Court Rules Iran Owes $1.4B Over Presumed Death of FBI Agent

Posted on October 6, 2020October 6, 2020 by Denise Simon

Levinson was originally with the Drug Enforcement Agency before moving to the FBI and later assigned to a special operation for the CIA. Levinson’s family received $2.5 million annuity from the CIA in order to stop a lawsuit revealing details of his work in Iran and to forestall any revelation of details regarding the arrangement between Levinson and the agency. Levinson had retired from the FBI in 1998 and had become self-employed as a private investigator; his specialty was Russian organized crime gangs, and he was even interviewed numerous times for television documentaries to discuss the topic. Both Levinson and the CIA analyst who hired him, Anne Jablonski, specialized in Russian organized crime and not Iranian issues.

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — A U.S. judge has ordered Iran to pay $1.45 billion to the family of a former FBI agent believed to have been kidnapped by the Islamic Republic while on an unauthorized CIA mission to an Iranian island in 2007.

The judgment this month comes after Robert Levinson’s family and the U.S. government now believe he died in the Iranian government’s custody, something long denied by Tehran, though officials over time have offered contradictory accounts about what happened to him on Kish Island.

Tensions remain high between the U.S. and Iran amid President Donald Trump’s maximalist pressure campaign over Tehran’s nuclear program. And though the U.S. and Iran haven’t had diplomatic relations since the aftermath of the 1979 U.S. Embassy hostage crisis in Tehran, America stills holds billions of dollars in frozen Iranian assets that could be used to pay Levinson’s family.

In a ruling dated Thursday, the U.S. District Court in Washington found Iran owed Levinson’s family $1.35 billion in punitive damages and $107 million in compensatory damages for his kidnapping. The court cited the case of Otto Warmbier, an American college student who died in 2017 shortly after being freed from captivity in North Korea, in deciding to award the massive amount of punitive damages to Levinson’s family.

“Iran’s conduct here is also unique, given that — astonishingly — it plucked a former FBI and DEA special agent from the face of the earth without warning, tortured him, held him captive for as long as 13 years, and to this day refuses to admit its responsibility,” the ruling by Judge Timothy J. Kelly said.

“And his wife and children, and their spouses and children — while keeping Levinson’s memory alive — have had to proceed with their lives without knowing his exact fate. These are surely acts worthy of the gravest condemnation,” the judge added.

Iranian state media and officials in Tehran did not immediately acknowledge the ruling in a case in which Iran offered no defense. Iran’s mission to the United Nations did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday from The Associated Press.

In a statement, Levinson’s family called the court’s award “the first step in the pursuit of justice.”

“Until now, Iran has faced no consequences for its actions,” the family said. “Judge Kelly’s decision won’t bring Bob home, but we hope that it will serve as a warning against further hostage taking by Iran.”

Levinson disappeared from Iran’s Kish Island on March 9, 2007. For years, U.S. officials would only say that Levinson, a meticulous FBI investigator credited with busting Russian and Italian mobsters, was working for a private firm on his trip.

In December 2013, the AP revealed Levinson in fact had been on a mission for CIA analysts who had no authority to run spy operations. Levinson’s family had received a $2.5 million annuity from the CIA in order to stop a lawsuit revealing details of his work, while the agency forced out three veteran analysts and disciplined seven others.

Voting is Protected Speech but so is Not Voting

Posted on October 1, 2020October 1, 2020 by Denise Simon

Primer: There are going to be countless legal challenges to vote results nationwide, it cannot be avoided. Just prepared for a mess larger than that of the Bush-Gore results which took 36 days.

A civil right is an enforceable right or privilege, which if interfered with by another gives rise to an action for injury.

Discrimination occurs when the civil rights of an individual are denied or interfered with because of the individual’s membership in a particular group or class. Various jurisdictions have enacted statutes to prevent discrimination based on a person’s race, sex, religion, age, previous condition of servitude, physical limitation, national origin, and in some instances sexual orientation.

Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

People often confuse civil rights and civil liberties. Civil rights refer to legal provisions that stem from notions of equality. Civil rights are not in the Bill of Rights; they deal with legal protections. For example, the right to vote is a civil right. A civil liberty, on the other hand, refers to personal freedoms protected by the Bill of Rights. For example, the First Amendment’s right to free speech is a civil liberty.

Read on however and give this a bit of critical thinking.

Free speech protected by the 1st Amendment has thousands of moving parts including voting or not voting. There are many times where free speech is not only challenged but removed as a civil right as noted in the case of a criminal conviction of a felony.

Wearing a t-shirt or a hat with a logo or slogan is free speech just as much as flying a flag at your home or not doing so.

Mandatory Voting Will Build Resentment, Not Democracy ...

Additional reading: Mandatory Voting Will Build Resentment, Not Democracy/ Fining non-voters would show that government is all about forcing people to do things just to make politicians happy.

So, when it comes to ballot harvesting, consider that forcing votes by turning in ballots for tabulation is against free speech. This all stems from voter rolls (databases) that are not audited, purged, corrected or amended. People move away, people die, people change names and people request ballots using phony names and addresses. Mass mailings of the entire database is not representative of quality and current data. Then there is the matter of ballot design that is challenged making it confusing for the voter or the matter of mistakes made in the comparisons of signatures on file to the actually submitted ballot. How about errors made in names and addresses in the mass mailings where it does not at all match yet the ballots are mailed? What about people tailing the Post Office and delivery personnel and grabbing ballots out of mail trays or slots or simply offering a stipend to fill out the ballot for the alleged voter on their behalf?

There is still the matter of voter ID which has yet to be resolved in many states.

But now we are hearing many other incidents of ballot malfunctions including 100,000 in New York.

Valerie Vazquez-Diaz, a spokesperson for the board, told CNN that 99,477 voters in Brooklyn were affected by an issue with the “oath” envelope for their absentee ballot.

The envelopes—which include the voter’s name, address and voter ID—were sent with the wrong name and address, a problem that was first reported Monday by confused voters, though its scope was unknown.

pic.twitter.com/G2j7xbEYgn

— NYCBoardOfElections (@BOENYC) September 29, 2020

Here too it is important to note that many candidate vote results come down to a mere few hundred votes where absentee ballots or provisional ballots come into question.

For the matter of not voting…this matter of ballot harvesting is forcing a name in many cases as a vote where otherwise there may not be a vote at all and that too is free speech. One has to ask is this a violation of the civil rights of an individual? Of course it is….perhaps a person is apathetic, disgusted or otherwise not engaged at all in any part of government affairs or policy? That is fine too under the 1st Amendment.

The media should really challenge the whole matter of civil rights violations and ballot harvesting.

Key Background

This error comes amid continued attacks on mail-in voting from President Trump, who has insisted—without evidence—that the Democrats will use mail-in voting, “a whole big scam,” to steal the 2020 election. News from last week that a “small number” of ballots in Pennsylvania had been discarded further fueled the president’s accusations of widespread “voter fraud.”

Yup, Hillary Concocted the Russia Scandal, BHO was Briefed on the Plot

Posted on September 29, 2020September 29, 2020 by Denise Simon

Hat tip to Sean Davis for his assessment, which has been reviewed and declassified by DNI John Ratcliffe. At some point, one of the debates will include this and then we will have fireworks. Frankly, this may not have been exclusively Hillary, you know she had help from say, Sid Blumenthal, John Podesta or Strobe Talbot. More to come for sure, as there are more hearings in the Senate.

Keep reading…..

Hillary Clinton is right about why she lost. But ...

*** Actual letter is found here.

BREAKING: On July 26, 2016, U.S. intel authorities learned that Russian intel knew of Hillary Clinton’s plans to cook up a scandal alleging that Trump was working with Russia. Obama was personally briefed on Russia’s knowledge of Clinton’s plans.

On September 7, 2016, U.S. intel officials sent an investigative referral to James Comey and Peter Strzok about Clinton’s election interference plan–and Russia’s knowledge of it. We now know the Steele dossier was entirely a product of Russian agents and intel officials.

Christopher Steele, the Clinton campaign subcontractor who compiled the dossier, was working for a sanctioned Russian oligarch. So was Fusion GPS. And we learned this week that the dossier’s “primary sub-source” was a Russian intel asset who was deemed a national security threat.

Today’s declassification confirms that from the beginning, the FBI knew its anti-Trump investigation was based entirely on Russian disinformation. Brennan and Comey were personally warned. They responded by fabricating evidence and defrauding the courts.

2009, A Refresher Course on Sheriff Joe Biden and the Stimulus Fraud

Posted on September 28, 2020September 28, 2020 by Denise Simon

February 23, 2009

President Barack Obama announced Vice President Joe Biden will oversee the Administration’s implementation of the Recovery Act’s provisions and the appointment of Earl Devaney as Chair of the Recovery Act Transparency and Accountability Board in a meeting with the Nation’s Governors this morning. The Vice President will meet regularly with key members of the Cabinet, Governors and Mayors to make sure their efforts are speedy and effective. He will also make regular, public reports to the President on implementation and those will be posted on Recovery.gov. The Chair of the Transparency and Accountability Board Earl Devaney will report to the Vice President.

“Beginning this week, Vice President Biden will meet regularly with key members of my cabinet to make sure our efforts are not just swift, but efficient and effective. He’ll also work closely with our nation’s Governors, and our Mayors, and everyone else involved in this effort, to keep things on track. The fact that I am asking the Vice President to personally lead this effort shows how important it is for our country and our future to get this right, and I thank him for his willingness to take on this critical task,” President Obama told a group of Governors this morning. “I am also proud to announce the appointment of Earl Devaney as Chair of the Recovery Act Transparency and Accountability Board. For nearly a decade as Inspector General at the Interior Department, Earl has doggedly pursued waste, fraud and mismanagement, and Joe and I can’t think of a more tenacious and efficient guardian of the hard-earned tax dollars the American people have entrusted us to wisely invest.”

$800 BILLION

Missing in Action: Stimulus Sheriff Joe Biden

***

Then in 2011 as reported:

The Congressional Budget Office says the stimulus package will cost $43 billion more than estimated. The stimulus package is full of waste, fraud, and abuse. As Michelle Malkin notes:

Last week, the Treasury Department inspector general found that the tax police have failed to prevent fraud in the stimulus law’s energy tax credit program. Some $6 billion in stimulus energy credits for homeowners have been claimed — but the inspector general’s audit found that 30 percent of credit-claimers had no record of homeownership. The recipients included prisoners and minors. “I am troubled by the IRS’s continued failure to develop appropriate verification methods for distributing Recovery Act credits,” the Treasury Inspector watchdog said. Moreover, when the IRS wasn’t falling down on its job policing outside fraud, its own workers were committing their own stimulus fraud — by cheating the system and claiming a first-time homebuyer tax credit included in the 2008 and 2009 economic stimulus packages. At least 128 IRS employees claimed the credit, according to a recent Treasury Department audit, yet weren’t first-time buyers or violated other basic eligibility criteria.

Moreover, the stimulus package has also “redistributed wealth to prison inmates, flaky researchers, social justice boondoggles, infrastructure to nowhere, foreign companies, dead people and ghost congressional districts — not to mention $20 million in chump change to pay for campaign-style stimulus-hyping road signs across the country emblazoned with the shovel-ready logo.” Only a small fraction of the stimulus package went to infrastructure spending, and maintenance-of-effort provisions elsewhere in the stimulus package required states to maintain or increase welfare spending, resulting in cash-strapped states cutting back their own spending on useful things like transportation. As a result, Investor’s Business Daily noted, economists “found that despite the influx of all that federal money, highway construction jobs actually plunged by nearly 70,000 between 2008 and 2010.” The $800 billion stimulus package was purged of most investments in roads and bridges, and filled instead with welfare and social spending, out of political correctness, after feminist leaders complained that building and repairing roads and bridges would put unemployed blue-collar men to work, rather than women. “A recent Associated Press story reports: ‘Stimulus Funds Go to Social Programs Over ‘Shovel-ready’ Projects.’ A team of six AP reporters who have been tracking the funds find that the $300 billion sent to the states is being used mainly for health care, education, unemployment benefits, food stamps, and other social services.” Or, as another AP report put it, “Stimulus Aid Favors Welfare, Not Work, Programs.” Two economics professors recently estimated that the stimulus had actually wiped out 550,000 jobs. The stimulus package also repealed welfare reform, as Slate’s Mickey Kaus and the Heritage Foundation have noted. Obama ran campaign ads claiming to support welfare reform, even though he had actually fought against meaningful welfare reform as an Illinois legislator. This claim was as dishonest as his claim that he would enact a “net spending cut” (which he flouted as soon as he took office) and that America would undergo an “irreversible decline” if the stimulus package wasn’t enacted (when even the CBO admitted that the stimulus will actually shrink the economy over the long run).

***

Then in 2012:

According to Investor’s Business Daily this week, a new analysis by Ohio State University economics professor Bill Dupor reported that “(m)ore than three-quarters of the jobs created or saved by President Obama’s economic stimulus in the first year were in government.”

Dupor and another colleague had earlier concluded that the porkulus was a predictable jobs-killer that crowded out non-government jobs with make-work public jobs and programs. Indeed, the massive wealth redistribution scheme “destroyed/forestalled roughly one million private sector jobs” by siphoning tax dollars “to offset state revenue shortfalls and Medicaid increases rather than boost private sector employment.”

Will this Keynesian wreckage come up during Thursday night’s vice presidential debate? It should be a centerpiece of domestic policy discussion. Nowhere is the gulf between Obama/Biden rhetoric and reality on jobs wider.

Remember: Obama’s Ivy League eggheads behind the stimulus promised that “(m)ore than 90 percent of the jobs created are likely to be in the private sector.” These are the same feckless economic advisers who infamously vowed that the stimulus would keep unemployment below 8 percent — and that unemployment would drop below 6 percent sometime this year.

Sheriff Joe rebuked the “naysayers” who decried the behemoth stimulus program’s waste, fraud and abuse. “You know what? They were wrong,” he crowed.

But Biden was radio silent about the nearly 4,000 stimulus recipients who received $24 billion in Recovery Act funds — while owing more than $750 million in unpaid corporate, payroll and other taxes. (Cash for Tax Cheats, anyone?)

He had nothing to say about the $6 billion in stimulus energy credits for homeowners that went to nearly a third of credit-claimers who had no record of homeownership, including minors and prisoners.

And the $530 million dumped into the profligate Detroit public schools for laptops and other computer equipment that have had little, if any, measurable academic benefits.

And the whopping $6.7 million cost per job under the $50 billion stimulus-funded green energy loan program — which funded politically connected but now bankrupt solar firms Solyndra ($535 million), Abound Solar ($400 million), Beacon Power ($43 million), A123 ($250 million) and Ener1 ($119 million). (The con game of just Solyndra for extra credit reading)

And the $1 million in stimulus cash that went to Big Bird and Sesame Street “to promote healthy eating,” which created a theoretical “1.47” jobs. (As Sean Higgins of The Examiner noted, “(T)hat comes out to about $726,000 per job created.”)

And the hundreds of millions in stimulus money steered to General Services Administrations junkets in Las Vegas and Hawaii, ghost congressional districts, dead people, infrastructure to nowhere and ubiquitous stimulus propaganda road signs stamped with the shovel-ready logo.

Of course, there’s no example of unfettered stimulus squandering more fitting than the one named after Keystone Fiscal Kop Joe Biden himself. Government-funded Amtrak’s Wilmington, Del., station raked in $20 million in “recovery” money after heavy personal lobbying by the state’s most prominent customer and cheerleader. In return, the station (which came in $6 million over budget, according to The Washington Times) renamed its facility after Biden.

Bloated costs. Crony political narcissism. Glaring conflicts of interest. Monumental waste. This is the Obama/Biden stimulus legacy bequeathed to our children and their grandchildren. Sheriff Joe and his plundering boss need to be run out of town on a rail. More here.

Trump’s EO Protects Vulnerable Newborn and Infant Children

Posted on September 28, 2020September 28, 2020 by Denise Simon

One would have to look far and wide to see where media reported this. But Planned Parenthood did respond.

Planned Parenthood: The Bible Says Nothing About Abortion ...

Washington, D.C. — Today, the Clergy Advocacy Board of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America issued the following statement on Donald Trump’s new executive order, which he announced earlier this week at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast and released last night:

“As clergy, people invite us into their lives when the unexpected arises. But in these times of overheated political rhetoric, we must clarify: politicians are creating a false narrative to score political points. We are clergy to people facing real-life health crises and we know this is not how medical care works. The situation this executive order pretends to address simply does not happen, but the cruel stigma it creates for those seeking abortions is very real.

“Our experience teaches, first and foremost, to avoid judging those who would seek an abortion, no matter the reason. When we are called upon to provide prayer, counsel, and support, we see that every pregnancy is different, and that pregnancy must not be taken for granted, especially in those circumstances when something goes horribly wrong.

“We realize that many people’s faith will influence their decisions. We underscore the importance of allowing people to honor their differing faith teachings and personal conscience in these most trying and intimate moments of life. We respect these heartfelt personal decisions.

“Meanwhile, we acknowledge that people disagree about abortion. Yet we underscore the importance of ensuring that everyone has access to high quality health care throughout their pregnancy. Health care providers and their patients need all of their options.

“As religious leaders, we believe that God created human beings with the capacity to make wise decisions that direct their personal, private lives. We believe that each person deserves access to quality health care and must be spared from unwanted interference by politicians and hostile rhetoric.

“We walk in no one’s shoes but our own, and we would all be wise to react with compassion for every pregnant person and their loved ones who face such an exceptional and sorrowful situation.”

Background on the Planned Parenthood Federation of America Clergy Advocacy Board:

Building on the long history of faith leaders taking an active role in supporting reproductive health care, the Clergy Advocacy Board has been working with Planned Parenthood at the national and state levels to further the goal of full reproductive rights and freedom for all people for more than two decades. Its members, who are dedicated clergy and faith leaders from different denominations and communities throughout the U.S., lead a national effort to increase public awareness of the theological and moral basis for advocating reproductive health.

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Purpose. Every infant born alive, no matter the circumstances of his or her birth, has the same dignity and the same rights as every other individual and is entitled to the same protections under Federal law. Such laws include the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), 42 U.S.C. 1395dd, which guarantees, in hospitals that have an emergency department, each individual’s right to an appropriate medical screening examination and to either stabilizing treatment or an appropriate transfer. They also include section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (Rehab Act), 29 U.S.C. 794, which prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities by programs and activities receiving Federal funding. In addition, the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, 1 U.S.C. 8, makes clear that all infants born alive are individuals for purposes of these and other Federal laws and are therefore afforded the same legal protections as any other person. Together, these laws help protect infants born alive from discrimination in the provision of medical treatment, including infants who require emergency medical treatment, who are premature, or who are born with disabilities. Such infants are entitled to meaningful and non-discriminatory access to medical examination and services, with the consent of a parent or guardian, when they present at hospitals receiving Federal funds.

Despite these laws, some hospitals refuse the required medical screening examination and stabilizing treatment or otherwise do not provide potentially lifesaving medical treatment to extremely premature or disabled infants, even when parents plead for such treatment. Hospitals might refuse to provide treatment to extremely premature infants — born alive before 24 weeks of gestation — because they believe these infants may not survive, may have to live with long-term disabilities, or may have a quality-of-life deemed to be inadequate. Active treatment of extremely premature infants has, however, been shown to improve their survival rates. And the denial of such treatment, or discouragement of parents from seeking such treatment for their children, devalues the lives of these children and may violate Federal law.

Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to recognize the human dignity and inherent worth of every newborn or other infant child, regardless of prematurity or disability, and to ensure for each child due protection under the law.

Sec. 3. (a) The Secretary of Health and Human Services (Secretary) shall ensure that individuals responsible for all programs and activities under his jurisdiction that receive Federal funding are aware of their obligations toward infants, including premature infants or infants with disabilities, who have an emergency medical condition in need of stabilizing treatment, under EMTALA and section 504 of the Rehab Act, as interpreted consistent with the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act. In particular, the Secretary shall ensure that individuals responsible for such programs and activities are aware that they are not excused from complying with these obligations, including the obligation to provide an appropriate medical screening examination and stabilizing treatment or transfer, when extremely premature infants are born alive or infants are born with disabilities. The Secretary shall also ensure that individuals responsible for such programs and activities are aware that they may not unlawfully discourage parents from seeking medical treatment for their infant child solely because of their infant child’s disability. The Secretary shall further ensure that individuals responsible for such programs and activities are aware of their obligations to provide stabilizing treatment that will allow the infant patients to be transferred to a more suitable facility if appropriate treatment is not possible at the initial location.

(b) The Secretary shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, ensure that Federal funding disbursed by the Department of Health and Human Services is expended in full compliance with EMTALA and section 504 of the Rehab Act, as interpreted consistent with the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, as reflected in the policy set forth in section 2 of this order.

(i) The Secretary shall, as appropriate and to the fullest extent permitted by law, investigate complaints of violations of applicable Federal laws with respect to infants born alive, including infants who have an emergency medical condition in need of stabilizing treatment or infants with disabilities whose parents seek medical treatment for their infants. The Secretary shall also clarify, in an easily understandable format, the process by which parents and hospital staff may submit such complaints for investigation under applicable Federal laws.

(ii) The Secretary shall take all appropriate enforcement action against individuals and organizations found through investigation to have violated applicable Federal laws, up to and including terminating Federal funding for non-compliant programs and activities.

(c) The Secretary shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, prioritize the allocation of Department of Health and Human Services discretionary grant funding and National Institutes of Health research dollars for programs and activities conducting research to develop treatments that may improve survival — especially survival without impairment — of infants born alive, including premature infants or infants with disabilities, who have an emergency medical condition in need of stabilizing treatment.

(d) The Secretary shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, prioritize the allocation of Department of Health and Human Services discretionary grant funding to programs and activities, including hospitals, that provide training to medical personnel regarding the provision of life-saving medical treatment to all infants born alive, including premature infants or infants with disabilities, who have an emergency medical condition in need of stabilizing treatment.

(e) The Secretary shall, as necessary and consistent with applicable law, issue such regulations or guidance as may be necessary to implement this order.

Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

Category Archives: The Denise Simon Experience