Embassies Open Today, the Cuban Flag Flies in DC

A cop killer who fled to Cuba is not part of the deal that the White House or the State Department with the normalized relations with Cuba.

Despite New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s aggravated pleas to President Obama to have Assata Shakur extradited back to the United States, Cuba’s head of North American affairs, Josefina Vidal, has denied that request.

Shakur, formerly known as Joanne Chesimard, was a member of the Black Panther Party and Black Liberation Army (BLA).  She became the first woman to ever be placed on the FBI’s most-wanted list for her involvement in a 1973 shootout in which New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foerster was killed. Shakur was eventually sentenced to life in prison in 1977; however, she managed to flee the cement walls of the penitentiary in 1979, and later fled to Cuba where she was granted political asylum.

Shakur currently remains on the FBI’s most-wanted list and has a bounty of $2 million offered for her capture.  Since President Obama has been attempting to normalize relations with Cuba, NJ Governor Chris Christie has adamantly requested that Obama demand Shakur be extradited to America as a part of Cuba and the United States’ new beginning.  However, Josefina Vidal has denied Cuba’s agreement to hand over Shakur.

“We’ve explained to the U.S. government in the past that there are some people living in Cuba to whom Cuba has legitimately granted political asylum,” Vidal stated.  “There’s no extradition treaty in effect between Cuba and the U.S.  We’ve reminded the U.S. government that in its country they’ve given shelter to dozens and dozens of Cuban citizens.  Some of them accused of horrible crimes, some accused of terrorism, murder and kidnapping, and in every case the U.S. government has decided to welcome them.”

After 54 Years From Stars and Stripes:

The last time the United States and Cuba had diplomatic relations, Dwight Eisenhower was in the White House, Elvis Presley’s “Are You Lonesome Tonight?” topped the charts and a new dance craze, the Twist, was sweeping the country.

The past half-century of U.S.-Cuba relations has been a roller-coaster ride of high hopes for improvement at times, but low points that included mutual acts of terrorism, separation of Cuban families, CIA attempts to kill Fidel Castro, the most dangerous days of the Cold War during the Cuban Missile Crisis, a U.S.-sponsored invasion, Cuba’s alignment with the old Soviet bloc, confiscation of U.S. property, the 1996 shootdown of two Brothers to the Rescue planes by Cuban MiGs, and countless human tragedies on a smaller scale.

The US and Cuba will re-establish diplomatic relations Monday and their embassies will reopen for the first time in 54 years.

On Monday morning, the Cuban government will raise its flag over the its old limestone building on Washington’s 16th Street Northwest, which has been a Cuban Embassy, a Cuban Interests Section in the absence of diplomatic relations, and now again an embassy. Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez will be the highest-ranking Cuban diplomat to visit the State Department in decades when he meets with Secretary of State John Kerry in the afternoon.

For the United States, it begins a new chapter of engagement with Cuba. Kerry plans to travel to Havana later this summer to inaugurate the U.S. Embassy. The interests section will be elevated to embassy status Monday, but US flag won’t fly until Kerry’s arrival.

The respective mission chiefs in Havana and Washington will become chargés d’affaires at the new embassies until ambassadors are named, and new rules for operations at the embassies will take effect.

Even as the Cuban flag is hoisted in Washington, a difficult relationship between the United States and Cuba is expected to remain just that — difficult — but with the difference that the two sides are now talking more freely with each other to work through the many issues that still separate them.

“That will include America’s enduring support for universal values, like freedom of speech and assembly, and the ability to access information,” President Barack Obama said on July 1 when he announced the date for restoring diplomatic ties.

“When the United States shuttered our embassy in 1961, I don’t think anyone expected that it would be more than half a century before it reopened,” Obama said. The old policy of isolation, he said, “shuts America out of Cuba’s future, and it only makes life worse for the Cuban people.”

Roberta Jacobson, the U.S. assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs –– who was the lead U.S. negotiator in normalization talks –– said there is an “obvious groundswell of support” among Cubans on the island for the new policy. But during an appearance at the Wilson Center in Washington in June, Jacobson said Cubans’ very high expectations “must be managed. Because let’s face it, things aren’t going to change overnight.”

The United States officially broke relations with Cuba on Jan. 3, 1961, but they had begun to turn sour within six months of New Year’s Day 1959, when the Cuban Revolution triumphed.

By August 1960, Cuba had expropriated all U.S.-owned industrial and agricultural holdings, and nationalized all U.S. banks. That fall, Eisenhower had begun to phase in the U.S. trade embargo, and in December he eliminated Cuba’s sugar quota for the next quarter. In the last months of 1960, as Cuba complained of air raids coming from the United States and, plans to invade the island were already under discussion in Washington.

Months before Eisenhower decided to break with Cuba, personnel at the U.S. Embassy had been instructed to cut down to two suitcases in case a hasty departure was necessary, said Wayne Smith, then a junior officer at the embassy and later the chief of mission in 1977 when the United States established an interests section in the old embassy building.

“Things had been going so badly; it was inevitable,” Smith said. “It was almost a relief. Relations had been so strained and so bitter and we knew it was coming. But I remember thinking, ‘Let’s hope it won’t be for too long.’”

The tipping point came on Jan. 2, 1961, when Cuban Foreign Minister Raul Roa, speaking before the United Nations Security Council, charged that the United States was planning to invade, and Fidel Castro gave a speech in which he denounced the U.S. Embassy as a “nest of spies” and demanded that the staff be reduced to 11 people, including U.S. diplomats, Marine guards and local employees.

The next day the White House broke off relations with Cuba and asked the Swiss government to represent it in dealings with the island. That representation will end on Monday. Since 1977, when the United States once again sent diplomats to Havana, there hasn’t been much of a role for the Swiss. But from 1961 and 1977, the Swiss ambassador was the U.S. man in Havana.

Because the Swiss were overseeing U.S. interests in Cuba, the old U.S. Embassy building never really closed.

There was only that Swiss representation in Havana four months later during the failed Bay of Pigs invasion and during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, the height of the Cold War. Those 13 days in October would be among the most perilous in the U.S.-Cuban relationship, but for most of the next five decades U.S.-Cuba relations remained rocky.

That is until Dec. 17, when Obama and Cuban President Raul Castro announced an opening — the fruit of 18 months of secret negotiations — that included re-establishing diplomatic relations and converting the interests sections into full-fledged embassies.

Rodriguez, who will arrive in Washington Sunday, will lead a 30-person delegation that includes former National Assembly President Ricardo Alarcon, National Assembly Vice President Ana Maria Mari Machado and Josefina Vidal, Jacobson’s Cuban counterpart in the normalization talks.

Other delegation members will be Havana historian Eusebio Leal, members of the Council of State, Ramon Sanchez Parodi, the first head of the Cuban Interests Section; singer Silvio Rodriguez, artist Alexis Leiva (Kcho) who provides a free public Wi-Fi hotspot at his studio, and other figures from the Cuban art and literary world.

The Fatal San Francisco Sheriff’s Memo

Thank you journalists for continuing to investigate this corrupt sheriff.

A Month Before Kate Steinle’s Killer Was Released, San Francisco Sheriff ORDERED Deputies Not To Communicate With ICE

 by Chuck Ross

San Francisco’s progressive sheriff, Ross Mirkarimi, issued a memo in March barring deputies from communicating with federal immigration agents, the sheriff’s deputy’s union revealed earlier this week.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Mirkarimi issued the memo on March 13, about a month before the sheriff’s department released Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, an illegal alien from Mexico who has used more than 30 aliases since first entering the U.S. in 1991 and has been deported five times.

Lopez-Sanchez, 45, allegedly fatally shot 32-year-old Kathryn Steinle in broad daylight July 1. Lopez-Sanchez was in federal prison until March 26. At that point, he was turned over to the San Francisco sheriff’s department because he had an outstanding marijuana warrant from 1995.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had issued a detainer request to the sheriff’s department asking to be notified before Lopez-Sanchez’s release. The sheriff’s department declined to honor that request because of San Francisco’s sanctuary city laws.

But Mirkarimi’s March 13 memo went even beyond the city’s statute.

In it, Mirkarimi called for “limited contact and communication with ICE representatives absent a court-issued warrant, a signed court order, or other legal requirement authorizing ICE access.”

According to The Los Angeles Times, Mirkarimi’s directive was stricter than the city’s 2013 Due Process for All ordinance. That prohibited sheriff’s deputies from holding illegal aliens in jail on behalf of federal immigration agencies past their official release date except in cases involving certain felons. Mirkarimi memo prohibited deputies from communicating to ICE that the department would not hold Lopez-Sanchez.

The San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs’ Association called on Mirkarimi to rescind the memo saying that it “recklessly compromises the safety of sworn personnel, citizens, and those who merely come to visit the San Francisco area.

The union’s attorney, Peter Hoffman, told The L.A. Times that Mirkarimi’s memo “absolutely modifies” the relationship between ICE and San Francisco sheriff’s deputies. He told The Times that before the memo there had been “some level of communication” between the two agencies.

“I can tell you the sheriff did change policy effective March of this year to effectively eliminate communication with ICE altogether, and that is the change in working conditions that we’re focused on,” Hoffman said.

Mirkarimi dismissed the union’s complaint, calling it “political posturing.” The union supports Mirkarimi’s challenger in an upcoming election.

In the aftermath of Steinle’s death, Mirkarimi has sought to blame ICE. When he initially defended the city’s sanctuary city policies, he said that ICE never should not have turned Lopez-Sanchez over to his department in the first place. But it emerged shortly after that the sheriff’s department had requested that the U.S. Bureau of Prisons hand over Lopez-Sanchez because of the 1995 bench warrant for the sale of marijuana. Charges in that case were dropped against Lopez-Sanchez the next day. ICE submitted its detainer request at that point.

 

 

Chicago is Money Sick, Is it Contagious to Other Cities?

Now that El Chapo Guzman has escaped prison in Mexico, Chicago will have an increase in their cartel and cocaine epidemic.
The city faces trouble from every direction.

After years of warnings, financial reality is hitting home in Chicago, clouding Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s hope for a transformational legacy. In March, Moody’s downgraded the city’s credit rating to junk, but Chicago’s financial hole long predates its ratings slide. The trouble began emerging at least as far back as 2003, albeit under the radar. Then, as the Great Recession pummeled municipal budgets around the country, former Mayor Richard M. Daley engaged in dubious deals, such as the city’s parking-meter lease. In 2010, as Daley’s tenure neared its close, Crain’s Chicago Business published an exposé on the troubling levels of debt that the mayor’s administration had accumulated. In 2013, after Daley had left office, the Chicago Tribune ran a series further detailing the city’s questionable debt practices, such as “scoop and toss”—that is, rolling over debt at higher cost as it came due, rather than paying it off. Chicago’s pension woes, along with Illinois’, started attracting media coverage—as did financial can-kicking by agencies like the Chicago Public Schools (CPS), which drained its reserves in 2012 and created a 2015 budget showing 14 months of revenue (“loopy,” said the Tribune). So for several years now, the media have been telling Chicagoans that there’s a financial crisis. But it hasn’t really felt like one, at least not in the booming Loop and on the North Side.

The Moody’s downgrade triggered termination clauses in swaps contracts that the city and CPS had been using as part of their financial juggling act, creating a liquidity crisis. To deal with the downgrade fallout, the city plans to issue $1.1 billion in long-term bonds. While some sort of refinancing may be required, the proposed debt issue contains maneuvers similar to those that helped get Chicago into trouble in the first place—including more scoop and toss deferrals, $75 million for police back pay, $62 million to pay a judgment related to the city’s lakefront parking-garage lease, and $35 million to pay debt on the acquisition of the former Michael Reese Hospital site (an architecturally significant complex Daley acquired and razed for an ill-fated Olympic bid). The debt-issue proposal also includes $170 million in so-called “capitalized interest” for the first two years. That is, Chicago is actually borrowing the money to pay the first two years of interest payments on these bonds. In true Chicago style, the proposal passed the city council on a 45-3 vote. Hey, at least the city is getting out of the swaps business.

Even with no further gimmicks, Emanuel will be six years into his mayoralty before the city can stop borrowing just to pay the interest on its debt. And without accounting for pensions, it will take the full eight years of both his terms to get the city to a balanced budget, where it can pay for the regular debt it has already accumulated.

Then there’s the crisis engulfing the city’s schools, which are facing 1,000 layoffs and numerous other cuts to avoid running out of cash. Forced by a state mandate to start paying its pensions, CPS coughed up $634 million as required last week. A recent Ernst & Young report said that even if CPS got another five-year pension-contribution holiday, it would still rack up an additional $2.4 billion in accumulated deficits by 2020. Meanwhile, the Chicago Teachers Union, hostile to any reform that would affect teacher salaries and benefits, says that the district is “broke on purpose.” And CPS has no permanent CEO in place after Barbara Byrd-Bennett resigned last month amid a federal investigation into no-bid contracts.

Emanuel wants Springfield to pay for Chicago’s teacher pensions going forward, as it does for every other school district. He has a legitimate gripe here, but the state is in a deep financial hole of its own, with its teacher-pension fund in even worse shape than the city’s—and a government shutdown looming over the failure to pass a budget.

It’s not just the teachers’ pensions that are in trouble in Chicago; pensions for all municipal workers are woefully underfunded. (Separately, Cook County plans to raise its sales tax by one percentage point to start dealing with its own yawning pension gap.) Emanuel is willing to raise taxes by instituting a $175 million annual pension levy for the schools, but even his best-case scenario for pensions leaves a structural deficit in the CPS operating budget. And an Illinois Supreme Court ruling puts the previously negotiated city reforms in jeopardy. The court struck down state-level pension reform, saying that even future pension accruals for public employees can’t be reduced—a ruling that triggered the Moody’s downgrade. Emanuel denounced the Moody’s decision while strongly defending the legality of his reform. He makes good arguments, but he’s up against an extremely pro-union court. Perhaps recognizing this, he isn’t even trying to reform the police and fire pension funds. Instead, he proposes simply to defer and extend payments. If adopted, it would mean that the city wouldn’t be on track to funding its pensions until 2021—a decade after Emanuel was first elected. Even so, Crain’s projects that this would raise the city’s slice of property taxes next year by 31 percent—and by more than 50 percent if the deferrals aren’t approved.

Add it up and Chicago residents face another five to six years of pain just to get into a position where they might begin climbing out of the hole. This surely isn’t where Rahm Emanuel envisioned himself back in 2011. One wonders whether he fully understood the true financial condition of Chicago when he decided to pursue the mayor’s office—or grasped the lack of power even the most autocratic mayors have compared with the president or a governor.

Even if all of Emanuel’s reforms go through, the best that he could hope for is that after nearly a decade in office, he will have put out Chicago’s financial fire. There is one thing he can do, however, truly to change the trajectory: partner with Illinois governor Bruce Rauner to get legislation passed requiring that all future local-government employees get 401k-style defined-contribution pensions. This would make it much harder for future administrations to create another pension disaster.

Of course, getting such a law passed wouldn’t be easy, which is precisely why a tough guy like Emanuel should take a shot at it. If he succeeded, he could yet leave a legacy that future generations of Chicagoans would look back on with gratitude.

Iran, Argentina, Cuba, Venezuela, Nuclear Program and a Dead Body

This is likely going to be the longest and wordiest post on this website, but it is germane to events today when it comes to Barack Obama spiking the football on the Iran nuclear deal.

Alberto Nisman is dead.

I have been tracking this event in Argentina for several months and thanks to New Yorker magazine, several more items are now in better perspective.

After hanging around in WikiLeaks cables, more truth bubbles to the surface with regard to Barack Obama, Iran and inspections but more so, Iran’s further covert operations in Latin America, in our own hemisphere.

GW Bush, told Iran, there will be NO negotiations.

The IAEA could not get access to sites for inspection, yet Barack Obama well full throttle with talks, paying to get Iran to the table and to keep them there. The White House knew quite well about Iran’s black market actions in Cuba, Venezuela and in Argentina and embassy officials put out cables for a call to action.

In 1994, there was a truck bomb at a Jewish Center in Argentina that killed 85 and injured hundreds. Prosecutor Alberto Nisman worked years to prove it was at the request of Nasrallah with the orders given by the top officials in the Iranian regime. The investigation by Nisman led him around the globe to perform interviews, work with the FBI who did the forensic investigation and even Interpol issued ‘red-sheets’.

Alberto Nisman is DEAD. He was shot a day before he was to present his full case to an Argentinian panel of judges.

This WikiLeaks cable explains in short form the events and the complicity of the top government officials in Argentina to cover up the whole history which brings in the White House, Cuba, Venezuela and Iran.

Who knew that Argentina had a nuclear program and was enriching uranium? Well those in the Obama administration did, Iran did, Venezuela did as well as Cuba and the United Nations. Ahmadinejad needed all 3 Latin American country’s cooperation and he got it willingly.

Oh and Reuters knew as well.

Did Venezuela begin a nuclear program? Not yet, but they had uranium and the discussion began as well as clandestine deals including cooperation with Iran.

Alberto Nisman is still dead and no one is paying attention to who killed him, except Iran and Argentina’s President Kirchner, she is paid and is an agent of Iran to cover for Iran’s guilt in the death of Nisman but more on the 1992 AIMA bombing.

Do the Saudis know about all of this? Yes, they are more concerned about Iran than Israel due to the hate going back many more years so they keep pace with all actions of Iran. The Saudis even warned several intelligence services in Latin America.

If you are inclined to see the Iranians in Argentina and who played several nefarious roles there. click here.

Several in President Kirchner’s administration have traveled to the White House to ask Obama and the Department of Justice to influence Interpol to remove sanctions on key Iranian players in exchange for additional information on Iran’s nuclear weapons program in country and in Latin America. The WH said no, the inner circle during the WH lead P5+1 talks was a tight and highly controlled group and those Iranians on the Interpol list may be needed during the negotiations until Iran said NO to John Kerry.

For a full yet shorter explanation of the murder of Alberto Nisman, click here.

As for the New Yorker story which as written should be a Hollywood thriller, click here and enjoy some popcorn during the long read.

Obama’s Signature Causes Deaths by Illegals

The White House spokesperson Josh Earnest has been asked several times about the shooting death of Kate Steinle in San Francisco. Earnest replied they have nothing to add on the matter and referred reporters to the Department of Homeland Security and or to the Department of Justice. More on that later.

There is no more Safe Act, there is no more Secure Community or Sanctuary for America, only for the criminal immigrants, they are the protected class.

Background and context

Sadly, due to ridiculous arguments on immigration law enforcement by the left and the horrific case loads of crimes caused by illegals, in 2008, Congress passed a law title the Safe Act(Secure Communities) to force compliance to all immigration laws.

From ICE:

The highest priority of any law enforcement agency is to protect the communities it serves. When it comes to enforcing our nation’s immigration laws, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) focuses its limited resources on those who have been arrested for breaking criminal laws.

ICE prioritizes the removal of criminal aliens, those who pose a threat to public safety, and repeat immigration violators.

Secure Communities is a simple and common sense way to carry out ICE’s priorities. It uses an already-existing federal information-sharing partnership between ICE and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) that helps to identify criminal aliens without imposing new or additional requirements on state and local law enforcement. For decades, local jurisdictions have shared the fingerprints of individuals who are arrested or booked into custody with the FBI to see if they have a criminal record. Under Secure Communities, the FBI automatically sends the fingerprints to DHS to check against its immigration databases. If these checks reveal that an individual is unlawfully present in the United States or otherwise removable due to a criminal conviction, ICE takes enforcement action – prioritizing the removal of individuals who present the most significant threats to public safety as determined by the severity of their crime, their criminal history, and other factors – as well as those who have repeatedly violated immigration laws.

For additional details, click here.

By the stroke of the pen, Barack Obama suspended, well terminated the law. Let that sink in.

While the implementation by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) of the state/local partnership agreements known as the 287(g) program has been a source of great controversy, it is far from the only tool ICE uses to engage state and local law enforcement in immigration control.  Most notably, the Secure Communities Program, which launched in March 2008, has been held out as a simplified model for state and local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. This fact sheet lays out the basics of Secure Communities program, how it works, key areas of concern and recommendations on how to improve the program.

What is Secure Communities?

Secure Communities is a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) program designed to identify immigrants in U.S. jails who are deportable under immigration law. Under Secure Communities, participating jails submit arrestees’ fingerprints not only to criminal databases, but to immigration databases as well, allowing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) access to information on individuals held in jails. Unlike other ICE-local partnerships, Secure Communities gives ICE a technological, not physical, presence in prisons and jails. Unlike the 287(g) program, no local law-enforcement agents are deputized to enforce immigration laws through Secure Communities.

As of September 27, 2011, Secure Communities was available in 1,595 jurisdictions in 44 states and territories. ICE plans to implement Secure Communities in each of the 3,100 state and local jails across the country by 2013. ICE reported that, as of September 30, 2011, over 11,000,000 fingerprint submissions have resulted in 692,788 database matches. As a result of Secure Communities, ICE had removed more than 142,000 persons. Many more details here.

In 2014, Barack Obama wound this law back which has proven to be a deadly action of which there is no dispute.

From the White House:

FACT SHEET:  Immigration Accountability Executive Action

The President’s Immigration Accountability Executive Actions will help secure the border, hold nearly 5 million undocumented immigrants accountable, and ensure that everyone plays by the same rules.  Acting within his legal authority, the President is taking an important step to fix our broken immigration system.

These executive actions crack down on illegal immigration at the border, prioritize deporting felons not families, and require certain undocumented immigrants to pass a criminal background check and pay their fair share of taxes as they register to temporarily stay in the U.S. without fear of deportation.

These are common sense steps, but only Congress can finish the job. As the President acts, he’ll continue to work with Congress on a comprehensive, bipartisan bill—like the one passed by the Senate more than a year ago—that can replace these actions and fix the whole system. For the stepped process, it is important to click here.

On July 14, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson appeared before Congress on the matter of Sanctuary Cities.

Washington Times:

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson admitted Tuesday that the administration goofed in releasing an illegal immigrant to sanctuary city San Francisco ahead of a shocking murder earlier this month, but said there’s little the government can do to pressure sanctuary communities to change their minds.

Facing lawmakers for the first time since the slaying of Kathryn Steinle, a 32-year-old killed while out walking with her father, Mr. Johnson said he’s made personal appeals to San Francisco to rethink its refusal to let police cooperate with federal immigration agents, and will try again in the wake of the killing.

But he declined to criticize sanctuary cities themselves, and told Congress not to try to pass laws forcing cooperation, saying it could conflict with the Constitution, and it won’t win over the hearts of reluctant communities.

In 2012, John Morton, then-director of ICE, told Congress he was pushing within the administration to punish sanctuary cities, but signaled the Justice Department was blocking that.

Mr. Morton at the time said he’d fight to cut off funding for sanctuary cities.

But that’s no longer Homeland Security’s position. New ICE Director Sarah R. Saldana had told Congress earlier this year she would welcome a law forcing communities to cooperate, but a day later retracted that statement after receiving a talking-to from Mr. Johnson.

Beyond the sanctuary city issue, Mr. Johnson said border security is improving. Border Patrol agents are on pace to apprehend fewer than 400,000 illegal immigrants this year, which could be the lowest total since the 1970s. The agency says that means fewer people are even attempting to cross in the first place. For the full story, click here.

Jeh Johnson appeared before Congress and was asked about the matter of the event in San Francisco and if had any comment about the Steinle death. His reply was ‘I don’t know who that is’. So, this spells out that the information and intelligence network from the ground does not make it to DC’s DHS headquarters. How can Johnson be so detached?

This video will answer that question.