To add insult to injury, the protesters were arrested, and the event’s organizers have stated that they will be pressing charges.
An undercover video published Thursday by James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas purports to show Nevada-based Hillary Clinton campaign staffers and volunteers ignoring and knowingly violating Nevada’s voter registration laws. Moreover, the video appears to show that this conduct is being condoned and encouraged by a local attorney who works for the Clinton campaign.
According to the video, it is a felony in the state of Nevada for anyone involved in the voter registration process to “solicit a vote for or against a particular question or candidate; speak to a voter on the subject of marking his or her ballot for or against a particular question or candidate.”
The video appears to show that numerous Hillary Clinton campaign staffers are well aware of the law. Nevertheless, the video shows them laughing at the law and repeatedly bragging about violating it by promoting Hillary Clinton verbally and with campaign literature as they attempt to register potential voters.
The Project Veritas video further appears to show that the Clinton campaign staff solicits voter registration in close proximity to state offices, which may also violate Nevada law
According to the video, when the attorney in question, identified as Christina Gupana, was told about this alleged lawbreaking, she advised the staffers to, “Do whatever you can. Whatever you can get away with, just do it, until you get kicked out like totally.”
More than one staffer says that the campaign’s motto towards these laws is “Ask for forgiveness, not for permission.”
An independent federal agency has just determined that the Department of Veterans Affairs retaliated against whistleblower Bradie Frink because he tried to get the VA to find his lost claims folder.
According to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC), retaliation started after Frink, a disabled veteran and employee at the Baltimore Regional Office (BRO) of the Veterans Benefits Administration, contacted Congress when he realized that the VA couldn’t add one of his children as a beneficiary to his disability payments. The reason? Employees couldn’t even locate his claims folder.
As policy, a veteran’s claim folder cannot be stored at the same office where that veteran works, in order to maintain impartiality. When Frink was hired as a clerk in February 2013, the VA attempted to move the folder out to another regional office, but soon discovered that it was lost, even though it appeared in the computer system. Frink initially made several requests, asking the VA to try and locate his folder.
He tried for months. Nothing worked. That’s when Frink decided to contact Sen. Barbara Mikulski on June 5, 2013, with a complaint that the VA was unable to make important service-connected disability payments to him and his family. Mikulski launched an inquriy and forwarded the complaint letter over to BRO, which sparked near immediate retaliation. Incidentally, during the time when Mikulski sent the letter over, BRO was being watched for how it was processing benefits claims.
VA officials started discussing ways to terminate Frink. They succeeded in firing him on July 12, 2013, during his probationary period, despite a clean performance record. Officials alleged that Frink engaged in misconduct, but OSC didn’t buy it.
“OSC’s investigation determined that the VA’s allegations about Mr. Frink lacked evidentiary support; management’s testimony was inconsistent and lacked candor; other witnesses did not corroborate the agency’s version of the events; and termination was an excessive penalty for the alleged misconduct,” the OSC said in a statement. “Further, OSC found one of the VA officials involved in Mr. Frink’s termination showed animus and all three officials involved had a clear motive to retaliate against him.”
With the OSC investigation in hand, VA officials have reinstated Frink with back pay, as well as damages for emotional distress. After a long, hard fight, Frink starts work again Tuesday, over two years after he was fired by supervisors.
“The constitutional right to petition Congress must be guaranteed for all Americans. Federal agencies cannot deny their employees this right even if it leads to scrutiny of their operations,” said Special Counsel Carolyn Lerner in a statement.
The Daily Beast says that 50 spies have signed a document saying that the Obama administration is politicizing their reports on ISIS in order to fit their political narrative:
It’s being called a “revolt” by intelligence pros who are paid to give their honest assessment of the ISIS war – but are instead seeing their reports turned into happy talk.
More than 50 intelligence analysts working out of the U.S. military’s Central Command have formally complained that their reports on ISIS and al Qaeda’s branch in Syria were being inappropriately altered by senior officials, The Daily Beast has learned.
The complaints spurred the Pentagon’s inspector general to open an investigation into the alleged manipulation of intelligence. The fact that so many people complained suggests there are deep-rooted, systemic problems in how the U.S. military command charged with the war against the self-proclaimed Islamic State assesses intelligence.
“The cancer was within the senior level of the intelligence command,” one defense official said.
Two senior analysts at CENTCOM signed a written complaint sent to the Defense Department inspector general in July alleging that the reports, some of which were briefed to President Obama, portrayed the terror groups as weaker than the analysts believe they are. The reports were changed by CENTCOM higher-ups to adhere to the administration’s public line that the U.S. is winning the battle against ISIS and al Nusra, al Qaeda’s branch in Syria, the analysts claim.
This is pretty remarkable – it sounds so much like the spin the government handed down to the public about Vietnam.
The accusations suggest that a large number of people tracking the inner workings of the terror groups think that their reports are being manipulated to fit a public narrative. The allegations echoed charges that political appointees and senior officials cherry-picked intelligence about Iraq’s supposed weapons program in 2002 and 2003.
The two signatories to the complaint were described as the ones formally lodging it, and the additional analysts are willing and able to back up the substance of the allegations with concrete examples.
Some of those CENTCOM analysts described the sizeable cadre of protesting analysts as a “revolt” by intelligence professionals who are paid to give their honest assessment, based on facts, and not to be influenced by national-level policy. The analysts have accused senior-level leaders, including the commander in charge of intelligence and his deputy in CENTCOM, of changing their analyses to be more in line with the Obama administration’s public contention that the fight against ISIS and al Qaeda is making progress. The analysts take a more pessimistic view about how military efforts to destroy the groups are going.
“Cherry-picked” intelligence? Sounds a lot like what they say about the Iraq War, doesn’t it? But what do you wanna bet that they’ll downplay this as much as possible?
Adding to Hillary Clinton’s concern that the FBI may open a criminal investigation into her use of a private email server is evidence among the emails recently released by the State Department that she maintained deep ties to the Clinton Foundation while serving as U.S. secretary of state.
In a new report, Wall Street analyst and investor Charles Ortel charges the Clintons and their associates have been engaged in a “vast criminal conspiracy to defraud the general public, enrich themselves and entrench their political influence.”
Ortel believes the evidence calls for a criminal investigation by the FBI as well as by attorneys general in four states where the Clinton Foundation is registered, maintains offices and/or has aggressively solicited individual donations: Arkansas, Massachusetts, California and New York.
He published on his website a new executive summary of his “First Foundation Report” of his continuing investigation into the operations of the Bill, Hillary, & Chelsea Clinton Foundation.
“Since July 2002, the worst known example of flagrant and unpunished abuses by a U.S. domiciled, public charity is the record of voluminous flawed, inaccurate, false and misleading public disclosures made by representatives of the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation (the “Clinton Foundation”), as trustees, executives and agents illegally solicited across state, and national boundaries and raised close to $2 billion from donors who were either willingly or unwillingly duped,” Ortel alleges.
Ortel has shared with WND his investigative files amounting to hundreds of pages of tables, exhibits and appendices. The documentation supports his claim that between 2002 and 2013, the Clinton Foundation solicited potential donors across state and national boundaries to raise close to $2 billion.
“The biggest unanswered questions concern why state, federal, and foreign government authorities have failed, so far, to prosecute trustees, executives, and agents of the Clinton Foundation and its constituent elements for ceaselessly promoting a global criminal enterprise in the guise of philanthropy,” Ortel writes.
“Known and unprosecuted felony and misdemeanor offenses of Clinton Foundation Trustees and others include taking donations under false pretenses, diverting donations from their intended purposes, failing to exercise required control over operations, creating substantial private gain, allowing insiders to appropriate illegally created private gains, and thereby corroding an otherwise well deserved reputation that many American charities rightfully have obtained over decades, for performing good works worldwide in conformity with applicable laws and regulations.”
Clintons admit to filing false financials
In his report, Ortel stresses the Clintons admitted to violating federal and state law by acknowledging in April that the foundation needed to withdraw error-ridden IRS Form 990s “for some years” and file corrected financials.
He cites an April 26 statement by Clinton Foundation acting CEO Maura Pally titled “A Commitment to Honesty Transparency, and Accountability.” Published on the Clinton Foundation website, it says that after a “voluntary external review is completed,” the foundation “will likely refile forms for some years.”
Pally tried to excuse the erroneous financial statements filed with the IRS by claiming that “mistakes” in incorrectly combining government grants with other donations were not uncommon for “organizations of our size.” She added that the foundation was “acting quickly to remedy” the problem and “to take steps” to make sure no more erroneous financials are filed with the IRS in the future.
For Ortel, that explanation does not excuse the various requirements under state and federal law specifying that charitable organizations must file truthful, complete and accurate financial statements with regulators, including the IRS, verified by competent, informed and independent auditing firms.
Ortel points out that since April 26, the Clintons have not filed or posted on their website corrected financial statements along with “thorough and granular explanations” of any and all amendments made to the erroneous financial statements.
Ortel puts the blame on federal and state regulators, including the IRS, for failing to hold the Clinton Foundation to standards regarding the operation of charitable organizations. In contrast, “smaller public charities, run by less august persons who are, less well trained professionally, and by less responsible principals who solicited fewer target donors and raised smaller sums of money have been aggressively prosecuted, and severely punished via criminal and civil legal proceedings.”
Meanwhile, Ortel alleges that despite the continued failure to post the promised corrected financial statements, “the Clinton Foundation and constituent elements recklessly continue to solicit donations on the basis of inaccurate, false, and misleading public filings in violation of state, federal, and foreign laws.”
Ortel charges that because Hillary Clinton served as a trustee of the Clinton Foundation, she cannot escape legal responsibility for the erroneous statements the Clinton Foundation now admits having filed with the IRS. He contends she also is responsible for inconsistent, incomplete, materially misleading and outright false financial filings that invalidate audited financial statements since the foundation’s inception.
Ortel alleges that while Clinton served as trustee, from 2013 through April 2015, the Clinton Foundation “procured independent audits of financial statements and submitted public filings to government authorities that were false, materially misleading, and fraudulent, while actively soliciting donations across state and national boundaries.”
He charges that during Hillary’s tenure as trustee, the Clinton Foundation filed false and misleading financial forms concerning calendar years 2010 and 2011. Also, the Clinton Health Access Initiative, CHAI, aimed at combating HIV/AIDS in third world countries, filed amended financial forms for 2012 and 2013. Ortel takes that as an admission CHAI initially filed erroneous financial forms in apparent violation of state and federal law.
Ortel notes that while she was a trustee, Clinton never demanded any reexamination of Clinton Foundation financial filings for the years 2002 through 2013. He has concluded the audited statements for the Clinton Foundation for those years were inconsistently consolidated “in gross violation of relevant accounting standards and of applicable state, federal and foreign laws that require production of wholly accurate, truthful, and complete informational returns.”
“Legally mandated Clinton Foundation disclosures that are the responsibility of Clinton Foundation Trustees and must be wholly accurate, complete and, in the case of financial disclosures, verified by competent, informed, and independent accounting professionals,” Ortel writes.
“Instead, Clinton Foundation public disclosures concerning the period July 2002 to present are false, incomplete, inaccurate, and not appropriately verified by independent auditors.”
Brought to you by:
Take that boycott nationwide…
Via Boston Herald:
Jerry Flynn, a Lowell cop on leave while serving as executive director of the New England Police Benevolent Association, said his organization’s executive board has chosen to boycott President Obama’s Labor Day breakfast address in Boston today to make a statement about violence against police:
“Our members are enraged at his lack of support of law enforcement. It’s clear that he has an agenda, and unfortunately the police are not part of his agenda.
Let’s face it, (there have been) eight people killed in a nine-day period, eight police officers, and his silence up until recently has been deafening. And the real sad part of this – and when I went to the White House in the first term with (Vice President) Joe Biden – he said to me that he would be the voice of law enforcement. Well, as much as I love and adore Joe, his voice has been silent as well. So it’s not an Obama problem, it’s an administration problem.
This is a horror show, this is an epidemic of lawless people trying to kill police officers for no apparent reasons. Case in point is the lieutenant who was pumping gas in Houston. Over 7,000 people were at that church, and where was he (Obama)? Why wasn’t he there instead of a unity breakfast?”
A Maryland man has been arrested for making threats against La Plata residents on social media.
Carlos Anthony Hollins, 20, of Waldorf, Maryland, has been charged with threats of mass violence for allegedly sending a tweet Wednesday afternoon that read:
IM NOT GONNA STAND FOR THIS NO. MORE. TONIGHT WE PURGE ! KILL ALL THE WHITE PPL IN THE TOWN OF LAPLATA. #BLACKLIVESMATTER
The Twitter account from which the tweet was sent has since been suspended.
The La Plata Police Department has deployed additional officers to patrol the streets following the threat.
No further details about the incident have been released.
Hollins is being held on $250,000 bond.
Join us on the West Lawn of the United States Capitol in Washington, D.C. to make our voices heard on this bad Iran deal. We are working to create broad coalition of organizations and speakers to come together against the Iran nuclear deal.
Jenny Beth Martin
We have created a toolkit to help you prepare.
A federal judge on Friday ordered the Internal Revenue Service to reveal White House requests for taxpayers’ private information, advancing a probe into whether administration officials targeted political opponents by revealing such information.
Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia rejected the IRS’s argument that a law designed to protect the confidentiality of such information protected the public disclosure of such communications with the White House.
The law, 26 U.S. Code § 6103, was passed after the Watergate scandal to protect citizens from retribution by federal officials. Jackson scoffed at the administration’s claims that the statute could be used to shield investigations into whether private tax information had been used in such a manner.
“The Court is unwilling to stretch the statute so far, and it cannot conclude that section 6103 may be used to shield the very misconduct it was enacted to prohibit,” Jackson wrote in her order.
The decision was a victory for Cause of Action, the legal watchdog group that sued the IRS in 2013 seeking records of its communications with the White House and potential disclosure of confidential taxpayer information.
The group called the decision “a significant victory for transparency advocates” in a Friday statement
“As we have said all along, this administration cannot misinterpret the law in order to potentially hide evidence of wrongdoing,” said Dan Epstein, the group’s executive director. “No administration is above the law, and we are pleased that the court has sided with us on this important point.”
The lawsuit came after Treasury’s inspector general for tax administration, the IRS’s official watchdog agency, revealed that it was investigating whether Austan Goolsbee, the White House’s former chief economist, illegally accessed or revealed confidential tax information related to Koch Industries.
The corporation’s owners, Charles and David Koch, are prominent funders of conservative and libertarian groups that often oppose the White House’s policy priorities.
Goolsbee “used Koch Industries as an example when discussing an issue noted in the [President’s Economic Recovery Board] report that half of business income goes to companies that do not pay corporate income tax because they are pass-through entities and that many of them are quite large,” the White House said in 2010.
His apparent knowledge of Koch’s tax history, detailed during a conference call with reporters, “implies direct knowledge of Koch’s legal and tax status, which would appear to be a violation” of federal law, said Sen. Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa), the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, at the time.
Can you imagine a group of white people marching down the street chanting, “Michael Brown what a clown! He got what he deserved,” after he was shot by officer Darren Wilson?
I can only imagine how the #BlackLivesMatter activists would have reacted.
How many riots would it have started? It would have been considered a ‘racist chant’ and it would have gotten coverage from the Obama Administration, for sure.
But moments after Texas Deputy Darren H. Goforth, a 10-year veteran, father of two, husband, and a public servant, was murdered execution style by an African-American at a gas station while he was refueling his vehicle, we heard chants of “Pigs In A Blanket, Fry ‘Em Like Bacon” from the racist #BlackLivesMatter activists.
Yes, you heard right. I said racist.
Check it out:
* When white people say “white power”… it’s racist.
* When Mexicans say “brown pride”… it’s racist.
* But when ‘Black Power’ and ‘Black Lives Matter’ is chanted… that isn’t racist? If that’s your way of thinking, you’re an ignorant person and you are part of the problem.
In what world is it OK for such a disturbing chant to be yelled out in the streets after an innocent man was murdered?
The Obama administration has had multiple chances to bring whites, blacks and Hispanics together to possibly end racism by uniting everyone in a tragic time. But instead, they’ve picked a side and now our country is divided by race.
We need to wake up America. We need to stop the ignorant people who keep dividing us. We need to become one and do as Jesus instructed us: ‘Love your neighbor as you love yourself.’
How about instead of White, Black, Hispanic lives matter, we use #ALLLIVESMATTER?
Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley thinks the Democratic Party’s decision to limit the number of primary debates is tantamount to rigging the nomination process.
“Four debates and only four debates – we are told, not asked – before voters in our earliest states make their decision,” the presidential candidate said at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Summer Meeting on Friday.
“This sort of rigged process has never been attempted before,” he added. “One debate in Iowa. That’s it. One debate in New Hampshire. That’s all we can afford.”
After O’Malley’s speech wrapped up, observers noted palpable tension as he greeted DNC Chair, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
He has also said Democrats are making a “big mistake” by rushing to make Clinton the party’s nominee.
“I think it’s a big mistake for us as a party to circle the wagons around the inevitable front-runner,” O’Malley said on Thursday.
The first Democratic Party debate will be held on Oct. 13 in Las Vegas.
A RealClearPolitics polling average has Clinton leading the field at 47 percent support, followed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) at 26 percent support and Vice President Biden at 14 percent support. O’Malley places fourth with just over 1 percent support.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) believes the Democratic Party is using its limited primary debate schedule to rig the nomination process.
“I do,” Sanders reportedly responded when asked Friday whether he agrees with former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley’s assertion that the debate system is “rigged.”
The two Democratic presidential candidates were speaking at the summer meeting of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in Minneapolis on Friday.
“This sort of rigged process has never been attempted before,” O’Malley said in his speech earlier Friday.
The DNC has drawn criticism for scheduling only four debates before the early-primary states cast their votes, and six total throughout the election cycle.
DNC spokeswoman Holly Shulman defended the schedule, saying it will “give plenty of opportunity for the candidates to be seen side-by-side.”
“I’m sure there will be lots of other forums for the candidates to make their case to voters, and that they will make the most out of every opportunity,” Shulman said in a statement, according to The Washington Post.
Sanders previously said he would not agree to additional debates unless all of the Democratic presidential candidates participated.
But he has expressed concern with the number of debates.
“At a time when many Americans are demoralized about politics and have given up on the political process, I think it’s imperative that we have as many debates as possible,” Sanders said in a statement earlier this month. “I look forward to working with the DNC to see if we can significantly expand the proposed debate schedule.”
“Further, I also think it is important for us to debate not only in the early states but also in many states which currently do not have much Democratic presidential campaign activity,” Sanders wrote in a letter to DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) in June.
The first Democratic Party debate will be held on Oct. 13 in Las Vegas.
Modern day Democrat politicians are socialists, which really isn’t breaking news. Heck, that particular socio-political philosophy was adopted by the DNC during the Great Depression. What is news, however, is that they’ve also become psychopathic, exhibiting the personality traits of your average serial killer just before he decides to start butchering prostitutes for the first time.
For a while there – say, 70 years or so – they seemed to be merely delusional, but since the turn of the 21st century, they’ve proven themselves to be devoid of any genuine feelings of empathy, compassion or remorse with respect to other human beings – at least the ones who don’t appear on their respective campaign contributors lists.
While not insane in the purely legal sense of the word, they are, nonetheless, stark-staring lunatics who are capable of the worst atrocities imaginable. In other words, they are scheming, soulless humanoids with a knack for appearing normal most of the time, despite their utter lack of humanity.
They’re also control freaks of the highest order, which is why they spend practically every waking moment thinking up ways to interfere with other people’s lives instead of doing anything substantive with their own. They become politicians because that is the one profession wherein you can make a name for yourself – not to mention oodles of money – without actually being a productive member of society.
Sadly, their minions in the entertainment industry, academia, and the press are still stuck in the aforementioned delusional phase of the socialist experiment, and have no idea that pols like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are complete monsters. Then again, I suppose it’s better that they’ve remained merely psychoneurotic rather than having mutated into full-blown, dead-eyed maniacs themselves. After all, psychosis (a distorted sense of reality) can be treated and even cured over time, but psychopathy is forever.
Anyway, enough with those demented bastards, let’s move on to the psychology of today’s Republican politicians and the sad sacks who help elect them, shall we?
— In the interest of full disclosure, there was a time when I too was a card-carrying member of the Republican party, but that ended soon after John Boehner became Speaker of the House of Representatives. You see, Mr. Boehner is what we in the rusted bucket of political punditry call an “assclown”, and one day while I was having a shave, I looked into the bathroom mirror and asked myself this question: can you really continue to claim membership in an organization that would appoint the likes of ‘Tammy Faye Boehner’ to such a position of power in Congress? My reflection answered with a resounding: NOPE! And the rest, as they say, is history. —
Now onto the subject at hand…
The GOP of the 21st century – thus far – is about as useful as shoe laces on a pair of sandals, and its leadership seems to be comprised of more cowards than a battalion of Iraqi soldiers.
But why is that, you ask?
Well, have you ever heard the term ‘Stockholm Syndrome’? It’s a psychological phenomenon in which hostages come to identify with – and even feel sympathy for – their captors. If you ask me, that’s the basic underpinning of the whole right-wing malfunction at the federal level in recent times, and if there’s a better explanation than this one for the behavioral patterns exhibited by the GOP’s most powerful leaders, I’d like to hear it. Really, I would.
The only viable alternative hypothesis I can come up with is that they’re just plain suicidal, and they want to take us all down with them. The problem with that supposition is that people who commit suicide are generally compulsive in nature. They don’t plan their demise years in advance, and they almost never intentionally take a stranger to his grave in the process.
As for the psychology of Republicans who are prominent in the fields of academia, entertainment and journalism, these people appear to be largely normal, with some notable exceptions. That’s why they and most other right-wingers in the private sector feel so disconnected from their elected representatives these days – especially the ones in positions of party leadership. After all, rational people have a hard time accepting irrational behavior, even from people they like.
So if you’ve been wondering why so many Republicans – even a good number of staunch conservatives – on TV, the internet, and talk radio are defending the likes of Donald Trump this election cycle, despite the fact that he’s wandered all over the political spectrum in terms of policy positions over the years, please allow me to explain their reasoning as best I understand it.
You see, it’s not who Trump is – per se – or even what he may believe about many issues that’s of primary importance to a lot of folks on the right these days. No, it’s what he represents that has them fired up, and what he represents is a man who just might actually get something positive done for a change in Washington DC, simply because he’s not a career politician with a long track record of fucking up absolutely EVERYTHING he touches!
Many people are just plain tired of the same platitudes and empty promises they’ve heard over and over again for the past quarter of a century from nearly every polished, right-leaning, professional politico who’s come down the pike. They all say pretty much the same things, yet little if anything actually changes once they take office, and in the meantime, the party elites keep growing more and more hostile toward the very people who elected them.
In essence, a growing number of Republicans are willing to roll the dice with an unknown quantity like The Donald on the off chance that he may be able to do what nobody since Ronald Reagan has managed to pull off, which is stem the tide of leftist incompetence and corruption that has permeated our federal government for decades. And what’s more, it really doesn’t seem to matter to them that he may entertain certain left-leaning sympathies with which they disagree.
Perhaps if there is a psychological malady that can be applied to some non-elected Republicans, it is ‘Battered Woman Syndrome’, a condition brought about by persistent abuse at the hands of someone whom the victim initially trusted and even professed to love. Of course, people who suffer from this complex for an extended period of time often snap and turn on their abusers with unfettered ferocity. (see Battered Woman’s Defense – U.S. criminal law)
So, is that what this whole Trump phenomenon is about? Is he merely a weapon of convenience being leveled at an habitually abusive political class by its long-suffering voter base? Is he like the butcher knife on the counter that the bruised and bloodied wife of a bully finally picks up one day and plunges into her tormenter’s filthy neck?
Your guess is as good as mine, but I certainly wouldn’t be surprised to find out that there’s some merit to that theory.
Edward L. Daley
NASA employees were caught buying child pornography from a criminal ring in Eastern Europe that distributed images of minors as young as three, it can be revealed.
An investigation by Daily Mail Online found 16 staff members from the space agency paid for pictures and videos of children in sexual situations, but were never prosecuted.
Their names have never been released because of government guidelines which protect their privacy – prompting fears some of the culprits are still employed by NASA.
The probe found that in 2010, the employees paid for the pornography using personal credit cards or PayPal while working for the government.
Their actions were uncovered during Project Flicker – an investigation by the FBI and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) into American citizens buying child pornography from Belarus and Ukraine.
The investigation began in 2007 when more than 33,000 images of minors being abused flooded into the country.
Investigators identified more than 5,200 citizens across the country who had paid for a subscription to illicit websites in order to access the content.
In 2010 it was revealed that 264 of these worked for the Pentagon as either employees or contractors. Some of them worked for the NSA and had top security clearance.
But the Daily Mail Online can reveal for the first time that NASA employees were also identified in the sickening scheme in the same year.
Transactions from the space agency workers were discovered after a FBI special agent tipped off investigators.
However their names have been redacted in documents obtained by Daily Mail Online via a Freedom of Information Act request from NASA’s Office of Inspector General.
Therefore it is not known whether they were disciplined or sanctioned within the department – meaning they could still be working for the government.
When the Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS) investigated the Pentagon employees identified in the scheme, they only investigated 52 of the suspects and 212 people on ICE’s list were never questioned at all.
Some had highest available security clearance.
After the probe was completed just 10 were ever charged with viewing or purchasing child pornography – prompting fears some of those caught could still be working for the military.
It is not known whether any of the NASA employers were questioned, but it is clear they were not prosecuted – as their names have not been revealed.
If they had been found guilty of a crime, their names would not have been redacted in the disclosed files.
A spokesman for NASA told Daily Mail Online they would not be commenting beyond what was stated in the FOIA documents.
A spokesman from Immigration and Customs Enforcement said: ‘In 2006, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) opened an investigation into the criminal network behind hundreds of child pornography websites.
‘The investigation, called Project Flicker, was conducted in collaboration with other U.S. and international law enforcement partners around the world, and identified 30,000 customers in 132 countries – resulting in hundreds of convictions in the U.S. and 16 arrests in Belarus and the Ukraine.
‘The criminal rings involved used a variety of online and traditional payment methods, elaborate defense measures and a franchise business model that provided access to images and videos of sexually exploited boys and girls, some as young as 3 years old.
‘HSI’s Cyber Crimes Center distributed more than 5,000 domestic leads to field offices around the country and shared more than 4,000 foreign leads with its law enforcement partners via HSI’s attaché offices.
‘HSI is a leading federal law enforcement agency combating the sexual exploitation of children. HSI conducts investigations under Operation Predator, a nationwide initiative to protect children from sexual predators, including those who possess, trade and produce child pornography; who travel overseas for sex with minors; and who engage in the sex trafficking of children.
‘HSI encourages the public to report suspected child predators and any suspicious activity through its toll-free hotline at 1-866-DHS-2ICE. This hotline is staffed around the clock by investigators.’
The FBI said they would not be adding to the ICE’s statement.
The latest disclosure comes after Daily Mail Online investigations unearthed shocking breaches of computer guidelines inside the Department of Education the Department of Labor and the Department of Health and Human Services.