Mediaboss Marketing

On August 3, The American Conservative ran a lengthy piece of mine dealing with the whistleblower protection nightmare that is the Department of Defense. One of the subjects of that piece is now former NSA IG George Ellard, and because I had even more on his case than I could fit into the TAC piece, I wanted to share the rest of what I knowand dont knowabout the allegations against Ellard, the final disposition of the case, why the Obama administrations whistleblower retaliation fix is itself broken, and what might be done to actually provide meaningful protections for would-be national security whistleblowers in the Pentagon and elsewhere in the national security establishment.

Regarding what little we know about the specifics of Ellards case, I had this to say in the TAC piece:

As the Project on Government Oversight firstreportedin December 2016, a three-member interagency Inspector General External Review Panel concluded in May 2016 that the then-Inspector General of the National Security Agency (NSA), George Ellard, had, according to POGO, himself had previously retaliated against an NSA whistleblower[.] This apparently occurred during the very same period that Ellard hadclaimedthatSnowden could have come to me. The panel that reviewed Ellards case recommended he be fired, a decision affirmed by NSA Director Mike Rogers.

But there was a catch: the Secretary of Defense had the final word on Ellards fate. Outgoing Obama administration Defense Secretary Ash Carter, apparently indifferent to the magnitude of the Ellard case, left office without making a decision.

In the months after Donald Trump became president, rumors swirled inside Washington that Ellard had, in fact, escaped termination. One source, who requested anonymity, reported that Ellard had been seen recently on the NSA campus at Ft. Meade, Maryland. That report, it turns out, was accurate.

On July 21, in response to the authors inquiry, the Pentagon public affairs office provided the following statement:

NSA followed the appropriate procedures following a whistleblower retaliation claim against former NSA Inspector General George Ellard. Following thorough adjudication procedures, Mr. Ellard continues to be employed by NSA.

After Id finished the TAC piece, Ellards attorney, Terrence ODonnell of the Washington mega law firm of Williams & Connolly, sent me the following statement about his client, George Ellard:

The Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (ASD) examined and rejected an allegation that former NSA Inspector General, George Ellard, had retaliated against an NSA employee by not selecting that employee to fill a vacancy in the OIGs Office of Investigations.

In a lengthy, detailed, and well-reasoned memorandum, the ASD concluded that Dr. Ellard had not played a role in that personnel decision or, in the terms of the applicable laws and regulations the ASD cited, Dr. Ellard did not take, fail to take, or threaten to take or fail to take any action associated with the personnel decision.

This judgment echoes the conclusion reached by the Department of Defenses Office of the Inspector General. An External Review Panel (ERP) later came to the opposite conclusion, leading to the ASD review. The ASD concluded that the evidence cited in the ERP report as reflective of [Dr. Ellards] alleged retaliatory animus toward Complainant is of a character so circumstantial and speculative that it lacks probity.

In assessing Dr. Ellards credibility and in rendering its decision, the ASD also considered Dr. Ellards distinguished career of public service, spanning more than 21 years of service across the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, culminating in almost 10 years of service as the NSA IG. Dr. Ellard, the ASD noted, has been entrusted to address some of our nations most challenging national security issues; successive NSA Directors have consistently rated Dr. Ellards performance as Exceptional Results and Outstanding; and he has been commended by well-respected senior officials with whom [he has] worked closely over the years for [his] ability and integrity.

Dr. Ellard is serving as the NSA Chair on the faculty of the National War College, a position he held prior to the ERP review.

Quite a bit to unpack in that statement. Lets start with the ASDs decision to overrule the External Review Panel (ERP), a key component of the Obama-era PPD-19, the directive designed to prevent in all government departments or agencies the very kind of thing Ellard allegedly did. Here are the key paragraphs of PPD-19 with respect to ERP recommendations:

If the External Review Panel determines that the individual was the subject of a Personnel Action prohibited by Section A while an employee of a Covered Agency or an action affecting his or her Eligibility for Access to Classified Information prohibited by Section B, the panel may recommend that the agency head take corrective action to return the employee, as nearly aspracticable and reasonable, to the position such employee would have held had the reprisal not occurred and that the agency head reconsider the employees Eligibility for Access to Classified Information consistent with the national security and with Executive Order 12968. (emphasis added)

An agency head shall carefully consider the recommendation of the External Review Panel pursuant to the above paragraph and within 90 days, inform the panel and the DNI of what action he or she has taken. If the head of any agency fails to so inform the DNI, the DNI shall notify the President. (emphasis added)

Taking the ERPs recommendations is strictly optional.

Whats so significant about the ERP recommendation in Ellards case was that the ERP not only apparently believed that the whistleblower in question should be given a fair chance at getting the position he or she originally applied for within the IG itself, but that Ellards actions werein the view of three non-DoD IGs who examined the caseso severe that they recommended he be terminated.

ODonnell quoted from a Pentagon memo clearing Ellard that is not public. The ERPs findings, along with their record of investigation, are not public. Nor do we know how thoroughor cursorythe ASDs review of the Ellard case was prior to the decision to clear Ellard. Given all of that, who are we to believe?

There are some key facts we do know that lead me to believe that the ERPs recommendations were not only likely soundly based, but that the whistleblower retaliation problem inside the Pentagon is deeply entrenched.

ODonnells statement also claimed that the ASDs decision to reverse the ERP and clear Ellard of wrongdoing echoes the conclusion reached by the Department of Defenses Office of the Inspector General. But its the DoD IG itself, as an institution, that is also under a major cloud because of other whistleblower retaliation claims coming from former NSA or DoD IG employeesspecifically former NSA senior executive service member Thomas Drake and for DoD Assistant Inspector General John Crane. As Ive noted previously, the independent Office of Special Counsel found adequate evidence of whistleblower retaliation and document destruction to refer the matter to the Justice Departments own IG; Cranes case is getting a look from the Government Accountability Office (GAO), Congresss own executive branch watchdog.

The DoD and NSA IGs have clear conflicts of interest when employees from within their own ranks are implicated in potential criminal wrongdoing. PPD-19 was supposed to be the answer to such conflicts of interest, but its lack of teeth from an enforcement standpoint renders it a badly flawed remedy for an extremely serious integrity problem.

And what about Congress? PPD-19 speaks to that as well:

On an annual basis, the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community shall report the determinations and recommendations and department and agency head responses to the DNI and, as appropriate, to the relevant congressional committees.

But Congress doesnt need to wait for the IC IG to tell it what is already publicly known about the Ellard, Drake, and Crane cases. It has ample cause to not only investigate these cases, but to take action to replace PPD-19 with a whistleblower protection system that actually protects those reporting waste, fraud, abuse, or criminal conduct and punishes those who attempt to block such reporting. Two options that deserve consideration are 1) empowering OSC to examine these kinds of cases and issue unreviewable summary judgments itself or 2) revive the expired Independent Counsel statute, rewritten with a focus on whistleblower reprisal case investigations.

One thing is beyond dispute. The PPD-19 process is not the answer for protecting whistleblower and punishing those who retaliate against them. We need a credible system that will do both. The only question now is whether anybody in the House or Senate will step up to the task of building a new one.

More:
The Curious Case Of Ex-NSA Inspector General George Ellard - Cato Institute (blog)

A federal judge has sided with prosecutors in the case against former Fort Gordon contractor Reality Winner, finding that her defense team should be muzzled from speaking about any information deemed classified by the government, even if it has been widely reported in local, national and international media publications.

Winner has pleaded not guilty to a single count of violating a provision of the espionage act. She is accused of leaking a classified document to online media news publication, The Intercept.

That document was extensively reported on by The Intercept and numerous other news media organizations in stories on Winner, who is accused of leaking a national security document she allegedly obtained through her job with a NSA contractor on Fort Gordon.

The document is an analysis of the extent of Russias efforts to hack into state election boards. Russian meddling is the subject of U.S. Senate and House intelligence committees investigations and a special prosecutor who is looking into possible collusion between Trump supporters and the Russians during last years presidential campaign.

In his order released Thursday, Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps wrote that determining what is classified information is a function of the executive branch of government, not the judicial branch.

Just because the defense team has expressed concern of accidentally mishandling classified information is no reason to relax the strict procedures required, Epps wrote. The defense is not prohibited in using classified information in Winners defense, but it must follow the strict procedures, he wrote.

Both sides have until Aug. 16 to weigh in on Epps proposed protective order that describes the closely guarded handling of materials in the case. A classified information security officer is in charge of ensuring such information is handled only by those on the defense team who have obtained security clearance, and only in a secured location.

The defense is to have free access to that location during regular business hours, although other times may be allotted with proper notice and consultation with the U.S. Marshals Service, according to the order.

Any notes or other papers the defense may create using classified information is not allowed outside of the security location. Any document filed with the court that contains or might contain classified information must be filed under seal. Only those portions deemed not classified by the classified information security officer will be unsealed for public review.

At the end of the case any such defense-prepared material will be destroyed by the classified information security officer. The confines of the protective order are a lifetime commitment and any violation is punishable not only by a finding of contempt but criminal prosecution.

The publication of any classified information does not change the classified status unless a member of the executive branch of government with the proper authorization declares the information to be declassified.

Winners trial is tentatively set to begin in October.

Reach Sandy Hodson at sandy.hodson@augustachronicle.com or (706) 823-3226

Continued here:
Judge sides with prosecution in Reality Winner NSA leak case | The ... - The Augusta Chronicle

(TNS) -- Further cementing its ambitions as a national powerhouse in cybersecurity education, Columbus State University announced Tuesday that it received a $174,000 grant from the National Security Agency to develop a new tool for rapid cybersecurity training and curriculum development.

The award makes CSU one of the top universities in the nation in providing technologies for cybersecurity workforce development to universities, government and private sector across the nation, said Shuangbao Wang, a professor in CSUs TSYS School of Computer Science in a press release.

The tool will be internet-based, allowing it to be accessed anywhere in the world. Wang expects it will eventually be used by global Department of Defense installations and other private and public organizations.

A key part of the tool will be the use of visual mapping, a technology developed by researchers at the university to assist in military decision making.

We are building a tool that people across the nation can use to develop cybersecurity training, which guarantees compliance with government and industry standards for cybersecurity workforce development, said Wang.

The grant is the latest in a string of awards the university has received for developing cybersecurity programs. Earlier this month, CSU announced that it had partnered with the Muscogee County School District to develop a yearlong cybersecurity course at Rothschild Leadership Academy with the help of a $50,000 grant from the NSA.

The university also hosted a weeklong cybersecurity summer camp in June with another NSA grant, this one for $28,000.

The investments may well pay off, with worldwide spending on cybersecurity estimated to reach more than $100 billion by 2020, according to research by the International Data Corporation. That spending is butting against an expected shortage of about two million jobs by 2019.

National cybersecurity workforce development is one of the key areas of this action plan, Wang said. Upon completion, universities, government, and private sector across the nation can use the tool to quickly develop training and curriculum that otherwise would not be possible due to lack of experts, knowledge and skills.

2017 the Columbus Ledger-Enquirer (Columbus, Ga.) Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Read the rest here:
Columbus State Awarded NSA Grant to Develop Cybersecurity Tool - Government Technology

Then-Deputy Security Advisor Ben Rhodes, shown talking to the White House press corps in December 2016, joins a growing list of former Obama officials under subpoena from the House Intelligence Committee. (Cheriss May/Zuma Press/Newscom)

'Unmasking' Scandal: Day by day, the scandal of the Obama administration's abuse of domestic intelligence gathered by the National Security Agency grows. Forget the phony Russia-Trump collusion charges the Obama White House looks increasingly to have committed a crime by using U.S. intelligence for political purposes.

The NSA's insatiable gathering of data and conversations on Americans make it a potentially highly dangerous enemy of Americans' freedoms. Who would want to have a federal government spy shop that knows almost everything you do in public, on the phone, by email, or by computer?

That's why the super-secret NSA, which is much bigger than the better-known CIA, has always operated under strict guidelines for how its intel could be used. In its reports, Americans who are surveilled without a warrant while speaking to a foreign citizen are routinely "masked" that is, their identity is kept secret unless there's an overwhelming national security interest in that person being "unmasked."

Unfortunately, like a child with a dangerous new toy, the Obama administration apparently seems to have believed that the NSA could be used for narrow, political purposes.

As a result, a number of administration officials and Obama supporters, including former National Security Advisor Susan Rice, former U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power and former CIA chief John Brennan, have been subpoenaed by the House Intelligence Committee to answer some questions.

On Wednesday, the panel announced another subpoena had been issued for a former Obama official, this for former Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes. Our guess is it won't be the last.

This mega-scandal, by the way, has been building for months, though you would hardly know by the near-silence it's been treated with in the media.

But there are exceptions. Back on May 24, the online journal Circa reported that the scandal was far more serious than it first appeared.

"The National Security Agency under former President Barack Obama routinely violated American privacy protections while scouring through overseas intercepts and failed to disclose the extent of the problems until the final days before Donald Trump was elected president last fall, according to once top-secret documents that chronicle some of the most serious constitutional abuses to date by the U.S. intelligence community," wrote Circa investigative reporter Sara A. Carter.

Now, this week, Carter reports that the scandal is much bigger than suspected. A review of government documents found that "government officials conducted 30,355 searches in 2016 seeking information about Americans in NSA intercept meta-data, which include telephone numbers and email addresses," Carter wrote.

She notes that the election-year searches by Obama's political aides and other government officials jumped 27.5% from 2015, tripling the "9,500 such searches" in 2013."In 2016 the administration also scoured the actual contents of NSA intercepted calls and emails for 5,288 Americans, an increase of 13% over the prior year and a massive spike from the 198 names searched in 2013."

Before the Obama administration, under rules propagated by former President George H.W. Bush, "unmasking" incidental intelligence targets was strictly limited and frowned upon. Even after 9/11, despite increased surveillance of people with potential terrorist ties, the rules stayed in place. The potential for abuse, they knew, was too great.

But that ended in 2011 as Obama, using the pretense of fighting a War on Terror that he never even believed in, loosened the rules. As the Washington Examiner reported earlier this week, in 2013 National Intelligence Director James Clapper formally loosened the rules on "unmasking" the names of congressional staffers, elected officials and others.

That major violations occurred under this program seems clear. Last week, House Intelligence Committee Chair Devin Nunes in a letter to Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats noted that "the total requests for Americans' names by Obama political aides numbered in the hundreds during Obama's last year in office and often lacked a specific intelligence community justification," according to The Hill.

In particular, Nunes pointed out that "one official, whose position had no apparent intelligence related function, made hundreds of unmasking requests" in 2016. Speculation is that the official was U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power.

Is this a crime? We do know that the FISA Court, in a closed-door hearing last October, already censured White House officials for their violations of Americans' email privacy, citing an "institutional lack of candor" that had become a "very serious Fourth Amendment issue."

As a reminder, the Fourth Amendment states flatly that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated ..." Spying on, and then unmasking, hundreds if not thousands of Americans would seem to us to be a brazen violation of the Constitution.

Remember how the media ridiculed and shamed Donald Trump for tweeting out that he had been "wiretapped" by Obama? It's starting to look like that, or something like it, was very much the case.

If it turns out, as some suspect, that the "unmasking" was used for domestic spying on political foes such as Trump, it would constitute a serious crime and would require a special counsel to investigate it.

The immense size of the spying operation and the clear attempt to use the U.S.' intelligence apparatus for questionable personal purposes seems to be at minimum a violation of the law. If it further turns out that there was a coordinated effort by Obama and his aides to use the information in the 2016 presidential campaign, it will be a crime and scandal larger than even Watergate.

Yes, people will go to prison.

Is that what we have here, the political crime of the still-young 21st century? It would be nice if the mainstream media seemed at all interested in answering that question.

RELATED:

Did Obama Spy On Trump? It Sure Looks That Way

Real Scandals The Trump-Obsessed Media Are Ignoring

Is Susan Rice The Missing Piece In Obama Spy Scandal?

Reality Winner Is A Loser, And So Is U.S. Security

Continue reading here:
In Abusing NSA Intelligence, Did Obama White House Commit A Crime? - Investor's Business Daily

McMaster. Photo: Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images

H.R. McMaster, national security adviser and so-called adult in the room, is apparently gaining some ground over the nationalistic forces inside the Trump administration.

On Wednesday, the White House confirmed that the NSCs senior director of intelligence, 30-year-old Ezra Cohen-Watnick has left the NSC. McMaster had allegedly tried to get rid of Cohen-Watnick who was brought on by former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, and also worked on the Trump transition soon after taking the NSC job. McMaster reportedly expressed doubts about Cohen-Watnicks qualifications, but advisers Jared Kushner and Steve Bannon intervened on his behalf, and got Trump to step in and overrule McMaster.

Cohen-Watnicks ouster appears to be the latest sign that McMaster isnt done cleaning house of both Bannon and Flynn loyalists at the NSC. (And maybe its also a sign of a new order under chief of staff John Kelly.) In addition to Cohen-Watnick, Derek Harvey, another Flynn ally and Iran hawk, was removed from his post as NSC Middle East adviser last week.

These personnel changes come amid an Atlantic report that an NSC staffer was fired last month after a troubling memo he wrote arguing that globalists, Islamists, and the deep state are working to undermine President Trumps agenda, and threatening the country.

The NSC staffer in question is Rich Higgins, formerly director of strategic planning. Through the campaign, candidate Trump tapped into a deep vein of concern among many citizens that America is at risk and slipping away, he wrote in the memo, a portion of which the Atlantic obtained. Globalists and Islamists recognize that for their visions to succeed, America, both as an ideal and as a national and political identity, must be destroyed.

The conspiracy-laced memo reportedly also insinuates that the Russia probe is made up to hurt Trump and accuses the left of being aligned with Islamist organizations at the local, national and international levels, and:

recognition should be given to the fact that they seamlessly interoperate through coordinated synchronized interactive narratives These attacks narratives are pervasive, full spectrum and institutionalized at all levels. They operate in social media, television, the 24-hour news cycle in all media and are entrenched at the upper levels of the bureaucracies

Higgins apparently wrote the memo in May, though warning about the Maoist insurgency being co-opted by Islamists was shockingly outside his job description. Its not clear how the memo came to the attention of NSC higher-ups or why it took so long but sources told the Atlantic that the memo had been circulating around the White House and may have landed on the presidents desk. Finally, on July 21, McMasters deputy NSA Ricky Waddell (who himself replaced Trump appointee K.T. McFarland when McMaster took the job after Flynns firing) relieved Higgins from his duties.

In July, former Breitbart writer Tera Dahl also left the NSC, rounding out a string of dismissals for the Bannonesque populists. However, its unclear if some of the ex-NSCers will leave the Trump orbit for good, or be reshuffled to new posts within the administration. Which means McMaster may have an edge now, but the battle against the fever swamp is far from over.

The rule calls for a reduction in asthma-causing ground-level ozone.

In theory everybody in Congress favors a straightforward debt-limit increase. But side deals and other complications loom large.

An American ally is heard talking to the president of the United States like hes a slow-witted child.

Hes cut deals with the FBI, Russian oligarchs, and the president. Hes also quite a talker.

The vandals spray-painted f*ck Capito, f*ck Capital on the building.

Sources are saying the Staten Island politician may be looking to 2018 for a comeback.

After spending many weekends away at his resorts, Trump is now taking his first official getaway.

His punishment was to forfeit four days of vacation time.

It had sounded like hed be Skyping with America.

Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen much faster than you thought they could.

After repeatedly pushing off major undertakings like tax reform and raising the debt ceiling, theyre in for a truly hellish fall.

He suggested replacing the top general, but experts say the issue is he hasnt approved a new strategy.

A few high-profile firings of Flynn and Bannon allies including one who wrote a bizarre memo warning against globalists are out in recent weeks.

Despite Governor Cuomos assurances that wouldnt happen, the Board of Elections complied though it wont turn over Social Security numbers.

The GOPs plans to use the budget process for health-care and tax legislation are already half-ruined. The worst could be yet to come.

The Statue of Liberty doesnt mean what you think it does, Miller says.

Sanders, Biden, or Warren may run in 2020 and clear the field of pretenders. If not, Democrats could have the kind of field the GOP sported in 2016.

Yous guys should give him some credit.

Trump said an executive from the organization called him to say his speech was the greatest. Turns out, no such call was ever placed.

See the rest here:
It Looks Like HR McMaster Is Cleaning House at the National Security Council - New York Magazine