đŸ‡ș🇾 Donald Trump

  • Keskustelun aloittaja Keskustelun aloittaja makhak
  • Aloitettu Aloitettu
Meta title: đŸ’„ Donald Trump – Mies, myrsky ja ilmiö joka jakaa mielipiteet kaikkialla

Meta description: Keskustelua Trumpin vaikutuksesta politiikkaan, mediaan ja kulttuuriin – miksi hĂ€n herĂ€ttÀÀ niin vahvat mielipiteet puolesta ja vastaan?*


Obama 60%->105%, Trump 105%->106%. Itse asiassa 2017 lukema tippui hieman. Eli mitÀÀn radikaalia muutosta ei ole Trumpin aikana tapahtunut, eikÀ Obama missÀÀn 8 vuoden lamassa ollut vaan nousukautta oli suurin osa.
Ja vuonna 2017 oli vielÀ Obaman aikainen budjetti. Edelleen, Obaman aikana samanlaisilla velanotoilla saatiin talous selvÀÀn nousuun. Trumpit aikana vastaavat lainanotot ovat olleet lÀhinnÀ lÀmmintÀ kylmÀlle kiukaalle. Mutta hei jÀtetÀÀn vaan mun puolesta ovet auki mahdollisuudelle, ettÀ ehkÀ sieltÀ ihan just kohta vielÀ putkahtaa jÀÀkiekkomailan muotoinen nousukÀppyrÀ kansantalouteen.

Trumpin rallyt ovat pitkiÀ tottakai kÀsikirjoitusta on. Ihan skarpisti Trump ne vetÀÀ ja ottaa yleisönsÀ. Mutta kyllÀ Trump puhuu mielellÀÀn ja aiheesta kuin aiheesta. Monella muulla US poliitikolla menisi jauhot suuhun, Trump puhuu kyllÀ ihan kaikenlaisissa yhteyksissÀ jatkuvasti eikÀ takeltele.
KyllÀhÀn niissÀ varmasti kÀsikirjoitus on, mutta Trumpilla tunnetusti on taipumusta poiketa niistÀ ja monesti lopputuloksena on vain pÀÀmÀÀrÀtöntÀ harhailua. SillÀ on ne tietyt lauserakenteet, joita se mielellÀÀn toistelee, samoin kuin anekdootteja isoista itkevistÀ miehistÀ, kunnes se taas palaa takaisin kÀsikirjoitukseen. On kyllÀ totta, ettÀ Trump jÀÀ harvemmin sanattomaksi ja tekstiÀ tulee ulos aivan pidÀkkeettömÀsti, mutta en tiedÀ onko valtionpÀÀmiehelle hyvÀ asia olla tunnistamatta tilannetta, milloin olisi parempi olla vain hiljaa?

En ole perehtynyt vesiasiaan tarkemmin, aika epÀtoivoiselta lillukanvarrelta kuulostaa vasta-argumenttina isoa taloudellista hyvÀÀ tuonutta muutosta vastaan(?). Taisit vaan jotain negatiivista sanoa kun sen velvollisuudeksi koet. :-) YrittÀjÀt ja bisneselÀmÀ laajasti kiittelee nimenomaan regulaation purkua, olihan tuolla aiemmin se Kevin o Learyn juttu, missÀ nimenomaan regulaation purkua kehuttiin. Saanut jopa enemmÀn kiitosta kuin verouudistus.
Lillukanvarsi? Regulaatioilla yleensÀ pyritÀÀn esimerkiksi pitÀmÀÀn ne surullisenkuuluisat Boeingit taivaalla, mutta en sitÀ vÀitÀ, etteikö varmasti joistakin sÀÀntelyistÀ voisi luopua. Mutta tÀmÀ vesihöpinÀ on jotain ihan omaa luokkaansa - ilmeisesti tÀssÀkin oli alunperin tarkoituksena kertoa hassunhauska juttu kuinka wc-pöntöt olivat 80-luvulla paljon parempia, mutta tarina meni liioittelussa ihan överiksi ja jÀtti tÀysin auki, mikÀ olisi hÀnen tarjoamansa uusi tapa selvitÀ kuivuuden runtelemissa osavaltioissa. Ja oliko tÀmÀ nyt sellainen asia, johon presidentin arvovallalla tulisi puuttua?
 
^ Auts! Pahasti lÀsÀhti Schiffin kuontaloon.

Democrat Adam Schiff SUED In Federal Court, Accused Of Abuse Of Power In Impeachment Process


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkPphuVPtME


^ Auts! Pahasti lÀsÀhti Schiffin kuontaloon. =D


Oikeinko Judicial Watch taas haastaa oikeuteen jostain? Onko tÀmÀ pulju oikeasti saanut haasteillaan mitÀÀn muuta aikaan itselleen clickbait-uutisointia?
Miksei Schiff saisi rikoksista epÀillyn ja Ukraina-keissiin liittyvÀn Lev Parnaksen puhelutietoja havitella? Siksikö, ettÀ sieltÀ sattui löytymÀÀn mm. republikaani Nunesin nimi?
 
Viimeksi muokattu:
Obaman aikana samanlaisilla velanotoilla saatiin talous selvÀÀn nousuun.

Tilanteessa missÀ ei hölmöinkÀÀn talousjohtaja voinut mennÀ kuin pohjilta ylös, Obama meni ylös nostamalla velkasuhteen 60% -105%.

KyllÀhÀn niissÀ varmasti kÀsikirjoitus on, mutta Trumpilla tunnetusti on taipumusta poiketa niistÀ ja monesti lopputuloksena on vain pÀÀmÀÀrÀtöntÀ harhailua.

Luet medioita jotka haluavat kaiken Trumpin sanoman sellaisena esittÀÀÀ, tulokset puhuvat puolestaan, Trump is on the point.

Lillukanvarsi? Regulaatioilla yleensÀ pyritÀÀn esimerkiksi pitÀmÀÀn ne surullisenkuuluisat Boeingit taivaalla

Obaman aikana tehty regulaatio voimassa tippuneille Boeing koneille. Trumpin regulaatiolla kaikki hyvin. Ja sinÀ tartuit vesiasia lillukanvarteen. TÀssÀ asioiden oikea jÀrjestys. :-)
 
Demokraattien törkykampanja jatkuu, kaikenlainen kiusanteko ja vaikuttaminen seuraaviin vaaleihin epÀdemoktraattisella impeacmentillÀ nÀyttÀÀ olevan demokraattien ainoa vaalitaktiikka. Pelosin voisi haastaa oikeuteen myös, esim. epÀisÀnmaallisuudesta ja demokratian halventamisesta. :-)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3N-8rwkrMZE
 
Demokraattien törkykampanja jatkuu, kaikenlainen kiusanteko ja vaikuttaminen seuraaviin vaaleihin epÀdemoktraattisella impeacmentillÀ nÀyttÀÀ olevan demokraattien ainoa vaalitaktiikka. Pelosin voisi haastaa oikeuteen myös, esim. epÀisÀnmaallisuudesta ja demokratian halventamisesta. :-)

Jos sanomasi pitÀÀ paikkansa, niin miksei republikaanit tee ilmeisintÀ ratkaisua ja vapauta pantattuja todistajia ja asiakirjoja? Jo sillÀ kaadettaisiin virkasyytteistÀ toinen. Todistajien vahvistaessa Foxin narratiivin lÀhtisi jÀljellÀolevan virkasyytteen lisÀksi lopullinen pohja myöskin demokraattien kannatukselta. SehÀn olisi tÀydellinen isku vastapalloon tilanteessa, jossa demokraatit kuvittelevat olevansa niskan pÀÀllÀ. Miksei nÀin toimita?
 
TÀÀ virkarikossyyte ja sen spekulointi on aika turhaa hommaa, syytteet eivÀt republikaanienemmistöisessÀ senaatissa mene lÀpi kuitenkaan.
NÀin ollen, homman tarkoitus olla smearing kampanja ja tahrimista demokraatit haluaa venyttÀÀ.
Trumpilla on talous ja työllisyys, demareilla Trumpin tahriminen.
MikÀli maailmassa on mitÀÀn tolkkua jÀljellÀ, ensinmainittu on se mikÀ merkitsee ja Trump voittaa 2020.
 
TÀÀ virkarikossyyte ja sen spekulointi on aika turhaa hommaa, syytteet eivÀt republikaanienemmistöisessÀ senaatissa mene lÀpi kuitenkaan.
NÀin ollen, homman tarkoitus olla smearing kampanja ja tahrimista demokraatit haluaa venyttÀÀ.
Trumpilla on talous ja työllisyys, demareilla Trumpin tahriminen.
MikÀli maailmassa on mitÀÀn tolkkua jÀljellÀ, ensinmainittu on se mikÀ merkitsee ja Trump voittaa 2020.

Republikaanit antavat demokraattien jatkaa lokakampanjaansa, koska kyseessÀ on vain lokakampanja? EihÀn tuossa ole jÀrjen hiventÀkÀÀn.
 
Demokraatit sitÀ itse pitkittÀvÀt.

Erinomainen video mistÀ tÀssÀ impeachmentissÀ on kyse.

Trumpin vihaajat eivÀt uskoneet ettÀ Trump voisi voittaa, Trumpin vihaajat eivÀt uskoneet ettÀ Trump voisi onnistua politiikassaan. Nyt kun kumpikin on tapahtunut ja heidÀt on nolattu, heidÀn on vaan kanavoitava vihansa ja pettymyksensÀ impeachmenttiin ja kuten aiemmassa todettiin: ovat valmiita generoimaan niitÀ lisÀÀ.


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CgnygL2J4VI
 
Demokraatit sitÀ itse pitkittÀvÀt.

Erinomainen video mistÀ tÀssÀ impeachmentissÀ on kyse.

Trumpin vihaajat eivÀt uskoneet ettÀ Trump voisi voittaa, Trumpin vihaajat eivÀt uskoneet ettÀ Trump voisi onnistua politiikassaan. Nyt kun kumpikin on tapahtunut ja heidÀt on nolattu, heidÀn on vaan kanavoitava vihansa ja pettymyksensÀ impeachmenttiin ja kuten aiemmassa todettiin: ovat valmiita generoimaan niitÀ lisÀÀ.


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CgnygL2J4VI


Niin, mikseivÀt pitkittÀisi - ajan kuluessa tipahtelee pÀÀtöksiÀ korkeimmalta oikeudelta liittyen hallinnon blokkaamiin asiakirjoihin sekÀ todistajiin ja sitÀ myöten virkasyytekohtien lista mahdollisesti kasvaa entisestÀÀn. Ja vaikka ei kasvaisikaan, niin miksi ihmeessÀ heille olisi parempi vaihtoehto antaa republikaanien skipata koko oikeudenkÀynti? Ja miksi republikaanit olisivat niin epÀtyypillisen solidaarisia, etteivÀt haluaisi demokraatteja nolata perusteellisella oikeudenkÀynnillÀ?
Muutenkin hullu asetelma - miten kaikki valaehtoisia todistuksia antaneet olisivat valehdelleet ja sattumalta ainoat todenpuhujat olisivat Foxin puhuvat pÀÀt ja sekÀ tietenkin ne, jotka ovat tÀhÀn mennessÀ valaehtoisesta todistuksesta kieltÀytyneet (jopa haasteita uhmaten)?
MÀ en ole mikÀÀn rakettitiedemies, mutta jokin tÀssÀ vastakkainasettelussa haisee pahalle ihan ilman mitÀÀn masinoitua loanheittoakin.
 
-Alhaisin työttömyys yli 50 vuoteen
-Alhaisin mustien työttömyys tilastoidussa historiassa
-Suurin työllisten mÀÀrÀ koskaan USA:n historiassa
-101 all time high pÀivÀÀ Dow Jonesiin
-Ei yhtÀÀn uutta aloitettua sotaa

TÀÀ on se mitÀ Trump on tehnyt, noi asiakirjat ja valat ja vÀittely ja draama about nothing on mitÀ demokraatit on tehny.
Saavutuksina eroaa siinÀ et toisen on tehny Amerikan historian paras pressa kansan parhaaksi, toisen katkera #%„! lauma erottaakseen Amerikan parhaan pressan kansan demokraattisen vaalin tulosta vastaan omaksi parhaakseen.
That’s it.
 
Katotaan kunhan ensi vuoden iphone-mallisto julkaistaan hintoineen, niin siinÀ selviÀÀ hitaammillekin mitÀ tÀÀ talousnero on todellisuudessa saanut aikaan.
Onneksi sentÀÀn Meksiko on ensi vuodelle kaavaillun budjetin mukaan taas maksamassa muuria, eiku.. Noh, Obama-caren tilalle on sentÀÀn tulossa jotain parempaa - SPACE FORCE!
 
-Alhaisin työttömyys yli 50 vuoteen
-Alhaisin mustien työttömyys tilastoidussa historiassa
-Suurin työllisten mÀÀrÀ koskaan USA:n historiassa
-101 all time high pÀivÀÀ Dow Jonesiin
-Ei yhtÀÀn uutta aloitettua sotaa

TÀÀ on se mitÀ Trump on tehnyt


Katotaan kunhan ensi vuoden iphone-mallisto julkaistaan hintoineen, niin siinÀ selviÀÀ

😂

IMG_0543.webp
đŸ‘đŸ»đŸ˜Š
 
Trump paukuttelee talous- ja työllisyysennÀtyksiÀ, samoin tottakai USA:n retail:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...opping-sets-one-day-sales-record-analyst-says
Holiday shopping set records over the weekend, with Super Saturday sales reaching $34.4 billion, the biggest single day in U.S. retail history, according to Customer Growth Partners.
“Paced by the ‘Big Four’ mega-retailers -- Walmart, Amazon, Costco and Target -- Super Saturday was boosted by the best traffic our team has seen in years,” said Craig Johnson, president of the retail research firm.
 
Siis.. mÀ en tajua tÀstÀ mitÀÀn, saisiko suomennoksen?

"Yhdysvaltain presidentin Donald Trumpin uudelleentviittaus ja kyseisen tviitin poisto hetkeÀ myöhemmin on aiheuttanut laajan kohdun Yhdysvalloissa. KyseisessÀ tviitissÀ kerrottiin Trumpin virkasyytteeseen johtaneiden tietojen ilmiantajaksi vÀitetyn henkilön nimi.

Trumpin epÀillÀÀn syyllistyneen virkavirheeseen, kun hÀn heinÀkuun lopulla kÀydyssÀ puhelinkeskustelussa pyysi Ukrainan presidenttiÀ Volodymyr ZelenskiyÀ selvittÀmÀÀn, miksi Ukrainan pÀÀsyyttÀjÀ lopetti rikostutkimukset, jotka kohdistuivat kaasuyhtiöön, jossa Hunter Biden oli töissÀ. Trump on useasti vaatinut ilmiantajan nimen julkistamista.

Donald Trumpin uudelleentviittaus on saanut osakseen rajua arvostelua.
”On tĂ€ysin sopimatonta Yhdysvaltain presidentiltĂ€, ettĂ€ hĂ€n on mukana toiminnassa, joka saattaa vahingoittaa ilmiantajaa”, entinen FBI-virkalija Michael German kommentoi BBC:n mukaan.

Ilmiantajia koskevan amerikkalaisen lainsÀÀdÀnnön asiantuntija Stephen Kohn puolestaan sanoo, ettÀ lain mukaan presidentin velvollisuus on suojella ilmiantajia.
”On uskomatonta, ettĂ€ Trump rikkoo tĂ€tĂ€â€, hĂ€n toteaa Washington Postille.
"
 
Siis.. mÀ en tajua tÀstÀ mitÀÀn, saisiko suomennoksen?

"Yhdysvaltain presidentin Donald Trumpin uudelleentviittaus ja kyseisen tviitin poisto hetkeÀ myöhemmin on aiheuttanut laajan kohdun Yhdysvalloissa. KyseisessÀ tviitissÀ kerrottiin Trumpin virkasyytteeseen johtaneiden tietojen ilmiantajaksi vÀitetyn henkilön nimi.

Trumpin epÀillÀÀn syyllistyneen virkavirheeseen, kun hÀn heinÀkuun lopulla kÀydyssÀ puhelinkeskustelussa pyysi Ukrainan presidenttiÀ Volodymyr ZelenskiyÀ selvittÀmÀÀn, miksi Ukrainan pÀÀsyyttÀjÀ lopetti rikostutkimukset, jotka kohdistuivat kaasuyhtiöön, jossa Hunter Biden oli töissÀ. Trump on useasti vaatinut ilmiantajan nimen julkistamista.

Donald Trumpin uudelleentviittaus on saanut osakseen rajua arvostelua.
”On tĂ€ysin sopimatonta Yhdysvaltain presidentiltĂ€, ettĂ€ hĂ€n on mukana toiminnassa, joka saattaa vahingoittaa ilmiantajaa”, entinen FBI-virkalija Michael German kommentoi BBC:n mukaan.

Ilmiantajia koskevan amerikkalaisen lainsÀÀdÀnnön asiantuntija Stephen Kohn puolestaan sanoo, ettÀ lain mukaan presidentin velvollisuus on suojella ilmiantajia.
”On uskomatonta, ettĂ€ Trump rikkoo tĂ€tĂ€â€, hĂ€n toteaa Washington Postille.
"

Eli meni julkaisemaan epÀillyn ilmiantajansa nimen ja samainen julkaisu katosi hetkeÀ myöhemmin. Miten pohjaton taulapÀÀ pitÀÀ olla, kun tuollaista menee tekemÀÀn?
 
Kun aiemmin horisin iphonen hinnoista, niin tÀssÀ olisi tuoretta dataa kauppasodan vaikutuksista:
TÀhÀn mennessÀ rankaisutullit ovat siis ainoastaan kurittaneet tavallista työntekijÀÀ ja kuluttajaa, mitÀÀn piristÀvÀÀ vaikutusta kotimaisen tuotannon parantamiseksi niillÀ ei ole ollut. MitenköhÀn hassusti pÀin tÀmÀ tutkimus on Foxilla spinnattu vai uskalletaanko siellÀ puhua aiheesta ollenkaan?
 
En ole jaksanut seurata tapausta, mutta puhutaanko tÀssÀ Eric Ciaramellasta? NimihÀn on ollut tiedossa jo pitkÀÀn, tosin ei mediassa. Jewtubessakin jos mainitsi videolla kyseisen nimen, video poistettiin ja banniuhkausta perÀÀn.

TÀÀ on reilu kuukauden takaa jossa kÀsitellÀÀn kyseistÀ asiaa.

 
En ole jaksanut seurata tapausta, mutta puhutaanko tÀssÀ Eric Ciaramellasta? NimihÀn on ollut tiedossa jo pitkÀÀn, tosin ei mediassa. Jewtubessakin jos mainitsi videolla kyseisen nimen, video poistettiin ja banniuhkausta perÀÀn.

TÀÀ on reilu kuukauden takaa jossa kÀsitellÀÀn kyseistÀ asiaa.



Joo - sama nimi on pyörinyt jo jonkin aikaa joissakin piireissÀ. Jopa keltainen lehdistö ymmÀrtÀÀ olla tarttumatta asiaan, mutta Yhdysvaltain presidentti ei.
 
Joo - sama nimi on pyörinyt jo jonkin aikaa joissakin piireissÀ. Jopa keltainen lehdistö ymmÀrtÀÀ olla tarttumatta asiaan, mutta Yhdysvaltain presidentti ei.
En nyt oikein ymmÀrrÀ logiikkaa tÀssÀ. Trumpin kaudella vuotajaa pidetÀÀn suunnilleen pyhÀnÀ lehmÀnÀ, Obaman kaudella nÀitÀ laitettiin linnaan ihan huolella(8) ja hyvÀveliverkoston roistoja pÀÀstettiin ku koiria verÀjÀstÀ.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...standard-obama-david-petraeus-chelsea-manning
Obama's war on whistleblowers leaves administration insiders unscathed

This article is more than 4 years old
Five key political players enjoy ‘virtual impunity’ – while four lower-level figures are in prison or facing time

Spencer Ackerman and Ed Pilkington in New York
Mon 16 Mar 2015 19.39
Barack Obama

Since Barack Obama entered the White House in 2009, his government has waged a war against whistleblowers and official leakers. On his watch, there have been eight prosecutions under the 1917 Espionage Act – more than double those under all previous presidents combined.
2000.jpg


Petraeus leaks: Obama's leniency reveals 'profound double standard', lawyer says

And yet other apparent leaks have gone entirely unpunished or have been treated, as in the case of General David Petraeus, as misdemeanors. As Abbe Lowell, lawyer for one of the Espionage Act eight, Stephen Kim, has argued in a letter to the Department of Justice, low-level officials who lack the political connections to fight back have had the book thrown at them, while high-level figures have been allowed to leak with “virtual impunity”.

One law for us 

Leon Panetta: enjoying his retirement on a walnut firm

Michael Vickers: remains in post

Former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta
The former CIA director and defense secretary Leon Panetta Photograph: Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP

Panetta, the former CIA director and defense secretary who has been a fixture in the Democratic firmament for decades, today spends his retirement on his walnut farm on California’s Monterey peninsula. Had his name been more obscure, or his position lower, he might have found himself in a less hospitable locale after permitting the makers of the film Zero Dark Thirty access to details about the secret raid that killed Osama bin Laden in 2011.

Film-maker Mark Boal was permitted to attend a secret speech Panetta gave at CIA headquarters on 24 June 2011, less than two months after the raid. Military special operators were “all in uniform with name tapes” and seated at the front, according to a 2013 draft Pentagon inspector general report. Panetta’s speech – the text of which read “SECRET//NO FORN” – ie, not for release to foreigners – revealed “the unit that conducted the operation and identified the ground commander by name”.


Boal’s attendance, according to the inspector general report, occurred in an atmosphere defined by Obama administration eagerness to cooperate with Zero Dark Thirty. A key figure facilitating that cooperation was Michael Vickers, as undersecretary of defense for intelligence the Pentagon’s senior civilian intelligence official. Vickers is something of a CIA legend: a wunderkind who in the 1980s aided the anti-Soviet jihad in Afghanistan, he was played by Christopher Denham in the 2007 Tom Hanks vehicle Charlie Wilson’s War.


In 2011, Vickers met and talked repeatedly with Boal and the film’s director, Kathryn Bigelow. In one of those conversations, on 15 July, Vickers specifically named a “special operations planner” who, he told the film-makers, “can probably give you everything you would want”. According to the inspector general report, Admiral Eric Olson, then the commander of US Special Operations Command, had already told Vickers: “My (our) hope and intent is that [the Special Operations Planner] not be identified by name as having participated in any way.”


Zero-Dark-Thirty-Navy-Sea-010.jpg


Zero Dark Thirty's torture scenes are controversial and historically dubious


Neither man has been prosecuted. Vickers remains the undersecretary of defense for intelligence. Zero Dark Thirty has been criticized for inaccurately portraying CIA torture as critical to the success of the Bin Laden raid.

The ‘Olympic Games’ leaker(s): no charges

In June 2012, with a presidential election under way, David Sanger of the New York Times published an explosive story: Obama had ordered “a wave of cyber-attacks against Iran”. The sabotage operations were ongoing and included Stuxnet, the US-Israeli developed worm that assaulted the systems controlling Iranian centrifuges.



Olympic Games – the code name for the operation – was a milestone in two ways. It brought the US into the unfamiliar territory of a first-use cyber-attack that compromised physical systems, precisely the sort of network assault that its own officials publicly cite as a grave and impending danger. It was also described to Sanger by “members of the president’s national security team who were in the room” at a time when Obama was under attack by Republican rival Mitt Romney as weak on national security generally and Iran specifically.


The disclosure was so shocking that within days of Sanger’s story being published the Democrat Dianne Feinstein, then chair of the Senate intelligence committee, called for an inquiry. That inquiry, by the FBI, has been said to focus on James “Hoss” Cartwright, a now-retired marine general who had served as vice-chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and a rare flag officer trusted by the White House.


Cartwright has not been charged, and the Olympic Games inquiry is said to have run aground – because Cartwright’s attorney might “try to put the White House’s relationship with reporters and the use of authorized leaks on display” on trial, the Washington Post recently reported.


ef5fba8d-dc12-4d71-a923-9c11ce675471-2060x1236.jpeg


David Petraeus pleads guilty for passing classified 'black books' to lover


David Petraeus: jail time unlikely for ‘misdemeanor’

David Petraeus

David Petraeus Photograph: Alex Wong/Getty Images
Petraeus, the most celebrated army general of his generation who went on to become director of the CIA, is now out of legal trouble. Earlier this month, Petraeus pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor violation of classified information, ending a years-long official inquiry.


His plea deal involved his assent to a factual stipulation: in August 2011, Petraeus provided his biographer and mistress, Paula Broadwell, with notebooks containing “the identities of covert officers, war strategy, intelligence capabilities and mechanisms, diplomatic discussions, quotes and deliberate discussions from high-level National Security Council meetings and 
 the President”. He lied to FBI investigators in October 2012, stating that he never gave Broadwell any classified information.


Unlike other leakers, authorized or not, Petraeus has been warmly re-embraced by the highest levels of Washington policymakers.


“I believe it is time to consider this matter closed,” said Senator John McCain. His Democratic counterpart on the Senate armed services committee, Jack Reed of Rhode Island, added: “At this difficult moment for the Petraeus family, it is important to remember the extraordinary sacrifice and service he has rendered to our armed forces and the nation.”


Petraeus faces a $40,000 fine but is is unlikely to serve jail time. He remains an adviser to the Obama administration on its war against the Islamic State. His position with the private equity firm KKR appears unaffected.

John Brennan: promotion to lead the CIA

John Brennan

‘We were confident that we had inside control over the – any plot that might have been associated with this device.’ Photograph: Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP
Since joining Barack Obama’s first presidential campaign, the CIA director and former White House counter-terrorism and homeland security coordinator, John Brennan, has been Obama’s liaison to the secret world of US intelligence. It has rewarded Brennan tremendously: not only does he now run the agency he served for decades, his position appears secure even after he obstructed a Senate inquiry into Bush-era torture. Perhaps his most ironic aspect of that obstruction was an attempt to get the Justice Department to investigate Senate staffers for allegedly removing classified information.



Yet while Brennan was still a White House official, on 7 May 2012, he talked about having “inside control” of a plot by al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) to place a bomb on a US-bound plane. Brennan’s confirmation occurred on an official conference call with ex-counter-terrorism officials who now recycle intelligence-community talking points for TV news outlets.


“We were confident that we had inside control over the – any plot that might have been associated with this device,” Brennan is quoted in a transcript later obtained by Judicial Watch, in which he attempts to assure the media personalities that the danger from the bomb was marginal. Subsequent media reports promptly stated that the US and its allies had infiltrated the terror group.


Months later, when Brennan testified before the Senate intelligence panel for his CIA confirmation hearing, the long-time intelligence official denied he had in fact confirmed the AQAP infiltration. Yet he confirmed that he had said the US had “inside control” of the plot and lamented that the operation “got out to the press before that operation was, in fact, concluded”.


In March 2013, the Senate confirmed Brennan as CIA director by a 63-34 vote.

Another law for them

Stephen Kim: 13 months in prison


The former State Department contractor has served eight months of a 13-month sentence for violating the Espionage Act. He was subjected to a five-year legal ordeal, at the end of which he pleaded guilty to leaking details of North Korea’s nuclear program to a Fox News reporter, though he insisted he had done so to inform the American people about the nature of the North Korean threat.



Before he was incarcerated at the Federal Bureau of Prisons in Cumberland, Maryland, Kim told The Intercept that the intensity of his prosecution had driven him to the verge of suicide. His lawyer has now written to the Department of Justice, calling for him to be released immediately in recognition of the “profound double standard” displayed by the contrasting treatment of General David Petraeus.

Chelsea Manning: 35 years in military custody

Chelsea Manning

No evidence has ever been presented that Manning’s actions caused harm to anybody. Photograph: HO/AFP/Getty Images
The army intelligence analyst is serving a 35-year sentence for transferring to WikiLeaks a treasure trove of confidential US files to which she had access at a military base in Iraq. Manning was found guilty of violations of the Espionage Act, and computer crimes.



No evidence has ever been presented that her actions caused harm to anybody, while others have argued the disclosures helped to inspire the democratic uprisings of the Arab Spring.


Manning, who is currently appealing, said at the time of her sentencing: “When I chose to disclose classified information, I did so out of a love for my country and a sense of duty to others.”

Jeffrey Sterling: facing years in prison

The former CIA officer is awaiting sentencing next month, having been convicted in January under the Espionage Act. He pleaded not guilty to leaking information about a covert effort to disrupt Iran’s nuclear program to a New York Times reporter, James Risen, details of which appeared in Risen’s book State of War.


Sterling faces a sentence that could run to decades in prison. Not only was his treatment notably severe, but the Department of Justice also aggressively pursued Risen, essentially threatening the journalist with imprisonment for refusing to disclose his source.

John Kiriakou: served two years in federal prison

John Kiriakou

Kiriakou’s supporters point out that he is the only person to be prosecuted for any aspect of the CIA’s use of torture Photograph: ABCnews/AP
The former CIA analyst is currently under an 86-day house arrest, having been released from a 30-month sentence at a correctional facility in Loretto, Pennsylvania. The information he leaked to a reporter – the identity of a covert agent involved in the CIA’s harsh interrogation techniques under President George W Bush – was never published.


Kiriakou’s supporters point out that he is the only person to be prosecuted for any aspect of the CIA’s use of torture, including waterboarding, which he first confirmed publicly in 2007. Leaking details of the abuses has earned him jail time, while the torture itself has gone unpunished.




https://prospect.org/justice/all-the-presidents-whistleblowers/
All the President’s Whistleblowers
The history of government whistleblowing in the U.S. is fraught with charges of espionage, inadequate protections, and real hardships for those who speak out.


“Under the Obama administration was a complete misuse of the Espionage Act to target whistleblowers and to create an example of these individuals who came forward to blow the whistle on really serious intelligence community abuses of power,” says Liz Hempowicz, director of public policy at the Project on Government Oversight. Only 13 people have been charged under the Espionage Act, but eight of these cases occurred during President Barack Obama’s two terms. None of those cases involved double agents or wartime security concerns, but instead leaking secure documents. Examples of these document leaks ranged from highly classified military intelligence to embarrassing candid diplomatic cables.


Anyone who comes forward to reveal wrongdoing, abuse of power, or corruption is a whistleblower, but when that whistleblowing happens within the government there are several protected channels to report this abuse created by the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 (WPA) and the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2012 (WPEA). The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1998 was specifically crafted for intelligence officers, and created, in 2010, the Office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General. It was ICIG Michael Atkinson who found Trump’s whistleblower complaint to be “credible” and of “urgent concern” in a notification letter to Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire.


Most government whistleblowers fall under the WPA and WPEA, and they can disclose to several protected channels: a supervisor, Congress, a federal agency called the Office of Special Counsel, advocacy groups, or the press. Whistleblowers in this category are not revealing classified information, and their biggest incentive for using these channels is legal protection from termination or other retaliation because of blowing the whistle.
 
Viimeksi muokattu:
Back
Ylös Bottom