Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, November 27, 2017

Of all the State Department employees who might have been vulnerable in the staff reductions that Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson has initiated as he reshapes the department, the one person who seemed least likely to be a target was the chief of security, Bill A. Miller. Republicans pilloried Hillary Clinton for what they claimed was her inadequate attention to security as secretary of state in the months before the deadly 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya. Congress even passed legislation mandating that the department's top security official have unrestricted access to the secretary of state.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

But in his first nine months in office, Tillerson turned down repeated and sometimes urgent requests from the department's security staff to brief him, according to several former top officials in the Bureau of Diplomatic Security. Finally, Miller, the acting assistant secretary for diplomatic security, was forced to cite the law's requirement that he be allowed to speak to Tillerson.

Miller got just five minutes with the secretary of state, the former officials said. Afterward, Miller, a career Foreign Service officer, was pushed out, joining a parade of dismissals and early retirements that has decimated the State Department's senior ranks. Miller declined to comment.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Just Wow. They wanted to pillory Clinton for Benghazi but Tillerson will get an atta boy from the right after the next Benghazi. State Department is seeing damage that will take decades to undo. We are talking about the non-political people here.

#1 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-11-25 01:09 AM | Reply

What would putin do.

#2 | Posted by bored at 2017-11-25 03:10 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

To have a next Benghazi, they have to overthrow a sovereign government first to trigger a mass weapons proliferation and civil breakdown.

#3 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2017-11-25 10:19 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Tillerson can't sell out the United States with all those witnesses. The Trump administration is being orchestrated by Putin and if you haven't figured that out yet you are just stupid. Trump and Tillerson along with many other members of the Cabinet should all be charged with treason. They will wish the strongest charge against them was collusion, it won't be. OK tell me I'm wrong, I was right with Nixon, Reagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2. Republicans love power more than they love their country.

#4 | Posted by danni at 2017-11-25 11:35 AM | Reply

"To have a next Benghazi, they have to overthrow a sovereign government first to trigger a mass weapons proliferation and civil breakdown."

That "sovereign" government was overthrown by their own people with our air support preventing "rivers of blood." I am totally sick of the defenders of Ghadafi and his evil sons. The right knows no level of hatred that is too much to direct at American Democrats, they have become seriously unhinged. As in crazier than bat s**t crazy.

#5 | Posted by danni at 2017-11-25 11:38 AM | Reply

That "sovereign" government was overthrown by their own people with our air support preventing "rivers of blood." I am totally sick of the defenders of Ghadafi and his evil sons. The right knows no level of hatred that is too much to direct at American Democrats, they have become seriously unhinged. As in crazier than bat s**t crazy.

#5 | Posted by danni at 2017-11-25 11:38 AM | Reply | Flag:

Still spreading that garbage lie I see. There was no rebellion no genocidal killings. Gadaffi wouldn't deal with the oil companies like our government wanted so he had to go. Libya was Obama's Iraq.

#6 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-11-25 11:45 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

www.salon.com

You'll note that there's nothing new in the idea that invading Iraq benefited the Jihadi cause. Liberal hawks may have been mistaken, but not nearly as much as the neocons, whose trap they fell into. So has the liberal hawk position finally been fully vindicated? Is Hillary Clinton finally in the right place, at the right time?

Electorally, perhaps. But in terms of actually having a working policy? That's a whole different story. After all, Clinton herself pushed hard for a similarly flawed regime change strategy in Libya -- Conor Friedersdorf even compared her role in Libya to Cheney's in Iraq. Hyperbolic? Yes. But he did have a point. As summarized by Joel Gillin at the New Republic, she did get carried away with questionable intelligence, over-focused on deposing a long-time U.S. bogeyman, and failed to give sufficient consideration to the depths of difficulties that would follow afterwards. All of which allowed the broader jihadi threat increased opportunity to spread.

In particular, the key claim that something genocidal was about to unfold was entirely unfounded, according to a lengthy review of the Libya intervention at the London Review of Books, which noted that "in retaking the towns that the uprising had briefly wrested from the government's control, Gaddafi's forces had committed no massacres at all; the fighting had been bitter and bloody, but there had been nothing remotely r

#7 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-11-25 11:51 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Libya was Obama's Iraq."

Worked out a lot better than W's Iraq.

#8 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-25 12:30 PM | Reply

Tillerson Gutting State Department of Senior Staff: "A Disaster Waiting to Happen"

www.slate.com

#9 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-11-25 08:18 PM | Reply

Tillerson refused to meet with State Dept security chief

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson previously turned down multiple meetings with the department's chief of security, forcing the chief to invoke the law's requirement that he is allowed to meet with the top U.S. diplomat, according to The New York Times.

The chief, Bill Miller, has since resigned from his position.

Former senior officials at the Bureau of Diplomatic Security told the Times that for nine months Tillerson turned down multiple briefing requests, including urgent requests, from Miller.

Miller was eventually granted a meeting, according to the report, but only after demanding it in according with the law. The meeting reportedly only lasted five minutes.

thehill.com

#10 | Posted by Corky at 2017-11-25 08:31 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

The "deconstruction" of the Government continues.

#11 | Posted by donnerboy at 2017-11-26 04:03 PM | Reply

That "sovereign" government was overthrown by their own people with our air support preventing "rivers of blood."

#5 | POSTED BY DANNI AT 2017-11-25 11:38 AM | FLAG:

First, congrats on acknowledging the primary lie that was peddled. We weren't executing a "No Fly Zone", but an actual close air support offensive to overthrow a government, where we went tank plinking against targets called in by Twitter the pilots could not visually identify in many cases. No US, no mass air campaign, and no overthrow, so we're actually in agreement. No overthrow, no Benghazi. That also means no mass proliferation of Milan AT missiles to Syria, no Nursa Front build up to get backdoored and absorbed by IS, no mass proliferation into the Sinai which just fueled the 300+ dead terror attack their and mass human rights violations committed by the Egyptian military before and already happening in retaliation, etc, etc.

Pick your poison, but you're on overthrow Saddam logic. He was a butcher that used WMDs against Kurds and gassed babies. Was taking him out a good idea? We're not going to know for another hundred years or so when historical periodization kicks to give scholars a full view of the subject.

#12 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2017-11-27 07:59 AM | Reply

"Meanwhile, these people lap up the gravy train of skipping taxes on income earned overseas"

That's only allowed when working in countries which have an agreement with the US; taxes are withheld and paid locally.

"taking advantage of every wasteful perk provided to them"

How is that different from going on a business trip for your employer, who then pays for the flight, food, and hotel?

#14 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-11-27 08:21 AM | Reply

"Because the business is not taxpayer funded."

But those expenditures are normal business expenses. Are you suggesting workers should get the tab for business travel and lodging?

#16 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-11-27 08:29 AM | Reply

"Local taxes are generally much lower than US rates so there generally are still huge savings. "

Link, please.

"The local taxes then offset income earned over ~$140K after all other allowances are used."

Because income taxes have already been paid, locally. Are you suggesting this income should be subject to double taxation?

Also, 140K is only if they're not providing housing and food. (IOW, with your proposal, workers would have to pay on their home, AND pay for their business trip lodging.) Otherwise, it's ~$102K of earned income, but again, only because local taxes are paid in the equation.

#17 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-11-27 08:35 AM | Reply

"Look up the tax tables for anywhere in the middle east (taxes = 0%)."

I was referring to countries which have reciprocal agreements with the US. If there are no local taxes, there is no foreign earned income credit.

"The taxes they pay locally are less than US rates. "

Again...link, please. Don't tell ME to look up YOUR claim.

"Have you ever earned income while living overseas or filed taxes in general? Doesn't seem that way."

Have you ever prepared taxes for workers who earned income outside the US? Doesn't seem that way.

"Please try to keep up."

My irony meter is pegging.

#20 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-11-27 08:55 AM | Reply

The foreign tax credit is intended to relieve you of a double tax burden when you foreign source income is taxed by both the U.S. and the foreign country. Generally, if the foreign tax rate is higher than the U.S. rate, there will be no U.S. tax on the foreign income.
humanresources.umn.edu

#21 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-11-27 08:56 AM | Reply

"I realize taxes are hard and are not for everyone, but Googling is pretty easy."

Yes Googling is easy. Now find a country with no taxes, which has a reciprocal agreement with the US.

"Great job at posting a link countering an argument no one made."

Reread your posts as many times as it takes for the light to go on. Apologies if you truly are slow.

#24 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-11-27 09:06 AM | Reply

"As I stated above and you have demonstrated, you have no clue about overseas income."

IOW, you failed at proving your point, so now it's my fault.

"Your series of posts proves that so you have done nothing but waste my time."

Readers of this thread will probably come to the opposite conclusion.

#26 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-11-27 09:17 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Everything I posted was 100% correct. "

You posted Qatar income tax rates, at zero. But Qatar doesn't have a reciprocal agreement with the US, so no FEIC.

"They don't pay US taxes on their first $140K in income and the local tax rates are less than US rates."

There must be specific housing and food costs borne by the worker to get that number to $140K, and you haven't proven local tax rates are lower. You also haven't stated whether or not you believe a) workers should have to bear overseas travel costs of their employers, and b) workers should be double-taxed on income.

"My links (which you were too lazy to get for yourself) proved my case 100%."

All your links proved is you don't understand the concept of a reciprocal agreement, or why it matters.

In addition, the laziness is on your end: it's the claimant's responsibility to prove the claim. Why are you pretending otherwise?

#28 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-11-27 10:35 AM | Reply

"If I work in Saudi and earn ~$140K, please tell me what my tax bill will in,
A) Saudi"

Whatever the Saudis tax you.

"B) US"

Whatever the US would tax you, minus what the Saudis taxed you, via the Foreign Tax Credit. Why it is that way? BECAUSE THE US DOESN'T HAVE A RECIPROCAL TAX TREATY WITH SAUDI ARABIA. Or Qatar, for that matter:
www.irs.gov

"You simply don't understand taxes."

Good God, you're an ignorant ass.

#30 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-11-27 10:49 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Assuming you have an ounce of integrity, you will then post that you were incorrect.

Anyone else's irony meter pegging?

#31 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-11-27 10:49 AM | Reply

Could you two derail a security related thread any harder? We don't know enough about foreign taxes yet.

#33 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2017-11-27 11:17 AM | Reply

"As a result, there is zero need for a reciprocal tax treaty as the Saudis don't have income taxes "

And since no taxes are paid in SA, all taxes are due in the US, and there is NO Foreign Earned Income Credit.

"everyone else can see you are clueless on this issue."

You've clearly shown you don't understand the basic, underlying issues. Meanwhile, I've done taxes professionally for nearly 30 years, have ~450 clients, and regularly lecture on the collegiate and professional level.

And your bona fides?

#34 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-11-27 11:29 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"As a result, there is zero need for a reciprocal tax treaty as the Saudis don't have income taxes "

And since no taxes are paid in SA, all taxes are due in the US, and there is NO Foreign Earned Income Credit.

"everyone else can see you are clueless on this issue."

You've clearly shown you don't understand the basic, underlying issues. Meanwhile, I've done taxes professionally for nearly 30 years, have ~450 clients, and regularly lecture on the collegiate and professional level.

And your bona fides?

#35 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-11-27 11:29 AM | Reply

Sorry for the double-click.

#36 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-11-27 11:30 AM | Reply

- And your bona fides?

He slept in a Holiday Inn Express.

#37 | Posted by Corky at 2017-11-27 11:55 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

I highly doubt any of you people have ever had the chance to actually travel or live outside the US

#32 | Posted by MidtownLandlord

A legend in his own mind, clearly.

#38 | Posted by Zed at 2017-11-27 02:57 PM | Reply

I highly doubt any of you people have ever had the chance to actually travel or live outside the US
#32 | Posted by MidtownLandlord

Being a slum lord, doesn't make you worldly, buddy.

#39 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-11-27 04:04 PM | Reply

Tillerson was appointed to lead, not read.

#40 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-11-27 04:13 PM | Reply

He slept in a Holiday Inn Express.
#37 | POSTED BY CORKY

In Qatar, no less.

#41 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2017-11-27 05:06 PM | Reply

Whatever the US would tax you, minus what the Saudis taxed you, via the Foreign Tax Credit. Why it is that way? BECAUSE THE US DOESN'T HAVE A RECIPROCAL TAX TREATY WITH SAUDI ARABIA."

Which would be $0 as the income is exempt as it is earned overseas. The Foreign Tax Credit which is you hung up on is irrelevant as the Saudis don't have an income tax, which I already linked to for you. As a result, there is zero need for a reciprocal tax treaty as the Saudis don't have income taxes (for about the 3rd time).

So, again, as I stated from the get go, these government waste of spaces skip out on their tax obligations despite sucking on the government teat. How much more do you want to embarrass yourself today on this issue? Go play internet tax super star with one of your ignorant libbies because everyone else can see you are clueless on this issue.

#32 | Posted by MidtownLandlord at 2017-11-27 11:01 AM | Reply

Sorry to continue this digression, and I won't reply further, but here is the actual words from the IRS:

1. U.S. Government Civilian Employees Working Overseas

If you are a U. S. citizen working for the US Government, including the Foreign Service, and you are stationed abroad, your income tax filing requirements are generally the same as those for citizens and residents living in the United States. You are taxed on your worldwide income, even though you live and work abroad. However, you may receive certain allowances and have certain expenses that you generally do not have while living in the United States.

U.S. Foreign Service Employees

If you are an employee of the US Foreign Service and your position requires you to establish and maintain favorable relations in foreign countries, you may receive a nontaxable allowance for representation expenses. If your expenses are more than the allowance you receive, you can deduct the excess expenses as an itemized deduction if you meet certain conditions. For more information, refer to U.S. Foreign Service Employees.

Found here https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/us-government-civilian-employees-stationed-
abroad

I've read through the section U.S. Foreign Service Employees as well. There is no mention there of exclusion of foreign-earned income, no $102k, no $140k. Primarily because they aren't considered as earning foreign income. If they had a second job earning income from a foreign source (which is generally frowned upon for government employees), they might be able to exclude some of it based on if there is a reciprocal tax agreement; however, the pay they receive from the State Department is not considered foreign income, and is taxed as US-based income. At least that's what it says on the IRS website. Maybe, just maybe, the rules for commercial workers is different from those for State Department employees, maybe?

#42 | Posted by StatsPlease at 2017-11-27 06:00 PM | Reply

Tillerson was appointed to lead, not read.

#40 | Posted by Sycophant

Tillerson was appointed to cripple the state department, putin's biggest enemy, and then to lift the sanctions on putin, his boss's boss.

He's doing it all as ordered.

And all these flag waving patriots seem to have no problem with it. Maybe they should be wrapping their pickup trucks with the russian flag instead.

#43 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-27 06:32 PM | Reply

"And all these flag waving patriots seem to have no problem with it."

Whereas the same scenario under President HRC would have them all demanding impeachment.

In a nutshell, that's the problem with our country.

#44 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-11-27 06:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Of course. Republicans have become traitors to they country.

#45 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-11-27 07:34 PM | Reply

Of course. Republicans have become traitors to they country.

Glad I'm not a Republican.

#46 | Posted by Ray at 2017-11-27 07:56 PM | Reply

Glad I'm not a Republican.

#46 | Posted by Ray

Yeah you just help elect them.

#47 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-27 08:01 PM | Reply

Yeah you just help elect them.

See. One person can make a difference.

#48 | Posted by Ray at 2017-11-27 08:08 PM | Reply

Ray sounds like one of those "non-partisans" that grumble about everything Democrats do that they don't like, say nothing about the things Democrats do that they do like, say nothing about the things Republicans do that they don't like, but praise everything Republicans do that they do like.

#49 | Posted by REDIAL at 2017-11-27 08:15 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Ray sounds like one of those "non-partisans" that grumble about everything Democrats do that they don't like, say nothing about the things Democrats do that they do like, say nothing about the things Republicans do that they don't like, but praise everything Republicans do that they do like.
#49 | POSTED BY REDIAL

Nope. Not even close. I see government as a criminal syndicate that brings out the worst in human instincts.

#50 | Posted by Ray at 2017-11-27 08:26 PM | Reply

Yet you constantly bark at "liberals" but never bark at "conservatives"?

Sure.

#51 | Posted by REDIAL at 2017-11-27 08:31 PM | Reply

#51 | POSTED BY REDIAL

This site is overly dominated by liberals. That's my audience.

#52 | Posted by Ray at 2017-11-27 08:39 PM | Reply

This site is overly dominated by liberals. That's my audience.

Posted by Ray at 2017-11-27 08:39 PM | Reply

Awwwwwwwwwwww how sweet. Do you wanna cookie???

#53 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-11-27 08:39 PM | Reply

Nope. Not even close. I see government as a criminal syndicate that brings out the worst in human instincts.

#50 | Posted by Ray

Such a simple diagnosis from such a simple man.

If you were capable of complex thought, you'd realize there is a reason every society has to have a government, and no society has every stood without one.

#54 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-27 08:47 PM | Reply

Libya was Obama's Iraq.

#6 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR

Weak false equivalence.

#55 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2017-11-27 09:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Weak false equivalence."

Yep. And off by a few trillion dollars, too.

#56 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-11-27 09:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Libya might have been Obama's Waco.

#57 | Posted by REDIAL at 2017-11-27 09:08 PM | Reply

#57 LOL

#58 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-11-27 09:09 PM | Reply

Weak false equivalence.

Posted by IndianaJones at 2017-11-27 09:02 PM | Reply

TRUTH

#59 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-11-27 09:14 PM | Reply

If you were capable of complex thought, you'd realize there is a reason every society has to have a government, and no society has every stood without one.
#54 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Understand. One person could not survive alone. It is our social nature to live in groups. When we were hunter-gatherers, group living enabled us to coordinate our time and skills. Our ancestors didn't just hunt for food, they hunted other tribes for their food. Fossil remains of pre-historic humans demonstrated that humans were more violent than we are now.

So now we act out our violent instincts through this pathological organization called government. The most violent rise to the top of the pecking order.

Don't think you liberals are coming out ahead of this war of neighbr verse neighbor. The elites have you people screwing yourselves. Their power comes at your expense.

#60 | Posted by Ray at 2017-11-27 09:15 PM | Reply

Don't think you liberals are coming out ahead of this war of neighbr verse neighbor. The elites have you people screwing yourselves. Their power comes at your expense.

#60 | Posted by Ray

Their power comes from convincing chumps not to vote, so they can continue to run the show.

#61 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-27 09:20 PM | Reply

#61 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

As I expected, #60 went right over your head.

#62 | Posted by Ray at 2017-11-27 09:29 PM | Reply

As I expected, #60 went right over your head.

#62 | Posted by Ray

Says the guy with nothing between his ears.

#63 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-11-28 01:00 PM | Reply

Don't think you liberals are coming out ahead of this war of neighbr verse neighbor. The elites have you people screwing yourselves. Their power comes at your expense.
#60 | Posted by Ray

Trump is the very definition of elite and has you doing everything in your power to defend him, his selling out the country to the Russians, pedophiles running for Senate, and his big tax cut gift to himself.

There's a sucker born every minute and Trump thanks you for it.

#64 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-11-28 06:04 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort