Jump to content

7 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: IR-1/CR-1 Visa Country: Canada
Timeline
Posted

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-benghazi-investigator-says-he-was-fired-unlawfully/ar-AAfj3ZS?ocid=ansmsnnews11



WASHINGTON — The Republican leaders of a House committee who have been in a bitter partisan battle with Democrats are enmeshed in a new fight with one of the committee’s former staff members.


A former investigator for the Republicans on the House Select Committee on Benghazi plans to file a complaint in federal court next month alleging that he was fired unlawfully in part because his superiors opposed his efforts to conduct a comprehensive investigation into the 2012 attack on the American diplomatic mission in the Libyan city rather than focus primarily on the role of the State Department and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.


The former investigator, Bradley F. Podliska, a major in the Air Force Reserve who is on active duty in Germany, also claims that the committee’s majority staff retaliated against him for taking leave for several weeks to go on active duty. If true, the retaliation would violate the federal Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994, which Major Podliska plans to invoke in his complaint, according to a draft that was made available to The New York Times.


The case is now in a confidential mediation phase, limiting what the Republican-led staff can publicly say about the matter.


The committee firmly disputed Major Podliska’s allegations, saying Saturday that he had been “terminated for cause.”


A committee spokesman, Jamal Ware, cited Major Podliska’s “repeated efforts, of his own volition, to develop and direct committee resources to a PowerPoint ‘hit piece’ on members of the Obama administration, including Secretary Clinton, that bore no relationship whatsoever to the committee’s current investigative tone, focus or investigative plan.”


Sign Up For NYT Now's Morning Briefing Newsletter


“Thus, directly contrary to his brand-new assertion, the employee actually was terminated, in part, because he himself manifested improper partiality and animus in his investigative work,” Mr. Ware said. “The committee vigorously denies all of his allegations. Moreover, once legally permitted to do, the committee stands ready to prove his termination was legal, justified and warranted — on multiple levels.”


In countering the complaints, Mr. Ware said Major Podliska had “never previously raised any allegation with respect to his work involving Secretary Clinton (other than that he was not allowed to do it) throughout.”


In his complaint, Major Podliska, 41, acknowledges that he was told that he was being fired for three infractions, the most serious of which was mishandling classified information, although he disputes the charge. Major Podliska is seeking compensation for lost wages, reinstatement in his former job if possible and, if not, future wages that he will forgo as a result of his termination. He is also seeking an injunction requiring the committee to follow the uniformed employment law.


The House committee is under increasing criticism for what critics say is the partisan nature of its investigation. In late September, Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the House majority leader, rekindled these suspicions when he suggested that damaging Mrs. Clinton’s presidential prospects was a welcome byproduct of the committee’s investigation.


“Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right?” Mr. McCarthy said on Fox News. “But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.”


Major Podliska, a lifelong Republican, holds a doctorate in political science from Texas A&M University and spent more than 15 years working at a federal defense agency, as an intelligence analyst for much of that time.


In September 2014, he began working for the Benghazi committee, on which his role was to investigate the way that various federal agencies in Washington responded to the attack, in which four Americans, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, were killed.


Major Podliska claims that through February, he was repeatedly praised for his work by his superiors, including Phil Kiko, the staff director for the Republican majority.


But two things changed in March, Major Podliska said. First, after revelations that Mrs. Clinton relied exclusively on a private email server for her State Department correspondence, the committee became preoccupied with the State Department’s role in the controversy surrounding the Benghazi attack and less interested in a comprehensive investigation.


Second, Major Podliska informed his superiors around the same time that he would need to perform 39 days of active duty for the Air Force in Germany in a handful of intervals, beginning with the middle of that month. (The length of the leave later rose slightly.)


According to Major Podliska’s complaint, Mr. Kiko responded to his email saying, “wow.” The complaint alleges that another senior staff member, Dana Chipman, who had served as the Army’s judge advocate general, questioned whether he “really needs to go to Germany.”


Major Podliska said in an interview that he believed they were both skeptical of his obligations as a reservist and annoyed that he would take time off just as the committee had received its biggest break since being formed in May 2014 — the Clinton email revelations.


Major Podliska said that when he returned from active duty in late March, much of the committee staff, which had been investigating a variety of leads across numerous agencies, had been redeployed to focus primarily on Mrs. Clinton and the State Department.


Despite the change in focus, Major Podliska continued to work on his examination of the response in Washington to the attack, only to meet escalating resistance from his superiors, according to his complaint. In his view, they felt he was not focusing enough on Mrs. Clinton’s alleged mistakes, a criticism he considered odd given that his findings were far from favorable to her.


“My thing was actually related to Hillary — I just wasn’t all in on Hillary,” he said in the interview. “I was finding other officials at other agencies that bore responsibility for the post-attack piece.”


Major Podliska was fired late that month. In addition to the alleged mishandling of classified information — an accusation that Major Podliska, who once worked for several years on classification-review issues, said reflected a misunderstanding of classification protocols — the committee cited two other reasons for his firing: He had sent an email to colleagues inviting them to a reception sponsored by an industry trade association, and he had assigned a project related to his work to an intern without authorization.


“The Benghazi committee fired Major Podliska because of his service in the Air Force Reserve and because he insisted on conducting a fair and impartial investigation of all the agencies involved in the aftermath of the Benghazi attacks,” said Joe Napiltonia, Major Podliska’s lead lawyer. “The committee fabricated reasons to justify Major Podliska’s termination that have no basis in reality.”


Assuming that Major Podliska can establish that his military service played a role in his ouster, it would fall to the House committee to demonstrate that it would have fired him for resisting the direction of the investigation, or for the three specific violations his supervisors identified.

The content available on a site dedicated to bringing folks to America should not be promoting racial discord, euro-supremacy, discrimination based on religion , exclusion of groups from immigration based on where they were born, disenfranchisement of voters rights based on how they might vote.

horsey-change.jpg?w=336&h=265

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Ecuador
Timeline
Posted

Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the House majority leader

Should this have escaped the article's editors?

06-04-2007 = TSC stamps postal return-receipt for I-129f.

06-11-2007 = NOA1 date (unknown to me).

07-20-2007 = Phoned Immigration Officer; got WAC#; where's NOA1?

09-25-2007 = Touch (first-ever).

09-28-2007 = NOA1, 23 days after their 45-day promise to send it (grrrr).

10-20 & 11-14-2007 = Phoned ImmOffs; "still pending."

12-11-2007 = 180 days; file is "between workstations, may be early Jan."; touches 12/11 & 12/12.

12-18-2007 = Call; file is with Division 9 ofcr. (bckgrnd check); e-prompt to shake it; touch.

12-19-2007 = NOA2 by e-mail & web, dated 12-18-07 (187 days; 201 per VJ); in mail 12/24/07.

01-09-2008 = File from USCIS to NVC, 1-4-08; NVC creates file, 1/15/08; to consulate 1/16/08.

01-23-2008 = Consulate gets file; outdated Packet 4 mailed to fiancee 1/27/08; rec'd 3/3/08.

04-29-2008 = Fiancee's 4-min. consular interview, 8:30 a.m.; much evidence brought but not allowed to be presented (consul: "More proof! Second interview! Bring your fiance!").

05-05-2008 = Infuriating $12 call to non-English-speaking consulate appointment-setter.

05-06-2008 = Better $12 call to English-speaker; "joint" interview date 6/30/08 (my selection).

06-30-2008 = Stokes Interrogations w/Ecuadorian (not USC); "wait 2 weeks; we'll mail her."

07-2008 = Daily calls to DOS: "currently processing"; 8/05 = Phoned consulate, got Section Chief; wrote him.

08-07-08 = E-mail from consulate, promising to issue visa "as soon as we get her passport" (on 8/12, per DHL).

08-27-08 = Phoned consulate (they "couldn't find" our file); visa DHL'd 8/28; in hand 9/1; through POE on 10/9 with NO hassles(!).

Filed: IR-1/CR-1 Visa Country: Canada
Timeline
Posted

Should this have escaped the article's editors?

No he is the Majority leader, just not the Speaker of the House

The content available on a site dedicated to bringing folks to America should not be promoting racial discord, euro-supremacy, discrimination based on religion , exclusion of groups from immigration based on where they were born, disenfranchisement of voters rights based on how they might vote.

horsey-change.jpg?w=336&h=265

Posted

I think we seeing the leading edge of the Republican witch hunt to defeat Hillary Clinton beginning the slow process of imploding in their faces.

B and J K-1 story

  • April 2004 met online
  • July 16, 2006 Met in person on her birthday in United Arab Emirates
  • August 4, 2006 sent certified mail I-129F packet Neb SC
  • August 9, 2006 NOA1
  • August 21, 2006 received NOA1 in mail
  • October 4, 5, 7, 13 & 17 2006 Touches! 50 day address change... Yes Judith is beautiful, quit staring at her passport photo and approve us!!! Shaming works! LOL
  • October 13, 2006 NOA2! November 2, 2006 NOA2? Huh? NVC already processed and sent us on to Abu Dhabi Consulate!
  • February 12, 2007 Abu Dhabi Interview SUCCESS!!! February 14 Visa in hand!
  • March 6, 2007 she is here!
  • MARCH 14, 2007 WE ARE MARRIED!!!
  • May 5, 2007 Sent AOS/EAD packet
  • May 11, 2007 NOA1 AOS/EAD
  • June 7, 2007 Biometrics appointment
  • June 8, 2007 first post biometrics touch, June 11, next touch...
  • August 1, 2007 AOS Interview! APPROVED!! EAD APPROVED TOO...
  • August 6, 2007 EAD card and Welcome Letter received!
  • August 13, 2007 GREEN CARD received!!! 375 days since mailing the I-129F!

    Remove Conditions:

  • May 1, 2009 first day to file
  • May 9, 2009 mailed I-751 to USCIS CS
Filed: IR-1/CR-1 Visa Country: Canada
Timeline
Posted

I think we seeing the leading edge of the Republican witch hunt to defeat Hillary Clinton beginning the slow process of imploding in their faces.

The goal of some was just to keep this alive into the Presidential Election cycle. They did not need to win, its just part of the ground game.

The content available on a site dedicated to bringing folks to America should not be promoting racial discord, euro-supremacy, discrimination based on religion , exclusion of groups from immigration based on where they were born, disenfranchisement of voters rights based on how they might vote.

horsey-change.jpg?w=336&h=265

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...