FBI admits no major cases cracked with Patriot Act snooping powers

By Maggie Ybarra   \  The Washington Times  |  May 21, 2015

FBI agents can't point to any major terrorism cases they've cracked thanks to the key snooping powers in the Patriot Act, the Justice Department's inspector general said in a report Thursday that could complicate efforts to keep key parts of the law operating.

Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz said that between 2004 and 2009, the FBI tripled its use of bulk collection under Section 215 of the Patriot Act, which allows government agents to compel businesses to turn over records and documents, and increasingly scooped up records of Americans who had no ties to official terrorism investigations.

The FBI did finally come up with procedures to try to minimize the information it was gathering on nontargets, but it took far too long, Mr. Horowitz said in the 77-page report, which comes just as Congress is trying to decide whether to extend, rewrite or entirely nix Section 215.

Backers say the Patriot Act powers are critical and must be kept intact, particularly with the spread of the threat from terrorists. But opponents have doubted the efficacy of Section 215, particularly when it's used to justify bulk data collection such as in the case of the National Security Agency's phone metadata program, revealed in leaks from former government contractor Edward Snowden.

The new report adds ammunition to those opponents, with the inspector general concluding that no major cases have been broken by use of the Patriot Act's records-snooping provisions.

"The agents we interviewed did not identify any major case developments that resulted from use of the records obtained in response to Section 215 orders," the inspector general concluded — though he said agents did view the material they gathered as "valuable" in developing other leads or corroborating information.

10 Ways to Get a Discount on Every Online Purchase

By Maryalene LaPonsie  |  MoneyTalksNews  |  May 11, 2015

If you ask me, shopping online is the way to go. No need to pack the kids in the car; no need to fight the crowds in the store. All you need is yourself, your computer and a piece of plastic. And in some cases, you may even be able to do without the plastic.

In fact, paying without plastic is No. 10 on our list of ways to get a discount on everything you buy online. Keep reading to see what other strategies made the cut.

1. Chat with customer service

Even people who regularly haggle for purchases in person forget they can negotiate online. The best way to ask for a discount is to open up the chat box on the retailer’s website.

Sometimes, if you leave your shopping window open long enough, a chat box will pop up asking if you need help. Other times you may need to unearth the chat option from the contact page of the site.

Once you get a representative online, tell them you’re shopping on a couple sites and looking for the best deal. Ask if any discounts are currently available. If none, ask if the company ever does free shipping. There’s no guarantee of getting a discount this way, but it’s a tried and true method that has worked in the past for me.

2. Give the retailer a call

Maybe you’re on a site that still lives in the dark ages and doesn’t offer customer service via chat. In that case, the phone is your new best friend.

It’s the same routine as when you’re chatting. Explain you’re shopping for a deal, and ask if they have any discounts available or if free shipping is offered. The worst they can say is “no.”

New trade warning: International 'tribunal' could junk U.S. laws to help foreign firms

By Paul Bedard  |  Washington Examiner  |  May 7, 2015

An Asian trade deal being negotiated in secret by the administration would let an international tribunal overrule state and federal laws to help foreign firms, a new issue congressional and legal opponents are raising in hopes of slowing the race for passage.

"It is really worrisome," said top House Ways and Means Committee Democrat Rep. Sandy Levin. "Countries do not want to give away their jurisdiction away to some arbitrary panel," he added.

At issue is the pending Trans-Pacific Partnership treaty and a provision called "Investor-State Dispute Settlement," or ISDS, that would let foreign firms challenge U.S. laws, potentially overruling those laws and resulting in fines to be paid by taxpayers. The provisions are becoming common in some trade deals between other nations.

Levin, a Michigan Democrat, said that the White House has dismissed the fears, claiming that the country normally wins legal trade disputes. But he noted how a U.S. cigarette maker is challenging Uruguay and Australia packaging rules because the laws challenge trade treaty language that bars legislation that could damage profits.

"ISDS is a real issue," said Levin.

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren has warned that it would undermine U.S. sovereignty.

VE Day anniversary: This vet knows what won WWII

By Jerry Carino  |  Asbury Park (N.J.) Press  |  May 7, 2015



MIDDLETON, N.J. — A handwritten note rested on the dining room table in David Scheinhartz's home.

"We all live in the land of the free because of the few who were and are brave," it read.

The 91-year-old Scheinhartz was one of the brave, and still is. Friday marks the 70th anniversary of Victory in Europe Day. As a telephone lineman and radio mechanic with the U.S. Army Air Force's 364th Fighter Group, Scheinhartz was stationed in England in 1944-45 and recalls the events like they happened last week. He knows it's important to tell his story as the ranks of the Greatest Generation dwindle.

"Sixteen million of us served in World War II," he said. "There's less than a million of us left, and we're losing between 800 and a thousand every single day."

Scheinhartz, a grandfather of five who has lived in the New Monmouth section of Middletown for 47 years with his wife Sybil, wants us to remember who they were and what they stood for.

"One word describes the Greatest Generation, two letters, W-E. We," he said. "Everybody did what was best for 'we.' Unfortunately today there's also a two-letter word that describes most of the current generation (me). If we could get the country to become 'we,' we wouldn't have the problems that we're having."

10 Money Mistakes Successful People Don’t Make

By Bruce Harpan  |  Lifehack.org

Managing money effectively is a key success skill. Successful people make the decision to become effective with money, many of them early in life. Like any area of life, it is important to educate yourself about the threats and challenges in the world. Taking the time to master a few key principles will pay off for years to come.

1. They don’t overspend; they live on less than they make.

Living on less than you make is an essential money management skill. Some of the world’s wealthiest people have taken this principle to heart. For example, Sir John Templeton, a legendary investor who became a billionaire, saved 50% of his income even when he grew up with limited means. If that is more than you manage, don’t worry! You can reach financial success by saving 10-15% of your income.

Tip: Learning to live on less than you earn takes time. Start by looking for ways to save money: 55 Practical Ways To Save Money Efficiently.

2. They don’t fixate on price; they understand the importance of value.

The price you pay for an investment, a meal or piece of clothing is only part of the story. Successful people also think about the value of that good. For investments, they consider the prospects for the investment growing in the future. For personal items, they look for high quality products that will last. For example, a well made pair of business shoes may cost $200 or more but these shoes can last for years with proper care.

Tip: Buy high quality products that will last for a long time.

White House report offers more on NSA spying on Americans' calls, with Patriot Act set to expire

By Associated Press  |  Fox News  |  April 27, 2015

With debate gearing up over the coming expiration of the Patriot Act surveillance law, the Obama administration on Saturday unveiled a 6-year-old report examining the once-secret program to collect information on Americans' calls and emails.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence publicly released the redacted report following a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by the New York Times. The basics of the National Security Agency program had already been declassified, but the lengthy report includes some new details about the secrecy surrounding it.

President George W. Bush authorized the "President's Surveillance Program" in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. The review was completed in July 2009 by inspectors general from the Justice Department, Pentagon, CIA, NSA and Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

They found that while many senior intelligence officials believe the program filled a gap by increasing access to international communications, others including FBI agents, CIA analysts and managers "had difficulty evaluating the precise contribution of the PSP to counterterrorism efforts because it was most often viewed as one source among many available analytic and intelligence-gathering tools in these efforts."

Critics of the phone records program, which allows the NSA to hunt for communications between terrorists abroad and U.S. residents, argue it has not proven to be an effective counterterrorism tool. They also say an intelligence agency has no business possessing the deeply personal records of Americans. Many favor a system under which the NSA can obtain court orders to query records held by the phone companies.

The Patriot Act expires on June 1, and Senate Republicans have introduced a bill that would allow continued collection of call records of nearly every American. The legislation would reauthorize sections of the Patriot Act, including the provision under which the NSA requires phone companies to turn over the "to and from" records of most domestic landline calls.

History repeats itself When Civilized People Ignore its Lessons

By Lairi B. Regan  |  American Thinker  |  April 7, 2015

In both the months leading up to and the days following last week’s announcement by Obama of his capitulation to the tyrannical Islamist Iranians (aka an outline for a possible deal paving the way for Iran to produce nuclear weapons and fulfill its non-negotiable promise to annihilate Israel), many across the political spectrum have compared the negotiations to Chamberlain’s Munich Agreement.

This is the deal made by what could be called the “P3” and Germany. Hitler was vying for the Sudetenland, strategically important to Czechoslovakia because its border defenses and major industries located there. France, the UK and Italy signed a deal with Germany caving to its demands to control the area. The Czechs were left out of the discussions despite recognizing that the “Munich Betrayal” would lead to its invasion.

Every American should watch the video of Chamberlain’s infamous announcement upon returning from the signing of the Munich Agreement as he claimed it was “a prelude to a larger settlement in which all Europe may find peace.” It is impossible to watch that video and not query not only how someone of such esteem could have mispredicted his evil adversary, but also how the throngs of cheering British citizens could have supported such a capitulation.

Alas, it is important to understand the historical context of Chamberlain’s appeasement. The British were war weary – not in the sense of America’s frame-of-mind post-Iraq and Afghan wars.  World War I resulted in the death of over 16 million people with another 20 million wounded, which makes it one of history’s deadliest conflicts.  Of those, the British lost close to 1 million civilian and military personnel with an additional 1.7 million wounded.

Those figures do not justify Chamberlain’s policy of appeasement. But historian James P. Levy explained:

Knowing what Hitler did later, the critics of Appeasement condemn the men who tried to keep the peace in the 1930s, men who could not know what would come later…The political leaders responsible for Appeasement made many errors. They were not blameless. But what they attempted was logical, rational, and humane.

Non-citizens in New York City could soon be given the right to vote

By Kanishk Tharoor  |  The Guardian  |  April 2, 2015

New York may be about to become even more distinct. The left-leaning New York City council is currently drafting legislation that would allow all legal residents, regardless of citizenship, the right to vote in city elections. If the measure passes into law, it would mark a major victory for a voting rights campaign that seeks to enfranchise non-citizen voters in local elections across the country. A few towns already permit non-citizen residents to vote locally, but New York City would be by far the largest jurisdiction to do so.Under the likely terms of the legislation, legally documented residents who have lived in New York City for at least six months will be able to vote in municipal elections. Reports suggest that the city council is discussing the legislation with Mayor Bill de Blasio’s office, and that a bill might be introduced as soon as this spring.

While the legislation stands a good chance of sailing through the council and even winning the approval of the mayor, the prospect of New York City enfranchising its residents has stoked controversy. Many Americans find the idea of non-citizen voting entirely unpalatable and fear that it undermines the sanctity and privilege of citizenship. 

Advocates for non-citizen voting in New York City argue that it would right a glaring wrong. Invoking the ancient American battle cry of “no taxation without representation”, they point to the enormous numbers of non-citizen residents who pay taxes, send their children to public schools, are active members of their communities, but have no say in local elections.

“People are New Yorkers in profound ways without being citizens of the US,” said Ronald Hayduk, a professor of political science at Queens College and a member of the Coalition to Expand Voting Rights. Non-citizen residents contribute $18.2bn to New York state in income taxes every year. According to a 2013 Fiscal Policy Institute study, 1.3 million people in New York City over the age of 18 are non-citizens (a full 21% of the voting age population). Adjusting the figure to account for undocumented migrants, the study claims that about one million more New Yorkers would be eligible to vote were the bill passed.

Outrageous public pensions could bankrupt these states

By Steven Malanga  |  The Fiscal Times  |  March 31, 2015

Some of the worst public-sector pension problems in America are playing out in states and cities where legislation or local court rulings have granted extraordinary protections to workers’ retirement benefits—far beyond those enjoyed by private-sector employees.

Illinois officials, for instance, are awaiting a ruling from the state’s Supreme Court on a suit by workers seeking to overturn the legislature’s 2013 pension reforms. If the court, which has previously refused to allow any changes to retirement plans for retirees or current workers, throws out the reforms, Illinois will face $145 billion in higher taxes over the next three decades just to pay off the debt, according to a report by the Civic Committee of Chicago.

One can see a glimpse of Illinois’s possible future in Arizona. Last year, the state’s Supreme Court overturned 2011 pension reforms that, among other things, sought to curb expensive annual cost-of-living increases for judges, legislators, and municipal public-safety workers. Though courts in other places have ruled that retirees have no right to annual cost-of-living increases, the Arizona high court ordered the state to reinstate the 4 percent increases and pay retirees back for payments that the pension system had missed. In restoring the payments, the court ignored the distress of the pension system, which is only 67 percent funded.

Indeed, the system is so hard-pressed that the head of one of the state’s largest public unions has asked the legislature to push for a constitutional amendment allowing the kind of money-saving changes that the court nixed. Without such changes, according to the Arizona Republic, some retirees will wind up earning more within a few years of retirement than they earned while working full-time for government.

An Olympic athlete and entrepreneur shares his 8 keys to success

By Kathleen Elkins  |  March 11, 2015  |  Business Insider

Lewis Howes was a two-sport, All-American athlete in college before pursuing, and achieving, his dream of playing professional football.

A career-ending injury in 2007 sidelined him from the sport early on, but it propelled him into a different arena: the business arena, which he quickly mastered.

Within two years, Howes launched and sold a seven-figure online media company, which aimed to help people grow their careers through a series of webinars, ebooks, and other online training materials.

Today he focuses on the success of others, and helps people make a living doing what they love. He also found a way to return to the competitive world of sports, and plays for the US Olympic handball team.

We asked the dynamic entrepreneur, motivational speaker, and athlete, to share his eight keys to success. Here's what he said: 

1. Have a clear vision.

"If you want to achieve success, you have to be clear on what it is you want first, and why you want it."

2. Learn to overcome adversity.

"If you want to achieve great results, there's going to be a lot thrown at you. If you buckle under pressure and allow the adversity to imprison you, rather than turn it into an advantage, you're never going to achieve success."