Saturday, January 23, 2016

Whoopi Goldberg Won't Stay In U.S. Soil If Trump Becomes President (another reason to vote Trump)

Parent Herald ^ | Jan 22, 2016 09:26 PM EST | Snow 

Veteran actress Whoopi Goldberg is making plans to leave the U.S. in case Donald Trump is elected as president on November. The 60-year old comedian openly expressed her sentiments over Trump's blaming immigrants for U.S. problems.
Fox News reported that on the Wednesday episode of "The View," Goldberg, a co-host of the show said, "I've always been an American, and this has always been my country, and we've always been able to have discussions."
Goldberg further elaborated on her statement saying, "And suddenly now it's turning into, you know, 'not them, not them.' And you know, we have a lot of friends whose parents saw this already." To this she added, "They don't want to relive this. They don't want to relive this. So I need all the candidates to get it together. Get back to American values."
According to Goldberg, she does not think that Trump's views reflect what America is all about. People must stop blaming others for the problems that hound U.S. For Goldberg, these troubles must not be attributed to immigrants.
Breitbart has reported on the sentiments of another co-host, Joy Behar, where she said, "That's scapegoating. It's as old as the hills. What do you think World War II is all about?" Behar believes that what transpired in World War II where Jews were blamed is happening all over again. This time around it is the Muslims and the Mexicans.

Bombshell: Hillary e-mails may have exposed human intel source!

Hotair ^ | 01/22/2016 | Ed Morrissey 

If true, the latest revelation about Hillary Clinton’s secret e-mail system goes way beyond “smoking gun.” It reaches the level of full core meltdown when it comes to US national security and the safety of American intel sources. Fox News reporters Catherine Herridge report that the Inspector General has noted that information in one or more e-mails contained information classified as “HCS-O,” denoting extraordinarily sensitive material that could put a human intel source at high risk if exposed:

At least one of the emails on Hillary Clinton’s private server contained extremely sensitive information identified by an intelligence agency as “HCS-O,” which is the code used for reporting on human intelligence sources in ongoing operations, according to two sources not authorized to speak on the record.
Both sources are familiar with the intelligence community inspector general's January 14 letter to Congress, advising the Oversight committees that intelligence beyond Top Secret — known as Special Access Program (SAP) — was identified in the Clinton emails, as well the supporting documents from the affected agencies that owned the information and have final say on classification.
According to a December 2013 policy document released by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence: "The HSC-0 compartment (Operations) is used to protect exceptionally fragile and unique IC (intelligence community) clandestine HUMINT operations and methods that are not intended for dissemination outside of the originating agency."
It is not publicly known whether the information contained in the Clinton emails also revealed who the human source was, their nationality or affiliation.
According to the Authorized Classification and Control Markings Register, the HCS classification applies to human intelligence (HUMINT) that is also classified at the SCI level — Sensitive Compartmented Information. The SCI classification is itself another form of higher classification; we first saw this come up in the context of Hillary’s e-mail system last summer, when Top Secret/Compartmented data from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and NSA showed up in her e-mails. That dealt with satellite data about North Korea’s nuclear program, and the exposure of that data could have allowed our enemies the ability to render our satellite data-collection capabilities useless.
If Hillary’s server transmitted and retained SCI/HCS in an unsecured and unauthorized manner, the US would be very lucky to still have that source available to us. This goes beyond gross negligence; it demonstrates an utter contempt not only for national security, but for the risks faced by those who gather intelligence and cooperate with the US to safeguard the country.
Herridge and Browne also report that IG Charles McCullough has briefed key members of Congress on just how much this was not just an “interagency dispute” over publicly discussed topics:
The source said that the “several dozen” refers to the main or principal email thread identified by reviewers, not the number of times that classified information was forwarded, replied to or copied to people who did not have a "need-to-know" using unsecured communication channels — in this case a personal server. More than one Special Access Program was affected. …
The two declarations provided to the heads of the House and Senate Intelligence committees — as well as the leadership of Senate Foreign Affairs with oversight for the State Department — include the emails containing SAP intelligence, as well as supporting documents from the agency affected, showing how they reached the determination it came from one of its sources, and not from publicly available information.
The originators of this information would know precisely what came from sources in the clear, and which came from their most sensitive data. The question will be whether the FBI has also mapped out the manner in which this information got manipulated into unsecured systems so that the Secretary of State could hide her communications from Congress and the courts, and whether the Department of Justice will prosecute what might be the worst spillage outside of a purposeful espionage effort in recent memory, if not ever.
Update: Robert Gates told Hugh Hewitt yesterday that the “odds are pretty high” that Russia, China, and Iran had compromised Hillary’s home-brew server:

HH: One of your colleagues, Mike Morell, said on this program, or actually agreed with my assertion that almost certainly, Russians, Chinese and Iranians had compromised the home brew server of the former Secretary of State. He agreed with that. Do you agree with his assessment of my assessment?
RG: Well, given the fact that the Pentagon acknowledges that they get attacked about 100,000 times a day, I think the odds are pretty high.
HH: And so if they had real time access to her server, would that have compromised national security?
RG: Well, again, it would depend entirely on what she put on there. And I just, I haven't read any of these emails, so I don't know what was on those servers.

If it’s SCI and HSC information, then the clear answer is yes.

National Review just handed Donald Trump the Election

Republican Newswatch ^ | 1/22/16 | DOUG IBENDAHL 

National Review's publication of the collective anti-Donald Trump missives from 22 self-appointed conservative potentates has caused quite a stir in Republican circles.
The nationwide responses range from, "Wait, I thought National Review went out of business years ago," to "Ed Meese? Seriously?"
The Gang of 22 have officially become parodies of themselves. One would have to reach back to the days of Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew to lift an adequate quote to describe them.
"Nattering nabobs of negativism," "vicars of vacillation," "pusillanimous pussyfooters," "the decadent few," "ideological eunuchs," "the effete corps of impudent snobs," or "the hopeless, hysterical hypochondriacs of history" - take your pick, because they all apply about equally well to each and every one of them.
So clueless is the Gang of 22 they can't even see how they've stumbled right into the narrative Trump's been communicating so successfully for months. Just like the elected officials from both parties, the Gang of 22 has been GREAT at complaining about stuff, year, after year, after year.
But getting anything accomplished? Not so much.
Many of the Gang of 22 have been hanging around and chattering for decades, and some are active cogs in the Conservative Entertainment Complex, deriving their income by pandering to conservative anger while offering no real solutions.
Donald Trump represents a threat to these ineffectual poohbahs in the same way he represents a threat to do-nothing public officials.
Jealousy is also seriously at work here. Trump is inspiring and exciting a broad spectrum of the country like no member of the Gang of 22 ever has, or ever will.
In just seven months of campaigning, Trump already has more Americans listening to a Republican message than the entire Gang of 22 could muster over decades. Trump understands that before you can advance the ball, you have to convince people to take time from their busy lives to listen. No one on the GOP side since Ronald Reagan has accomplished that like Trump.
No one else has come close, and certainly no one from that "effete corps of impudent snobs" to which the National Review thinks we should defer.
The Gang of 22 had their chance. They've done a lot of bitching over the years, and it paid well for some.
But Americans care about results. They can plainly see that all of the empty talk from the Gang of 22 got us eight years of Barack Obama, and a loss in pretty much every conservative battle there was to lose.
At the same time when Americans look at Donald Trump's life they get a lot of assurance that here is finally a man who shares their focus on actually getting results. And Trump returns the respect by recognizing regular hard-working Americans are a lot smarter than any of the "ideological eunuchs" in all of their pontificating glory.
The "pusillanimous pussyfooters" love to nitpick Trump's words, but what voters are looking for this year is competence and accomplishment. Donald Trump has an actual record of delivering both in spades.
The Gang of 22 is right to be terrified. A President who could get things done would expose them as the irrelevant creatures they truly are.
It can't happen fast enough.