APNewsBreak: US declares 22 Clinton emails 'top secret'

 

By Bradley Klapper, Associated Press 45 minutes ago

.WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Obama administration confirmed for the first time Friday that Hillary Clinton's home server contained closely guarded government secrets, censoring 22 emails that contained material requiring one of the highest levels of classification. The revelation comes three days before Clinton competes in the Iowa presidential caucuses.

State Department officials also said the agency's Diplomatic Security and Intelligence and Research bureaus are investigating if any of the information was classified at the time of transmission, going to the heart of Clinton's defense of her email practices.

The department will release its next batch of emails from her time as secretary of state later Friday.

But The Associated Press learned seven email chains are being withheld in full for containing "top secret" information. The 37 pages include messages a key intelligence official recently said concerned "special access programs" —highly restricted, classified material that could point to confidential sources or clandestine programs like drone strikes.

"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, calling the withholding of documents in full "not unusual." That means they won't be published online with others being released, even with blacked-out boxes.

Department officials wouldn't describe the substance of the emails, or say if Clinton sent any herself.

Clinton, the Democratic presidential front-runner, insists 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 designated more than 1,000 messages at lower classification levels. Friday's will be the first at top secret level.

Even if Clinton didn't write or forward the messages, she still would have been required to report any classification slippages she recognized in emails she received. But without classification markings, that may have been difficult, especially if the information was publicly available.

"We firmly oppose the complete blocking of the release of these emails," Clinton campaign spokesman Brain Fallon said. "Since first providing her emails to the State Department more than one year ago, Hillary Clinton has urged that they be made available to the public. We feel no differently today."

Fallon accused the "loudest and leakiest participants" in a process of bureaucratic infighting for withholding the exchanges. The documents, he said, originated in the State Department's unclassified system before they ever reached Clinton, and "in at least one case, the emails appear to involve information from a published news article."

"This appears to be overclassification run amok," Fallon said.

Kirby said the State Department was focused, as part of a Freedom of Information Act review of Clinton's emails, on "whether they need to be classified today." Past classification questions, he said, "are being, and will be, handled separately by the State Department." It is the first indication of such a probe.

Department responses for classification infractions could include counseling, warnings or other action, officials said. They wouldn't say if Clinton or senior aides who've since left government could face penalties. The officials weren't authorized to speak on the matter and demanded anonymity.

Separately, Kirby said the department is withholding eight email chains, totaling 18 messages, between President Barack Obama and Clinton. These are remaining confidential "to protect the president's ability to receive unvarnished advice and counsel," and will be released eventually like other presidential records.

The emails have been a Clinton campaign issue since 10 months ago, when the AP discovered her exclusive use while in office of a homebrew email server in the basement of her family's New York home. Doing so wasn't expressly forbidden. Clinton first called the decision a matter of convenience, then a mistake.

Last March, Clinton and the State Department said no business conducted in the emails included top-secret matters. Both said her account was never hacked or compromised, which security experts assess as unlikely.

Clinton and the State Department also claimed the vast majority of her emails were preserved properly for archiving because she corresponded mainly with government accounts. They've backtracked from that claim in recent months.

The special access programs emails surfaced last week, when Charles I. McCullough, lead auditor for U.S. intelligence agencies, told Congress he found some in Clinton's account.

Kirby confirmed the "denied-in-full emails" are among those McCullough recently cited. He said one 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 CIA's classified U.S. drone program. Such operations are widely discussed publicly, including by top U.S. officials, and State Department officials debated 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 a tendency to overclassify material, and a lack of consistent classification policies across government.

The FBI also is looking into Clinton's email setup, but has said nothing about the nature of its probe. Independent experts say it's unlikely Clinton will be charged with wrongdoing, based on details that have surfaced so far and the lack of indications she intended to break laws.

"What I would hope comes out of all of this is a bit of humility" and Clinton's acknowledgement that "I made some serious mistakes," said Bradley Moss, a Washington lawyer specializing in security clearance matters.

Legal questions aside, it's the potential political costs that probably more concern Clinton. She has struggled in surveys measuring perceived trustworthiness and any investigation, buoyed by evidence of top secret material coursing through her account, could negate a main selling point for her becoming commander in chief: her national security resume.

ABOVE IS FROM: http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-govt-finds-top-secret-clinton-emails-194823520.html

Obama to address Illinois lawmakers in Springfield next month

 

President Barack Obama will return to his old stomping grounds Feb. 10 and deliver an address to the Illinois General Assembly.

Obama will talk about "what we can do, together, to build a better politics — one that reflects our better selves," according to a travel advisory from the White House.

The visit will come nine years after Obama announced his candidacy for president, and amid a historic budget impasse between Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner and Democrats who control the General Assembly. Rauner name-checked the president during his annual State of the State address this week, citing his support for term limits and changing how legislative districts are drawn — ideas that ruling Democrats have resisted.

Obama served as an Illinois state senator from 1997 until he was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004.

mcgarcia@tribpub.com

Above is from:  http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-barack-obama-illinois-legislature-speech-met-0130-20160129-story.html

 

Wednesday February 10 is the day

The above is from:  http://abc7chicago.com/politics/obama-to-address-illinois-legislature-amid-budget-impasse/1179105/

Lead Poisoning in Other Parts of Michigan Is Even Worse Than It Is in Flint

The water crisis in Flint has whipped America into a state of righteous outrage, but just look at the rest of Michigan: In at least 30 zip codes in more than 13 cities across the state, elevated levels of lead have been detected in a shocking percentage of local children — sometimes at almost five times the rate of kids in Flint, according to the The Detroit News.

The numbers add a grim layer to an already-devastating story. While Flint struggles to recover, as many as 20% of kids under 6 years old tested in parts of Detroit — and between 7% and 12% in parts of Saginaw, Ludington, Lansing, Highland Park, Grand Rapids, Hamtramck and a handful of other cities in the state — had elevated levels of lead in their blood as recently as 2013, according to the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. 

The percentage of children in Flint who had comparable levels peaked at 6.4% at the end of 2015, Mother Jones reports.

Lead poisoning is irreversible and causes a host of developmental problems in kids. These include poor motor skills, learning delays, difficulty articulating speech and problems controlling behavior. While the extreme government neglect and deceit in Flint made what’s happening there its own unique horror story — residents have been exposed to toxic drinking water for more than a year — statistics from across the state reveal lead poisoning is hardly an isolated issue. 

The reasons for exposure in Michigan differ from place to place. Whereas in Flint the lead comes from old and corroding water pipes, the culprit in most other areas in the state is much more common: paint. In 1977, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission outlawed the use of lead-based paint on toys, furniture and other products, including house paint. But many homes built before then are still coated with the stuff. And as time passes and the paint chips and peels, the dust it kicks up is inhaled by the people around it, poisoning them.

The result is a crisis the state of Michigan has spent millions of dollars trying to solve. Their methods — including varying approaches to lead abatement — have led to a significant drop in lead levels in children’s blood across the state over the last few years, according to the Center of Michigan.

Above is from:  https://www.yahoo.com/health/lead-poisoning-other-parts-michigan-222900551.html

The U.S. economy expanded at an annualized pace of 0.7 percent in the 4th quarter of 2015

 

By Chico Harlan January 29 at 7:49 AM

The U.S.  economy grew at a rate of 0.7 percent in the last quarter of 2015 amid a global slowdown, according to government data released Friday morning.

Economists surveyed by Bloomberg expected that the economy — between October and December — grew at a 0.8 percent annualized rate, marking a step back from the 2 percent third-quarter pace. Other analysts, drawing on a series of recent disappointing industrial data, expected that growth in the fourth quarter was nearly flat.

Wall Street has faced wild swings since the beginning of the year amid worries of a global economic slowdown. (AP Photo)

An anemic quarter would drive new concerns about the nation’s ability to fight off a series of major headwinds, including a downturn in China — the world’s second-largest economy — and an appreciated dollar that has trimmed profits for American manufacturers. Markets have reflected that turmoil in the first weeks of 2016, with the S&P 500 falling more than 7 percent this month. On Thursday, the Federal Reserve acknowledged that economic growth was slowing down, even though the U.S. labor market remained strong.

The gross domestic product figure for the fourth quarter is only a preliminary figure and will be revised over the next two months.

For the year, economists say, the U.S. economy likely expanded by roughly 2 percent, on par with the underwhelming pace maintained in the aftermath of the Great Recession. In 2014, the economy grew by 2.4 percent; in 2013, it grew by 1.5 percent.

Though many analysts figure the nation is in for more of the same in 2016, some — noting the stock market and dwindling industrial production — see still-modest but increasing risk of a recession.

Those risks come mostly from beyond U.S. shores.

Growth is expected to slow globally this year, most notably in China, where the government has strained to deal with an explosion of debt and a seeming stock market bubble. Meantime, a strong dollar has hamstrung U.S. manufacturers, making their products more expensive overseas. Companies from Johnson & Johnson to Apple have partly blamed the dollar for weaker earnings.

“Two-thirds of Apple’s revenue is now generated outside the United States,” Apple CEO Tim Cook said this week, “so foreign currency fluctuations have a very meaningful impact on our results.” Cook said Apple was dealing with “extreme conditions unlike anything we’ve seen before just about everywhere we look.”

Separate government data released Thursday showed that orders for durable goods — long-term products like washing machines or furniture — fell 5.1 percent in December from the prior month, and fell 3.5 percent for all of 2015. That marked the first annual drop-off in demand since the recession.

ABOVE IS FROM:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/29/u-s-to-release-figures-expecting-to-show-fourth-quarter-growth/?wpisrc=al_alert-COMBO-economy%252Bnation

Here’s Why the Republican Populist Revolt Will Backfire

 

This makes for a good story—but could there be any truth in it?

 

By Edward Morrissey January 28, 2016 5:15 AM

Barack Obama has a lot to do after he leaves office. Outgoing presidents traditionally start planning presidential libraries -- Obama chose the South Side of Chicago as the location for his archives, and the project has gone out to bid for architects.

Arrangements must be made for a new residence after two terms in the White House, and Obama has hinted at a number of locations, including New York, North Carolina, and home to Chicago. His post-presidential career will almost certainly include writing and speaking tours, the common vehicles for outgoing presidents to secure their retirement wealth. Obama has a head start on a writing career, having already authored two books. 

Still, the President has insisted that he wants to remain in the political mix rather than sit on the sidelines, although he has ruled out any more electoral campaigns. If he won’t run for another office, what about an appointment – say, to the Supreme Court? 

“What a great idea!” Hillary Clinton gushed at a campaign event in Decorah, Iowa on Monday night when an attendee offered the suggestion. “No one has ever suggested that to me, I love that, wow,” Clinton continued. “I would certainly take that under advisement. I mean he’s brilliant, and he can set forth an argument, and he was a law professor, so he’s got all the credentials." 

A great idea? Hardly. 

The big trend in the 2016 cycle thus far has been passionate populist anti-establishmentarianism. The nomination process in both parties has proven susceptible to this anger and backlash to years of partisan gridlock and failed promises. The Republican nomination race has been affected more overtly, as more experienced leaders have either faded or disappeared entirely to the benefit of outsiders such as Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and until very recently Ben Carson -- all of whom have a combined single term in elected public office among them. But Democrats have seen Clinton fall from foregone conclusion to embattled underdog in Iowa and New Hampshire with much less competition, seemingly outclassed by a self-proclaimed socialist backbencher. 

Related: Clinton’s Lead Shrinks as Iowa Caucuses Loom

The frustration driving Bernie Sanders’ rise as a legitimate alternative to Clinton can be traced in significant part back to Obama himself. Obama beat Clinton in 2008 for the nomination by posturing himself a break with the Democratic Party establishment, a fresh voice for a more progressive party. He promised to end the Iraq war and win in Afghanistan, take on the “Too Big to Fail” financial institutions, and take action on a broad front of progressive social-justice issues. In September 2011, Obama pitched his rhetoric even sharper and helped promote the Occupy movement as a counter to the conservative Tea Party. 

Almost eight years later, most of those promises went unfulfilled. Obama was yanked into openly supporting same-sex marriage by Joe Biden after spending nearly four years “evolving” on the issue. Obamacare passed, but it enabled the biggest insurers to gain a captive market. Dodd-Frank has reinforced “Too Big to Fail,” while not a single Wall Street executive has faced criminal charges for the financial-sector meltdown that helped create the Great Recession. Obama hasn’t passed punitive taxes on the rich as he once championed, and he has made common cause with globalists on trade. 

Other than his expansion of the regulatory state, progressives have plenty of reason to feel ignored – which is why they have flocked to Sanders’ populist campaign. Clinton has tried tacking to the Left in the primary without much success, at one time trying to keep arms’ distance from Obama. Suddenly, though, she has chosen to embrace the current status quo, and Obama has in some ways turned his back on 2007-8 to embrace Clinton and the status quo ante. Promising to perpetuate Obama as a policymaker doesn’t make much sense in a primary marked by passionate demands for major change from the present. 

Related: Obama Steps Up Executive Action With Time Fast Running Out

Here’s Why the Republican Populist Revolt Will Backfire

 

It makes even less sense for someone preparing for a general election. Despite the disappointment and frustration on the Left with Obama, he remains a fairly popular figure. Among voters in general, approval of Obama’s work runs significantly lower. Gallup’s weekly polling has him consistently in the mid-40s for the past year or more. Even the suggestion of nominating Obama for the Supreme Court will likely unite Republicans on two of their common passions – judicial appointments and the desire to retire Obama from public life. 

In fact, Clinton provided a welcome reminder of the important stakes for the GOP and conservatives in this election, especially those who do not feel excitement for any of the leading candidates for the Republican presidential nomination. Four of the current justices are over 70 years of age, two from each wing of the court. The next president will almost certainly need to make one or more nominations to the nation’s top court, and the Senate will have to confirm those nominees. The lifetime appointments may provide the most significant legacy a president can create, one that keeps adding to their public role for decades after leaving office. 

Obama has already established his legacy on the court through the appointments of Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. The two can be expected to engage in an activist policy role over the next several years, attempting to extend decades of precedent in which the court has encroached on legislative turf. 

Related: Does Mike Bloomberg Know Something We Don’t About the Clinton FBI Probe?

No stranger to executive action that treads on Congressional prerogative, Obama would be only too glad to pursue his policy goals in the same manner. But even if Clinton thought better of putting Obama on the court, it is clear that she will appoint judges and justices of the same ideological and activist bent. 

Let this serve as a wake-up call to those who wish to see Obama enjoy a long and happy retirement from power and reverse as many of his policies as possible in the next four years. It will take a unity that has so far eluded Republicans in this cycle to succeed in this mission. Anti-establishment populism has its place, but complete nihilism on the Right will result in what they oppose most.

Above is from:  http://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-republican-populist-revolt-backfire-101500434.html

Letter to Editor: Republican obstruction continues

• 

 

• Posted Jan. 28, 2016 at 4:01 PM

  While President Barack Obama celebrated his inauguration at various balls on inauguration night, Jan. 20, 2009, top Republican lawmakers and strategists were conjuring up ways to sabotage his presidency at a private dinner in Washington, D.C.

  That night at the Caucus Room, a high-end D.C. establishment, Republican leadership plotted ways to win back political power by uniting as one to obstruct Obama's entire agenda. Present were prominent Republicans, including Newt Gingrich, Frank Luntz, Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan, Jim DeMint, John Boehner, Mitch McConnell and at least eight others. Their goal: a unified pact to filibuster governance, even while the banksters’ generated economic collapse was current event and public enemy No. 1.

  Stifling all of Obama’s “change” or “hope” began inauguration night with their commitment to obstruction by any means necessary. The Republican dinner-date vow to each other that night in January prioritized obstructing any opportunity of the newly elected president to advance his 2008 election landslide mandate. What negatively reflects on the Obama administration is naively failing to recognize how thoroughly congressional Republicans would oppose the priorities the overwhelming majority elected him to pursue.

  Politics trumped governance, dismissing negotiation. Republican politicians prioritized advancing their own voter-rejected political agenda, and that of their billionaire benefactors. Regaining the presidency, not recovery of the American economy, was their primary objective, and it still infects the ongoing state of the union.

  — Michael Cannariato, Rockford