Teaching Immigrants to Unionize, Chicago

Posted on March 30, 2015March 30, 2015 by Denise Simon

The National Labor Relations Board is signing agreements with Mexico, Ecuador and other countries. Of note: Lafe Soloman being investigated for violating ethics. Richard Griffin is devoted to big labor.

August 26, 2013 the Chicago Office of the NLRB and the Mexican Consulate in Chicago will sign a local agreement to strengthen cooperation and collaboration between the NLRB and the Consulate and improve access to information and education regarding rights and responsibilities for Mexican workers, their employers, and Mexican business owners in the United States.

On July 23, 2013 the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the United Mexican States signed a national letter of agreement in Washington D.C. The NLRB is the independent government agency responsible for enforcing the National Labor Relations Act, the primary law governing relations between employers and employees in the private sector. The Act guarantees workers the right to join together, with or without a union, to improve their wages and working conditions, or to refrain from such activities. Employers and employees alike are protected from unfair labor practices.

Under the framework, the NLRB and the Mexican Embassy in Washington, D.C., as well as NLRB Regional Offices and Mexican Consulates nationwide, will cooperate to provide outreach, education, and training, and to develop best practices. The Agreement is an outgrowth of initial negotiations between the NLRB’s Chicago office and the Mexican Consulate in Chicago. The framework has been used by other federal labor agencies, including the Department of Labor and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which have similar agreements with the Mexican Embassy and its consulates.

“With coordination from the consulates, we expect to meet with Mexican workers around the country to help forge innovative solutions to issues specific to their needs,” Acting NLRB General Counsel Lafe Solomon said. He noted the letter of agreement will also increase the NLRB’s ability to provide employers, including Mexican business owners in the United States, with resources directly available to them, including access to education and training resources regarding rights and responsibilities under the Act.

*** There is more:

U.S. signed agreement with Mexico to teach immigrants to unionize

The federal government has signed agreements with three foreign countries — Mexico, Ecuador and the Philippines — to establish outreach programs to teach immigrants their rights to engage in labor organizing in the U.S.

The agreements do not distinguish between those who entered legally or illegally. They are part of a broader effort by the National Labor Relations Board to get immigrants involved in union activism.

The five-member board is the agency that enforces the National Labor Relations Act, the main federal law covering unions. In 2013, Lafe Solomon, the board’s then-acting general counsel, signed a “memorandum of understanding” with Mexico’s U.S. ambassador. The current general counsel, Richard Griffin, signed additional agreements with the ambassadors of Ecuador and the Philippines last year.

“Those are the only countries that the NLRB has MOUs with,” said spokeswoman Jessica Kahanek.

The agreements are substantially similar, with several sections repeated verbatim in each one. All three documents state that the No. 1 outreach goal is “to educate those who may not be aware of the Act, including those employees just entering the work force, by providing information designed to clearly inform [that nation’s] workers in the United States of America their rights under the Act and to develop ways of communicating such information (e.g., via print and electronic media, electronic assistance tools, mobile device applications, and links to the NLRB’s web site from the [country’s] web sites) to the … workers residing in the United States of America and their employers.”

The board has said the law’s protections for workers engaged in union organizing extend even to people who are not legally authorized to work in the U.S. An employer who fires an illegal immigrant worker — which is required under federal immigration law — can be sanctioned by the board if it decides the worker’s union activism was the real reason for the dismissal.

In the documents, the countries’ foreign consulates agree to help locate foreign nationals living in the U.S. “who might aid the NLRB in investigations, trials or compliance matters” involving businesses and to develop a system for the consulates to refer complaints from foreign workers to the board’s regional offices.

The documents also call for systems to inform foreign businesses operating in the U.S. of their responsibilities to their employees under federal labor law. In testimony before the House Appropriations Committee on March 24, Griffin characterized that as the principal focus of the agreements.

“We have executed letters of agreement with foreign ministries designed to strengthen collaborative efforts to provide foreign business owners doing business in the United States, as well as workers from those countries, with education, guidance and access to information regarding their rights and responsibilities under our statute,” he told lawmakers.

Griffin, formerly a top lawyer for the International Union of Operating Engineers, testified that the agreements save taxpayer money because they would “pay dividends as employers will be able to avoid unintentionally violating our statute and workers will be educated about their statutory rights to engage with one another to improve their conditions of employment, both of which benefits taxpayers, and the country as a whole, through increased economic growth.”

If the main intention is to provide legal information to foreign employers, it is not clear why the board pursued agreements with those countries, which represent a relatively small portion of businesses operating the in the U.S.

A November study by the Bureau of Economic Analysis found that Mexican businesses operating in the U.S. employ slightly less than 69,000 people total. The numbers employed by Ecuadorian and Philippine businesses operating in the U.S. are so small, the bureau doesn’t publish a measurement for either one.

By comparison, Canadian businesses employ well over a half-million people in the U.S. British businesses employ nearly a million, Japanese nearly 720,000 and German 620,000.

Mexico and the Philippines, one the other hand, represent two of the countries providing the most immigrants to the U.S. Mexico accounts for 11.6 million immigrants living in the U.S., the most from any single country, according to the Migration Policy Institute. The Philippines is fourth overall, accounting for 1.8 million.

A 2013 board press release stated the Mexican agreement was “an outgrowth of initial negotiations between the NLRB’s Chicago office and the Mexican Consulate in Chicago. The framework has been used by other federal labor agencies, including the Department of Labor and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which have similar agreements with the Mexican Embassy and its consulates.”

The release quoted Solomon saying, “With coordination from the consulates, we expect to meet with Mexican workers around the country to help forge innovative solutions to issues specific to their needs.”

Last month, Griffin instituted a new policy in which the board will “facilitate” obtaining visas for illegal immigrants if their status impedes it from pursuing a labor violation case against a business. The policy gives illegal immigrants living in the U.S. a strong incentive to engage in labor activism, because doing so will make employers reluctant to fire them and potentially get them a visa, and therefore legal status, if they are fired.

What About the P5+1 and Iran/North Korea

Posted on March 30, 2015March 30, 2015 by Denise Simon

If you are inclined to read about the technical cooperation agreement between North Korea and Iran go here.

Ed Schroeder’s Military Intelligence Report: Does Iran Have Secret Nukes in North Korea?

In October 2012, Iran began stationing personnel at a military base in North Korea, in a mountainous area close to the Chinese border. The Iranians, from the Ministry of Defense and associated firms, reportedly are working on both missiles and nuclear weapons. Ahmed Vahidi, Tehran’s minister of defense at the time,denied sending people to the North, but the unconfirmed dispatches make sense in light of the two states announcing a technical cooperation pact the preceding month.

The P5+1—the five permanent members of the Security Council and Germany—appear determined, before their self-imposed March 31 deadline, to ink a deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran regarding its nuclear energy program, which is surely a cover for a wide-ranging weapons effort. The international community wants the preliminary arrangement now under discussion, referred to as a “framework agreement,” to ensure that the country remains at least one year away from being able to produce an atomic device.

The P5+1 negotiators believe they can do that by monitoring Tehran’s centrifuges—supersonic-speed machines that separate uranium gas into different isotopes and upgrade the potent stuff to weapons-grade purity—and thereby keep track of its total stock of fissile material.

The negotiators from the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, and China are trying to get Tehran to adhere to the Additional Protocol, which allows anytime, anyplace inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.’s nuclear watchdog. If Iran agrees to the IAEA’s intrusive inspections, proponents of the deal will claim a major breakthrough, arguing for instance that Iran will not be able to hide centrifuges in undisclosed locations.

There were so many North Korean nuclear and missile scientists, specialists, and technicians at Iran’s facilities that they took over their own coastal resort there.

But no inspections of Iranian sites will solve a fundamental issue: As can be seen from the North Korean base housing Tehran’s weapons specialists, Iran is only one part of a nuclear weapons effort spanning the Asian continent. North Korea, now the world’s proliferation superstar, is a participant. China, once the mastermind, may still be a co-conspirator. Inspections inside the borders of Iran, therefore, will not give the international community the assurance it needs.

The cross-border nuclear trade is substantial enough to be called a “program.” Larry Niksch of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C., estimates that the North’s proceeds from this trade with Iran are “between $1.5 billion and $2.0 billion annually.” A portion of this amount is related to missiles and miscellaneous items, the rest derived from building Tehran’s nuclear capabilities.

Iran has bought a lot with its money. Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, thought to be Tehran’s chief nuclear scientist, was almost certainly in North Korea at Punggye-ri in February 2013 to witness Pyongyang’s third atomic test. Reports put Iranian technicians on hand at the site for the first two detonations as well.

The North Koreans have also sold Iran material for bomb cores, perhaps even weapons-grade uranium. The Telegraph reported that in 2002 a barrel of North Korean uranium cracked open and contaminated the tarmac of the new Tehran airport.

In addition, the Kim Jong Un regime appears to have helped the Islamic Republic on its other pathway to the bomb. In 2013, Meir Dagan, a former Mossad director,charged the North with providing assistance to Iran’s plutonium reactor.

The relationship between the two regimes has been long-lasting. Hundreds of North Koreans have worked at about 10 nuclear and missile facilities in Iran. There were so many nuclear and missile scientists, specialists, and technicians that they took over their own coastal resort there, according to Henry Sokolski, the proliferation maven, writing in 2003.

Even if Iran today were to agree to adhere to the Additional Protocol, it could still continue developing its bomb in North Korea, conducting research there or buying North Korean technology and plans. And as North Korean centrifuges spin in both known and hidden locations, the Kim regime will have a bigger stock of uranium to sell to the Iranians for their warheads. With the removal of sanctions, as the P5+1 is contemplating, Iran will have the cash to accelerate the building of its nuclear arsenal.

So while the international community inspects Iranian facilities pursuant to a framework deal, the Iranians could be busy assembling the components for a bomb elsewhere. In other words, they will be one day away from a bomb—the flight time from Pyongyang to Tehran—not one year as American and other policymakers hope.

The North Koreans are not the only contributors to the Iranian atom bomb. Iran got its first centrifuges from Pakistan, and Pakistan’s program was an offshoot from the Chinese one.

Some argue that China proliferated nuclear weapons through the infamous black market ring run by Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan. There is no open source proof of that contention, but Beijing did nothing while Khan merchandised Chinese parts, plans, and knowhow—its most sensitive technology—from the capital of one of its closest allies. Moreover, Beijing did its best to protect the smuggler when Washington rolled up his network in the early part of last decade. The Chinese, for instance, supported General Pervez Musharraf’s controversial decision to end prematurely his government’s inquiry, which avoided exposing Beijing’s rumored involvement with Khan’s activities.

And there are circumstances suggesting that Beijing, around the time of Khan’s confession and immediate pardon in 2004, took over his proliferation role directly, boldly transferring materials and equipment straight to Iran. For example, in November 2003 the staff of the IAEA had fingered China as one of the sources of equipment used in Iran’s suspected nuclear weapons effort. And as reported in July 2007 by The Wall Street Journal, the State Department had lodged formal protests with Beijing about Chinese enterprises violating Security Council resolutions by exporting to Tehran items that could be used for building atomic weapons.

Since then, there have been continual reports of transfers by Chinese enterprises to Iran in violation of international treaties and U.N. rules. Chinese entities have been implicated in shipments of maraging steel, ring-shaped magnets, and valves and vacuum gauges, all apparently headed to Iran’s atom facilities. In March 2011, police in Port Klang seized two containers from a ship bound to Iran from China. Malaysian authorities discovered that goods passed off as “used for liquid mixing or storage” were actually components for potential atomic weapons.

In the last few years, there has been an apparent decline in Chinese shipments to Iran. Beijing could be reacting to American pressure to end the trade, but there are more worrying explanations. First, it’s possible that, after decades of direct and indirect illicit transfers, China has already supplied most of what Iran needs to construct a weapon. Second, Beijing may be letting Pyongyang assume the leading proliferation role. After all, the shadowy Fakhrizadeh was reported to have traveled through China on his way to North Korea to observe the North’s third nuclear test.

Fakhrizadeh’s passage through China—probably Beijing’s airport—suggests that China may not have abandoned its “managed proliferation.” In the past, China’s proxy for this deadly trade was Pakistan. Then it was China’s only formal ally, North Korea. In both cases, Chinese policymakers intended to benefit Iran.

In a theoretical sense, there is nothing wrong with an accommodation with the Islamic Republic over nukes, yet there is no point in signing a deal with just one arm of a multi-nation weapons effort. That’s why the P5+1 needs to know what is going on at that isolated military base in the mountains of North Korea. And perhaps others as well.

Poll Results: Larger Threat Obama or Putin

Posted on March 30, 2015March 30, 2015 by Denise Simon

Sheesh, is there a difference? Actually, Putin has a policy that is good for Russia, the policy of Obama seems to only be good for Iran and global adversaries.

Reuters Asks “Who Is More Of A Threat: Obama Or Putin”, Surprised By The Answer

People in the United States feel under threat, both from beyond our borders and within them and as Reuters reports, when asked about both U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin, it was a pretty darn close call. A new Reuters/Ipsos poll finds a third of Republicans believe President Barack Obama poses an imminent threat to the United States, outranking concerns about Russian President Vladimir Putin and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The blame, according to one sociologist, “the TV media here, and American politics, very much trade on fears.”

On the bright side for the Administration, ISIS and Al Qaeda still outrank him as more imminent threats… so that’s good (considering he is a Nobel Peace Prize winner).

A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll asked more than 3,000 Americans what they see as some of the biggest threats to themselves and the country. Overall it was close – 20% saw Putin as an imminent threat compared to 18% who said the same about Obama.

I think it’s safe to say that a national security expert might not agree with the public’s choices.

More people fear Boko Haram, a scary but ragged Islamic radical group in Nigeria that might have trouble paying for plane tickets to the United States, than Russia, which recently invaded a major European country. And a whopping 34 percent consider Kim Jong-un, the leader of impoverished North Korea, an imminent threat. Kim may have a couple of nukes, but otherwise his nation is a basket case, so poor that it relies on international aid to feed itself. Though considering how fast Sony Pictures pulled “The Interview” from theaters, I guess the public’s not alone in being afraid of the young man with the unique hairstyle.

Perhaps the most disturbing part, however, is how Americans view each other, simply because of the political party they favor. Thirteen percent of us see the Republican and Democratic parties as an imminent threat. That’s the same number who think the Chinese might be.

The Guardian also notes, a third of Republicans believe President Barack Obama poses an imminent threat to the United States, outranking concerns about Russian President Vladimir Putin and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

People who were polled were most concerned about threats related to potential terror attacks.

Islamic State militants were rated an imminent threat by 58% of respondents, and al Qaeda by 43%. North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un was viewed as a threat by 34%, and Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei by 27%.

* * *
Meanwhile, the world is certainly worried about the United States.

In a Gallup survey of people in 65 countries, about one quarter named the United States as the greatest threat to world peace.

Maybe that should not be so surprising, as only about half of Americans know which country was the only one to ever drop a nuclear bomb.

American Journalist in Iran

Posted on March 30, 2015March 30, 2015 by Denise Simon

What I Saw in Iran

The worst part about taking a two-week vacation to Iran happens before you ever set foot in the country. “Oh really, where are you going?” people inevitably ask over the course of a normal conversation.

And then you tell them.

Almost every response is the same: incredulity followed by a splash of gallows humor—literally, in some cases. (“Don’t get hanged! LOL!”) Some are more sophisticated (“Be sure to forward your new address at Evin Prison”) than others (“Watch out for ISIS!”). Some people are clearly joking, while others seem legitimately concerned.

At a certain point, if you’re paranoid enough, you start taking them all seriously. This is especially true if you happen to have ties to an obscure warmongering Kate Upton blog whose coverage of the Iranian regime has been less than flattering, and who employs this man. What have you gotten yourself into? Let’s see what the State Department has to say:

Some elements in Iran remain hostile to the United States. As a result, U.S. citizens may be subject to harassment or arrest while traveling or residing in Iran.

Jason Rezaian can certainly attest to this fact. The dual Iranian-American citizen and Washington Post bureau chief has spent the better part of a year in jail on unknown charges. You don’t want to end up like him. For example, what if the nuclear talks go south in a hurry after John Kerry gets tired of being yelled at all the time and takes his windsurfing board out on Lake Geneva to shred away his sorrow? Maybe the ayatollahs fancy an extra bargaining chip?

You imagine being thrown in Evin Prison for a year or twenty, and conclude that it’s probably not very nice. On the other hand, it could be a brilliant career move. Just ask Winston Churchill. The book advance would be nothing to scoff at. The screenplay would win all of the awards and tear at the heartstrings. That scene where you visit your parents’ graves? Man, that’s dark. Or meeting your girlfriend’s children like in Cast Away. Being perplexed by all the new technology, and then longing for the dreary solace of your cell while watching President Chelsea Clinton being sworn in for a second term.

But eventually—as in, a couple hours before takeoff—you consider the possibility that you should chill the f—k out. This particular Persian excursion, after all, is sponsored by none other than the New York Times, the esteemed paper of record that, in case you hadn’t noticed, is quickly transforming itself into a travel agency of some renown, offering an array of exhilarating (and expensive) cultural journeys for the sophisticated traveller.

Looking for a “people to people experience” in communist Cuba? The Times has you covered. Eager to help solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Ditto. Keen to “retrace the footsteps of some of the world’s greatest explorers” in Antarctica? There’s a trip for that. It’s not clear whose footsteps you’ll be retracing aboard the “297-foot luxury expedition yacht” the Times has commissioned, but why quibble? Rates start at $15,695. Carlos Slim must be loving this.

No Times Journey, as they’re called, is as popular as “Tales from Persia.” Ours is the inaugural voyage, but there’s been so much interest that they’ve already had to increase the number of offerings this year from three to five, all of which are sold out. At the end of the day, no one—not even the ayatollah—is going to f—k with the Times. That’s what you’re counting on, anyway. Although the Gray Lady has certainly gone to great lengths to ensure her release from liability:

Without limitation, we are not responsible for any injury, loss, or damage to personal property, death, delay or inconvenience in connection with the provision of any goods or services occasioned by or resulting from, but not limited to, acts of God, acts of government, weather, force majeure, acts of war or civil unrest, insurrection or revolt, strikes or other labor activities, criminal or terrorist activities or the threat thereof…

But even if it comes to that—getting yanked into a windowless room upon arrival at Imam Khomeini International Airport—you’ve settled on a failsafe strategy: blame everything on the Jews. Before you know it, your Qatar Airways flight to Tehran (connecting through Doha, site of the 2022 World Cup final) is preparing for takeoff. There’s a large compass displayed on a big screen at the front of the cabin. One arrow points towards Mecca, the holiest of Muslim holy sites, and another (for some reason) towards Gaithersburg, Md.

‘Welcome to Iran’

I arrive in Tehran and head straight for passport control. The ceilings are low and the lights are hot. I’m exhausted and sweating suspiciously while trying to avoid eye contact with the security camera pointed right at my face. Behind the row of guards, there’s a wall-off area marked “Fingerprinting Room.” This should be fun.

If the Iranian commitment to airport inconvenience is any indication, their willingness to embrace Western culture may be underestimated. The line I’m in is moving at an excruciating pace. So, nothing out of the ordinary. After a nerve-wracking three-quarter hours, I’m next. Until I’m not. The guard seems to be waving me over to another station, and has exquisitely timed it so that I’m just seconds too late to beat out the professional soccer team arriving from Abu Dhabi. Typical soccer. The additional forty-five minutes I’m forced to wait is only slightly more tedious than watching them play.

Finally, I am stamped through. After a brief, wordless exchange, the Iranian guard had unsuccessfully searched his desk for what I assume was the foreigner fingerprinting/detention worksheet, and could not have been less enthusiastic about the prospect of getting up from his seat to find one. I am shrugged over the line onto Iranian soil, where I collect my bag and am instantly greeted by one of our local tour guides, Cyrus, who is holding a sign with my name on it. “I was expecting someone much older,” he says. “Welcome to Iran.”

Our group of 20 is staying at the Laleh International Hotel in Tehran. Lonely Planet calls it “the best choice among the fading prerevolutionary luxury hotels.” The former InterContinental was a favorite haunt of Western visitors in the days of the shah, including the foreign journalists who accompanied Ayatollah Khomeini on his triumphant return from exile in Paris. (The New York Times reporter accompanying our group, Elaine Sciolino, was among them.) Judging by the rooms, very little has changed since the days of the Islamic Revolution. The toilets are American Standard. The plumbing, as I will soon realize, is Iranian substandard.

The television seems modern enough, so I flip on Press TV, Iran’s premiere English-language news channel. George Galloway, the cantankerous British lawmaker, is yelling about imperialism. Apparently he has his own show on the network. Galloway tries to take a call from a viewer named “Blair,” but the connection is down. Without missing a beat, he launches into a soliloquy denouncing the “treasonous” regime of Tony Blair. Galloway, who makes Ed Schultz seem sedate by comparison, insists the former prime minister “will be brought to justice,” before reminding viewers that he’s up for reelection to the House of Commons in May.

As much as I’d like to keep watching, it’s getting late, and before I turn in for the night I need to get online and let the folks back home know that I’ve arrived. When I call reception for the internet access code, the gentleman says he’ll call back in five minutes, which is a bit strange. Fifteen minutes later I am logged on and providing proof of life. My laptop kindly alerts me to the possibility that “other people might be able to see information you send over this network.”

Our New York Times crew assembles in the lobby at 10 a.m. the next morning. It’s immediately clear what Cyrus was talking about back at the airport. Nearly all of my fellow tourists are old enough to be my grandparents. This doesn’t really come as a surprise, but I had hoped to be a little less conspicuous. If the Iranians ever suspect the CIA has infiltrated our group, it’s pretty obvious who will be first in line for the strip search.

As far as I can tell, I am initially regarded by the group with a skepticism and contempt that, given my young age and the hefty price tag of this trip, is not unwarranted. But everyone seems nice enough and wealthy enough and liberal enough. Exactly what one should expect for a trip organized by the New York Times.

I learn that most of my travel companions arrived a day or two before me, including one couple who shared a Turkish Airlines flight from Istanbul with none other than former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who was returning home after hanging out with his good buddy Erdogan, and was reportedly mobbed by children asking for photographs. Did they mention he was sitting in coach?

We head out to the parking lot to board our VIP tour bus, a spacious beast with a Times Journeys logo affixed to the front window. An assortment of flags lines the street in front of the hotel. The United States, obviously, is not represented, but the colors of Democratic People’s Republic of Korea hang proudly in the still air.

After a brief squabble over seat belts, we’re off. I’m eager to get my first glimpse of Tehran. One of my guide books describes it as “a huge polluted agglomeration,” which is both accurate and somewhat charitable. The surrounding Alborz Mountains offer a scenic touch, assuming you can see them through the smog. I’m jolted from my jetlagged stupor when our tour leader, Hadi, fires up the on-board microphone. I’m instantly reminded of why I’ve never taken a guided bus tour.

“Louder,” an old woman yells from the back.

Our first stop is outside a government complex housing the Iranian criminal justice system and Supreme Court. “It is forbidden to take a photo,” Hadi says. Our pre-trip material repeatedly warned us against shooting (as it were) anything that could conceivably be a government building, including the airport. Everyone gets off and immediately starts taking photos. Not of the building itself, to be fair, but of the giant Ayatollah Khomeini billboard down the block, something that will become less interesting once we realize there’s one on practically every block in the country.

We walk around the corner to the Golestan Palace, once the residence of the royal Qajar family and the site of Mohammad Reza Shah’s coronation in 1967. It’s a perfectly nice palace, though its grandeur is slightly undermined by the drab concrete of the criminal justice building towering over it. The teacher’s pets are wasting no time making themselves known, asking all sorts of questions about where King so and so was coronated during the such and such dynasty. Others, meanwhile, offer some unsolicited gripes about John Boehner and the Citizens United ruling. “Why can’t America be more like France?”

Hadi tells us that the royal garden, where we appear to be standing, was arranged in honor of a water goddess. And, in fairness, the extensive fountain system would make for an impressive sight, if there was any water in it. About half a dozen frustrated men seem to be struggling to fix that, while in the grass off to the side an unattended garden hose gushes freely.

Eventually we end up at the main bazaar. I’m reminded that my mother, who collects Christmas ornaments, had made a passing comment that maybe I could pick something up for her collection. Dad quickly pointed out the long odds of fulfilling this request in the Islamic Republic of Iran. But Iran is full of surprises.

Outside the main entrance to the bazaar, for example, young kids are selling what looks like lingerie out of a cardboard box to women covered in black sheets. The locals don’t seem very impressed with our entourage. I think this apathy has something to do with the fact that the bazaar is jam packed with Iranians buying gifts for Nowruz, the Iranian New Year, and we’re blocking traffic while trying to record videos on our iPads. Our opportunities to interact with average Iranians have been limited, and our guides seem pretty determined to keep it that way.

On the way back to hotel, we drive by the old U.S. embassy. You know, the one from Argo. It is currently home to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and an impressive collection of anti-American graffiti. There’s also a museum inside, where visitors can see the charred wreckage of Jimmy Carter’s failed attempt to liberate our hostages, but I don’t think we’re invited. Our guides promise an in-depth discussion of the hostage crisis at a later date.

‘Other people might be able to see information you send over this network’

There’s no cell phone service in Iran. Even if you wanted to enable roaming and call home for $12 a minute, you couldn’t, thanks to international sanctions. Fortunately, there’s Viber, an app that lets you make calls and send texts for free over a Wi-Fi connection. In places like Iran, using Viber is a great way to keep and touch with friends and family back home. Until it isn’t.

Our bus is leaving Tehran in less than an hour, so I return to my room after breakfast to finish packing. I’m trying to work out which hotel items I can feasibly smuggle out in my suitcase without causing a scene when there’s a knock at the door. After shoving everything I can manage into my bag and struggling to zip it shut, I peer through the peephole. This would be easier if the door had a peephole.

I can’t see my visitor’s face when I open the door. This is largely due to the fact that there is a smart phone inches from my own face. There’s an obnoxious clicking sound as my photo is taken.

“Good morning, sir. Are you Turkish?” says the sweaty, bespectacled young man standing in front of me. He has a backpack draped over one arm, and a neck pillow on the other, like he just got off a plane. I don’t know what to tell him.

“Can I take photo?”

“No, but I think you already did.”

“Can I come inside your home?”

“No. Why?”

He pulls out an ID card, which I obviously can’t read, and tells me he’s a student at a local university who happens to be conducting a research project on an app called Viber. He shows me his phone. “Do you know?”

This can’t be good. The Basij can’t be far behind, and my screenplay draft is a mess. I’m frantically trying to remember anything incriminating I may have said or done in the last 24 hours. Maybe I complained about the lack of alcohol? Perhaps I expressed some skepticism at Cyrus’s claim that Hillary Clinton personally created ISIS?

This is an extraordinary coincidence, I explain with as much credulity as I can muster. Of course I know about Viber. In fact, I was just using it. Your research sounds fascinating. Why don’t we discuss this further in the lobby with my Iranian guides?

I wait until we’re in the elevator to drop a Columbo on him. “Just one more thing, [whatever his name was]. How did you find my room?” He pretends not to understand the question, but I know he does. When I repeat it for him, he continues to stare blankly. “I asked reception,” he finally says. “I thought you were Turkish.” I hope my guides are around to sort this out.

Fortunately, they are waiting in the lobby. I introduce them to my new friend so they can hash things out in Farsi. They start talking, and he shows them the “student” ID. After a few minutes, he turns to me and apologizes before walking away. “He is a student,” Cyrus explains. “But his research methodology is flawed. Research requires data, not anecdotes.” Says the guy who thinks Hillary spawned the Islamic State.

Hey look, a Jew

We arrive in the town of Hamadan on the eve of Purim, the Jewish holiday commemorating the heroic efforts of Queen Esther, a former sex slave, and her cousin Mordecai to save the Persian Jews from extermination at the hand of King Ahasuerus. So we might as well visit the tombs of Esther and Mordecai while we’re here.

One imagines they’d be underwhelmed by the state of Iranian Jewry today. Maybe no one considered that Haman (Ahasuerus’s Jew-hating viceroy) was playing the long game. We are accompanied by Najad, a member of the thriving Jewish community in Hamadan that currently numbers 15, who leads us into the tomb. It’s located in a fenced off complex in the middle of a crowded avenue. The act of crossing the street in Iran, by the way, is practically indistinguishable from the act of committing suicide by automobile. The river of cars never stops; you just have to pray that, like Esther’s people, you’ll be spared. The tomb is cold and damp and solemn, as tombs are. When we emerge, an old man is glaring at us from the street. He doesn’t look very excited to see us.

We arrive at the hotel just in time to catch the tail end of Benjamin’s Netanyahu’s address to Congress, which is being carried on Press TV. There’s an intended audience for this speech, but it’s not us. Some folks are listening intently, while others simply scowl at the screen. Netanyahu invokes the story of Esther, who “gave for the Jewish people the right to defend themselves against their enemies”—especially relevant, he says, now that Jews “face another attempt by yet another Persian potentate to destroy us.” It’s agreed among the group that we can’t wait to read the scathing editorial response in the New York Times tomorrow morning. The unstoppable power of the Jewish lobby is discussed over dinner.

Squatting towards Khorramabad

The hours-long bus rides are excruciating at times, but at least the scenery is breathtaking. Flat plains lined on either side by massive, snow-covered peaks. Winding our way through the mountains, we drive past the mud huts of lakeside villages that look untouched since Biblical times. The rest stops along the highway are not as scenic. The bathroom facilities are exclusively of the squat variety, and could all use a good pressure washing. This is a less than ideal situation given the contingency of senior citizens in our group with bad knees.

Like every large transport vehicle in the country, our bus is equipped with a GPS system that must be regularly inspected by the highway patrol in order to monitor our driver’s speed and time behind the wheel. At least that’s what we’re told. It occurs to me that this is one of several reasons why Iran should not be mistaken for a libertarian utopia. I also learn while waiting at these stops that the morbid nature of American “don’t text and drive” campaigns has nothing on the Iranian version, which includes the public display of charred vehicles on spikes along the highway.

We have an “important announcement” on the bus. Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations has written a New York Times op-ed in response to the Israeli prime minister’s speech to Congress. “Netanyahu’s Nuclear Deceptions” is read aloud by a member of the group, and receives a round of applause. The initial reviews are positive. (“Very powerful.” “Powerfully written.”) The Obama administration’s efforts to negotiate a peace deal are “incredibly courageous,” and likely to succeed. There are murmured suggestions that we also read the latest Tom Friedman column, but I am in no mood to have to throw myself off a moving bus. But this reminds me that before the trip is over I should find at least one local taxi driver to bombard with metaphors.

Our bus rolls into Khorramabad, a mid-sized town in the foothills of the Zagros Mountains. Our tour of the local citadel stumbles upon a curious group of school children. They regale us with a barrage of memorized English phrases (“What time is it?”) and, after some lobbying, agree to sing us a song. It’s pretty adorable. Now they want us to sing for them. Someone suggests “God Bless America,” but we ultimately settle on “Do-Re-Mi” from the Sound of Music. I anchor the bass section.

The restaurant we’re supposed to eat at needs a few minutes to set up our tables, so a few of us decide to go for a wander. We pop inside a grocery store, and are immediately drawn to a colorful display at the center—condoms. Every variety (and flavor) imaginable is represented. There is even a “Fun Time” variety pack with a vibrating ring. I doubt Ayotallah Khomeini would approve, given that he sought to disband family planning clinics in the early days of the Islamic Republic with the explicit goal of spurring population growth. The neighboring aisle boasts an impressive selection of toy guns for children.

Ostrich kabob is something of a local specialty in Khorramabad, so that’s what I order for lunch. It’s a little chewy but tastes of ground beef. Not bad. The food in general has been a disappointment. Until now, practically every meal has featured the same menu of options: Lamb kabob, chicken kabob, or fried fish, with or without rice, and a pile of stale, dimpled bread that looks like it was manufactured on a 3-D printer. The lamb kabob is my favorite, but its presentation leaves something to be desired. Think “turd on a plate.”

To keep the lengthy bus trips interesting and enhance our cultural experience, we’ve started an informal lecture series. As it turns out, this is far more enjoyable than discussing U.S. energy policy with liberal Times readers. (“If a train can take you anywhere you want to go in Paris, why not in America?”) Our Iranian guides, Hadi in particular, share fascinating stories about their experiences during the early years of the Islamic Revolution.

A former air traffic controller, Hadi was on duty at Tehran International Airport on Sept. 22, 1980, the first day of the Iran-Iraq War. He describes how he and his colleagues followed standard operating procedure in response to a group of unidentified aircraft approaching the airport. After repeatedly failing to make contact, and operating under the assumption that there was an emergency on board, they proceeded to clear the runways and divert all other air traffic as emergency units gathered on the ground. Moments later, the convoy of Iraqi bombers came into view, and military hotlines started ringing off the hook.

These lectures can also inspire some heated discussions, mostly because even the liberal New York Times crowd can’t abide some of the sizzling hot takes served up by our Iranian guides. Members of the group routinely push back against their rosy depictions of the human rights situation, and bizarre claims that Western culture is to blame for domestic violence in Iran.

Cyrus has read Hillary Clinton’s latest memoir cover to cover. It contains indisputable proof, he says, that her goal as Secretary of State was to travel the world creating ISIS. This is an especially bold claim to make in front of a busload of prospective Hillary Clinton donors, and it does not go over well. However, it’s pretty clear that this general belief—that the United States is actively facilitating the rise of ISIS—is not uncommon in Iran. Hadi chimes in to suggest that the President of Turkey might be working for the CIA, given his tacit support for the Islamic State. “I’m just raising the question.”

What the West called “Holocaust denial,” we’re told, is actually a call for additional “research.” And when someone brings up Khomeini’s fatwa against the author Salman Rushdie, it is dismissed as merely rhetorical, not unlike Barack Obama saying “all options are on the table” regarding the Iranian nuclear program. In any event, Rushdie is an MI-6 operative who was ordered to publish The Satanic Verses in order to embarrass the Supreme Leader. Cyrus eventually concedes that he has “not seen any documents to confirm this.”

Dance like nobody’s watching (because it’s probably illegal)

When we arrive at our lodging for the night—the centuries old castle—it’s already dark. We were running late so we had to cancel our planned stop in Khomein, site of the Supreme Leader’s family home. After checking in, the Cheng brothers (a pair of sixty-something Taiwanese-Americans) and I stumble upon a group of Iranian tourists from nearby Isfahan. They are celebrating the coming of Nowruz by jumping over a fire they’ve prepared in the central courtyard. It’s the sort of celebration Ayatollah Khomeini tried to stamp out in the early days of the revolution, only to be met with strong popular resistance. We are promptly invited to join them in the common room area for what appears to be a dance party.

I sort of feel bad for the Cheng brothers. Their English is harsh and difficult to understand, but they are by far the most gregarious and adventurous members of our tour. Iranians are constantly asking them where they’re from, but never believe them when they say America. “You look China,” one of the Isfahani partiers tells them. “Chop sticks.” We agree to let this blatant microaggression slide.

Dancing to the irregular beat of traditional Iranian music without appearing epileptic is no easy task. Attempting this in the absence of alcohol is especially ill advised. When your dance partner is a 50-year-old Iranian man, well, you have a sense of what I was up against. The locals, of course, were highly amused.

A lovely young lady saunters and we begin. There’s no way this is allowed. You’re not even supposed to shake hands with an Iranian woman unless she initiates. I resolved long before coming here to never allow myself to be honey potted. But this seems like a safe space. Some of the women seated around us have removed their obligatory headscarves. F—k the revolution. My dance partner launches into the universally recognized “Change The Light Bulb” maneuver. I counter with “The Shopping Cart,” and the crowd goes wild.

The Chengs and I are beckoned to the dining hall for dinner—another bland kebab. Ed, a geological expert, complains about the lack of internet access. When we return to the party, the mood has changed. Our guides have situated themselves at the front next to the band, stone-faced. They’re not having any fun, and want to make sure no one else is either. The women are covered. My Persian lady friend leans against the wall with her head down. Four sad dudes attempt to get things going on the dance floor. I am one of them. The music dies down in short order. “Good dancing,” Cyrus says on the way out. “But you need to work on your technique.”

Americans in Iran are generally regarded with a degree of skepticism, but not for the reason you might think. Iranians want to know what you’re doing in Iran, not because they suspect you of plotting a coup, but because they know American passport holders could spend their vacations anywhere else on earth (give or take a few tin-pot communist police states), and feel sorry for you. They are almost always friendly and eager to tell you there are no hard feelings. “Ninety percent of Iranians love America,” is a widely cited statistic, though it’s not clear if this is based on actual data. Eventually, this becomes rather eerie, as if everyone is reading off the same approved script.

Nazri, a student studying computer animation, offered the boldest riff on the “We love America” line, leaning in close to whisper “and Israel,” though I am not convinced this is a 90-10 issue. Moments later, a mullah in a black turban strolled by and leered in our direction. “Very dangerous,” Nazri said after he passed. “I f—king hate them.” Also, can I get him a job in California? Not everyone is so gracious toward Americans. A few (say 10 percent) of the locals, mostly older men, simply said, “Okay,” and sauntered away after I told them my nationality.

Talking to locals seems to always paint a slightly different picture of the country than the one we received from our guides on the bus. One day I stumbled upon a coffee shop run by Armenian Christians. The barista disagreed with Cyrus’s assessment that religious minorities were valued members of Iranian society, and could practice their faith openly without harassment. “No, it’s not good,” he told me. “If I could, I’d leave.”

Visions of Valerie

On the road to Shiraz, birthplace of renowned senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett. Our resident geologist gives a lecture about Iranian rock formations and oil deposits, which inevitably turns into a discussion about fracking. He notes in passing that most of the alleged environmental concerns are bogus. But what does he know? A group of women sitting behind me aren’t buying it, and begin discussing the virtues of government imposed energy quotas for individuals and households. “I’d kill myself,” says the lone dissenter.

Our bus pulls off the side of the road. This can’t be good. In fact, we’ve reached our destination. Well, almost. To get there, we have to essentially trespass through a rustic township and walk about a quarter of a mile through a dry, rocky riverbed. This isn’t the easiest of tasks for some of our less able-bodied tour members. There is a sort of hieroglyph carved into the rock face commemorating an ancient king. It must have been pretty majestic back when there was still a river here. Now there’s just a bunch of trash and some puddles.

The Times has put us up in the Hotel Shiraz, a towering structure on the edge of town that has been plastered onto the side of a mountain overlooking some ruins. Its “five star” accreditation is purely arbitrary, though it is fancier than previous hotels, and even offers a wide range of spa services. When we arrive, the lobby is scattered with bandaged men who look like they’ve all sustained the same injury to the back of the head. Or maybe it’s a religious thing? What we hadn’t considered was that Iran was, apparently, something of a regional mecca for hair transplant surgery, among other procedures. (Only Thailand performs more sex change operations.) It doesn’t take long for us to realize that we might be the only people staying at this hotel who aren’t here for some type of cosmetic surgery.

Taxicab confessions

My Tom Friedman moment has finally arrived. Eager for a night on the town in Valerie’s old stomping grounds, the Cheng brothers and I skip dinner and set off in search of an English-speaking cab driver. His name is Arman, and whether his stories are true or completely made up, they tell you everything you need to know about Iran. The world is a flat circle. Or something like that.

Arman, 28, graduated from university with a degree in petroleum engineering. That’s a pretty good degree in the United States. In Iran, it gets you a cab-driving gig working long hours, seven days a week, for a salary of about $6,000 a year, which is roughly in line with the national average. Like most unmarried Iranians his age, he lives with his parents.

Shiraz is a lively town. Local merchants seem to be competing with one another for the prize of most blindingly obnoxious Times Square-style storefront. Like most places in Iran, there used to be a river here. It has a reputation for being more “relaxed,” but unless I can locate some booze—and I obviously can’t—that seems a distinction without a difference.

The Chengs are absolutely raring to go. It’s slightly unnerving. George, the older one, caused a minor commotion days earlier during a visit to a madrasa when he wandered into a classroom and starting taking photos. That’s just how he rolls. Turn your back on him for a second, and sooner or later he will emerge surrounded by a group of adolescent schoolgirls, smiling incessantly, and taking photos. When the schoolgirls inevitably take an interest in me—solely because I’m the one in our group within 20 years of them—and start lining up to request photos and autographs, George seems genuinely disappointed in me for failing pursue romantic relations with these children. So, naturally, he’s trying to get Arman to take to the hippest hangouts where the hot young Iranians congregate and get up to no good.

As politely as possible, Arman tries to explain that the type of place we’re looking for does not exist. Sure, kids like to party, but this usually happens on the weekends, when groups of friends will load up on booze and go camping in the country, away from the watchful eye of the Islamic Republic. He estimates that roughly half of young Iranians consume alcohol on a semi-regular basis. All you need is a reliable dealer and a lot of cash. A bottle of Johnny Walker Red will set you back about $60—triple what you’ll pay in the United States.

We settle on a hookah lounge Arman has recommended. Despite being reasonably crowded, the place is soul-crushingly silent, apart from the Titanic theme song playing softly in the background. Because we have nothing better to do, we bring Arman with us and start grilling him about politics. Our discussion of the Iranian hostage crisis doesn’t get very far, however, mostly because Arman has never heard of it. But he’s not afraid to criticize the Iranian regime. Like most people who speak English well enough to convey the sentiment, he thinks Ahmadinejad ruined the country. Every Iranian election is a choice between “bad and less bad.”

Arman hopes for better relations between our countries, mostly because he hates it here and wants more than anything to come live in the United States. His uncle has a friend in Louisville, Kentucky. Do I know of any girls back home who would fake marry him for money? I’ll have to get back to him. I ask if he’s ever considered pretending to be gay and claiming refugee status. “Yes,” he says. As if on queue, “Show Me The Meaning of Being Lonely” comes on over the sound system.

On our way out, Arman asks how much we paid to come on this trip. He is stunned when we tell him. “It’s too much,” he says. He’s not wrong.

Veiled privilege

It’s been a while since I’ve checked in on Press TV. To my surprise, Daniel Pipes is on some news program (via satellite) arguing with the host over the extent of Iranian involvement in the war against ISIS. “Strictly an advisory role,” the host insists, before citing a Cato Institute paper criticizing the role of the United States. This evening’s lineup includes a documentary about Palestine—“At The Heart of Siege”—followed by a segment criticizing ISIS over its use of human shields. We’ll also get an update on the BDS movement at the University of Toledo. The host has a cousin in Cleveland.

It’s a long drive north from Shiraz to Isfahan, so our lecture series continues. There is some disagreement over whether the U.S. Navy’s downing of Iran Air 655 in 1988 was a “sheer accident” or the act of “excited soldiers looking for stories.” The discussion becomes more heated when we move on to the topic of women in Iran. One of the first acts of the revolutionary government was to abolish many of the legal protections afforded to women under the Shah, and to lower the legal age of marriage to nine, because that’s what Muhammad would have wanted.

Such things are easily dismissed as barbaric. However, the issue of female dress requirements is more complicated, especially for liberals. On the one hand, modern feminism dictates that forcing women to cover themselves in inherently wrong. On the other, criticizing other cultures is very problematic, as it is often a reflection of Western imperialism and privilege. I’m confused.

I asked a young female student I met in Shiraz about this. She liked wearing a headscarf, she said, because it made her feel “safe” from the lurid stares of the mouthbreathing male hordes. Our Iranian guides loved this little anecdote. “See, it should be a choice,” Hadi says. Except it isn’t. In fact, quite of few Iranian women treat the headscarf requirement as a joke, revealing as much hair as possible with a wisp of cloth dangling off the back of the head.

Isfahan is the most photogenic of the cities we’ve visited. It boasts a series of ornately constructed bridges and, more importantly, an actual river with water in it—but that’s only because the government has turned up the flow for Nowruz. It’s a bit of a sore subject for the locals. Ahmadinejad made a mess of things when he tried to collectivize the water supply. What a dick. What was his deal anyway? I ask Cyrus to weigh in. “You see,” he said, “Ahmadinejad really wanted to have a good relationship with the United States, but…”

“He didn’t realize that denying the Holocaust and threatening to annihilate Israel wasn’t the best way to accomplish that?”

“Exactly.”

‘Welcome to Iran’ (Again)

On the way back to Tehran, we visit the ancient village of Abyaneh—population 250—nestled in the foothills of the Karkas Mountains. It’s said to date back thousands of years to Sassanid times, and is so isolated its residents almost missed out on the Islamic Revolution. These days, according to our guides, the villagers are just a bunch of welfare queens.

There is a pleasant silence as we stroll among the mud brick huts, and for a moment it’s like stepping back in time—until we’re suddenly overtaken by a swarm of Chinese tourists, blitzing the town with gigantic zoom lenses, snapping hundreds of photos per second, including some extreme close-ups of the locals selling dried apples on their doorsteps. Yeah, I know it’s a stereotype but this is literally what happened.

Before leaving, the Chinese manage to instigate a vicious dogfight after throwing some food scraps to the village dogs. This obviously makes for another great photo opportunity, as several members of the group assume the crouched position of professional sports photographers to capture the action. This is kind of amusing at first, until the blood start to flow and it becomes apparent that the black dog isn’t going to make it to the next round. Fortunately, one of the villagers manages to break it up with a baseball-sized rock. I suppose the silver lining in all this is that one of these days Americans are going to concede their long-held title as most obnoxious tourists. Decline has its consequences.

After lunch, we are greeted by an Iranian gentleman superbly dressed in a white over coat, blue sash and sharp leather driving moccasins. He looks like he hasn’t changed clothes since 1979. He interrupts our conversation about how Iran is a peculiar place that becomes more difficult to understand the more you learn about it in order to deliver a public service announcement. “Welcome to Iran,” he says. “We are all Aryans. The Arab Semites, they are a common enemy. They are ruining the world, including your country, by building their satanic mosques. Welcome to Iran.”

We arrive back to the Laleh International in Tehran for a brief stay before heading to airport. I make sure all my electronic devices are turned off, and pick up a copy of one of the English language newspapers. “Iran, Turkmenistan sign 18 agreements,” is the lead story. Also, something about a new link between the United States and ISIS. At the airport, I begin to prepare myself for the grilling I’ll be subjected to upon arrival at Dulles. This will prove to be a waste of time when I am waved through customs without the slightest hesitation—although they did ask if I had spent any time in West Africa.

It’s great to be home.

Cheryl Mills, the Firewall for Hillary’s SpyNet

Posted on March 30, 2015March 30, 2015 by Denise Simon

Jeffrey Epstein background and post prison social life
Epstein has a powerful circle
Prince Andrew
Millions to the Clintons from Secret Swiss Bank

Cheryl Mills: The Woman Who Knew Too Much?

The New York Times reports that Cheryl Mills, Hillary Clinton’s long-time henchwoman will not be joining the Presidential campaign now presumably in the final stages of formation. Why? Perhaps Mills is, to borrow a phrase from Alfred Hitchcock, the woman who knew too much.

Mills, who was the State Department’s counselor and chief of staff during the entirety of Hillary’s tumultuous tenure, is up to her waist in the Benghazi matter, where the overwhelming evidence is that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton put politics before the security and safety of U.S. citizens serving their country in that hell-hole.

Earlier this month, Judicial Watch obtained emails through a federal lawsuit which contained multiple references to the, “so-called Benghazi Group. A diplomatic source told Fox News that was code inside the department for the so-called Cheryl Mills task force, whose job was damage control.”

Clearly Clinton, and Obama, were concerned about the “optics” and potential political fallout of the al-Qaeda 9/11 assault on the Benghazi consulate where four Americans were murdered less than 60 days from election day. The emails show Mills “running interference internally during the 2012 Benghazi terror attack.”

Specifically, Mills instructed then State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland “to stop answering reporter questions about the status of Ambassador Chris Stevens, who was missing and later found dead.” Nuland quickly demurred.

This is the same Nuland who objected to the original Benghazi talking points drafted by the CIA because they included references to the al Qaeda affiliate Ansar al-Sharia and to previous CIA warnings about terror threats in Benghazi. Nuland worried that any mention of the the CIA warnings “could be used by Members [of Congress] to beat the State Department for not paying attention to Agency warnings so why do we want to feed that? Concerned …”

Surely Nuland was given guidance by Mills.

Mills continued the cover-up by telling State Department employees to obstruct the 2013 congressional investigation. In June, 2013 Gregory Hicks, the former deputy chief of mission in Libya during the Benghazi attack, testified to Congress that Mills was “personally instructed to allow the RSO [Regional Security Officer], the acting deputy chief of mission, and myself to be personally interviewed by Congressman Chaffetz.”

In true Clinton form, Hicks said in a September 2013 interview that as a result of cooperating with Congress he was “punished” and “shunted aside, put in a closet,” not receiving a new assignment from State.

Like Nixon and his White House tapes, Hillary is now arguing that the e-mails are her personal property and she should decide what the American people get to read. While serving as secretary of State, Hillary Clinton no doubt sent and received countless emails pertaining to personal issues with no relevance to State Department issues via her private account. But Supreme Court precedent in the Nixon case seems clear: she doesn’t get to decide what to release and what not to.

What does this have to do with Ms. Mills? Mills is the trusted aide who reviewed the e-mail to decide which e-mails to erase. Mills joined Hillary in eschewing government e-mail so e-mails between her and her boss are illegally kept from public view when they conducted public business.

Mills has another darker distinction. When the Palm Beach police seized the address book of convicted billionaire pedophile and friend of Bill, Jeffrey Epstein, they found the cell phone and personal e-mail address for Mills.

What did Hillary know of Epstein’s sexual abuse of underage girls? What did Hillary think Bill was doing when he and his now disaffected wingman Doug Band visited Epstein’s palatial Palm Beach home where neighbors say the POTUS partied until the wee hours with scores of women who were dropped off by limousine after the arrival of the presidential motorcade.

What did Hillary think Bill was doing on Epstein’s hedonistic island retreat where he was seen in the company of two 17 year-olds flown in from New York for the former Presidents amusement? Perhaps Mills can tell us.

Mills is a member of the Clinton Foundation’s Board of Directors, now under fire for taking millions from foreign governments, particularly those in the Middle East who oppress women and deny them the most basic human rights. Perhaps Mills has seen the e-mails that show the self-dealing nexus between Hillary’s stint at State and the avalanche of cash the Clintons have scammed from foreign powers for a charity that spends more on luxury travel for the Clintons and a huge staff of political retainers than they do on charitable works to help actual people.

Pine not for Ms. Mills. As the Clintons demonstrated when they placed Epstein’s pedophilic pimp Ghislaine Maxwell in a job at a non-profit funded by the Clinton Foundation, the Clintons sometimes buy silence. Maxwell was granted immunity for her role in procuring underage girls for Epstein to molest. She was present when Bill partied in both Palm Beach and on Epstein’s orgy island, his private retreat in the carribean. Like Mills, Maxwell knows too much.

Or perhaps Mills should be concerned. Cheryl Mills figures into every scandal dogging Hillary Clinton and probably a few we don’t know about yet. As they did with James Carville, Dick Morris, Doug Band, and others the Clinton’s have no problem discarding staff when they are no longer useful. But sometimes, as in the case of former Clinton Security Chief Jerry Parks who knew chapter and verse on Bill Clinton’s sexual peccadilloes and whose brutal murder goes unsolved, those who know too much are silenced.

**** As an aside, my buddy Larry Klayman, at Freedom Watch filed a lawsuit against Hillary Clinton for operating a criminal enterprise, charges of racketeering.