Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN ...EOM
I PUT THE CLOWN ON IGNORE A FEW DAYS AGO ..I DON'T GIVE A $HIT WHAT HE HAS TO SAY ...HE IS A PAID SCHILL
What All Americans Need To Know About Hillary Clinton’s Alleged SAP Compromise--Maj Ed Coet, USA (Ret)
[Courtesy: Capt. Les Horn, USN (Ret)]
My name is Ed Coet. I am a retired US Army Intelligence Officer. In my last job in the army I was the Chief of the Human Intelligence Branch for the US European Command in Stuttgart, Germany. In that capacity I was also the Designated Program Manager for a Special Access Program (SAP) like the SAP that Hillary Clinton is alleged to have compromised in the most recent State Department Inspector General report to congress and which has been widely reported in the news. Here is what I personally know about SAP’s and what I can attest to in an unclassified forum:
1. The names of each SAP are themselves classified Top Secret because the information within the SAP are far and above Top Secret.
2. SAP’s are so sensitive that even people who have security clearances giving them access to Top Secret Sensitive Compartment Information (TS SCI), an enormously high security clearance level, cannot have accesses to a SAP’s unless they receive a special indoctrination into the SAP based on an operational “must know” that exceeds all other “need to know” standards.
3. Being “read on” for a SAP is far more then acknowledging in writing that you have been briefed on the SAP. It is an in-depth “indoctrination” into the given SAP, and each SAP is itself compartmented separately from other SAPS. Having access to one SAP does not give you access to another SAP, and in fact rarely does. Only a tiny handful of people have knowledge of all SAP’s. SAP’s are the most stringently compartmented and protected information in the entire US government.
4. Unlike Top Secret SCI which is maintained in highly secure Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilitates (SCIF’s) managed by specially trained Special Security Officers (SSO’s) at various levels of command, every single SAP is managed by an individually designated Program Manager for each individual SAP covering an entire theater of operations. In other words, SAP Program Managers are far fewer in number than there is SSO’s. SSO’s are not cleared to even know about SAP’s or to maintain information about them in their already enormously secure SCIF’s. How SAP’s are secured cannot be discussed because of the sensitive beyond Top Secret nature in which it is done.
5. Unlike individuals with the highest Top Secret SCI access security clearances, who must undergo a special background information with periodic “bring-up” background investigation, those tiny few who have access to SAP’s must also endure periodic polygraph tests in addition to the most comprehensive of special background investigations. I used to have to schedule four-star generals and admirals to be polygraphed in order for them to maintain their access to my SAP. Many generals and admirals who obviously have the highest security clearances still did not rate being indoctrinated into my SAP. In fact, they didn’t even know the SAP existed.
6. Compromise of a SAP is the single most dangerous security violation that can ever happen to the USA. Even the enormously damaging revelations of the Edward Snowden’s TOP Secret SCI security compromise does not reach the level of a SAP compromise.
7. To put SAP information in to an unsecure server like Hillary Clinton’s unsecure server is a class one felony that could, in some cases, result in life in prison. That is because such a compromise is so dangerous that it could and likely will result in the death of people protected by and within the scope of the SAP.
As a former SAP Program Manager I believe it is inconceivable that if it is verified that Hillary Clinton’s server actually had SAP information on it that she could possibly escape indictment and criminal prosecution. As hard as it is to imagine, that would even be worse than electing to not prosecute a mass murdering serial killer because even they could not inflict as much damage on our country as the compromise of a SAP. Compromise of a SAP not only could -- but without doubt would -- cause serious damage to our national security.
If it is true that Hillary Clinton had SAP information on her unsecure server, whether it was marked or not, you can be sure that the FBI will strongly recommend that charges be brought against Hillary Clinton and continue in an exhaustive investigation to trace back to every single person that had even the tiniest role in this unbelievable security compromise.
If the Attorney General, through “prosecutorial discretion,” elected not to prosecute this crime, I believe congress would have no alternative but to impeach her, and the FBI would then have no choice but to conduct a criminal investigation of her for a deliberate cover up –- so grave is this security violation.
If President Obama were to pardon Hillary Clinton for a compromise of this magnitude he would render himself in the historical record as an “enemy of the state,” and could himself face criminal prosecution –- so grave is such a security compromise. Nobody, not even the POTUS could get away with something like this in our system of government. If anyone could escape persecution for compromising a SAP, we are deep trouble as a nation. No president who loves this country and is true to his oath would ever allow anyone, not even his or her closest and most loved relative, to get away with a SAP compromise. It is simply unimaginable that this could ever happen.
If the ongoing investigation finds that Hillary Clinton compromised a SAP, then we all should know with certainty, regardless of political persuasion, that she is entirely unfit to hold public office of any kind let alone President of the USA -- and ALL Americans should never tolerate it. Compromising a SAP is an absolute “disqualifier” for public office and access to our nation’s most sensitive information - period.
ED COET
Major, US Army (Retired)
http://www.bewilderingstories.com/bios/coet_bio.html
P.S. It is my sincere hope that each of you will share this article, to help other Americans understand how grave Hillary Clinton’s alleged SAP compromise is. We can’t allow anyone so careless with this level of information to have access to any classified information ever again for as long as she lives. This would surely render her unqualified and unfit to hold any public office let alone POTUS if this allegation proves to be true.
The rest is mere noise.
Where is the guy who wrote that 9,000 times?
HE IS BURNING HIS POM-POMS
24 YEARS IN AND IT NEVER ENDS ...
Peregrine Pharmaceuticals Provides Update on Phase III SUNRISE Trial of Bavituximab
Conference Call With Management Scheduled for 4:30 p.m. Eastern Time
TUSTIN, Calif., Feb. 25, 2016 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Peregrine Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ:PPHM) (NASDAQ:PPHMP), a biopharmaceutical company focused on developing therapeutics to stimulate the body's immune system to fight cancer, today announced that it is discontinuing the company's Phase III SUNRISE trial of bavituximab in patients with previously treated locally advanced or metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The decision to stop the trial was based on the recommendation of the study's Independent Data Monitoring Committee (IDMC) following a pre-specified interim analysis performed after 33% of targeted overall events (patient deaths) in the study were reached. Results of the analysis demonstrated that the bavituximab plus docetaxel group did not show a sufficient improvement in overall survival as compared to the docetaxel group to warrant continuation of the study. The interim analysis showed that the bavituximab combination group is performing as expected according to the original trial assumptions in terms of overall survival, while the docetaxel group is dramatically outperforming overall survival expectations based on the original trial assumptions and as compared to recently published studies.
"Let me start by taking this opportunity to thank all of the patients, their families, and the physicians who participated in the SUNRISE trial. While we are deeply disappointed by this early outcome from the SUNRISE trial, we plan to take a deliberate and detailed approach in reviewing and verifying all available data from the trial in order to understand what subgroups or other patient characteristics may have impacted the performance of the study. While we perform this analysis, we plan to put our other chemotherapy combination studies on hold until we have a clear understanding of the SUNRISE study results," said Steven W. King, president and chief executive officer of Peregrine. "While this is an unexpected and disappointing setback for the bavituximab chemotherapy combination clinical program, we have not seen anything in this trial result that diminishes our enthusiasm for advancing our immuno-oncology (I-O) combination trials. The I-O combination studies are based on different mechanistic synergies that are clearly separate from the chemotherapy combination being evaluated in the SUNRISE study. In addition, it is important to note that in no way do these results have any impact on our contract manufacturing business conducted through our wholly owned subsidiary, Avid Bioservices. This business has shown consistent revenue growth and has been instrumental in maintaining a strong cash position and our plan is to continue growing this business."
As of February 1, 2016, Avid Bioservices had a revenue backlog in excess of $58 million under committed contracts from existing clients. In addition, Peregrine had $67.5 million in cash and equivalents as of January 31, 2016.
Conference Call Today
Peregrine will host a conference call today beginning at 4:30 PM Eastern Time (1:30 PM Pacific Time). To listen to the conference call, please dial (877) 312-5443 or (253) 237-1126 and request the Peregrine Pharmaceuticals conference call. To listen to the archived webcast please visit: http://ir.peregrineinc.com/events.cfm.
About Bavituximab: A Targeted Investigational Immunotherapy
Bavituximab is an investigational chimeric monoclonal antibody that targets phosphatidylserine (PS). Signals from PS inhibit the ability of immune cells to recognize and fight tumors. Bavituximab is believed to override PS mediated immunosuppressive signaling by blocking the engagement of PS with its receptors as well as by sending an alternate immune activating signal. PS targeting antibodies have been shown to shift the functions of immune cells in tumors, resulting in multiple signs of immune activation and robust anti-tumor immune responses.
About Peregrine Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Law of the land......Did you know this?
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO THINK IT CAN’T BE DONE.
Here is number eight US Code 1182, inadmissible aliens. This law was written in 1952. It was passed by a Democrat-controlled Congress, House and Senate, and signed by a Democrat president, Harry S. Truman.
"Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by president. Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, the president may, by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
All of the pundits that are claiming that what Trump said is dumb, stupid, reckless, dangerous, and/or unconstitutional, need to educate themselves. It is already the law of the land. And it was utilized by Jimmy Carter, no less, in 1979 to keep Iranians out of the United States , but he actually did more. He made all Iranian students already here check in, and then he deported a bunch. Seven thousand were found in violation of their visas, 15,000 Iranians were forced to leave the United States , 1979.
You probably won’t hear of this from our mainstream media (nor from our narcissist-in-chief), but those are the facts.
LOL....I GOT DELETED AGAIN FOR MAKING FUN OF THE FAMOUS
CLAY TRADER.........P.O.S. BOARD MODS ......
Hamburgers...
Low military pay was not mentioned in The State Of The Union speech. Just increasing the minimum wage was . . . Hamburgers or Minimum Wage. For those fast food employees striking for $15 an hour, let's do some math. At $15 an hour, Johnny McFry-Boy would make $31,200 annually. An E1 (Private) in the military makes $18,378. An E5 (Sergeant) with 8 years of service only makes $35,067 annually.
So you're telling me, LaTisha McBurgerflipper, that you deserve as much as those kids getting shot at, deploying for months in hostile environments, and putting their collective asses on the line every day protecting you, many times working 24 hrs a day, with NO overtime.?
Here's the deal, Baconator, you are working in a job designed for a kid in high school who is learning how to work and earning enough for gas, and hanging out with their equally goofy high school pals. If you have chosen this as your life-long profession, you have failed. If you don't want minimum wage, don't have minimum skills. I guess you have to be really smart to understand this. Politicians don’t. They just promise more free stuff. At the cost of someone else’s paycheck. Sad, but, I think the public is waking up to the Ponzi scheme.
If you can read this, thank a teacher.
If it's in English, thank a Veteran.
THREE CHEERS FOR CANADA
PUT SOME PORK ON YOUR FORK"
Let's hear it for the Quebec mayor...
"PUT SOME PORK ON YOUR FORK"
A commercial promoting pork says:
"PUT SOME PORK ON YOUR FORK"
The MAYOR REFUSES TO REMOVE PORK FROM
SCHOOL CAFETERIA MENU and EXPLAINS WHY:
Muslim parents demanded the abolition of pork in all the school canteens of a Montreal suburb.
The mayor of the Montreal suburb of Dorval has refused, and the town clerk sent a note to all parents to explain why..
"Muslims must understand that they have to adapt to Canada and Quebec, its customs, its traditions, and it’s way of life, because that's where they chose to immigrate.
"Muslims must understand that they have to integrate and learn to live in Quebec. "They must understand that it is for them to change their lifestyle, not the Canadians who, so generously, welcomed them.
"Muslims must understand that Canadians are neither racist nor xenophobic. Canada accepted many immigrants before Muslims showed up (whereas the reverse is not true, in that Muslim states do not accept non-Muslim immigrants)."
"Just like other nations, Canadians are not willing to give up their identity or their culture.
"And, if Canada is a land of welcome, it's not the Mayor of Dorval who welcomes foreigners, but the Canadian-Quebecois people as a whole.
"Finally, they must understand that in Canada (Quebec) with its Judeo-Christian roots, Christmas trees, churches and religious festivals, religion must remain in the private domain."
The municipality of Dorval was right to refuse any concessions to Islam and Sharia.
"For Muslims who disagree with secularism and do not feel comfortable in Canada, there are 57 beautiful Muslim countries in the world, most of them under-populated and ready to receive them with open halal arms in accordance with Sharia.
"If you left your country for Canada, and not for other Muslim countries, it is because you have considered that life is better in Canada than elsewhere. We will not let you drag Canada down to the level of those 57 countries."
"Ask yourself this question - just once: "Why is it better here in Canada than where you come from?" "A canteen with pork on the menu is part of the answer."
If you came to Canada with the idea that you will displace us with your prolific propagation and eventually take over the country, you should pack up and go back to the country you came from. We have no room here for you and your ideology.
I'M STILL DREAMING OF WAKING UP ONE DAY A GAZZIONAIRE...
CAN'T GET OUT NOW
Subject: E= mc2
Einstein developed and proved this remarkable formula:
Energy = Mass x Speed of Light squared.
A brilliant genius as we all know.
Another lesser known of Einstein's formulas determined;
if you were to strip naked and run around in a circle at
the speed of 298 KM/sec (the speed of light)
it could be possible for you to screw yourself!
Should you determine you are not physically capable of achieving
that speed at your age, you can easily achieve the same result
by voting Democratic in theNovember 8, 2016 election!
By Judge Andrew P. Napolitano Published February 04, 2016 FoxNews.com
Hillary Clinton claims victory in Iowa after tight race
Never autoplay videos
This has not been a good week for Hillary Clinton.
She prevailed over Sen. Bernie Sanders in the Iowa Democratic presidential caucuses by less than four tenths of one percent of all votes cast, after having led him in polls in Iowa at one time by 40 percentage points.
In her statement to supporters, standing in front of her gaunt and listless looking husband, she was not able to mouth the word “victory” or any of its standard variants. She could barely hide her contempt for the Iowa Democrats who disserted her.
Sanders isn’t even a Democrat. According to official Senate records, he is an “Independent Socialist” who votes to organize the Senate with the Democrats, and sits on the Senate floor with them.
Clinton, of course, is the heiress to the mightiest Democratic political apparatus in the land. Hence the question: What do the Iowa Democrats know that caused thousands of them to flee from her?
They know she is a crook.
On the Friday before Monday’s caucuses, the State Department, which Clinton headed in President Obama’s first term, revealed that it discovered 22 top-secret emails on the private computer server to which Clinton diverted all her governmental email traffic. This acknowledgement marks a radical departure from previous State Department pronouncements and is a direct repudiation of Clinton’s repeated assertions.
She has repeatedly asserted that she neither sent nor received anything “marked classified” using her private email server. The State Department, until last Friday, has backed that up by claiming that while the substance of at least 1,300 of her emails was confidential, secret or top secret, they were not “marked” as such when she dealt with them.
These are word games. First, under the law, nothing is “marked classified.” The markings are “confidential” or “secret” or “top secret,” and Clinton knows this.
Second, under the law, it is not the markings on the email headers that make the contents state secrets; it is the vulnerability of the contents of the emails to impair the government’s national security mission that rationally characterizes them as secrets.
Clinton knows this because she signed an oath on Jan. 22, 2009 recognizing that state secrets retain their secrecy status whether “marked or unmarked” by any of the secrecy designations. She knows as well that, under the law, the secretary of state is charged with knowing state secrets when she comes upon them.
Yet, in order to further Clinton’s deceptive narrative, the State Department has consistently claimed that it retroactively marked at least 1,300 emails as state secrets. It did this until last Friday.
Last Friday, the State Department revealed that 22 emails it found on Clinton’s private server were in fact top secret, and were in fact marked top secret, and were in fact sent to or received from President Obama. This is a revelation that substantially undermines Clinton’s political arguments and is catastrophic to her legal position.
Politically, Clinton has lost the final argument in her public arsenal -- that she did not recognize top-secret data unless it was marked as top secret. She has also lost the ability to claim, as she has repeatedly, that she neither sent nor received anything marked classified, as meaningless as that phrase is.
Legally, the ground under Clinton continues to crumble. The more she denies, the more she admits. How can that be? That is so because her denials are essentially an admission of ignorance, forgetfulness or negligence, and, under the law, these are not defenses to the failure to safeguard state secrets entrusted to the secretary of state. They are, instead, recognition of that failure.
Late Monday afternoon, before the Iowa caucuses convened and after Clinton’s political folks had lobbied their former colleagues at the State Department to re-characterize what they found and revealed late last week, the State Department reversed itself and claimed that the 22 emails were not “marked” top secret.
It was too little and too late. The cat was out of the bag and Iowa Democrats knew it.
Few really believed that the State Department would state publicly that the 22 emails were top secret and then state publicly that they were not, without a political motivation and irrespective of the truth. All this is infuriating to the FBI, which perceives these word games as mocking its fidelity to the rule of law.
Sanders’ presence in the Democratic primaries will continue to give Democrats who mistrust Clinton a safe political haven. But he is not Clinton’s real worry.
Her real worry is an FBI committed to the rule of law and determined to fortify national security by gathering the evidence of her mishandling state secrets.
Let’s be as blunt about this as the FBI will be: Causing state secrets to reside in a nonsecure, nongovernmental venue, whether done intentionally or negligently, constitutes the crime of espionage.
And there is more. When asked about the consequences of Clinton’s brazen exposure of state secrets to anyone who knows how to hack into a nonsecure computer, an intelligence operative winced as if in pain when he remarked that the nation’s then chief diplomat surely compromised the “sources, methods, and lives” of her colleagues.
Even Democrats who see Clinton as a symbol of their long-time wish for a progressive female in the Oval Office are beginning to recognize that anyone who has jeopardized American lives for political gain is unworthy of their votes, unworthy of their trust and unworthy of public office.
Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel.
CLAY TRADER BACK ON P.O.S. BOARD .....
STOCK WILL BE HEADING BACK DOWN AGAIN ... I WONDER WHO HE IS WORKING FOR ??
NEVER FAILS CHECK OUT HIS TRACK RECORD WITH P.O.S. WHEN HE SHOWS THE STOCK TANKS...
I AGREE BIGWUP....
IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN ..OBAMA'S PROTECTING HER BECAUSE HE WILL GET THROWN UNDER THE BUS BY HER AND BILLYBOB..
REALLY !!! ARE YOU KIDDING ME ....
Hillary Clinton won 6 Iowa precincts thanks to coin tosses
The same way school children decide who gets to play with a toy first or how referees choose who gets the ball first on Super Bowl Sunday, some precincts in Iowa determined who they'd choose for the most powerful job in the world.
Sanders and Clinton ran in a dead heat throughout the state and in cases where there was a tie, the decision was left up to chance.
Clinton came out victorious after she won six precincts that way.
ELECTION 2016 IS COMING
You may have already heard this one but BOY, I wish more people got it!!
I have never heard this said as simply or as well. Class war at its best.
The folks who are getting the free stuff don't like the folks who are paying for thefree stuff , because the folks who are paying for the free stuff can no longer afford to pay for both the free stuff and their own stuff.
And the folks who are paying for the free stuff want the free stuff to stop.
And the folks who are getting the free stuff want even more free stuff on top of thefree stuff they are already getting!
Now... the people who are forcing the people who pay for the free stuff have told the people who are RECEIVING the free stuff that the people who are PAYING for thefree stuff are being mean, prejudiced, and racist.
So... the people who are GETTING the free stuff have been convinced they need to hate the people who are paying for the free stuff by the people who are forcing some people to pay for their free stuff and giving them the free stuff in the first place.
We have let the free stuff giving go on for so long that there are now more people getting free stuff than paying for the free stuff .
Now understand this. All great democracies have committed financial suicide somewhere between 200 and 250 years after being founded. The reason?
The voters figured out they could vote themselves money from the treasury by electing people who promised to give them money from the treasury in exchange for electing them.
The United States officially became a Republic in 1776 , 236 years ago. The number of people now getting free stuff outnumbers the people paying for the free stuff . Failure to change that spells the end of the United States as we know it.
ELECTION 2016 IS COMING
A Nation of Sheep Breeds a Government of Wolves!
I'M 100% for PASSING THIS ON!!!
For all our sake PLEASE Take a Stand!!!
Obama : Gone!
Borders : Closed!
Language : English only
Culture : God, Constitution, and the Bill of Rights!
Drug Free : Mandatory Drug Screening before Welfare!
NO freebies to: Non-Citizens!
Only 86% will send this on. Should be 100% .. What will you do? Please forward, for your children and grandchildren's sake.
I BELIEVE THE POS BOARD CALLS THAT ANOTHER BUYING OPPORTUNITY ..
BEEN THROUGH THAT TOO MANY TIMES OVER THE LAST 24 YEARS ...
P.O.S. NUTS ALL COMING OUT OF THE WOODWORK TODAY ...
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration confirmed for the first time Friday that Hillary Clinton's unsecured home server contained closely guarded government secrets, censoring 22 emails with material requiring one of the highest levels of classification. The revelation comes just three days before the Iowa presidential nominating caucuses in which Clinton is a candidate.
Department officials also said the agency's Diplomatic Security and Intelligence and Research bureaus will investigate whether any of the information was classified at the time of transmission, going to the heart of one of Clinton's primary defenses of her email practices.
The State Department will release its next batch of emails from Clinton's time as secretary of state later Friday.
But The Associated Press has learned seven email chains are being withheld in full from the Friday release because they contain information deemed to be "top secret." The 37 pages include messages recently described by a key intelligence official as concerning so-called "special access programs" — a highly restricted subset of classified material that could point to confidential sources or clandestine programs like drone strikes or government eavesdropping.
"The documents are being upgraded at the request of the intelligence community because they contain a category of top secret information," State Department spokesman John Kirby told the AP, describing the decision to withhold documents in full as "not unusual." That means they won't be published online with the rest of the documents, even with blacked-out boxes.
Department officials wouldn't describe the substance of the emails, or say if Clinton sent any herself.
Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, has insisted she never sent or received information on her personal email account that was classified at the time. No emails released so far were stamped "CLASSIFIED" or "TOP SECRET," but reviewers previously had designated more than 1,000 messages at lower classification levels for public release. Friday's will be the first at the top secret level.
Even if Clinton only read, and didn't write or forward the secret messages, she still would have been required to report classification slippages that she recognized. But without classification markings, that may have been difficult, especially if the information was in the public domain.
"This is overclassification run amok," Brian Fallon, Clinton's campaign spokesman, tweeted in response to the AP story. "We adamently (sic) oppose the complete blocking of the release of these emails."
Kirby said the State Department was focused, as part of the Freedom of Information Act review of Clinton's emails, on "whether they need to be classified today." Questions about their past classification, he said, "are being, and will be, handled separately by the State Department."
Possible department responses for classification infractions include counseling, warnings or other action, State Department officials said, though they declined to say if these applied to Clinton or senior aides who've since left the department. The officials weren't authorized to speak on the matter and spoke on condition of anonymity.
Friday's release is coming at an awkward time for Clinton. The Iowa caucus is on Feb. 1, and her main challenger, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, is running a competitive campaign in Iowa and New Hampshire. Clinton still holds a strong advantage in national polls.
The emails have been an issue for Clinton's campaign since it became known 10 months ago that she exclusively used a nongovernment account linked to a homebrew server while in office. Clinton first called the decision a matter of convenience and then termed it a mistake, even if doing so wasn't expressly forbidden. But the matter could prove more troublesome now that Clinton's former agency has confirmed that business conducted over the account included top-secret matters.
Like Clinton, the State Department discounted such a possibility last March. Both also said her account was never hacked or compromised. Security experts assess that as unlikely, and that the vast majority of her emails were preserved properly for archiving purposes because she corresponded mainly with government accounts. They've backtracked from the archiving claim, while the AP discovered several phishing attempts on her server connected to Russia.
The question of special access programs first surfaced last week, when Charles I. McCullough, the inspector general for U.S. intelligence agencies, cited examples on Clinton's account in a letter to Congress. Republicans pounced on the report, though Clinton's campaign insisted none of the exchanges were "classified at the time" and accused McCullough and GOP lawmakers of selectively leaking materials to damage her presidential hopes.
Kirby confirmed that the "denied-in-full emails" are among those McCullough recently cited. One of the emails, he said, was among those McCullough identified last summer as possibly containing top secret information.
The AP reported last August that one focused on a forwarded news article about the classified U.S. drone program run by the CIA. Such operations are widely discussed in the public sphere, including by top U.S. officials, and the State Department immediately argued with McCullough's claim. The other concerned North Korean nuclear weapons programs, according to officials.
At the time, several officials from different agencies suggested the disagreement over the drone emails reflected the government's tendency to over-classify material, and the lack of consistent policies across difference agencies about what should and shouldn't be classified.
The FBI also is looking into Clinton's email setup, but has said nothing about the nature of its probe. Independent experts say it is highly unlikely that Clinton will be charged with wrongdoing, based on the limited details that have surfaced up to now and the lack of indications that she intended to break any laws.
"What I would hope comes out of all of this is a bit of humility" and an acknowledgement from Clinton that "I made some serious mistakes," said Bradley Moss, a Washington lawyer who regularly handles security clearance matters.
Legal questions aside, it's the potential political costs that are probably of more immediate concern for Clinton. She has struggled in surveys measuring her perceived trustworthiness and an active federal investigation, especially one buoyed by evidence that top secret material coursed through her account, could negate one of her main selling points for becoming commander in chief: Her national security resume.
___
Associated Press writer Eric Tucker contributed this report.
Hillary Clinton
Published January 27, 2016
By Jim Geraghty, The National Review
Could the Hillary Clinton e-mail saga end with FBI Director James Comey resigning in protest?
Ken Cuccinelli, the former attorney general of Virginia, knows the laws regarding classified information firsthand. In his private practice, Cuccinelli defended a Marine lieutenant colonel court martialed on charges of possessing such information outside a secure facility. He says Clinton’s actions in the e-mail scandal clearly satisfy all five requirements necessary to sustain charges of mishandling classified material, and constitute a breach perhaps even more glaring than the one for which General David Petraeus was convicted.
RELATED:
Hillary Clinton un-admits her e-mail error
Like Petraeus, Clinton was clearly “an employee of the United States government.” Like Petraeus, Clinton obtained and created “documents and materials containing classified information” through her work at the State Department. In response to a Congressional inquiry earlier this month, I. Charles McCullough, III, the inspector general of the intelligence community, declared that an intelligence official examined “several dozen e-mails containing classified information determined . . . to be . . . CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET, and TOP SECRET/SAP information” residing on Clinton’s server. (SAP is an acronym for ‘special access programs,’ a level of classification above top secret.)
Like Petraeus, Clinton “knowingly removed such documents or materials.” Cuccinelli points out that she actually committed this crime on a significant scale three separate times: First, by setting up her e-mail system to route messages to and through her unsecured server, then by moving the server to Platte River Networks, a private company, in June of 2013, and then by transferring the server’s contents to her private lawyers in 2014
Interesting take on Donald Trump
Former U. S. Secretary of Education , William J. Bennett's frankly candid and shocking observations of Donald Trump's impact on the behavior of the entrenched Washington D. C. bureaucrats in both parties -- and the risk The Donald faces in so doing.
> William J. Bennett, Host of Bill Bennett's Morning in America Show, is one of America's most important, influential, and respected voices on cultural, political, and education issues. He has one of the strongest Christian world views of any writer in modern times.
>
> What I See Happening In a Trump Presidency
> By Bill Bennett
> They will kill him before they let him be president. It could be a Republican or a Democrat that instigates the shutting up of Trump.
> Don't be surprised if Trump has an accident. Some people are getting very nervous: Barack Obama, Valerie Jarrett, Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Jon Corzine, to name just a few.
> It's about the unholy dynamics between big government, big business, and big media. They all benefit by the billions of dollars from this partnership, and it's in all of their interests to protect one another. It's one for all and all for one.
> It's a heck of a filthy relationship that makes everyone filthy rich, everyone except the American people. We get ripped off. We're the patsies. But for once, the powerful socialist cabal and the corrupt crony capitalists are scared. The over-the-top reaction to Trump by politicians of both parties, the media, and the biggest corporations of America has been so swift and insanely angry that it suggests they are all threatened and frightened.
> Donald Trump can self-fund. No matter how much they say to the contrary, the media, business, and political elite understand that Trump is no joke. He could actually win and upset their nice cozy apple cart. It's no coincidence that everyone has gotten together to destroy The Donald. It's because most of the other politicians are part of the a good old boys club. They talk big, but they won't change a thing. They are all beholden to big-money donors. They are all owned by lobbyists, unions, lawyers, gigantic environmental organizations, and multinational corporations - like Big Pharmacy or Big Oil. Or they are owned lock, stock, and barrel by foreigners like George Soros owns Obama or foreign governments own Hillary and their Clinton Foundation donations.
> These run-of-the-mill establishment politicians are all puppets owned by big money. But there's one man who isn't beholden to anyone There's one man who doesn't need foreigners, or foreign governments, or George Soros, or the United Auto Workers, or the teacher's union, or the Service Employees International Union, or the Bar Association to fund his campaign.
> Billionaire tycoon and maverick Donald Trump doesn't need anyone's help. That means he doesn't care what the media says. He doesn't care what the corporate elites think. That makes him very dangerous to the entrenched interests. That makes Trump a huge threat to those people. Trump can ruin everything for the bribed politicians and their spoiled slave masters.
> Don't you ever wonder why the GOP has never tried to impeach Obama? Don't you wonder why John Boehner and Mitch McConnell talk a big game, but never actually try to stop Obama? Don't you wonder why Congress holds the purse strings, yet has never tried to de-fund Obamacare or Obama's clearly illegal executive action on amnesty for illegal aliens? Bizarre, right? It defies logic, right?
> First, I'd guess many key Republicans are being bribed. Secondly, I believe many key Republicans are being blackmailed. Whether they are having affairs, or secretly gay, or stealing taxpayer money, the National Security Agency knows everything.
> Ask former House Speaker Dennis Hastert about that. The government even knew he was withdrawing large sums of his own money from his own bank account. The NSA, the SEC, the IRS, and all the other three-letter government agencies are watching every Republican political leader. They surveil everything. Thirdly, many Republicans are petrified of being called racists, so they are scared to ever criticize Obama or call out his crimes, let alone demand his impeachment. Fourth , why rock the boat? After defeat or retirement, if you're a good old boy, you've got a $5 million-per-year lobbying job waiting. The big-money interests have the system gamed. Win or lose, they win.
> But Trump doesn't play by any of these rules. Trump breaks up this nice, cozy relationship between big government, big media, and big business. All the rules are out the window if Trump wins the Presidency. The other politicians will protect Obama and his aides but not Trump. Remember: Trump is the guy who publicly questioned Obama's birth certificate. He questioned Obama's college records and how a mediocre student got into an Ivy League university. Now, he's doing something no Republican has the chutzpah to do. He's questioning our relationship with Mexico; he's questioning why the border is wide open; he's questioning why no wall has been built across the border; he's questioning if allowing millions of illegal aliens into America is in our best interests; he's questioning why so many illegal aliens commit violent crimes, yet are not deported; and he's questioning why our trade deals with Mexico, Russia and China are so bad.
> Trump has the audacity to ask out loud why American workers always get the short end of the stick. Good question! I'm certain Trump will question what happened to the almost billion dollars given in a rigged no-bid contract to college friends of Michelle Obama at foreign companies to build the defective Obamacare website. By the way, that tab is now up to $5 billion. Trump will ask if Obamacare's architects can be charged with fraud for selling it by lying. Trump will investigate Obama's widespread IRS conspiracy, not to mention Obama's college records. Trump will prosecute Clinton and Obama for fraud committed to cover up Benghazi before the election. How about the fraud committed by employees of the Labor Department when they made up dramatic job numbers in the last jobs report before the 2012 election?
> Obama, the multinational corporations and the media need to stop Trump. They recognize this could get out of control. If left unchecked, telling the raw truth and asking questions everyone else is afraid to ask, Trump could wake a sleeping giant. Trump's election would be a nightmare. Obama has committed many crimes. No one else but Trump would dare to prosecute. He will not hesitate. Once Trump gets in and gets a look at the cooked books and Obama's records, the game is over. The jig is up. The goose is cooked. Holder could wind up in prison. Jarrett could wind up in prison. Obama bundler Corzine could wind up in prison for losing $1.5 billion of customer money. Clinton could wind up in jail for deleting 32,000 emails or for accepting bribes from foreign governments while Secretary of State, or for misplacing $6 billion as the head of the State Department, or for lying about Benghazi. The entire upper level management of the IRS could wind up in prison.
> Obamacare will be de-funded and dismantled. Obama himself could wind up ruined, his legacy in tatters. Trump will investigate. Trump will prosecute. Trump will go after everyone involved. That's why the dogs of hell have been unleashed on Donald Trump.
> Yes, it's become open season on Donald Trump. The left and the right are determined to attack his policies, harm his businesses, and, if possible, even keep him out of the coming debates. But they can't silence him. And they sure can't intimidate him. The more they try, the more the public will realize that he's the one telling the truth.
BOY AIN'T THAT THE TRUTH ............
PEOPLE ON P.O.S BOARD SAYING THEY ARE DOWN 500K ..WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD HAVE THAT KIND OF MONEY IN A PENNY STOCK LIKE P.O.S. ?? MAYBE ONE OF THEM WILL BUY MY OCEANFRONT LOT IN UTAH ?? YOU THINK ?
PLACE IS LOADED WITH SCAMMERS, PUMPERS AND NEWBIES THAT ALL THINK THEY KNOW IT ALL ... THEY WILL LEARN AS MANY HAVE BEFORE THEM ...
Herridge Exclusive: Hillary's Emails Contained 'Crown Jewels of US Intelligence
Several dozen of the emails on Hillary Clinton’s personal server were even more sensitive than those with the “top secret” classification, Fox News has learned.
Chief intelligence correspondent Catherine Herridge reported on The Real Story that Clinton’s personal server contained intelligence from the U.S. Special Access Programs, also known as SAP.
“These are the crown jewels of the American intelligence community of the United States government,” said former CIA agent Charles Faddis.
“If this information’s compromised, we’re going to suffer very serious national security damage. People are going to die, quite frankly.”
The new details are expected to bring “even more scrutiny to her handling of the government’s most closely-held secrets,” Herridge reported.
She noted that Hillary Clinton, like former CIA Director David Petraeus, signed a non-disclosure agreement as Secretary of State promising to protect the intelligence of Special Access Programs.
“Now, there is a clear question,” Herridge explained.
“Will there be standard treatment in the Petraeus and Clinton cases? Or will there be a law for her, and a different set of rules for him?”
PRETTY MUCH THE REASON I STOPPED POSTING OVER THERE ..IF YOU SAY ANYTHING NEGATIVE IT'S DELETED ...NOT MODERATED FAIRLY .. I HAVE BEEN A SHAREHOLDER FOR 24 PLUS YEARS AND WAS ONE OF THE FIRST ON THAT BOARD COMING FROM RB ... IT'S A JOKE .. I LOVE THE WAY LEMMY TEARS THEIR ASSES UP THO ...LOL
DOO-DAH
HOLDERS OF PPHM....
I HAVE ANOTHER GREAT DEAL FOR ANYONE INTERESTED ......
I WOULD LIKE TO SELL A NICE OCEANFRONT LOT IN UTAH .. I HAVEN'T ANY USE FOR IT AND AM WILLING TO DEAL ......
IT WAS FOR 1 SHARE...
Published January 04, 2016 | Washington Free Beacon
Mark Penn, who owns a public relations firm handling communications for the Barack Obama Foundation, credited Obama with uttering the “stupidest thing ever said by a president in foreign policy.”
In a March 2012 email sent to Hillary Clinton’s private email address, Penn lambasted Obama for his statement to then-Russian President Dmitri Medvedev that he would “have more flexibility” on missile defense issues after the 2012 election.
“This could be about the stupidest thing ever said by a president in foreign policy,” wrote Penn. “To explicitly say that he is laying low on nuclear defense policies because of his election right now and tell your opponent that is to politicize all foreign policy, evidence weakness that can be exploited by others, and undermine the administration’s credibility."
http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/01/05/obama-credited-saying-stupidest-thing-ever-said-president?intcmp=ob_article_footer_text
Mexico is angry...
Wow! Please forward to all you know.
The shoe is on the other foot and the Mexicans from the State of Sonora, Mexico do not like it. Can you believe the nerve of these people? It's almost funny. The State of Sonora is angry at the influx of Mexicans into Mexico!
The state legislators from the Mexican State of Sonora traveled to Tucson to complain about Arizona's new employer crackdown on illegals from Mexico. It seems that many Mexican illegals are returning to their hometowns and the officials in the Sonora state government are ticked off. A delegation of nine state legislators from Sonora was in Tucson on Tuesday to state that Arizona's new 'Employer Sanctions Law' will have a devastating effect on the Mexican state. At a news conference, the legislators said that Sonora (Arizona's southern neighbor) made up of mostly of small towns - cannot handle the demand for housing, jobs and schools that it will face as Mexican workers return to their hometowns from the USA without jobs or money.
The Arizona law, which took effect Jan. 1, punishes Arizona employers who knowingly hire individuals without valid legal documents to work in the United States . Penalties include suspension of, or loss of, their business license. The Mexican legislators are angry because their own citizens are returning to their hometowns, placing a burden on THEIR state government instead of ours.
'How can Arizona pass a law like this?' asked Mexican Rep Leticia Amparano-Gamez, who represents Nogales . 'There is not one person living in Sonora who does not have a friend or relative working in Arizona ,' she said, speaking in Spanish. 'Mexico is not prepared for this, for the tremendous problems it will face as more and more Mexicans working in Arizona and who were sending money to their families return to their hometowns in Sonora without jobs,' she said 'We are one family, socially and economically,' she said of the people of Sonora and Arizona.
Wrong! The United States is a sovereign nation, not a subsidiary of Mexico, and its taxpayers are not responsible for the welfare of Mexico's citizens. It's time for the Mexican government, and its citizens, to stop feeding parasitically off the United States and to start taking care of its/their own needs.
Too bad that other states within the USA don't pass a law just like that passed by Arizona. Maybe that's the answer, since our own Congress will do nothing!
GUESS WHO IS MARRIED TO JOHN KERRY'S DAUGHTER ??
This may indicate why Kerry fought so hard to get the Iran nuclear deal through
We may have surrendered already and just don't know it.
JUST ANOTHER LITTLE CONNECTION THAT CAUSES WORRY ABOUT IRAN; IT NEVER STOPS.
GUESS WHO IS MARRIED TO JOHN KERRY'S DAUGHTER? Maybe you don't know that in 2009 the daughter of Secretary of State John Kerry, Dr. Vanessa Bradford Kerry, married an Iranian physician named Dr. Brian Vale Nahed.
Well, No mainstream media reported this at the time.
Guess who was the best man at the wedding? Mohammad Javad Zarif.
So who is Mr. Zarif?
Zarifis the current Minister of Foreign Affairs for Iran. He was Kerry's chief counterpart in the nuclear deal negotiations just concluded.
As Front Page Magazine pointed out several months ago, the nuclear talks with Iran were a tragic farce, choreographed and orchestrated by Iran.
Could rape claim against Bill Clinton impact his wife's campaign?
http://www.aol.com/article/2016/01/07/could-rape-claim-against-bill-clinton-impact-his-wifes-campaig/21293272/?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl2|sec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D-865523398
The question of whether Bill Clinton's past will be a big part of his wife's second presidential run seems to have been answered.
Juanita Broaddrick, a woman who first publicly accused President Clinton of rape in the '90s, has spoken out on social media. In a series of tweets, Broaddrick says, "Clinton, Arkansas attorney general raped me and Hillary tried to silence me."
Broaddrick worked on Bill Clinton's gubernatorial campaign and alleges Clinton raped her in a hotel room in 1978.
"He starts to bite on my top lip as I try to pull away from him, and then he forces me down on the bed," Broaddrick said in a 1999 interview.
Broaddrick says Hillary Clinton walked up to her weeks later at a campaign event and thanked her for what she had done for Clinton while squeezing her hand tightly. Broaddrick took that to mean Hillary Clinton knew about the alleged rape and was thanking her for keeping quiet.
Broaddrick sued the Clinton White House in 1999 for documents she said the White House had on her in an attempt to attack her credibility. That suit was dismissed in 2000 for a lack of "factual support."
Hillary Clinton has recently faced questions on the campaign trail about Broaddrick and other women who claim her husband sexually assaulted them on multiple occasions.
"You say that all rape victims should be believed, but would you say that about Juanita Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey and Paula Jones?" a woman asked in December.
"Well, I would say that everybody should be believed at first until they are disbelieved on evidence," the Democratic front-runner answered.
Neither of the Clintons have directly addressed Broaddrick's allegations
P.O.S DOWN TO 1.09 ANOTHER BUYING OPPORTUNITY ....
01/07/2011 2.44 2.5 2.38 2.4 356,366
?REMEMBER WE ARE TALKING "ILLEGAL ALIENS?"
WHAT IF THEY LEFT
Considering the Denver Post is a very liberal paper I'm surprised they published this. This really shows how the hiring of illegals is false economic practice.
Tina Griego is a Free-Lance reporter for the Denver Post. She writes some really good stuff and she is a strong advocate for LEGAL immigration . Homework on issues is part of her make-up and fabric ...
What if they left?
Somebody really did their homework on this one. Best on the subject to date. It does not have a political slant to it, it’s just the facts: Not Democratic, not Republican, not liberal and not conservative.
What if 20 Million Illegal Aliens Vacated America ?
I, Tina Griego, journalist for the Denver Rocky Mountain News wrote a column titled, "Mexican Visitor's Lament."
I interviewed Mexican journalist Evangelina Hernandez while visiting Denver last week. Hernandez said, "Illegal aliens pay rent, buy groceries, buy clothes. What happens to your country's economy if 20 million people go away?"
Hmmm, I thought, what would happen?
So I did my due diligence, buried my nose as a reporter into the FACTS I found below.
It's a good question... it deserves an honest answer. Over 80% of Americans demand secured borders and illegal migration stopped. But what would happen if all 20 million or more vacatedAmerica ? The answers I found may surprise you!
In California , if 3.5 million illegal aliens moved back to Mexico , it would leave an extra $10.2 billion to spend on overloaded school systems, bankrupt hospitals and overrun prisons. It would leave highways cleaner, safer and less congested. Everyone could understand one another as English became the dominant language again.
In Colorado , 500,000 illegal migrants, plus their 300,000 kids and grandchildren would move back "home," mostly to Mexico . That would save Colorado an estimated $2 billion (other experts say $7 billion) annually in taxes that pay for schooling, medical, social-services and incarceration costs.
It means 12,000 gang members would vanish out of Denver alone.
Colorado would save more than $20 million in prison costs, and the terror that those 7,300 alien criminals set upon local citizens. Denver Officer Don Young and hundreds of Colorado victims would not have suffered death, accidents, rapes and other crimes by illegals.
Denver Public Schools would not suffer a 67% dropout/flunk rate because of thousands of illegal alien students speaking 41 different languages. At least200,000 vehicles would vanish from our gridlocked cities in Colorado . Denver 's 4% unemployment rate would vanish as our working poor would gain jobs at a living wage.
In Florida , 1.5 million illegals would return the Sunshine State back to America , the rule of law, and English.
In Chicago , Illinois , 2.1 million illegals would free up hospitals, schools, prisons and highways for a safer, cleaner and more crime-free experience.
If 20 million illegal aliens returned 'home,' the U.S. economy would return to the rule of law. Employers would hire legal American citizens at a living wage. Everyone would pay their fair share of taxes because they wouldn't be working off the books. That would result in an additional $401 billion in IRS income taxes collected annually, and an equal amount for local, state and city coffers.
No more push '1' for Spanish or '2' for English. No more confusion in American schools that now must contend with over 100 languages that degrade the educational system for American kids. Our overcrowded schools would lose more than two million illegal alien kids at a cost of billions in ESL and free breakfasts and lunches.
We would lose 500,000 illegal criminal alien inmates at a cost of more than $1.6 billion annually. That includes 15,000 MS-13 gang members who distribute $130 billion in drugs annually would vacate our country.
In cities like L.A. , 20,000 members of the ' 18th Street Gang' would vanish from our nation. No more Mexican forgery gangs for ID theft from Americans! No more foreign rapists and child molesters!
Losing more than 20 million people would clear up our crowded highways and gridlock. Cleaner air and less drinking and driving American deaths by illegal aliens!
America's economy is drained. Taxpayers are harmed. Employers get rich. Over $80 billion annually wouldn't return to the aliens' home countries by cash transfers. Illegal migrants earned half that money untaxed, which further drains America 's economy which currently suffers a $20 trillion debt. $20 trillion debt!!!
At least 400,000 anchor babies would not be born in our country, costing us $109 billion per year per cycle. At least 86 hospitals in California , Georgia and Florida would still be operating instead of being bankrupt out of existence because illegals pay nothing via the EMTOLA Act.
Americans wouldn't suffer thousands of TB and hepatitis cases rampant in our country - brought in by illegals unscreened at our borders.
Our cities would see 20 million less people driving, polluting and grid locking our cities. It would also put the 'progressives' on the horns of a dilemma; illegal aliens and their families cause 11% of our greenhouse gases.
Over one million of Mexico's poorest citizens now live inside and along our border from Brownsville, Texas, to San Diego, California, in what the New York Times called, 'colonias' or new neighborhoods. Trouble is, those living areas resemble Bombay and Calcutta where grinding poverty, filth, diseases, drugs, crimes, no sanitation and worse. They live without sewage, clean water, streets, roads, electricity, or any kind of sanitation.
The New York Times reported them to be America 's new ' Third World ' inside our own country. Within 20 years, at their current growth rate, they expect 20 million residents of those colonias. (I've seen them personally in Texas and Arizona ; it's sickening beyond anything you can imagine.)
By enforcing our laws, we could repatriate them back to Mexico . We should invite 20 million aliens to go home, fix their own countries and/or make a better life in Mexico . We already invite a million people into our country legally annually, more than all other countries combined. We cannot and must not allow anarchy at our borders, more anarchy within our borders and growing lawlessness at every level in our nation.
It's time to stand up for our country, our culture, our civilization and our way of life. Interesting Statistics!
Here are 14 reasons illegal aliens should vacate America, and I hope they are forwarded over and over again until they are read so many times that the reader gets sick of reading them:
1. $14 billion to $22 billion dollars are spent each year on welfare to illegal aliens (that's Billion with a 'B')
3. $7.5 billion dollars are spent each year on Medicaid for illegal aliens.
4. $12 billion dollars are spent each year on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they still cannot speak a word of English
5. $27 billion dollars are spent each year for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.
6. $3 Million Dollars 'PER DAY' is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens. That's $1.2 Billion a year.
7. 28% percent of all federal prison inmates are illegal aliens.
8. $190 billion dollars are spent each year on illegal aliens for welfare & social services by the American taxpayers. <http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANscriptS/0610/29/ldt.01.html >
9. $200 billion dollars per year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.
10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US .
11. During the year 2005, there were 8 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our southern border with as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from other terrorist countries. Over 10,000 of those were middle-eastern terrorists. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin, crack, guns, and marijuana crossed into the U.S. from the southern border.
12. The National Policy Institute, estimates that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion, or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.
13. In 2006, illegal aliens sent home $65 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin, to their families and friends.
14. The dark side of illegal immigration: Nearly one million sex crimes are committed by illegal immigrants in the United States !
Total cost a whopping $538.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR!
How the Obama Administration Changed Our Missile Defense Strategy
By Michaela Dodge | December 31, 2015 | 12:30 PM EST
Russian troops are seen near truck-mounted Topol-M intercontinental ballistic missiles as they rehearse for the Victory Day parade in Moscow's Red Square, at a training field in the town of Alabino outside Moscow, Tuesday, March 18, 2008. (AP Photo)
Recently the Russian strategic missile forces’ commander Col. Gen. Sergei Karakayev said Russia’s new missiles will have the capability to neutralize any future U.S. missile defense system.
For now, Karakayev is right – not because the missiles are invincible – but because the Obama administration is deliberately limiting the United States’ ballistic missile defense program.
This must change.
Background on U.S. Missile Defense Strategy
After the U.S. withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Defense Treaty in 2002, the United States focused on developing a layered ballistic missile defense system. The Bush administration concentrated on quick deployment of the ground-based midcourse defense (GMD) system for the protection of U.S. homeland. This system is made up of ground based missiles and radars, which can incept incoming missiles. To augment the protection within the United States, the Bush administration planned on deploying a radar to the Czech Republic with two-stage ground-based midcourse defense interceptors in Poland.
In order to address intermediate, and shot-range ballistic missile threats, the Bush administration developed and deployed Aegis ship-based missile defense system, the Theatre High Altitude Area Defense System, and the Patriot system.
Change of Plans Under Obama
The U.S. missile defense plans changed, however, under the Obama administration. Our current administration decided to pursue a European Phased Adaptive Approach, a modified missile defense plan emphasizing medium-range ballistic missile threat, instead of putting a radar and two-stage ground-based interceptors in Europe.
The Obama administration was to augment protection of the U.S. homeland in the 2020 timeframe. But the Obama administration decided to cancel that aspect of the plan and focus on short- and medium-range missile defense protection for the European allies (Russia happened to object to this part of the plan most).
The United States therefore is deliberately pursuing a missile defense program to be able to intercept only a handful of incoming ballistic missiles of first, not as technologically advanced, generations.
Given the spread of ballistic missiles – their increasing sophistication, range, and lethality – it is time to put U.S. missile defense policy on a sound track.
Additionally, Russia’s aggressive behavior and a desire to use its nuclear and ballistic missile leverage to blackmail the U.S. and its allies, the United States should plan in a comprehensive-layered ballistic missile defense system capable of shooting down all ballistic missiles.
To do so, the United States will have to pursue a space-based ballistic missile defense layer as well as continue to work on future technologies, for example directed energy.
Michaela Dodge specializes in missile defense, nuclear weapons modernization and arms control as policy analyst for defense and strategic policy in The Heritage Foundation’s Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies.
New Obama vacation costs uncovered; They now exceed $70 million
As Barack, Michelle, Malia and Sasha Obama, family, friends, pets and staff enjoy their half-month-long Hawaiian vacation, the Secret Service finally complied with a court order to release some Obama vacation expenses from two years ago.
That's how eager the Obama administration is about being transparent when it comes to spending large sums of taxpayers' money on itself.
As with the slow-motion releases of Hillary Clinton's emails, the idea of bureaucratic stalling, of course, is that the details become "old" news more likely to be ignored by media. Fortunately, we're not on vacation this week, so we can help the president out. Here goes:
The new expense reports, heavily-redacted allegedly for security reasons, push the total known costs for vacations during Obama's reign to nearly $71 million -- with another full year to go. That's about $10.1 million per year in known expenses.
The totals come from Judicial Watch, the dogged watchdog group that pursues such information through repeated Freedom of Information Act requests.
Earlier this year Judicial Watch obtained transportation costs for a pair of the Democrat's cross-country golf weekends just in 2015. They totaled nearly $2 million, or $20,000 per hole, the Washington Examiner calculated.
In February, for instance, Obama spent President's Weekend golfing with male friends in Palm Springs. At $206,000 per flight hour, that trip set taxpayers back $1.03 million. That does not include other costs such as security and transportation.
Of course, even with Camp David available for free in Maryland every president goes on vacation, though none have gone so far so often as the Obamas, sometimes in separate planes.
Their family trips to Hawaii, for example, require at least 18 hours of Air Force One flight time at $206,000 per flight hour. Or $3.7 million minimum.
Complaints of over-spending on personal travel have dogged this first couple starting with Michelle Obama's luxury vacation with friends to Spain at the peak of the recession and subsequent family excursions during the nation's weakest economic recovery since World War II.
As we reported earlier this year: The Obamas have "traveled more than any other first family, often with Mrs. Obama's mother and her friends. By the summer of 2014 the Obamas had taken 31 international trips lasting 119 days. At the same point in his presidency, Ronald Reagan had taken 14 such trips over 73 days.
"When the family visited Ireland in 2013, taxpayers were hit for just under $8 million, including a quarter-million dollars for a two-day side-trip to Dublin for the Obama women. They chose a $3,500-per-night hotel suite in addition to 29 other rooms for their traveling party at the five-star hotel.
Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/politics-andrew-malcolm/123015-787012-obama-vacation-expenses-already-exceed-70-million-dollars.htm#ixzz3vv50TplU
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook
SOUND FAMILIAR ????????????? LOL
Penny Stocks’ Potential for Fraud Is Written into SEC Regulations
First a little background.
The SEC generally categorizes penny stocks as the shares of any company trading at under $5/share or under and having a capitalization anywhere from $50 million to $300 million. Sometimes the cut is $1 to $3 a share, depending on the definition.
Typically, most of these companies have such small market capitalizations that they don’t meet the standards needed to trade on major exchanges like the New York Stock Market or Nasdaq, for example. Most are, as a result, traded in so-called “over the counter” exchanges (OTC), meaning the stock is sold by and to individuals connected by phone or computer networks.
If you’ve ever heard the expression “pink sheets,” this is sometimes used interchangeably. Over the counter trades – OTC for short – used to be written on pink sheets of paper.
Here’s where it gets tricky.
It’s tough enough to find accurate information about bigger, more established companies when it comes to investing. But it’s a whole lot more problematic for small caps.
That’s because OTC companies don’t have to meet the same SEC mandated financial reporting standards for larger, more established peers. The requirements for timely reporting, among other things, leaves a lot to be desired. So do auditing stipulations.
Not surprisingly, this makes OTC stocks an attractive vehicle for fraudsters, who will often breathlessly lobby unsuspecting investors over the phone, spinning a narrative of a tiny company that’s poised for tremendous upside. Pump and dump scammers don’t help because of their false and misleading actions.
That’s where many investors get into trouble.
They figure the potential for higher rewards makes the exposure worth it, so they pile into penny stocks without much thought. After all, they reason, if a stock is trading at $0.10/share, it just requires a small push to bump it up to $0.15/share – a rapid 50% gain!
What they’re missing is that the same penny stock can just as easily move in the wrong direction, trading at $0.10/share the day they buy it and $0.05 the next. And the 50% loss is even worse than it appears, because penny stocks tend to have far less liquidity than their bigger brothers. So price moves can be far more rapid and jagged than many people expect.
There are ways around this, though, and we talk about those all the time including the need for specific company research, position sizing (the tactic of only allocating a small percentage of your capital to any investment, to reduce the chance of a catastrophic loss) and dollar-cost averaging among other things.
But most of the time, you’re better off simply not taking the risk in the first place.
How do you know which companies are “worth it?”
Fortunately, the answer is not as difficult as you might imagine
Penny Stock Red Flag #1: Management Doesn’t Seem Invested in the Company
I’ve analyzed thousands of companies during the course of my career and it’s not always obvious which ones have the best potential. That’s why I recommend you take a detailed look at a company’s 10-k as part of your pre-investment research.
If you’ve never heard the term before, a 10-k is a periodic report mandated by the Securities and Exchange Commission that details a company’s financial performance. Like most government required paperwork, reading one of these things is about as exciting as watching paint dry. There’s a specific format and an even more specific list of things a company has to include when it files.
Every 10-k report, for example, contains detailed information on a company’s history, equity, shares outstanding, holdings, and subsidiaries – all in appallingly bland detail. A 10-k, incidentally, is different from an “annual report to shareholders” which is frequently all dolled up to present the most favorable spin on their prospects.
I frequently start with executive compensation.
It’s normal these days for CEOs to be paid at least partly in cash, even with small companies, as almost everyone can be expected to face liquidity events over time. But when an executive pays himself exclusively in cash, with no thought for deferred compensation, a red flag goes up.
Successful small cap stocks are aligned top to bottom, meaning that management and shareholders both have a vested interest in success. Hopefully the same interest.
A small cap exec with an all-cash compensation package and no options or vesting tells me that there’s very little alignment. Worse, it suggests management has no faith in the company’s long-term outlook and is using the corporate treasury as a slush fund to maximize his or her earnings even if the company goes up in flames.
For example, I recently examined a small cap company with what sounds like a promising clean energy technology. The 10-K revealed that the CEO of the company in question was paying himself nearly $2 million a year in cash and bonuses with no stock options or additional vesting.
At the same time, though, the 10-K also revealed that the company has accumulated debt of more than $200 million and liabilities that outweigh cash and other assets by 7 to 1.
My experience suggests that there’s a direct correlation between CEO pay and performance – the more they get, the worse their companies do.
And I’m not alone.
A 2014 study by Michael Cooper of the University of Utah, Huseyin Gulen of Purdue University and P. Raghavendra Rau confirms that there is a direct relationship between what CEOs are paid and the next three years of performance. According to the authors, the returns of higher paying firms are almost three times lower than low-paying firms.
If a CEO isn’t betting on shares of his or her company rising, there’s no reason you should.
Penny Stock Red Flag # 2: Weak Statement of Operations
Penny stock companies can be unprofitable for long periods of time, yet still have exceptionally an exceptionally bright future.
Here, too, the 10-k can be very helpful because it shows not only a company’s condition at a specific point in time, but over time. And that, in turn, will tell you whether the company is moving in a direction that’s consistent with its stated goals.
For example, I’ve recommended Ekso Bionics Holdings Inc. (OTC:EKSO) as one of the most inspirational, small cap stocks I’ve seen in years. The company trades at only around $1.15 a share now but I think it could hit $21.84 a few years from now, assuming management continues to charge down the path they’ve chosen.
The company’s most recent 10-k report, filed in March 2015, shows that the company has spent heavily on medical and engineering devices, which is exactly what you would expect for a company that’s growing sales and landing new medical and engineering contracts for its products.
Further, the $3.86 million spent on research and development (up sharply from the $2.67 million spent the previous year) shows the company is serious about not just protecting but expanding its technological edge.
In other words, the company’s spending is absolutely consistent with its objectives.
On the other hand, I reviewed a bio-fertilizer company in China a few years back that had fabulous plans to manufacture and distribute a breakthrough crop yield enhancer. Given the terrible shape of most of China’s agricultural land, this made a lot of sense – right up until I saw plans for an amusement park and hotel posted on the back of a greenhouse in their research acreage.
Turns out money being invested in “research” was being diverted into other assets that were not consistent with the core product lines or even a logical extension of the business. And that was reflected in the 10-k, with a surge in assets and expenses falling outside the primary business.
Penny Stock Red Flag # 3: Paid Promotions
Promoters and unscrupulous corporate insiders are often in cahoots when it comes to penny stocks. Not that you’d know it from the glossy spreads you and I both get in our mailbox from time to time.
The slick story and well-written copy is designed to make you think the company being promoted is truly transformative, with potential profits that could transform your own life. Supposedly independent, it’s actually paid.
Many times analysts take large cash payments in return for providing glowing coverage, or they receive shares that they can quickly unload after they trigger their intended buying spree.
Consider the following example I’ve pulled from our files at random.
The thinly camouflaged disclaimer reveals that the research company doing the paid promotion received 550 restricted shares from the company, and will receive 550,000 shares during the course of conducting their research. Shares that, I might add, they’re telling you they will sell at any time and without warning… probably as unsuspecting buyers are being lured in.
For a long time Wall Street itself was no better. In many ways it still isn’t.
Commissions and trading used to be the economic rationale for traditional research offerings. In-house analysts made “calls” that caused people to buy or sell securities in almost reflexive fashion, which was great when the markets were headed higher. Some analysts achieved almost rock-star like status even as their work supported commissions. Others like Henry Bloget and Mary Meeker were vilified when dot.com became dot.bomb.
Yet, the practice still continues today as part of almost every Private Placement leading to an Initial Public Offering. Rather than face regulatory pressure in today’s litigious environment, Goldman Sachs, for example, puts a disclaimer in its documents telling clients that the firm could short the very shares clients are buying or dump shares of a given transaction at any time.
Effectively, Goldman and other firms have rigged the game so that insider trading is not only totally in the open, but brazenly in your face and perfectly legal.