From the Washington Post: Retired Gen. John F. Kelly confirmed as secretary of homeland security

This is also a bit late.

- Click here for the article.

The Senate confirmed John F. Kelly as secretary of homeland security on Friday, putting the blunt-spoken retired Marine general in charge of securing the nation’s borders, including construction of the controversial southwest border wall that was a centerpiece of President Trump’s campaign.

Senators approved Kelly’s nomination to run the Department of Homeland Security, a sprawling entity of more than 240,000 employees who do everything from protecting the president to safeguarding the nation’s electrical grid.

Kelly, who retired in February as chief of the U.S. Southern Command, is part of the first wave of Cabinet secretaries who will begin to implement the expansive plans of the nation’s 45th president. 

DHS will be at the forefront of some of the most highly charged parts of that agenda, including the wall, which would be designed to keep out illegal immigrants. Kelly appeared to play down the wall’s importance at his recent confirmation hearing, telling a Senate committee that “a physical barrier in and of itself will not do the job’’ and that technology such as drones and sensors are also needed to secure the border.

For more on the DHS:

- Wikipedia: Department of Homeland Security.

The organizational flowchart for DHS

To elaborate on point below.

Click here for it.

From the Washington Post: Department of Homeland Security cancels national license-plate tracking plan

Here's some good news:

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson on Wednesday ordered the cancellation of a plan by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency to develop a national license-plate tracking system after privacy advocates raised concern about the initiative.

The order came just days after ICE solicited proposals from companies to compile a database of license-plate information from commercial and law enforcement tag readers. Officials said the database was intended to help apprehend fugitive illegal immigrants, but the plan raised concerns that the movements of ordinary citizens under no criminal suspicion could be scrutinized.

The data would have been drawn from readers that scan the tags of every vehicle crossing their paths, and would have been accessed only for “ongoing criminal investigations or to locate wanted individuals,” officials told The Washington Post this week.

“The solicitation, which was posted without the awareness of ICE leadership, has been cancelled,” ICE spokeswoman Gillian Christensen said in a statement. “While we continue to support a range of technologies to help meet our law enforcement mission, this solicitation will be reviewed to ensure the path forward appropriately meets our operational needs.”

Lawmakers and privacy advocates reacted with approval.

The Immigration Directive

 A few random posts regarding it:

- GOP Senators send letter to Obama challenging directive. The letter requests documents from President Obama proving that he sought legal counsel to ensure that he had the right to issue the immigration directive.


- Republican Representative King thinks the directive is unconstitutional because it violates the checks and balances. He promises to sue the administration.

- Homeland Security Secretary clarifies the directive. It is not an executive order, it is a directive authorizing "prosecutorial discretion" in who they bring deportation proceedings against.

- Lyle Denniston doubts the courts can hear King's lawsuit. Courts customarily do not second-guess the use of "prosecutorial discretion," unless that has been done in a "malicious" way that is somehow discriminatory or punitive in a special way.

What rankled Rep. King, and other members of Congress, was that Congress itself had refused last year to pass the so-called "DREAM Act" that would have achieved the same kind of deportation reprieve, so -- they argued -- the President was defying congressional will in going ahead on his own.

But the failure to pass legislation, or the explicit refusal to enact a bill, does not limit Executive discretion in enforcing laws already on the books. Congress does have the power, of course, to pass a new piece of legislation to undo what DHS did last week. But the votes are not there to do that and, in any event, such a bill would be subject to presidential veto even if it had cleared Congress.
- A commentator argues that Congress should pass immigration reform - maybe the Dream Act - if it want to adjust the policy.

Wikileaks and Espionage

Some musings.

The Scanner Lobby

The makers of the body scanners have lobbied Congress heavily to promote their products.

The companies with multimillion-dollar contracts to supply American airports with body-scanning machines more than doubled their spending on lobbying in the last five years and hired several high-profile former government officials to advance their causes in Washington, records show.

L-3 Communications, which has sold $39.7 million worth of the machines to the federal government, spent $4.3 million to influence Congress and federal agencies during the first nine months of this year, up from $2.1 million in 2005, lobbying data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics show. Last year, the company spent $5.5 million on lobbying.

Its lobbyists include Linda Daschle, a prominent Democratic figure in Washington, who is a former Federal Aviation Administration official.

Rapiscan Systems, meanwhile, has spent $271,500 on lobbying so far this year, compared with $80,000 five years earlier. It has faced criticism for hiring Michael Chertoff, the former Homeland Security secretary, who has been a prominent proponent of using scanners to foil terrorism. Officials with Chertoff's firm and Rapiscan say Chertoff was not paid to promote scanner technology. It spent $440,000 on lobbying in 2009.

For those unaware, Linda Daschle is the wife of ex-Senate majority leader Tom Daschle.

A visit to Rapiscan.

Despite All the Fuss ....

... nearly two thirds of Americans support full body scanners at airports.

Reports on Extremism

The Department of Homeland Security has released separate reports this year regarding first left wing and now right wing terrorism. Secretary Napolitano has drawn heat from some on the right for her concern that disaffected veterans might be prone to lash out at the government. She responds by mentioning her involvement with the prosecution of the last disaffected veteran to do so.

It's worth noting that the left wing report was the product of the DHS under the Bush Administration and the right wing report under the Obama Administration. One one hand we could argue that each side is trying to tar the other as unruly extremists, but on the other hand, is it not unreasonable to believe that left wing groups are more likely to strike against a conservative administration and vice versa?

The Right to Travel

I use the right to travel as an example of the potential unalienable rights that might fall under the heading "among" in the Declaration of Independence - see below - but do it with tongue in cheek.

Maybe I should rethink this. The Daily Kos points out that a recent copy of the Federal Register contains something called the Secure Flight Plan which, they argue, will allow the Department of Homeland Security to take over pre-screening passengers, which means that the federal government will have to give you permission to get on an airplane before you can fly.

This has been in the works for a while and administration officials say that this will not violate individual liberties.

Sticklers among you will point out, correctly, that this does necessarily restrict travel, just a certain mode of transportation. But still, where does this end?