AG Barr Press Conference Announcing Results of Investigation into Terrorist Attack at Pensacola Naval Air Station – Video and Transcript…

Earlier today U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr announced the results of a criminal investigation into the December terrorist attack at Pensacola Naval Air Station.  The AG answered press questions at the end of his remarks.

Accompanying AG Bill was FBI Deputy Director David Bowditch.  Interestingly, Mr. Bowditch, as SanFran field office head, was the lead investigator of the San Bernadino terrorist attack prior to returning to Washington DC. [Video and Transcript Below]

.

[Transcript] – BILL BARR: Good afternoon, and thank you for coming.

We are here to discuss the results of the investigation into the shooting that occurred on Dec. 6, 2019 at Pensacola Naval Air Station.

Joining me today are David Bowdich, Deputy Director of the FBI; John Demers, Assistant Attorney General for National Security; Michael Sherwin, Associate Deputy Attorney General for National Security; Rachel Rojas, FBI Special Agent in Charge of the FBI Field Office in Jacksonville, Florida; and Larry Keefe, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Florida.

I want to thank the FBI and the other federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies involved in responding to and investigating the incident for their rapid and excellent work.  Many people worked long hours through the holidays, and I am grateful for their diligence and commitment to seeing this through.  You will be hearing from Deputy Director Bowdich shortly about the details of the FBI investigative work, which was superb.

In considering this case, we have to remember that there are thousands of allied pilots and other military personnel receiving training on military bases throughout the United States.  These military partnerships are critically important to the United States.  The Royal Saudi Air Force, which flies American-made aircraft, is an important military partner, and has long had a training relationship with us.

On Dec. 6, 2nd Lt. Mohammed Saeed Alshamrani, a member of the Royal Saudi Air Force, entered a building on the grounds of Pensacola Naval Air Station and killed three U.S. sailors and severely wounded eight other Americans.  Alshamrani was killed during the attack.

This was an act of terrorism.

The evidence shows that the shooter was motivated by jihadist ideology.  During the course of the investigation, we learned that the shooter posted a message on social media on Sept. 11 of last year that said: “the countdown has begun.”  Over Thanksgiving weekend, he visited the 9/11 Memorial in New York City.  He also posted other anti-American, anti-Israeli, and jihadi messages on social media, and did so two hours before his attack at the naval base.

Early reports indicated that the shooter arrived at the site, accompanied by other Saudi cadets, who took video of the attack as it unfolded.  These reports turned out not to be accurate.  The shooter arrived by himself.  Other Saudi cadets happened to be in the area and, after the attack began, they took some videos of the resulting commotion.  They fully cooperated in the investigation, as did the other Saudi cadets who were interviewed by the FBI at Pensacola and at additional bases across the country.

After Alshamrani entered the building and cased the facility, he proceeded to walk around shooting down his unarmed victims in cold blood.

During and after this heinous attack, there were many specific acts of courage, and I want to draw special attention to two U.S. Marines: Gunnery Sgt. Ryan Maisel and Staff Sgt. Samuel Mullins.

They were outside the building when they heard gunfire and, although unarmed, they ran into the building to confront the shooter.  Their only weapon was a fire extinguisher that they had pulled off the wall as they ran toward the gunfire.  Who but the Marines?

Although they were unable to engage the shooter, they helped save many lives by performing CPR and other medical aid on the victims.

I would also like to mention the heroic acts of Navy Airman Ryan Blackwell.  The shooter shot Airman Blackwell five times, yet Ryan still managed to jump on top of a fellow sailor to keep her from being shot.  He further assisted other students and helped them escape, all while taking additional fire from the shooter.  Airman Blackwell’s heroic acts also saved countless lives that day.

We are grateful as well for the bravery of the base personnel and local law enforcement responders who initially arrived at the scene and engaged the shooter.

I would also like to address the cooperation of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia gave complete and total support for our counter-terrorism investigation, and ordered all Saudi trainees to fully cooperate.  This assistance was critical to helping the FBI determine whether anyone assisted the shooter in the attack.

While there was no evidence of assistance or pre-knowledge of the attack by other members of the Saudi military (or any other foreign nationals) who are training in the United States, we did learn of derogatory material possessed by 21 members of the Saudi military who are training here in the United States.

17 had social media containing some jihadi or anti-American content.  However, there was no evidence of any affiliation or involvement with any terrorist activity or group.  15 individuals (including some of the 17 just mentioned) had had some kind of contact with child pornography.  While one of these individuals had a significant number of such images, all the rest had one or two images, in most cases posted in a chat room by someone else or received over social media.

The relevant U.S. Attorneys offices independently reviewed each of the 21 cases involving derogatory information and determined that none of them would, in the normal course, result in federal prosecution.

However, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia determined that this material demonstrated conduct unbecoming an officer in the Saudi Royal Air Force and Royal Navy and the 21 cadets have been dis-enrolled from their training curriculum in the U.S. military and will be returning to Saudi Arabia (later today).

The Kingdom has assured me that it will review each of these cases under their code of military justice and criminal code.  The Kingdom has also agreed that we will have full access to anyone we want to interview in Saudi Arabia and any documents relevant to our investigation.  Indeed, it has already been providing documents.  Further, the Kingdom has assured us that, if we later decide to charge any of those being sent back to Saudi Arabia in connection with this counterterrorism investigation, it will return them for trial.

We appreciate Saudi Arabia’s cooperation in this case.

Finally, I want to address an issue regarding the shooter’s phones.

The shooter possessed two Apple iPhones, seen on posters here.

Within one day of the shooting, the FBI sought and received court authorization based on probable cause to search both phones in an effort to run down all leads and figure out with whom the shooter was communicating.

During the gunfight with first responders, the shooter disengaged long enough to place one of the phones on the floor and shoot a single round into the device.  It also appears the other phone was damaged.

Our experts at the FBI crime lab were able to fix both damaged phones so they are operational.

However, both phones are engineered to make it virtually impossible to unlock them without the password.  It is very important to know with whom and about what the shooter was communicating before he died.

We have asked Apple for their help in unlocking the shooter’s iPhones.  So far Apple has not given us any substantive assistance.  This situation perfectly illustrates why it is critical that investigators be able to get access to digital evidence once they have obtained a court order based on probable cause.  We call on Apple and other technology companies to help us find a solution so that we can better protect the lives of Americans and prevent future attacks.

With that, I will turn things over to Deputy Director Bowdich.

[Barr Transcript Ends – Video Continues]

This entry was posted in Dept Of Justice, FBI, media bias, President Trump, Saudi Arabia, Terrorist Attacks, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

249 Responses to AG Barr Press Conference Announcing Results of Investigation into Terrorist Attack at Pensacola Naval Air Station – Video and Transcript…

  1. sundance says:

    About the Soleimani removal:

    Liked by 17 people

    • Re “immense”…What difference, at this point, does it make?
      Re attacks on the embassy…there must have been a vile video being played somewhere
      Re the workplace violence in the same state as the Pulse nightclub, we may never know the real motive of the shooter.

      And remember above all else…what we saw (fill in the blank) is not the true face of…

      Liked by 3 people

      • H.R. says:

        Your bitter sarcasm is duly noted… and appreciated.

        Liked by 2 people

      • sysconfig says:

        Looks like Barr was a liitle less than forthcoming in re Apple
        “Apple has hit back after US Attorney General William Barr accused the company of offering no assistance in unlocking devices linked to the Pensacola shooter, insisting that it handed the FBI large troves of data for its probe.

        Barr told reporters on Monday that Apple had not “given any substantive assistance” to law enforcement agencies looking to crack into a pair of smartphones owned by the shooter – who left four people dead on a Florida naval base in December – but the company directly countered the AG in a statement.

        “We reject the characterization that Apple has not provided substantive assistance in the Pensacola investigation,” the tech giant said, adding that it had responded to the FBI’s requests for help “promptly, often within hours.”

        The queries resulted in many gigabytes of information that we turned over to investigators. In every instance, we responded with all of the information that we had.

        Apple previously went head-to-head with the FBI in a lengthy legal battle over a similar phone-cracking case related to the 2016 terrorist attack in San Bernardino, in which the company refused to provide the bureau a backdoor into one of the attacker’s phones.

        Though Apple still maintains “there is no such thing as a backdoor just for the good guys,” the company has become more willing to engage with law enforcement in recent years, announcing in 2018 that it would create a special police “portal” allowing officers to request data.”

        Like

        • Snellvillebob says:

          Obviously, Barr wants to include the Apple phone into the crooked NSA database.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Chewbarkah says:

          Apple buries their refusal to help unlock the terrorist’s phone under the old “but we turned over a billion pages of useless crap” game. Smells just like Hillary’s response to demands for her emails.

          Liked by 1 person

          • JTaylor says:

            Yes, James Comey should have a permanent key into every Americans cell phone with financial, health, location, emails, phone calls and internet browsing data. That is your idea.

            Like

            • d2jlking says:

              This issue is so much simpler than it is being made out to be. No one is suggesting (that I’ve heard) that every iPhone should be opened for the government to intrude. However, if you murder people, I don’t care even a little bit about your right to privacy.

              Liked by 1 person

              • craig says:

                Encryption doesn’t work that way. We went through all this in the 1990s when Clinton tried to cram key-escrow requirements upon us with SKIPJACK.

                Basically, if there is a capability to unlock your device without your knowledge, it can be done one of two ways: (1) the vendor keeps an enormous database of individual master keys tied to individual devices, or (2) the vendor keeps a ‘skeleton’ master key that unlocks any device. In either case, the master key or keys become highly-sought targets for hackers and criminals.

                There are additional problems. In case (1) the vendor is strongly tempted to simplify its implementation and make individual keys derivable according to a predictable algorithm. This weakens all individual master keys significantly. And in case (2) a ‘skeleton’ key, once released, cannot be limited for use against the specific warrant mandating its release; it’s the government’s to keep and use for all time and all purposes legal or illegal. And if hackers manage to reverse-engineer the master key or keys, everything your device has on it is open to the world.

                Liked by 3 people

  2. sundance says:

    Liked by 15 people

    • Bob Parker says:

      With all due respect AG Barr, I do believe that We the People would have preferred prosecution/incarceration & where applicable execution vs expulsion of these bastards.

      This expulsion stuff reeks of “Catch & Release”.

      Liked by 17 people

      • mr.piddles says:

        Diplomatic Relations complicates matters. TBH, if I were this terrorist I might prefer to get locked up in the Good Ol’ U.S. of A. rather than go home. I hear Guantanamo is nice this time of year.

        Liked by 3 people

      • mopar2016 says:

        These so called professionals are getting our people killed.
        Maybe they all need to be retrained or let go.

        Liked by 12 people

      • Robert Shotzberger says:

        My guess they might face beheading when they get back

        Liked by 1 person

        • David L. Hull says:

          This comment brings to mind an experience in my Army career several decades ago, wherein at one southern US installation we hosted military individuals from a variety of nations including certain countries of the Middle East. One such foreign officer thought it would be acceptable to sexually assault one of the maids at the Bachelor Officer’s Quarters (BOQ) whereupon we summarily removed him from the program and returned him to his home country on the next flight out.

          The next week came the news that he had been beheaded by his home country for embarrassing their nation.

          Liked by 1 person

      • The Devilbat says:

        You cannot even imagine the dastardly fate that awaits those students when they are returned to Saudi Arabia. You can be quite sure that all of them would far prefer to be tried and executed here in the US. It is a far cry from catch and release. They will be subjected to horrific torture to uncover any fellow jihadis prior to their ultimate execution.

        Liked by 5 people

        • Robert Smith says:

          Yeah, people can wonder about the ultimate Saudi stance towards radical wahabbism, but they will happily and severely punish people for causing them these difficulties. Remember that the Saudis would like their big arms deal to go through.

          Liked by 3 people

          • Raghn Crow says:

            The Saudi Royal family, 20,000 plus of them, are loathed in Saudi Arabia. Many want to see them overthrown and liquidated.

            So therefore the Saudi bigshots and governing elites, very much, don’t want the Royal Family to be overthrown, which is exactly what these radicals want to see happen. So therefore it is logical for the Saudis to take this opportunity to torture the living Hell outta these (let’s face it) preferred “pets” of the Saudi system, for the Saudi rulers know what the end game of these radicals is.

            Like

      • GB Bari says:

        From what AG Barr said, it does not sound like “catch and release.”

        (Bold emphasis mine)

        The Kingdom has also agreed that we will have full access to anyone we want to interview in Saudi Arabia and any documents relevant to our investigation. Indeed, it has already been providing documents. Further, the Kingdom has assured us that, if we later decide to charge any of those being sent back to Saudi Arabia in connection with this counterterrorism investigation, it will return them for trial>.

        Liked by 2 people

    • JJ says:

      Deep State Billy Barr acts tough on these relatively minor actions… but when it comes to prosecuting the proven felonies of Hillary, Comey, Brennan and Clapper… he wets his panties and crawls to his Safe Space…

      Like

  3. Caius Lowell says:

    How’s the Vegas investigation going?

    Liked by 24 people

  4. mr.piddles says:

    You’d think with all the spying going on by our Federal Government that this Jihadi Jackwagon would have been easy to spot. *shrug emoji*

    Liked by 9 people

    • mikeyboo says:

      The only thing they knew for sure was “some people were doing something.”

      Liked by 7 people

    • Some old guy says:

      Not necessarily unless the Jihadis were Trump supporters. 😉

      Liked by 3 people

    • mimbler says:

      Well, he wasn’t a Trump supporter so he wouldn’t have been under surveillance,

      Liked by 4 people

    • Robert Smith says:

      They spy on domestic political enemies of the state.

      The FBI has a ways to go before they prove to me they successfully stop a lot of terror. We always hear them being in touch with these people in some manner. SO WHAT? So what if you always defer to watching them until they kill people.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Dutchman says:

      So, they have the NSA database,…right?

      And its specifically a necesary tool, for investigating TERRORISM, in order to keep us safe,….right?

      And, with it and the two-hop rule, they can listen to every phone call this pilot has made, email or text he has sent or recieved, PLUS anyone he has communicated with, or anyone THEY have communicated with,…right?

      So, WHY is Barr breaking Apples balls over getting access to the phone?

      And, since these weren’t citisens, (cause,we don’t DO Title 1 searches on American citisens, and if they do, inadvertently get caught up in a title one,search, we mask their names, just,ask Susan Powers) anyway WHY weren’t any FBI doing regular,searches of these guys, just to see what they were up to,….huh?

      Once again, I am left doubting these FISA warrants have anything to do with ‘combatting terrorism’.

      Liked by 3 people

      • zekness says:

        most of them probably have very little to do with terrorism….

        there are two known components within NSA…a military division…combat signit *CYBERCOM”..and a “civilian side “NSA”…each has a specific set of legal authorities they operate from and are constrained. The problem, as has been identified by many, even prior to Binney and Snowden, is that the compartmentalization from “users” of this massive data base often operate in both worlds…so the collection authorities become trivial..whereas the law prescribes narrown proportions…this is how the FBI was able to establish otherwise unreachable data from queries…they would mine the NSA side..and also glean aspects of the CYBERCOM side.

        now, where I live, how my mind works, is that terrorism is a military dimension….

        if you understand how the patriot act imposed new legal language and authorities to the FBI as the lead agency for terrorism..and not the military..then you understand how the FBI (and the FISC) operates to make little if not distinctions between military signit and domestic collections…it’s all very problematic..but it is now become all one big huge trough in which the FBI is allowed unfettered access..this means they can select targets at will..with little to no predicate at all…this has been going on for years.

        this is why RADM ROGERS is so important to this discussion and this predicate for the entire russia gate collusion conspiracy…he witnessed an unparalleled ramp up of selectors on signit that were aimed without FISC authorities at all! And for political figures, 100 percent aimed at this president and his associates. It did not take a rocket scientist to understand this was not some small development…it was a radical shift in the kinds of errors he witnessed before…(like looking at what your girlfriends was texting while you were away on business sort of thing)…nope..this was thousands and thousands of selectors and queries being made mostly by private contractors across both cybercom shared signit and domestic up and down stream…and it was two hop and about…

        RADM ROGERS raised the red flag…he is the one and only true whistleblower in my view worth the effort to get on the stand. He knows…

        Perhaps he has already cooperated..I would think he has. I know this person..I know his character. He is a principled Military Officer, who understands the constitution..and his orders. He followed them..and he reported misconduct.

        We shall hear from him..I am counting on it.

        I am praying on it.

        Liked by 3 people

  5. Boots says:

    We have asked Apple for their help in unlocking the shooter’s iPhones. So far Apple has not given us any substantive assistance. This situation perfectly illustrates why it is critical that investigators be able to get access to digital evidence once they have obtained a court order based on probable cause. We call on Apple and other technology companies to help us find a solution so that we can better protect the lives of Americans and prevent future attacks.
    —–
    Bullshit! The guy should’ve NEVER been in the USA. Now he’s dead, as it should be. Letting you and the other lying POS like you have unfettered access to American’s phones is how the liars you like framed Trump.

    Preserving liberty for 350,000,000 Americans is worth far more than you looking into one dead terrorist’s phone.

    Shove it, Bill, you know where.

    Liked by 14 people

    • trialbytruth says:

      Sometimes you need to read between the lines.

      “A court order based on probable cause.”

      You know like rule of law, like a legitimate search warrant.

      All most of us are asking for is a return to rule of law

      Liked by 3 people

      • Bill says:

        Again, you are missing the point or ROLCON’ing, TBT. The government is asking apple for something they don’t have. They don’t create back doors into their products. It’s part of their product sales pitch point. Some customers come to them for this reason. You can’t force a private company to create something that they don’t currently have. And if they did it, it would hurt their sales and further give the invasive govt the ease of violating our fourth amendment rights.

        The government makes a careless mistake like having shit laws about letting in people from terrorist countries without proper vetting because it might be racist, and then a bunch of people get killed because of it, and Apple should have to help them find new ways to violate innocent US citizens rights? Makes about as much sense as making guns illegal for all law abiding citizens that have never done anything because some crack dealer shot up a Starbucks. ZERO LOGIC.

        Liked by 8 people

        • grumpyqs says:

          Just wondering if Apple would be allowed to sell even 1 phone in Red China if the government did not have full access to the phone and data within it. Surely Apple would not differentiate between country ideology and politics.

          Liked by 4 people

          • zekness says:

            china DOES have access to icloud (just as the FBI/IC has access to it here)…iphones sold to china are modified in such a way that they operate with icloud that makes asking for backdoors to the mobile devices moot
            this is essentially what the FBI/iC is really after….but they will settle for apple building in a backdoor via an OTA update that allows from the same kind of thing that accomplished the same goal. The IC already has standing NSL with apple since 2003 for icloud access. The difference right now, and its important to distinguish the differences (china vs Us models) that the user in the US can control directly what if any information/data is actually collected in icloud at all….and the kinds of apps we use here are regulated by apple play security with a focus on this grandular control..In china that does not exist…whatever you do on a china model device will ultimately be captured by an icloud where access to it by the PRC is accomplished.

            This is one of the reasons why a iphone device for the china market is do very different…yes all the hardware security is there…but the actual firmware has been modified for full collection to the icloud. (and shared to/from other remote servers).

            what the FBI is seeking here, is that Apple push a similar kind of firmware update such that the users here in the US have “pretend” security and privacy…that collection of user communications and data is collected in the shared icloud framework that the IC has already developed and uses for almost all other tech companies (here is looking at you amazon and google and microsoft)

            Liked by 1 person

        • trialbytruth says:

          Well you can refuse to let them market a device. I remember a product “pretty good encryption” i beleive it was called this was about 20 yeas ago. Feds decided he could not offer his free product outside the USA and since he couldnt control who downloaded it poof it was gone.

          Oh and Bill how do you vet someone with a non logging VPN and an apple phone.

          Just Curious

          Like

          • Bill says:

            How do you bet someone? Well if they can’t be vetted you don’t let them in. How about that novel concept?

            I’m sure you’re all for letting in everyone as long as we can’t be perceived as being racist.

            Like

        • What about the iCloud data Apple refused to give from the San Bernardino bastards but gave up in a heartbeat on Manafort? There may not be a phone back Dior but the cloud is easy to penetrate. Look how Google now has most of our health records.

          Like

          • I guess my thumbs were thinking of fashion during my above post.

            Like

          • Ironclaw says:

            If I remember correctly about San Bernardino, the FBI acted stupidly. They had Apple reset the password on his iCloud account which gave them access to that stuff. However, when they reset that password, the phone could no longer sync data to the cloud and they couldn’t very well crack the phone because it had a feature that would destroy all data if the wrong password was used too many times.

            In essence, they didn’t take the phone where it could automatically sync before they had the password on the account changed and Apple did not have a way to view what the password was to unlock the device, nor could they view what the password on his account was before they changed it.

            Apple was the only major tech company that didn’t data harvest their customers, at least at that point in time. At that point, you set your access keys and Apple did not maintain copies of those keys/tokens/passwords. This may have changed, I don’t buy their stuff so I don’t really know.

            At least that was how I understood it at the time.

            Like

        • glissmeister says:

          From time-to-time the FBI is in the business of protecting the nation from organized crime. They need to face facts as do we. It seems the overall federal police cultural has transitioned into the business of criminalizing everybody else, and profiting professionally and financially from the practice, also seeking partisan favor and respite in pursuit of yet more wealth and personal advantage.

          Overall, the pernicious psychopathy dominating our Federal culture appears to have become the most organized ongoing crime of all; the most institutionally dishonest; the most uncivil; the most distorted and perverse; the most cruel and predatory.

          When we think and speak of Barr we should remember what confronts him.

          Justice Deranged.

          Like

      • craig says:

        You don’t return to rule of law by further empowering the same people who brought you secret, ex parte FISA search warrants to use against domestic political opponents, secret ‘red flag’ lists for depriving Americans of Constitutional rights without due process, etc., etc. The idea that government will only use the powers of the Panopticon against ‘bad’ people is the mentality of a child. (They must be bad, why else would the government be investigating them!)

        Either you have learned nothing from the coup attempt against Trump, or you’re a shill for the coup plotters.

        Like

        • trialbytruth says:

          So no return to normalcy. No return to rule of law. Got it

          So if.yoir neighbor walks into your yard and shoots your dog. Nails his four paws to your door and spray paints ” your next your neighbor Billy..whatcha gone do go vigilanty and wait for the cops to come and arrest you?? Or are you gonna do what normal folks would do gun up at home and call the police to confrount your neighbor…

          Rule of law.has to be returned or we will lose it all.

          Like

    • Lenfb says:

      @ Boots
      Your argument is one for increased vetting, which is just fine, but it is irrelevant in relation to acquiring info from a criminal’s phone.
      Whether or not a company should be required to assist should be decided by Congress.

      Like

      • tacocat43 says:

        Either it’s the law, or it’s not. If you don’t like it change the law, but if it is the law, obey it.

        Like

      • Devil in the Blue Drapes says:

        Yeah, no Lenfb.

        You want to give THIS Congress full authority to “order” private companies turn over encryption? I suppose you believe FBI will use the backdoor to surveil only “credible” risks.

        My definition of “credible” doesn’t jive with FBIs. But I guess it depends on what the definition of “is” is.

        Like

        • Lenfb says:

          No Devil in the Blue Drapes.
          “You want …”; “I suppose you believe …”. Really?
          Is assuming facts not in evidence a particular forte of yours?
          Maybe it would have been better to ask for a clarification instead of assuming?
          I said “assist”. In context, that would be assisting in “acquiring info from a criminal’s phone”. To me that would be Apple unlocking the phone or giving a digital copy of the unencrypted information.
          So my further comment of, “Whether or not a company should be required to assist should be decided by Congress.”, would go that type of assisting given that a search warrant had been issued and not turning over their encryption.
          Better?

          Like

          • Devil in the Blue Drapes says:

            Whoa, stand down “assuming facts not in evidence” Matlock, and address what I actually said.

            Assist, assist? What does assist mean? To YOU, “that would be Apple unlocking the phone or giving a digital copy of the unencrypted information”. That’s a distinction without a difference, no?

            I reiterate, Apple nor any enhanced communication company, while collecting personal data for greedy marketing purposes, possesses NO legal authority to spy on and use that info against a US citizen in a court of law…..the FBI/DOJ, not so much….

            We’ve hit a low point in this country when our fellow Americans, having ceded our constitutional protections post 9/11, with the knowledge of how the govt has misused and abused those trusts (and that’s just what we KNOW about), are willing to cede even more of those freedoms/rights.

            Until I see a clear and concise effort by these institutions to clean up this mess and hold people accountable, I remain skeptical of their motives. Enjoy that boot on your neck.

            Like

            • Lenfb says:

              1. “Stand down …”; “Matlock….”; “boot on your neck”?
              While your current reply surely tells everybody where your thoughts are, it is also hilarious nonsense.
              2. I did address what you actually said by pointing out you assumed facts to make your reply (which makes your reply irrelevant to what had been stated), and that you should have asked for clarification instead of assuming.
              3. A distinction without a difference? Wut?
              How is it you are unable to establish a distinction between an “assist” vs a requirement to hand over their encryption? Once established in law, the first is something that would require a court order, the second just allows the FBI to work on their own.
              It is very odd you do not get this distinction and continue arguing nonsense to what was actually said.
              4. “I reiterate”? You do? Interesting.
              Where in your replies to me did you iterate such to begin with? Then tell me how a law requiring Apple to unlock a phone of a known criminal after it has been court ordered is somehow wrong or a “boot on” a neck scenario. You actually can’t. All you can do is argue your made-up assumed nonsense of the company surrendering their encryption, which I reiterate, wasn’t argued.
              Assuming I am actually interested in a reply would just be a continuation and compounding of your previous errors.

              Like

              • Devil in the Blue Drapes says:

                I’m sorry I didn’t actually read your vacuous rant, but here’s hoping you’re back on your meds today 🙄😂

                Like

                • Lenfb says:

                  Stop the dishonesty and projecting your frailties upon others.

                  Like

                • Devil in the Blue Drapes says:

                  Just gonna drop this here…

                  The tech giant previously squared off with law enforcement in 2016 over access to the San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone. In that case, Apple fought the government until a third-party company provided a solution to break into the shooter’s device.

                  The ACLU told Wired that the government could be pursuing a political strategy aimed at strengthening its ability to surveil consumers.

                  “It seems clear they are more interested in the authority than they are in the data on the phone,” Ben Wizner, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, told the magazine.

                  https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/01/16/report-fbi-may-not-need-apple-to-open-pensacola-terrorists-iphones/

                  Like

                • Lenfb says:

                  lol Drop whatever you want, it doesn’t change the relevance of what I stated or the irrelevance of your replies.
                  It is pretty sad that some folks don’t want there to be laws that allow Law Enforcement to obtain warrants to obtain encrypted information on a criminals phone.

                  Like

                • Devil in the Blue Drapes says:

                  Are you insane or just seriously deficient in reading comprehension?

                  What part of “the FBI ALREADY HAS THIRD PARTY CAPABILITY TO EXTRACT DATA???? They don’t need Apple for this purpose!

                  So now explain exactly what further freedoms you’re willing to give up to the Stasi.

                  Are you sure you’re not campaigning for AOC or Bernie??

                  Like

                • Lenfb says:

                  lol Your insulting nature, combined with your replies lack of relevancy, only further establishes your inability to comprehend, let alone argue that which was actually stated.
                  Clearly your multiple insults only apply to you.
                  Again; It doesn’t change the relevance of what I stated or the irrelevance of your replies.
                  That you are off on a tangent that exists solely in your own thoughts speaks volumes.

                  How in the world do you think someone’s opinion (of no authority on the matter) which contradicts what the FBI says (an authority on the matter), matters one bit to what I said of; “Whether or not a company should be required to assist should be decided by Congress.”.
                  Let me clue you in; It matters not one bit.
                  Not only is it sad that some folks don’t want there to be laws that allow Law Enforcement to obtain warrants to obtain encrypted information on a criminals phone; It is also sad that those who know what PDJT is going through (accusations based on opinion) would use the same type of arguments in another venue.
                  Are you ever actually going to address what was actually stated – “Whether or not a company should be required to assist should be decided by Congress.”? Or are you going to continue to address the made up stuff you have swirling around in your thoughts?

                  Like

    • Loggerman says:

      Jesus Boots you are a moron. Getting a court order the legally let’s them get into this phone, who’s side are you on you stupid traitor?

      Like

    • Robert Smith says:

      I wonder if Apple similarly is non-compliant to Chinese requests for such data inside China?

      Like

    • lolli says:

      👍Boots

      Like

  6. hokkoda says:

    It’s a shame we only get this kind of action from DOJ and FBI after people get shot. Maybe they should devote fewer resources to the Trump Coup and employee “how to spy on a Presidential campaign and not get caught” training videos.

    It stands in such stark contrast to the glacial pace of investigating an attempted coup, that its hard not to laugh at the absurdity of it all…

    Liked by 11 people

    • Beau Geste says:

      the FBI could not ever even call assange to ask where wikileaks got the DNC emails, or give carter page a call to confirm that he was a CIA/FBI agent.! Maybe Apple has their phone numbers encrypted on an IPhone, to hide them from the FBI?

      Liked by 1 person

      • hokkoda says:

        Never ask a question you don’t want answered.

        Like

      • hokkoda says:

        Btw, in the case of Page, the FBI was flat-out told that Page is an asset. So they changed the email to “is not” and wrote it into the FISA. So, even when they knew the truth, they just flat-out lied. Heck, they had confirmation the dossier was bunk in Dec 17…filed three more renewals anyway.

        Like

        • Rob says:

          But, but, it was just an innocent, unbiased error when they edited the email to mean the opposite of what was originally written… Can’t fault an honest mistake now, can we?

          Liked by 1 person

          • hokkoda says:

            Can you imagine Chris Wray’s training video. “Hello. My name is Christopher Wray, Director of the FBI. I am here today to introduce our new series of training videos to help you, our dedicated agents and employees of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, tell the difference between lying to destroy a political opponent and perhaps overturn an election and making a simple administrative error that has the same goal but will not publicly embarrass me, the FBI, or your fellow agents. Because, God forbid, the public might just find out that we really are a corrupt agency that is perfectly willing to alter key evidence in order to put innocent people in prison. As you watch these videos today, I ask you to keep in mind the phrase, “What would Obama do?” Because, at the end of the day, if Obama would be okay with it, you’re good to go. Just, please, paper that shit over because I’m tired of being told that criminals, like yourselves, ought to be in prison for what you did. I have a cherry job lined up on K Street and plan to retire a multi-millionaire. So don’t f&&k this up. And for Heaven’s sake, stop texting things.”

            Liked by 2 people

  7. Frank says:

    I was on board until his Apple comments… until you can convince me government can be trusted don’t you dare ask for more tools to spy. It’s always a terrorist threat that is used to justify more surveillance, then it’s always found it it’s used on Americans.

    Liked by 25 people

    • WES says:

      Frank: Barr’s comment about Apple is just 100% cover-up! They don’t want anyone to look at what was on the phone. Now this will just go away and quietly die out of sight.

      Like

    • Manny says:

      Ain’t that the Truth..so as sure as God made little green Apples he loves his FISA court

      Like

    • Rob says:

      So I guess millions of people with iphones and a passcode can avoid government surveillance.. Hmm, somehow I doubt that. Barr is losing credibility quickly.

      Like

  8. If the terrorists would JUST register as Democrats first and get involved with the DNC, they could get away scott-free.

    Liked by 6 people

  9. RJ says:

    I don’t like this video for Barr tried to rehab the FBi and the #2 guy in the bureau is that bulldog face behind Barr’s right shoulder. This is where they begin to dig a big hole within which they both intend to “bury” whatever they can!

    Doubt me? Ok, listen to the argument about Apple not helping them to get into the Saudi’s cell phone. Now, keep in mind the NSA where every electronic communication is captured. Keep in mind how the FBI jumped into the NSA going after Trump et al.

    Why do they want or need Apple? Backdoor access? Just another step in taking total control…government getting access to everything.

    Welcome to a Soviet world where the State knows everything about you! Barr is coming across as not a good guy, not a white hat. That FBI mean faced guy is supposed to be the bad cop as opposed to the good cop played by Wray. Oh really?

    I got really bad feelings about Trump’s people getting to the bottom of the corruption, the attempted coup.

    Liked by 5 people

    • mopar2016 says:

      FBI: “Please let us spy on you even more than we already do, it’s for your own good”.

      Yeah right! If you want back door access, go talk to mayor Pete.

      Liked by 6 people

    • trialbytruth says:

      Communication sent encrypted stays encrypted on the carriers signal. The phone would have the unencrypted messages. Now they are of course in the encrypted files within the phones memory.

      If I am law enforcement and i have a court order i can have your bank records, your credit card records, your internet browsing history. I can search your car ,home.and property. If i am looking for something small enough i can have body cavity searches perform on you your wife and your children.

      But OH NO dont you use a court order on an accused murderer to force Apple to diminish its marketing capability to criminals terrorist and drug dealers

      Before you go all libertarian on me consider it is your child lying in that pool of blood. My guess is you would consider Apple to be an accessory to your childs murder. Perhaps you would be locked and loaded and looking for an apple tech with the code.

      This is insanity.

      Liked by 1 person

      • tacocat43 says:

        Completely agree, trialbytruth. When this happened in San Bernadino, i was not in favor of having Apple get into the phone encryption. But now after seeing what we have been through the last few years, I am afraid if they do not find the whom this monster was communicating with more bad things will happen. It’s like you can feel them cranking it up. So many things gone wrong in this story. The guy getting a permit to buy a hunting rifle???

        Like

      • JMP says:

        Thanks for the voice of reason.

        Like

      • craig says:

        “For the children” — really??!! A mandatory back door to encryption is FISA in triplicate. If Apple has a key they can give out, then privacy is dead. Law enforcement would gain the ability to violate anyone’s privacy at any time for any reason, legal or not.

        Liked by 1 person

        • trialbytruth says:

          So privacy if and only if you buy the brand new ultra cool limited edition Iphone approved and certifiedm secure by Rush and and made in China where all your secrets belong to them..Rush also sells Norton VPN where no one can track you….unless they have a warrant because Norton maintians logs of all user activity

          Do you think for one minute China and Apple can not data.mine your phone.

          You should have no expectation of privacy of any signal of any kind. We are all basically sending smoke signals up in the air for anyone to read.

          Want privacy, whisper in your lovers ear or use a courier you trust and sealing wax. The king never sent his private messages by Bell Tower.

          All that asside we are not talking about a secret court warrant. We are talking good old constitutionally valid just cause criminal warrant.

          Like

      • JTaylor says:

        There is no backdoor. Apple makes the phone locked down for the owners privacy. If Apple could come in through a back door then the owner would have no privacy. If there was magic software that could open phones then that software would be copied by dishonest people, like the FBI, and used against everyone. The very idea is the definition of stupidity. Does the FBI require all safe manufacturers to supply easy means to break in? Seriously, if the FBI wants the phone records just ask the FBI. They have everything on everyone.

        Like

        • Dutchman says:

          Sorry, JTaylor,..
          But your argument regarding safes is invalid.
          Many,…many years ago, when I was just a youngster, I burglarised a locksmith.
          Got pass keys, lockpicks, a drill with a strong electro magnet,…and a little paperback book.
          It listed every safe by brand and model, and told EXACTLY where to drill.

          People lose the combination, or amatuers TRY to break into the safe, fale but make it so the owner can’t get in,…and so they call the locksmith.

          So, I don’t know that the FBI “makes” them, but if FBI encounters,a safe, and they have a,warrant, they can call a locksmith and get in.

          Like

          • Kent says:

            Well, my statement about Apple is 100% correct. There is no backdoor. If there was such a piece of software the FBI and every intelligence agency in the world would have it. It does not exist and it won’t because Apple’s business future depends on delivering what it promises, which is a phone where the user controls access to the device. Period.

            Like

      • RJ says:

        Insanity is believing that every time law enforcement comes “looking” into every crack and crevice for clues they are trying to help the victim(s) of a crime, including demanding Apple open a cell phone.

        Insanity is believing whatever comes out of Comey’s mouth, Hillary’s mouth, Susan’s mouth, Holder’s mouth. Gore’s mouth, Wray’s mouth, and of course Mr. Truth Teller himself, Obama’s mouth! Lying got us where we are today in distrust…

        I don’t deny your point. What I say is that these “government” agencies that are supposed to work on the citizen’s behalf have lost my trust “to do the right thing” as regards the “rule of law” which is what this country’s foundation is built upon.

        You are correct in the abstract, but recent reality suggests one should gird his loins when government comes calling!

        Liked by 1 person

      • Devil in the Blue Drapes says:

        @trialbytruth

        I surmise most law abiding patriots would’ve agreed with your analogy (even though using “your child lying in a pool of blood” is a canard oft used to gain sympathy/agreement for your argument), POST 9/11.

        Perhaps the increased surveillance granted under the “expanded” Patriot Act did prevent further attacks on the Homeland, we can never be 100% certain.

        But with all the knowledge of misuse/abuse of govt surveillance of US citizens doesn’t give you pause, in fact just the opposite, you may be suffering from Stockholm syndrome.

        I for one am disgusted, as a blonde/blue eyed American, every time I have to remove friggin flip flops, be subjected to full body scan AND wanding AND pat down by a TSA commando every time I fly, while the woman in a hijab gets to keep her “religious scarf” in tact.

        The govt’s facial recognition pilot program is ready for full launch across all US airports. How much more of the Fourth A are you willing to relinquish? How about the 2nd A?

        Post San Bernardino, I too was in favor of Apple assisting the FBI a backdoor into the terrorists phone, however, thats NOT what happened……

        DOJ/FBI sued Apple. The case meandered through the Courts, until at the 11th hour, it was discovered the FBI had already (via encryption contractors) had already gained the desired level of access into the phone. DOJ suddenly dropped the case. Tim Cooke said he “would never trust the FBI again”. Of course Bowdich’s was in charge and his lies were entangled throughout the case.

        The Pensacola tragedy is being used by Barr/Bowdich to AGAIN attempt to force Apple to comply with their demands. No thanks. IF and UNTIL I see an honest, full throated admission and cleanup of the “intentional” mistakes of the past by the IC/DOJ, I’ll pass on their altruistic motives.

        Liked by 1 person

        • trialbytruth says:

          Umderstand but im not convinced the government needs special powers before the fact (fisa) We are talking after the fact gathering evidence for trial and to arrest coconspirators.

          This is also why i am not a big proponent of bit coin. I would like to know if he was funded and or rewarded and by who.

          Digs into his foxhole and prepares for incoming

          Like

          • Devil in the Blue Drapes says:

            and “after the fact” resolves what exactly?

            No incoming from me. Just a logical discussion in an attempt to foster more of a concern v “blind trust” as pertains to willingly ceding your constitutional protections to tyrannical govt. agencies.

            I posted down thread a 2018 report re: AWOL foreign trainees (2005-2017) and the basic/logical remedies that may’ve prevented this latest terrorist.
            Recommendation to vet/one by one “in person” interviews prior to entry to US was ignored by DoS.

            That’s just one example whereby govt agencies refusing to implement logical standard procedures to protect the US citizens.

            Isn’t Nadal/Fort Worth, San Bernardino, Pulse Nightclub, Las Vegas…to name just a few, enough to give you pause (to say nothing of the 2016 coup on steroids)?

            Your avatar “trial by truth” may be an noble ideal of which you believe is still possible….the govt has a different definition….ask Carter Page and Michael Flynn.

            Like

            • d2jlking says:

              This entire thread of comments is very interesting to me. It does seem that we are ignoring the elephant in the room. Our government run society has gone WAY BEYOND these discussions of ideals and principles. I am NOT for government intrusion, or giving up my individual liberties. That said, I am also not for foreign extremists shooting people as they go about their work day. I don’t demand safety from government. I consider myself responsible and accountable for my own safety. Frankly, the government has changed the law and the very fabric of our society to make it wildly dangerous. This “look at his iPhone” thing, is a band-aid. It does NOT address the real problem. It would probably “help” this particular investigation, but that is not what we need. What we need is to remove all enemies from this nation, and secure our borders. Start over, and return the government to the skeletal role it was given during the founding.

              Liked by 1 person

            • trialbytruth says:

              Again no argument of the abuses and continued abuses by those who are paid to and have sworn to uphold the constitution.

              My issue is again a rule of law issue. We have a dead perpetrator that shot his phones to protect something. I dont know if its pictures of his goat naked ,contacts with a terrorist cell, or a plot still in the works. T
              p
              is this is a just cause search warant issued in a constitutional manner and i. My mind Apple as being non compliant and hiding behind a million dollars worth of lawyers, As someone else mentioned.if it was Trumps phome there would be no warant required.

              Like

              • Devil in the Blue Drapes says:

                “As someone else mentioned.if it was Trumps phome there would be no warant required”.

                That’s an excellent observation in furtherance of my point….until we’re assured restoration of equality in the pursuit of justice in this land, personally I’m not in favor of “trusting” the LE/IC/DOJ to utilize said evidence for anything other than nefarious purpose(s) or to coverup terrorist activities. I mean it’s not like we don’t have any examples, right?
                Boston bombers
                San Bernardino
                Las Vegas
                Orlando
                Ft Lauderdale Airport
                Ft Worth/Nadal
                Garland Tx

                I’ll stop now.

                Like

          • zekness says:

            fyi…cryto-coin by the nature of block chain is NOT a privacy issue. The means by which criminals can be obscured is not established by block chain..but rather how intelligent they are to launder the “money”….this is NO different than regular fiat scheme….there is no practical differences…

            take burisma for example….it’s well known money laundering operation..how is it NOT possible to track down the criminals…because the criminals took care to learn how to shift the funds in a very complex set of transfers to shell companies in nation states where security and privacy laws are guarded against law enforcement and to have rather smart opsec about paying off gatekeepers within the state.

            I am not a fan of crypto…..all monies can be so exploited…is crypto more likely to be exploited in this way? sure! there is certainly an entire industry of cybercriminals that prefer operating with it….but block chain technology ….the backbone of what makes cypto “work”..is by nature something that can be tracked…each transaction has a public transaction “address”….that reality means it is not as opaque as many people really understand….the be clear…hard cold cash is far easier to conceal about ownership ….there are definitions of fungible that take on a far greater import when discussing the differences between hard fiat and crypto…

            btw…just to be clear: don’t be fooled, almost all without exception, crypto-coins is about the worst possible investment scheme anyone should consider …mostly because it’s a virtual concept that you do not actually own…it’s a trust that can never be fully evaluated or tested. Technically, block-chain is nothing more than a decentralized encrypted database…with no financial law protections…it’s the perfect scammers paradise…

            it’s a trap to avoid.

            Like

            • trialbytruth says:

              Wasnt aware of the public transaction. But thanks for the investment advice.

              In my mind i see some eager puzzle solving 12 year old in his pjs going look mom i mined 6 million dollars in bit coin today can i get an extra. Computer so i can still play games while.this one mines.

              Like

      • Ironclaw says:

        The real question is whether it’s a question of willingness or capability? If Apple does not store copies of people’s encryption keys then they may be willing to help but not capable. No amount of willingness can overcome the mathematical barrier that very strong encryption can place in the way. When I decide I want something kept private, I use absurdly long keys and I don’t care how bad you want it, the Sun will run out hydrogen atoms before you can crack it.

        Like

    • Robert Smith says:

      To be fair, the government has long had these issues with Apple. Well known in the criminal world/government (!) to use Apple for this reason. By the way, it’s why Mueller wiped Strzok & Pages device because, I assume, they had to give the government access.

      Like

      • abel says:

        just a thought/question, we can drop a missile via drone through a car window a million miles away and can track and do anything but we cant figure out a password or way into an apple phone? this may be, but it sounds unlikely. it almost sounds like theater. again, not an expert and don’t know it just sounds far fetched.

        Liked by 2 people

      • JTaylor says:

        Apple is also the preferred phone of those who don’t want rogue FBI agents or Obama appointed bureaucrats gaining access to their private data. It is the phone of those who like the 4th Amendment and distrust government and depraved people.

        Like

  10. Alexander Bocephus Hamilton says:

    I thought you said incineration and I am on board with that treatment for ass lifter terrorists

    Like

  11. akaPatience says:

    I hate to say it but have to be honest: why do I suspect Apple wouldn’t hesitate to unlock a phone if it belonged to a US citizen who’d killed some Muslims? AND, I wonder if the fact that the perp killed and wounded US military personnel may be making the decision even easier for Apple to refuse to cooperate with the investigation?

    Liked by 6 people

    • JTaylor says:

      Apple can’t unlock the phone. They don’t have the password. It is a secure device.

      Like

      • GH says:

        JTaylor-Wow. Do you really believe that? Apple can unlock the phone and so can the US Gov’t. This is another tactic to delay investigation

        Like

        • JTaylor says:

          GH, I not only believe it, it is a fact. Wow are you people stupid. Sorry. Apple would never create such a feature because it would end their business. People get their phones from Apple because they are secure and those people want devices that cannot be broken into by hackers and others who will then use ransomware and other malware to wreak havoc. This is not complicated except to the very dense. My guess is that you have an Android so you think every phone is a piece of crap where the manufacturer builds in ways that crooks and foreign governments can enter your device, steal your contacts, look at your financial records, access your health data. Because you are OK with that and you prefer the cheapest phone possible. Well, that is Android. Apple is the biggest company in the world because it doesn’t make that kind of crap.

          Like

          • Alligator Gar says:

            Apple uses Chinese child slave labor to build their overpriced cr@p. I’d rather have mine built by free adults. Thank you.

            Like

  12. mopar2016 says:

    What a great idea, bring in the cult of islam and put em in our military bases.

    Their phones were full of anti-American and jihadi BS, but that wasn’t a red flag?
    I’m surprised we didn’t give em a few fighter jets for more fun.

    Liked by 4 people

    • CM-TX says:

      Now, now… FiB aren’t allowed to “profile” terrorists. It wouldn’t be prudent– or something.
      They also removed any relevant material from their training manuals. So technically, they don’t actually know HOW to.

      But if you’re a Conservative a/o a Trump Supporter- well then your privacy/devices are fair game! But that’s only b/c we’re so super DANGEROUS! /S

      Liked by 2 people

    • Perot Conservative says:

      Can’t they train in Djibouti, Egypt, or Saudia Arabia?

      Like

      • zekness says:

        lets extend that argument to why is the US permitting radical death cult practitioners access and training to some of the most formidable cutting edge military systems?

        My view is that pensacola (and other case like it) make the argument seriously flawed that any of these islamist should ever be trusted with any training with US forces…it just invites a kind of perverse threat that should be avoided period.

        Let me be clear: SA is an accomodation for a very narrow set of foreign policy interests…I get that. But I have long since doubted that our Military give them any space or access to our hardware and training. The argument I’ve often seen passed around: if we don’t train them and sell them US hardware then they will acquire it from russia…I don’t doubt this…But I can’t overcome the nature of the threat that SA poses to our own national security…It’s a liars game…

        Liked by 1 person

    • Robert Smith says:

      Many in the Democrat base espouse anti-American views and some run and win office!

      Like

  13. Julian says:

    That was quick!

    Wow. How’s the investigation of those letters to Jussie Smollett going?

    It’s only been a year and one would have to assume investigating a letter would be far easier than investigating a possibly international conspiracy involved behind these Saudi killings.

    Liked by 4 people

  14. MVW says:

    Gun free zone? Had to grab a fire extinguisher to counter a gunman?????
    WTF.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Dutchman says:

      Yup, I believe all U.S. Military bases are essentially “gun free zones”, believe it or not (unless the policy has changed).

      MP’s on duty are armed, and anyone who needs range time, or for training, checks out their weopon from the,armory, uses it and returns it at the end of shift or training excercise.

      Gun free zones, where only the ‘police’are armed. Until some nutjob pulls out a gun and starts shooting people.

      Those whose only experience with the military is movies, think everyone in the military is,armed all the time, but it just ain’t so.

      Liked by 1 person

      • zekness says:

        this is not uncommon for “training facilities”….and this has been the policy for quite some time.

        It’s worth noting, on that same very Air Station, there are other units that are not training related that do not carry this same “gun free” policy….It really depends entirely on the purpose of the mission for that unit…Force Protection is made for ALL by military police and personnel are assigned based on risk assessments. One should not expect to have students carrying live rounds in handguns into a classroom. But one also expects areas considered high risk or high value assets to be protected to have armed force protections and the requisite armed personnel to perform that mission.

        What we just witnessed in Pensacola was a wakeup call to reform training centers and understand the value of providing adequate monitoring and a better assessment of risk mitigation for training personnel..particularly with foreign islamic varieties…

        I would imagine that now NAS Pensacola likely has regular screening and monitoring systems in place for students of these types (and others), and has increased the number of armed force protections types at key places withing the facilities..and hopefully some very good training and awareness refreshers to everyone at that station of what kind of behavior and activity to take action on.

        just after 9/11 all bases of every US military facility was ordered to complete a reform to harden the force protection regimes…I would not have imagined we have fallen backwards from that increased vigilance..but here we are…

        Liked by 1 person

        • Dutchman says:

          Yeah, on U.S. military bases, force protection would generally by military police, right? On the gate, patrolling the perimeter, and ‘roving’units, not unlike patrol cars of civilian LE?
          And, when these individuals are ‘off duty’, they do not have their weopons, right?
          Or is my info antiquated?

          Like

          • zekness says:

            It really depends on the base commander….and of course there are specific requirements for all base commanders for certain high value high risk assets.

            think defense in depth concepts …layers.

            for a relatively HIGH risk environment you are going to see restrictions such as no go zones with shoot ROE with signs posted (certain nuke sites, or command centers, etc)…and so, the base commander has to establish some minimums at all times…people are made to carry at all times,protections are enforced…narrow access lists..and constant monitoring…and hardened physical security. that’s the upper end of the spectrum in defense in depth.

            on the lower end, such as commissaries and exchanges and off base MWR facilities, where risks AND assets may be regarded as much lower than the above circumstances, and in some cases where military and civilian laws collide, these force protections are more relaxed per se.

            Just after 9/11 all military commanders were ordered to maintain the highest state of readiness for force protection. As you might imagine this meant many base commanders had to re-establish what that required…the training..the risk measurement and analysis and then to deploy….While one can imagine it was immediate, ideally this was not possible to achieve for many due to funding and a lack of personnel to perform this overnight. So there was a period of time to hone it. Ultimately it became a primary function to perform this responsibility routinely as part of the base commanders orders. Just as readiness and training for personnel has always been essential, now the base commanders would be require to perform and address all sort of force protection practices…What most realized is that the posture could never be a one size fits all…it had to be molded to the resources allowable against the risks that were measured.

            It seems (now) unfathomable that a training facility where future combat pilots go to train and where known islamists from foreign countries such as the radical SA, was not measured as high risk, high value asset worthy of a much more enhanced force protection regime. It seems that the level of personnel monitoring was not being conducted properly. It seems the armed personnel at or near the immediate areas of training was not being addressed. I think, I will assume, the military now has a greater awareness of the risk involved in these programs ..specifically, that death culture practitioners in the wire makes about as much sense as making a rabid dog your family pet. If the military does not smarten up on this matter, pensacola will happen again.

            Constant personnel monitoring..no exceptions…that’s the risk….so the mission has to be reformed to select for it.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Dutchman says:

              Yeah, after so many blue on greens in ME, you would THINK somebody would have anticipated this.
              Overeducated idiots establishing rediculous ROE, also establishing stupid, P.C. Rules of THINKING.
              Just like removing all mention of Islamic or muslim from anti-terror training for FBI.

              Absurd group think.

              Like

      • In Full Metal Jacket it was obvious nobody should have live rounds.

        Like

  15. SnapperCheeks says:

    Soooooooooooo “Apple” is protecting terrorists…????

    Like

    • JTaylor says:

      Apple is protecting the privacy of its users. Apple does not have any tool to break into a customer’s phone. If they did, they would have lied when they sold it as a secure device. There is truly an oversupply of ignorance on this topic around here.

      Like

      • SnapperCheeks says:

        Welllll duh JTaylor! Of course the device is sold as a secure device…that’s why all the “leaked” text mesages and other convos of people are seemingly made public at the most uncanny time.
        However, when the user of said Apple device broke the law by killing another human being….ummmmm pretty sure that user gave up their rights to protection of a “secure device”. I’m quite certain that most people in the CTH community do not suffer from “an oversupply of ignorance” however YOUR OPINION has been noted.

        Like

    • S&WJM625 says:

      Another one that’s dumber than a box of hammers, good grief.

      Like

  16. Blind no Longer says:

    As I recall not to long ago…a certain company had no problem giving up records to Adam “little pencil neck” Schitt…oh that’s right, you only give up phone records if there’s a possibility of screwing President Trump!

    As for the FBI and DOJ—I wouldn’t believe jackshitt they’ve got to say. I’m sure Bill Barr had to coerce them into saying it was terrorism.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Bill says:

      The phone company has already given the data they have. APPLE is saying they won’t create a back door to their systems as they don’t have one. It’s part of the lure of their product. You can’t force them to do it. And it is just another rouse to take away our freedoms. All because our stupid govt brought these terrorists into the country, TRAINED THEM HOW TO FLY PLANES AND FIGHTER JETS AFTER THEIR COUNTRY IS THE ONE THAT FLEW PLANES INTO OUR BUILDINGS KILLING THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS. And yet apple is the enemy. GMAFB

      Like

      • Rj says:

        Just remember and learn what a 702 is, it produces every thing about you. EVERYTHING you do and spend and where and who you talk to and they have ALL of our recorded conversations. Why do they continue to all these people to kill us ? General Nadal who killed all the soldiers in TX, the FBI knew everything he was doing including his terrorists contacts.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Dutchman says:

        Given the ordinance this guy was given access to, we should consider ourselves very lucky he only went on a shooting spree, with a gun!

        Liked by 1 person

  17. thedoc00 says:

    Don’t know the situation today but for officers and soldiers being thrown out of a training course in the US used to actually be a death sentence for nations like Saudi Arabia as well as several African, South American and Asian nations. Being sent home may be a death sentence in these cases.

    Had first hand experience from days attending the Armored Officers advanced course at Ft. Knox, KY.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Why aren’t our service men and women allowed to carry ARMS on base at ALL TIMES? WTH is that all about???
    They are sitting ducks for these scumbag terrorists.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Bill says:

      Liberals. That’s why. Absence of all logic. And our government goes along with these rules made by the minority of citizens that scream the loudest. Our government has become the insufferable parent that caves to all the demands their spoiled little shit child demands when having a temper tantrum inside Walmart.

      I’m so disgusted.

      Liked by 2 people

      • G. Alistar says:

        It’s more complex than it seems to be….

        Like

        • Dutchman says:

          Yes, it is.
          Weoponry on a military base is kept in the,ARMORY.
          The armorer maintains the,weopons, and keeps detailed records. If you need a,weopon for your duty, be it training, or as an MP, you ‘sign out’your weopon and sign it back in.
          Just like a vehicle from the motor pool.
          And, no ‘unauthorised’ or ‘privately owned’ weopons are (supposed to be) allowed.
          The military likes to keep track of weopons.

          I don’t know when this policy started, but I believe it predates P.C. Crap, by a bunch of years.

          Like

          • zekness says:

            yes, this is true…but what happens in pensacola shows there are weaknesses beyond the simple frameworks..

            how do you inspect personnel and check them? at the gate..packages? do the regulations exist to inspect for it? kniives? box cutters? lets think big here.

            the problem is that base commanders have to establish specific orders for force protection types to follow…that’s the framework.

            bigger picture here: why is SA death culture practitioners as US student pilots in training at the facilities a good idea to begin with? Does this mean that base commanders have to consider and vette against the next terrorists? yes…it does. How to do it? that’s the big problem…the reality is that you really can’t perform perfect regimes to protect against this

            blue on green is going to happen…it’s only a matter of time.

            and can only be stopped when the military realizes that inviting death culture practitioners is a no-starter.

            Liked by 1 person

      • Bill- you and me both! I cannot take the Leftist Commie indoctrination that has completely taken over my small town and the surrounding suburbs of NYC. Example- guess what’s coming to our local library? DRAG QUEEN STORY HOUR.
        When somebody posted on the local FB page I thought it was a joke! Not only that, but the FB mob is out in full force if anyone even suggests that maybe it’s not such a good idea to allow big hairy men dressed in tutus and fairy costumes to have access to little children.
        This whole DQSH is part of an agenda to “normalize” perversions such as pedophilia.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Perot Conservative says:

      Even just 10% or 20% would have stopped this.

      Liked by 1 person

  19. decisiontime16 says:

    If we didn’t have Islamic trainees here at our military bases, none of this would happen. Putting our soldiers in peril right at home by bringing in incompatible people for them to train.
    Besides the cost to bodily harm, who pays to train these Saudi Arabian people? The American taxpayers?

    Liked by 2 people

  20. JohnCasper says:

    I read the first line, “AG Barr Press Conference Announcing Results of Investigation “, and for one brief moment I thought “into FBI and DOJ” and then my hopes were dashed … … yet again.

    Liked by 2 people

  21. Rj says:

    Do you mean in just over a month the corrupted DOJ can do an investigation and come to this conclusion? Wow what a miracle and most of us knew from day one what this was. Saudi Arabia is the head of the snake of All terrorists activity and every Saudi should be removed from this country and those involved in the killing of our soldiers should be instantly brought to GITMO and just remember folks every Muslim who gives at their mosque gives a jihad tax. Illegals kill Americans and are released from jail, China and Mexico kill Americans by the hundreds of thousands directly and not one thing happens. BB is no different then RR or Janet Reno or Eric Holder.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. MVW says:

    After Huber’s white wash of Clinton, and DOJ continued mistreatment of Flynn, I am ready for Trump to take a fire hose to the FBI and DOJ.

    Bondo Barr is not curing Obama’s mortal wounds to the FBI & DOJ. The contrasting Huber treatment of Clinton and DOJ mistreatment of Flynn UNDER Barr’s administration has put fresh logs on the fire boiling the pot of witches septic brew.

    Trump has to fix this, really fix this. Barr has failed to do what needs to be done….Huber, Flynn.

    I am done with excuses, yeah, I know, fig leaf for impeachment. I am ready for Ghost of Andrew Jackson.

    [And I am sick of gun free zones. 15 minutes free shooting, 8 minutes to respond? And Las Vegas is still festering.]

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dutchman says:

      The POTUS is the “Chief law enforcement officer of the United States.
      He takes an oath to faithfully execute,..

      He said he doesn’t WANT to, but if he detirmines its the ONLY way he can and will step in and take over the,DOJ.

      He is also on record saying he didn’t want to be POTUS, and only stepoed in when he realised no one else would or could.
      After Nov., he can fire a bunch of people, at DOJ and FBI, take charge directly, and hire as “Councilor to the Potus” (which doesn’t require confirmation) several people to assist him.
      He doesn’t have to worry about reelection, so he’ll have more flexibility.
      And what,are they gonna do,….impeach him?
      Or, God forbid call him a TYRANT?
      Uh, say he is conspiring with Putin, perhaps?

      Like

  23. JohnCasper says:

    Attention pentagon!

    Old Proverb: “If you do not put sharks in your base swimming pool, your military personnel are less likely to be eaten”.

    Liked by 1 person

    • G. Alistar says:

      Selection and allocations for foreign training with US Armed Forces on military posts, camps and stations is a function of the Dept of State, not the Department of a Defense. The actual training is completed by the services under a Title 10 US Code who train, man and equip the Army, Navy, USAF and Marines.

      Like

  24. alliwantissometruth says:

    Two questions I would have liked Barr to ask…

    I’m wondering why we’re training these foreign pilots / soldiers here and not over there, given the number of problems already?

    Why in Gods name are military soldiers, those entrusted and authorized to protect our nation, not allowed to carry or have quick access to weapons at a military bases?

    Liked by 1 person

    • G. Alistar says:

      They are, IF married and live in on post housing, They are not allowed to conceal and carry like in most states when going to the on post establishments and offices. Soldiers who live in the Baracks cannot keep personal weapons in their wall locker or car or room, rather they must be locked in the company or battalion Arms Room. Their weapons are available for sports shooting and hunting. A red herring is the comparison of Soldiers deployed in a combat zone carries 24/7….and he/she does. But keep in mind when deployed, Soldiers are restricted from any alcohol and they have little time to spend outside of their military duties. When in a training environment and day to day activities, most readers have NO clue the type of trouble, grab ass and problems a bunch of young Soldiers can get into when they are drunk. When they are drunk and someone is packing heat….bad things happen. During most training and field exercises, while carrying weapons 24/7, they are not loaded. Ammo meets weapons mostly on the shooting ranges. Second Amendment for the Services is also a red herring argument as being in the military you give up untold civilian constitutional and other legal rights. Complex issue….IMHO.

      Liked by 1 person

  25. Streak 264 says:

    I wonder why Wray was left out of this.
    You would think he would want in on this presser.

    Like

  26. Chiefco says:

    The key takeaway for me is that foreign nationals working with the US military were Screened once they were already in the United States. AG Barr states that background checks will be before they step foot on our soil. I applaud this change… it is due diligence that is needed.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. Perot Conservative says:

    Barr contradicted himself: he said one individual had a “significant” number of child pornography images, but he gets a pass.

    (While George Bush Jr. was president, Bernie Ward of KGO Radio in San Francisco got i believe 5 years in prison for distributing child pornography. I believe he had over 400 images.)

    Talk about a white, non diverse press pool. What, 3 African Americans? Hypocrites!

    Like

  28. Boots says:

    Meanwhile, Dems get Senate to void law forbidding Congress from funding gun control studies, as Senate approves House Bill to give CDC and Center For Gun Violence $25 million.

    https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/design-ar-15-derail-charges-tied-popular-rifle-68252403

    Like

  29. coltlending says:

    It seems to me every Saudi Cadet ought to be sent back to the Kingdom and vetted before being allowed to step foot on NAS Pensacola.

    No way no how should Apple give the FBI keys to anything.

    We’ll take our chances, thank you.

    🙏 to the families of the fallen and injured.

    Like

  30. TheLastDemocrat says:

    Far too late. The ovr stayed visa crowd should not even have been here to hijack the 9-11 planes.

    We are a joke to these anti-American foreigners, and we are afraid to monitor these guests or require them to abide by the rules they agreed to.

    Where has it got us?

    If we are the worst nation on the planet, then some one else can train everyone’s military.

    Kitchen closed.

    Liked by 2 people

  31. 335blues says:

    Barr should ask Boasberg if he has trashed his Constitutional oath
    by appointing Kris to look into the FISA court.

    Liked by 2 people

  32. suncc49 says:

    Seems like quite a high statistic of those within Saudi military who are looking at jihadi propaganda… wonder how stable things really are

    Liked by 2 people

  33. Bowditch oversaw the San Bernardino investigation as Assistant Director in Charge of the Los AngelesFBI office, not the San Francisco FBI Office.

    Like

  34. hawkins6 says:

    I thought Deputy Director Bowdich looked like a strong genuine law enforcement type and not at all like the duplicitous suit McCabe and others like Redwood Comey seemed to be. He was a patrol officer for the Albuquerque Police from 1991 to 1995 and lastly as a detective in the N. Valley. (Albuquerque Journal)

    He joined the FBI in 1995 and served as a Swat member and then was a Special Agent on the Joint Terrorism Task force and a lot more. It appears to me that he is a very experienced and competent law enforcement official. In April 2016, he became Associate Deputy Director and of course in Mar, 2018, he became Deputy Director. Given his experience, knowledge and personal strengths, it might not be surprising to believe that he earned his promotions honestly and not by being a DS stooge.

    It’s possible that Mr. Bowdich was “at the center of the small group in Washington DC who were doing the Trump investigation” because he had been justly promoted and did not join the Comey-McCabe–Strzok etc coup attempt—-Bowdich fired Strzok.

    However, Mr. Bowdich’s determined efforts in partnering with Director Wray in stonewalling the release of long sought transcripts by Judicial Watch and the Nunes GOP Congress and other numerous documents “that could shed light on the DS corruption against POTUS” is still puzzling. Although he’s Wray’s Deputy and not his boss. Maybe Durham will make sense of this–or not.

    Liked by 1 person

  35. WES says:

    This Barr speech was just another example of Barr covering up.

    Said the talk but no action.

    Now issue goes away to die out of sight as intended.

    Like

  36. Mike in a Truck says:

    Since these “pilots” are in some way connected to the royal family I doubt they will be punished. In fact they will probably be hailed as heroes if not upon their return then later when things settle down.

    Like

  37. JimFromNH says:

    At least Barr didn’t “Huber” the Pensacola case-
    Sometimes speaking to witnesses & talking to those affected, can apparently make all the difference in an investigation. Huh…
    Glad to see Barr didn’t let his subordinates submerge that Florida decision.

    Liked by 1 person

  38. Rynn69 says:

    People are tiring of Barr and his BS. American people WANT FRE@KING JUSTICE.

    Liked by 2 people

  39. John-Y128 says:

    Why don’t we use our base in Cuba for training all [5000+] foreigners, at least during off duty they won’t be buying firearms for ‘hunting’ of our citizens. They could do practice bombing runs on Venezuela. And have the defense contractors donate to the families [write it off as training] of the 3 servicemen lost at Pensacola.

    Liked by 1 person

  40. abel says:

    why am i listening to a fraud ag tell me saudis sponsor and are terrorists that we once again trained to fly planes to kill us? i dont need barr to investigate this, i already know it.
    i need barr to uphold some law any law really that holds communists and terrorists accountable. this man is a fraud. wray is a fraud. the president is failing in his law enforcement picks.

    Liked by 1 person

  41. Devil in the Blue Drapes says:

    Increased vetting BEFORE they’re granted entry to the US? Well there’s a novel idea. I mean its not as if there’s been an inkling of a problem since 9/11 whereby trainees from Muslim countries demonstrating ulterior motives for entry to the US, right?

    Oh wait….between 2005-2017, 320 trainees went AWOL, and thats just the ones included in this report. Pre 2005? Who knows?

    FTA: Our analysis showed that between 2005 and 2017 253,977 foreign trainees came to the United States for training, 2,537 of these trainees were from Afghanistan. During this time 320 foreign trainees went AWOL while training in the United States. Of the 320, 152 (47.5 percent) of the AWOL trainees were from Afghanistan.

    https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/special%20projects/SIGAR-18-03-SP.pdf

    Sopar’s report/recommendations to US Dept of State (under Tillerson), were ignored or declined.

    For instance, some of the Afghan trainees were here for ESL training (I guess we can’t instruct them on English in their own country)? Sopar recommended “in person” interviews for all foreign military. DoS….nay, not gonna do that.

    Liked by 1 person

  42. moe ham head says:

    bill blah sucks again

    Like

  43. timothy says:

    amazing how quickly some of “these things take time” invesrigations go.

    Like

  44. William says:

    It took barely a month of investigation and charges have been brought against the terrorist and others after the Pensacola shooting. It is nearly a year William Barr began the investigation of the corrupt action of government officials in the 2016 election. Yet not one person has been charged to date.

    Liked by 1 person

  45. lolli says:

    In these situations, Ben Franklin’s quote, to me, is always applicable.
    “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”.

    These political rats bring terrorists into our country, then use them as an excuse to strip away citizens rights.
    Anyone remember 911? /(s).
    Patriot Act was already written, they just needed an excuse to implement it.

    Liked by 1 person

  46. iwasthere says:

    D9es Bowditch address the issue of the lawful gun purchase? I didn’t know a person on a student visa was allowed to purchase a gun.

    Like

  47. RC23321 says:

    So what ever happened to Bondo’s “investigation” of Epstein’s death?

    Like

    • lolli says:

      If I remember correctly, Bondo said it was a suicide. And conspiracy theories are illegal, now.
      So, move along…they have provided additional entertainment to distract you.

      Like

  48. Rob says:

    Would be nice if they checked FB posts of foreign nationals in our military before they conduct a terrorist attack, instead of after. And why are military bases an easier target than an average high school?

    Liked by 1 person

  49. JTaylor says:

    It is high time Bill Barr protect American’s rights to illegal search and seizure as well as Apple. Barr has in his employ hundreds of people who have participated in lying to secret courts so that illegal surveillance could be done not just on a suspect, but on tens of thousands of non-suspects who may have once upon a time talked with that suspect. Barr has employees who manufacture evidence, frame innocent people, conspire to overthrow a President. All this has been documented for years with the guilty parties known and yet AG Barr has not indicted a single one of these crooked cops. Not one. So, stop lecturing Apple and start doing your damn job, Mr. Barr.

    Liked by 1 person

  50. S&WJM625 says:

    hope Bondo Barr gets the Comey treatment along with Wray in November. Never seen an AG this sh*tty.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s