Long Detail of Biden, Inc.

Politico:

The day the Bidens took over Paradigm Global Advisors was a memorable one.

In the late summer of 2006 Joe Biden’s son Hunter and Joe’s younger brother, James, purchased the firm. On their first day on the job, they showed up with Joe’s other son, Beau, and two large men and ordered the hedge fund’s chief of compliance to fire its president, according to a Paradigm executive who was present.

After the firing, the two large men escorted the fund’s president out of the firm’s midtown Manhattan office, and James Biden laid out his vision for the fund’s future. “Don’t worry about investors,” he said, according to the executive, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing fear of retaliation. “We’ve got people all around the world who want to invest in Joe Biden.”

At the time, the senator was just months away from both assuming the chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and launching his second presidential bid. According to the executive, James Biden made it clear he viewed the fund as a way to take money from rich foreigners who could not legally give money to his older brother or his campaign account. “We’ve got investors lined up in a line of 747s filled with cash ready to invest in this company,” the executive remembers James Biden saying.

At this, the executive recalled, Beau Biden, who was then running for attorney general of Delaware, turned bright red. He told his uncle, “This can never leave this room, and if you ever say it again, I will have nothing to do with this.”

A spokesman for James and Hunter Biden said no such episode ever occurred. Beau Biden died in 2015, at 46.

But the recollection of an effort to cash in on Joe’s political ties is consistent with other accounts provided by other former executives at the fund.

Three former Paradigm executives said James and Hunter Biden also sought to capitalize on Joe’s strong ties to labor unions in the hopes of landing investments from them; Charles Provini, who briefly served as Paradigm’s president, said both James and Hunter repeatedly cited Joe’s political ties when they recruited him to work for the fund. “I was told because of his relationships with the unions that they felt as though it would be favorably looked upon to invest in the fund as long as it was a good fund,” Provini recalled.

Documents submitted as part of a legal dispute over Paradigm’s acquisition show James Biden planned to solicit investments for it from union pension funds. A spokesman for James and Hunter said they did not end up marketing the fund to unions.

As Joe Biden runs for the Democratic presidential nomination on the argument he can strongly appeal to the party’s dwindling base of blue-collar supporters, the candidate has often made the point that he hasn’t gotten rich from his decades in politics. As recently as 2009, his net worth was less than $30,000, though in recent years he has made millions from book sales and speaking fees. He refers to himself as “Middle-Class Joe,” and presents himself as a corrective to a system rigged by financiers and networked corporate elites.

Biden’s image as a straight-shooting man of the people, however, is clouded by the careers of his son and brother, who have lengthy track records of making, or seeking, deals that cash in on his name. Interviews, court records, government filings and news reports reveal that some members of the Biden family have consistently mixed business and politics over nearly half a century, moving from one business to the next as Joe’s stature in Washington grew.

None of the ventures appear to have been runaway successes, and Biden’s relatives have not been accused of criminal wrongdoing in their dealings. But over the years, several of their partners and associates have ended up indicted or convicted. The dealings have brought Joe unwelcome scrutiny and threaten to distract from his presidential bid.

A spokesman for Biden’s campaign, Andrew Bates, declined to comment for this story. A spokesman for James and Hunter disputed several specific recollections of former Paradigm executives but did not address more general questions about their business dealings.

Their ventures, over nearly half a century, have regularly raised conflict-of-interest questions and brought the Biden family into potentially compromising associations. This investigation offers the most comprehensive account to date of the politically tinged business activities of Biden’s brother and son, and is the first time former associates of James and Hunter have alleged that the pair explicitly sought to make money off of Joe’s political connections.

Photo illustration of Hunter Biden, MBNA bank

Within weeks of the encounter at Paradigm Global Advisors, Beau Biden won his race for Delaware attorney general, and never established any recorded ties to Paradigm. His political career kept him well clear of his brother and uncle’s business endeavors.

James and Hunter are another story. There is no indication the Bidens ever succeeded in bringing new foreign money into the fund, but their involvement with Paradigm, which spanned the final two years of Joe’s Senate career and first two years of his vice presidency, was troubled for other reasons: In James and Hunter’s five-year tenure, Paradigm became associated with a number of alleged and confirmed frauds, including Allen Stanford’s multibillion-dollar Ponzi scheme, while seeking to draw on their powerful relative’s political allies for financing.

The pattern of dubious associations and possible conflicts of interest would continue later with Hunter’s foreign dealings, which led him to a lucrative appointment to the board of a Ukrainian oil company and to deals with firms connected to the Chinese state. But it started far earlier.

The Biden Family:

A political and financial timeline

As Joe has risen from senator to vice president to leading

contender for president, his brother and son have charted

their own complicated path in the business world.

***Go here for the timeline graphic that began in 1973.

James Biden, known socially as Jimmy, is seven years younger than Joe and a dead ringer for his famous older brother. He worked as a salesman and served as the finance chairman of Joe’s first Senate campaign in 1972 before embarking on a career as a serial entrepreneur.

In the 1970s, as Joe was entering the Senate and taking a seat on the Banking Committee, James obtained unusually generous loans from lenders who later faced federal regulatory issues. Joe Biden was in touch with two of those banks about his brother’s loans, once to scold a bank executive about invoking his name in attempts to collect on overdue payments.

In the 1990s, a group of Mississippi trial lawyers enlisted James to further its interests in Washington as it sought congressional support for a tobacco megasettlement. A decade later, those Mississippi contacts supported Joe’s presidential bid — hosting a fundraiser for him and accepting an invitation to accompany Joe to a high-profile Washington dinner — while they simultaneously prepared to launch a lobbying firm with James and his wife, Sara. Plans for the firm fizzled when the Mississippians were arrested, then jailed, for an unrelated bribery scheme.

During the Obama years, several months after James joined a construction firm as an executive, the firm received a contract worth more than a billion dollars to build houses in Iraq while Joe oversaw the U.S.-led occupation of that country.

Along the way, James partnered with his nephew Hunter, the younger of Joe’s two sons. A graduate of Georgetown University and Yale Law School, Hunter, 49, has struggled with substance abuse while hopscotching between endeavors in law, business and politics.

In the early 2000s, before working with his uncle, Hunter had opened a lobbying practice that landed clients with interests that overlapped with Joe’s committee assignments and legislative priorities. Ahead of his father’s second presidential bid, he entered the hedge fund business with James.

There’s no evidence that Joe Biden used his power inappropriately or took action to benefit his relatives with respect to these ventures. These entanglements could pose problems for Democrats as they seek to draw a contrast with President Donald Trump, who they accuse of corruption for mixing politics with his own family’s business ventures.

“Joe Biden needs to recognize it’s a problem,” said Richard Painter, a former chief White House ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush era, who recently became a Democrat. Painter said Biden should pledge that if he were elected president, he would ask his relatives to refrain from business practices that could pose ethical quandaries, such as taking foreign sources of financing.

“You can’t control your brothers. You can’t control your grown son. But you can put some firewalls in place in your own office,” Painter said.

SCANDAL-PLAGUED HEDGE FUND

Paradigm was the brainchild of James Park, a son-in-law of the billionaire Sun Myung Moon, who claimed to be the messiah and founded the Unification movement, a religious group often accused of being a cult and whose members are known as Moonies. Started by Park in 1989, Paradigm was an early entrant in the hedge fund industry and among the first funds of funds — that is, a hedge fund that invested in other hedge funds.
The Biden involvement began in January 2006. James Biden called Anthony Lotito, a New York financial adviser, and said his older brother, Joe, wanted his son Hunter to find a job outside of lobbying to avoid damaging his planned campaign for the presidency, according to a complaint Lotito later filed in a New York court, after his relationship with James and Hunter soured.

In a court filing of their own, James and Hunter denied that such a call took place as described, but it is undisputed that Lotito, James and Hunter were soon exploring a purchase of Paradigm together.

According to court filings, James Biden and Lotito had been introduced years earlier by Tom Scotto, a former president of New York’s Detectives’ Endowment Association, a union, around 2002. A year before, Scotto had been named an unindicted co-conspirator by federal prosecutors in an organized crime scheme — described at the time as the largest securities fraud bust in U.S. history — to bribe union leaders in order to access union pension funds. Scotto, who denied wrongdoing at the time, declined to comment on his relationship with James Biden and Lotito.

After their introduction, a firm owned by Lotito, Globex Financial Advisors, began doing business with one owned by James, Lion Hall Group. Lotito and Biden later co-founded a company called Americore International Security, a private security firm, according to court filings. Not much is known about Americore, though James Biden said in court filings that the business was not successful.

Lotito did not respond to requests for comment.

By 2006, Lotito, James and Hunter were eyeing a purchase of Paradigm.

James and Hunter brought in Larry Rasky, a lobbyist and longtime Biden adviser, who at one point, according to court records, was going to provide $1 million in financing. Rasky did not respond to a request for comment. They also obtained $1 million in financing from SimmonsCooper, a St. Louis-area law firm with a thriving practice representing asbestos victims. Partners in the firm had befriended the Biden sons, steering business to Beau’s Delaware law firm and donations to Biden’s campaign coffers. SimmonsCooper’s interests aligned with Joe Biden’s views. He was a prominent opponent of the creation of an asbestos trust fund, a measure that would have curtailed lawsuits related to the cancer-causing fibers.

Things quickly got messy. The prospective purchasers discovered that because of an accounting trick, the fund had only a fraction of the $1.5 billion in assets under management that it claimed, according to court filings.

James and Hunter also discovered that the attorney the trio had hired on Lotito’s recommendation to explore the purchase, John Fasciana, had recently been convicted on 12 counts of fraud, according to court filings.

Fasciana declined to comment, citing attorney-client confidentiality rules. Messages left at a number listed in Lotito’s name were not returned.

Despite the problems with the fund and souring relations with Lotito, James and Hunter charged ahead with their acquisition of Paradigm. They purchased the fund without him in August 2006, not for cash, but for an $8.1 million promissory note.

Lotito later sued James and Hunter in New York state court, accusing them of fraudulently acquiring Paradigm behind his back. Lotito claimed in his complaint that Hunter had entered into an employment agreement with Paradigm that entitled Hunter to draw an annual salary of $1.2 million.

James and Hunter counter-sued, and James stated in an affidavit that he, Hunter and a firm they had formed with Lotito had lost $1.3 million in their initial attempt to acquire Paradigm. All parties voluntarily dropped their claims in December 2008.

According to an agreement Lotito and James made with Paradigm in May 2006 that later surfaced in their court fight, they had planned to use their connections to union pension funds governed by the 1947 Taft–Hartley Act, which regulates labor unions, in order to steer new investments to Paradigm.

The documents corroborate the recollections of the three executives who said James and Hunter sought to tap Joe’s union ties.

At one point after the Bidens purchased the fund, one of the executives recalled, groups of firefighters started trekking up in small groups to Paradigm’s offices and leaving him checks for a few thousand dollars each, about 10 in total over the course of a few days.

Firefighters unions have been among Joe Biden’s closest political allies since the start of his political career.

The Paradigm executive said the checks were never cashed. Generally, legal restrictions and fund policies mean only the rich can invest directly in hedge funds, and only in much higher increments than a couple thousand dollars. A spokesman for James and Hunter said no such episode occurred.

Another of the former executives recalled that Paradigm abandoned plans to pursue Taft–Hartley pension funds because of the prospect of “perceived conflicts.”

As soon as James and Hunter — without Lotito — took control of Paradigm, they ordered the firing of the fund’s president, Stephane Farouze. Farouze, who had been in a dispute about equity with the fund’s previous owner, later sued James, Hunter and Lotito in New York state, accusing them of engaging in an “elaborate scheme” to defraud him out of his ownership stake in Paradigm. Farouze alleged that James and Hunter entered into a contract with him to buy out his share in the fund without ever intending to abide by it, as part of a ploy to steal his share. The case was dismissed. Farouze did not respond to requests for comment.

James and Hunter set about reorganizing the fund, installing Provini as its president in 2007.

Two legal documents

In the Bidens’ first months at the helm, Paradigm reached an arrangement with Longship Capital Management, a New York investment firm, in which Longship would serve as an investment adviser to Paradigm, according to an Securities and Exchange Commission filing. The arrangement put James and Hunter in business with Longship partner Brian Mathis, a veteran of the Clinton Treasury Department and a Democratic bundler who was friends with Barack and Michelle Obama at Harvard Law School. In March 2011, Mathis, who declined to comment, was among the roughly 30 financiers invited to a controversial White House meeting to discuss the state of the economy. The meeting was arranged by the Democratic National Committee and omitted from Obama’s public schedule. There is no evidence Joe Biden was involved in the meeting.

To pay back the million dollars they had borrowed from SimmonsCooper during their first, aborted acquisition attempt, James and Hunter had taken out a loan from WashingtonFirst Bank, which had been co-founded by one of Hunter’s former lobbying partners. A former WashingtonFirst executive said James and Hunter had pledged their houses on the loan and both had paid back their debts after several years.

In the meantime, that debt was causing friction within Paradigm.

At one point, the executive said, Hunter called him and asked him to hand over $21,000 in company funds for a personal mortgage payment. When the executive refused, saying the funds were needed to cover operating expenses, he recalled that Hunter — who recently told The New Yorker he has spent most of his life living paycheck to paycheck — responded that he might lose his house.

“Hunter did take substantial dollars out of the company,” said a second former Paradigm executive, describing the withdrawals as a “semi-regular” subject of discussion and concern within the firm.

A third former executive at Paradigm claimed that at one point around 2008 or 2009, James and Hunter withdrew several million dollars from Paradigm’s coffers for their own use. By this point, “The Bidens didn’t have access to the day-to-day operation of Paradigm at all,” this executive said. “The only thing the Bidens could do was get paid or request to get money out of the hedge fund.” The executive said the Bidens had the right to withdraw the funds and that the transaction was cleared through counsel.

A spokesman for James and Hunter said no such withdrawals occurred.

An independent audit performed on the fund in 2008 by the Philadelphia firm Briggs, Bunting & Dougherty was filed with the SEC. Though it is does not detail the basis for its findings, the audit found accounting deficiencies at Paradigm, including a “failure to timely prepare financial statements” and a “failure to reconcile Investment Advisors reimbursement of fund expenses.”

***

While James and Hunter Biden were trying to succeed in the world of high finance, Joe Biden was seeking the Democratic nomination for the presidency, eventually becoming Barack Obama’s running mate after his own bid foundered. The duo would go on to victory, in part by casting themselves as reliable stewards of an economy that was careening downward as a result of financial engineering gone awry.

As Election Day neared, the government took over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, there was a run on money market accounts, the Fed bailed out AIG, and some of the country’s largest financial institutions teetered on the brink of collapse. On September 29, the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell by 777 points, then the largest single-day drop in history.

Dennis Tang, now an undergraduate instructor at Columbia University, was interning at Paradigm that summer. He described a business that was oddly quiet, saying its offices were a “ghost town” that summer, including on the September day Lehman Brothers collapsed. “It was just empty desks and empty Bloomberg terminals,” Tang said.

Paradigm was still running and would soon attract attention for its associations with several criminal frauds.

In September 2008, with the financial system melting, an executive at Paradigm registered “Paradigm Stanford Capital Management Core Alternative Fund” with the SEC. The fund of hedge funds represented a partnership with the firm run by Allen Stanford.

In February 2009, less than a month after Joe Biden was sworn in as vice president and Hunter served as honorary co-chairman of the inaugural committee, Stanford was charged with a multibillion-dollar Ponzi scheme, one of the largest in U.S. history. Paradigm was not accused of participating in the scheme. At the time, a spokesman for Paradigm told The Wall Street Journal that it had terminated its relationship with Stanford and offered to turn over the money it received from him to a court-appointed receiver.

Paradigm had also rented space to Francesco Rusciano, whose Ponta Negra fund shared both an office and a phone number with Paradigm. In April 2009, the SEC accused Rusciano of a multimillion-dollar fraud. He got a year in prison. There is no evidence Paradigm participated in the scheme.

Sun Myung Moon, Jim Biden, Allen Stanford

There were also allegations that James and Hunter’s proximity to political power allowed them to mistreat business partners.

In his suit against Hunter and James, Lotito alleged they invoked their political connections in their dispute with Fasciana, the lawyer who was later jailed. “The Bidens refused to pay the bill, repeatedly citing their political connections and family status as a basis for disclaiming the obligation,” Lotito claimed in his complaint. “The Bidens threatened to use their alleged connections with a former United States Senator to retaliate against counsel for insisting that his bill be paid, claiming that the former senator was prepared to use his influence with a federal judge to disadvantage counsel in a proceeding then pending before that court.” James and Hunter denied those allegations.

A month after Joe Biden was elected vice president, the Justice Department seized the building that housed Paradigm’s offices, 650 Fifth Ave., New York, N.Y., alleging that it was secretly owned by the same Iranian bank that was financing the nation’s nuclear program. In 2017, the U.S. won a case that granted it the power to sell the building and use the proceeds to benefit terrorism victims.

According to one of the former Paradigm executives, many of the fund’s staffers were members of the Unification Church who received roughly 30 percent of prevailing market salaries because they considered working for Park, with his proximity to the late Rev. Moon, to be compensation in itself.

James and Hunter began unwinding the fund in 2010.

Another former executive said negative press about Paradigm’s ties to fraudulent funds made James and Hunter wary of more scrutiny of “potential conflicts of interest or tie-ins to the Biden family.” As a result, the executive said, “They really just chose to liquidate the hedge fund and give back the money to the investors.” The former WashingtonFirst executive said James and Hunter shut down Paradigm because the global recession had cut into its revenues.

They never brought on any new investors.

According to a 2013 New Republic story on the Unification Church, Park, who did not respond to requests for comment, was never able to collect from James and Hunter on the promissory note they used to acquire the fund.

UNUSUAL LOANS

Paradigm was not the first Biden family business venture to fail after attracting unwanted attention.

In 1972, Joe ran a scrappy campaign for Senate with his younger brother in charge of the finances. The Bidens earned a reputation for being tight-knit and fiercely loyal to one another. “People called [James] ‘the Hammer,’” explained one future associate of his. “He would hammer the table until people agreed to give money to Joe’s campaign.”

No sooner was freshman lawmaker Joe Biden seated on the Senate Banking Committee than James became the beneficiary of business loans that were described in news accounts at the time as unusually generous because of the relatively large amount of money he was able to borrow with little or no collateral and a lack of relevant prior experience.

In early 1973, on the heels of Joe’s election to the Senate, James Biden and a business partner decided to open a nightclub.

The club, Seasons Change, located in a shopping plaza near the Pennsylvania state line, would eventually fail, leaving behind it a trail of debt and a trickle of embarrassing revelations about its financing.

The pair had obtained a series of loans for $80,000, $60,000 and $25,000 from Wilmington’s Farmers Bank. At least one of those loans was unsecured, meaning it was not backed by collateral that could be seized if the borrowers stopped paying.

When James began missing his payments and risking default, his brother Joe became angry — at the bank.

“What I’d like to know,” the junior senator told his hometown paper in 1977, “is how the guy in charge of loans let it get this far.”

The paper looked into it: “The answer, according to three former officers of the troubled Farmers Bank, is the Biden name,” reported Delaware’s News Journal. According to the paper, the bank thought the senatorial name would attract club-goers.

It did not attract enough to turn a profit, and by 1975, the bank was having problems collecting from James.

That year, Joe Biden called Farmers’ chairman, A. Edwards Danforth, to complain about the bank’s collection practices. As the News Journal later reported, “After the phone call, the former bank officers said, P. Gary Hastings, a vice president, was called into Danforth’s office and told the senator had complained that his brother has been harassed.”

The Bidens told the News Journal that the senator placed the call only because the bank was telling James that a default would be embarrassing for Joe. Danforth concurred with Joe’s characterization of the call. “They were trying to use me as a bludgeon,” Joe complained to the paper.

Another figure tied to Farmers Bank, the politically connected financier Norman Rales, extended James Biden an unsecured loan.

Rales, who did extensive business with Farmers, extended the loan to James through Joe Biden’s former law firm, Walsh, Monzack & Owens. One of the firm’s partners, John T. Owens, was a Biden brother-in-law, having married Joe’s sister and political confidante, Valerie. Owens would also become a partner in the nightclub.

These unusual arrangements came to light after Farmers Bank nearly collapsed in 1976, forcing the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to bail it out. The crisis spurred several investigations into the bank’s lending practices and political connections. It also prompted Moody’s to downgrade the state of Delaware’s credit rating from A1 to A because the state’s finances were so intertwined with the bank’s.

A Delaware banking commissioner was found to have received a loan from Farmers while overseeing its finances, an apparent violation of federal law. Separately, the Justice Department began investigating whether Rales had defrauded the bank in his unrelated dealings with it. The DOJ also scrutinized unusual loans made by Farmers, including the Biden loan. In 1978, assistant U.S. Attorney Alan Hoffman — who would go on to serve as a top aide to Biden in the Senate and the White House — told the Philadelphia Daily News that the government found nothing improper about Farmers’ loan to James.

Farmers was not the only bank to provide James unusual funding.

In 1975, the same year Farmers was having difficulty collecting on its original night club loan, James Biden and his partners went to a Philadelphia bank, First Pennsylvania, to get more money to expand their operation.

Despite their meager financial means and lack of experience in the nightclub business, James and his partner were able to obtain a loan of $500,000, equivalent to more than $2 million today.

The same year that First Pennsylvania granted the loan, it was placed on the Federal Reserve Board’s watch list over potentially unsound lending practices.

Delaware’s News Journal would later report that the office of Pennsylvania’s then-governor, Democrat Milton Shapp, had recommended James Biden for the First Pennsylvania loan. Owens had previously worked as an aide to Shapp. While declining to discuss specifics, Owens told the News Journal that from a “philosophical” perspective there would be nothing wrong with such a recommendation. Owens did not respond to a request for comment left at his office.

It also emerged that after the loan was made, First Pennsylvania met with Joe Biden to discuss it.

“My only contact with First Pennsylvania was with a junior loan officer who wanted to see me about my brother’s loan. I told him no. It was my brother’s business,” Joe Biden told the Philadelphia Daily News in 1978, though the bank representative he named, William Githens, was in fact a senior vice president.

The senator said he was not intervening on his brother’s behalf, but that in fact the bank executive was asking for his help in dealing with his brother. “He asked me,” Joe said at the time, “to intercede with my brother and ask him to change the management. He wanted me to use my influence with my brother. I did talk to him for them, and they finally changed the management.”

By early 1977, unable to make payments on his loans, James Biden had to give up the struggling club. A year later, the man who took it over from him, Salvatore Cardile, was fighting First Pennsylvania in court, claiming the bank had set him up to take the failing club off of James Biden’s hands. “The bank didn’t want the senator’s brother to be on the paper when the disco folded,” Cardile said at the time. “They needed a patsy. Me.”

There is no indication that Joe Biden helped his brother obtain any of the loans.

James told the Daily News he had made a deal on undisclosed terms to settle his debt to First Pennsylvania. In 1981, the FDIC sued James and his partners for outstanding loans to Farmers. In both instances, the Bidens told the press that Joe did nothing to help James get the loans.

CORRUPT TRIAL LAWYERS

By the time the club was going under, Joe had left his seat on the Banking Committee for one on the Judiciary Committee.

As for James, after a stint selling real estate in San Francisco, he returned to the East Coast and set up a new firm, the Lion Hall Group.

By the mid-1990s, he was working with a crew of corrupt Mississippi operators, as detailed in journalist Curtis Wilkie’s 2010 book, The Fall of the House of Zeus.

Left-right: Patrick Ho, Joe Biden, Finnegan Biden and Hunter Biden.

In 1995, famed Mississippi trial lawyer Dickie Scruggs set his sights on a gargantuan national settlement with Big Tobacco worth hundreds of billions of dollars. To make such a settlement work, Congress would have to bless it by immunizing the tobacco companies against future legal claims.

But Biden and many of his fellow liberals in Congress had reservations about passing any measure that absolved tobacco companies of further liability.

As part of an effort to win over Joe and other Democrats, Scruggs hired James’ Lion Hall Group to help with a “legislative, executive, political and social” campaign, according to Wilkie’s book. Neither James nor Lion Hall appear in federal lobbying disclosures.

The congressional measure, which was championed by Arizona Sen. John McCain, failed to pass. There is no evidence James influenced Joe’s votes on the legislation.

Scruggs is among the lawyers who reached a multistate settlement with Big Tobacco worth more than $360 billion anyway. Scruggs, a prolific Democratic donor, would become the world’s richest trial lawyer, and earn the nickname “The King of Torts.”

He would also remain in touch with the Bidens. During the tobacco fight, James Biden’s services had been recommended to Scruggs by former Mississippi State Auditor Steve Patterson.

Before serving as auditor, Patterson, a Democrat, had served as a regional director for Joe Biden’s 1988 presidential primary bid. Patterson resigned as auditor in 1996 after pleading guilty to lying on official documents to avoid paying taxes on a car.

A decade after the tobacco fight, just as Joe was embarking on his second presidential campaign, Patterson and another Scruggs associate, trial lawyer Timothy Balducci, would embark on a new business venture with James.

The plan was to open a Washington law and lobbying practice with the name Patterson, Balducci and Biden. James was not an attorney, but his wife, Sara Biden, a Duke-educated lawyer, would be a partner, and Hunter Biden was expected to be involved, according to Wilkie’s book. Sara Biden referred a request for comment to Joe Biden’s campaign.

Those plans were heating up around August 2007, when Patterson, Balducci and Scruggs co-hosted a high-dollar fundraiser for Joe Biden’s presidential campaign in Oxford, Mississippi. James attended the event and used it as an opportunity to talk business with his Southern associates, according to the book.

The next month, Balducci and Patterson were invited to attend a formal dinner with Joe as part of the Congressional Black Caucus’ annual weekend. They planned to use the dinner as an opportunity to recruit Charles Stith, who had served as ambassador to Tanzania during the Clinton administration, to their firm in a bid to bolster the firm’s standing with potential clients in Africa, according to Wilkie’s book.

In an email, Stith described James Biden as a longtime acquaintance but said they had never gone into business together nor, so far as he could remember, even talked about it. “If any such discussions took place they lacked such seriousness I don’t recall any such conversation,” he wrote.

The group also sought out associates in Switzerland, Argentina and Venezuela, according to a brochure for the prospective firm obtained by Wilkie.

At the same time James and Sara were planning to open an influence shop with Patterson and Balducci, the Mississippians were being investigated by the FBI over a scheme to bribe a judge to rule in favor of Scruggs in a dispute over legal bills. In September, the FBI picked up a wiretapped phone call between the Mississippians in which Balducci told Patterson, “We really need to push on the Senate bill.” He also said, “We’re going to meet with the Bidens around noon,” and mentioned a meeting with “black farmers.” It is unclear whether the meeting occurred. At the time, Biden was backing legislation to compensate black farmers who had faced discrimination when seeking loans and subsidies from the Department of Agriculture.

A month later, in October 2007, plans for the lobbying firm were derailed when Balducci was arrested for leaving an envelope full of cash on the judge’s desk while being videotaped by the feds.

After the scandal erupted in public in the midst of the presidential campaign, Biden returned donations from the two men and Scruggs. In 2008, Scruggs pleaded guilty to his role in the scheme and was sentenced to five years in prison. In 2009, Balducci and Patterson each received two-year sentences.

Before he published the book, Wilkie — who covered Joe Biden’s career on the New Castle County Council as a local Delaware reporter in the 1970s — said he reached out to the vice president’s office to offer him a briefing on its contents. Wilkie said he never heard back.

There is no allegation that James Biden was a party to his would-be colleagues’ misdeeds or was even aware of them before their arrests, but Wilkie said he is nevertheless shocked that James’ association with the crew has not received greater attention. “I thought surely someone in Washington would pick up on this thing because of the Biden name,” he said. “The whole thing was indiscreet at best.”

LOBBYING AND FOREIGN DEALINGS

During this time, Hunter Biden was busy making a living in his father’s wake.

He began working at MBNA bank, one of Delaware’s largest employer, in 1996. He left to become a lobbyist in 2001, though he continued receiving consulting fees from the bank. For years, beginning in the late ’90s, Joe Biden had been a top Democratic supporter of a controversial bankruptcy bill that aided issuers of credit card debt, like MBNA, by making it harder for borrowers to seek bankruptcy protections. The consulting fees to Hunter continued until 2005, when the bankruptcy bill finally passed with Joe’s support.

At his new firm, Oldaker, Biden & Belair, Hunter also lobbied for the music-sharing service Napster while the Judiciary Committee, on which Joe sat, took on digital music piracy and represented public universities seeking congressional earmarks. The Bidens have said that Hunter avoided lobbying his father. In 2008, The Washington Post reported that, as a senator, Obama had sought more than $3.4 million in earmarks for Hunter’s clients before Joe became his running mate and that another lobbyist at Hunter’s firm had successfully lobbied Joe for an earmark for the University of Delaware.

As Joe prepared to mount his second presidential run, James and Hunter pivoted to Paradigm.

Two legal documents

After Paradigm, James Biden landed a new gig. Despite a lack of experience in the construction industry, he was named an executive vice president at HillStone International, a subsidiary of New Jersey-based construction firm Hill International, in November 2010.

In June 2011, the firm landed contracts worth an estimated $1.5 billion to build homes in Iraq. At the time, HillStone had little homebuilding experience. Joe Biden was leading the administration’s Iraq policy. The firm denied that the vice president’s position helped it land the deal, which came through the TRAC Development Group, a South Korean firm that had been awarded a contract by the Iraqi government to build 500,000 homes in Iraq.

A former executive at HillStone and a person involved in negotiating TRAC’s deal with the Iraqi government both told POLITICO that James Biden played no role in the deal, but the founder of HillStone’s parent company has said the Biden name was an asset.

“Listen, his name helps him get in the door, but it doesn’t help him get business,” Hill International’s founder, Irvin Richter, told Fox Business News of James. “People who have important names tend to get in the door easier but it doesn’t mean success. If he had the name Obama he would get in the door easier.”

In the end, the contracts did not work out, and HillStone did not end up building the housing. “I thought we had a good chance during a downturn in that market to become a player and I was wrong, so we closed it down,” Richter told the magazine Arabian Business in 2014.

Hunter had more success pursuing business in Asia and Europe. After buying Paradigm, he went into business with former Secretary of State John Kerry’s stepson, Christopher Heinz, and Heinz’s friend, Devon Archer. They formed a variety of investment-focused firms under the name Rosemont Seneca.

As they set about searching for deals, Hunter and Archer were eager to land business in China.

In late 2013, Hunter traveled with his father to Beijing, where the vice president was set to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

While there, Hunter introduced one of his business partners, Jonathan Li of the Beijing-based private equity firm Bohai Capital, to his father, according to The New Yorker. Hunter and Archer had just concluded a large real estate deal with Bohai. In May of 2019, The Intercept reported that Hunter’s Chinese investment vehicle, Bohai Harvest RST, was invested in a firm that developed facial-recognition technology used in Chinese state-backed surveillance efforts.

In 2014, as Joe Biden led the administration’s response to the annexation of the Crimean peninsula in southern Ukraine, Hunter and Archer received appointments to the board of a Ukrainian natural gas company, Burisma Holdings. Hunter’s monthly pay from Burisma was reportedly as high as $50,000 in some months.

Last June, Archer was convicted in federal court in New York for an unrelated fraud targeting a Native American tribe and pension funds. In November, a judge granted Archer a retrial.

A spokesman for Heinz, Chris Bastardi, said the ketchup fortune heir had nothing to do with Hunter’s foreign dealings. “Neither Mr. Heinz, nor any business in which he had an interest, was involved in Burisma or Bohai Harvest RST.”

Since his father left office, Hunter has cultivated a relationship with the Chinese billionaire Ye Jianming. Hunter told The New Yorker the pair had partnered on a natural gas venture in Louisiana and that Ye had once gifted him a large diamond.

Hunter also dealt with Ye’s deputy, Patrick Ho. In November 2017, federal agents in New York arrested Ho on suspicion of bribing government officials in Chad and Uganda. Ho’s first call, according to The New York Times, was to James Biden, who told the paper Ho had been trying to reach Hunter.

Ho was convicted on seven counts in December. Ye has disappeared from public view, and his name has surfaced in a corruption case in China.

LIMITED SUCCESS

In 2017, Joe Biden told a Vanity Fair writer that he sometimes wished that one of his children had gotten rich in order to provide for him in his old age.

Biden and his wife, Jill, have set about providing for themselves, earning more than $15 million in the two years following the end of his vice presidency in early 2017.

Hunter recently told The New Yorker that he lives on $4,000 a month and that he offered to pay his ex-wife $37,000 a month in alimony and child support for 10 years.

In 2012, Fox Business pegged James Biden’s net worth at $7 million. In 2013, James and Sara Biden bought a vacation house on Keewaydin Island in Florida for $2.5 million. While the house served for several years as a family getaway amid beautiful surroundings, it did not pay off as an investment. After James and Sara put it on the market in early 2016 with an initial asking price of $5.9 million; it sold for just $1.35 million in 2018.

 

 

Defamation Laws v. President Trump

The El Paso shooter left a 4 page manifesto laying out his political and society position(s) on several topics including the Hispanic invasion. He also addressed fake news and that Trump did not have anything to do with his evil decisions to go on a killing rampage. So, Cloudflare fired one of it’s customers, 8Chan. The shooter’s manifesto was posted on 8Chan. A cyber site known as ZDNet among others reporting the termination of 8Chan had it the subtitle the following: “8Chan has harbored a community of hate” (in part). No argument there.

Okay, yet consider the words ‘harbored a community of hate’. In a review of media and politicians, it is beyond dispute that they too have harbored a community of hate.

Image result for victims of mass shootings

Senator and presidential candidate Kamala Harris often has called President Trump a ‘predator‘.

Senator Cory Booker declared on Meet the Press that Trump is responsible for El Paso shooting.

Mayor Pete Buttigeig along with Elizabeth Warren and Julian Castro and others have said the same thing.  These politicians created the phrase ‘white nationalism’ to describe Trump and Trump supporters.

Bernie Sanders too? Yes.

While being one of the moderators of the Democrat debate, Don Lemon of CNN twice called Trump a racist. Not to be left out is the New York Times and for sure the Washington Post.

So we have yet another ‘community of hate’ and is anyone challenging these politicians or media to look inward and ask if they are complicit is all this?

So, what about defamation laws? Glad you asked. Consider the following:

What is Defamation?

Defamation is a common law tort, governed by state law, in which an individual makes a “publication” of a defamatory statement of and concerning the plaintiff that damages the reputation of the plaintiff. Defamation comes in two forms: slander and libel. Slander involves the oral “publication” of a defamatory remark that is heard by another, which injures the subject’s reputation or character. Libel is the written “publication” of a defamatory remark that has the tendency to injure another’s reputation or character.

What are the elements of a cause of action for defamation?

The elements of a defamation suit; whether slander or libel, are:

1. A defamatory statement;

2. Published to a third party;

3. Which the speaker knew or should have known was false;

4. That causes injury to the subject of the communication

So, just how many are really creating more hate and division and the manifestation of this into the full landscape of domestic tranquility or the that matter even when it comes to global relations between the United States and countries across the world?

Active shooters and deadly ambushes on soft targets where very innocent people die is the result of all this high octane rhetoric by some many. Evil pulled the trigger(s). Evil is a form of mental defect. See something say something? Okay, that does often work when it comes to public safety and nabbing criminals. Great. Yet here is another suggestion for a layered approach. How about the cyber wing of our government, suggesting the NSA create a search algorithm that searches online sites including dark parts of the web like that of 8Chan to flush out evil as spelled out in the El Paso shooter’s manifesto? Google, Facebook and Twitter all created and apply these kinds of software tactics. Suggesting the NRA is to blame is without basis, suggesting Trump is to blame is without basis, suggesting that white nationalism is to blame is without basis.

There is no single cure to this community of hate. There must be a layered approach, so having a cogent summit and plan is suggested. After the Parkland shooting, the Trump White House did host a summit and several approaches were suggested including a state by state Red Flag law system to keep schools safe.

How do you legislate away hate that may turn deadly? You don’t but politicians and media must become introspective in this community of hate.

For more consideration is the recent item published by the LA Times. In part:

For two years, we’ve been studying the life histories of mass shooters in the United States for a project funded by the National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the U.S. Department of Justice. We’ve built a database dating back to 1966 of every mass shooter who shot and killed four or more people in a public place, and every shooting incident at schools, workplaces, and places of worship since 1999. We’ve interviewed incarcerated perpetrators and their families, shooting survivors and first responders. We’ve read media and social media, manifestos, suicide notes, trial transcripts and medical records.

Our goal has been to find new, data-driven pathways for preventing such shootings. Although we haven’t found that mass shooters are all alike, our data do reveal four commonalities among the perpetrators of nearly all the mass shootings we studied.

First, the vast majority of mass shooters in our study experienced early childhood trauma and exposure to violence at a young age. The nature of their exposure included parental suicide, physical or sexual abuse, neglect, domestic violence, and/or severe bullying. The trauma was often a precursor to mental health concerns, including depression, anxiety, thought disorders or suicidality.

Second, practically every mass shooter we studied had reached an identifiable crisis point in the weeks or months leading up to the shooting. They often had become angry and despondent because of a specific grievance. For workplace shooters, a change in job status was frequently the trigger. For shooters in other contexts, relationship rejection or loss often played a role. Such crises were, in many cases, communicated to others through a marked change in behavior, an expression of suicidal thoughts or plans, or specific threats of violence.

Third, most of the shooters had studied the actions of other shooters and sought validation for their motives. People in crisis have always existed. But in the age of 24-hour rolling news and social media, there are scripts to follow that promise notoriety in death. Societal fear and fascination with mass shootings partly drives the motivation to commit them. Hence, as we have seen in the last week, mass shootings tend to come in clusters. They are socially contagious. Perpetrators study other perpetrators and model their acts after previous shootings. Many are radicalized online in their search for validation from others that their will to murder is justified.

Fourth, the shooters all had the means to carry out their plans. Once someone decides life is no longer worth living and that murdering others would be a proper revenge, only means and opportunity stand in the way of another mass shooting. Is an appropriate shooting site accessible? Can the would-be shooter obtain firearms? In 80% of school shootings, perpetrators got their weapons from family members, according to our data. Workplace shooters tended to use handguns they legally owned. Other public shooters were more likely to acquire them illegally. Go here for the full article.

Venezuelan Shipwreck Defines Drug Route

The sinking of a small boat heading from Venezuela to Curaçao and the disappearance of all the migrants aboard suggest that drug trafficking groups are also controlling human smuggling routes in the region.

On June 7, the group of 32 migrants, along with three crew members, set sail from Punta de Aguide in Venezuela’s Falcón state, on the Caribbean coast. On June 11, the boat was was declared missing, and a month later, the whereabouts of it and its passengers remain unknown.

The disappearance was reported as a shipwreck, an increasingly common disaster in the Caribbean as Venezuelans resort to desperate measures to flee the country. So far this year, three shipwrecks involving over 80 migrants have been reported.

After the latest shipwreck, family members reported that all the migrants had been wearing life-jackets. Yet only one body has been recovered to date — that of Elio Ramones, identified in Curaçao on June 12. To the surprise of authorities, his corpse seemed fresh, suggesting that the man had died several days after the supposed shipwreck.

Oswaldo Rodríguez León, Falcon’s security secretary who is coordinating the search for the missing, said that “it is not possible for no trace to be found of the 32 people who disappeared in that shipwreck; the bodies should be floating if they were drowned. We must investigate [the fact] that pirates could have taken them.”

On July 11, two men were arrested for recruiting the migrants in their hometown of Vela de Coro, along Venezuela’s northern coast.

But the arrests have brought authorities no closer to finding the disappeared.
In June, survivors of a previous shipwreck exposed a human trafficking route used to transport vulnerable women and children from Venezuela to Trinidad and Tobago, where they were sold into the sex trade.

After the latest shipwreck, residents in Falcón told InSight Crime that human smuggling is used as a front for drug shipments to the Dutch Caribbean islands of Aruba, Bonaire and Curaçao, which are between 15 to 50 miles off the coast of Venezuela.

According to local sources, both cocaine and marijuana arrive overland and are stored in huts along the beaches of Falcón. It is then loaded onto small boats by night and shipped to neighboring islands under the guise of migrant transports, in quantities of up to 8,000 kilograms per day.

Although not officially corroborated, the locals’ claims are supported by recent large drug seizures on the Lara-Falcón highway, headed for the Falcón coast.

Mapa mostrando as ilhas ABC - Aruba, Bonaire e Curaçao e ...

Migrants are lured into the scheme by the low rates charged. The 32 missing people had reportedly paid $400 for the journey, compared to the standard rate of between $650 and $700.
In Vela de Coro, InSight Crime spoke to three families whose loved ones were aboard the shipwrecked boat and who are now missing. They said that following the disappearance they have begun their own investigations, including making inquiries with relatives on Curaçao. They claim that the missing boat was carrying a drug shipment to Curaçao and that the shipment did arrive, but 500 kilograms lighter than expected, giving rise to their belief that the migrants were kidnapped because the captain did not deliver the full drug shipment.

Full circle - Drugs trafficking in the Caribbean

The families have also begun searching hills near Punta de Aguide, where they believe the migrants were held before boarding the boats. Helicopters, however, are needed to comb over the mountainous territory largely controlled by drug traffickers.

Relatives of the missing migrants point to the inadequate official response as evidence of criminal complicity. Although the authorities were notified within a day of the disappearance, a search was not initiated until June 11, four days later.

Furthermore, authorities are alleged to have known of the voyage before the boat set sail. The family members who spoke with InSight Crime said that the migrants had intended to depart on June 6, but were intercepted by officials from the country’s criminal investigation unit (Cuerpo de Investigaciones Científicas, Penales y Criminalísticas – CICPC) who stole some of their belongings, including mobile phones, and took $1,000 from the captain. The migrants spent the night hiding in the woods before setting sail the following evening.

CICPC officials have also allegedly been involved in previous cases of predation on migrants, including the sex trafficking route to Trinidad and Tobago exposed in June.

This is not the first boatload of Venezuelan migrants to disappear. A boat vanished on May 16 in route to Trinidad and Tobago, and no corpses, wreckage or surviving passengers have been found. Hat tip to InSight for continued stellar investigations/reporting.

QAnon Among Others in the FBI Report

The FBI for the first time has identified fringe conspiracy theories as a domestic terrorist threat, according to a previously unpublicized document obtained by Yahoo News. (Read the document below.)

The FBI intelligence bulletin from the bureau’s Phoenix field office, dated May 30, 2019, describes “conspiracy theory-driven domestic extremists,” as a growing threat, and notes that it is the first such report to do so. It lists a number of arrests, including some that haven’t been publicized, related to violent incidents motivated by fringe beliefs.

The document specifically mentions QAnon, a shadowy network that believes in a deep state conspiracy against President Trump, and Pizzagate, the theory that a pedophile ring including Clinton associates was being run out of the basement of a Washington, D.C., pizza restaurant (which didn’t actually have a basement).

“The FBI assesses these conspiracy theories very likely will emerge, spread, and evolve in the modern information marketplace, occasionally driving both groups and individual extremists to carry out criminal or violent acts,” the document states. It also goes on to say the FBI believes conspiracy theory-driven extremists are likely to increase during the 2020 presidential election cycle.

The FBI said another factor driving the intensity of this threat is “the uncovering of real conspiracies or cover-ups involving illegal, harmful, or unconstitutional activities by government officials or leading political figures.” The FBI does not specify which political leaders or which cover-ups it was referring to.

President Trump is mentioned by name briefly in the latest FBI document, which notes that the origins of QAnon is the conspiratorial belief that “Q,” allegedly a government official, “posts classified information online to reveal a covert effort, led by President Trump, to dismantle a conspiracy involving ‘deep state’ actors and global elites allegedly engaged in an international child sex trafficking ring.”

This recent intelligence bulletin comes as the FBI is facing pressure to explain who it considers an extremist, and how the government prosecutes domestic terrorists. In recent weeks the FBI director has addressed domestic terrorism multiple times but did not publicly mention this new conspiracy theorist threat.

Christopher Wray, Trump’s FBI Director Pick, Is the Anti ...

The FBI is already under fire for its approach to domestic extremism. In a contentious hearing last week before the Senate Judiciary Committee, FBI Director Christopher Wray faced criticism from Democrats who said the bureau was not focusing enough on white supremacist violence. “The term ‘white supremacist,’ ‘white nationalist’ is not included in your statement to the committee when you talk about threats to America,” Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said. “There is a reference to racism, which I think probably was meant to include that, but nothing more specific.”
***

FBI Conspiracy Theory Redacted by Kelli R. Grant on Scribd


Wray told lawmakers the FBI had done away with separate categories for black identity extremists and white supremacists, and said the bureau was instead now focusing on “racially motivated” violence. But he added, “I will say that a majority of the domestic terrorism cases that we’ve investigated are motivated by some version of what you might call white supremacist violence.”

The FBI had faced mounting criticism for the term “black identity extremists,” after its use was revealed by Foreign Policy magazine in 2017. Critics pointed out that the term was an FBI invention based solely on race, since no group or even any specific individuals actually identify as black identity extremists.

In May, Michael C. McGarrity, the FBI’s assistant director of the counterterrorism division, told Congress the bureau now “classifies domestic terrorism threats into four main categories: racially motivated violent extremism, anti-government/anti-authority extremism, animal rights/environmental extremism, and abortion extremism,” a term the bureau uses to classify both pro-choice and anti-abortion extremists.

The new focus on conspiracy theorists appears to fall under the broader category of anti-government extremism. “This is the first FBI product examining the threat from conspiracy theory-driven domestic extremists and provides a baseline for future intelligence products,” the document states.

The new category is different in that it focuses not on racial motivations, but on violence based specifically on beliefs that, in the words of the FBI document, “attempt to explain events or circumstances as the result of a group of actors working in secret to benefit themselves at the expense of others” and are “usually at odds with official or prevailing explanations of events.”

The FBI acknowledges conspiracy theory-driven violence is not new, but says it’s gotten worse with advances in technology combined with an increasingly partisan political landscape in the lead-up to the 2020 presidential election. “The advent of the Internet and social media has enabled promoters of conspiracy theories to produce and share greater volumes of material via online platforms that larger audiences of consumers can quickly and easily access,” the document says.

The bulletin says it is intended to provide guidance and “inform discussions within law enforcement as they relate to potentially harmful conspiracy theories and domestic extremism.”

The FBI Phoenix field office referred Yahoo News to the bureau’s national press office, which provided a written statement.

“While our standard practice is to not comment on specific intelligence products, the FBI routinely shares information with our law enforcement partners in order to assist in protecting the communities they serve,” the FBI said.

In its statement, the FBI also said it can “never initiate an investigation based solely on First Amendment protected activity. As with all of our investigations, the FBI can never monitor a website or a social media platform without probable cause.”

The Department of Homeland Security, which has also been involved in monitoring domestic extremism, did not return or acknowledge emails and phone requests for comment.

While not all conspiracy theories are deadly, those identified in the FBI’s 15-page report led to either attempted or successfully carried-out violent attacks. For example, the Pizzagate conspiracy led a 28-year-old man to invade a Washington, D.C., restaurant to rescue the children he believed were being kept there, and fire an assault-style weapon inside.

The FBI document also cites an unnamed California man who was arrested on Dec. 19, 2018, after being found with what appeared to be bomb-making materials in his car. The man allegedly was planning “blow up a satanic temple monument” in the Capitol rotunda in Springfield, Ill., to “make Americans aware of Pizzagate and the New World Order, who were dismantling society,” the document says.

Historian David Garrow, the author of a Pulitzer Prize-winning biography of Martin Luther King Jr. who has worked extensively with FBI archives, raised doubts to Yahoo News about the memo. He says the FBI’s default assumption is that violence is motivated by ideological beliefs rather than mental illness. “The guy who shot up the pizza place in D.C.: Do we think of him as a right-wing activist, or insane?” Garrow asked.

Garrow was similarly critical of the FBI’s use of the term “black identity extremists” and related attempts to ascribe incidents like the 2016 shooting of six police officers in Baton Rouge, La., to black radicalism. He said the shooter, Gavin Long, had a history of mental health problems. “The bureau’s presumption — the mindset — is to see ideological motives where most of the rest of us see individual nuttiness,” he said.

Identifying conspiracy theories as a threat could be a political lightning rod, since President Trump has been accused of promulgating some of them, with his frequent references to a deep state and his praise in 2015 for Alex Jones, who runs the conspiracy site InfoWars. While the FBI intelligence bulletin does not mention Jones or InfoWars by name, it does mention some of the conspiracy theories frequently associated with the far-right radio host, in particular the concept of the New World Order.

Jones claimed the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, in which 26 children were killed, was a hoax, a false flag operation intended as a pretext for the government to seize or outlaw firearms. The families of a number of victims have sued Jones for defamation, saying his conspiracy-mongering contributed to death threats and online abuse they have received.

While Trump has never endorsed Sandy Hook denialism, he was almost up until the 2016 election the most high-profile promoter of the birther conspiracy that claimed former President Barack Obama was not born in the United States. He later dropped his claim, and deflected criticism by pointing the finger at Hillary Clinton. He said her campaign had given birth to the conspiracy, and Trump “finished it.”

There is no evidence that Clinton started the birther conspiracy.

Joe Uscinski, an associate professor of political science at the University of Miami, whose work on conspiracy theories is cited in the intelligence bulletin, said there’s no data suggesting conspiracy theories are any more widespread now than in the past. “There is absolutely no evidence that people are more conspiratorial now,” says Uscinski, after Yahoo News described the bulletin to him. “They may be, but there is not strong evidence showing this.”

It’s not that people are becoming more conspiratorial, says Uscinski, but conspiracies are simply getting more media attention.

“We are looking back at the past with very rosy hindsight to forget our beliefs, pre-internet, in JFK [assassination] conspiracy theories and Red scares. My gosh, we have conspiracy theories about the king [of England] written into the Declaration of Independence,” he said, referencing claims that the king was planning to establish tyranny over the American colonies.

It’s not that conspiracy theorists are growing in number, Uscinski argues, but that media coverage of those conspiracies has grown. “For most of the last 50 years, 60 to 80 percent of the country believe in some form of JFK conspiracy theory,” he said. “They’re obviously not all extremist.”

Conspiracy theories, including Russia’s role in creating and promoting them, attracted widespread attention during the 2016 presidential election when they crossed over from Internet chat groups to mainstream news coverage. Yahoo News’s “Conspiracyland” podcast recently revealed that Russia’s foreign intelligence service was the origin of a hoax report that tied the murder of Seth Rich, a Democratic National Committee staffer, to Hillary Clinton.

Washington police believe that Rich was killed in a botched robbery, and there is no proof that his murder had any political connections.

Among the violent conspiracy theories cited in the May FBI document is one involving a man who thought Transportation Security Administration agents were part of a New World Order. Another focused on the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), a government-funded facility in Alaska that has been linked to everything from death beams to mind control. The two men arrested in connection with HAARP were “stockpiling weapons, ammunition and other tactical gear in preparation to attack” the facility, believing it was being used “to control the weather and prevent humans from talking to God.”

Nate Snyder, who served as a Department of Homeland Security counterterrorism official during the Obama administration, said that the FBI appears to be applying the same radicalization analysis it employs against foreign terrorism, like the Islamic State group, which has recruited followers in the United States.

“The domestic violent extremists cited in the bulletin are using the same playbook that groups like ISIS and al-Qaida have used to inspire, recruit and carry out attacks,” said Snyder, after reviewing a copy of the bulletin provided by Yahoo News. “You put out a bulletin and say this is the content they’re looking at — and it’s some guy saying he’s a religious cleric or philosopher — and then you look at the content, videos on YouTube, etc., that they are pushing and show how people in the U.S. might be radicalized by that content.”

Though the FBI document focuses on ideological motivations, FBI Director Wray, in his testimony last week, asserted that the FBI is concerned only with violence, not people’s beliefs. The FBI doesn’t “investigate ideology, no matter how repugnant,” he told lawmakers. “We investigate violence. And any extremist ideology, when it turns to violence, we are all over it. … In the first three quarters of this year, we’ve had more domestic terrorism arrests than the prior year, and it’s about the same number of arrests as we have on the international terrorism side.”

Yet the proliferation of the extremist categories concerns Michael German, a former FBI agent and now a fellow with the Brennan Center for Justice’s Liberty & National Security program. “It’s part of the radicalization theory the FBI has promoted despite empirical studies that show it’s bogus,” he said.

German says this new category is a continuing part of FBI overreach. “They like the radicalization theory because it justifies mass surveillance,” he said. “If we know everyone who will do harm is coming from this particular community, mass surveillance is important. We keep broadening the number of communities we include in extremist categories.”

For Garrow, the historian, the FBI’s expansive definition has its roots in bureau paranoia that dates back decades. “I think it’s their starting point,” he said. “This goes all the way back to the Hoover era without question. They see ideology as a central motivating factor in human life, and they don’t see mental health issues as a major factor.”

Yet trying to label a specific belief system as prone to violence is problematic, he said.

“I don’t think most of us would do a good job in predicting what sort of wacky information could lead someone to violence, or not lead anyone to violence,” Garrow said. “Pizzagate would be a great example of that.”

 

When Russia Helps N Korea Cheat on Sanctions, What to Do

Primer: Do you wonder what Russia’s votes on the UNSC really do to help North Korea? Do you wonder about the 40,000+ North Korean slave laborers in Russia add to the North Korean economy each year? About $200 million. How about the Russian oil pipeline that goes through North Korea? What about the rail system between the two countries and how that helps North Korea skirt sanctions with illicit goods transportation? Then there is the alleged legitimate navy and fishing fleets between Russia and North Korea. Money? Or the weekly air flight service from Vladivostok to Pyongyang. Or how Russia provides internet service to North Korea in addition to China, known as SatGate and the fiber optic lines that run along the rail system. Check front companies in China, Singapore and the banking system known as Dalcombank or just flying cash twice a week.

Rajin, North Korea Image result for rajin north korea  Image result for rajin north korea

FDD: The Treasury Department on Monday sanctioned a North Korean trading company official for helping Pyongyang evade U.S. and UN sanctions through illicit activity in Vietnam. The designation, which arrived in the brief interval between two North Korean missile tests in less than a week, suggests that Washington understands the importance of investigating and disrupting North Korea’s extensive overseas illicit networks.

Treasury’s latest target is Kim Su Il, who works for a Vietnam-based trading company on behalf of North Korea’s Munitions Industry Department, which the U.S. and UN have both sanctioned. According to Treasury, Kim helped export UN-sanctioned goods such as anthracite coal, titanium ore concentrate, and other raw materials from North Korea to Vietnam. Both anthracite coal and titanium ore are among the top exports that fund the regime’s illicit activities. Treasury also found that Kim Su Il helped charter ships and export Vietnamese products to North Korea, as well as to China and other undisclosed countries.

Kim Su Il’s designation is a reminder that North Korea’s overseas networks continue to thrive despite sanctions. In January, The Wall Street Journalreported that up to six Chinese-owned vessels transported North Korean coal between North Korea and Vietnam throughout 2018. In March 2018, the UN Panel of Experts also found that North Korean coal shipments to Vietnam go as far back as January 2017 – eight months before the UN Security Council’s comprehensive coal ban on North Korea went into effect. This persistent trade affirms Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Marshall Billingslea’s assessment in 2017 that coal “has been the center of North Korea’s revenue generation” for many years.

In March 2019, the same UN Panel of Experts exposed North Korea’s numerous overseas illicit money-making schemes, which employ networks of front companies, North Korean government workers, and local banks. For example, in Malaysia, North Korea’s intelligence agency, the Reconnaissance General Bureau, operated two companies that provided revenue to Pyongyang: the Malaysia-Korea Partners Group and Global Communications.

The UN Panel also found that foreign governments were applying “insufficient scrutiny” on the activities of North Korea’s overseas banking and government representatives, thereby enabling these company networks to thrive. The lax monitoring has ultimately allowed Pyongyang’s representatives to conduct financial transactions across numerous borders. Chinese banks in particular have been key enablers of North Korea’s actions.

Treasury provided robust evidence of this lax oversight last month when it sanctioned the Russian Financial Society (RFS) for helping North Korea evade sanctions. This designation revealed how a U.S.-sanctioned North Korean banking representative in Moscow exploited local financial service providers, specifically RFS, to conduct business for sanctioned North Korean companies. The incident showed that designating only the North Korean nationals working abroad is not enough. Rather, Washington also should target the banks and financial institutions that allow North Korean government officials based overseas to thrive.

Treasury’s next steps therefore should focus on investigating Kim Su Il’s local network of companies, individuals, and banks. Closing these gaps in enforcement is an indispensable step for maximizing the impact of U.S. sanctions on North Korea.