BUSINESS THE MEDIA EQUATION White House Uses Espionage Act to Pursue Leak Cases

Randy Sager/ABC Jake Tapper of ABC News questioned the Obama administration's efforts to prosecute officials.

1 more image

By DAVID CARR Published: February 27, 2012

Last Wednesday in the White House briefing room,the administration's press secretary,Jay Carney,opened on a somber note,citing the deaths of Marie Colvin and Anthony Shadid,two reporters who had died "in order to bring truth" while reporting in Syria.

Jake Tapper,the White House correspondent for ABC News,pointed out that the administration had lauded brave reporting in distant lands more than once and then asked,"How does that square with the fact that this administration has been so aggressively trying to stop aggressive journalism in the United States by using the Espionage Act to take whistle-blowers to court?"

He then suggested that the administration seemed to believe that "the truth should come out abroad;it shouldn't come out here."

Fair point. The Obama administration, which promised during its transition to power that it would enhance "whistle-blower laws to protect federal workers," has been more prone than any administration in history in trying to silence and prosecute federal workers.

The Espionage Act,enacted back in 1917 to punish those who gave aid to our enemies,was used three times in all the prior administrations to bring cases against government officials accused of providing classified information to the media. It has been used six times since the current president took office.

Setting aside the case of Pfc. Bradley Manning,an Army intelligence analyst who is accused of stealing thousands of secret documents,the majority of the recent prosecutions seem to have everything to do with administrative secrecy and very little to do with national security.

In case after case,the Espionage Act has been deployed as a kind of ad hoc Official Secrets Act,which is not a law that has ever found traction in America,a place where the people's right to know is viewed as superseding the government's right to hide its business.

In the most recent case,John Kiriakou, a former C.I.A. officer who became a Democratic staff member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was charged under the Espionage Act with leaking information to journalists about other C.I.A. officers,some of whom were involved in the agency's interrogation program,which included waterboarding.

For those of you keeping score,none of the individuals who engaged in or authorized the waterboarding of terror suspects have been prosecuted, but Mr. Kiriakou is in federal cross hairs,accused of talking to journalists and news organizations,including The New York Times.

Mr. Tapper said that he had not planned on raising the issue,but hearing Mr. Carney echo the praise for reporters who dug deep to bring out the truth elsewhere got his attention.

"I have been following all of these case, and it's not like they are instances of government employees leaking the location of secret nuclear sites," Mr. Tapper said. "These are classic whistle-blower cases that dealt with questionable behavior by government officials or its agents acting in the name of protecting America."

Mr. Carney said in the briefing that he felt it was appropriate "to honor and praise the bravery" of Ms. Colvin and Mr. Shadid,but he did not really engage Mr. Tapper's broader question, saying he could not go into information about specific cases. He did not respond to an e-mail message seeking comment.

In one of the more remarkable examples of the administration's aggressive approach,Thomas A. Drake, a former employee of the National Security Agency,was prosecuted under the Espionage Act last year and faced a possible 35 years in prison.

His crime?When his agency was about to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a software program bought from the private sector intended to monitor digital data,he spoke with a reporter at The Baltimore Sun. He suggested an internally developed program that cost significantly less would be more effective and not violate privacy in the way the product from the vendor would. (He turned out to be right,by the way.)

He was charged with 10 felony counts that accused him of lying to investigators and obstructing justice. Last summer,the case against him collapsed,and he pleaded guilty to a single misdemeanor,of misuse of a government computer.

Jesselyn Radack,the director for national security and human rights at the Government Accountability Project,was one of the lawyers who represented him.

"The Obama administration has been quite hypocritical about its promises of openness,transparency and accountability," she said. "All presidents hate leaks,but pursuing whistle-blowers as spies is heavy-handed and beyond the scope of the law."

Mark Corallo,who served under Attorney General John D. Ashcroft during the Bush administration,told Adam Liptak of The New York Times this month that he was "sort of shocked" by the number of leak prosecutions under President Obama. "We would have gotten hammered for it," he said.

As Mr. Liptak pointed out,it has become easier to ferret out leakers in a digital age,but just because it can be done doesn't mean it should be.

These kinds of prosecutions can have ripples well beyond the immediate proceedings. Two reporters in Washington who work on national security issues said that the rulings had created a chilly environment between journalists and people who work at the various government agencies.

During a point in history when our government has been accused of sending prisoners to secret locations where they were said to have been tortured and the C.I.A. is conducting remote-controlled wars in far-flung places,it's not a good time to treat the people who aid in the publication of critical information as spies.

And it's worth pointing out that the administration's emphasis on secrecy comes and goes depending on the news. Reporters were immediately and endlessly briefed on the "secret" operation that successfully found and killed Osama bin Laden. And the drone program in Pakistan and Afghanistan comes to light in a very organized and systematic way every time there is a successful mission.

There is plenty of authorized leaking going on,but this particular boat leaks from the top. Leaks from the decks below,especially ones that might embarrass the administration,have been dealt with very differently.

In new analysis from the Mackinac Center, James Hohman discusses how $3 billion in federal and state funding for General Motors’ Chevy Volt, the much acclaimed “green,” plug-in, hybrid electric vehicle, is costing taxpayers $250,000 per car. As noted by Hohman, the Volt “might be the most government-supported car since the Trabant,” the car produced by the former Communist country of East Germany.

Each Chevy Volt sold thus far may have as much as $250,000 in state and federal dollars in incentives behind it —a total of $3 billion altogether, according to an analysis by James Hohman, assistant director of fiscal policy at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.

Hohman looked at total state and federal assistance offered for the development and production of the Chevy Volt, General Motors’ plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. His analysis included 18 government deals that included loans, rebates, grants and tax credits. The amount of government assistance does not include the fact that General Motors is currently 26 percent owned by the federal government.

The Volt subsidies flow through multiple companies involved in production. The analysis includes adding up the amount of government subsidies via tax credits and direct funding for not only General Motors, but other companies supplying parts for the vehicle. For example, the Department of Energy awarded a $105.9 million grant to the GM Brownstown plant that assembles the batteries. The company was also awarded approximately $106 million for its Hamtramck assembly plant in state credits to retain jobs. The company that supplies the Volt’s batteries, Compact Power, was awarded up to $100 million in refundable battery credits (combination tax breaks and cash subsidies). These are among many of the subsidies and tax credits for the vehicle.

It’s unlikely that all the companies involved in Volt production will ever receive all the $3 billion in incentives, Hohman said, because many of them are linked to meeting various employment and other milestones. But the analysis looks at the total value that has been offered to the Volt in different aspects of production—from the assembly line to the dealerships to the battery manufacturers. Some tax credits and subsidies are offered for periods up to 20 years, though most have a much shorter time frame.

GM has estimated they’ve sold 6,000 Volts so far. That would mean each of the 6,000 Volts sold would be subsidized between $50,000 and $250,000, depending on how many government subsidy milestones are realized.







SUCCESS!

Funny chit;

The Obama administration believes that executive branch reviews of evidence against suspected al-Qaeda leaders before they are targeted for killing meet the constitution’s “due process” requirement and that American citizenship alone doesn’t protect individuals from being killed, Attorney General Eric Holder said in a speech Monday.

“Due process and judicial process are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security,” Holder said. “The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process.”

Broadly outlining the guidelines the Obama administration has used to conduct lethal drone stikes overseas, Holder said the U.S. government could legally target a senior operational al Qaeda leader who is actively engaged in planning to kill Americans if the individual (1) posed an imminent threat of violence; (2) could not feasibly be captured; and (3) if the operation was conducted in line with war principles.

Such a use of lethal force against that type of individual, Holder said, wouldn’t violate the executive order banning assassinations or criminal statues because such an act would be in “self defense.” In remarks delivered at Northwestern University Law School in Chicago, Holder also said that targeted killings are not “assassinations,” adding that the “use of that loaded term is misplaced” because assassinations are “unlawful killings” while targeted strikes are conducted lawfully.

The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has so far refused to release a copy of a legal memorandum justifying the targeted killing of the U.S. born Anwar al-Awlaki, who allegedly inspired several attacks or attempted attacks on the U.S.

While not mentioning Anwar al-Awlaki by name — Holder said he “cannot discuss or confirm any particular program or operation” — he arguably referenced his killing by using the example of a U.S. born al Qaeda leader. Holder said that “citizenship alone does not make such individuals immune from being targeted.”

Holder also argued that the due process clause of the Constitution did not mean that federal judges had to review decisions to kill individuals the U.S. government claimed were terrorists.

“The Supreme Court has made clear that the Due Process Clause does not impose one-size-fits-all requirements, but instead mandates procedural safeguards that depend on specific circumstances,” Holder said.

“In cases arising under the Due Process Clause - including in a case involving a U.S. citizen captured in the conflict against al Qaeda - the Court has applied a balancing approach, weighing the private interest that will be affected against the interest the government is trying to protect, and the burdens the government would face in providing additional process,” Holder said. “Where national security operations are at stake, due process takes into account the realities of combat.”

Holder said that any decision to use lethal force against a U.S. citizen is “among the gravest that government leaders can face” and that the American people deserve to be assured that actions taking place on their behalf are consistent with values and laws.”

Holder said that the “imminent threat” evaluation had to take into account what would happen if the U.S. missed its window of opportunity and said the Constitution did not require the President to “delay action until some theoretical end-stage of planning.”

The question of whether the capture of a terrorist is feasible is “a fact-specific, and potentially time-sensitive, question,” said Holder, adding that the “nature of how terrorists act and where they tend to hide” meant capture wasn’t always possible.

Holder also said that the administration informs members of Congress about counterterrorism activities and the legal framework for targeting individuals for killing, which he said was part of a system of “robust oversight”

“The Constitution’s guarantee of due process is ironclad, and it is essential - but, as a recent court decision makes clear, it does not require judicial approval before the President may use force abroad against a senior operational leader of a foreign terrorist organization with which the United States is at war - even if that individual happens to be a U.S. citizen,” Holder said.

Hina Shamsi of the ACLU said ahead ahead of Holder’s speech that the question was whether Holder would offer “meaningful transparency both about the legal standards that the Obama administration uses to determine who can be killed as well as basic facts about who can be targeted.”

Daphne Eviatar of Human Rights First called the question of whether al-Awlaki was a U.S. citizen “sort of a red herring.”

“You cannot arbitrarily kill individuals that you decided secretly are your enemies, even if they are U.S. citizens,” Eviatar said. “It’s not as if due process only applies to U.S. citizens. The bigger question is what made al-Alwaki targetable, was he an operational leader of al-Qaeda with whom were were at war?”

Heard this yesterday ... kinda scary. President can put a hit out "legally" ?? WTF?

DOJ seeks to ensure illegal aliens get federal housing

March 16th, 2012 by Jim Kouri

With so many white, black and Latino citizens on waiting lists for public housing, the Obama DOJ is pushing to house illegal aliens, say critics.

In a case that legal experts say defies logic and common sense, in order to ensure that low-income minorities get taxpayer-subsidized housing, Obama’s Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched a nationwide discrimination probe that, ironically, is focusing on an area where the overwhelming number of public housing residents are Latino and black.

The investigations are being conducted by the DOJ’s civil rights division, which is headed by renowned illegal immigration advocate Thomas Perez, who once served as president of a taxpayer-funded group (Casa de Maryland) dedicated to helping illegal aliens, according to a public-interest law firm.

A former Maryland Labor Secretary, Assistant Attorney General Perez has made a number of controversial moves at the DOJ to protect illegal immigrants and minorities in general. Most famous is his dismissal of charges against the New Black Panther Party who were "accused" of voter intimidation of whites, according to public interest groups such as Judicial Watch and the National Legal and Policy Center.

Among controversial moves is his ordering Colorado to protect the interests of “language minority populations,” suing a public college system for discrimination over a requirement that job applicants furnish proof of residency to get hired and launching an initiative to kill written tests that Perez asserts discriminate against minorities in the workplace.

"Perez doesn't care if these workers can speak, read and write English. In his world, as long as they are living and breathing they're qualified to work at institutions of higher learning," said former New York Detective Ben Cardoza

This month the DOJ’s pro-minority act du jour focuses on two cities -- Lancaster and Palmdale --in Los Angeles County known as the Antelope Valley. Perez claims they discriminate against blacks and Latinos when it comes to providing federally-subsidized housing known as Section 8, even though 86% of the Section 8 recipients in both cities are minorities, according to the county commissioner Michael Antonovich who represents the area.

Antonovich accused Perez, who flew into the Antelope Valley a few days ago to formally announce the probe, of grandstanding.

At the heavily promoted Antelope Valley press conference Perez also announced that his agency has opened a related investigation into allegations of discriminatory policing by the law enforcement agency that patrols the area, the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department. This is relevant because Perez alleges that deputies harass minority residents of government-subsidized housing in an effort to drive blacks and Latinos out of the historically white area that sits about 60 miles north of the city of Los Angeles, according to Judicial Watch's Jill Farrell.

Officers who patrol the Antelope Valley engage in a pattern or practice of discrimination on the basis of race or national origin, Perez said, revealing that his agency made the determination after “extensive conversations with individuals” in addition to “representatives from community organizations.”

During the interviews, DOJ investigators heard “troubling accounts of allegedly unjustified stops and searches,” according to Perez who said his agency is focusing on whether there is a pattern of “racially motivated stops and arrests.”

Under Perez’s leadership the DOJ has launched similar investigations of state and local law enforcement agencies throughout the country, including New York, Ohio, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, the District of Columbia and Louisiana, according to Judicial Watch.

It has also created a secret department (National Origin Working Group) within the civil rights division to monitor “discriminatory” laws passed by states and municipalities to control illegal immigration.

Perez' mendacity is well-known within the "Beltway." For example, last year Perez was accused of lying to the U.S. Civil Rights Commission to cover up that political leadership was involved in the dismissal of the voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party. Judicial Watch obtained records that prove top political appointees were intimately involved in the decision to drop charges against the radical black revolutionary group for bullying voters with racial insults, profanity and weapons during the 2008 presidential election.

Obama’s 13 year old daughter Malia off for vacation in Mexico with 12 friends and 25 Secret Service, media scrubs story from Internet


Didn’t the Texas Department of Public Safety recently issue warning, advising students on Spring Break to not travel to Mexico? Well, not everyone on Spring Break (which we used to call Easter Vacation when I was younger) has twenty five Secret Service members to keep them safe. According to Breitbart, Malia Obama, the 13 year old daughter of the Obama’s is off for a nice little vacation to Oaxaca, Mexico. She not only took along 25 Secret Services members to keep her safe (which she should), but also took along twelve of her friends. Don’t worry though, you’re paying for it with your tax dollars. Must be nice. Meanwhile, Michelle Obama is headed to misogynistic David Letterman’s show tonight. I wonder if she will call him out? Update: The excuse for the media scrubbing the story from left wing biased Buzzfeed:

There’s a long tradition of keeping presidents’ kids out of the press, but the newswire reported today on details of Obama’s elder daughter’s travel in Mexico. The story was quickly removed from websites across the Internet, but you can’t unring that bell.

So there you have it. The story isn’t bogus. It’s the lame stream media and Obama colluding again to scrub the Internet of stories that will make him look bad. I don’t remember the Internet being scrubbed of any stories when George W. Bush’s daughters traveled. Oh and if you want to see how Malia Obama is living it up with 12 friends on your tax dollars, Noticias 24 Gente has a few pictures. Looks like Malia Obama is having a good time at least.

Update: Something very strange is going on. Not only has this story been pulled from the Huffington Post and AFP, but now it’s gone from other sites too. Intentional Business Times’ old URL of this story redirects to it’s main page, but a copy of the article and some pissed off comments are still available. Also, the UK Telegraph pulled the story. Either there’s some shenanigans going on here with the Obama regime and the media, or this story was bogus. A Chilean site has the story about Malia Obama’s extravagant trip in Spanish. South African site The New Age has the original AFP story in English.

An AFP story, linked at the Huffington Post and elsewhere, reported on Malia Obama’s visit to Mexico despite a Texas public safety warning, she’s reportedly accompanied by 12 friends and 25 Secret Service agents. The Huffington Post story link now directs to the main page and the AFP item is fast disappearing from view.
The Yahoo News link now diverts to a completely different story, in contrast to the url:
http://news.yahoo.com/obamas-daughter-spends-springbreak-mexico-145031176.html . The headline now reads: Senegal music star Youssou Ndour hits campaign trail.

http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/2012/03/19/obamas-13-year-old-daughter-malia-off-for-vacation-in-mexico-with-12-friends-and-25-secret-service-media-scrubs-story-from-internet/ 

Scrub scrub scrub the site roughly of the facts, merrily merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream.

Even snopes has done this for Soetoro.

🤔 Not sure what kind of Outrage to have here....

the kid is 13.. why is she traveling without her parents to mexico in the first place..?? 😕

Prolly going drinking!

secret hot wing sauce I bet... made with peppers grown at a Guatemalan insane asylum .. 😟

The White House has admitted to telling news agencies to pull stories on Malia Obama visiting Mexico for spring break, Politico reports.

Kristina Schake, Communications Director to the First Lady, emailed Dylan Byers:

From the beginning of the administration, the White House has asked news outlets not to report on or photograph the Obama children when they are not with their parents and there is no vital news interest. We have reminded outlets of this request in order to protect the privacy and security of these girls.

The Blaze first noticed the disappearing stories Monday afternoon, when accounts of Malia and 12 friends visiting Oaxaca with 25 Secret Service agents mysteriously began turning into broken links.

However, in admitting to “reminding outlets” about not reporting on the Obama children when there is “no vital news interest,” the White House has also tacitly admitted that Malia is (or now maybe was) in Mexico for spring break. Additional evidence has surfaced confirming that. One site has published a photo of the Obamas going to church on Sunday. It notes that Malia is absent, and says that’s due to the Mexico trip:

That site has also posted alleged photos of the vacation, but we have decided not to repost those.

As The Blaze noted on Monday, a vacation for Malia in Mexico raises a slew of questions considering the State Department has warned American citizens against travel there.

In fact, the language contained in the State Department’s travel warning is quite ominous.

“[C]rime and violence are serious problems throughout the country and can occur anywhere,” the warning reads. “U.S. citizens have fallen victim to TCO activity, including homicide, gun battles, kidnapping, carjacking and highway robbery.” [Emphasis added] It continues later:

The rising number of kidnappings and disappearances throughout Mexico is of particular concern. Both local and expatriate communities have been victimized. In addition, local police have been implicated in some of these incidents. We strongly advise you to lower your profile and avoid displaying any evidence of wealth that might draw attention.

Additionally, the warning (dated February 😎 notes that “U.S. government personnel and their families are prohibited from personal travel to all areas described as ‘defer non-essential travel’ and when travel for official purposes is essential it is conducted with extensive security precautions.” However, it adds that “USG personnel and their families are allowed to travel for personal reasons to the areas where no advisory is in effect or where the advisory is to exercise caution.”

According to the release, no specific warning has been issued for Oaxaca, where Malia is said to be. However, there have been concerns about that area in the past.

This is a breaking story. Updates will be added

HUD to Pay Leftist Groups $42 Million to Teach Homeowners How to Pay Their Bills Posted by Jim Hoft on Wednesday, March 21, 2012, 5:38 AM

Your tax dollars at work… The Housing and Urban Development Department is spending $42 million in federal funding for “housing counseling.” The money is going to far left groups, including La Raza, for free assistance on foreclosure avoidance. The groups will also offer services to help combat predatory lending practices.

The New American reported:

The Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) is doling out $42 millionin federal funding for housing counseling grants to 468 local, regional, and national organizations. Intended to prevent foreclosures and assist new home buyers, the grants will offer free assistance on foreclosure avoidance as well as educate buyers on how to rent or purchase a home. HUD alleges that beneficiaries of these services will help combat predatory lending practices, because buyers will be equipped with information to help them evade mortgage scams, high interest rates, and unreasonably high appraisals.

“The HUD-approved counseling agencies this funding supports are crucial in helping struggling families on a one-to-one basis to manage their money, navigate the homebuying process, and secure their financial futures,” asserted HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan. “Housing counseling works for families that are in need, but also for entire neighborhoods and our housing market more broadly.”

The funding stems from the fiscal 2012 budget that reinstated HUD-approved counseling services after Congress slashed such funding in 2011. According to HUD, the funding supplements the $2.5 billion supplied to states for housing programs as an extension of the federal government’s $25-billion mortgage servicing settlement.

A handful of those “HUD-approved” organizations include high-profile liberal activist groups. One of the organizations, the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) —which in Spanish means “the Race” —harvested roughly $1.7 million from the federal housing agency. The largest Hispanic civil rights and advocacy group in the nation, the NCLR works on a myriad of social and economic issues pertaining to the Hispanic community, including labor, housing, education, and healthcare.

Forgerygate:MediaThreatened WithFederalInvestigationsIf ObamaBirthCertificateStory Reported Mar 20th, 2012 @ 11:55 am › Doug Book ↓ Skip to comments

Western Center for Journalism on Facebook

Like 10,492

Share with your friends! Facebook

Email Print Reddit Digg

Free Republic Fark It!

Individuals and member organizations of the American media were threatened with FTC and FCC investigation if information gathered by Sheriff Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse concerning the forgery of Barack Obama’s long form birth certificate were passed on to the American public.

It was Posse lead investigator Mike Zullo who made this stunning revelation, stating “During our investigation, we actually were told [that media] had been threatened with FTC investigations. Commentators [had been] threatened with their jobs.”

And Jerome Corsi, author of “Where’s the birth certificate,” the book whose imminent publication was responsible for forcing Barack Obama to quickly create and place the fraudulent long form birth certificate on the White House web site, has said that “Testimony is being developed that the White House is intimidating, in a systematic way, the mainstream media and if any broadcasters dare go into this birther story, they’re going to risk FCC investigations… people are going to have careers ruined… thrown off the air.”

Zullo went on to say the threats actually caused some individuals to “…quit their positions over safety concerns for their families.”

Those who tuned in to the web-cast of the Cold Case Posse report will recall that the scant few media members in attendance made it their business to represent the President rather than report on the information presented about the fraudulent birth certificate. Each “reporter” in his turn questioned the motives of Sheriff Arpaio and the political leanings of Mike Zullo, clearly far more interested in developing a tale of “right-wing conspiracy” than in the facts reported by Posse investigators.

And as only the internet would make the American people aware of what is arguably the most extraordinary crime committed against the American public in the past century, Zullo and Corsi teamed up to create an e-book which would make known all of the pertinent facts and findings of the investigation–facts which had of course been blacked out by the legacy media.

Naturally, the writing of the e-book has led to accusations of profiteering by Zullo and Corsi. In fact an AP article accuses the pair of using the Arpaio investigation “…as a promotional tool to sell [their] books and theories.” And although nowhere in the short article does the author present any of the facts supporting the claims of the Arpaio-led group, the AP hack does offer an Obama spokesman ample opportunity to ridicule the Posse’s work by comparing it to “the TV series ‘The X-Files.”

The entire episode of media and White House corruption has been summed up by on-line newsman Jeff Crouere as he writes, “Such a bombshell should have led the national news coverage throughout the country. Instead, it was completely ignored by a corrupt network of media elites who are decidedly liberal and wholeheartedly support Obama’s re-election.” “The vast majority of the American people have been denied the truth by a media who want to shield Obama.”

And apparently those select few members of the media actually interested in reporting the truth were intimidated out of doing so by minions of the Manchurian Candidate.

Obama seizes control over all food,farms, livestock,farm equipment,fertilizer and food production across America

Tuesday, March 20, 2012 by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles...)

(NaturalNews) "We told ya so" just doesn't quite cut it anymore. As the American sheeple slept, selfishly refusing to take a stand against tyranny, the Obama administration has been plotting what can only be called a total government takeover of America.

On March 16, 2012, President Obama issued an executive order entitled, "NATIONAL DEFENSE RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS." (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/16/executive-order...)

This executive order states that the President alone has the authority to take over all resources in the nation (labor, food, industry, etc.) as long as it is done "to promote the national defense" -- a phrase so vague that it could mean practically anything.

The power to seize control and take over these resources is delegated to the following government authorities:

(1) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;

(2) the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;

(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;

(4) the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;

(5) the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and

(6) the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.

This takeover is designed, in part, to "stockpile supplies" for the U.S. military. Authority for this total takeover of all national resources is granted with nothing more than the writing of a single statement that claims these actions are necessary to "promote the national defense." As stated in the order:

the authority delegated by section 201 of this order may be used only to support programs that have been determined in writing as necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense:

(a) by the Secretary of Defense with respect to military production and construction, military assistance to foreign nations, military use of civil transportation, stockpiles managed by the Department of Defense, space, and directly related activities;

What all this means is that the U.S. government now claims the power to simply march onto your farm with guns drawn and demand all your crops, seeds, livestock and farm equipment.

Think I'm exaggerating? Read it yourself!

And for those living in denial who refuse to accept the reality of what's happening in America, remember the following:

• When NaturalNews reported on the existence of the NDAA, we were told our reporting was misleading because Obama opposed it and wouldn't sign it.

• When Obama betrayed America and signed the bill, we were told our reporting was misleading because "it didn't apply to Americans."

• When Obama admitted it did apply to Americans, he announced that he would choose "not to use it on Americans" but only by the grace of his restraint. Nobody who previously accused us of misleading the public had the integrity to offer us an apology and say, "Gee, you were right, it DOES apply to Americans!"

• Now Obama has seized control over all food, farms, livestock, water and transportation across America. How many brain-dead Americans will continue to live in denial and try to convince themselves this is not happening? Sticking your head in the sand does not make this go away...

What California did to Rawesome Foods,the Obama administration can do to everyone

Remember the armed raids on Rawesome Foods? With guns drawn, California authorities assaulted the food distribution center, arrested the farmers, then proceeded to destroy $50,000 worth of food including milk, eggs, cheese and watermelons. (http://www.naturalnews.com/033220_Rawesome_Foods_armed_raids.html)

As outrageous as that raid was, it's only the beginning. Now, thanks to Obama's executive order, the federal government can conduct Rawesome-style raids on all farms, all grocery stores, all food co-ops and even individual home gardens.

It's written in plain English. This is no longer debatable and it's not a conspiracy theory. It's Obama administration policy. For what other purpose would this be issued in an executive order if it was not seen as actionable by the government? This piece of paper, you see, gives them the (false) authority to do whatever they want and then have the front-line soldiers who carry it out claim "we're only following orders."

Sound familiar? Heil Hitler!

Understanding the fraud

This executive order starts out by stating that the U.S. President is the "Commander in Chief" of the U.S. military. This is false. He is not the commander in chief unless and until Congress declares an Act of War. No acts of war have been declared in recent memory, and certainly not under Obama who doesn't even seek congressional approval for war.

So Obama is in no way a "Commander in Chief." In fact, it is questionable whether he is even a U.S. citizen.

The phrase "national defense" can be twisted to mean almost anything. It could be invoked from something as harmless as a barge sinking in the harbor. It could even be invoked based on fabricated intelligence such as a fake website post from someone alleged to be "Bin Laden's second in command" who appears to shout some sort of threat against the United States of America. So the claim that this seizing of national resources will only be done under some sort of national defense emergency is pure bunk -- both Obama and Bush before him have already declared we are living under a national defense emergency! Thus, the conditions described in this executive order have already been triggered. It is already in effect!

Notice how nothing in this document talks about protecting the People? Serving the People? Supporting the People? It's all about protecting the government! The government needs stockpiles of weapons, food and resources -- but YOU don't! Such is the philosophy of current government which sees itself as all powerful and the People as helpless, mindless slaves of the state.

Tyrannical governments concern themselves with important concepts such as continuity of government but never the continuity of liberty for the People. At the first drop of a hat, liberty gets thrown out the window to keep government in power.

Other signs of the takeover

http://tv.naturalnews.com/v.asp?  v=72620642EB2DE54931674ED4857C08EC

http://www.prisonplanet.com/cop-arrests-nbc-reporters-says-your-first ...

• Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta recently revealed in U.S. Senate testimony that the Obama administration takes its orders from the UN and that the U.S. Congress is now null and void. (http://wethepeoplefree.com/constitution/senator-sessions-leon-panetta...) and (http://www.infowars.com/coup-detat-pentagon-obama-declare-congress-ce...)

• When MF Global head Jon Corzine stole billions of dollars from investors (many were farmers), there were absolutely no investigations, no indictments and no criminal arrests! Massive financial theft is now openly tolerated in America as long as those doing the stealing are politically connected to the Obama administration. (http://www.prisonplanet.com/the-cojones-defense-of-jon-corzine.html )

Of course, it's not an Obama thing. Bush was much the same. It's not the name of the person in the Oval Office who matters, it's the fundamental lack of principles and ethics reflected across government today. Instead of protecting the rights of the People, today's corrupt governments are little more than criminal gangs who steal power and resources for themselves (and their connected buddies) while destroying the economy and stealing everything in sight from the real workers upon whose sweat-drenched backs America was built.

DHS Secretary receives warning for refusing to comply with subpoena

November 20th, 2011 by Dave Gibson

What is she hiding?

On Friday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith sent Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano a letter warning her to “immediately comply” with the subpoena his committee issued over two weeks ago for information on the hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens the Obama administration has failed to deport.

Rep. Smith (R-TX) was forced to issue the subpoena after Napolitano failed to meet the House Judiciary Committee's original October 31 deadline for the information.

Specifically, Smith wants to see a list of names of the roughly 250,000 illegal aliens identified in local jails across the country through the federal Secure Communities program whom DHS has not deported.

On November 10, DHS did send Smith’s committee a list, but it reportedly contained nothing but numbers.

In a statement, Smith said: “Instead of providing this information, all DHS gave was a list numbered 1 through 220,995...Proving the administration can count is not what we asked for.”

Smith wrote to Napolitano: “If you do not, the committee will be forced to seek enforcement of the subpoena to the fullest extent allowed by the law.”