Just wait till you listen to this. PC kills folks. Willful blindness indeed!
Just wait till you listen to this. PC kills folks. Willful blindness indeed!
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R., S.C.) questioned a Department of Homeland Security official about the idea that American citizens on the terrorist watchlist should be denied gun rights on Friday.
“What process is afforded a U.S. citizen, not someone who’s overstayed a visa, not someone who crossed a border without permission, but an American citizen – what process is currently afforded an American citizen before they go on that list?” Gowdy asked DHS secretary Kelli Ann Burriesci at a House Oversight Committee hearing.
“I’m sorry, um, there’s not a process afforded the citizen prior to getting on the list,” Burriesci said. “There is a process should someone feel they’re unduly placed on the list.”
“Yes, there is,” Gowdy said. “When I say ‘process’ I’m actually using half of the term ‘due process,’ which is a phrase we find in the Constitution, that you cannot deprive people of certain things without due process. So I understand [Center for American Progress fellow Ken Gude]’s idea, which is to wait until your right has been taken from you and then you can petition the government to get it back. I understand that that’s his idea.”
“My question is, can you name another constitutional right we have that is chilled until you find out it’s chilled, and then you have to petition the government to get it back? Is that true with the First Amendment?”
Burriesci then began to explain the criteria to put someone on the watchlist, but Gowdy interrupted her, saying she was not answering his question. He then asked the question again. “My question is what process is afforded a United States citizen before that person’s constitutional right is infringed. [Gude] is fine with doing it with the Second Amendment. My question is how about the first?”
“My question is what process is afforded a United States citizen before that person’s constitutional right is infringed? [Gude] is fine with doing it with the Second Amendment. My question is, how about the First?”
Gowdy then asked what other constitutional rights DHS might be comfortable infringing upon without due process. How about we
“How about we not let them set up a website?” he asked. “Or a Google account? How about we not let them join a church until they can petition government to get off the list? How about not get a lawyer? How about the Sixth Amendment? How about you can’t get a lawyer until you petition the government to get off the list? Or, my favorite, how about the Eighth Amendment? We’re going to subject you to cruel and unusual punishment until you petition the government to get off the list.”
“Is there another constitutional right that we treat the same way, for American citizens, that we do the Second Amendment?” Gowdy asked. “Can you think of one?”
After a pause, he repeated the question. “Can you think of one?” he asked.
“I don’t have an answer for you, sir,” Burriesci said as Gowdy’s allotted time to ask questions ran out.
So 14 people are dead because the Obama regime decided looking at a public Facebook was a violation of privacy, and Tashfeen Malik openly posted about jihad. Unbelievable.
Via The Hill:
Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson decided against ending a secret U.S. policy that prohibits immigration officials from reviewing social media posts of foreigners applying for U.S. visas, according to a report by ABC News.
Johnson decided to keep the prohibition in place in early 2014 because he feared a civil liberties backlash and “bad public relations,” according to ABC.
“During that time period immigration officials were not allowed to use or review social media as part of the screening process,” John Cohen, a former acting undersecretary at the Department of Homeland Security for intelligence and analysis, told ABC News.
One current and one former senior counterterrorism official confirmed Cohen’s account to ABC.
A DHS spokesman told ABC News that in the fall of 2014 after Cohen left, the department began three pilot programs to include social media in vetting, but officials say it’s still not a widespread policy and a review is underway.
The policy’s revelation comes after U.S. officials learned that Tashfeen Malik, one of the San Bernardino shooters, posted a message on Facebook declaring allegiance to the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria; 14 people were killed.
Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) demanded Sunday that the U.S. immediately start a program to review social media sites of those admitted on visas.
“Had they checked out Tashfeen Malik,,, maybe those people in San Bernardino would be alive,” he said, according to ABC News.
Cohen said he and other U.S. officials had pressed for a policy change in 2014 but top officials with the DHS’s Office of Civil Liberties and the Office of Privacy opposed it.
“The primary concern was that it would be viewed negatively if it was disclosed publicly and there were concerns that it would be embarrassing,” Cohen said in an interview with “Good Morning America.”
“There is no excuse for not using every resource at our disposal to fully vet individuals before they come to the United States,” he added.
Another former senior counterterrorism official vouched for Cohen’s retelling: “They felt looking at public postings [of foreign U.S. visa applicants] was an invasion of their privacy.”
A former Department of Homeland Security agent says that an investigation he was conducting into a fundamentalist Islamic group operating in the U.S. may have helped stop San Bernardino jihadi Syed Farook had the government not shut down his probe.
During an interview with Fox News’ Megyn Kelly on Thursday, Philip Haney said that in 2012 as an agent with U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s National Targeting Center, he opened an investigation into a Sunni Islamic group called, Tablighi Jamaat, a subset of the fundamentalist Deobandi movement.
But Haney said that just a year into the investigation it was shut down State Department and the Homeland Security Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties.
The reason the investigation was quashed? Because the federal government did not want to profile Islamic groups, Haney told Kelly.
In the process of shutting down Haney’s inquiry, the feds also deleted his files, which included information on an organization with ties to Farook’s mosque, San Bernardino’s Deobandi movement-affiliated Dar-al-Uloom al-Islamia.
And Farook’s wife and accomplice, Tashfeen Malik, went to school at Pakistan’s al-Huda, which also has ties to the Deobandi movement.
As the global intelligence group Stratfor has reported, Talighi Jamaat has been linked to a number of attempted terrorist attacks targeting the U.S.
Members of the sect were tied to the Oct. 2002 Portland Seven case and the Sept. 2002 Lackawanna Six case. Members were also involved in an Aug. 2006 plot to bomb airliners en route from London to the U.S. and attempted bombings in London and Glasgow, Scotland in July 2007. Stratfor also reported that Talighi Jamaat affiliates were involved in the the July 7, 2005 bombings. That attack left 52 dead and more than 700 injured.
Haney said that had his investigation been allowed to develop, Farook may have ended up on the federal government’s terror radar or on the government’s no-fly list. And if that had occurred, Farook would not have been able to connect with Malik. The jihadists reportedly met in 2013. She came to the U.S. from Saudi Arabia last year on a fiancee visa and married soon after.
“Either Syed would have been put on the no-fly list because association with that mosque, and/or the K-1 visa that his wife was given may have been denied because of his association with a known organization,” Haney told Kelly.
Haney turned whistleblower in 2013 after meeting with DHS’ inspector general. In turn, DHS and the Justice Department investigated him, though found no wrongdoing, The Federalist reported.
In Sept. 2014, Haney had his security clearance revoked as well as his access to work databases.
According to Fox’s Trace Gallagher, the Department of Homeland Security declined to comment on the story but said that Haney’s story is missing many details.
Haney’s claim comes amid reports that investigators believe that Farook was in the same social circle as a Riverside, Cal. man who was arrested in 2012 in a plot to recruit for al-Qaeda. That recruiter, Soheil Kabir, was convicted of providing material support to terrorists and sentenced to 25 years in prison.
Farook had reportedly planned an attack in 2012 but got spooked after that recruiting ring was busted.
At least 72 employees at the Department of Homeland Security are listed on the U.S. terrorist watch list, according to a Democratic lawmaker.
Rep. Stephen Lynch (D., Mass.) disclosed that a congressional investigation recently found that at least 72 people working at DHS also “were on the terrorist watch list.”
“Back in August, we did an investigation – the inspector general did – of the Department of Homeland Security, and they had 72 individuals that were on the terrorist watch list that were actually working at the Department of Homeland Security,” Lynch told Boston Public Radio.
“The [former DHS] director had to resign because of that,” he said.
DHS continues to fail inspections aimed at determining the efficiency of its internal safety mechanisms, as well as its efforts to protect the nation.
Lynch referred to a recent report that found the Transportation Security Administration, which is overseen by DHS, failed to stop 95 percent of those who attempted to bring restricted items past airport security.
“We had staffers go into eight different airports to test the department of homeland security screening process at major airports. They had a 95 percent failure rate,” Lynch said. “We had folks – this was a testing exercise, so we had folks going in there with guns on their ankles, and other weapons on their persons, and there was a 95 percent failure rate.”
Lynch said he has “very low confidence” in DHS based on its many failures over the years. For this reason, he voted in favor of recent legislation that will tighten the vetting process for any Syrian refugees applying for asylum in the United States.
“I have very low confidence based on empirical data that we’ve got on the Department of Homeland Security. I think we desperately need another set of eyeballs looking at the vetting process,” he said. “That’s vetting that’s being done at major airports where we have a stationary person coming through a facility, and we’re failing 95 percent of the time.”
“I have even lower confidence that they can conduct the vetting process in places like Jordan, or Belize or on the Syrian border, or in Cairo, or Beirut in any better fashion, especially given the huge volume of applicants we’ve had seeking refugee status,” Lynch said.
Every day the mountain of evidence that is being hidden and the amount of effort needed to perpetuate the ever-widening cover-up continues to increase. There is certainly no shortage of regulatory violations and other, at best questionable, conduct being engaged in at the State under Hillary Clinton and during the days since she left.
A new violation of procedures intended to protect our nation’s secrets is revealed by a reporter during a briefing held by paid State Department paid liar and former Rear Admiral now disgracing his service, John Kirby.
The reporter raises the issue of the State Department’s failure to submit “legally required information regarding Secretary Clinton’s email server to the DHS during her term as Secretary.” He asks Kirby if he’s familiar with it at all, with him naturally stating that he is not, whether that is true or not it buys time. Obstructionists such as those employed by the State Department always want as much time as they can get.
The reporter says it was a 2010 DHS program called the “Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation Program,” under which DHS was to receive every thirty days a list of systems and vulnerabilities from all government agencies. He says, “Evidently there is some reporting that they didn’t get that from State regarding that server.”
He asks Kirby if he’s “familiar at all with that,” to which Kirby predictably replies that he is not. Asked if he would “take it,” Kirby agrees but says, “I don’t know when I’ll be able to get back to you on it. Some of these issues are under review and under investigations, so there may be a real limit here as to what we can do in terms of detail on that.”
What Kirby is telling him is that unless some of his colleagues start pressing for it or unless it is picked up somehow by the mainstream media, he won’t be answering the quite legitimate question. He says that ongoing investigations or reviews might be a problem, but certainly admitting that such a program exists would in no way interfere with either nor would divulging whether that policy had been followed and if not where the failure had occurred.
What Kirby is doing is covering up. It’s now what he gets paid to do, to assist those engaging in criminal conduct in shielding their anti-American activities from the American people.
This is a potentially huge smoking gun, in that during, perhaps throughout, the four year tenure of Clinton as Secretary of State, the practice was either to not report based upon a recognized security breach or to report the deviation and violations with complicity in both agencies to its existence and continuance.
Just who those individuals involved were and the basis for their decisions would be some very telling and relevant information. The process left a decision-making trail that would indicate both intent and culpability of multiple parties involved.
It’s not surprising that Kirby claimed to not know anything about it while also assuming that it was under review or investigation. He didn’t have time to get his story straight but he’d better. This is probably a question he’ll be asked again, and something else he’s going to have to cover up for in order to “serve his country.”