New Technology for Diplomacy, the Blackberry for Wendy/Hillary

Primer: Anyone subpoena the Blackberry call records and meta-data?

Wendy Sherman worked for both the Clinton administration and the Obama administration. Wendy’s early background included: She has formerly worked as a social worker, the director of EMILY’s list, the director of Maryland’s office of child welfare, and the founding president of the Fannie Mae Foundation. During the Clinton Administration, she served as Counselor of the United States Department of State and Special Advisor to the President and Secretary of State and North Korea Policy Coordinator. In the latter role, she was instrumental in negotiations related to North Korea’s nuclear weapon and ballistic missile programs that failed to stop North Koreas nuclear program. She was also the lead negotiator for the Iran nuclear deal. She currently serves as a resident fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School Institute of Politics (IOP). Sherman directed Campaign ’88 for the Democratic National Committee, where she oversaw field and political operations, communications, Congressional relations, constituency operations, issue development and coordination with all federal, state and local campaigns during the 1988 general election. Wendy Sherman was the Clinton administration’s policy coordinator for North Korea. The Clinton Administration had first arrived at the 1994 Agreed Framework under which, North Korea agreed to freeze and dismantle its nuclear weapons program, including its main reactor at Yongbyon (Sherman continues to defend the 1994 deal and her involvement in it, stating that “during the Clinton administration not one ounce of plutonium was added to the North Korean stockpile”). Sherman later headed North Korean negotiation policy until 2001.

Fox: 2013 Video Shows Wendy Sherman Boasting About Clinton Using Blackberry to Send Classified Material

FreeBeacon: Fox News correspondent Ed Henry reported Monday on a 2013 video showing State Department official Wendy Sherman boasting at a private event about Hillary Clinton and her aides sending, as Henry put it, “sensitive information on unclassified systems.”

“Now we have Blackberries, and it has changed the way diplomacy is done,” Sherman says in the 2013 tape. “Things appear on your Blackberries that would never be on an unclassified system, but you’re out traveling. You’re trying to negotiate something.“

Henry said Fox News had exclusively obtained the clip, where Sherman is shown speaking with the American Foreign Service Association.

“Sherman cited the example of Clinton’s September 2011 visit to the United Nations General Assembly, where the then-Secretary of State met with Lady [Catherine] Ashton of the European Union, and they conducted delicate Middle East peace negotiations,” Henry said.

The clip then returned to Sherman in 2013.

“And so they sat there as they were having the meeting with their Blackberries transferring language back and forth, between them and between their aides, to multitask in quite a new fashion,” Sherman said.

Fox reports:

Previous email releases by the State Department of Clinton’s official correspondence show that in September 2011, Clinton aide Jake Sullivan forwarded her an email chain on the Quartet statement.

The State Department considered the correspondence sensitive enough that the department deemed some of those emails to now be classified, and officials redacted details before the emails were released to the public.

The conservative super PAC America Rising declared that under National Archives guidelines, the information deemed classified involves “foreign relations or foreign activities of the United States, including confidential sources,” so it was born classified when the emails were created.

“Despite her numerous protests, evidence continues to grow showing Secretary Clinton knowingly sent and received classified material using her private email,” Jeff Bechdel, communications director for America Rising, said in a written statement. “This new video again puts Clinton on defense, forcing the former Secretary of State to explain why she put U.S. intelligence at risk by exclusively [using] a private email account for government business.”

A Clinton aide would not comment on the video, which was revealed as new Fox News polls showed a tightening race between Clinton and Democratic Sen. Bernie Sanders. Clinton’s once double-digit lead in Iowa has dwindled to just 6 points, while Sanders has opened a 22-point lead in New Hampshire.

Both Iowa and New Hampshire polls showed that a candidate’s trustworthiness topped the qualities Democratic voters look for most in their preferred candidates.

Clinton House of Cards Falling?

The Hill:

It is the beginning of the end of the House of Clinton:

1. There is the stench of political death around Hillary, Bill, Chelsea and the entire House of Clinton.

2. You could feel it when Republican front-runner Donald Trump hit back — hard — over the “penchant for sexism” charge by basically calling Hillary Clinton an enabler in the former president’s sexual shenanigans.

3. When have we ever seen the Clintons back off? But they did.

4. Then came further reports about an expanded FBI probe of her handling of secure information; the nexus of State Department favors for donors to the Clinton Foundation; and the story that Hillary Clinton or her staff might have lied to FBI agents in this probe.

5. All of this has raised the speculation, yet again: Will President Obama stop the Department of Justice (DOJ) from indicting her if the eight-person DOJ team working with over 100 FBI agents recommends criminal charges?

6. The president will be in an odd situation: He ran against the Clintons. He is known to loathe Bill Clinton. He apparently does not want the Clintons back in charge of the Democratic Party (thus removing the thousands of Obama acolytes with cushy patronage jobs).

7. So: If the DOJ recommends an indictment and he K.O.’s it, he will have his own legacy smeared with a permanent taint of having covered up for the Clintons.

8. If he allows an indictment to move ahead, that will be the end of Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Period. She may think she can march on despite charges, but that would be self-delusional. Her campaign will be finished the day charges are filed by Obama’s Justice Department.

9. She can’t claim “politics as usual” or that old “right-wing conspiracy” nonsense as this will be Obama’s Justice Department — not a Republican-controlled entity — bringing these charges.

10. Now, even without an indictment, Hillary Clinton’s fortunes are rapidly sinking.

11. As of today, she is on track to lose both the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary — to an unelectable 72-year-old Vermont socialist!

12. That tells us how politically weak and out of it the Clinton machine has become.

13. It is no coincidence that Vice President Joe Biden has suddenly resurfaced — first in a Hartford, Conn. TV interview stating that he regrets not running “every day,” and then by softly criticizing Hillary Clinton for not leading on the anti-1 percent front.

14. Biden may very well be warming up in the bullpen for a possible emergency entry into the Democratic field once Clinton is charged and has to withdraw.

15. In the meantime, we see a frantic, panic-stricken Clinton family out on the stump hitting Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on healthcare and guns. But they’re hitting him from the center on healthcare — not the left, where the votes are.

16. They are running national TV ads on guns on MSNBC; there are ads every few minutes. If Team Clinton members think they can turn around her negative trajectory over guns, they are sorely mistaken.

17. Economics is the main issue.

18. And Hillary Clinton is seen as being in the tank for corporate interests, while Sanders has stood up to them. Period. That is the race.

19. The 2016 campaign is a political revolution.

20. The House of Bush is also falling.

21. So is the Establishment of both political parties.

22. Who is more establishment than the Clintons and the Bushes?

23. Who has milked the political system for more money, gigs, access and cushy jobs for cronies than the Clintons and the Bushes?

24. But this is the year that the public is standing up to the status quo.

25. We are witnessing history: the fall of the Houses of Clinton and Bush.

26. Who is rising?

27. The outsiders.

Further reading from a former Hillary senior aide: Admits Bill’s exploitation of women…

Politico: For the better part of the last month, Donald Trump has hit Hillary Clinton for playing the “woman’s card” in her attacks against him, frequently mentioning her husband’s past affairs in an attempt to discredit her argument that she would be champion for women in the White House.

For one of Clinton’s closest senior advisers as first lady, however, those arguments ring hollow.

“Here’s what I think about that: I think what Bill Clinton did in terms of infidelity was absolutely horrible. A shitty thing to do,” Patti Solis Doyle told David Axelrod in the latest episode of his “The Axe Files” podcast for the University of Chicago Institute of Politics, where she is a resident fellow this winter.

Remarking again what a “shitty thing” it was “to do to her,” Solis Doyle emphasized that it was the president, not his wife, who did anything wrong.

“It was awful. You know, many of us thought about quitting after what he did,” she revealed. “But when we thought about it – when I thought about it – I thought, she didn’t do anything. He is the jerk here.”

Solis Doyle surmised at another point that Axelrod was alluding to a comment in private correspondence in which Clinton wrote to a friend that Lewinsky was a “narcisstic loony toon.”

“It’s not like she went on television or said it publicly. She didn’t say anything publicly about any of the… And, you know, as a woman, if my husband were having some sort of extramarital affair with another woman, I’m sure I wouldn’t have very nice things to say about that woman either. I mean, that’s just normal,” she added. “But she never said anything publicly. And I think it’s its own form of sexism to somehow blame the spouse for what the husband did. I think that’s its own form of sexism.”

Solis Doyle advised Clinton during both of her Senate campaigns as well as serving as her campaign manager during her 2008 presidential campaign until a third-place finish in Iowa necessitated a change. She then worked as a senior adviser to Barack Obama’s campaign, serving as Joe Biden’s campaign chief of staff.

This time, while acknowledging that Bill appears to be the Clinton more at ease at rallies and on the rope line, Solis Doyle remarked that she had “no doubt” that her former boss would be the Democratic nominee.

“You know, Bill Clinton, he gets so much energy from the people at his rallies. When he’s working a rope line, you can just see him light up. You know, she’s tired. She gets tired. She does it. She does it dutifully. Is it her most fun thing to do? No. Would she rather be looking at policy and going through legislation and working with a bunch of experts on how to, you know, improve the Affordable Care Act? Absolutely,” Solis Doyle explained. “This is not her favorite thing to do. It’s a mean, you know, to an end, I guess.”

At the same time, she said, Clinton “seems much more comfortable in her skin this time around than she did in 2008 and I think she’s much more comfortable as a candidate.”

“I think she’s much more prepared for the rigors of a campaign. I always think that you learn so much more from losing than from winning,” she continued. “You learn many more lessons from losing a campaign than from winning one. I think that nobody likes an inevitable frontrunner.”

“I was in a discussion today and I quoted the famous Mario Cuomo about campaigning – ‘you campaign in poetry and govern in prose.’ She doesn’t seem all that comfortable with the poetry,” Axelrod mused. “I used to say that President Obama – and I suspect President Clinton as well – was the guy who cracked the book open the night before the exam, you know, and got the A. And she was the one who stayed up all night and did the extra credit.”

Solis Doyle agreed, responding that Clinton “does her homework” and might not be “the most inspirational kid in the class, right?”

“But man, do you want her running the country? Absolutely,” she said. “She has a level of competency that no one else has in this field both on the Republican side and on the Democratic side and in these times – we’re in some very tenuous times – I think you want her there at the helm.”

 

 

Non-Stop Flight: NYC to Tehran?

As an aside note, one of the 7 in the prisoner swap and 14 people that Obama lifted the Interpol ‘red-notice’ on was the CEO of Mahan Air.

See more on Mahan Air here.

Obama Admin Denies Resumption of U.S.-Iran Commercial Flights

Iran Air / Wikimedia Commons

Iran Air / Wikimedia Commons

BY:

Obama administration officials on Monday denied that they are holding talks with Iran aimed at resuming direct flights between the two countries, according to information provided by the administration to the Washington Free Beacon.

The head of Iran’s national air carrier, Iran Air, announced over the weekend that negotiations are taking place between the United States and Iran regarding the resumption of direct flights between the countries.

The announcement, which Obama administration officials denied Monday when asked by the Free Beacon, comes as Iran engages in talks with French airplane manufacturer Airbus about the purchase of more than 100 new planes.

Farhad Parvaresh, Iran Air chairman, said that talks are underway with the United States to begin direct flights from America to Iran now that international sanctions on the Islamic Republic have been lifted as part of the recent nuclear agreement.

The “Iran Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is conducting talks on direct flights between Iran and the US,” Parvaresh said, according to the country’s state-controlled press. “Daily flights to New York used to take place before the Islamic Revolution and they will hopefully get resumed in near future.”

Obama administration officials say this is not true, citing a number of concerns that would complicate any such resumption.

The administration officials maintain that, to their knowledge, no talks have take place between the U.S. government and Iran regarding the resumption of direct flights.

“There are no U.S. government officials involved in such talks,” a State Department official who was not authorized to speak on record told the Free Beacon.

A resumption of U.S.-Iran flights is “not something we’re considering,” the official said. “There are a number of issues, regulatory and otherwise, that would prevent direct flights between the U.S. and Iran.”

A second administration official also confirmed that direct U.S.-Iran flights are “not something we are considering.”

Primarily, Iranian travelers would be unable to obtain a U.S. travel visa since America has no diplomatic ties with Iran and does not maintain an embassy in the country.

However, dual U.S.-Iranian citizens might benefit from such an arrangement.

Iran is continuing to explore ways in which it can expand its aviation industry. A portion of the nuclear agreement centered on lifting restrictions on Iran’s ability to conduct business with international airlines and plane manufacturers.

Iran has long been operating an aged fleet of commercial planes that are in dire need of spare parts. Since the nuclear deal was implemented and international sanctions were lifted, Iranian officials have begun talks with European airliners and airports.

France’s Airbus confirmed Monday that talks are underway to sell Iran some of the newest commercial jetliners.

The sales could encompass “100-seat turboprops to the 555-seat twin-deck Airbus A380 superjumbo,” according to reports in the U.S. and Iranian media.

“We have been negotiating for 10 months” about the purchase, but “there was no way to pay for them because of banking sanctions,” Iran’s transportation minister told the country’s state-controlled press.

The release by the United States of some $150 billion in once-frozen cash assets has enabled Iran to more seriously negotiate a deal.

“Following the lifting of international economic sanctions, Iran seeks [to] purchase 114 Airbus jets to renovate the aging fleet,” said Iran Air chairman Parvaresh. “Hopefully, a part of the financing will be carried out by the National Development Fund of Iran.”

Iran also is in talks to boost relations with many European airports. This will enable Iran’s commercial airplanes to more easily land, refuel, and resupply.

“Currently, on the basis of a contract with France’s Total, Iran Air flights are supplied with necessary fuel in French airports,” Parvaresh was quoted as saying. “So far, London Heathrow, Amsterdam, Hamburg Fuhlsbuttel and Vienna airports have also resolved the issue for Iranian aircrafts while talks with other fuel companies are underway.”

Michael Rubin, a former Pentagon adviser and terrorism analyst, dismissed the Obama administration’s denial, saying that time and again, Iranian press reports have more accurately reported the status of U.S.-Iran negotiations.

“The sad truth is that the Iranian press has been more accurate than the White House with regard to anything dealing with secret talks or American concessions,” Rubin said, saying the denial “means nothing.”

Rubin also warned that European nations should consider that boosting aviation ties with Iran means that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps will gain access to major airports.

“Why not trust airplane security to Revolutionary Guards baggage handlers?” Rubin asked. “And if they pilfered electronics from luggage, they could avoid the tricky issue of evading what few sanctions remain on electronics.”

In 2015: 84 million

Just imagine, the cyber espionage….industrial espionage….the hacking…..

Do you really want to continue to tell the world about everything you do and who you are connected with on Facebook?

Cybercriminals Making Computer Malware at a Record Rate: Researchers

NBC: Last year was a particularly bad year for hacks and computer intrusions, and it looks like 2016 will only get worse, Panda Security says.

The Spain-based Internet security company said its lab researchers detected and disabled more than 84 million new samples of malware in 2015 — 9 million more than the previous year. The figure means cybercriminals were churning out new malware samples at a rate of more than 230,000 a day throughout 2015.

In fact, more than a quarter (27 percent) of all malware samples ever recorded were produced in 2015, Panda Security said in a news release.

“We predict that the amount of malware created by cybercriminals will continue to grow,” said Luis Corrons, technical director of PandaLabs. “We also can’t forget that the creation of millions of Trojans and other threats corresponds to the cybercriminals’ needs to infect as many users as possible in order to get more money.”

Malware is any type of software that is designed to gain access to and damage or disable a computer.

Trojans, a type of malware disguised as legitimate software, accounted for more than half the malware detected in 2015, according to Panda Security.

China topped the list of countries with the highest rate of infected computers, followed by Taiwan and Turkey. At the other end of the spectrum, nine of the top 10 countries with the lowest rates of infection were in Europe, led by Finland, Norway and Sweden.

***

Barack Obama has been a big user of BIG DATA but he experienced a huge firestorm after the exposure of the NSA programs by Edward Snowden. Barack Obama enlisted John Podesta, at the time his chief of staff and now Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign architect to commission a study. Sheesh…but nonetheless, here is what you should read in the findings.

From the White House: Over the past several days, severe storms have battered Arkansas, Oklahoma, Mississippi and other states. Dozens of people have been killed and entire neighborhoods turned to rubble and debris as tornadoes have touched down across the region. Natural disasters like these present a host of challenges for first responders. How many people are affected, injured, or dead? Where can they find food, shelter, and medical attention? What critical infrastructure might have been damaged?

Drawing on open government data sources, including Census demographics and NOAA weather data, along with their own demographic databases, Esri, a geospatial technology company, has created a real-time map showing where the twisters have been spotted and how the storm systems are moving. They have also used these data to show how many people live in the affected area, and summarize potential impacts from the storms. It’s a powerful tool for emergency services and communities. And it’s driven by big data technology.

In January, President Obama asked me to lead a wide-ranging review of “big data” and privacy—to explore how these technologies are changing our economy, our government, and our society, and to consider their implications for our personal privacy. Together with Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker, Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz, the President’s Science Advisor John Holdren, the President’s Economic Advisor Jeff Zients, and other senior officials, our review sought to understand what is genuinely new and different about big data and to consider how best to encourage the potential of these technologies while minimizing risks to privacy and core American values.

Over the course of 90 days, we met with academic researchers and privacy advocates, with regulators and the technology industry, with advertisers and civil rights groups. The President’s Council of Advisors for Science and Technology conducted a parallel study of the technological trends underpinning big data. The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy jointly organized three university conferences at MIT, NYU, and U.C. Berkeley. We issued a formal Request for Information seeking public comment, and hosted a survey to generate even more public input.

Today, we presented our findings to the President. We knew better than to try to answer every question about big data in three months. But we are able to draw important conclusions and make concrete recommendations for Administration attention and policy development in a few key areas.

There are a few technological trends that bear drawing out. The declining cost of collection, storage, and processing of data, combined with new sources of data like sensors, cameras, and geospatial technologies, mean that we live in a world of near-ubiquitous data collection. All this data is being crunched at a speed that is increasingly approaching real-time, meaning that big data algorithms could soon have immediate effects on decisions being made about our lives.

The big data revolution presents incredible opportunities in virtually every sector of the economy and every corner of society.

Big data is saving lives. Infections are dangerous—even deadly—for many babies born prematurely. By collecting and analyzing millions of data points from a NICU, one study was able to identify factors, like slight increases in body temperature and heart rate, that serve as early warning signs an infection may be taking root—subtle changes that even the most experienced doctors wouldn’t have noticed on their own.

Big data is making the economy work better. Jet engines and delivery trucks now come outfitted with sensors that continuously monitor hundreds of data points and send automatic alerts when maintenance is needed. Utility companies are starting to use big data to predict periods of peak electric demand, adjusting the grid to be more efficient and potentially averting brown-outs.

Big data is making government work better and saving taxpayer dollars. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services have begun using predictive analytics—a big data technique—to flag likely instances of reimbursement fraud before claims are paid. The Fraud Prevention System helps identify the highest-risk health care providers for waste, fraud, and abuse in real time and has already stopped, prevented, or identified $115 million in fraudulent payments.

But big data raises serious questions, too, about how we protect our privacy and other values in a world where data collection is increasingly ubiquitous and where analysis is conducted at speeds approaching real time. In particular, our review raised the question of whether the “notice and consent” framework, in which a user grants permission for a service to collect and use information about them, still allows us to meaningfully control our privacy as data about us is increasingly used and reused in ways that could not have been anticipated when it was collected.

Big data raises other concerns, as well. One significant finding of our review was the potential for big data analytics to lead to discriminatory outcomes and to circumvent longstanding civil rights protections in housing, employment, credit, and the consumer marketplace.

No matter how quickly technology advances, it remains within our power to ensure that we both encourage innovation and protect our values through law, policy, and the practices we encourage in the public and private sector. To that end, we make six actionable policy recommendations in our report to the President:

Advance the Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights. Consumers deserve clear, understandable, reasonable standards for how their personal information is used in the big data era. We recommend the Department of Commerce take appropriate consultative steps to seek stakeholder and public comment on what changes, if any, are needed to the Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights, first proposed by the President in 2012, and to prepare draft legislative text for consideration by stakeholders and submission by the President to Congress.

Pass National Data Breach Legislation. Big data technologies make it possible to store significantly more data, and further derive intimate insights into a person’s character, habits, preferences, and activities. That makes the potential impacts of data breaches at businesses or other organizations even more serious. A patchwork of state laws currently governs requirements for reporting data breaches. Congress should pass legislation that provides for a single national data breach standard, along the lines of the Administration’s 2011 Cybersecurity legislative proposal.

Extend Privacy Protections to non-U.S. Persons. Privacy is a worldwide value that should be reflected in how the federal government handles personally identifiable information about non-U.S. citizens. The Office of Management and Budget should work with departments and agencies to apply the Privacy Act of 1974 to non-U.S. persons where practicable, or to establish alternative privacy policies that apply appropriate and meaningful protections to personal information regardless of a person’s nationality.

Ensure Data Collected on Students in School is used for Educational Purposes. Big data and other technological innovations, including new online course platforms that provide students real time feedback, promise to transform education by personalizing learning. At the same time, the federal government must ensure educational data linked to individual students gathered in school is used for educational purposes, and protect students against their data being shared or used inappropriately.

Expand Technical Expertise to Stop Discrimination. The detailed personal profiles held about many consumers, combined with automated, algorithm-driven decision-making, could lead—intentionally or inadvertently—to discriminatory outcomes, or what some are already calling “digital redlining.” The federal government’s lead civil rights and consumer protection agencies should expand their technical expertise to be able to identify practices and outcomes facilitated by big data analytics that have a discriminatory impact on protected classes, and develop a plan for investigating and resolving violations of law.

Amend the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. The laws that govern protections afforded to our communications were written before email, the internet, and cloud computing came into wide use. Congress should amend ECPA to ensure the standard of protection for online, digital content is consistent with that afforded in the physical world—including by removing archaic distinctions between email left unread or over a certain age.

We also identify several broader areas ripe for further study, debate, and public engagement that, collectively, we hope will spark a national conversation about how to harness big data for the public good. We conclude that we must find a way to preserve our privacy values in both the domestic and international marketplace. We urgently need to build capacity in the federal government to identify and prevent new modes of discrimination that could be enabled by big data. We must ensure that law enforcement agencies using big data technologies do so responsibly, and that our fundamental privacy rights remain protected. Finally, we recognize that data is a valuable public resource, and call for continuing the Administration’s efforts to open more government data sources and make investments in research and technology.

While big data presents new challenges, it also presents immense opportunities to improve lives, the United States is perhaps better suited to lead this conversation than any other nation on earth. Our innovative spirit, technological know-how, and deep commitment to values of privacy, fairness, non-discrimination, and self-determination will help us harness the benefits of the big data revolution and encourage the free flow of information while working with our international partners to protect personal privacy. This review is but one piece of that effort, and we hope it spurs a conversation about big data across the country and around the world.

Read the Big Data Report.

See the fact sheet from today’s announcement.

‘Putin is corrupt’ says US Treasury

But like Iran, John Kerry and the White House are protecting Russia and never want to upset the Kremlin.

Syria’s leading opposition coalition is to decide Tuesday whether to attend peace talks in Geneva, following a tense meeting with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, a member told AFP on Monday.

The member of the so-called High Negotiations Committee said Kerry applied “pressure” during a weekend meeting in Saudi Arabia, warning the opposition risked “losing friends” if they failed to attend the talks.

Fuad Aliko said the Committee would meet Tuesday to make a final decision on whether to attend the Geneva talks.

The Saturday meeting with Kerry was “neither comfortable, nor positive”, said Aliko, a member of the Committee’s designated delegation for the talks.

Kerry told the Committee’s chief Riad Hijab that they risked “losing friends”, Aliko said.

“This talk means a halt to political and military support to the opposition,” he added.

Syria’s warring parties were scheduled to begin the latest round of talks aimed at ending the country’s conflict on Monday in Geneva.

But they have been delayed at least in part by a dispute over who will represent the opposition.

The High Negotiations Committee, a coalition of opposition bodies formed last year in Riyadh, insists it should send a sole opposition delegation to the talks.

But the Committee excludes Syria’s main Kurdish force and other opposition figures, and Russia has branded some of its components as “terrorist” organizations.

Moscow reportedly wants to see excluded members allowed to participate in the talks either as part of the Committee’s delegation or in a second opposition delegation.

But the Committee has roundly rejected either option and threatened to boycott the talks altogether if other opposition figures are included.

Aliko said Kerry applied “pressure” during the Saturday talks, though he stopped short of saying the U.S. diplomat had used threats.

“He tried with all his efforts to insist on the necessity of us attending, saying we’d be able to do whatever we want there, but he was not able to reassure us that we are going into negotiations, rather than nothing more than a dialogue,” he said.

“We want negotiations that revolve around a political transition,” Aliko said.

The Geneva talks have also been held up by a dispute about some of the members of the negotiating team chosen by the Committee.

The Committee has selected Mohammed Alloush of the Islamist rebel group Army of Islam as its chief negotiator, drawing the ire of some of its other members.

Russia said last week it continues to consider the Army of Islam a “terrorist” organization.

U.N. envoy Staffan de Mistura is expected to hold a press conference in Geneva later on Monday to discuss preparations for the talks.

‘Putin is corrupt’ says US Treasury

BBC: The US Treasury has told a BBC investigation that it considers Russian President Vladimir Putin to be corrupt.

The US government has already imposed sanctions on Mr Putin’s aides, but it is thought to be the first time it has directly accused him of corruption.

His spokesman told the BBC that “none of these questions or issues needs to be answered, as they are pure fiction”.

Last week a UK public inquiry said Mr Putin had “probably” approved the murder of ex-spy Alexander Litvinenko.

The broadcast is available here.

Secret wealth

Litvinenko, a former Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) agent and fierce critic of Mr Putin, was poisoned in London with radioactive polonium in 2006.

Adam Szubin, who oversees US Treasury sanctions, has told BBC Panorama that the Russian president is corrupt and that the US government has known this for “many, many years”.

He said: “We’ve seen him enriching his friends, his close allies, and marginalising those who he doesn’t view as friends using state assets. Whether that’s Russia’s energy wealth, whether it’s other state contracts, he directs those to whom he believes will serve him and excludes those who don’t. To me, that is a picture of corruption.”

The US government imposed sanctions against a number of Kremlin insiders in 2014 and stated that Vladimir Putin had secret investments in the energy sector. However, the Americans did not directly accuse him of corruption at the time.

The sanctions – later expanded to include more individuals and organisations – coincided with similar EU measures against Russia. The trigger for them was Russia’s annexation of Crimea, during political turmoil in Ukraine.

Adam Szubin, who oversees US Treasury sanctions
Image caption The US Treasury’s Adam Szubin speaks of a “picture of corruption”

US government officials have been reluctant to be interviewed about President Putin’s wealth, but Mr Szubin agreed to take part in a BBC Panorama programme investigating the issue.

Mr Szubin would not comment on a secret CIA report from 2007 that put Mr Putin’s wealth at around $40bn (£28bn). But he said the Russian president had been amassing secret wealth.

“He supposedly draws a state salary of something like $110,000 a year. That is not an accurate statement of the man’s wealth, and he has long time training and practices in terms of how to mask his actual wealth.”

The Kremlin denies such allegations. In 2008, President Putin personally addressed claims that he was the richest man in Europe, saying: “It’s simply rubbish. They just picked all of it out of someone’s nose and smeared it across their little papers.”

Offshore company

But Panorama has spoken to former Russian insiders who say they have first-hand knowledge of Vladimir Putin’s secret riches.

Dmitry Skarga, who used to run the state shipping company Sovcomflot, says he oversaw the transfer of a $35m yacht to Mr Putin. Mr Skarga says the 57m-long Olympia was a gift from Britain’s most famous Russian – the Chelsea football club owner Roman Abramovich.

The Kremlin, Moscow
Image caption The Kremlin says the allegations against President Putin are “pure fiction”

“It’s a fact that Mr Abramovich, through his employee, transferred a yacht to Mr Putin,” he said. “I was on board of this yacht at the end of March 2002, in Amsterdam. And there was a representative of Mr Abramovich… He said that Roman is the owner of this yacht.”

Mr Skarga says the Olympia was then given to the Russian president via an offshore company. He then oversaw the management of the yacht for Vladimir Putin and prepared reports on the boat’s running costs.

He said: “This yacht was maintained and paid for running costs from the state budget.”

Mr Skarga says the yacht was kept secret because it belonged personally to Vladimir Putin, rather than the state.

Panorama asked Mr Abramovich about the yacht. His lawyers dismissed claims about him as speculation and rumour.

President Putin declined to be interviewed for Panorama.