Trump Team Better Keep on Eye on Hillary, She is Plotting

Posted on January 23, 2017January 23, 2017 by Denise Simon

Hillary Clinton Says the Women’s Marches Were ‘Awe-Inspiring’

Clinton, 69, who was the first-ever female presidential nominee for a major political party and won the popular vote, tweeted about the peaceful rallies on Saturday, January 21. “Thanks for standing, speaking & marching for our values @womensmarch. Important as ever. I truly believe we’re always Stronger Together,” she wrote to her more than 12 million followers. “Scrolling through images of the #womensmarch is awe-inspiring. Hope it brought joy to others as it did to me.”

Protesters walk during the Women’s March on Washington, with the U.S. Capitol in the background, on Jan. 21, 2017. Mario Tama/Getty Images

Hillary ClintonVerified account ‏@HillaryClinton 18h18 hours ago

Scrolling through images of the #womensmarch is awe-inspiring. Hope it brought joy to others as it did to me.

**** Some of her closets political allies also echoed the same sentiments. Read more here.

Hillary Clinton plots her next move

The Democrat has been studying election presentations, including reports on where she underperformed.

Politico: LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — In a series of private meetings and phone calls at their home in Chappaqua, in New York City and in Washington, Bill and Hillary Clinton are slowly starting to puzzle through their political future, according to over a dozen people who have spoken directly with them, and nearly two dozen other Democrats who have been briefed on their thinking.

The recently vanquished candidate has told some associates she’s looking at a spring timeline for mapping out some of her next political steps. Still recovering from her stunning loss, a political return is far from the top of Clinton’s mind, with much of her planning focused around the kinds of projects she wants to take on outside the partisan arena, like writing or pushing specific policy initiatives.

Just as the Democratic Party feels its way through a landscape without either Clinton looming over its future for the first time in nearly a quarter century, Clinton herself is working through the uncertainty surrounding how to best return to the fold.

There have been no conversations about starting her own political group but Clinton has spoken with leaders of emerging Democratic-leaning organizations about their work, and has discussed possible opportunities to work with Organizing For Action, former President Barack Obama’s initiative. Among the potential political priorities she has mentioned to associates are building pipelines for young party leaders to rise and ensuring that a reconstructed Democratic National Committee functions as an effective hub that works seamlessly with other party campaign wings.

The one-time secretary of state has been in contact with a range of ex-aides, studying presentations as she tries to better understand the forces behind her shocking November defeat.

Included among those presentations has been a series of reports pulled together by her former campaign manager Robby Mook and members of his team, who have updated her not just on data and polling errors, but also on results among segments of the electorate where she underperformed, according to Democrats familiar with the project.

“She understands that a forensic exam of the campaign is necessary, not only for her, but for the party and other electeds, and for the investors in the campaign,” said a close Hillary Clinton friend in Washington who, like several others, declined to speak on the record because their conversations with one or both Clintons were private. “People want to know that their investment was treated with respect, but that their mistakes wouldn’t be repeated.”

For his part, Bill Clinton has spent considerable time poring over precinct-level results from the 2016 race while meeting with and calling longtime friends to rail against FBI Director James Comey’s late campaign intervention and Russia’s involvement, say a handful of Democrats who have spoken with him.

“Many Democratic politicians have been personally influenced or share direct ties to President Clinton, Secretary Clinton, or both. That history goes back decades,” said Mack McLarty, Bill Clinton’s first White House chief of staff and a lifelong friend, predicting their eventual return to the scene. “And, despite the grave disappointment, resilience is in the Clintons’ DNA. So, while I certainly don’t expect to see them trying to assert their authority, I think there will be natural and welcome opportunities for them to engage.”

Wary of the complex political moment as Donald Trump assumes the presidency and supporters of Bernie Sanders assert themselves more forcefully within the Democratic Party, however, the Clintons have been letting the political discussions come to them, rarely bringing it up unprompted in their conversations, and for the moment focusing more on other projects.

Bill Clinton, for example, has dived back into his work with the Clinton Foundation, while Hillary Clinton — spotted recently resuming her social life on Broadway and at trendy dinners in New York and Washington — is considering doing some writing.

For weeks leading up to Trump’s swearing in, the constant refrain among friends and former aides who are struggling with the question of their next political step has been, “Let’s get through the inauguration first.” The Clintons have been careful not to step into the party-shaping territory now occupied by Obama as the most recent Democratic president. And that posture is unlikely to change until at least late February, as the couple studiously stays away from a race for the DNC chairmanship that is widely seen as a Clinton-Sanders proxy fight.

Still, party leaders and friends alike expect them to jump back into the political fundraising and campaigning circuit in some form by the 2018 midterms — and perhaps in time for 2017’s two gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia. A number of Hillary Clinton’s most prominent 2016 supporters are likely to need the help soon, including Florida Sen. Bill Nelson, Miami Beach Mayor Philip Levine and Orlando attorney John Morgan — both likely gubernatorial candidates in 2018 — as well as Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown, Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey, and New Jersey governor hopeful Phil Murphy.

“I would be surprised [to see Bill Clinton step away from politics] only because he has so many friends who are still involved, who he’s worked with for so many years,” said Skip Rutherford, the dean of the University of Arkansas’ Clinton School of Public Service and the founding president of the Clinton Foundation. “Many of the people who are involved in the political world got their starts in the Clinton world, so there’s a whole base of people who are connected to both Clintons.”

“If someone they knew was running for the Senate or the Statehouse or City Hall, it would be out of character for them not to be supportive,” added McLarty.

But before that lies a set of more immediate concerns that includes determining the fate of Hillary Clinton’s campaign email list and figuring out which new Democratic efforts — if any — to support.

“On a personal level, I lost a race in 2014 and it was on a much, much smaller scale than what she lost. But I know there’s a time of healing that has to happen. So on a personal level I know she just needs to get away for a while,” said former Democratic Arkansas Senator Mark Pryor.

There’s no obvious model for the pair to follow in the months and years ahead: Bill Clinton has been uniquely involved in electoral politics in his post-presidency, and recent losing nominees have either returned to their Senate day jobs — like John Kerry and John McCain — or continued to flirt with another presidential run — like Mitt Romney.

But neither Clinton is likely to run for office again, never mind the New York City mayoral rumors that Hillary Clinton’s friends routinely laugh off.

“The Democratic Party does need new blood, new faces, and I don’t think Bill or Hillary Clinton would ever want to get back and run for anything — I don’t think a team of mules could drag them to do that,” said Pryor.

Their current political standing within the party is somewhat precarious, defined by a mixture of admiration for the family balanced with frustration, and in some cases, anger. Many supporters of Sanders, for instance, are still licking their wounds from the bruising primary, and have seized the post-election moment to gain power in local Democratic party committees across the country — often by dismissing the more establishment-oriented Clintonian way of doing business.

And some Clinton supporters in the states are irritated by the lack of a formal, public-facing autopsy from her campaign since the absence of even a preliminary acknowledgment of fault has made it harder for the party to raise money on a local level — donors feel burned.

“There’s huge annoyance in the states,” said one swing-state party leader. “People assume they’re done, and they’re more powerful if they take that back seat. [For now] there’s short-term fatigue, but it will settle into respect.”

Clinton allies have been careful not to engage in direct fights with detractors that could turn into referenda on the family’s legacy, but national leaders acknowledge some lingering post-election tension.

“The problem with circular firing squads is everyone gets hit. I don’t think there’s any room in the party right now for a circular firing squad. The party has a long way to go in order to regain its proverbial political footing across the country,” said interim DNC chair Donna Brazile — a Bill Clinton campaign advisor in 1992 and 1996 — adding that Hillary Clinton’s victory over Trump in the popular vote underscores the potential use of promoting her as a surrogate for the next crop of candidates.

Not relying on Clinton, she said, would be “like taking your running back and placing them on the sideline just because you lost the season. As Democrats, we need to keep everyone on the roster — to recruit, raise funds, and more — even if they are no longer part of the starting lineup.”

The ongoing competition to lead the DNC makes the situation all the more delicate as the couple monitors the situation from New York: the candidates for chair rarely mention either Clinton, sensing a level of impatience with them among voting members of the committee and elected officials who want to see a younger generation of Democrats take power.

“New ideas and new approaches and new direction, that’s really needed right now,” said Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan, a prominent Clinton supporter during the campaign who challenged Nancy Pelosi’s House leadership position after the election. Ryan said the Clintons would remain useful to the party moving forward, but “it’s just the natural cycle of political parties, and I think Republicans have done a better job than we have in trying to engage young voices to get into the mix.”

For the moment, the Clintons’ closest political allies are counseling a “wait-and-see” approach when it comes to the nature of their public-facing role. Well acquainted with fluctuating public perceptions after three decades of sine curve-style approval ratings, they are watching Trump’s numbers closely, aware that their own popularity could rebound — especially when the Trump administration runs up against popular pieces of Bill Clinton’s White House and Hillary Clinton’s State Department legacies.

Whatever role they choose, however, their shadow will continue to loom over the party’s infrastructure. A number of the major left-leaning organizations that are relaunching in opposition to Trump are run by operatives who are closely associated with the Clintons, including the Priorities USA super PAC run by Guy Cecil, the Center for American Progress under Neera Tanden, and the network of liberal groups steered by David Brock.

Outside Washington, meanwhile, Democrats are considering ways Clinton could emerge as a prominent potential ally for local-level officials. For example, a major problem faced by Democratic state parties in red states is the reluctance of national party leaders to travel and help them raise money, due to those state’s lack of relevance in national races. But such a fundraising role would be natural for Clinton, said multiple Democrats who are piecing together the party’s map ahead.

“They believe in the party and they want to leave this party in a better position than where they found it, and I think [they and the Obamas] have an obligation to the party, because the party has given them so much,” said South Carolina Chairman Jaime Harrison, a candidate to lead the national committee. “If I’m DNC chair, that’s one of the first calls I’m going to make, to ask them to play that ambassador role.”

Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, who was considered for Clinton’s running-mate position last summer, said Hillary Clinton — like her husband — will have much to offer as a party elder, a sentiment repeated by up-and-coming liberals and veteran moderates alike. “Thirty-four states have both their House and Senate in Republican hands, so there’s a larger discussion [to be had]. It involves not just policy, but it involves funding, and she’s going to be a respected voice who’s been in just about every situation imaginable.”

So while the Clintons’ short-term priorities remain apolitical, their allies and the people surrounding them are skeptical that can last too long.

Predicted former Pennsylvania governor and DNC chair Ed Rendell, a longtime family friend: “I’m certain Trump will screw up enough that by the fall of ’18, Hillary’s numbers will be way up again.”

Opposing Trump Admin, When Documents Matter

Posted on January 23, 2017January 23, 2017 by Denise Simon

Well we have quite an army of Marxists and progressives to watch in the next two years and it will be a full time job.

There are names such as:

Tom Steyer, David Brock, Obama, George Soros, Keith Ellison, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Van Jones, Gara LaMarche, CAIR, John Podesta, Valerie Jarrett, Elizabeth Warren, Donald Sussman and Bernie Sanders. There are of course more as one name leads to others and thousands of associated progressive organizations. Don’t be fooled that your job as a ‘Constitutional Originalist’ and conservative is over, that is hardly the case. We have already seen their mission in action.

So, why all this as a warning system?

For the full document as crafted for meeting in November of 2016: Progressive Orgs vs Trump

For what David Brock has planned, it is called impeachment and the documents are here. Confidential David Brock.

As reported by the Huffington Post, the progressives are re-tooling and are in it for the long game.

Here are five key elements of the concerted effort we must undertake to stop President-elect Trump from wreaking havoc on our communities, while building the alternative economic vision and power we need to win in the future.

First, we must wage sustained collective action. Within 24 hours of Trump’s victory, thousands of protestors had taken to the streets. Their statement was powerful and immediate. And it should be clear to every progressive that the next four years will require sustained collective action—and, often, action that means putting our bodies on the line to defend ourselves and others. Social movements from the abolitionists to the suffragettes to the civil rights movement to the immigrant rights movement have time and again changed the course of American history. Now we are called to come together again to demonstrate the moral dimension of the imminent attacks on immigrants, Muslims, women, LGBTQ people, indigenous people, and more.

This collective action will, and should, be led primarily by those who are directly affected by the dangerous rhetoric and proposals of Donald Trump, Paul Ryan, and Mitch McConnell. But it will also require solidarity and engagement from all progressives—when called upon to stand with, and sometimes get arrested with, our brothers and sisters, those with privileges like whiteness, US citizenship, maleness, and economic security must be willing to put ourselves on the line. Hashtag solidarity will not suffice—nor will simply coming to a protest every few months after a particularly horrific event. Progressives need to show up—in person, and with regularity.

Those with financial resources will also need to open their wallets to help support grassroots efforts—whether it be philanthropists writing checks or middle- and working-class people giving monthly contributions to organizations that are building strong memberships to wage strategic campaigns.

Mass action should also be channeled out of, and into, existing social movement organizations as much as possible. Spontaneous “movement moments” like this week are inspiring and important. But to be effective in the medium and long term, they must build engagement and membership in grassroots organizations that can sustain mass action.

Second, we will need expert legislative maneuvering. The scariest ideas of Donald Trump and his alt-right idea factory will quickly become legislative proposals. Progressives will need to ensure that their champions, as well as courageous moderates, are prepared to use every tool at their disposal to prevent these reckless bills from becoming law. Many are rightly pointing to the tool of the filibuster in the Senate, which will be a critical tool for blocking legislation that will put communities in danger. And surely, there is no Democratic figure more critical than Charles Schumer, the leader of the Senate Democrats, right now. But there are myriad other parliamentary procedures at legislators’ disposal to slow down the legislative process—both to provide more time for public scrutiny and debate and to simply block dangerous ideas.

And progressive legislators and progressive organizations must use whatever openings they have to invite our communities into the process. This will, no doubt, include efforts to have constituents make phone calls and send emails to their legislators. But it needs to go further. Resistance on Capitol Hill must be rooted in the lived experiences of the people who Mr. Trump and his acolytes will attack. Progressive organizations and legislators must invite these people to be at the forefront of hearings and targeted actions.

And, where Republicans try to prevent these fora from emerging within the halls of Congress, progressives must create alternative fora outside formal committee hearings to elevate people’s stories. To re-frame the debate on issues like immigration from the toxic terms that Mr. Trump will seek to deploy, progressives must elevate the moving stories of our communities—and let our resistance emanate from there. Similarly, in response to the anti-worker agenda that is surely coming, progressives must put working-class and low-income people’s faces and experiences at the forefront of legislative resistance.
Third, progressives will need to flex our legal muscles and undertake aggressive litigation. The next four years will bring a torrent of attacks on civil liberties and basic rights that progressives hold dear. While mass action will be critical for changing the public conversation on policy debates and confronting lawmakers with the consequences of their votes, and legislative maneuvers (particularly in the Senate) will be critical for blocking the worst of Trump’s agenda, it will not be sufficient to prevent all of his bad ideas from becoming law.
Here, legal tools will be critical. Progressives must use all the tools at our disposal to challenge the legality of clearly unconstitutional proposals that will emerge from President-elect Trump’s White House, including the expansion of the surveillance and national security state that he will seek to deploy. Already, Anthony Romero of the American Civil Liberties Union has made this strategy clear, posting a statement titled, “If Donald Trump Implements His Proposed Policies, We’ll See Him in Court.” Other prominent progressive legal organizations are similarly girding themselves up for the fights ahead.
The legal path will, of course, be made more difficult by a Supreme Court that will almost certainly tilt conservative next year. But that does not make litigation less important. In recent years, progressives fought back successfully against the worst attempts by legislatures across the country to attack immigrants, women, and labor unions. Our side has some of the best legal minds in the country, and we need them now more than ever.
Fourth, progressives must play offense at the state and local level. We must avoid being on permanent defense. Particularly in states, cities, and counties controlled by Democrats, progressives must assert ourselves and show the promise of our ideals and the policies that stem from them. Part one of this strategy must be to protect those who are most vulnerable to the effects of Trump’s domestic policy agenda—immigrants, Muslims, women, and the poor. The litmus test of a truly progressive city, county, or state will be whether it develops a comprehensive strategy for protecting its people from an out-of-control immigration and law enforcement infrastructure and attacks on the social safety net that keeps millions of Americans alive.

But, to win the next decade, progressives must also articulate an alternative vision for our country. While we hold the line against an agenda framed as economic populism. This cannot be a Clintonian pitch to the “middle class,” which embraced much of neoliberal ideology and trusted technocrats to solve our economic problems. Instead, it must be rooted in a radical critique of power, a commitment to working-class and low-income people, and the dedication to use government as a vehicle for grassroots democracy.

In practice, that means policies that, for instance, rein in corporate power and the stranglehold of large corporations and the wealthy on our politics while empowering workers to assert their rights and police and criminal justice reform that protects the constitutional rights of all people while dismantling the school-to-prison pipeline. And it also means bold policy experimentation that deepens democracy by inviting residents into new participatory spaces with real decision-making that incentivize engagement. In the next four years, our municipalities and states must be vibrant laboratories for democracy and spaces from which we can begin to imagine a more inclusive economy—one that prioritizes the rights and needs of working-class people and offers a strengthened safety net that protects us all.

Fifth, we must build grassroots political power. As we take to the streets and organize, progressives must also plot a path forward to channel all of the incredible grassroots spirit of resistance into actual political power building. Part of that will be achieved through the work of building larger bases of membership in grassroots organizations across the country—particularly those with political arms that can endorse and support candidates who share our values. But it must also include a concerted effort to build the ranks of truly progressive candidates and elected officials—and more progressive party institutions.

Some have reflected in recent days about the need for the Democratic Party to reinvent itself. Surely, the Democrats must learn that part of the enthusiasm gap that plagued the Clinton candidacy stemmed from the failure to articulate a vision that highlighted how our system has failed working people, how we must take on the role of big money, how we must invite people back to democracy at every level instead of relying on a neoliberal technocracy, and how black lives must be at the center of our politics.

Others are reflecting on the need to challenge the two-party system in this country. On this front, the best source of hope is the Working Families Party (WFP), which now operates across ten states and the District of Columbia and lent considerable grassroots muscle to the remarkable candidacy of Bernie Sanders. In states like New York, the WFP has identified, cultivated, and bolstered progressive stars running for office at every level of government—from town councilmembers to county legislators to the Mayor of our nation’s largest city. Growth in the geographic reach, membership, and resources of the WFP will be critical for continuing to build this leadership pipeline and holding Democrats accountable to the truly progressive vision that we need to win the next decade.

One key battleground for this political fight will be the issue of voting rights. On the national level and in red states, we will see concerted efforts to restrict access to the ballot for communities of color, immigrants, and low-income people. We must defend against this wherever it occurs—through all of the tactics mentioned above. But progressives must also go on offense where we can to expand suffrage and make registering to vote and casting a ballot as easy as possible. This is intrinsically the right thing to do. It will also prove instrumentally valuable, as we seek to build progressive political power.

Finally, it bears mention that some of these tactics may bear a resemblance to those that conservatives have deployed over the past decade—after all, litigation and legislative obstructionism have been the hallmark of efforts to block President Obama’s agenda since 2009. But there is a key difference: our way forward will, and must, be rooted in radical empathy—that is, a commitment to try to put ourselves in the shoes of others who are under attack. Put differently, radical empathy in this context means that we understand attacks on the lives and livelihoods of others as attacks on ourselves. It means that we will put our bodies and our professional lives on the line to protect our neighbors and their families.

Such empathy also means listening to and understanding the pain and alienation in communities across the country that tilted towards Donald Trump—especially white working-class people who voted for him because they have seen their livelihoods crumble and come to conclude that the system is rigged against them. Progressives must, of course, forcefully call out hatred and the attacks on our communities that will become a fixture of the next four years, and there is a moral imperative to prioritize the safety and well-being of those communities under imminent threat of attack. But we must also seek to understand those whose votes have endangered us—and, where possible, both listen actively to, and articulate a vision that can build bridges to them.

There are no shortcuts to diffusing the worst of what a Trump presidency could become. The next four years will undoubtedly bring intense fear and pain for people around this country. Many progressives feel right now like they are in the wilderness, and that we may be there for some time. But if we can respond strategically to this moment—and harness our capacity for collective action, legislative maneuvering, and aggressive litigation to block as much of the Trump agenda possible, while identifying opportunities to make local and state progress and building our political muscle—then we can still win the next decade.

Hey Trump Meet America Under Siege 2017

Posted on January 19, 2017January 19, 2017 by Denise Simon

Add outgoing Secretary of State John Kerry who will not be attending and not providing a reason. Further, in Barack Obama’s last White House press briefing, he refused to comment on his thoughts as to those in his party that will not be attending.

****

In his final press conference as president on Wednesday, Barack Obama declined to comment on the growing list of Democrats who are refusing to attend President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration on Friday

FOX News’ Kevin Corke asked the 44th president if he supports the dozens of Democratic lawmakers who have vowed to boycott Trump’s inauguration.

“With respect to the inauguration, I’m not going to comment on those issues,” Obama responded. “All I know is I’m going to be there, so is Michelle.”

First lady Michelle Obama seemed to indicate her support for Rep. John Lewis, who is one of the most prominent lawmakers boycotting the inauguration, when she sent a tweet calling him a “great leader” on Monday. More here.

Protesters host ‘Queer Dance Party’ in front of Mike Pence’s DC home

For Reference: Bradley Manning’s Charge Sheet, Then Swap

Posted on January 18, 2017January 18, 2017 by Denise Simon

Obama says he granted Manning clemency ‘in the pursuit of justice’

USAToday: President Obama defended his decision to release Army Private Chelsea Manning from prison early, telling reporters at his last press conference as president Wednesday that “I feel very comfortable that justice has been served.”

Obama said the commutation of Manning balanced national security interests with Manning’s remorse and her long sentence.

“First of all, let’s be clear, Chelsea Manning has served a tough prison sentence,” he said. “Given she went to trial and due process was carried out, that she took responsibility for her crime, that the sentence that she received was very disproportionate relative to what other leakers had received — and that she had served a significant amount of time — it made sense to commute a part of her sentence.”

It must be mentioned here too that while Obama’s pen is busy on felons in U.S. jails and transferring those in Guantanamo, what about that Iranian prisoner swap? We were only told about getting back the Americans held in detention in Iran, but Obama freed and included in the swap 21 Iranians held in prison in the United States.

But many in the group were assisting Iran’s military, spy services and nuclear program, providing what one U.S. attorney called a threat to national security. At least two suspects reportedly lent logistical support to what the United States considers a terrorist group.

Seven of the 21 were pardoned or had their sentences commuted as part of the trade for four Americans imprisoned in Iran. The other 14 were fugitives, believed to be overseas, and arrest warrants were dropped against them.

Among the 14 were Hamid Arabnejad and Gholamreza Mahmoudi, senior executives with Iran’s Mahan airline. U.S. officials say the airline ran supplies to Hezbollah, the Lebanese-based Islamic organization that the U.S. considers a terrorist group.

The airline also is accused of providing logistics support, including covert travel, to the Quds Force, the elite overseas unit of the hard-line Revolutionary Guard. The U.S. has designated the Quds Force a supporter of terrorism since 2007. Arabnejad was separately accused of using Mahan to smuggle weapons to Syrian President Bashar Assad for the “regime’s violent crackdown against its own citizens,” according to a 3-year-old Department of Treasury designation that imposes sanctions. More here from LATimes.

*** Now back to Manning’s charge sheet.

Fatah and Hamas to form unity government after Moscow deal

Posted on January 18, 2017January 18, 2017 by Denise Simon

The timing is purposeful and Putin led the coordination. This is a real message to the West.

Fatah and Hamas agree to form unity Palestinian government to end election gridlock,” by Bethan McKernan, Independent, January 19, 2017:

The governing bodies of the West Bank and Gaza Strip have agreed to bury their differences to form a unity government in order to finally hold delayed elections.

The secular Fatah-led Palestinian Authority, based in Ramallah, and Islamist militant group Hamas, which seized control of Gaza in 2007, will form a new National Council including the Palestinian diaspora to hold elections.

“We have reached agreement under which, within 48 hours, we will call on [Palestinian Authority President] Mahmoud Abbas to launch consultations on the creation of a government,” Fatah spokesperson Azzam al-Ahmad told media after three days of reconciliation talks in the Russian capital of Moscow concluded on Tuesday.

“Today the conditions for [the idea] are better than ever,” Mr Ahmad added.

Relations between Fatah and Hamas have been tense since Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip a decade ago.

The first elections since 2007 were due to be held in 2016 but were delayed multiple times after legal complaints filed by various political actors and a high court ruling found elections could only be held in the West Bank.

The non-official Russian brokered talks also involved representatives from the Shia Islamic Jihad militant group, which has not been present at political talks in years.

While in Moscow, Palestinian representatives also met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, asking him to pressure US President-elect Donald Trump into reneging on a campaign promise to move the US Embassy to Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem….

****

According to Al Jazeera, the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority has agreed to form a unity government with rival organisation Hamas.

The two organisations will form a new National Council. The plan is to include Palestinians in exile and then hold elections.

It should be noted that the Islamic Jihad group was also included in the negotiations.

The last time the Palestinians staged elections in which both Hamas and Fatah took part was in 2006.

The Palestinian representatives also met on Monday with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, asking him not persuade the US government not to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

This new Russian involvement in the Palestinian issues is an upgrade for Moscow and with the new foreign policy Donald Trump will follow, it might not be the last.

Meanwhile: From Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center

The electricity crisis in the Gaza Strip brought masses of protesters into the streets (one held in the Jabalia refugee camp had thousands of demonstrators). Qatar and Turkey promised aid (money and fuel) to help Hamas cope with the immediate problem, although it will not fundamentally solve the problem.

The crisis illustrates Hamas’ difficulty in coping with the challenges of governance in the Gaza Strip, and its inability to cooperate with the Palestinian Authority (PA), even over vital services for the population. However, Hamas’ security forces have proved themselves effective in controlling the situation and so far have managed to contain the protests.

Senior Palestinian figures have initiated a campaign threatening mainly the United States, in the wake of the possibility that America will relocate its embassy to Jerusalem.One of the Palestinians’ main claims was that such a move would “ignite the region” and “open the gates of hell in the Middle East and the world.” Mahmoud Abbas said it would make the United States ineligible to play a role in resolving the conflict, destroy the two-state solution and lead the PA to examine possible responses, including retracting Palestinian recognition of the State of Israel.

Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem

Detention of Palestinian Who Attempted Vehicular Attack

On January 11, 2017, during an IDF activity in the al-Fawwar refugee camp (south of Hebron), a Palestinian attempted a vehicular attack. There were no casualties. The Palestinian media reported the Israeli security forces had detained a Palestinian, claiming he had tried to run over a Border Policeman on the road between the town of Dura and the al-Fawwar refugee camp (Shasha News, January 11, 2017).

Riots and Clashes

In the meantime, routine popular terrorism continued unabated (the throwing of stones and Molotov cocktails). The more prominent attacks were the following:

January 17, 2017 – Palestinians threw stones at Israeli vehicles on route 443 near the Ofer military camp. There were no casualties. The vehicles were damaged (Facebook page of Red Alert, January 17, 2017).

January 16, 2017 – Border Policemen operating in A-Tor detained a Palestinian bus passenger who looked suspicious. Initial investigation revealed that he lived in Judea and Samaria and did not have an entry permit for east Jerusalem. During his interrogation the police began to suspect he had come to east Jerusalem to carry out a stabbing attack targeting Israeli security forces near the Nablus Gate in the Old City of east Jerusalem (Jerusalem Police spokesperson’s unit, January 17, 2017).

January 16, 2017 – A Palestinian who clashed with IDF forces in a riot near Tekoa in Gush Etzion and threw stones at the soldiers was shot and killed. (Facebook page of Red Alert, January 16, 2017). The Palestinian media reported him as Qusay al-Amur, 17, a Fatah operative (Facebook page of the Fatah movement, January 16, 2017).

January 15, 2017 – Israeli security forces sealed a weapons workshop that was exposed in Hebron three weeks ago. It was discovered at the beginning of December 2016 in a large underground chamber in a residential house in Hebron’s southern industrial zone. The workshop produced hundreds of weapons (Ynet, January 15, 2017).

January 12, 2017 – Palestinians threw stones at a car and truck near Beit Hanina in east Jerusalem. One man was injured; the vehicles were damaged (Facebook page of Red Alert, January 12, 2017).

January 11, 2017 – Palestinians threw a pipe bomb at IDF forces on the Husan detour near Beitar (west of Bethlehem). There were no casualties (Facebook page of Red Alert, January 11, 2017).

January 11, 2017 – Israeli policemen stopped an Israeli truck at the Beqaot crossing which was driving in the direction of Nablus. It was found to contain 14 tons of fertilizer, which is also used to making explosives and not allowed into Judea and Samaria. The truck was confiscated and the driver detained for questioning (Civilian administration spokesperson’s unit, January 11, 2017).

On the night of January 15, 2017, in a joint Israeli security force operation, 13 Hamas operatives were detained near Ramallah. One of them was Ahmed Mubarak, a Hamas member of the Palestinian Legislative Council. The forces confiscated money, vehicles and Hamas propaganda materials. The operation was carried out after the Israeli security forces exposed a Hamas network of about 120 operatives. The network operated in the region of Ramallah and in effect served as the local Hamas headquarters. Ahmed Bahar, deputy chairman of the Palestinian Legislative Council, condemned the detention of Ahmed Mubarak, claiming it was a clear violation of parliamentary immunity (Quds.press, January 16, 2017).

The objective of the network exposed in the Ramallah region was to strengthen Hamas in Judea and Samaria, and to achieve the goal it also engaged in the da’wah (Islamic indoctrination), providing economic support for prisoners and the families of terrorists, and supporting a Hamas student cell. The network also distributed Hamas propaganda and organized mass demonstrations. Its activities were financed by Hamas sources abroad and by Hamas in the Gaza Strip (Israel Security Agency media unit, January 16, 2017)

Israel’s South

Rocket Fire Attacking Israel

Palestinians opened fire at an IDF force maintaining the border security fence between Israel and the Gaza Strip in the southern Gaza Strip. There were no casualties. A military vehicle was damaged. In response an IDF tank fired at and destroyed a Hamas post near the source of the shots (Ynet, January 15, 2017).

Developments in the Gaza Strip

The Electricity Crisis

The electricity crisis in the Gaza Strip recently worsened, and Gazans currently have electricity for only about three hours a day. The crisis is apparently the result of several factors, including the increase in consumption due to the winter cold; a problem with the power lines from Egypt, which supply 11% of the Gaza Strip’s electricity; the completion of a number of infrastructure projects which require electricity; and a rise in the price of fuel, which made it more expensive to operate the power plant.

The situation resulted in mass protests throughout the Gaza Strip (one in Jabalia had thousands of demonstrators). Some of the demonstrations were harshly dispersed by Hamas’ security forces and their organizers detained. Hamas rejected the claims of civilians and claimed Mahmoud Abbas and the national consensus government were responsible for the crisis. Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum stressed the right of the public to protest, but said it could not create “anarchy in [the Gaza Strip’s] security” and disturb public order. Senior Hamas figure Fathi Hamad urged the demonstrators to move to Egypt or the West Bank if life in the Gaza Strip was unsatisfactory. He added that Hamas would use all its power to suppress the protests (Facebook page of Watan, January 14, 2017).

The crisis led Hamas and the Palestinian Authority to exchange mutual accusations. At its weekly meeting, the Palestinian national consensus government blamed Hamas for the ongoing shortages of electricity in the Gaza Strip. The PA claimed Hamas was determined to take control of the electric company and the Palestinian energy and natural resources authority, and did not allow them to perform their functions (Wafa, January 10, 2017).

The crisis raised claims that there was a connection between Hamas’ use of electricity the tunnels and its shortage in the public sector. In response Abu Obeida, spokesman for Hamas’ military wing, claimed the tunnels were one of the “greatest creations of the Palestinian resistance” in response to Israel’s military arsenal and the closure of the Gaza Strip. He claimed building the tunnels had caused the “resistance” many sacrifices, and strongly rejected any attempt to link the “resistance” to the lack of electricity (Twitter account of Abu Obeida, January 12, 2017).

To find an immediate arrangement for the electricity crisis, Ismail Haniyeh, deputy head of the Hamas political bureau, consulted with the emir of Qatar. The emir promised him that over the next three months Qatar would transfer $12 million to buy fuel for the power plant (Gaza al-A’an, January 15, 2017). In addition, Turkey promised to send 15 million liters (almost four million gallons) of fuel to the Gaza Strip. Both are supposed to arrive shortly (Safa, January 16, 2017). The aid from Qatar and Turkey may be able to provide Hamas with a short-term solution but it cannot fundamentally end the crisis.

In conclusion, the crisis illustrates the difficulties Hamas has in dealing with the challenges of governance in the Gaza Strip, one of which is the uninterrupted supply of electricity to the Gazans. It has also led the local residents to strongly protest against Hamas and again shows that Hamas and the PA are incapable of cooperating, even on issues that relate to the daily life of the population. However, as far as can be seen, the Hamas enforcement agencies still function effectively, and so far Hamas has successfully contained the protests and prevented them from spinning out of control.

The Palestinian Authority

Palestinian Reactions to the Paris Conference

On January 15, 2017, a peace conference organized by France was held in Paris. Seventy countries sent representatives, most of them foreign ministers. There were no representatives from either Israel or the PA. The conference’s final summation confirmed that a negotiated solution of two states, existing side by side, was the only way an enduring peace could be achieved. It stressed the importance of both sides’ commitment to a solution to the conflict and to taking immediate steps that would bring an end to continued acts of violence and ongoing settlement activity.^[2] The announcement noted that the solutions would be in accordance with the relevant Security Council resolutions, including Resolution 2334, and with the principles formulated by John Kerry, the American secretary of state, on December 18, 2016 (Website of the French foreign ministry, January 15, 2017).

Responses from a number of senior Palestinian figures were the following:

Mahmoud Abbas, PA chairman, called on Israel to stop construction in the settlements. He said the PA was prepared to renew negotiations to revitalize the peace process within an international framework and with a defined time table. He called on all states around the globe that had not yet recognized the Palestinian state to do so, and to monitor the implementation of Security Council Resolution 2334 (Watan, January 15, 2017).

Nabil Abu Rudeina, spokesman for Mahmoud Abbas, said the Palestinians’ many recent achievements had proved the failure of Israel’s policies and the victory of the Palestinian cause. He said that was shown by the global consensus over resistance to construction in the settlements and support for the two-state solution (Wafa, January 16, 2017).

Riyad al-Maliki, foreign minister of the national consensus government, said the foreign ministry would monitor the implementation of the conference’s conclusions that Israel stop building in the settlements so that a Palestinian state could be established and officially join the UN (Watan, January 15, 2017).

Saeb Erekat, secretary of the PLO’s Executive Committee, stressed the need to end the “Israeli occupation” and the right of the Palestinian people to establish an independent state. He also noted the importance of the two-state solution, thanked all the countries that attended the conference and called on them to recognize the Palestinian state immediately (Watan24, January 15, 2017).

While senior PA figures tried to represent the results of the conference as an achievement, senior Hamas figures mocked the conference, its results and its final statement:

Senior Hamas figure Mahmoud al-Zahar said he found it hard to believe an international conference would bring any benefit to the Palestinian cause (Quds.net, January 15, 2017).

Hamas spokesman Hazem Qassem said Hamas viewed the conference as “a waste of time” that copied previous failed peace conferences. He called on the PA to focus on the internal Palestinian reconciliation instead (al-Anadolu News, January 15, 2017).

Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum said the Paris conference was an attempt to renew the “absurd negotiations” that would give the “Zionist entity” the legitimacy to remain in the territories of Palestine. He said the Palestinian people had to stand fast by their principles and focus on the path of “resistance” to defend themselves (Hamas website, January 16, 2017).

Hamas spokesman Abd al-Latif al-Qanu’ said Hamas did not have much hope that an international conference held for the sake of the Palestinian cause because Israel did not honor its conclusions. He added that any negotiations with Israel were a “waste of time” (al-Aqsa, January 14, 2017).

Responses to Possible Relocation of American Embassy to Jerusalem

Senior PA figures continue dealing with the possibility that the American embassy will be moved to Jerusalem. They said the following:

Mahmoud Abbas said he had appealed to the American president-elect not to relocate the American embassy in Jerusalem, because, he said, such a step would make the United States ineligible to play a role in resolving the conflict and destroy the two-state solution. He added that if the Americans did relocate their embassy, there were a number of possible responses which would be discussed with the Arab states, including the possibility of retracting Palestinian recognition of the State of Israel.

Rami Hamdallah, prime minister of the national consensus government, demanded that the institutions of the international community stand up to the threat of the new American administration to relocate its embassy. He warned that if the United States did relocate it, there would be a significant deterioration of regional security (Safa, January 11, 2017).

Saeb Erekat, secretary of the PLO’s Executive Committee, sent a communiqué to Russian President Putin asked Russia to intervene and prevent the American embassy from being relocated. Interviewed by the RT channel in Arabic, he said that moving the embassy to east Jerusalem meant annexing Jerusalem to Israel (YouTube, January 12, 2017).

Fatah spokesman Osama al-Qawasmeh issued an announcement threatening that it would “open the gates of hell in the Middle East and the world.” He also said that it would put a lid on any possibility for regional peace and stability, because east Jerusalem was the capital of the Palestinian state (Ma’an, January 14, 2017).

Muhammad Hussein, the mufti of Jerusalem and the PA, warned the incoming administration that relocating the embassy could “ignite the region” (alresala.net, January 12, 2017). In his Friday sermon in al-Aqsa mosque, he said relocating the embassy was “aggression against the entire Muslim world” and was liable to have consequences “that only Allah knew.” He said it was an attack on all the conventions and UN Security Council resolutions, and that Muslims would not silently accept it (YouTube, January 13, 2017).

The weekly riot in Kafar Qadoum was also exploited for a protest. Demonstrators held signs reading that relocating the embassy to Jerusalem was “a despicable crime” (Wafa, January 13, 2017). On January 16, 2017, Gazans demonstrated in the center of Gaza City. The held signs reading “Jerusalem is a red line” (Facebook page of QudsN, January 16, 2017).

Palestinian Legation Opened in the Vatican

Mahmoud Abbas paid a visit to the Vatican and met with the Pope. He also participated in the ceremony opening the legation of Palestine in the Vatican City. He told newspaper correspondents that he called on all the nations of the world to follow the Vatican and recognize the sate of Palestine. He called on the states to participate in realizing peace (al-Wataniya, January 14, 2017).

Memorial to the Hamas Terrorist Engineer Killed in Tunisia

In Deir Ghassaneh, a town northwest of Ramallah, a sign was hung naming a street for Muhammad al-Zoari, a Hamas terrorist engineer who was killed in Tunisia (Twitter account of Palinfo, January 15, 2017).^[3] Hanging the sign might have been a local initiative.