Slashdot Mirror

Same for others according to this news article, but who knows how accurate that is since no other sites seem to mention it too.

God I love left wing projection, it must be nice being able to blame all of your problems on the other side without a moment of self reflection or awareness.

The usual right wing lies

A lie requires me to know that what I am saying is false... care to support that claim?

No? You lament a lack of facts from me (despite me highlighting just one law she can be convicted under)... but offer nothing yourself... this is my shocked face: :|

no proof of course

If you bothered to pay attention to the available facts and use your brain (I'm sure you have one, it's just atrophied a bit from lack of use), allow me to educate you:

1) True or false: Hillary is known to have had at least one spy satellite photo on her server which should have been labeled "TOP SECRET//SI//TK//NOFORN", a image which did not originate with the State Department so the original classification would apply.

2) True or false: Hillary's private email server was authorized by the State Department or another federal agency to store classified information.

3) True or false: Hillary is known to have been briefed on her requirements to properly handle classified information and signed a document confirming her acceptance of policies, including criminal penalties for violations.

Answer Key:
1) True: http://www.thedailybeast.com/a...
2) False: https://www.washingtonpost.com...
3) True: http://freebeacon.com/politics...

Given the law I cited above doesn't require 'malice' or 'intent', but simply 'gross negligence', it's not at all a stretch to suggest that Hillary was negligent with the setting up of her server that any reasonable person would expect would see classified information traverse it... and given the fact the server was not a 'proper place of custody'... per instance of classified information on her server, she could be looking at a penalty of "Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."

How much does being a Hillary shill pay? I'm looking for a side job, and unlike you morons, I actually have a grasp of facts.

And Chelsey Clinton is giving speeches about how her mother will finally outlaw guns now that Scalia is dead and there is an opening on the Supreme Court.

I don't think you can call it a conspiracy if they are telling people that is their plan.
Video Feel free to ignore the news article with it, just watch the video.

She says, in that very video, that now they have a CHANCE to have increased gun CONTROL, something which I am against by the way, not BANNING them entirely. Scalia was an evil shitbag who thankfully is now burning in hell where he deserves to be.

And Chelsey Clinton is giving speeches about how her mother will finally outlaw guns now that Scalia is dead and there is an opening on the Supreme Court.

I don't think you can call it a conspiracy if they are telling people that is their plan.
Video Feel free to ignore the news article with it, just watch the video.

She said there is a CHANCE of increased gun CONTROL, something which I am against by the way, not that they were planning to BAN guns. Scalia was an evil shitbag who thankfully is now rotting in hell where he belongs.

And Chelsey Clinton is giving speeches about how her mother will finally outlaw guns now that Scalia is dead and there is an opening on the Supreme Court.

I don't think you can call it a conspiracy if they are telling people that is their plan.
Video Feel free to ignore the news article with it, just watch the video.

She said they have a CHANCE of increased gun CONTROL, something I am against, but far from banning guns. Scalia was a shitbag who thankfully is now rotting in hell where he belongs.

And Chelsey Clinton is giving speeches about how her mother will finally outlaw guns now that Scalia is dead and there is an opening on the Supreme Court.

I don't think you can call it a conspiracy if they are telling people that is their plan.
Video Feel free to ignore the news article with it, just watch the video.

Lest we forget the Democrats are doing the same thing.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/d...

This has led to lower taxes without corresponding cuts in spending.

"Taxes" is a vague word. Please use the more precise terms "tax rates" and/or "tax revenue."

Your statement gives the impression that tax revenue is lower. No, revenue is at record-high levels. And that makes the size of our ongoing budget deficits all the more depressing; these deficits exist because the insatiable spending outpaces the record-high revenue.

Bush 43 reduced tax rates for all taxpayers, but those reductions had sunset provisions that made them expire at the end of 2010. Interestingly, the Democratic Congress of 2010 thought it unwise to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire during the weak economic recovery, and extended them to 2012 for all taxpayers via the "Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010," which President Obama signed. In 2012, he signed legislation making the Bush tax cuts permanent for anyone making under $400,000 per year. I'm glad a realization of economic reality made Democrats abandon their campaign promises to entirely roll back the Bush tax cuts.

spending = revenue + deficit
Now, just tackle the spending side of the equation, where the problem lies.

Yes it does, which doesn't apply in this case as the markings on a classified document are only there as guidance, it's up to the sender/receiver to recognize the document as such and treat it accordingly... something Hillary agreed to early on in her SoS tenure: http://freebeacon.com/politics...

John Podesta, Podesta Group and the Clinton Fund. Google that for some king of sleaze stuff. Podesta Group was BPs chief lobby pre and during the oil spill.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/p...

https://www.opensecrets.org/lo...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

John Podesta, Podesta Group and the Clinton Fund. Google that for some king of sleaze stuff. Podesta Group was BPs chief lobby pre and during the oil spill.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/p...

https://www.opensecrets.org/lo...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

Just because you didn't bother to apply doesn't mean the program doesn't exist... or that it was well run: http://freebeacon.com/issues/f...

So...did Clinton knowingly and deliberately violate the law?

That is not the criteria for enforcement of relevant laws. "Ignorance is no excuse before the law"

BUT besides that, she singed a NDA document outlining her DUTIES and responsibilities and under that NDA, she failed. Suffice it to say, if she didn't know, that makes her unqualified to be Secretary of State, as well as President.

Here it is, for your viewing pleasure http://freebeacon.com/wp-conte...

To support the parent, here is the relevant document; the NDA Hillary signed ..

http://freebeacon.com/wp-conte...

Enjoy.

Actually, you need to read the NDA Hillary signed about such things, before you parrot the Hillary talking point about being "marked" classified.

http://freebeacon.com/wp-conte...

In simple terms you can understand, the markings are irrelevant. But keep repeating that line and it will become the truth, right?

Anyone who thinks that "classified" means something like super duper secret is either uninformed or an idiot.

Sure. We know very well, that "Classified" may mean any of the restriction levels, most of which are not "super duper".

But it was still illegal (felonious) for Hillary Clinton to mishandle such material — and she knew it. She needs to be charged with the crime and convicted of it. President Obama can then show leniency and pardon her, if he wishes.

And if that costs Democrats the election, so be it — their own fault for giving the nation a choice between a Russia-manipulated crypto-Communist and a this spy-magnet.

John Podesta, Podesta Group and the Clinton Fund. Google that for some king of sleaze stuff.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/p...

Hauser's Law states that generally the Federal Government gets about 19.5% of the GDP. Independent of the marginal tax rates. So focus on growing the GDP. One way that is proven to do just that is cutting the corporate income tax. It also has the side benefit of raising wages as well...

How about just giving it back to Cuba?

What? Are you crazy? You can't go handing over prime tropical real estate to third world dictators (or third world leaders at all, for that matter). These scientists have a great idea, and I'm sure there will be tons of junkets by congressmen, business professionals, and all sorts of elite university researchers. All paid by the expense account of course - what a capital plan!

I mean, we let Haiti take over all that prime vacation land for SOOO long! Good thing that "natural" earthquake came along and rubblized everything, so we could use "humanitarian" funds to help build a new 5-star resort hotel for the elites!

Yes, yes, yes finally someone gets it. Yes, she's more republican than Trump and WAY more republican than Sanders.

I will be modded to oblivion by the Hillary shills, but oh well. When you have someone who starts more conflicts than George Bush, pushes MULTIPLE trade agreements to strip US of businesses and workers, was against gay marriage before she was for it, wasn't always on the minority's side, ran a war room against the women which Bill had hurt then tweeted all women who are assaulted should be heart, and is in bed with Wall Street, yes she's pretty much a Republican.

A Clinton/Trump vote is good for Republicans though

No, a Clinton/Trump election is not good, regardless of which party you claim. In January, Gallup reported that Trump had the highest unfavorability rating recorded, and yesterday Clinton's unfavorability hit a new high. 60% of people actively dislike Trump, and 55% of people actively dislike Hillary. Those are 2 people who are both disliked by a majority of the country. That's not good. They are the only candidates over 50%. Jeb! peaked at around 45%, the evangelist Ted Cruz is at 37% unfavorable and noted socialist Bernie Sanders is at 31%.

31% of the country dislikes a socialist in a presidential election, and 55% dislike the presumptive Democratic nominee while 60% dislike the Republican. That's not a good sign that things are going well in this country. If this election comes down to Clinton and Trump without any big-name independents you're going to see the lowest voter turnout in recent history and a lot of unhappy people feeling like they are not represented.

The documents don't have to be marked classified. It's the information that is classified, not the document. Hillary Clinton knows this because she signed a non disclosure agreement that clearly states. This is the same NDA that David Petraeus signed, and was prosecuted for violating.

She clearly violated this agreement in multiple ways, and anyone who takes 5 minutes to read it cannot deny that as a fact.

TSA agents continue to grope and oogle women through their clothing
http://www.globalresearch.ca/a...
http://time.com/3822487/tsa-se...

Bored people in the airline reservation system who pre-screen passenger names for security using, in part , known pictures of them continuer to amuse themselves by seating "twin strangers" right next to each other then laughing as the internet loses its shit at the crazy coincidence. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

on a related note, the federal government spent $3.5 M to find out why lesbians are obese...

Your guess is wrong. It was held at this venue because of a "Stand With The Prophet" event that was held at the same place after the Charlie Hebdo massacre. The purpose of that event was to highlight that the media and American Islamaphobes are the reason that Islam has such a bad reputation in the west. More can be read here.

So I was wrong about the reason Texas was chosen but the fact that it was the same venue
as a previous opposing muslim rally pretty much backs up that they wanted a confrontation.
The really ironic part is that although it does help support that there are plenty of crazy
mulsims out there this might actually work against their stated goal and actually make it
harder to have a similiar event in the future.

Your guess is wrong. It was held at this venue because of a "Stand With The Prophet" event that was held at the same place after the Charlie Hebdo massacre. The purpose of that event was to highlight that the media and American Islamaphobes are the reason that Islam has such a bad reputation in the west. More can be read here.

"What difference, at this point, does it make?"

This is more likely an expression of Hawiian nationalism which has been on the rise in recent years.

In some cases it has crossed the line into race hatred as the Southern Poverty Law Center noted a few years back.

And there are several independence groups. China has even offered to arm them.

Hey, you left out your link to a reliable source for this claim.

Here's one for starters, since you asked.

notice the hyperlink, please starting using them, thanks

I use links quite frequently, but I include them according to my priorities, moods, and convenience, not yours.

...but that includes "technology to reduce emissions, science to better understand climate change, international assistance for developing countries, and wildlife adaptation to respond to actual or expected changes" -- so climate research is only a small part of that.

ALL of the things you mention here are research, except "assistance for developing countries".

Exxon Mobills's profits -- not revenues, profits -- last year were $32.5 billion. And that's just one company.

And here you commit the same sin you accused me of: throwing out a meaningless total that has nothing to do with the argument at hand.

Funding for public schools needs to increase at all levels.

Why? How much is enough? The average class size right now is about 22 students (average of elementary and secondary), and about $12,600 per student. So that's $277,000 per classroom of funding. Of that, the teacher "cost" is about $6800 per student. Meaning about half the income goes to the teacher (or $149,600 - for a class of 22) and the other half goes for everything else.

IF this was, in fact, what was happening - as is claimed by the links I provided - then teachers would be exceedingly well-paid - better than 94% of all taxpayers in the US. But this isn't happening. Why? Maybe money (and VAST amounts of it) are being siphoned off for other things. Lots of vice-principals, lots of extra counselors and specialty cafeterias, lots of buying of fads of technology, lots of half-million-dollar-a-year union bosses, etc.

We already massively outspend the rest of the OECD on a per-student basis. And we pay well in the middle of the pack for the OECD. If we cannot educate children AND pay highly desirable salaries with over a quarter of a million per classroom - something is SERIOUSLY fucked up. All the other OECD countries seem to do a lot better in compensating their teachers whilst spending considerably less per student. The LAST thing we should do is simply throw more money at the problem. Because too much money is already wasted...

I think the biggest thing Mayday PAC did wrong is that they were, in the end, massive hypocrites.

Their "competition" for the best video about the effect of big money was such an enormous debacle and a clear showing that their true goal was not to get money out of politics, but to get Conservative (and even libertarian) money out of politics. Their embracing and providing cover for Tom Steyer, who openly talked about influencing elections with large amounts of his money, makes Mayday PAC a bunch of liars.

http://freebeacon.com/politics...

If Mayday were true to its stated vision, they would have condemned Steyer's actions. That they did not condemn him like they constantly did the Koch brothers proves that they don't really want what they say they want.

On top of this, their support for a constitutional amendment that would allow congress to restrict speech, makes them a contemptable organization.

I really respect Lessig's views on copyrights and patents. His efforts with his Mayday PAC have made me lose great amounts of respect for him.

The funny thing is it's the cut in NIH funding that means we don't have vaccines...

Of course, they still had plenty of cash ($39.6 million in fact) to study fat lesbians, feces throwing primates and origami condoms among other things.

Pretty sure if you have the money to spend $39 million on researching why obese girls have a tough time getting dates, developing origami condoms, etc... the problem with not starting a $9 million research effort earlier isn't related to overall funding levels so much as to incompetent administration and politics driven priorities.

And, Allison Grimes is "Pro Coal" ... at least for now, and for long enough to win an election. Stop pretending that only one side lies.

http://freebeacon.com/politics...

What's settled is that the climate is changing at the hands of man

Yeah, sure. And every time I jump, the Earth moves (a little bit) in the opposite direction. Right... No, what is far from settled, is whether the humanity's impact is anything to speak of — or whether a single volcano's eruption produces more "greenhouse effect gases", than the Earth's entire bovine population and thus there is little justification in limiting beef-consumption on that account.

In other words, what's very far from being "settled" is whether humanity's impact matches that of other factors. Counting CO2 — and making predictions based on that — has already been demonstrated to be stupid. By those predictions, for example, Arctic ice should've disappeared this summer — instead, it has grown.

Kudos for tossing in the pinch of anti-government paranoia, it has to be that and not the desire for massively profitable fossil fuel corporations to defend said profits.

The profits of fossil fuel corporations are not endangered by the "green" moves at all — the demand for oil and gas is unaffected. Besides, for each such corporation, there is a bunch of solyndras peddling their wares to the "green" crowd — you aren't going to convince many, that it is the corporate world, that opposes "green initiatives".

But for the government folks — those, who are sincerely convinced, they know better than their subjects — this is a perfect way to expand their control. And if the already government-heavy countries (like Cuba) are helping persuade the free world's scientists, then all the better. Let's look the other way...

Consensus is the business of politics.

Exactly, darn it...

And yet, we are constantly bombarded with assertions that, though there are still perfectly valid debates in almost any other branch of science (dieting, economics, pedagogy, biology, and even computers — you name it — it is all in flux), the science of climate is "settled" and anybody doubting the line pushed by the governments must also believe, the Earth is flat.

And, for some reason, all measures proposed (and mandated) to solve the problems require the industrialized West to slow down, to not produce as much stuff, and to not enjoy themselves as much. And, for another mystery, all of the propositions lead to increased government control of both the industries and the individual lives.

Is it just, as Thomas Jefferson put it, "the natural process" of liberty yielding and government gaining ground? Or is there some foreign "help" leaning on Western academics to "settle" the branches of science, that would slow the West down and otherwise help the competing cultures prove, they aren't as inefficient as the history suggests?

It's not even clear that the issue is weapons. This isn't 1980s Afghanistan we're talking about. Ukraine is a former member of the USSR and was within spitting distance of NATO, so they're armed with fighter and attack aircraft, helicopter gunships, transport aircraft, artillery, armored personnel carriers, etc. etc.

None of it in a particularly good order, most of it a generation behind. And not enough of it to withstand Russia, which poured their gas-monies into weapons and training — in addition to skilful propaganda relying not only on the Leftists traditionally sympathetic to anything "revolutionary", but also on the Rigthists this time...

early on in the conflict, a group of soldiers simply surrendered their armored personnel carriers without a shot being fired

And the keyword here is "early in the conflict". Up until late Spring Russian television was allowed to broadcast in Ukraine... But, yes, Ukrainian's regular military does have issues of its own — many senior officers entered service during Soviet times. But not the newly-formed National Guard volunteers, who remain the shining edge of Ukraine's otherwise rusty blade. And they had to scrounge equipment themselves — from guns and ammunition to infra-red detectors to life-saving Celox...

presumably they're offering intelligence support such as satellite photos as well

Yeah, "presumably". Maybe, now they do alright. But what prevented them from doing it before Crimea got invaded? Russia was massing forces for it for a month in advance — had Pentagon not seen it from above? They had... And they surely had informed the President. But Mr. Incompetent did no see fit to inform Ukraine — neither side of the political fight there — so the invasion was a complete surprise for them... Ukrainian units stationed on peninsula did not know, what to do, and the new leaders did not have a worked-out policy. Their excuse is, they had more important things to do, what's Obama's? Too busy signing people up for Obamacare?

The US has sent body armor and night vision goggles.

Only in June! Four months since Russia first invaded — and only after multiple people, both Republican and Democrats, demanded it. Had Obama been anything more than a pathetic "community organizer", he would've reacted in March instead of trying to glue the pitiful attempts to "Reset" his relationship with Russia back together. But then, if he had been, Putin might not even have dared to invade in the first place...

Perhaps more importantly, the West has committed $27 billion in aid to Ukraine over the next two years

First of all, it is an IMF loan, not true aid. It is still welcome, of course, but it will be a while before it helps troops on the ground. Putin remains a step ahead of our amateur, who is training on-the job (as his own Vice-Amateur once said).

The US can't afford to perform any surgeries.

Of course, we can. Obama's economy may be weak, but it is still greater than that of Russia and Ukraine combined. Many times greater.

We don't need to send "boots on the ground" — just help Ukrainian defenders with weapons. Like, for example, precise ground-to-ground missiles to let them destroy a Russian "Grad" parked behind an apartment building without hitting the building too. Or all that surplus equipment, that Pentagon has been sending to police departments nation-wide, militarizing them against fellow citizens . But the charlatan-in-chief would not even send Ukrainians the perfectly defensive helmets and body armor...

pissing it all away invading Afghanistan and Iraq?

We pissed nothing away invading those two. We pissed it away by withdrawing prematurely.

The only reason why Israel shows restraint is because the Western world have fucking had enough, and no matter how many politicians they scare and/or bribe, they are afraid of massive reactions which may result in the isolation of Israel. And no matter how smart you think Israelis are, their state would NOT survive in isolation.

Let's try to do this the scientific way, shall we?

Here's an alternative theory. Israel is just trying to protect itself. Over time, the Palestinians, with a stress on Hamas, have started combining their strategy. Instead of trying to directly fight Israel (through suicide bombers and rockets), they now employ a combined strategy, involving provoking Israel to the point Israel has no choice but to respond, and then sacrificing Palestinians (by placing them deliberately in harm's way) to gain two objectives. One is to make Israel not attack strategic locations (headquarters, ammo depos, etc.). The other is, when Israel does attack, to have as high as possible body counts, broadcasting horrendous pictures of death, swaying public opinion, convincing people like you that Israel is horrible.

Now, lets see if we can devise predictions based on which we can distinguish between the theories. If your theory is correct, hurting Palestinians would be an agenda inside Israel. Papers in Hebrew would write about it supportively. Politicians would brag about it during elections. More importantly, since, as you said, the world media's attention is giving this issue more and more focus, limiting Israel's ability to act, the Palestinian casualties count would be in a constant decline. You'd expect a peek around the time Israel was physically occupying areas, with a sharp decline once Gaza was evicted, and a further decline as time goes on since. You certainly wouldn't expect the IDF to invent never before used methods to warn people that an area is going to be bombed.

If I am correct, however, not hitting Palestinians would be an agenda. The Hebrew media would be focused around damage done to Israel, rather than to the Palestinians. When reporting Palestinian innocent casualties, it would be in a downbeat, rather than an upbeat, tone. You would hope to see official Hamas actions attempting to maximize Palestinian casualties. You'd also expect casualties count would be higher after Israel withdrew from Gaza than before. Finally, the "reactive Israel" theory predicts that major escalations by Israel take place after major attacks on civilian population by Hamas.

So which is it? Where is your smoking gun? Where are the huge happy headlines in Israeli papers hailing the high death toll this operation has had on Palestinians? Where are the politicians bragging about how many Palestinians they killed?

On the other hand, here is Hamas telling people to stay put when warned by Israel an area is going to be bombed. Here is a Hamas spokeman taking pride in sacrificing civilians. Here is Hamas firing a missile from a press studio. Please note these are all primary sources. They are not someone giving their interpretations of events. They are recording of the actual events. The only exception is the first link, where the primary source (reachable from within the article) is in Arabic.

Shachar

It's the Emptiness of a Politicized Life. Progressives have failed to develop tolerance because theyâ(TM)ve never had to confront their idols disagreeing with them. It comes as a shock whenever their ideological bubble has been penetrated. And when your bubble is penetrated, the opposition must be destroyed. Perens doesn't see any problem with denouncing people he disagrees with because he rarely if ever actually encounters such people in his life. He lives in a bubble. The Grievance Industrial Complex gets angry when you ask it to explain itself because its arguments are, largely, untenable.

It's the Emptiness of a Politicized Life. Progressives have failed to develop tolerance because theyâ(TM)ve never had to confront their idols disagreeing with them. It comes as a shock whenever their ideological bubble has been penetrated. And when your bubble is penetrated, the opposition must be destroyed. Perens doesn't see any problem with denouncing people he disagrees with because he rarely if ever actually encounters such people in his life. He lives in a bubble. The Grievance Industrial Complex gets angry when you ask it to explain itself because its arguments are, largely, untenable.

You can just make him unemployable, which is far more scary nowadays.

Being "unemployable" is scarier than sent to a prison camp? Seriously? Nowadays — when work-force participation is at multi-decades lows? Wow, I wonder, what color the sky is in your world...

But, alright, Ok, name one blogger made "unemployable" by the government for their posts critical of same.

Story of a man with cancer that is refused treatment because of a pre-existing condition, on an Obamacare exchange policy.

Right wing fud is not fud, its actual facts and people are being harmed by it.

Story
A member of Congress is attempting to silence a political critic. Censorship of free speech in political speech.

We could also list all the abuses of the IRS over the last 4 years as well. Haven't heard a case of Canada censoring political speech.

Snowden being another Philby, with the add-on of enhanced Soviet style political warfare, would explain matters quite well. Soviet tradecraft, of the sort taught to Russia's current leaders, was among the best. There are former Soviet bloc intelligence officers that believe that it is practically certain that Snowden was a Russian asset, if not at least a willing stooge. Not many years ago this would have resulted in probably more than one Hero of the Soviet Union, Orders of Lenin, and Red Banners being awarded. The damage to US intelligence is devastating, to allied agencies hardly less so, and the political repercussions will echo for years to come. It is a masterpiece of work. The Chekists must be rightfully bursting with pride.

And perhaps this was just a ruse, or maybe it did happen but it was cloaked by the more seasoned guidance Snowden received from his Russian lawyer - a man on the public council of the FSB and a crony of former KGB officer Putin.

$634 million is the amunt set aside for the website, they spent over half of that by Oct. 1, 2013, and are quickly burning through the rest trying to fix what they created.

Oregon sent over $150 million on their website, and last I heard hadn't been able to process a single application through it after 4 months!

Looks like they hired some coders

The Belarusian Connection - Obamacare network vulnerable to cyber attack

'U.S. intelligence agencies last week urged the Obama administration to check its new healthcare network for malicious software after learning that developers linked to the Belarus government helped produce the website, raising fresh concerns that private data posted by millions of Americans will be compromised.'

http://freebeacon.com/the-bela...

I'm assuming you're referring to the US. If I understand you correctly, you either question or don't think there are (or could be?) any foreign spies, or associates or members of terrorist groups running lose in the US?

One recent famous case: How the FBI Busted Anna Chapman and the Russian Spy Ring
FBI Investigating Possible Russian Spy Recruiting In U.S.
After the Cold War, Russian Espionage in the U.S.
Russian spying at cold war levels, say experts

China's Growing Spy Threat
Spy case patterns the Chinese style of espionage

Senator’s memo shows Iran links in Homeland Security’s troubled immigration program

Cigarette Smuggling Linked to Terrorism - (From 2004, but the problem remains.)

Smugglers with ties to terrorist groups are acquiring millions of dollars from illegal cigarette sales and funneling the cash to organizations such as al Qaeda and Hezbollah, federal law enforcement officials say, prompting a nationwide crackdown on black market tobacco.

The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has more than 300 open cases of illicit cigarette trafficking -- including several with terrorist links -- up from only a handful five years ago, ATF sources said.

"This is a major priority for us," said Michael Bouchard, assistant director of the ATF. "The deeper we dig into these cases, the more ties to terrorism we're discovering."

Those links above are only a drop in the bucket, especially where China is concerned.

There is a process for properly releasing classified information. Broadcasting it on CSPAN without prior coordination and clearance generally doesn't conform to that.

Speaking of using your brain. Obama has shown zero restraint in using Executive Orders to modify laws he's been unhappy with. ACA comes to mind with his unilateral modification to extend employer mandates by a year. Something that is unconstitutional, I might add. He's trying to win by making as many miserable as he can and he doesn't give a damn who gets hurt. Oh, wait. That's Reid who's preventing any vote on parts of appropriations from progressing. Something that they should be doing under terms of a budget rather than continuing resolutions. Something the senate has been derelict in doing.

I would also point out you're the only one claiming congress passed a law to forbid parks operating during shutdowns. If that were actually the case, surely this administration would be actively screaming, "See see! These mean republicans are forcing me to spend more to close these things than they would to operate."