Justice Dept. Refuses to Comply With Court Order

Posted on February 4, 2016February 4, 2016 by Denise Simon

The excuses are stupid…

Justice Dept. Fights Subpoenas for Bank Records About Russian Assets

Visitors look through books before Russian President Vladimir Putin’s visit to the library of the Schneerson family of Hasidic rabbis in the Jewish Museum in Moscow, Thursday, June 13, 2013. The vast collection of Jewish books and documents is the focus of a dispute between Moscow and Washington.

Photo: Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP

Updated at 1:10 p.m.

The U.S. Department of Justice is fighting efforts by a Jewish group to subpoena banks for information about assets owned by the Russian Federation, which owes more than $43 million in sanctions for rebuffing a U.S. judge’s order to return a collection of religious texts.

In papers filed on Wednesday night, the Justice Department warned that allowing lawyers for Agudas Chasidei Chabad of the United States to subpoena information about Russian assets from five financial institutions—JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank and Computershare—could harm U.S. foreign policy interests. The subpoenas seek information about accounts that belong to the Russian government and to individuals, including President Vladimir Putin.

“Such efforts are antithetical to the goal of securing the return of the collection to Chabad, open the doors to reciprocal measures being taken against the United States by Russia, and would be out of step with international practice such that they could cause considerable friction with other foreign governments,” the Justice Department wrote.

The U.S. government supports Chabad’s claim to the Schneerson Collection—more than 12,000 books and manuscripts seized in Russia in the early 20th century, and 25,000 pages of texts stolen by the Nazis and then taken as war loot by the Soviet Red Army. Chabad has fought in court for the return of the collection for more than a decade. The Russian government stopped participating in the litigation in 2009.

The Justice Department has opposed efforts by Chabad’s lawyers to pursue Russian assets to force compliance with a 2010 court ruling that ordered Russia to return the collection to Chabad.

Steven Lieberman, a partner at Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck and a lead attorney for Chabad, said in a joint statement with lawyers from Lewin & Lewin in Washington that the Justice Department was “simply trying to re-litigate an issue it has already lost.”

“We are reviewing the government’s position, and we will consider asking [the judge] to take appropriate steps to ensure that our efforts to identify Russian assets will proceed without further interference,” Lieberman said. “However, it is shocking that the Departments of Justice and State now appear to be representing Russian interests more aggressively than their private counsel ever did.”

In 2013, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth in Washington—over the Justice Department’s objections—entered a civil contempt order against Russia that included a fine of $50,000 per day. In September 2015, Lamberth entered a judgment for Chabad for $43.7 million, the sanctions total at the time.

With the judgment on record, Chabad’s lawyers ramped up their search for Russian assets in the United States. They subpoenaed the five financial institutions in December.

The Justice Department argues that even with Lamberth’s sanctions order in place, the court wouldn’t be allowed under federal law to actually enforce it. And if the court can’t enforce its order, the government said, Chabad shouldn’t be allowed to subpoena information or otherwise use the court system to investigate Russian assets that it can’t attach.

“The sanctions judgment at issue here … while resulting from Russia’s noncompliance with a default judgment ordering it to return certain property to Chabad, does not in and of itself grant any property rights to Chabad. Instead, it simply sanctions Russia for its noncompliance with the court’s specific performance order,” the Justice Department wrote.

In a Feb. 2 letter included in the government’s court papers from Katherine McManus, deputy legal adviser at the U.S. Department of State, to Justice Department Civil Division Principal Assistant Attorney General Benjamin Mizer, McManus wrote that the Chabad case had already created diplomatic problems.

“For several years, senior Russian officials have regularly raised this litigation with their U.S. counterparts. They have done so more frequently, and at higher levels, since the issuance of the district court’s sanctions order,” McManus wrote. The sanctions order and efforts to enforce it would only hurt efforts to negotiate the return of the Schneerson Collection, she added.

More broadly, the Justice Department said in its court papers that if Chabad were allowed to conduct “sweeping discovery” into Russian assets, it would create “friction” with other foreign governments and risk similar orders being entered against the United States abroad. The U.S. last year was granted immunity from contempt sanctions in a Spanish court, the Justice Department noted.

“Any constraint placed on property of the Russian entities named in the subpoenas in the context of this case would isolate the United States in the international community and raise doubts about the United States’ respect for other foreign sovereigns,” the government argued.

Updated with comment from Chabad’s lawyers.

Price of Gas at the Pump too Low, Barack’s Proposal

Posted on February 4, 2016February 4, 2016 by Denise Simon

Obama to call for $10-per-barrel oil tax to fund clean transport

FNC: President Obama will propose a $10 fee for every barrel of oil to be paid by oil companies in order to fund clean energy transport system, the White House announced Thursday — although Republicans were quick to declare the plan “dead on arrival” in Congress.

The fee would be phased in over five years and would provide $20 billion per year for traffic reduction, investment in transit systems and other modes of transport such as high-speed rail, the White House said. It would also offer $10 billion to encourage investment in clean transport at the regional level.

Obama is expected to formalize the proposal Tuesday when he releases his final budget request to Congress. However, the proposal immediately faced resistance from Republicans.

“Once again, the president expects hardworking consumers to pay for his out of touch climate agenda,” House Speaker Paul Ryan said in a statement, arguing it would lead to higher energy prices and hurt poor Americans.

Ryan went on to describe Obama’s plan as “dead on arrival” in Congress.

“The good news is this plan is little more than an election-year distraction. As this lame-duck president knows, it’s dead on arrival in Congress, because House Republicans are committed to affordable American energy and a strong U.S. economy,” Ryan said.

The White House claims the added cost of gasoline would incentivize the private sector to reduce the reliance on oil and to increase investment in clean energy technology.

The plan also saw opposition from advocates for the oil industry, who warned it would only harm consumers.

“The White House thinks Americans are not paying enough for gasoline, so they have proposed a new tax that could raise the cost of gasoline by 25 cents a gallon, harm consumers that are enjoying low energy prices, destroy American jobs and reverse America’s emergence as a global energy leader,” API President and CEO Jack Gerard:

“On his way out of office, President Obama has now proposed making the United States less competitive.” Gerard said.

*****

In part from Bloomberg: With the proceeds targeted to transportation and climate initiatives, the proposal announced Thursday deepens Obama’s environmental credentials and signifies his ambitions to aggressively push action on climate change during his final year in office.

“By placing a fee on oil, the president’s plan creates a clear incentive for private-sector innovation to reduce our reliance on oil and at the same time invests in clean energy technologies that will power our future,” the White House said in a statement.

It is unclear who, exactly would pay the tax if it were to pass, and how it would be structured. White House officials repeatedly stressed that the fee would fall on oil companies, but said it wouldn’t be charged at the wellhead and they look forward to working with Congress on the details.

The fee, which drew swift objections from oil industry groups and Republicans, is part of a broader administration plan to shift the nation away from transportation systems reliant on internal combustion engines and fossil fuels. The proposal envisions investing $20 billion to reduce traffic and improve commuting, $10 billion for state and local transportation and climate programs and $2 billion for research on clean vehicles and aircraft.

Environmentalists applauded the move. “President Obama’s vision underscores the inevitable transition away from oil, and investments like this speed us along the way to a 100% clean energy future,” Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune said in an e-mail.

Inadequate infrastructure raises costs for businesses and consumers, including motorists stuck in traffic — a “hidden tax” and a harm to the environment, said Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. More here.

Homs. Syria: Today

Posted on February 4, 2016February 4, 2016 by Denise Simon

Context: New York City in 2014 had an estimated population of 8.49 million. Today in Syria, 11 million people have fled the country. Starvation is everywhere.

Iran and Russia have been long time friends with Bashir al Assad and both rogue countries continue to prop up Assad.

Every world leader is responsible for this and to blame. 5 years of Bashir al Assad, years of Islamic State, years of al Nusra. Russia continues to bomb those fighting against the Assad regime with wild abandon. This is 2016, how can a modern day holocaust be so real. No one can fully estimate the death tolls, 200,000 or 500,000?

What are the prospects for anyone to ever return? How can this be rebuilt?

Homs: Homs did not emerge into the historical record until the 1st century BCE at the time of the Seleucids. It later became the capital of a kingdom ruled by the Emesani dynasty who gave the city its name. Originally a center of worship for the sun god El-Gabal, it later gained importance in Christianity under the Byzantines. Homs was conquered by the Muslims in the 7th century and made capital of a district that bore its current name. Throughout the Islamic era, Muslim dynasties contending for control of Syria sought after Homs due to the city’s strategic position in the area. Homs began to decline under the Ottomans and only in the 19th century did the city regain its economic importance when its cotton industry boomed. During French Mandate rule, the city became a center of insurrection and, after independence in 1946, a center of Baathist resistance to the first Syrian governments.

Published on Feb 3, 2016

Large parts of Syria are reduced almost entirely to rubble after five years of civil war.

As attitudes and policies towards refugees harden across Europe, a video has emerged that exposes the utter devastation Syrians are fleeing from.

Revealing in detail the consequences of the country’s five-year civil war, the drone footage shows the piles of rubble ruined buildings that Homs – previously Syria’s third largest city – has been reduced to.

While the video reflects the utter desolation in a city that was once home to more than 650,000 people, peace talks aimed at ending hostilities remain frustratingly unproductive.
The video that shows the Syrian peace talks cannot come soon enough
Arguments over who should or should not attend the negotiations overshadowed the continuous damage wrought in a war that has seen over 11 million Syrians flee, more than half the country’s entire population.

The video was shot by Alexander Pushin, a cameraman for Russian state television.

While his drone footage from Syria has been described as propaganda designed to promote Russia’s military involvement in the country, the startling scale of devastation it exposes is beyond question.
Even as news emerged of nine people who died attempting to reach the relative safe haven of Europe, anti-refugee sentiment appears to be growing across the continent.

Denmark recently introduced legislation that permits the seizing of refugees’ valuables, which drew comparisons to the treatment of Jews by Nazi Germany.
Sweden is rejecting applications from 80,000 people who sought asylum in the Scandinavian country last year, while Finland also intends to expel 20,000 of the 32,000 applications received in 2015.

Angela Merkel announced recently that Syrian refugees would be expected to return to the Middle East once the conflict is over, while British Prime Minister David Cameron dismissed those living in the squalor of Calais’ “Jungle” as “a bunch of migrants”.

Starting in 2011, the ongoing conflict in Syria pitches Bashar al Assad’s regime – aided by Russia – against a multitude of different and competing factions, including Islamist group Isis and associated militias.

The language of a continent that once appeared to welcome refugees no longer appears so accommodating, despite the evidently dire situation in Homs, Damascus and other Syrian cities reduced to ruins over the last five years.

Finally, Hillary’s Security Clearance in Jeopardy?

Posted on February 4, 2016February 4, 2016 by Denise Simon

Humm –> Expect to undergo one or more interviews and often a polygraph as part of the clearance process. These steps are used by investigators to get a better understanding of your character, conduct and integrity. You might also have to answer questions designed to clear up discrepancies or clarify unfavorable data discovered during the background investigation. The ultimate goal is for government security personnel to determine your eligibility for a clearance, a decision based on the totality of the evidence and information collected.

August of last year: Intelligence community wants Clinton’s security clearance suspended

WashingtonTimes: Security experts say that if Hillary Rodham Clinton retained her government security clearance when she left the State Department, as is normal practice, it should be suspended now that it is known her unprotected private email server contained top secret material.

“Standard procedure is that when there is evidence of a security breach, the clearance of the individual is suspended in many, but not all, cases,” said retired Army Lt. Gen. William Boykin, who was deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence in the George W. Bush administration. “This rises to the level of requiring a suspension.”

“The department does not comment on individuals’ security clearance status,” the official said.

Mrs. Clinton is the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination. A campaign spokesman did not reply to a query, but she did get a vote of support from a key congressional Democrat.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee, said Thursday there is no evidence Mrs. Clinton herself sent classified information and that the emails now under scrutiny were not marked classified at the time she sent them.

Clinton’s Security Clearance Is Under Scrutiny

Bloomberg: Now that several e-mails on Hillary Clinton’s private server have been classified, there is a more immediate question than the outcome of the investigation: Should the former secretary of state retain her security clearance during the inquiry? Congressional Republicans and Democrats offer predictably different answers.

The State Department announced Friday that it would not release 22 e-mails from Clinton’s private server after a review found they contained information designated as top secret. U.S. officials who reviewed the e-mails tell us they contain the names of U.S. intelligence officers overseas, but not the identities of undercover spies; summaries of sensitive meetings with foreign officials; and information on classified programs like drone strikes and intelligence-collection efforts in North Korea.

The FBI is investigating the use of Clinton’s home server when she was secretary of state, which the bureau now has. The New York Times reported in August that Clinton is not a target of that investigation. We reported in September that one goal is to discover whether a foreign intelligence service hacked in.

Representative Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said Clinton should not lose her security clearance for receiving information that was not marked classified at the time. “I’m sure she does hold a clearance, and she should,” he told us.

Representative Mike Pompeo, a Republican member of that committee who also has read the e-mails, told us, “It’s important, given all the information we now know, that the House of Representatives work alongside the executive branch to determine whether it’s appropriate for Secretary Clinton to continue to hold her security clearances.”

Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr told us the decision lies with the White House. “I think that’s up to what the National Security Council is comfortable with,” he said.

Burr, who has also read all 22 e-mails, said Clinton should have known to better protect the information they contain. “They are definitely sensitive,” he said. “Anybody in the intelligence world would know that the content was sensitive.”

His Democratic counterpart, Senator Dianne Feinstein, who also read them, told us that Clinton didn’t originally send any of the e-mails and that they were largely from her staff, although she did sometimes reply. Feinstein said the intelligence community is being overly cautious by designating the e-mails as top secret.

“There’s no question that they are over-classifying this stuff,” she said.

Clinton’s discussion of classified programs on an unclassified e-mail system is hardly rare. The issue, called “spillage,” has plagued the government for years. It can apply to anything from a spoken conversation about intelligence programs outside of a secure facility, to printing out a document with classified information on an unsecure printer.

Still, it is forbidden. The State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual says “transmitting classified information over a communication channel that is unauthorized for the level of information being transmitted” is a “security violation.” Such violations must be investigated by the State Department’s own bureaus of human resources and diplomatic security. Punishment can vary from a letter of reprimand to loss of security clearance, according to the manual.

When asked about the status of Clinton’s security clearance, State Department spokesman John Kirby said: “The State Department does not comment on individuals’ security clearance status. We will say, however, that generally speaking there is a long tradition of secretaries of state making themselves available to future secretaries and presidents. Secretaries are typically allowed to maintain their security clearance and access to their own records for use in writing their memoirs and the like.”

The Clinton campaign declined to comment.

During the Obama administration, it has not been automatic for officials to lose their security clearance while an investigation is underway. Just last week, the Washington Post reported that the chief of naval intelligence, Vice Adm. Ted Branch, had his security clearance suspended because he is wrapped up in a Justice Department investigation into contracting corruption. He has not been able to read, see, or hear classified information since November 2013. Branch has not been charged with any crime and continues to serve in that post.

But when then-CIA director David Petraeus came under FBI investigation at the end of 2012, his security clearance was not formally revoked. After he resigned, his access to classified information was suspended, according to U.S. officials. In that case, Petraeus had provided notebooks with highly classified information to his biographer and mistress Paula Broadwell, whose security clearances did not permit her to receive it.

Unlike Broadwell, officials familiar with the e-mails tell us that Clinton and her e-mail correspondents were cleared to receive the information that has been classified after the fact. Steven Aftergood, who heads the project on government secrecy for the Federation of American Scientists, told us, “It’s entirely possible for information to start out as unclassified and to be classified only when the question of public disclosure arises.”

William Leonard, who oversaw the government’s security classification process between 2002 and 2008 as the director of the Information Security Oversight Office, told us this kind of “spillage” was common. “The bottom line is this, if you have the opportunity to pore through any cleared individual’s unclassified e-mail account, it’s almost inevitable you would find material that someone, some way would point out should be classified.” He also said that in Clinton’s case, “there is no indication that she deliberately disregarded the rules for handling classified information so I see no reason why she should not remain eligible for a security clearance.”

Nonetheless, Leonard added that Clinton’s decision to use the private e-mail server as secretary of state “reflected exceedingly poor judgment, and those that advised her on this did not serve her well.”

The FBI investigation may determine that neither Clinton nor her aides broke the law, but Clinton herself has said she used poor judgment. It’s an open question how that poor judgment will affect her access to state secrets, during and after the FBI’s investigation.

Pathetic, Kerry is Begging Russia

Posted on February 4, 2016February 4, 2016 by Denise Simon

As Syria Talks Fizzle, ‘War Has No Meaning Anymore’

NYT: GENEVA — Four Syrian rebel commanders huddled in a knot, all broad shoulders and shiny gray suits, surveying the hotel lounge. Gigantic portraits of Jim Morrison and Jimi Hendrix gazed down at the carpet, a checkerboard of faux zebra-hide in squares of orange and magenta. On a low sofa, a couple snuggled to the sounds of Amy Winehouse. The fighters decamped to a smokers’ enclosure behind a plate-glass window, its back wall a trompe-l’oeil image of electric-blue waves that made it seem as though they were submerged in a fish tank. It was an effect that fit their mood. They were in Geneva, notionally at least, for peace talks, but back in Syria, the government and its Russian allies were battering insurgents with scores of airstrikes. With their men under fire, the commanders were asking themselves how much longer they could credibly stay.

“Maybe a day,” one, Maj. Hassan Ibrahim, said on Monday night.

By Wednesday, the talks were indeed suspended, as the intense fighting on the ground proved there was as little to talk about as ever.

In an interview earlier, under the watchful eye of an adviser from Saudi Arabia, Major Ibrahim had dutifully projected strength and determination. But when the Saudi man walked away, the Syrian, who had defected from the government army in 2011, leaned forward and confided that the fighters he led in southern Syria were struggling. Supplies of weapons and salaries from the United States and its allies are dwindling. Moving in and out of Jordan is getting harder.

“They are doing it to put pressure on us to accept a political process,” he said, one in which he doubted that the Syrian government — or Russia, a sponsor of the talks — would make any compromise.

Major Ibrahim was reflecting a growing foreboding among the opposition’s fighters and civilians, mirrored by growing hope on the government side, that Washington, interested only in bombing the Islamic State militant group, is ceding the field to Russia and leaving the opposition on its own.

So much in Geneva this week was exactly like the last round of Syria peace talks in the city two years ago. Soft-lit hotel lobbies sweltered in the heat of glass fireplaces. Room service offered staple Syrian food — “Oriental mezze” — for about $40, which in Syria might constitute two weeks’ decent wages. Government and opposition delegates still seemed to be coming from different planets and witnessing different wars. Continue here.

Russia ignores Kerry plea to stop Syria bombing, deploys advanced fighter jets

FNC: Russia seemingly has ignored Secretary of State John Kerry’s appeals to stop bombing civilians and allow critical humanitarian aid to starving Syrians – and is instead escalating its military involvement, deploying four of its most capable fighter jets to Syria, two defense officials confirmed to Fox News.

The decision to send the Su-35S jets poses yet another hurdle for Kerry’s efforts to proceed with peace talks. The Su-35S is Russia’s most advanced warplane, capable of air-to-air and air-to-ground missions, one official familiar with the jet said.

Already, continued Russian airstrikes against Syrian opposition fighters, some backed by the CIA, were enough to derail proposed peace talks in Geneva Wednesday.

Despite backing two U.N. resolutions in support of a ceasefire, Russia reneged on its promise to stop bombing civilians in Syria, a prerequisite for the U.N.-backed talks in Geneva.

“[T]here will be a ceasefire,” Kerry predicted Tuesday in Rome. “We expect a ceasefire. And we expect adherence to the ceasefire. And we expect full humanitarian access.”

Two days later, the Russian bombing hasn’t stopped and thousands of Syrians remain starving.

Kerry said he was assured by his Russian counterpart the Russians would stop bombing.

“I talked to Foreign Minister Lavrov a couple of days ago and I specifically discussed a ceasefire with him, and he said they are prepared to have a ceasefire,” Kerry said.

But Kerry’s counterpart responded the next day saying the strikes would continue.

“Russian strikes will not cease [in Syria] … I don’t see why these airstrikes should be stopped,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Wednesday in Oman. Hours later, the U.N. talks fell apart.

Kerry continued calling on Russia to stop bombing Thursday in London.

“It could not be more clear. That is an obligation that is not tied to talks. It is an obligation accepted by all parties in the United Nations resolution. Russia voted for that, Russia has a responsibility, as do all parties, to live up to it,” he said.

The Russians have carried out 270 airstrikes since Monday, according to its defense ministry.

On Wednesday, a United Nations special envoy suspended the peace talks, which include participation from Russia and Iran, just hours after they began.

“It is not the end and it is not a failure of the talks,” said U.N. Special Envoy to Syria Staffan di Mistura.

The State Department denied the peace conference was a waste of time.

“It’s not a charade because they were there and because there was a beginning,” State Department spokesman John Kirby said Wednesday.

The top U.S. general in Iraq said the U.S. wants to avoid a confrontation with Russia, despite Russia bombing U.S.-backed rebels.

“I wouldn’t characterize it as a proxy war. I would say that we are pursuing different goals,” Lt. Gen. Sean MacFarland told reporters, speaking from Baghdad earlier this week.

Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of Syrians are starving inside the country, besieged by Russian airstrikes preventing humanitarian aid from reaching them.

The U.N. chief humanitarian coordinator says close to 500,000 Syrians are cut off from food assistance surrounded by Bashar Assad’s forces. Fifty-one people have died of hunger in Madaya, a town of 20,000, located an hour outside Damascus and just 10 miles from Lebanon and 40 miles from the Israeli border.

Aid workers who arrived with the first and only food convoy last month said they have never seen such devastation.

“We saw people who are clearly malnourished, especially children, we saw people who are extremely thin, skeletons, that are now barely moving,” said Yacoub El Hillo, the U.N. resident and humanitarian coordinator in Syria to Reuters.

There are currently no plans for the U.S. military to help the U.N. get food to the hundreds of thousands trapped in Syria.

“There are no plans for that at this time,” said Col. Steve Warren, a U.S. military spokesman for the coalition based in Baghdad. “We’ll, of course, support them if asked and able, but our focus is the defeat of ISIL.”

“We haven’t seen a catastrophe like this since World War II,” said Kerry in Rome. “[I]n recent months its people have been reduced to eating grass,” he added.

A Washington Post editorial blamed Secretary Kerry’s compromise with Russia in the pursuit of peace talks, in part, for the prolonged starvation crisis: “Unfortunately, the Obama administration’s handling of the Syrian crisis appears to be enabling those very war crimes.”

In a statement late Wednesday, the State Department said the peace talks in Geneva were “paused” and would resume later this month.