SCOTUS to Decide to Hear Case on Post 9/11 Case on FBI

Justices Will Hear Post-Sept. 11 Claims Against Ashcroft, Mueller

 Photo, BBC

NationalLawJournal: The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to decide whether a 14-year-old suit should go forward against former George W. Bush attorney general John Ashcroft and former FBI director Robert Mueller III based on their roles in the post-Sept. 11 roundup and detention of Muslim, Arab and South Asian men.

In Ashcroft v. Turkmen, the Obama administration had asked the high court to review a June 2015 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that reinstated claims by eight men and a potential class of 80. The plaintiffs alleged the former Bush officials purposely and unconstitutionally directed their detentions in harsh and abusive conditions due to their race, religion or national origin.

Justices Sonia Sotomayor, a former Second Circuit judge, and Elena Kagan, a former U.S. solicitor general, did not participate in the high court’s decision to review the case. Their potential recusals from the case could set the stage for a six-justice court to decide the outcome if the vacancy caused by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia remains unfilled through early next year.

The justices on Tuesday also added another potentially high profile case: Hernandez v. Mesa, a challenge stemming from a U.S. Border Patrol agent’s shooting of a 15-year-old Mexican boy on Mexican soil.

In the Ashcroft petition, the Obama administration argued that the Second Circuit was wrong—in the context of the Sept. 11 investigations—to allow Ashcroft, Mueller and other Justice department officials to be sued in their individual capacities for violations of constitutional rights under the 1971 high court decision Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents.

The Second Circuit is “the first circuit to permit such a damages remedy to be pursued ‘against executive branch officials for national security actions taken after the 9/11 attacks,’” then-Solicitor General Donald Verrilli Jr. wrote in the petition.

The Obama administration also challenges the appellate court’s ruling that Ashcroft and Mueller, now a partner at Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, were not entitled to qualified immunity for their alleged role in the treatment of those detained. The government also contends the allegations that the former officials personally condoned the detentions because of “invidious animus” against Arabs and Muslims are not “plausible.”

The justices set the plausibility standard in a similar case, Ashcroft v. Iqbal, in 2009. The court ruled 5-4 then that Javaid Iqbal, a Pakistani Muslim and post Sept. 11-detainee, failed to plead sufficient facts to support his claim of intentional, unlawful discrimination.

From Verrilli’s petition:

Based on conclusory allegations and after-the-fact inferences drawn in the chambers of appellate judges, the court of appeals concluded that the nation’s highest-ranking law-enforcement officers—a former Attorney General of the United States and former Director of the FBI—may be subjected to the demands of litigation and potential liability for compensatory and even punitive damages in their individual capacities because they could conceivably have learned about and condoned the allegedly improper ways in which their undisputedly constitutional policies were being implemented by lower-level officials during an unprecedented national-security crisis.

Representing the Turkmen plaintiffs, Rachel Meeropol of the Center for Constitutional Rights, had urged the justices to deny review.

“The petitions instead boil down to a request for a new and remarkable form of immunity, one in which the clearly unconstitutional actions of federal officials are untouchable so long as they occur in temporal proximity to a national tragedy,” Meeropol wrote.

The justices also granted review in two related petitions raising similar issues. Ballard Spahr’s William McDaniel Jr. filed a petition on behalf of former Immigration and Naturalization Service commissioner James Ziglar, and  MoloLamken’s Jeffrey Lamken filed on behalf of former wardens of the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn.

The Second Circuit decision stemmed from a lawsuit filed in 2002 by the Center for Constitutional Rights. The center charged that the plaintiffs and other detainees were placed in solitary confinement, some for up to eight months, even though they were only charged with civil immigration violations like overstaying a visa or working without authorization.

The lawsuit has yet to go to trial.

Fourth Amendment at the border

In Hernandez, the border shooting case, the parents of Sergio Hernandez, represented by Deepak Gupta of Washington’s Gupta Wessler, are asking the high court to overturn a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

The appeals court said the Fourth Amendment’s protection against excessive deadly force did not apply because their son was a Mexican citizen with no significant voluntary connection to the United States and he was killed on Mexican territory.

The justices have directed the parties also to brief whether Hernandez’s claim against border patrol agent Jesus Mesa could be brought under their 1971 decision in Bivens.

The Obama administration had urged the justices to deny review.

Hillary Revealed Through Hacked Podesta Emails

Nah….she isn’t all that is she? uh huh…..and she for sure has a system to keep her own fingerprints off the trail while her custom designed human firewall does all the work.

  CNN

Seems the Hillary campaign instigated by Brian Fallon was working to get Trey Gowdy’s emails on the matter of the Benghazi investigation and approached the vice chair of the committee Elijah Cummings.

7 biggest revelations from WikiLeaks release of Podesta emails

FNC: Here are seven of the biggest revelations so far:

‘SPOILED BRAT’

Top Bill Clinton lieutenant Doug Band, in an alleged 2011 exchange with Podesta, tore into Chelsea Clinton, who had apparently been raising questions about the company Band co-founded, Teneo.

“I don’t deserve this from her and deserve a tad more respect or at least a direct dialogue for me to explain these things,” Band wrote in November. “She is acting like a spoiled brat kid who had nothing else to do but create issues to justify what she’s doing because she, as she has said, hasn’t found her way and has a lack of focus in her life.”

BILL CLINTON ‘LOSING IT’

Bill Clinton has long had a soft spot for New Hampshire, the state that made him the “Comeback Kid” and helped propel him to the Democratic nomination in 1992. So when it seemed on Feb. 7 that Hillary Clinton was set to lose the state’s primary by a large margin, Bill did not take the news well.

“He’s losing it bad today,” Bill Clinton chief of staff Tina Flournoy wrote. “I’m not with him. If you’re in NH please see if you can talk to him.”

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders went on to beat Clinton in the Granite State 60-to-38 percent on Feb. 9.

Bill Clinton wasn’t alone in his despondency.

Neera Tanden, an activist and past adviser to Hillary Clinton, wrote to Podesta on Feb. 4: “What is wrong w the people of Nh?”

COZY WITH THE PRESS

The alleged Podesta emails show a particular level of comfort with certain members of the news media.

CNBC correspondent John Harwood emailed Podesta numerous times, on some occasions to request an interview and other times to offer advice. On May 8, 2015, Harwood wrote an email with the subject line “Watch out.”

“Ben Carson could give you real trouble in a general [election],” Harwood wrote before linking to video clips of an interview Harwood did with the former pediatric neurosurgeon.

In a July 2015 email, New York Times reporter Mark Leibovich emailed communications director Jennifer Palmieri several chunks of an interview he did with Hillary Clinton, and seemingly asked permission for the “option to use the following” portions. Palmieri suggested he cut a reference Clinton made to Sarah Palin and remove Clinton’s quote, “And gay rights has moved much faster than women’s rights or civil rights, which is an interesting phenomenon.”

Palmieri ended one email: “Pleasure doing business!”

In a January 2015 memo, former Politico reporter Maggie Haberman, who now works for The New York Times, was described as having “a very good relationship” with the campaign.

“We have had her tee up stories for us before and have never been disappointed,” the memo said.

HOPING FOR TRUMP

Hillary Clinton allies were apparently hoping the Republican primary electorate would nominate Donald Trump as the GOP candidate for president.

Media commentator Brent Budowsky wrote to Podesta on March 13 that “Right now I am petrified that Hillary is almost totally dependent on Republicans nominating Trump.”

“…..even a clown like Ted Cruz would be an even money bet to beat and this scares the hell of out me…..” Budowsky wrote.

A Democrat National Committee strategy document from April 7, 2015 also wrote about “elevating the Pied Piper candidates,” identified as Trump, Cruz and Carson.

WALL STREET SPEECHES

Campaign research director Tony Carrk emailed top Clinton advisers on Jan. 25 with some “flags from HRC’s paid speeches” that were given during the time between her tenure as secretary of state and when she announced her presidential candidacy. Clinton has not released transcripts of those speeches despite numerous calls from her primary and general election opponents.

Among the red flags is Clinton admitting she’s “Kind Of Far Removed” from middle-class struggles due to “The Economic, You Know, Fortunes That My Husband And I Now Enjoy.” That speech was delivered to employees at Goldman-Black Rock on Feb. 4, 2014.

In a line that came back to bite her in Sunday night’s presidential debate, Clinton discussed needing “Both A Public And A Private Position” during a speech for National Multi-Housing Council in April 2013.

In other speeches, Clinton boasts of her ties to Wall Street, admits she needs Wall Street funding and says insiders are needed to fix problems on Wall Street. Sanders was a particular critic of Wall Street and so-called “economic inequality” during his protracted primary campaign against Clinton.

In another speech, Clinton said her “dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders.”

SANDERS STRATEGY

Throughout the alleged Podesta emails, aides debate tactics against Clinton’s main 2016 primary rival, Sanders. Carrk forwarded a 71-page, nearly 50,000-word opposition research file on Oct. 28, 2015, picking apart nearly every policy and position of Sanders. “Attached are some hits that could either be written or deployed during the next debate on Sanders,” Carrk wrote.

On Jan.6, campaign adviser Mandy Grunwald and Palmieri debated how to respond to Sanders’ attacks on Clinton’s ties to Wall Street.

“I liked messing with Bernie on wall street at a staff level for the purposes of muddying the waters and throwing them off their game a bit,” Palmieri wrote. “But don’t know that it is most effective contrast for her. Seems like we are picking the fight he wants to have.”

Grunwald replied: “Bernie wants a fight on a Wall Street. We should not give him one.”

ALLIES’ SUPPORT FOR ISIS?

An alleged email sent from Hillary Clinton’s account to Podesta on Aug. 17, 2014, noted that ISIS was receiving financial and logistical support from Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

“While this military/para-military operation is moving forward, we need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to [ISIS] and other radical Sunni groups in the region,” the email said.

It’s unclear whether the email was actually authored by Clinton.

The Clinton campaign, meanwhile, has blasted WikiLeaks over the release, while ramping up its accusations that the group is working with the Russian government.

“It is absolutely disgraceful that the Trump campaign is cheering on a release today engineered by Vladimir Putin to interfere in this election, and this comes after Donald Trump encouraged more espionage over the summer and continued to deny the hack even happened at Sunday’s debate,” spokesman Glen Caplin said in a statement. “The timing shows you that even Putin knows Trump had a bad weekend and a bad debate. The only remaining question is why Donald Trump continues to make apologies for the Russians.”

****

The uranium deal, which involved 25 percent of Russia’s deposits, was discussed in an email conversation between Clinton Foundation communications head, Maura Pally, and Clinton campaign chief, John Podesta, Breitbart reports.

“Putting on all of your radars that Grassley sent a letter to AG Lynch (dated June 30th though we just saw it) asking questions about contributions to the Clinton Foundation and the Uranium One deal. Letter is attached. Craig is connecting with comms team to be sure they are aware as well,” the email said.

“Clinton Foundation’s ties to a number of investors involved in a business transaction that resulted in the acquisition of Uranium One, owner of U.S. based uranium assets, by Atomredmetzoloto (ARMZ), a subsidiary of Rosatom, a Russian government owned company. The transaction raised a number of national security concerns because it effectively ceded 20% of U.S. uranium production capacity to the Russian government,” said an excerpt from Grassley’s letter.

The original message was also sent to Hillary’s former shadow, Huma Adedin. She has not been spotted on the campaign trail since her husband’s latest sexting scandal, which included him making lewd comments and sending photos of himself in his underwear that also showed their toddler son laying next to him.

Minutes after receiving the email, John Podesta forwarded it to [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. The deep connection between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation has never been clearer – or more terrifying.

The Hill: An official within Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Rodham’s campaign appeared to have discussions with sources inside the Department of Justice (DOJ) about ongoing open records lawsuits regarding the former secretary of State’s emails, according to an email released on Tuesday.

In an email from May 2015, Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said that “DOJ folks” had “inform[ed]” him about an upcoming status conference in one of the lawsuits regarding Clinton’s private email setup.

The information about an upcoming court event would have been public knowledge and open for all to attend. And it’s unclear whether the people Fallon spoke to at the Justice Department were officials who regularly communicate with the public.

However, the fact Fallon – a former spokesman with the Justice Department — remained in contact with anyone from the department is likely to renew allegations that the Obama administration maintained an especially cozy relationship with Clinton’s presidential campaign.

****

Politico:

Clinton ‘not in the same place’ as her aides on email scandal

As the furor over Hillary Clinton’s emails built in the summer of 2015, the Democratic candidate appears to have resisted at least some of her team’s advice about how to get ahead of the story. In an email to other aides, Clinton campaign communications director Jennifer Palmieri said she viewed the decision to turn over thumb drives and a computer server to the Justice Department as a chance for Clinton to try to move past the controversy, but Clinton apparently had a different view.

“As you all know, I had hoped that we could use the ‘server moment’ as an opportunity for her to be viewed as having take [sic] a big step to deal with the email problem that would best position us for what is ahead. It is clear that she is not in same place (unless John has a convo with her and gets her in a different place),” Palmieri wrote in the August 8 email.

Palmieri proposed that the campaign put out word after the Sunday talk shows the following day that Clinton had surrendered the thumb drives and server to the Justice Department then do an interview with Univision where she would talk about the decision during a broader discussion about college costs. However, the timing ultimately slipped a bit, with the campaign announcing the move late on Tuesday, after she’d already taped the Univision interview earlier that day. Read the rolling blog from Politico here and the revealing references to the emails.

 

 

Mexican Officials are Smuggling Haitians into the U.S.

Immigration Official Warns 40,000 Haitians On Their Way To U.S. Via California’s Mexico Border

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A top U.S. immigration official says 40,000 Haitians may be on their way to the United States amid what she calls an “emergency situation” on California’s border with Mexico.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Sarah Saldana said Thursday in Washington that the estimate came from other governments during a recent trip she made to Central America.

Saldana told the House Judiciary Committee that word of the new arrivals contributed to the Homeland Security Department’s announcement on Thursday that it was lifting special protections shielding Haitians from deportation that were put in place after their country’s 2010 earthquake. She says changing conditions in Haiti also played a part.

***  

Mexican officials quietly helping thousands of Haitian illegal immigrants reach U.S.

WashingtonTimes: Mexican officials are quietly helping thousands of illegal immigrant Haitians make their way to the United States, according to an internal Homeland Security document that details the route taken by the migrants, the thousands of dollars paid to human smugglers along the way and the sometimes complicit role of the governments of America’s neighbors.

More than 6,000 Haitians arrived at the border in San Diego over the last year — a staggering 18-fold increase over fiscal year 2015. Some 2,600 more were waiting in northern Mexico as of last week, and 3,500 others were not far behind, waiting in Panama to make the trip north, according to the documents, obtained by Rep. Duncan Hunter, California Republican.

The migrants are paying at least $2,350 to be smuggled from South America to the doorstep of the U.S., where many present themselves at the border and many demand asylum, hoping to gain a foothold here.

Boat maker Audit Volmar walks inside the shell of a sail boat he's building on the beach of Leogane, Haiti. The 30-foot-long boats are purchased by smugglers for around $12,000 and then taken to northern Haiti to find passengers. (Associated Press)
Photo by: Dieu Nalio Chery
Boat maker Audit Volmar walks inside the shell of a sail boat he’s building on the beach of Leogane, Haiti. The 30-foot-long boats are purchased by smugglers for around $12,000 and then taken to northern Haiti to find passengers. (Associated Press)

“Haitians have forged a dangerous and clandestine new path to get to the United States,” says the document, which lays out in detail the route and the prices paid along the way for smugglers, bus tickets and, where they can be obtained legally, transit documents.

Their trek begins in Brazil and traces a 7,100-mile route up the west coast of South American and Central America, crossing 11 countries and taking as long as four months.

Some countries are more welcoming than others, according to the document, which was reviewed by The Washington Times. Nicaragua is listed as being particularly vigilant about deporting the Haitian migrants if they are caught — so smugglers charge $1,000 to get through that country.

When traveling through Central American countries the Haitians will claim instead to be from Congo, believing that authorities in Central America aren’t likely to go through the hassle of deporting them to West Africa if they are caught, Homeland Security said.

Being smuggled through Ecuador costs $200, while Guatemala and Colombia cost $300 apiece, the document says.

Mexico, though, is more accommodating to the migrants. It stops them at its southern border in Tapachula, processes them and — though they don’t have legal entry papers — “they receive a 20-day transit document” giving them enough time to get a bus across Mexico, arriving eventually in Tijuana, just south of San Diego.

Once in the United States, many of the Haitians claim asylum and fight deportation in cases that can drag on for years, guaranteeing the migrants a foothold in the country in the meantime. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services said it received referrals to conduct credible fear screenings, which is the first part of an affirmative asylum claim, for 523 Haitians over the last year.

Other Haitians who are apprehended are put on a slow deportation track, giving them a chance to blend into the shadows along with other illegal immigrants. Southern Florida is a particularly attractive destination for the Haitians once they are released into the U.S., the document said.

Haitians are the latest nationality to surge into the United States, along with Central Americans enticed by the belief that lax enforcement policies under President Obama will enable them to stay, even if it means living in the shadows.

“The exponential increase in Haitian migrants showing up at the southern border is truly astonishing, and it shows one of the many consequences of President Obama’s immigration policy, which invites illegal entry and exploitation of the system,” said Joe Kasper, chief of staff for Mr. Hunter.

He said he was struck by “Mexico’s complicity” in helping the Haitians by granting them legal passage just to reach the United States.

Mexico doesn’t want them, but it’s entirely content with putting migrants — in this case Haitians — right on America’s doorstep,” he said.

The Mexican Embassy in Washington has not responded to repeated inquiries from The Times, dating back to last month, on its role in the Haitian surge.

As many as 75,000 Haitians fled to Brazil after the 2010 earthquake. Some 50,000 still remain, but the rest have left — including a steady stream over the last year headed for the United States.

Haiti’s embassy in Washington promised to make someone available to discuss the situation, but didn’t follow through.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the agency that guards the borders and ports of entry, acknowledged “an uptick” in Haitians arriving without permission. In fact, the numbers leapt from 339 in fiscal year 2015 to 6,121 in 2016 — an increase of more than 1,800 percent.

“While CBP officials have made adjustments to port operations to accommodate this uptick in arriving individuals, CBP officials are used to dynamic changes at our local border crossings, including San Ysidro, the nation’s busiest border crossing, and are able to flex resources to accommodate those changes,” the agency said in a statement.

CBP says it processed the Haitians “on a case by case basis” and those that don’t have permission to be in the U.S. are sent to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the deportation agency.

As of Sept. 24, ICE had 619 Haitians in detention.

ICE had been moving slowly on deportations of Haitians under a humanitarian policy in place since the 2010 earthquake. But on Sept. 21, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson announced a change, saying agents would again begin rapid deportations of Haitians caught at the border.

Jessica Vaughan, policy studies director at the Center for Immigration Studies, said the data shows just how much the smuggling operations control illegal immigration. She said there are faster routes through Mexico and into the United States, but the fact that 90 percent of them are coming to San Diego is evidence they have an arrangement, likely with the Sinaloa cartel.

She also that by issuing transit permits, Mexico was assisting not only the Haitians’ illegal migration, but also providing a financial boost to the very criminal cartels that Mexican officials say are a threat to their society.

“I understand how this collusion or ambivalence to a criminal phenomenon works in Mexico, but I don’t understand why the Obama administration is letting it happen,” she said. “We could shut this down in a hurry simply by telling asylum seekers that they need to apply in one of the eight or nine safe countries that they passed through on the way. Otherwise we are just asking to see another 160,000 or more applicants next year.”

Secret Refugee Operations in Vermont, Your State Too?

Judicial Watch: Federal Contractor Tells Local Official to Keep Syria Refugee Plans Secret

 BostonGlobe  NBC

‘If we open it up to anybody and everybody, all sorts of people will come out of the woodwork’Amila Merdzanovic, executive director, Vermont Refugee Resettlement Program 

Second Group Helping to Resettle Syrian Refugees in Rutland, Vermont Received 91% of its Funding from Government Grants

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released 128 pages of documents it obtained from the mayor of Rutland, Vermont, showing a concerted effort by the mayor and a number of private organizations to conceal from the public their plans to resettle 100 Syrian refugees into the small southern Vermont town.

The documents include an April 14, 2016, email from Amila Merdzanovic, executive director of the Vermont Refugee Resettlement Program, to Mayor Christopher Louras, in which she wrote:

I want to share with you the concern my HQ has about holding a public forum. If we open it up to anybody and everybody, all sorts of people will come out of woodwork. Anti-immigrant, anti-anything. They suggest that the forum be invite only but make it as wide as possible. Work with faith leaders, United Way, etc… Perhaps, we could go back to the Congregational Church and continue the conversation there.

The mayor and resettlement organizations shrouded the plan in such secrecy that not even the town’s aldermen were informed of what was taking place behind closed doors. The aldermen eventually wrote to the U.S. Department of State protesting the plan and opened an investigation into the mayor’s actions. The State Department has not yet ruled on whether it will resettle refugees in Rutland despite the aldermen’s protest.

Handwritten notes state that the issue was, “Not what can ‘we’ do for ‘them,’ but what the diversity, cultural richness do for the community.” The documents contain detailed discussions of what Rutland will need to provide for the refugees – including housing, jobs, medical care, and places for worship.

Judicial Watch received the documents in response to a Vermont Public Records Law request to the office of Mayor Christopher Louras.

Merdzanovic later told the Boston Globe that the hidden talks were “the right thing to do — to move slowly, keep it to a small circle of people, and then expand.”

On April 10, 2016, she wrote to the director of the State Refugee Office about her coordination with the mayor to keep the resettlement program secret:

He did share with me that the Governor’s office called him after getting a frantic call from DOL [Vermont Department of Labor] inquiring about the plan to resettle ‘100 Syrians in the next month’ in Rutland.  Again, I cannot emphasize enough the importance of not sharing the information even if it is confidentially. Please respect our process, you will have plenty of opportunity to share and take action once we have met with the stakeholders. At that point we can and will share it widely. It will not serve any one of us well if the community in Rutland learned about it through the grapevine and not directly from us. The above example shows that what people hear and how they interpret it is two different things.

A May 3 document shows Hal Cohen, secretary of the agency for human services, introducing a meeting: “Vermont gains from diversity – new ideas, delicious food (laughs) …” A set of April meeting notes by the Vermont Refugee Resettlement Program and the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants stated: “Refugees can bring global perspectives and expertise … direct knowledge about history and world events (unfiltered by media) … synergize energy & momentum with youth.”

The U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, a nonprofit based in Virginia, is the parent organization of the Vermont Refugee Resettlement Program working with the mayor’s office. According to its financial statements the Committee received $46,560,462 of its $50,858,706 (or 91.45%) for fiscal year 2015 from “government grants.”

Local opponents of the refugee plans wanted a public vote on the proposal and transparency on the refugee settlement plan.

In December 2015, Judicial Watch sued the U.S. State Department to obtain documents about the Obama administration’s plan to resettle Syrian refugees across the country.  Judicial Watch is investigating the Obama administration’s Refugee and Resettlement program, which plans to bring an additional 10,000 Syrian refugees to the United States in 2016, and even more in 2017.  Obama is pressing ahead with his plan even though 129 people were killed and 350 were wounded by Syrian-trained terrorists recently in Paris.  The Obama administration is working in conjunction with The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to settle these individuals all across the U.S.  The federal government contracts with non-profits and other entities to settle and provide financial payments to refugees.

“Americans should be concerned that the Obama administration is funneling at least $46 million in tax dollars to a shady operation that encourages elected officials to cover up Obama’s Syrian refugee scheme,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

Chelsea, Corzine, Teneo and the Email(s)

Primer: Corzine subpoenaed in firm’s scandal

(2011) The Senate Agriculture Committee on Tuesday unanimously voted to subpoena former New Jersey Sen. Jon Corzine over his role in the collapse of brokerage firm MF Global, a rare move that will compel a onetime rising star in the Democratic Party to face tough questions about his role in the financial scandal.

Several members of the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry did not attend the session when the Corzine subpoena was approved, including Democratic Sens. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Kirsten Gillibrand of New York. More here from Politico

Teneo:

A spring 2012 email to Hillary Clinton’s top State Department aide, Huma Abedin, asked for help winning a presidential appointment for a supporter of the Clinton Foundation, according to a chain obtained by POLITICO.

The messages illustrate the relationship between Clinton’s most trusted confidante and the private consulting company that asked for the favor, Teneo — a global firm that later hired Abedin. Abedin signed on with the company while she still held a State Department position, a dual employment that is now being examined by congressional investigators. More here from Politico. 

Re: Fw: FYI WikiLeaks email of Hillary’s campaign and confidant John Podesta