “serve on a jury” or “vote in a federal election.”)

The Trump administration is planning to update the test, with a new version slated to debut before the end of President Trump’s first term, officials said Friday. A pilot test should be available this fall.

USCIS officials are offering few details about the changes to the test, which was last revised in 2008. Officers who administer the exam now choose as many as 10 questions to ask each applicant from a list of 100 in three categories: American Government, American History and Integrated Civics (geography, symbols and holidays.) The questions are not intended to trip up applicants — they are published and available for all to study.

With the executive branch able to control the test, and with President Trump making it clear that he wants to dramatically change the nation’s immigration policies and laws, how the White House approaches new questions or the test’s format could become an object of scrutiny.

“Isn’t everybody always paranoid that this is used for ulterior purposes?” USCIS Acting Director Ken Cuccinelli, an immigration hard-liner and former Virginia Attorney General who Trump appointed last month, said in an interview with The Washington Post on Thursday. “Of course they’re going to be sorely disappointed when it just looks like another version of a civics exam. I mean that’s pretty much how it’s going to look.”

In the first 2 1/2 years of his presidency, Trump has slashed the number of refugees admitted to the United States; banned thousands of would-be immigrants based on their nationality in a handful of majority-Muslim countries; made it more difficult to qualify for asylum; and proposed a visa system overhaul that would prioritize immigrants with advanced degrees, English-language skills and deep pockets.

In a series of tweets this week, Trump also sought to draw a line between the kinds of rights enjoyed by existing U.S. citizens, distinguishing between four minority Democratic Congresswomen, whom, he claimed, “originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe” and “the people of the United States.” Many critics have said the president was suggesting that the former had little or no right to criticize the latter.

(Question No. 51: What are two rights of everyone living in the United States? Answer: freedom of expression, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom to petition the government, freedom of religion, or the right to bear arms.)

Readers of Trump’s tweets have also pointed out that only one of the four Congresswomen he was tweeting about is foreign-born, and that, like all members of Congress, they are U.S. citizens. (Question No. 50: Name one right only for United States citizens. Answers: “vote in a federal election” or “run for federal office.”)

USCIS officials described the forthcoming test revision as a benign act; a rewording or reshuffling or reconsideration of some questions in alignment with adult education standards and best practices, which, they said, mandate regular updates to standardized tests.

“I just think we need to freshen the material,” Cuccinelli said. “Even if all we do is go pull questions from 2000 and questions from 2008.”

Hundreds of thousands of people become naturalized U.S. citizens every year. Last year, USCIS naturalized more than 750,000 people, a five-year high. Immigration attorneys have said there is an increasingly long application processing time, and there is a record backlog that has grown dramatically since 2016. A foreign national has to be a legal permanent resident of the United States for at least five years before applying for citizenship.

The questions are developed in consultation with middle school and high school curriculums across all 50 states, according to USCIS. An applicant must get at least six out of 10 correct to pass. The average pass rate on the naturalization test is 90 percent, according to USCIS data.

Not all the questions are easy.

Cuccinelli said that he often encounters applicants for citizenship who are better versed in U.S. civics than natural-born U.S. citizens.

“I can’t tell you how many spouses seeking to become citizens know more about that answer than their spouse,” he said, referring to Question No. 20: Who is one of your state’s U.S. Senators now?

He said his staff also has been “joking about the ones that currently exist — and whether we know them all.”

A survey last year by the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation found that of 1,000 U.S. citizens questioned, just 1 in 3 would pass the naturalization test. Khizr Khan — the Gold Star father who Trump attacked during the 2016 campaign — publicly challenged Trump to take the test.

Question No. 91 asks applicants to name one U.S. territory; Trump has referred to the governor of the U.S. Virgin Islands — one of the correct answers — as the “president” of the Caribbean territory, and he has complained that Puerto Rico — another correct answer — has gotten too much aid “from USA.” Hogan Gidley, a White House spokesman, has twice referred to Puerto Rico as “that country.” (The three other correct answers would be American Samoa, Northern Mariana Islands and Guam.)

Introduced in 1986, the test was last revised in 2008; a shift that officials said removed a lot of the trivia — such as an excessive number of questions surrounding the appearance of the American flag — and incorporated questions meant to foster a better understanding of the U.S. system of government and how the country came to be.

Cuccinelli said there isn’t anything in the existing naturalization test that strikes him as out of place in the way the previous test did. That version, he remembers, included a question about the United Nations, which he found preposterous because it “has absolutely nothing to do with United States of America,” and having such a question in there is “just not right.”

“Who gives a flying rat’s ass?” that the U.N. is located in the United States, he added. “So is the Russian Embassy. We don’t ask about Russia.”

But nothing stands out as inherently wrong with the existing test, he said.

“Really — and you see it in a lot of the questions that are already there — I want to see it reflecting American principles, constitutional principles, that are unique that help make us exceptional, and are frankly part of the reason people want to come here,” Cuccinelli said.

The first pilot test is expected to involve approximately 1,400 volunteers around the country. A second pilot is expected to be field tested in the spring.

A lot of the questions — such as “What is the economic system in the United States?” and “What was one important thing that Abraham Lincoln did — most likely will stay the same, officials said.

Two new questions that USCIS officials said are on the drafting table — but could be abandoned — include: Why did the U.S. enter World War II? (Answer: the bombing of Pearl Harbor, or the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.) And: Who do we celebrate on Veterans Day? (Answer: people in the military, or people who have served in the armed forces).

Some people have contacted the citizenship office with their own suggestions, requesting more questions about inventors or scientists; a question about the national parks; and maybe something about Mount Rushmore.

“Nobody has suggested anything specific to me,” Cuccinelli said.

The president, he said, has not weighed in.

So, the UN has "absolutely nothing to do with the United States"? good grief.

[candygirl200413]

It's wild because I doubt that this orange fuckface would even pass the test anyway

[fraurosena]

2 hours ago, candygirl200413 said:

It's wild because I doubt that this orange fuckface would even pass the test anyway

Well, he can’t read, so that’s a given.

[GreyhoundFan]

Because we can't go a damned hour without this sham administration being cruel to people: "Trump administration proposal would push 3 million Americans off food stamps"

Spoiler

The U.S. Department of Agriculture proposed new rules Tuesday to limit access to food stamps for households with savings and other assets, a measure that officials said would cut benefits to about 3 million people.

In a telephone call with reporters, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue and Acting Deputy Under Secretary Brandon Lipps said the proposed new rules for the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) were aimed at ending automatic eligibility for those who were already receiving federal and state assistance.

“This proposal will save money and preserve the integrity of the program,” Perdue said. “SNAP should be a temporary safety net.”

About 40 million low-income people received SNAP benefits in 2018. Forty-three states routinely grant eligibility to low-income people already receiving other government benefits, without undergoing income or asset tests.

Lipps said the proposal would result in an annual budgetary savings of $2.5 billion and restrict less needy individuals from qualifying for benefits.

USDA officials told the call the proposal was aimed at closing a loophole that was famously exploited by a wealthy Minnesota man, Rob Undersander, who claims he received food stamps for 19 months despite owning significant assets such as property and bank accounts.

“Now people will have to qualify like everyone else,” Perdue said.

Lipps also said the proposal aimed to make sure that beneficiaries are treated equally across all states, and that recipients’ geographic location should not dictate their benefit level.

The USDA officials had no specifics on the financial cutoff for their proposal.

Current rules give states latitude to raise SNAP income eligibility limits so that low-income families with housing and child care costs that consume a sizable share of their income can continue to receive help affording adequate food.

This option also allows states to adopt less restrictive asset tests so that families, seniors and people with a disability can have modest savings or own their own home without losing SNAP benefits.

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D.-Mich), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Agriculture Committee, said the proposed rule was an attempt to bypass Congress which has blocked earlier attempts by the Trump administration to cut food stamps.

“This proposal is yet another attempt by this Administration to circumvent Congress and make harmful changes to nutrition assistance that have been repeatedly rejected on a bipartisan basis,” Stabenow said in a statement. “This rule would take food away from families, prevent children from getting school meals, and make it harder for states to administer food assistance. "

Stacy Dean, vice president of food assistance policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said limiting access to SNAP would overwhelmingly affect working families, seniors and people with disabilities. It could encourage some recipients to spend down their savings or to work less to continue to qualify.

“Instead of punishing working families if they work more hours or penalizing seniors and people with disabilities who save for emergencies, the president should seek to assist them with policies that help them afford the basics and save for the future,” she said.

The proposal begins a 60-day public comment period Wednesday, and those comments must be reviewed before the proposal can go into effect. The last USDA proposal on SNAP received more than 100,000 comments.

To be eligible for SNAP, a household’s gross income must be below 130 percent of the federal poverty line. In 2019, that works out to $32,640 a year for a family of four. Democrats pointed out that the benefit amounts to $1.40 per person per meal.

Currently, households remain eligible with up to $2,250 in countable assets (such as cash or money in a bank account) or $3,500 in countable assets if at least one member of the household is age 60 or older, or is disabled. These amounts are updated annually.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

 

[GreyhoundFan]

Apparently Nunes (R-Moo) is angling to be the next DNI. This is a problem, since he is lacking in intelligence.

 

[smittykins]

7 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Nunes (R-Moo) 

Diet Pepsi + out nose=OUCH! ?

[fraurosena]

17 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Apparently Nunes (R-Moo) is angling to be the next DNI. This is a problem, since he is lacking in intelligence

I literally laughed out loud at this and scared the dogs. One is glaring at me for disturbing her sleep, and I'm sure the other one would too if he had the eyes to do so.

[Howl]

Devin Nunes as DNI is terrifying.  This Russian thing is getting deeper and deeper and make no mistake, this IS about Russia.  

If he is appointed to this position, he would become a watch dog for Trump, in the same way that AG Bill Barr is now a Trump crime family consigliere.  

If there is danger of exposure of the level of complicity with Russian influence, Nunes will alert the proper authorities (Fox news) to kick into gear with a disinformation/distraction campaign. 

JFC. 

Edited July 25, 2019 by Howl

[GreyhoundFan]

Only the best people... "Treasury pick Monica Crowley spread Obama smears: 'Can he be both loyal to Islam and loyal to the United States?'"

Spoiler

(CNN)President Donald Trump's pick for the top spokeswoman job at the Treasury Department repeatedly spread conspiracy theories that suggested then-President Barack Obama was secretly a Muslim who was sympathetic to America's enemies.

Monica Crowley, who was appointed by Trump last week as assistant treasury secretary for public affairs, made multiple comments spreading these false claims on her personal blog and in at least one tweet between 2009 and 2015, according to a review by CNN's KFile team.

Crowley also endorsed a story claiming Obama was an "Islamic community organizer" trying to conform the United States to Sharia law and claimed conspiracy theories about Obama's birth certificate were "legitimate concerns." During Obama's presidency, Trump was one of the most prominent voices pushing the so-called birther conspiracy theories questioning Obama's birthplace. When he was seeking the presidency himself and under continual questioning, Trump finally admitted that Obama was born in the US but offered no apologies or explanation for the years he spent sowing doubt about Obama's origins.

Crowley, formerly a syndicated radio host, columnist and Fox News contributor, was originally chosen by Trump in December 2016 to be the senior director of strategic communications for the National Security Council. She withdrew herself from consideration for that position after CNN's KFile team uncovered extensive plagiarism in her book and doctoral thesis.

Crowley did not respond to a request for comment. A spokesperson for the Treasury Department also did not respond to a request for comment.

Suggested Obama was a Muslim

Writing on her blog in August 2010, Crowley blasted Obama for supporting the right to build an Islamic community center and mosque in lower Manhattan. Some conservatives seized on the issue making it a flash-point and objecting to, at times using highly inflammatory rhetoric, building a mosque so close to the site of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Crowley wrote that Obama had loyalties to Islam and questioned if he could support both Islam and the United States.

"Maybe politics didn't have anything to do with it, but Islam certainly did. And does. Obama was born to a Muslim father, which under Islam automatically made him a Muslim. He says he converted to Christianity as an adult, which under Islam makes him an apostate," wrote Crowley. "He grew up in Indonesia, which is the most populous Muslim nation on earth. His stepfather was also a Muslim. He was steeped in Islam throughout his formative years, so it should come as no surprise that he has loyalties to Islam. During the 2008 campaign, he even slipped and claimed that the United States has '57' states, instead of 50. The number of Muslim states in the Organization of the Islamic Conference is 57."

"It may not come as a shock that he appears loyal to Islam. The question is: can he be both loyal to Islam and loyal to the United States?" she added.

Crowley added, "How could he....support the enemy?"

Called birther conspiracy theories legitimate

Writing in a blog post in April 2011 after the release of Obama's long-form birth certificate, Crowley praised Donald Trump for questioning Obama's citizenship and called concerns about the birth certificate legitimate.

"If the birth certificate were never a big deal, why did No Drama Obama wait nearly 3 years before releasing it? Why endure and stoke all of the drama? To make those raising legitimate concerns about his origins and policies look like kooks? Maybe," wrote Crowley.

"For over 2 1/2 years, questions have been raised about Obama's origins and background," she added. "He was never properly vetted by an adoring press corps, so outstanding concerns existed about his birth certificate (the long-form of which he had never released), where he grew up, his family's religious background, his parents' political beliefs, how he got into top schools such as Columbia and Harvard Law, how he paid for his education, what his grades were, etc. The questions were and are legitimate, and yet were never fully answered. In fact, anyone daring to ask them was painted as a fringe moron at best and racist at worst."

In 2011, Hawaiian officials, at Obama's request, released the long form of his birth certificate. It indicated that he had, indeed, been born in Hawaii. Conspiracy theorists continue to allege the document was a forgery.

Said Obama was on the side of terrorists

Writing about the Obama administration in June 2013, Crowley said it looked the Muslim Brotherhood was dictating American foreign policy.

"The Muslim Brotherhood is a sworn enemy of the United States. In Obama, they have found an ally. What does that say about Obama? I'm sure you can figure that one out," she wrote. "What it says about America's national security is that it looks increasingly like it's being dictated BY that sworn enemy."

Writing in a January 2009 blog post, Crowley singled out Obama for using his full name at his swearing in (presidents typically are sworn in using their full names) and decisions related to banning the use of torture and closing of the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention center as actions that raised questions about the president's sympathies.

"Barack Obama insisted on being sworn in as president with his full name, Barack Hussein Obama. One of his very first things he did as president was to order the closure of the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba," she wrote, without noting that Obama had campaigned on this issue, the facility had been a top concern for human rights defenders. "The two things he did along with that was to order a halt to the prosecutions of terrorist suspects there, including the mastermind of the September 11th attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and other top al Qaeda terrorists, like Ramzi Binalshibh. He also issued an order against the use of enhanced interrogation tactics on such terrorists, including waterboarding.

"Now comes word that he is granting his first formal television interview as president to Al-Arabiya," she added. "Tells you where his head is, and possibly, his sympathies. Just sayin'."

In February 2015, Crowley shared what she called an "important column," with the title "Obama's Two Faces of Islam." The column, written by author Bill Siegel and still available on the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine, argues that Obama is an "Islamic community organizer" and is "conforming US policy to Islam and Sharia."

"The administration, with Obama as Islamic community organizer, is not only placating Muslims and, in particular, our Islamic enemies; it is conforming US policy to Islam and Sharia," reads the column.

"Obama's actions may, however, actually betray a more nefarious strategy: do as little as politically possible so as to foment chaos across the region, all to the benefit of his seeming policy "companions" dedicated to promoting Sharia and Islamic statehood- the Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamic Republic of Iran- while defanging the US's best ally in the region, Israel. Despite public pressure, resist confronting ISIS/ISIL and Bashar Assad in any truly meaningful way and turn his back on the Christian genocide exploding across the region. In addition, flood the US with Muslim immigrants while keeping it bound to foreign oil despite remarkable innovations at home that can render it virtually energy independent."

Another hateful spokesperson.

[fraurosena]

Thank Rufus it's not going to be Nunes. Ratcliffe will probably be a terrible choice, but then so will any other R that gets the job.

 

Edited July 28, 2019 by fraurosena

[fraurosena]

It's official. Coats is out. I wonder who the 'acting' will be.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

 

 

[GreyhoundFan]

"New spy chief pick Ratcliffe made his name during the Trump inquiries by backing the president"

Spoiler

Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Tex.), President Trump’s pick to serve as the next director of national intelligence, has made his name in Congress as one of the GOP’s most dogged critics of perceived anti-Trump bias at the FBI and in the special counsel’s investigation of his alleged Russia ties.

Ratcliffe, who was first elected to the House in 2014, sits on the powerful House Judiciary and Intelligence committees, both of which are investigating Trump for suspected financial crimes, foreign collusion and obstruction of justice. It is from that perch that Ratcliffe last week steered one of the more memorable Republican exchanges with former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III during public hearings, accusing him of violating “every principle in the most sacred of traditions” of prosecutors by writing “180 pages about decisions that weren’t reached, about potential crimes that weren’t charged or decided.”

Ratcliffe argued that Mueller had no right to say that he never exonerated Trump, because the president should have been presumed innocent until proven guilty.

“Donald Trump is not above the law. He’s not. But he damn sure shouldn’t be below the law, which is where Volume 2 of this report puts him,” Ratcliffe said.

That turn in the spotlight appears to have solidified a positive impression on the president, who on Sunday tweeted that Ratcliffe “will lead and inspire greatness for the Country he loves” as the next director for national intelligence.

But first, Ratcliffe must be confirmed by the Senate, where leading Democrats accused him Sunday of being Trump’s top pick because of his efforts to please the president.

“It’s clear that Rep. Ratcliffe was selected because he exhibited blind loyalty to President Trump with his demagogic questioning of former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III,” Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) said in a statement. “If Senate Republicans elevate such a partisan player to a position that requires intelligence expertise and nonpartisanship, it would be a big mistake.”

A spokeswoman for Ratcliffe did not return a request late Sunday for comment.

Ratcliffe represents the seventh-most-Republican district in the country, according to the Cook Political Voting Index, and trumpets his conservative voting record and his ties to Trump far more than the current director of national intelligence, Daniel Coats, whose differences with Trump over his approach to adversaries such as Russia have often played out in public.

Coats, a Republican who was a longtime senator and congressman from Indiana before joining the administration, frequently won accolades from Democrats for being willing to contradict the president in the course of doing his job.

“The mission of the intelligence community is to speak truth to power. As DNI, Daniel Coats stayed true to that mission,” Sen. Mark R. Warner (Va.), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, tweeted Sunday.

Ratcliffe has not denied that Russians meddled in the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign. And before Trump came along, he, too, was allied with more classic Republican conservatives, serving as an aide to former presidential candidate and current Sen. Mitt Romney (Utah) during his presidential campaign, helping scout potential Cabinet picks.

Yet in recent years, Ratcliffe has been one of the GOP’s leading voices alleging that bias at the FBI corrupted investigations of Trump’s alleged Russia ties and Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state. He also has alleged to Mueller that although Russian meddling is a serious matter, it may have benefited Clinton more than Trump.

Mueller isn’t the first senior federal official Ratcliffe has accused of running an investigation biased against the president. Even before Trump was elected, he did the same with then-FBI Director James B. Comey, excoriating him inSeptember 2016 for allowing Clinton’s lawyers to be present for her interview during the bureau’s investigation of her use of the private email server.

Last year, Ratcliffe’s name was floated as a possible replacement for former attorney general Jeff Sessions, whom Trump replaced with William P. Barr. Ratcliffe, who briefly served as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Texas under President George W. Bush and worked as the office’s chief of anti-terrorism and national security, was at the time involved in the GOP-led congressional investigations of the FBI’s Trump and Clinton inquiries as a member of the Judiciary Committee.

He joined the House Intelligence Committee earlier this year, where he has been considered the GOP’s replacement for former congressman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), an accomplished prosecutor skilled in executing detailed, stinging examinations of witnesses in closed-door interviews and from the dais.

In the past several months, Ratcliffe has endorsed investigations of the origins of the Trump inquiry, presently being run by Barr and Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz, as a means of exposing alleged bias at the FBI, which Ratcliffe thinks wrongly used its surveillance authority against members of the Trump campaign based on faulty, Democratic-funded information.

On Sunday, just hours before Trump announced his nomination, Ratcliffe declared a political victory for the president, and defeat for the Democrats, who he said “overplayed their hand.”

“It was just a train wreck of a week for the Democrats, and it was a great week for Donald Trump because of that,” Ratcliffe said on the Fox Business Network’s “Sunday Morning Futures,” opining that House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) were “starting to look more like Laurel and Hardy” for continuing to investigate the president.

On Sunday, Schiff tweeted his thanks to Coats for serving “with such distinction,” adding that “he has had the independence and strength to speak truth to power.”

He did not comment publicly on Ratcliffe’s nomination.

Instead of the DNI, he's the DNS (Director of National Sycophants).

[fraurosena]

Deer sweet Rufus! You really cannot make this stuff up.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

@fraurosena, I imagine the Nobel committee laughed themselves silly when they received that nomination.

[fraurosena]

1 hour ago, GreyhoundFan said:

@fraurosena, I imagine the Nobel committee laughed themselves silly when they received that nomination.

Not as much though as the one they received last year for Trump himself, I should think. ?

[GreyhoundFan]

Well, he's starting the lying before his confirmation hearing. I guess he really wants to fit in with this sham administration.

 

[fraurosena]

He's the perfect candidate... for this administration.

Trump Intel Pick John Ratcliffe Started Theory of FBI Anti-Trump ‘Secret Society’

Quote

Donald Trump’s new pick for director of national intelligence played a role last year in popularizing what briefly became one of the right’s most easily debunked conspiracy theories about the investigation into the president and Russia, offering what he presented as evidence of an anti-Trump “secret society” operating within the FBI.

Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, has been an outspoken critic of the FBI’s investigation into contacts between Trump’s campaign and Russia before the 2016 election. Like other Republicans, he seized on text messages between FBI officials Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, who were having an affair, as proof that the FBI had been biased against Trump in the run-up to the election. 

One of Ratcliffe’s biggest contributions to the Republican pushback on the investigation came in January 2018, when he claimed he had seen text messages between Page and Strzok that suggested the existence of a “secret society” working against Trump. But Ratcliffe’s claims, which were subsequently amplified by pro-Trump media outlets, fell apart when the fuller text exchanges became public.

Ratcliffe’s congressional office didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Ratcliffe was also accused Tuesday of embellishing his record in an anti-terrorism case. ABC News reports that he has repeatedly misrepresented his role in the high-profile case, claiming he had been appointed as a “special prosecutor” in 2008 to help secure convictions for funneling money to Hamas, which is a designated terrorist organization.

The congressman, who did serve as a terrorism prosecutor and U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Texas, has used the Holy Land Foundation conviction to boost his anti-terror credentials, but court records and lawyers involved in the case suggest he had no direct role in the prosecution.

A spokesperson for Ratcliffe told ABC News that his involvement in the case was actually in conducting an investigation outside of the court proceedings, but said she could provide no further details “because the investigation did not result in any charges.”

Ratcliffe, who was tapped by Trump to succeed the departing Dan Coats, first made the FBI “secret society” claim during a Jan. 22, 2018, appearance on Fox News. 

“We learned today about information that in the immediate aftermath of his election, there may have been a ‘secret society’ of folks within the Department of Justice and the FBI, to include Page and Strzok, working against him,” Ratcliffe said. “I’m not saying that actually happened, but when folks speak in those terms, they need to come forward to explain the context.”

According to then-Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), who appeared alongside Ratcliffe on Fox News that day, it was Ratcliffe himself who was responsible for discovering the supposedly incriminating text messages. Ratcliffe followed that cable-news appearance by promoting his claim on Twitter, saying the text messages were proof of “manifest bias” at the top of the FBI. 

“The texts between Strzok and Page referenced a ‘secret society,” Ratcliffe tweeted.

While he was making these claims, Ratcliffe never described the full text message he was quoting from. Still, right-wing media picked up on his explosive notion of an anti-Trump cabal inside the FBI. The Daily Caller declared that Ratcliffe had found proof of an “Anti-Trump ‘Secret Society’ at FBI.” 

“FBI CONSPIRACY?” tweeted Fox News host and Trump confidant Sean Hannity, who later deleted the tweet. 

A day after Ratcliffe’s initial claim on Fox, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) moved the conspiracy further, claiming that Republican investigators had learned of meetings of an off-site “secret society” from an “informant.” Johnson eventually had to back down from his proclamation, saying he had only heard the term from the Strzok-Page text messages. 

Despite the excitement that greeted Ratcliffe’s claims among Trump supporters, the actual “secret society” text message turned out to be less sinister than initially suggested. ABC News published the full text message two days after Ratcliffe made his viral Fox appearance, revealing that the “secret society” text referenced calendars of a “beefcake” Vladimir Putin that Strzok was giving out as gifts to people who worked on the Russia investigation.   

“Are you even going to give out your calendars?” Page wrote. “Seems kind of depressing. Maybe it should just be the first meeting of the secret society.”

Shortly after the ABC story broke, discussion about an anti-Trump “secret society” largely disappeared from right-wing media. 

Even Johnson, one of the “secret society’s” most enthusiastic promoters, conceded there was a “real possibility” that Page’s text message was a joke. Ratcliffe himself appears to have abandoned the claim, at least publicly. He hasn’t tweeted about it since he first pushed it in January 2018.

Ratcliffe may have caught Trump’s eye during his hostile questioning of Robert Mueller last week, but if the Fox News favorite is to take up one of America's most prominent intelligence roles he will have to overcome a confirmation process that is expected to be rocky.

 

[fraurosena]

Tell me which the party of 'family values' was again?

DOJ restricts asylum claims based on family relations

Quote

A decision issued Monday by Attorney General William Barr will restrict the ability of migrants to claim asylum based on their family relations.

In a precedent-setting immigration court opinion, Barr said that simply being part of a nuclear family targeted for persecution doesn’t qualify as a “particular social group” eligible for asylum in the United States.

“The fact that a criminal group — such as a drug cartel, gang, or guerrilla force — targets a group of people does not, standing alone, transform those people into a particular social group,” the attorney general wrote.

President Donald Trump has sought to restrict access to asylum, which his administration views as a magnet that draws migrants north from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a similar immigration court decision in June 2018 that blocked asylum for victims of domestic violence and gang violence, a move that drew condemnation from pro-migrant advocates. A federal judge based in Washington, D.C., blocked key parts of a policy related to the decision six months later.

Barr’s ruling will guide future decisions in the immigration courts, which are not part of the federal judiciary and fall under the purview of the Justice Department. Barr highlighted that authority in the ruling Monday, saying “the attorney general has primary responsibility for construing and applying provisions in the immigration laws.”

Because 'being part of a nuclear family doesn't qualify as a particular social group'.

Ok, so if not a social group, what is a family exactly?