American Citizen Anwar Al-Awlaki was killed by a drone strike in Yemen solely on the authority of President Barack Obama. Al-Awlaki never received a trial, was never indicted, nor given any opportunity to address the allegations against him. But today during President Obama’s extensive terrorism speech Mr. Al-Awlaki finally received his trial, a show trial.

President Obama proclaimed to the world:

I’ve insisted on strong oversight of all lethal action. After I took office, my Administration began briefing all strikes outside of Iraq and Afghanistan to the appropriate committees of Congress. Let me repeat that – not only did Congress authorize the use of force, it is briefed on every strike that America takes. That includes the one instance when we targeted an American citizen: Anwar Awlaki, the chief of external operations for AQAP.

The Congressional authorization part is a little too cute. Obama is referencing the authorization of the use of military force of 2001 a law passed in the immediate aftermath (3 days) of the attacks on September 11th, 2001. That would be ten years before the Al-Awlaki killing. The second part, that Congress was “briefed”, is pretty meaningless. Not only did Congress not pass any enabling legislation they also do not have the authority to deny someone their constitutional rights.

Obama went on to present his case for firing missiles at the American.

But when a U.S. citizen goes abroad to wage war against America – and is actively plotting to kill U.S. citizens; and when neither the United States, nor our partners are in a position to capture him before he carries out a plot – his citizenship should no more serve as a shield than a sniper shooting down on an innocent crowd should be protected from a swat team

That’s who Anwar Awlaki was – he was continuously trying to kill people. He helped oversee the 2010 plot to detonate explosive devices on two U.S. bound cargo planes. He was involved in planning to blow up an airliner in 2009. When Farouk Abdulmutallab – the Christmas Day bomber – went to Yemen in 2009, Awlaki hosted him, approved his suicide operation, and helped him tape a martyrdom video to be shown after the attack. His last instructions were to blow up the airplane when it was over American soil. I would have detained and prosecuted Awlaki if we captured him before he carried out a plot. But we couldn’t. And as President, I would have been derelict in my duty had I not authorized the strike that took out Awlaki.

Those are some damning charges. But are they true? We’ll never know beyond a reasonable doubt of course but let’s examine the propaganda.

1.“Anwar Awlaki, the chief of external operations for AQAP”

There is no such title in AQAP as “chief of external operations” though it appears the wording was used today to comply with Attorney General Holder’s standard in the OLC Memos for targeted killing – a “senior operational leader” of Al-Qaeda.

2. “That’s who Anwar Awlaki was – he was continuously trying to kill people. He helped oversee the 2010 plot to detonate explosive devices on two U.S. bound cargo planes. He was involved in planning to blow up an airliner in 2009.”

The evidence is never provided for cargo planes and the evidence provided for the 2009 bombing involves Al-Awalki “approving” the operation and helping the underwear bomber make a video.

This evidence is not only not substantiated or offered for analysis by the public but by itself it’s pretty weak. Not a smoking gun by any stretch of the imagination.

Al-Awalki was, according to him and others, a spiritual teacher not an operative let alone a commander who “approved” missions and since when is helping someone make a last will and testament video a criminal act let alone one that justifies the suspension of due process?

3.“I would have detained and prosecuted Awlaki if we captured him before he carried out a plot. But we couldn’t.”

So why wasn’t Al-Awlaki indicted? The inability to apprehend someone does not invalidate the indictment process.

President Obama drew the analogy to a Swat Team killing a suspect but in those cases the Swat Team is acting as law enforcement – called in by police in the furtherance of a legal process such as an arrest. The Obama Administration went through no codified legal process and the AUMF of 2001 offers no justification for killing U.S. citizens or denying them due process. Obama followed no established legal process.

Furthermore, Al-Awalki was by no means a mysterious figure to the American government he had even met with DoD officials in the Pentagon after 9/11 to advise the government on issues relating to Islam and terrorism. Al-Awalki was also a guest preacher of the Congressional Muslim Staff Association. Al-Awalki had also been through the US legal system a number of times for passport fraud and solicitation of prostitution, he knew people and he knew the system.

Perhaps if he were formally charged, as an American citizen should be, he may have decided to engage the legal system and we would have an actual factual basis to go on rather than unsubstantiated assertions by Obama. None of that happened. Instead an American citizen was killed by the word of one unaccountable man, President Obama.

It is rather obvious now why President Obama waited until after Al-Awlaki was dead to present his case against him to the public, it is considerably unconvincing. The need to put a check on executive power has never been greater.

President Obama speaks at the National Defense University on his terrorism policies. The speech comes in the wake of official acknowledgement that the Obama Administration has killed at least 4 American citizens without due process.

Expected topics: Drones, Gitmo, Al-Qaeda, Afghanistan, Civil Liberties

Obama and Penny Pritzker

President Obama’s nomination of Penny Pritzker for Commerce Secretary was already problematic. Pritkzer is the epitome of the 1% – obscenely rich off of inherited wealth, hostile to workers, and someone who has advanced in politics by giving people money. She was a major campaign contributor and fundraiser for Obama which clearly played a role in her being nominated for Commerce Secretary and would have likely lead to her having been nominated sooner for a post if not for her involvement in a protracted labor dispute.

And also like many of the plutocrats in America Pritzker has a lot of tax abnormalities involving offshore accounts. But now Prtizker is under fire for providing a false financial disclosure statement which she has since amended.

Chicago billionaire Penny Pritzker inadvertently understated a portion of her income by at least $80 million in a disclosure form required for her nomination to be U.S. Commerce secretary and has amended the document.

Forms released online last night by the Office of Government Ethics show that Pritzker earned additional income for consulting work on hundreds of trusts, including family trusts, beyond what she disclosed last week. The omission, discovered by Pritzker’s financial advisers, was due to a clerical error, said Susan Anderson, the nominee’s spokeswoman

Not surprisingly Pritzker makes a nice chunk of change “consulting” with other 1%ers.

Documents released last week show Pritzker received $32.2 million for a decade’s worth of consulting on the restructuring of domestic trusts. The filings released yesterday show she earned at least $80 million for that work, according to Bloomberg’s compilation of the data. The revised total is in addition to the amount reported last week, according to Anderson.

Pritzker, whose family founded Hyatt Hotels Corp, is scheduled to testify on her nomination before the Senate Commerce Committee tomorrow. She disclosed last week that she earned $54 million in consulting fees last year for a similar restructuring of trusts based in the Bahamas, also over 10 years. The Bahamas’ income wasn’t changed in the amended disclosure document.

Just what we need in a Commerce Secretary, someone who knows how to help companies offshore their profits to avoid tax liabilities.

Pritzker is being strongly opposed by unions for her actions on the board of directors of her inherited business, Hyatt Hotels. Workers claim the company had unsafe labor practices and are upset by a lack of wages. The Hyatt Hotel union has protested her nomination as organized labor more generally sees this pick as anti-union.

The amended disclosure was offered just in time for Pritkzer’s nomination hearing today before the Senate, 11:00am ET live on C-SPAN 3.

Yesterday Lois Lerner, the head of the Exempt Organizations division of the IRS, took the Fifth Amendment at the House Oversight Committee hearing allowing her to refuse to testify on grounds that she would possibly incriminate herself. However, Lerner also gave a statement proclaiming her innocence.

That statement, according to House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, invalidated Lerner’s use of Fifth Amendment protections.

Lois Lerner might win the legal battle but she’s prolonging the political war.

Instead of simply taking the scorn of lawmakers for a day, repeatedly invoking the Fifth Amendment to avoid self-incrimination, and then moving on, she chose defiance. And her bravado has prompted House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) to say she has waived her constitutional right to not comment.

There is considerable dispute on the legal question of whether or not Lerner waived her Fifth Amendment rights by offering an opening statement that directly addressed the concerns of the hearing.  It would not be allowed in a court room, but she wasn’t in a court room.

Chairman Issa still believes Lerner tried to have it both ways and in doing so nullified her right against self-incrimination.

“When I asked her her questions from the very beginning, I did so so she could assert her rights prior to any statement,” Issa told POLITICO. “She chose not to do so — so she waived.”

Lerner shocked the committee room in the opening moments of Wednesday’s hearing by delivering an opening statement denying any wrongdoing and professing pride in her government service.

Lerner is likely to be forced back into the hearing room and might possibly face a contempt charge if she continues to assert Fifth Amendment rights. Though a court may invalidate the contempt charge. The ranking Democrat on the committee Elijah Cummings said he did not believe she waived her Fifth Amendment rights with the opening statement denying wrongdoing.

Chairman Issa never adjourned the hearing – it is technically in recess – which means Issa will not have to issue new subpoenas to bring Lerner back to testify.

Foreclosure Protester Arrested At DOJ

As Occupy Our Homes demonstrates at the Department of Justice the fraudclosure crisis continues unabated.

A Florida family man who not only made his mortgage payments on time but made payments early faces foreclosure by Wells Fargo. The explanation for initiating the foreclosure proceedings by Wells Fargo is nothing short of amazing and offers a sad commentary on how little has changed despite the 2008 financial crisis and supposed reforms like Dodd-Frank.

Etienne Syldor said he’s worked his whole life for a home in Orlando for his wife and three children.

Syldor is an immigrant from Haiti and a bus driver at Walt Disney World. At times, he said he has worked multiple jobs to make sure he never missed a mortgage payment.

Last year, Wells Fargo offered him mortgage modification, and he was told if he made four monthly payments during a trial period, the modification would be permanent.

So far so good. Family man working multiple jobs to make sure he is paying his bills – personal responsibility and all that jazz. Court records confirm that Syldor made his payments.

Then something funny happened. Despite the payments Wells Fargo began foreclosure proceedings on Syldor. Not surprisingly this made no sense to Syldor who, thankfully, hired an attorney and contacted a news station.

Wells Fargo’s statement to the news station is one for the ages.

Wells Fargo, bank representative Veronica Clemons sent a statement:

“For some loans, completing trial payments is a significant step toward a permanent modification; however, in this instance, the loan was part of a mortgage-backed security and in a protected pool, with specific payment guidelines. We are working with Mr. Syldor to explain the guidelines and explore options that may help.”

The bank told Eyewitness News Syldor didn’t follow the modification guidelines because he paid early and sometimes his payments were sent one on top of the other

Oh the absurdist world of MBS. Because Wells Fargo sold Mr. Syldor one of these chopped up and reassembled frankenloans it didn’t matter that the bank was getting paid – usually the goal of loaning money – what mattered was that the arcane calculus of the derivative was not being complied with. And since Syldor was so happy to have a home for his family and was able to cobble together the cash from working multiple jobs he rushed to pay his mortgage to keep his home. His reward? Foreclosure proceedings that would have put him and his family on the street.

It’s 2013 and we are still dealing with this nonsense.

Photo by Occupy Wall Street via Twitter.

Lois Lerner, the head of the Exempt Organizations division of the IRS, just took the fifth amendment at the House Government Oversight Committee refusing to testify on the grounds that she might incriminate herself.

Despite taking the fifth, Learner protested her innocence of any wrongdoing.

“I have not done anything wrong. I have not broken any laws. I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations. And I have not provided false information to this or any other congressional committee.”

Lerner was then excused from the hearing. Her future at the IRS is unclear.

The Exempt Organizations division of the IRS is tasked with evaluating whether organizations qualify for tax exempt status such as the Section 501(c)(4) status which groups targeted in the IRS Scandal were seeking.

Questions remain what further consequences, if any, persons in the IRS will face in response to the scandal.

Lawmakers pressing for more heads to roll at the Internal Revenue Service are going to be disappointed.

“Why weren’t more people fired?” Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) demanded at a hearing Tuesday on the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups, channeling the frustration of his colleagues.

In fact, it appears that no one has been formally reprimanded and a spokesperson for the union representing IRS workers said it hasn’t been called to help any employees yet. Most employees involved in the targeting program are covered by protections for federal workers that could drag out the termination process.

No matter how many “heads roll” at the IRS the damage to the public trust has been done. The only question left is how many people knew about the targeting and whether it was a result of policy-making from above or rogue elements in the IRS.

The Associated Press were not the only ones to have their phone records seized by the government as it was revealed Tuesday that Fox News had their phone records seized as part of the Obama Administration’s war on whistleblowers. After being labeled a “co-conspirator” Fox News reporter James Rosen was targeted for doing basic journalism.

The Obama Justice Department has seized the phone records of numbers that are associated with White House staffers and, apparently, with Fox News reporters, according to a document filed in the case of Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, on October 13, 2011…

Ronald C. Machen, Jr., the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, who is prosecuting the case, has seized records associated with two phone numbers at the White House, at least five numbers associated with Fox News, and one that has the same area code and exchange as Rosen’s personal-cell-phone number.

It had been previously reported that Rosen’s personal emails on his gmail account were seized as part of the investigation.

The New York Times condemned the actions of the Obama Justice Department Tuesday as endangering the freedom of the press.

With the decision to label a Fox News television reporter a possible “co-conspirator” in a criminal investigation of a news leak, the Obama administration has moved beyond protecting government secrets to threatening fundamental freedoms of the press to gather news…

The Rosen case follows other signs that the administration has gone overboard in its zeal to find and muzzle insiders. The Associated Press revealed last week that the government had secretly seized two months’ worth of records for telephones used by the agency’s staff, partly to determine the source of a leak about a report involving a foiled terrorist plot in Yemen. At least two other major leak investigations are continuing. Six current and former administration officials have been indicted under the old Espionage Act for leaking classified information to the press and public…

Obama administration officials often talk about the balance between protecting secrets and protecting the constitutional rights of a free press. Accusing a reporter of being a “co-conspirator,” on top of other zealous and secretive investigations, shows a heavy tilt toward secrecy and insufficient concern about a free press.

The attack by the Obama Administration on basic journalistic practices could have long lasting impact on the American media, particularly the labeling of a journalist talking to a source of information as “co-conspiracy” in a crime. Even more astounding is the hyper-vigilance being shown against minor leaks of information to journalists when compared to the Justice Department’s blase attitude towards crime on Wall Street which brought actual instability to the country in 2008 or, rather, is a genuine threat to National Security.

Not to mention the White House leaks information to the press constantly. Was Isikoff a co-conspirator? Or is this attack on journalism about something else?

Members of one of Occupy Wall Street’s offshoots, Occupy Our Homes, were arrested Monday and Tuesday demonstrating outside the headquarters of the Department of Justice in Washington.

According to Washington police the protesters attempted to enter the building.

About 100 protesters with groups called the Home Defenders League and Occupy Our Homes marched on the building about 2 p.m. Some set up tents on the lawn and sidewalk while others ran up to the building’s Constitution Avenue entrance.

According to D.C. police, 17 people were arrested. Ann C. Wilcox, an attorney who represents protesters, said several were tased during the scuffle. A D.C. police spokeswoman said D.C. police were not involved in the tasing. Federal law enforcement officials on the scene declined comment.

During the arrest tasers were used on protester Carmen Pittman who was arrested outside the Department of Justice.

Part of the reason for the protest at DOJ, according to activists, is to demonstrate strong opposition to comments Attorney General Eric Holder made regarding his inability to prosecute Wall Street banks due to the risks such a prosecution brings to the financial system. These statements were later characterized as Holder in effect saying some banks were Too Big To Jail and therefore corruption by Wall Street would continue indefinitely with the tacit sanction of the government.

Occupiers also cited the unjust fraudulent foreclosure settlement and continual foreclosures as grievances that led to the protest. The miniscule amount of money the banks paid is not only seen as comically inefficient at making victims whole but extremely ineffective in deterring future crimes. The banks escaped justice thanks to the Justice Department.

The Occupy Our Homes protest at DOJ is part of the Wall Street Accountability Week of Action.

Aafia Siddiqui

The new head of the CIA National Clandestine Service, Francis “Frank” Archibald, is listed in the Wikileaks Cables as authoring a confidential report from the U.S. Embassy in Pakistan regarding the naming of the embassy legal attache in a detainee torture case. Archibald discloses his involvement in communicating with other U.S. officials regarding public statements and press reports concerning the case. Archibald was under cover as an official of the U.S. State Department at the time.

C O N F I D E N T I A L ISLAMABAD

SUBJECT: EMBASSY LEGAL ATTACHE NAMED IN CASE INVOLVING ALLEGED BAGRAM DETAINEE

Classified By: CDA Frank Archibald, Reasons 1.4 (b), (d)

¶1. (C) Summary: Islamabad attorney Javed Jaffrey filed a habeas corpus petition July 29 on behalf of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, a Pakistani national who allegedly has been held and mistreated at the Bagram Theater Internment Facility since 2004. The court July 30 ordered Interior Ministry Secretary Shah to report on her alleged detention on September 9. End summary.

¶2. (C) Islamabad attorney Javed Iqbal Jaffery (who also represents Pakistani nuclear scientist AQ Khan) filed a habeas corpus petition with the Islamabad High Court (IHC) July 29 on behalf of Aafia Siddiqui a Pakistani national. There have been a spate of press reports about Siddiqui following a July 6 press conference in which UK journalist Yvonne Ridley accused the U.S. of holding and perhaps torturing an unnamed woman in solitary confinement since 2004 at the Bagram Theater Internment Facility. The IHC ordered Interior Ministry Secretary Kamal Shah to report on Siddique’s status, but for now the court exempted the other respondents, who include the Embassy’s Legal Attach, President Musharraf, and former President Farooq Ahmad Leghari. The IHC adjourned the case until September 9.

¶3. (C) According to press reports, Jaffrey claims in the petition that U.S. operatives kidnapped Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, with her three children, in 2004 as part of an al Qaeda hunt. It also charged that the U.S. moved her to the Bagram Theater Internment Facility with the help of Pakistani authorities. Jaffrey also petitioned the IHC to ask the respondents whether Siddiqui had been killed in detention. If she is alive, Jaffrey wants her presented before the Court and given compensation for the illegal detention.

Archibald is not merely reporting back to superiors the facts of the case derived from public information. In a comment he offered in his report he discusses participating in the case by being involved in communication with U.S. officials at the Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan.

¶5. (C) Comment: It is unclear who is paying Jaffrey and/or orchestrating this campaign on Siddiqui’s behalf. Siddiqui has family living in Karachi and noted politicians, including Imran Khan, continue their vocal support for her cause. Bagram officials have assured us that they have not been holding Siddiqui for the last four years, as has been alleged. End comment.

The Aafia Siddiqu case that Archibald was involved with became controversial in Pakistan. The facts surrounding Siddiqui’s activities and arrest remain disputed and though she was eventually tried and convicted in New York City her case remains controversial due to questions surrounding her possible kidnapping, detainment, and torture by U.S. forces as well as disputes regarding forensic evidence and due process rights.

The extent of Archibald’s involvement with the case is unknown. Nor is it known what role Archibald played in other cases involving covert activities in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Previous to his assignment(s) in the Middle East Archibald was believed to be under official cover in the Malaysian Embassy as a Regional Affairs Officer for the State Department. Before becoming head of the National Clandestine Service Archibald was head of the Latin American Division.

Photo by Muhammad Siddiqui under Creative Commons license.

White House Spokesman Jay Carney’s earlier statements regarding White House knowledge of the IRS scandal failed to disclose that the President’s Chief of Staff, Denis McDonough, knew about the situation weeks before the IRS report was published adding another name to the list of people who surrounded President Obama that knew about the report while the president did not.

The White House on Monday once again added to the list of people who knew about the IRS investigation into its targeting of conservative groups — saying White House chief of staff Denis McDonough had been informed about a month ago.

Press secretary Jay Carney said again that no one had told President Barack Obama ahead of the first news reports: not his top aide McDonough, nor his chief counsel Kathy Ruemmler, nor anyone from the Treasury Department.

This is the fifth time the story has changed.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney originally acknowledged that the counsel’s office had been told of the investigation during a press briefing last Monday. But Carney didn’t explicitly say Ruemmler had learned that conservative groups were targeted and how they were singled out…

Ruemmler did inform chief of staff Denis McDonough’s office of the investigation, Carney said, and other senior staff were also told of the report. Carney wouldn’t say who those other staffers were, but did say there were communications between White House and Treasury Department staff ahead of the first news reports of the IRS investigation 10 days ago.

So the White House Chief Counsel, the White House Chief of Staff and “other senior staff” decided to let President Obama get blindsided by the report? Was there some plan to keep the president purposely out of the loop? Is this a common practice in the Obama White House?

Lets see if the story changes again.