Following an event during which some African American attendees walked out on a Barack Obama speech intended to galvanize them into voting for Mary Burke, the Wisconsin Reporter claims that a pivotal event from Burke’s career has been falsely described by her during the campaign to cover up an embarrassment.
The article also claims that Burke included falsified information related to her job performance on her resume, a resume which she submitted before she was appointed as Wisconsin’s commerce secretary.
Burke has claimed that, after two years heading Trek Bicycle’s European operations during which sales figures rose substantially, she was “burnt out” and left for a several month “snowboarding tour.” Now, several former Trek executives claim that the story is entirely false.
They claim that Burke was in fact fired, and by her own family, which controls Trek Bicycle. Sales were not rising substantially under her watch, but were in fact plummeting, and morale was terrible among the European sales staff. This, they allege, was the real reason for Burke’s extended snowboarding tour – her family wanted her away from the company.
Gary Ellerman, a 21-year employee and head of Trek’s Human Resources Department (the article discloses that Ellerman is the current head of the Jefferson County Republican Party), said of Burke:
She was underperforming. She was [in] so far over her head; she didn’t understand the bike business.
Ellerman also claims that Burke’s father Richard Burke, founder and then-CEO of Trek, sent Tom Albers, then-president and CFO, to Amsterdam to evaluate Mary Burke’s performance. Albers reportedly found the European operations in disarray. As a result of Elbers’ review, Burke’s brother John – then-VP of sales and marketing and current Trek president – was obliged to let his sister go.
Asked about a possible political motivation for the disclosure considering his current political role, Ellerman stated:
I was there. This is what went down.
Other Trek employees – who reportedly requested anonymity – claim that European managers described Burke as a “pit bull on crack,” and “Attila the Hun.” Says Ellerman:
There is a dark side to Mary that the people at Trek have seen… She can explode on people. She can be the cruelest person you ever met.
In the course of her campaign, Burke has repeatedly claimed that European sales climbed to some $50M on her watch. Her 2004 résumé, submitted to the Doyle administration when she was being considered for commerce secretary, claims that the figure was closer to $60M. Despite repeated requests by reporters, Trek has refused to issue any confirmation of the claims, citing the company’s status as a closely held family business.
Ellerman says those sales figures are fabricated.
The actual figures, he maintains, were at least $10M lower than Burke says. Most of the company’s overseas sales increases occured in the United Kingdom, a market well-established before Burke’s arrival in Europe, and in Japan, where Burke had no involvement.
He says those increases were sharply offset by steep losses on the European continent, particularly in Germany, the areas for which Burke was actually responsible.
These disclosures come after the revelation that John Nettles, Burke’s predecessor as secretary of commerce, wrote in a 2006 e-mail regarding Burke that “she’s a disaster.”
The accusation of a falsified past and resume adds to prior campaign controversy of a similar nature: Burke was earlier confronted with claims that substantial parts of several of her policy papers, including her jobs plan which is central to her campaign, were plagiarized from documents issued by Democratic gubernatorial candidates in several other states.
The Burke family paints a very different picture of Mary Burke, but Ellerman and the others insist that this is historical revisionism for the sake of family and company image.
It appears that last week’s clumsy “October surprise” from Milwaukee County Executive Chris Abele – he released 16,000 pages of emails from Scott Walker’s stint as county executive – has just been countered by the Jefferson County Republican Party.
An elite, law-enforcement sensitive El Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC) intel report from July 7, 2014 was leaked to Breitbart Texas and reveals that homicide rates in Central America suggest violence is likely not the primary cause of the surge of thousands of unaccompanied minors and incomplete family units illegally entering the United States.
The EPIC report indicates that the belief among the illegal immigrants that they would receive permisos and be allowed to stay was the driving factor in their choices to come to the United States and that the crisis will continue until ‘misperceptions’ about U.S. immigration benefits were no longer prevalent . The report also states that the migrants cited Univision and other other outlets as having shaped their views on U.S. immigration policy. Another implication of the report is that family members already in the U.S. are encouraging the minors to come and organizing the travel with smugglers. EPIC is a widely respected intelligence analysis group and was initially staffed by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
According to the official DEA website, EPIC now contains representatives from a host of law enforcement agencies. The DEA states:
Agencies currently represented at EPIC include the Drug Enforcement Administration; Department of Homeland Security; Customs & Border Protection; Immigration & Customs Enforcement; U.S. Coast Guard; Federal Bureau of Investigation; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; U.S. Marshals Service; Department of Transportation; Internal Revenue Service; U.S. Department of the Interior; National Geospatial – Intelligence Agency; U.S. Department of Defense/IC; Joint Task Force – North; Joint Interagency Task Force – South; Texas Department of Public Safety; Texas Air National Guard; National Guard Counter Narcotics Bureau; Department of State; Bureau of Indian Affairs; Union Pacific Railroad Police; Kansas City Southern Railroad Police; El Paso Police Department; and the El Paso County Sheriff’s Office.
The leaked EPIC report discusses the motivational factors of the illegal immigrants in their choice to migrate to the United States:
(U//LES) In late May, the U.S. Border Patrol interviewed unaccompanied children (UAC) and migrant families apprehended in the Rio Grande Valley. Of the 230 total migrants interviewed, 219 cited the primary reason for migrating to the United States was the perception of U.S. immigration laws granting free passes or permisos to UAC and adult female OTMs traveling with minors. Migrants indicated that knowledge of permisos was widespread across Central America due to word of mouth, local, and international media messaging – prompting many to depart for the United States within 30 days of becoming aware of these perceived benefits, according to the same reporting.
(U//LES) A majority of migrants interviewed also noted that they had encountered family units, consisting of a mother and child under the age of 18 during their journey to the United States and that the families had indicated they planned to surrender to U.S. authorities because they were informed that they would likely be released.
The EPIC report discusses the lack of correlation between violence rates in Central America and the current border crisis:
(U//LES) EPIC assesses homicide trends and migrant interviews suggest violence is likely not the principal factor driving the increase in UAC migration. While CBP data from early fiscal year 2011 indicates a steady increase in OTM and UAC migration, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) statistics – within this same timeframe – show a decline in per capita homicide rates in these three countries; El Salvador saw the sharpest decline, followed by Honduras and Guatemala, respectively.
The EPIC report discusses the media outlets that the illegal immigrants claimed shaped their perceptions about U.S. policies towards illegal immigrants of this nature:
…Migrants cited Univision, Primer Impacto, Al Rojo Vivo and several Honduran television news outlets for helping shape their perception of U.S. immigration policy.
(U) Although EPIC lacks reliable reporting of Central American newspapers broadcasting the perceived benefits of U.S. immigration policies, several U.S. media outlets since June 2014 have identified Central American newspapers that have enticed minors to travel to the United States. For example, Honduran and El Salvadoran press have reportedly advertised the DACA policy, accommodations for detained UAC, and the promise of reunification with family members in the United States.
The EPIC report discusses the illegal immigrants’ family members already living in the U.S. as encouraging the minors to illegally enter the nation and setting up the travel arrangements with smugglers:
(U//LES) U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also notes that a large number of migrants interviewed claimed family members in the United States encouraged their travel because the U.S. government would cease issuing permisos after June 2014. (U//LES) U.S. Border Patrol officials report that the majority of migrants interviewed in late May indicated that they made arrangements with smugglers in their respective countries through the assistance of family members and friends in the United States.
The EPIC report states that near-term slowdown in the crisis is unlikely and that traditional migration factors will likely continue to fuel the wave of illegal immigration. It states that the crisis will continue until the migrants’ “misperceptions” about U.S. immigration benefits are changed:
(U//FOUO) EPIC assesses that UAC flow to the border will remain elevated until migrants’ misperceptions about US immigration benefits are changed. We further judge that this process could take the remainder of 2014 given the time needed for bi-lateral coordination efforts – such as information and enforcement campaigns in Mexico and Central America – to take hold. Nonetheless, traditional underlying immigration factors, such as family reunification and poor socioeconomic conditions, will continue to drive alien flow – including minors – from Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador.
Breitbart Texas provides a redacted version of the leaked intel report here. All redactions were made by Breitbart Texas. The redactions are limited to source material citations, names, and contact information.
Trouble is brewing in Washington as those who still consider legitimate the national healthcare takeover known as Obamacare try to figure out which enrollees are even eligible for coverage. A new report issued by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) admits that nearly 1.3 million Obamacare enrollees, or about 16 percent of the overall total, cannot be verified for legal status in the U.S. – in other words, most, if not all, of them are illegal immigrants rather than American citizens.
The shocking figures can be found on page 11 of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) report, entitled Marketplaces Faced Early Challenges Resolving Inconsistencies with Applicant Data. According to the figures, 1,295,571 “inconsistencies” – this is a politically correct way of implying missing or fraudulent data – found on Obamacare applications involved issues of citizenship, national status or lawful presence in the U.S., meaning applicants did not or could not verify this important information.
“The Federal marketplace was generally incapable of resolving most inconsistencies,” admits the report, noting that a large percentage of these faulty applications will likely never be resolved, at least not until the eligibility verification system becomes operable. “Without the ability to resolve inconsistencies in an applicant’s eligibility data, the marketplace cannot ensure that an applicant meets each of the eligibility requirements for enrollment in a [Qualified Health Plan] and when applicable, eligibility for insurance affordability programs.”
Nearly Half Of Total Obamacare Enrollees Cannot Be Verified As Eligible
What this implies is that the entire Obamacare program is nothing but a giant free-for-all, with absolutely no checks or balances in place to ensure that abuse and fraud don’t run rampant. Between abnormalities with income, employment verification and legal status in the U.S., it appears as though the bulk of Obamacare enrollees are either criminals, deadbeats or illegal aliens who don’t even belong in the country.
Of the roughly 8 million applicants who have signed up for Obamacare as of this writing, nearly 3 million of them cannot be verified by the current system as eligible, according to the HHS. And at this point in time, there is no way to ever verify them, as admitted by the Inspector General, further proving the massive swindle that has been levied on the American people by the Usurper-in-Chief who, ironically, has his own eligibility inconsistencies.
Four State-Run Exchanges Admit They Have No Way Of Verifying If Obamacare Enrollees Are Legal Citizens
Beyond the federal debacle, at least four state-run Obamacare exchanges are also incapable of verifying applicant eligibility. The HHS report explains that four of the 15 state marketplaces – Massachusetts, Nevada, Oregon and Vermont – haven’t figure out a way to resolve their “inconsistencies,” either. Much of this is due to their enrollment systems never having been designed with the capacity to verify applicants, a major oversight (or, perhaps, a deliberate design flaw).
Three other states – Hawaii, Colorado and Minnesota – have also had problems with inconsistencies. But these states sloughed the mess onto their state Medicaid offices, which are now having to individually verify each application by hand.
“One year ago, conservatives warned that the Obama administration’s decision to use the so-called ‘honor system’ for income eligibility was merely a backdoor way to get as many individuals on the public dole as possible,” wrote Wynton Hall for Breitbart about the ongoing dilemma. “The Office of Inspector General determined that ‘the federal marketplace was generally incapable of resolving most inconsistencies.’”
Scientists in the Netherlands have moved a step closer to overriding one of Albert Einstein’s most famous objections to the implications of quantum mechanics, which he described as “spooky action at a distance.”
In a paper published on Thursday in the journal Science, physicists at the Kavli Institute of Nanoscience at the Delft University of Technology reported that they were able to reliably teleport information between two quantum bits separated by three meters, or about 10 feet.
Quantum teleportation is not the “Star Trek”-style movement of people or things; rather, it involves transferring so-called quantum information – in this case what is known as the spin state of an electron – from one place to another without moving the physical matter to which the information is attached.
Classical bits, the basic units of information in computing, can have only one of two values – either 0 or 1. But quantum bits, or qubits, can simultaneously describe many values. They hold out both the possibility of a new generation of faster computing systems and the ability to create completely secure communication networks.
A forest of optical elements that was part of the quantum teleportation device used by the team of physicists in the Netherlands. Credit Hanson lab@TUDelft
Moreover, the scientists are now closer to definitively proving Einstein wrong in his early disbelief in the notion of entanglement, in which particles separated by light-years can still appear to remain connected, with the state of one particle instantaneously affecting the state of another.
They report that they have achieved perfectly accurate teleportation of quantum information over short distances. They are now seeking to repeat their experiment over the distance of more than a kilometer. If they are able to repeatedly show that entanglement works at this distance, it will be a definitive demonstration of the entanglement phenomenon and quantum mechanical theory.
Succeeding at greater distances will offer an affirmative solution to a thought experiment known as Bell’s theorem, proposed in 1964 by the Irish physicist John Stewart Bell as a method for determining whether particles connected via quantum entanglement communicate information faster than the speed of light.
“There is a big race going on between five or six groups to prove Einstein wrong,” said Ronald Hanson, a physicist who leads the group at Delft. “There is one very big fish.”
In the past, scientists have made halting gains in teleporting quantum information, a feat that is achieved by forcing physically separated quantum bits into an entangled state.
Researchers teleported quantum information between two distant atoms for the first time in 2009.
Click on image below to open interactive graphic
But reliability of quantum teleportation has been elusive. For example, in 2009, University of Maryland physicists demonstrated the transfer of quantum information, but only one of every 100 million attempts succeeded, meaning that transferring a single bit of quantum information required roughly 10 minutes.
In contrast, the scientists at Delft have achieved the ability “deterministically,” meaning they can now teleport the quantum state of two entangled electrons accurately 100 percent of the time.
They did so by producing qubits using electrons trapped in diamonds at extremely low temperatures. According to Dr. Hanson, the diamonds effectively create “miniprisons” in which the electrons were held. The researchers were able to establish a spin, or value, for electrons, and then read the value reliably.
In addition to the possibility of an impregnable quantum Internet, the research holds out the possibility of networks of quantum computers.
To date, practical quantum computers, which could solve certain classes of problems far more quickly than even the most powerful computers now in use, remain a distant goal. A functional quantum computer would need to entangle a large number of qubits and maintain that entangled state for relatively long periods, something that has so far not been achieved.
A distributed quantum network might also offer new forms of privacy, Dr. Hanson suggested. Such a network would make it possible for a remote user to perform a quantum calculation on a server, while at the same time making it impossible for the operator of the server to determine the nature of the calculation.
A year and a half later, we’re still looking for answers on Benghazi, and we’re not getting them from the Obama administration. They continue, with the help of the media, to cover up exactly what happened and who in the administration knew what and when regarding the attack.
The Citizens’ Committee on Benghazi is a group of ex-CIA officers, former top military officials, and policy experts who are searching for answers about the attack, and the report they just released on why Benghazi happened is just disturbing.
They allege that Obama was actually arming the affiliates of al-Qaeda in Libya during their attempt to overthrow Gaddafi, and the attack could’ve been prevented had the US not “switched sides in the War on Terror.”
‘The United States switched sides in the war on terror with what we did in Libya, knowingly facilitating the provision of weapons to known al-Qaeda militias and figures,’ Clare Lopez, a member of the commission and a former CIA officer, told MailOnline.
She blamed the Obama administration for failing to stop half of a $1 billion United Arab Emirates arms shipment from reaching al-Qaeda-linked militants.
‘Remember, these weapons that came into Benghazi were permitted to enter by our armed forces who were blockading the approaches from air and sea,’ Lopez claimed. ‘They were permitted to come in… [They] knew these weapons were coming in, and that was allowed.
‘The intelligence community was part of that, the Department of State was part of that, and certainly that means that the top leadership of the United States, our national security leadership, and potentially Congress – if they were briefed on this – also knew about this.’
The weapons were intended for Gaddafi but allowed by the U.S. to flow to his Islamist opposition.
‘The White House and senior Congressional members,’ the group wrote in an interim report released Tuesday, ‘deliberately and knowingly pursued a policy that provided material support to terrorist organizations in order to topple a ruler [Muammar Gaddafi] who had been working closely with the West actively to suppress al-Qaeda.’
The report claims that Gaddafi was willing to step down from his position of power and offer a truce with the rebels, but Obama would not allow the Pentagon to pursue a peace deal.
‘We had a leader who had won the Nobel Peace Prize,’ Kubic said, ‘but who was unwilling to give peace a chance for 72 hours.’ […]
Gaddafi wanted only two conditions to step down: permission to keeo fighting al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), and the lifting of sactions against him, his family, and those loyal to him.
The Obama administration’s unwillingness to help broker a peaceful exit for the Libyan strongman, ‘led to extensive loss of life (including four Americans)’ when al-Qaeda-linked militants attacked U.S. diplomatic facilities in the city of Benghazi,’ the commission told reporters.
The report calls out Hillary for her negligence and betrayal of our personnel in Benghazi, and says that the claim that armed forces couldn’t have made it in time is patently false:
Lyons also said U.S. claims that it lacked the resources to mount a counterattack in time to save lives is false.
‘I’m going to tell you that’s not true,’ he said. ‘We had a 130-man unit of forces at Sigonella [AFB in Italy]. They were ready to go.’
‘The flight time from Sigonella to Benghazi is roughly an hour.’ […]
‘They believed they were going to be saved, that they were going to be rescued, but they weren’t,’ Simmons said of the four Americans who died.
‘I know who made the decision, in my heart of hearts, to leave our war fighters there and be blown up. And then to have one of the most powerful politicians in our country sit there and say, “What difference does it make?” – should be an alarm bell for all Americans.
‘It haunts me,’ Simmons said. ‘I play that line over, and over, and over, and over in my mind.’
It’s important that we not take any of this information for granted, as these claims do go pretty far beyond what we know for sure up to this point and what Congress has been able to uncover about the attack. What’s clear is that Obama and Hillary were negligent in securing the embassy and responding promptly with force, and they lied for weeks about the nature of the attack, saying that it wasn’t an act of terrorism. Those are impeachable offenses.
If anything, this report should cause us to ask more questions and demand more answers from Obama. If the media would do its job and seriously investigate Benghazi, we might get to the bottom of this thing once and for all. We need a full select congressional committee with subpoena power to force administration officials to give us answers.
Please share this article on Facebook and Twitter if you think Obama and Hillary need to finally answer for what happened in Benghazi.