Inspector Generals Open Probes Into Alleged Retaliation By Obama Executives
The Pentagon’s Inspector General has launched a preliminary investigation into charges of vendettas and reprisals against whistle-blowers. Charges include those that James H. Baker, the director of the Defense Department’s Office of Net Assessment (ONA), is retaliating against whistleblowers who warned of “rigged” contracts to outside consultants. CIA, DOE, DOT and many other Agency Inspector Generals are now taking up the glut of Obama Era reprisal cases.
The Adam Lovinger Case -
Acting IG, Glenn A. Fine, initiated a formal “Whistleblower Reprisal Investigation” Sept. 28 to look into allegations that Baker unleashed various reprisals against, Adam Lovinger, a senior ONA official. Lovinger warned about potential sweetheart deals to politically-connected outside contractors, including one with a woman Chelsea Clinton has referred to as her “best friend.”
The IG is investigating Baker’s actions under Presidential Policy Directive-19, an October 2012 directive designed to protect members of the intelligence community who report waste, fraud and abuse. The directive pointedly states that it “prohibits retaliation against employees for reporting waste, fraud, and abuse.”
Baker is an Obama holdover appointed by Secretary Ashton Carter in May 2015, who remains the ONA director 11 months into the Trump administration. Lovinger specifically protested $11.2 million in ONA contracts awarded over a decade to the Long Term Strategic Group (LTSG), a company owned by Jacqueline Newmyer, a childhood friend of Chelsea Clinton. Clinton and Newmyer first met each other while attending Sidwell Friends School, an exclusive private Quaker school in the nation’s capital. They were in each other’s weddings, and in 2011 Chelsea referred to Newmyer as her “best friend.”
Lovinger’s attorney, Sean M. Bigley, accuses Baker of continuing the LTSG contract in the hopes it could help him in a Clinton presidency. (RELATED: Chelsea’s ‘Best Friend’ Wins $11 MIL in Defense Contracts With No Clearance)
“We submit that Baker’s interest was his awareness of the LTSG-Clinton connection; his presumptive desire to exploit that to his advantage in the event of a Clinton election win; and the fact that contractors like LTSG served as a lucrative landing pad for ONA retirees,” Bigley charged in a Sept. 13 letter to Rear Admiral Kevin Sweeney, the chief of staff for Defense Secretary James Mattis.
The IG’s decision to launch a preliminary investigation occurred as former high-profile national security officials are beginning to publicly weigh in about Baker’s allegedly retaliatory actions.
Richard Perle, Ronald Reagan’s former Assistant Secretary of Defense, said of Lovinger, “He’s been treated so badly. It’s a disgrace.”
Perle called Baker, “a shallow and manipulative character that should have gone with the change in administration.”
Across the Atlantic, Richard Kemp, the former commander of British troops in Afghanistan, who worked for four years at 10 Downing Street for British Prime Minister Tony Blair, also denounced Baker’s alleged act of retaliation.
“He is a highly respected analyst across the board,” Kemp said, referring to Lovinger. “The way he has been treated is deeply troubling.”
Lovinger, a GS-15 attorney and strategic foreign affairs analyst, successfully served at ONA for 12 years and each year received the highest possible “E” rating in his performance review. The “E” means “exceptional” performance.
Lovinger was also the 2006 recipient of the “Secretary of Defense Exceptional Civilian Service Award,” the highest career award for civil servants in Office of Secretary of Defense.
But Baker poorly rated Lovinger in 2017, after he raised issues about the ONA’s reliance on outside contractors, including LTSG.
ONA is a highly-classified think tank housed within the office of the Secretary of Defense. It conducts sensitive strategic research, especially for the Defense Secretary, and the office is supposed to serve as a model of performance. For 42 years, ONA was led solely by one director, Andrew Marshall, who Lovinger alleges initially authorized many of the sweetheart deals with outside contractors. Marshall retired from ONA at the age of 93. Baker took the helm four months later.
IG Fine’s investigation into possible wrongdoing by Baker is being carried out by his “Investigations of Senior Officials Directorate.” That unit investigates “allegations of misconduct against the most senior DoD officers (three-star and above and equivalents), senior officials in the Joint or Defense Intelligence Community, and members of the Senior Executive Service,” according to the latest IG semi-annual report to Congress that is current as of March 31, 2017.
IG investigations under the Presidential Policy Directive-19 appear to be extremely rare.
From 2013 to 2017, only three case were confirmed under PPD-19 among the 239 cases the IG “substantiated” across all the military services and civilian Defense Department employees, according to the IG’s semi-annual report.
Several IG investigators personally met with Lovinger for four and a half hours Oct. 5, examining the charges of how Baker retaliated against the analyst, according to Bigley. The original meeting was expected to last no more than three hours. The IG office is formally attempting to determine if they need to intervene in the Baker case, according to a source with direct knowledge of the investigation. Fine’s office customarily does not provide any public information about the pace of IG investigations.
The first inkling of retaliation against Lovinger came Jan. 12, 2017, when Baker suddenly issued a series of charges against him. This was the same day that the National Security Council officially invited Lovinger to leave ONA and join the NSC as a senior director.
Lovinger entered the Trump White House on Inauguration Day, but was dogged by Baker.
After Baker issued his latest set of allegations against Lovinger, the Washington Headquarters Services, a bureaucratic arm of the Pentagon, temporarily suspended Lovinger’s security clearance May 1 and removed him from his NSC post. Lovinger now works at a Defense Department annex where he currently is doing clerical work.
Baker dropped charges in two of the three of his initial investigations after they were challenged by Thomas Spencer, Lovinger’s first attorney. Bigley said the allegations against his client are “demonstrably false” and called Baker “partisan and highly vindictive” in an interview.
Baker has leveled four separate charges against Lovinger. The counts include an “unauthorized” trip to Israel, taking home unclassified academic papers to read, reading a classified document in an airplane, and having “unauthorized” contacts with the Indian government.
Baker’s accusation that the trip to Israel was “unauthorized” particularly rankles Lovinger.
Prior to the trip, Lovinger said that he notified ONA of an expected personal trip to Israel to commemorate his oldest son’s Bar Mitzvah. The Lovinger family traveled with their close family friends, the Wiesel’s, whose patriarch, Elisha, is the son of legendary Holocaust survivor and Nobel Laureate Eli Wiesel.
Lovinger said that they only did “tourist stuff” and did not meet with a single Israeli official.
Another charge is that Lovinger conducted “unauthorized” contacts with the Indian government.
Lovinger’s 2017 performance review includes a statement from Secretary Carter, commending him for his work with the Indian government. “Two days prior to departing for the NSC, on January 18, 2017, the Secretary of Defense highlighted in an official letter Lovinger’s exceptional performance on collaborative net assessment with the Government of India,” the performance review states.
Nevertheless, in the same review Baker rated Lovinger poorly. “I do not endorse the characterization set forth in the employee input (that) Adam performed successfully,” Baker said.
As for taking home papers, Baker sent an email to all ONA staff Nov. 1, 2016, in which he said, “Team-…acknowledging our cluttered workspace: we all read widely and have to as part of the job — all source, often all mixed together. Given the volume of reading, you may sometimes take reports and so forth home. (I certainly do).”
Lovinger did carry a document aboard an airplane during a Sept. 14, 2016 official trip. Anthony Russell, the ONA investigator of the incident, noted in an Oct. 18 memo for the record that the document “is marked without security markings in the header, but with ‘Classification Pending.'”
Russell concluded: “It is reasonable to conclude that there was no compromise given the content of the document in question and its close control either on Mr. Lovinger’s person or in his assigned lodging on a military base for a relatively short period of time. For these reasons, no violation is believed to have occurred.”
“He clearly was the target, for political reasons, of an effort to push him out of government,” Perle said of Lovinger. “And this was done consciously and deliberately. He’s a Trump loyalist, and it was launched and sustained by an Obama holdover.”
“This cries out for an investigation of Baker,” Perle added. Kemp called the sidelining of Lovinger “a great loss.” “He is very much a creative thinker and he’s not constrained by sort of narrow lines that affect so many people in government,” Kemp said.
“As I understand it, he questioned the actions of various organizations within the U.S. Government, particularly the Office of Net Assessment. And of course, these may not be always welcomed by one’s superiors,” Kemp said. As for the use of outside contractors, Kemp said, “I’m aware they [ONA] did depend a lot on in the past on external contractors. It’s not necessarily a good thing.” “To get rid of someone like that on what appeared to be questionable grounds is potentially problematic for the effectiveness of the U.S. intelligence organization,” Kemp added.
Robert Reilly, who served for 25 years in the national security field, including as a senior advisor to Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and as a White House special assistant to Reagan said, “I’m very familiar with the use of investigations to politically destroy people.” “That they would yank a top security clearance on what seemed to be unsubstantial grounds is shocking,” Reilly said.
Reilly also said he didn’t think the punishment fit the crime for Lovinger, and that it appeared Lovinger committed insignificant security infractions. “There’s a disproportion here that immediately raises suspicions,” he said. “What was the crime and how does the punishment fit the crime?” Heather Babb, a public affairs officer who spoke on behalf of ONA stated in an email, “As a matter of policy, we do not comment on current investigations.”
The David and the DOE Case -
The United States Department of Energy Inspector General, The FBI and the Pentagon’s Inspector General have now been informed of over one thousand retaliation, reprisal and vendetta attacks against those who reported corruption during the Obama Administration. Another case involves a California man and his technology team.
“David” has been employed since 1973. He worked for his community and his country as a law enforcement and intelligence researcher (law/IC) in which he closed cases that saved Americans billions of dollars. He held numerous state and federal certifications and credentials to this effect and was certified as an investigator under the State Government at the California Office Of Consumer Affairs. He also worked as a CEO, Inventor and Product Development Director for which the U.S. Government has awarded him dozens of seminal patent awards for products in use by Microsoft, Sony and other major companies to provide products and services to billions of people. He has received a vast number of commendation letters from U.S. Presidents, Agency heads and Mayors. He is pictured in videos, photographs, articles, meetings and personal correspondence with some of the most famous public and White House figures in America.
After he, and his team, reported corruption in a trillion dollar Department of Energy embezzlement scam involving crooked uranium (The Uranium One Scandal is now in the news headlines), lithium, indium and other mining scams, he was attacked. He reported the crimes to both the DoD and DOE Inspector Generals in the Obama Administration and got a massive number of attacks aimed at him for his efforts to help law enforcement.
The pay for his peers, and his own past compensation, started at $10,000 per month in the local technology market for those with even less hours, less patent awards, less past work reference letters and less experience than him. He has now been forced to try to live on $800.00 per month because of the attacks by government officials.
He has filed for compensation and reprisal review since 2007 and every year thereafter. He started filing lawsuits in 2009 and has been filing them against federal agencies ever since. He has received no day-in-court and no justice, yet, from those lawsuits. The law suits have simply highlighted the epic degree of stone-walling, “missing hard-drives” and obfuscation that Obama DOJ, DOE and DoD officials are willing to descend to in order to operate their cover-ups.
He and his supporters believe that he has been intentionally discriminated against as part of a reprisal. The federal courts and law enforcement have ruled in his ongoing cases, and hold proof, that he was subjected to reprisal, vendetta and revenge tactics by State and Federal employees. Even though official proof of the attacks are on public record. Nothing has been done to help him.
In the Energy Department case, his task force helped FBI, GAO and Congress hunt down and terminate well-known public officials who embezzled taxpayer funds.
Even though he has been a productive, working member of his community and the U.S. Government and he has organized companies and programs which have paid millions of dollars in taxes to that Government, he is only afforded the most minimal benefits possible and has received no offsets for the reprisal crimes committed against him.
His current benefits amount is so low it is impossible to live on. County officials have suggested he “move to Panama” where it is cheaper. Even Panama, and other third world countries, won’t let you live there unless you are receiving at least $1000.00 to $1500.00 in benefits. You heard it right, Government officials are asking native-born Americans to leave the country. Did you think that the taxes you were paying were to underwrite State and Federal agencies who are trying to send natural born citizen taxpayers to third-world countries and deplete the nation of its human resources. Is THAT the “American Dream”?
State and Federal agency officials who made tens of millions of dollars off of his losses have cost him his life savings and nearly a billion dollars of potential income by intentionally sabotaging and terminating his operating, Congressionally financed, electric car company and his national energy company because they competed with Senator’s and Agency bosses business investments.
To be clear: corrupt State and Federal employees did this because his companies competed with their stock market holdings. These are the very same public officials who have interdiction capability at the very same state and federal agencies that decide the fate of his reprisal claims and work benefits. That is an epic conflict-of-interest.
These public officials, including U.S. Senators, defrauded him by asking him to invest in their program. It turns out, though, they were using his, and his group’s, business ventures to cover their crimes at the expense of him and the taxpayers.
Part of his work involved creating America’s next national energy solutions. He worked with the U.S. Department of Energy, HUD, NAHB and related entities in work with the national weapons and energy labs since 2000. He worked with nuclear, heavy metals, sintered rare earth metals, extreme solvents and nano-particulated exotic chemistries and won a historical Congressional commendation, first-ever patents, industry and press acclaim, customer acclaim and a multi-million dollar lab research grant in the Congressional Iraq War Bill.
He was one of the people tasked with building America’s back-up energy technologies.
In the course of his work he, and his Team, uncovered a nearly one trillion dollar Energy Department corruption matter which led to the termination of senior staff at the U.S. Department of Energy, the FBI raid on their facilities and an ongoing FBI investigation. This also led to a suspected reprisal exposure to toxic materials which will remain in his body, at a cellular level, for the rest of his life. This also led to black-listing and HR database manipulation attacks by attack firms such as Fusion GPS, Stratfor, In-Q-Tel, Gawker, David Brock Group, PD Group, Black Cube and related contract reprisal services featured in contemporary news headlines. They were hired to poison him and his brand and “terminate” him and his career (in every sense of the word).
Because of their service to their country, Adam Lovinger, David, and many others, have been denied their legal rights, their rights to a home and safety and are forced to live like refugees. Their U.S. Constitution and State Constitutional rights have been denied because they did the right thing and helped law enforcement.
The social media and independent news outlets have picked up on these kinds of cases and are doxing and exposing the corrupt politicians involved in these cover-ups. The family, friends, supporters, reporters and the public will now never let these matters lapse without a fair review. Every unbiased third-party review of this matter has concluded that these whistle-blowers “got screwed” by the federal and state officials who were supposed to represent them. Those very same state and federal officials own portions of David’s competitors business and stock market ventures. In the opinion of the taxpaying public: That us a felony conflict of interest!
The FBI case files, City police case files, GAO case files, associated cases federal court files (which have already had rulings confirming the victims assertions) and Congressional investigation case files prove that government staff corruption and a system of organized vendetta campaigns are operating against these victims hundreds of their associates.
This is not about politics. Neither Lovinger nor David are associated with any political party.
This is about vendettas and revenge. The U.S. Attorney General, The Head of the White House Press Office, The Director of the FBI, The Secretary of Energy and his staff have been fired, or forced to quit, because of these cases. This is a very large matter but it is not about politics. It is about felony level crime and the physical, toxicological, emotional, reputational, brand and strategic attacks on the public by government officials who held stock market holdings in competing interests.
Senior federal and state executive government officials, and their campaign financiers at Google and Tesla Motors, ordered, operated and paid for the disabling attacks described herein and those disabling states are life-long and, indeed, disabling. These victims have been subjected to hacking; HR database rigging at Taleo, Axciom and all of the hiring computer networks; toxic poisoning, death threats; black-listing; character assassination and internet trolling and bot-attacks; benefits stone-walling, and worse.
These targeted individuals, and their advisors, have asked the FBI, The GAO, The NLRB, Journalists and Congressional Investigation committees to track this next stage of their appeals because of previous conflicts of interest by state and federal reviewers and consultants in these cases. In the earlier portions of their requests for help, up to this date, most of the reviewers, judges, administrators, and consultants, providing input or rulings have been shown, by investigators, to have had a political and economic affiliation with the DNC. All of the parties that their cases has caused to be fired, arrested and otherwise terminated had a political and economic affiliation with the DNC as proven by their archived emails, social media data, photographic postings, event attendance, campaign contributions and forensic records.
Said David: “...My donation to The City of San Francisco of the Clean Tech Green community center building and my electric car company, along with my extensive spoke-person work for green energy and my help in producing the Federal Jobs Act Law would lead one to believe that I would receive support from DNC entities rather than hit-jobs. The organized crime profiteering by DNC bosses seems to have led things in another direction. Even though I have no political involvements, I have been targeted and victimized by the corrupt State and Federal officials who are seeking to run reprisals because of their embedded emotional political triggers and SEC-tracked stock market schemes….”
While Agencies has denied these conflicts, FBI/Congressional-class forensic evidence on every party who has handled the cases, so far, proves otherwise. Over 500 lawsuits and federal investigations on other people’s cases for VA, IRS (ie: The Lois Lerner Case), DOE, etc., have proven that state and federal agencies do indeed conduct illegal reprisal decisions against whistle-blowers, witnesses and others such as these folks. Now these victims are taking a harder stand. Said one: “...If any other participant in my review is found to have such an unreported conflict of interest, I and my associates will pursue that continued violation of my rights as a felony, with the full force of the law, the media and the public resources...”
Tens of thousands of pages of evidence and hours of videos proving these assertions have been posted on-line by multiple journalists and investigation organizations, on multiple web site copies globally, for the convenience of the court and related investigators. The mirrors include such free peer-to-peer public web Wiki’s as http://www.outloud.biz and thousands more.
Since 2008, Government has spent ten times more taxpayer money and time delaying these cases than if they had approved the original filings in a fair review. It would seem to be a smarter bargain for the Agencies, and the taxpayers, to simply settle these matters with the victims and end these disputes.
The victims have asked the courts to correct the record and bring fairness and justice to the finalization of these cases but their cases keep getting assigned to DNC judges who have financially and administratively supported the Obama Administration.
The growing numbers of victims are determined people. They, and their associates, will pursue this forever, through the media, law enforcement and alternative means ...until it is fairly resolved.
There are now over one thousand such cases and in almost every case, the victim is receiving no help or resources from the very government agencies they sought to help.
Tags: Adam Lovinger, Chelsea Clinton, James H. Baker, National Security Council, Office of Net Assessment, Richard Kemp, Richard Perle, Steven Chu, Eric Holder, IG, Department of Energy, Corruption, Uranium One, Uranium1