Tag: 2016 Elections

Wag The Dog II: Cybernetic Boogaloo: Obama Administration Planning Cyber War With Russia

On By kingsjesterIn Politics1 Comment

exposed-600-li

Shortly before an election, a spin-doctor and a Hollywood producer join efforts to fabricate a war in order to cover up a presidential sex scandal. – “Wag The Dog” (1997) starring Dustin Hoffman and Robert DeNiro

NBCNews.com reports that

The Obama administration is contemplating an unprecedented cyber covert action against Russia in retaliation for alleged Russian interference in the American presidential election, U.S. intelligence officials told NBC News.

Current and former officials with direct knowledge of the situation say the CIA has been asked to deliver options to the White House for a wide-ranging “clandestine” cyber operation designed to harass and “embarrass” the Kremlin leadership.

The sources did not elaborate on the exact measures the CIA was considering, but said the agency had already begun opening cyber doors, selecting targets and making other preparations for an operation. Former intelligence officers told NBC News that the agency had gathered reams of documents that could expose unsavory tactics by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Vice President Joe Biden told “Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd on Friday that “we’re sending a message” to Putin and that “it will be at the time of our choosing, and under the circumstances that will have the greatest impact.”

When asked if the American public will know a message was sent, the vice president replied, “Hope not.”

Retired Admiral James Stavridis told NBC News’ Cynthia McFadden that the U.S. should attack Russia’s ability to censor its internal internet traffic and expose the financial dealings of Putin and his associates.

“It’s well known that there’s great deal of offshore money moved outside of Russia from oligarchs,” he said. “It would be very embarrassing if that was revealed, and that would be a proportional response to what we’ve seen” in Russia’s alleged hacks and leaks targeting U.S. public opinion.

Sean Kanuck, who was until this spring the senior U.S. intelligence official responsible for analyzing Russian cyber capabilities, said not mounting a response would carry a cost.

“If you publicly accuse someone,” he said, “and don’t follow it up with a responsive action, that may weaken the credible threat of your response capability.”

President Obama will ultimately have to decide whether he will authorize a CIA operation. Officials told NBC News that for now there are divisions at the top of the administration about whether to proceed.

Two former CIA officers who worked on Russia told NBC News that there is a long history of the White House asking the CIA to come up with options for covert action against Russia, including cyber options — only to abandon the idea.

“We’ve always hesitated to use a lot of stuff we’ve had, but that’s a political decision,” one former officer said. “If someone has decided, `We’ve had enough of the Russians,’ there is a lot we can do. Step one is to remind them that two can play at this game and we have a lot of stuff. Step two, if you are looking to mess with their networks, we can do that, but then the issue becomes, they can do worse things to us in other places.”

A second former officer, who helped run intelligence operations against Russia, said he was asked several times in recent years to work on covert action plans, but “none of the options were particularly good, nor did we think that any of them would be particularly effective,” he said.

Putin is almost beyond embarrassing, he said, and anything the U.S. can do against, for example, Russian bank accounts, the Russian can do in response.

“Do you want to have Barack Obama bouncing checks?” he asked.

Former CIA deputy director Michael Morell expressed skepticism that the U.S. would go so far as to attack Russian networks.

“Physical attacks on networks is not something the U.S. wants to do because we don’t want to set a precedent for other countries to do it as well, including against us,” he said. “My own view is that our response shouldn’t be covert — it should overt, for everybody to see.”

The Obama administration is debating just that question, officials say — whether to respond to Russia via cyber means, or with traditional measures such as sanctions.

The CIA’s cyber operation is being prepared by a team within the CIA’s Center for Cyber Intelligence, documents indicate. According to officials, the team has a staff of hundreds and a budget in the hundreds of millions, they say.

The covert action plan is designed to protect the U.S. election system and insure that Russian hackers can’t interfere with the November vote, officials say. Another goal is to send a message to Russia that it has crossed a line, officials say.

While the National Security Agency is the center for American digital spying, the CIA is the lead agency for covert action and has its own cyber capabilities. It sometimes brings in the NSA and the Pentagon to help, officials say.

CNN clarifies NBC’s report…

There is mounting evidence that the Russian government is supplying WikiLeaks with hacked emails pertaining to the US presidential election, US officials familiar with the investigation have told CNN.As WikiLeaks continues to publish emails belonging to Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, US officials told CNN that there is growing evidence that Russia is using the organization as a delivery vehicle for the messages and other stolen information.
 
The methods of the disclosures “suggest Moscow is at least providing the information or is possibly directly responsible for the leaks,” one US official said.
US intelligence officials are still investigating the degree of connection between Russia and WikiLeaks but they remain confident that Russia is behind the leaks themselves.
CNN attempted to reach WikiLeaks for comment but received no response. WikiLeaks’s founder, Julian Assange, has previously denied any connection to or cooperation with Russia.

Why would Obama and his administration intentionally be attempting to start a war with America’s greatest enemy less than a month out from the 2016 presidential election?

As the article states, written by Liberals to assure Liberals of how noble the Administration’s motive is, they are doing this to ensure that Russia does not “interfere” with our election process.

Which is an ironic statement, when you consider that fraud is already being discovered being committed by Democrat operatives in election precincts across America, and the election is not even here, yet.

I believe that the Administration’s excuse is a bunch of hooey.

As wild as this may sound to some of you, I believe it there are two reasons why President Barack Obama and his administration want to provoke Russia.

First, this is simply retaliation for the releasing of these emails, which the Main Stream Media is avoiding covering, which show corruption and collusion between President Barack Hussein Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, John Podesta, and the entire Obama Administration. If covered properly by the Main Stream Media, it would ensure that Donald J. Trump would be the next president of the United States of America.

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and the Democratic Party cannot allow the content of these emails to be seen by average Americans, including those who voted for the Democratic Party for decades, or their political party will vanish from the face of the Earth.

The political corruption outlined in these emails is of a magnitude not seen on this Earth since the old Soviet Union.

It is ironic that Russia has discovered the hidden Corruption of the ruling party of our government when it was the immense corruption of their own ruling party which brought down the Empire of the Soviet Union.

The second reason that I believe that this is happening now, is because the Democratic Party and Barack Hussein Obama are hedging their bets. They know that Hillary Rodham Clinton is in poor health and is weighted down by all of her own scandals. These reasons, along with the fact that she is drawing crowds that will not even fill up a high school gymnasium, are signs that she will most likely lose to Donald J. Trump on November 8th and will not be elected president of the United States of America.

If war is declared, Obama might move to suspend the election, even though that would be unconstitutional.

A wild thought I know, but, since when has that ever stopped him?

As Rush Limbaugh said, when there was speculation that Obama might suspend the 2012 Presidential Election because of the devastation caused by Hurricane Sandy,

The question thus arises, can the president wave a magic wand and move the election?  What do you think, Snerdley?  Why not?  He doesn’t have the constitutional mandate.  He didn’t have the constitutional mandate for Obamacare, either.  He didn’t have the constitutional mandate to award amnesty to the kids of a million illegals, but he did it. Now, the Constitution is very clear on when presidential elections are, and to change that, you would have to amend the Constitution, and there isn’t time.  That’s not the question.  The question is, would that stop a statist like Obama?  Let me ask you this.  I want you all to just see if you can, off the top of your head, at any time in American history has anything canceled an election?  One time.  And it was a local election, and it happened on September 11th, 2001, in New York City.  Local New York City elections were suspended because of 9/11.  Those elections were not federally Constitutionally mandated. 

We had every election on schedule, on time in the Civil War, during World War I, during World War II. There hasn’t been a time.  But the question is, does that matter?  If The One wants to change the election — can you see him going on TV — I mean, after all, look who’s gonna be affected here.

…Now, of course by law, Obama cannot move Election Day. At least according to Section 7, Chapter 1, Title 2 of the US Code. I’ll read that to you: “The Tuesday next after the first Monday in November in every even-numbered year is established as the day for the election in each of the states and territories of the United States of representatives and delegates to the Congress commencing on the third day of January next thereafter.”

So he can’t move it. It’s in the Constitution; it’s in the United States Code. He cannot move the election. But it has not stopped him. The law has not stopped him in other things.

As the brilliant political cartoon by the talented A.F.Branco shows, the Main Stream Media is playing the role of the little Dutch Boy, who stuck his finger in the dam to keep his town from flooding.

However,, once again, thanks to the “New Media” and its “Citizen Reporters”, Americans are finding out the depth of Obama and Clinton’s corruption and collusion, which the DOJ and the FBI purposefully kept hidden from the American People.

If the “dam” holding back the full story contained in those e-mails busts wide open, the resulting flood of information would mean the end of Hillary Clinton’s Presidential Aspirations and, ultimately, the end of the Democratic Party, itself.

And, all those involved, including President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) cannot allow that to happen…at any cost.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Congress Grows a Spine, Stands Up to Obama and Overrides Saudi Lawsuit Bill Veto. Dhimmi President Upset.

On By kingsjesterIn UncategorizedLeave a comment

obama-bows

“It’s very simple. If the Saudis were culpable, they should be held accountable. If they had nothing to do with 9/11, they have nothing to fear,” -Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), on the Floor of the Senate, 9/28/2016

The moment that Americans have been longing for the past 8 years finally happened yesterday.

Congress grew a spine.

The New York Times reports that

Congress on Wednesday voted overwhelmingly to override a veto by President Obama for the first time, passing into law a bill that would allow the families of those killed in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to sue Saudi Arabia for any role in the plot.

Democrats in large numbers joined with Republicans to deliver a remarkable rebuke to the president. The 97-to-1 vote in the Senate and the 348-to-77 vote in the House displayed the enduring power of the Sept. 11 families in Washington and the diminishing influence here of the Saudi government.

The new law, enacted over the fierce objections of the White House, immediately alters the legal landscape. American courts could seize Saudi assets to pay for any judgment obtained by the Sept. 11 families, while Saudi officials have warned they might need to sell off hundreds of billions of dollars in holdings in the United States to avoid such an outcome.

The override comes at an already freighted moment in America’s relations with the kingdom. The Saudi government has vigorously denied that it had any part in the Sept. 11 attacks, and the commission investigating the plot found “no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials individually funded” Al Qaeda, the terror group that carried out the attacks. But the commission left open the possibility that some Saudi officials may have played roles.

Mr. Obama angrily denounced the outcome, saying lawmakers had been swayed to cast a political vote for legislation that set a “dangerous precedent” with implications they did not understand and never debated.

“I think it was a mistake, and I understand why it happened,” Mr. Obama said at a CNN town hall-style meeting with military personnel in Fort Lee, Va. “It’s an example of why sometimes, you have to do what’s hard, and frankly, I wish Congress here had done what’s hard. I didn’t expect it, because if you’re perceived as voting against 9/11 families right before an election, not surprisingly, that’s a hard vote for people to take. But it would have been the right thing to do.”

There were swift complications. Within hours of their vote, nearly 30 senators signed a letter expressing some reservations about the potential consequences of the law, including the prospect that the United States could face lawsuits in foreign courts “as a result of important military or intelligence activities.”

The White House and some lawmakers were already plotting how they could weaken the law in the near future, although there was general pessimism on Wednesday that Congress would agree to any changes. “You got to find consensus,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, after the vote. “Then you need a vehicle.”

It is unclear whether the Saudis will make good on warnings that the kingdom could unload hundreds of billions of dollars worth of assets inside the United States, and some economists have said that such a sell-off would do far more damage to Saudi Arabia’s economy than America’s.

But legal experts say there is cause for concern in Riyadh.

The law allows families of the Sept. 11 victims to alter lawsuits already underway — or file new suits — to directly sue Saudi Arabia and to demand documents and other evidence. It amends a 1976 law that grants foreign countries broad immunity from American lawsuits. Now nations can be sued in federal court if they are found to have played any role in terrorist attacks that killed Americans on United States soil.

“From there, the ball goes squarely into the Obama administration’s court,” said Stephen I. Vladeck, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law.

As Mr. Vladeck noted, a little-discussed provision of the bill allows the attorney general to intervene in the lawsuits and get a judge to stay any settlement as long as there are continuing discussions with the Saudis about a possible resolution.

The provision was added earlier this year to soften the legislation — preserving the executive branch’s purview over foreign policy while still giving family members a path to sue.

But the prospects of such discussions ever beginning are uncertain. The Saudi government has long denied any role in the Sept. 11 plot, and any negotiation with the United States could be viewed as acknowledging culpability.

At the same time, lawyers for the families will no doubt push for judges to carefully scrutinize any attempt by the attorney general to delay court proceedings.

“The families would of course expect that in the event the provision is invoked, that the courts exercise their inherent authority to assure good faith negotiations are in fact taking place and that the courts not simply rubber stamp executive branch requests for delay in resolution of their claims,” said Allan Gerson, who is part of a team representing many of the Sept. 11 families.

Mr. Gerson filed a lawsuit against Libya on behalf of families of the victims of Pan Am Flight 103, which was brought down by a bomb as it flew over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988.

In recent days, Mr. Obama, Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter and Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, all wrote letters to Congress warning of the dangers of overriding the veto.

What happened here is that the professional politicians in the Senate and the House of Representatives saw their chances of holding on to their phony baloney jobs greatly diminished if they sided with the dhimmi President against the families of the victims of those Saudi Nationals, who committed the worst act of Terrorism ever seen on American Soil, when they slaughtered over 3,000 Americans on September 11, 2001.

Obama said,

It’s an example of why sometimes, you have to do what’s hard, and frankly, I wish Congress here had done what’s hard.

So, let’s talk about “doing what’s hard”.

You know what is “hard”, Mr. President?

Hard is burying a child…or a grandchild.

Step back from your incessant pandering to the Followers of Mohammed for a moment and attempt to feel the pain, which is still as real as that horrible day over 15 years ago, when over 3,00 American lives were mercilessly ended and, exponentially, tens of thousands of other American Lives irreversibly and helplessly changed forever.

Someone should be held responsible for the tremendous pain that is now an intrinsic part of the daily lives of so many American Families, don’t you think?

Now, I don’t expect a lot to happen out of these potential lawsuits.

However, if it makes those Saudis who funded those al Qaeda Members who savagely murdered all of those Americans on that fateful day, worry about losing some of their vast fortunes and makes them understand that they cannot sponsor Islamic Terrorist Acts with impunity, expecting to pay no consequences, then it is undoubtedly worth the effort.

And, you know something, President Obama?

If you had put America First during your poorly managed and executed Presidency, you might not be so worried about “potential repercussions” from these lawsuits.

Instead of delivering a “Message to the Muslim World” at the University of Cairo in July of 2009, perhaps you should have delivered a “Message to Americans” extoling OUR Country and the Faith which founded it.

Then, perhaps, this “mistake” as your Administration has referred to it, may have never happened.

But, that would have required a President who actually loves American and all of its citizens.

Until He Comes,

KJ