Category Archives: U.S. Constitution

Illegal Immigrant Children in US Gangs and Slavery

Posted on by

Unaccompanied minors swelling ranks of American gangs, say experts

FNC: surge of unaccompanied children coming across the southern border could be swelling the ranks of one of America’s most dangerous gangs, either as fresh recruits or hardened sleepers, according to federal authorities.

Some 227,149 unaccompanied children have been apprehended at the border over the last six years, according to the U.S. Border Patrol. They remain in federal custody until a sponsor can be located, at which time they are often sent to communities where they are ripe for recruitment by Latin gangs such as the infamous MS-13.

“Our safety standards have increased,” Andrea Helling, spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, told FoxNews.com. “In the last few months screening procedures of children and sponsors has increased in their intensity which we hadn’t done previously.”

Federal law requires the Department of Homeland Security transfer children under 18 to the custody of Helling’s agency until they are released to an appropriate sponsor, usually a relative, while their immigration cases are adjudicated. Some observers say that, at the least, the process sends a steady stream of loosely supervised youths lacking in language and coping skills right into the waiting arms of criminal gangs. At worst, the unaccompanied minors were already initiated into the gangs before they arrived at the border.

MS-13 is believed to be among the largest street gangs on New York’s Long Island, and more than 250 members have been convicted on federal felony charges since 2003. Federal prosecutors there have pinned more than 20 murders on the violent gang.

Meanwhile, over the last year, Long Island has received 2,093 unaccompanied children, and between October 2013 and July 2016, all of New York received 12,478 children from Central America. The overwhelming majority of the kids are not criminals and likely have competent sponsors. But some are.

In June 2015, MS-13 members and El Salvadoran immigrants Jose Cornejo, 17, Bryan Larios, 18 and Joel Escobar, 17, all of Brentwood, N.Y. were charged with the brutal rape of a 16 year-old girl on a local golf course.

Earlier this week, Joshua Guzman, 15, was shot and killed in the Long Island city of Hempstead. While not an unaccompanied immigrant, the boy’s father, Raul Guzman, told Newsday his son was under pressure to join a gang. Police believe his murder may be related.

“We’re looking at the possibility,” said Lt. Richard LeBrun, spokesman, Nassau County Police Department, that Guzman’s murder could be gang related.

MS-13 has a foothold in numerous other communities, where unaccompanied minors are being sent. Texas, which has seen a spike in MS-13 crime has received 15,999 over the same period. The 2015 Texas Department of Public Safety Gang Threat Assessment found MS-13 boasts some 800 members, and authorities explicitly blamed the flood of unaccompanied children being placed in the state.

“The influx of illegal alien gang members crossing the border into Texas in 2014, along with reports of extremely violent murders committed by its members in the Houston area, positions the gang as one of the most significant gang threats in the state for this upcoming year,” the report stated.

Other areas that have seen an influx in MS-13 crime are Maryland, Texas, and Virginia. Fairfax County, Va. has seen a 160 percent increase in MS-13 related incidents through April compared to the previous year.

Helling said HHS is looking more closely at the sponsors who step forward to take custody of the minors.

“Our responsibility is providing a safe place for these children,” she said.

She said that high-risk children who may have been identified as gang members by DHS would likely be placed in either a staff secure or secure-juvenile detention facility. But even if they are not gang members when they come into the U.S., the risk remains that they could fall prey to recruitment efforts.

****

The other part of the story, the dark side of America:

Human Trafficking—Exploitation of Illegal Aliens

ISSUE BRIEF | AUGUST 2016

FairUS.org: The large and persistent influx of illegal aliens contributes to an environment of vulnerability and abuse. Wherever the law fails to hold people accountable, crime will flourish. The federal government’s failure to effectively address the illegal alien dilemma creates and perpetuates an environment in which exploitation runs rampant.

It is estimated that 17,000 to 19,0001 foreign nationals are trafficked into the United States each year. Trafficking is the recruitment and possible transport of persons within or across boundaries by force, fraud, or deception for the purpose of exploiting them economically. Victims are lured with false promises of good jobs and better lives, and then forced to work under brutal and inhuman conditions. Victims of trafficking are exploited for purposes of commercial sex, including prostitution, stripping, pornography live-sex shows and other acts. However, trafficking also takes place as labor exploitation, including domestic servitude, sweatshop factories, agricultural work and more. After drug dealing, human trafficking is tied with the illegal arms industry as the second largest criminal industry in the world today, and it is the fastest growing.

While anyone can become a victim of trafficking, illegal aliens are highly vulnerable to being trafficked due to a combination of factors, including lack of legal status and protections, limited language skills and employment options, poverty and immigration-related debts, and social isolation. They are often victimized by traffickers from a similar ethnic or national background, on whom they may be dependent for employment or support in the foreign country.

The information below, taken from news and government sources, demonstrates the prevalence of human trafficking in the United States and the precarious nature many illegal aliens face. American immigrants seek opportunities far better than these nightmares, but often fall victim to a flawed immigration enforcement system. Human trafficking violates the promise that every person in the United States is guaranteed basic human rights. A critical strategy in ending human trafficking is better enforcement of our immigration laws and improved federal-local cooperation in law enforcement.

Examples of Human Trafficking in the United States

    • June 2016 — Aroldo Castillo- Serrano was sentenced to more than 15 years in prison for his part in smuggling Guatemalan workers, including minors, and making them work 12 hour days. They were forced to live in cramped conditions and were made to pay off a significant debt incurred by Castillo-Serrano. Ana Angelica Pedro Juan was also sentenced to 10 years in prison for her part in the operation.
    • January 2015 — Rafael Alberto Cardena-Sosa was sentenced to serve 15 years in prison for participating in a family run sex trafficking organization. His family member, Carmen Cadena, pleaded guilty and faces a maximum sentence of five years in prison. The two family members are responsible for luring young women and girls from Mexico and illegally smuggling them into the United States. They then imposed a smuggling debt and forced them into prostitution with physical force and death threats.
    • January 2015—Three brothers, Jorge, Ricardo and Leonel Estrada-Tepal pled guilty to sex trafficking charges. The Mexican nationals illegally transported females from Mexico to the United States and forced them to work as prostitutes in various cities. They face sentences ranging from a minimum of ten years behind bars to a maximum of life in prison.
    • September 2014—Charles Marquez was sentenced to life in federal prison for recruiting women in Mexico by placing an advertisement in Ciudad Juarez offering jobs in the United States. Once recruited, he harbored them in motels and forced them into prostitution. He worked with Martha Jimenez Sanchez who faces up to ten years in prison after pleading guilty. Sanchez was released on bond and is awaiting sentencing.
    • May 2013 — German Rolando Vicente-Sapon, an illegal alien, was sentenced to more than 15 years in federal prison for illegally smuggling and trafficking a 14 year old Guatemalan girl to Chattanooga, TN for $2,000 and coercing her into having sex. He will be deported after completing his prison sentence.
    • March 2013 — Susan Lee Gross was sentenced to 30 months in prison for her role in using a massage parlor as a front for a prostitution house. She transported women to work as prostitutes at her parlor and laundered the proceeds. Gross made them travel to various places around the United States. The women were originally from Korea and some were unlawfully present in the United States. Most lacked language and employment skills.
    • March 2013 — Moonseop Kim, who was illegally in the country, pleaded guilty to illegally transporting women from South Korea into Mississippi for financial gain with a sex trafficking organization. He posted an internet ad offering Korean female escort services. He is facing a maximum penalty of 10 years in federal prison as well as a deportation following the completion of his prison term.
    • July 2012 — Omelyan Botsvynyuk and Stepan Botsvynyuk were convicted of recruiting workers from Ukraine and forcing them to work through physical violence and threats of sexual assault. The victims never received compensation, but were rather instructed to work until their debts, ranging from $10,000 to $50,000, were paid off. They told victims that their families would be kidnapped and forced into prostitution if anyone attempted to escape. The two brothers were found guilty and received sentences of life plus 20 years in prison and 20 years.
    • October 2011 — Edk Kenit and Choimina Lukas pleaded guilty to document servitude and labor trafficking. The Micronesian couple recruited the victim from their home country to become their domestic servant. When she arrived, the couple took her passport in order to compel the victim to work for them. The couple prevented the victim from having friends, going out of the house or participating in social gatherings.
  • January 2011 — Lucinda Lyons Shackleford was indicted on charges of forced labor and document servitude (The withholding of an individual’s legal documents). He promised to take care of the victim after placement from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Family Reunification Program, but instead forced him to engage in various types of labor. Shackleford failed to provide him with adequate food or any form of payment for his labor.

Endnotes

  1. Shandra Woworuntu, “My life as a sex-trafficking victim,” BBC News, March, 2016, ; Trafficking in Persons Report, 2007, U.S. Department of State.

Benghazi: Getting Advanced Questions from Hillary to Senator

Posted on by

This is actually a procedure where witnesses are often given advanced notices on questions or where the legislators on the committees reach out early setting a scripted stage for congressional testimony. Sadly, the manipulation is common and Hillary’s testimony on Benghazi is part of this theater.

What is interesting is a conservative group had to sue to get these emails and they were not originally turned over in any form including subpoenas by Congress. Meanwhile, Jason Chaffetz, Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has advanced his mission now to include obstruction of justice and here.

‘We wired it’: Emails suggest Clinton aide stage-managed Benghazi hearing questions

FNC:Newly released emails suggest a senior Hillary Clinton aide stage-managed her first hearing on the Benghazi terrorist attack by feeding specific topics Clinton wanted to address to Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez, who at the time was acting chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.

“We wired it that Menendez would provide an opportunity to address two topics we needed to debunk (her actions/whereabouts on 9/11, and these email from Chris Stevens about moving locations,)” Clinton media gatekeeper Philippe Reines wrote to Chelsea Clinton the morning of the Jan. 23, 2013 hearing.

Click here to read the emails

Right out of the gate, the first hearing question from Menendez that day covered both topics referenced by Reines.

Menendez asked for Clinton’s “insights on the decision-making process regarding the location of the Mission.” The senator added, “can you also in your response, you touched upon it in your opening statement, but what actions were you and your staff taking the night of September 11 and into September 12?”

The then-secretary of state had an answer on both fronts. She told the committee that “[Ambassador] Chris [Stevens] was committed to not only being in Benghazi but to the location,” and that on the night of the attack, “I was notified of the attack shortly after 4:00 p.m. Over the following hours, we were in continuous meetings and conversations both within the department with our team in Tripoli, with the interagency and internationally.”

Stevens was among four Americans killed in the attack.

The emails were obtained by the group Citizens United as part of its ongoing Freedom of Information Act request to the State Department for emails from Chelsea Clinton and Hillary Clinton’s closest aides.

“This email chain provides a rare behind the scenes look at which Benghazi-related issues the Clinton camp had concerns about going into Secretary Clinton’s January 2013 testimony on Capitol Hill, and what they had apparently plotted out beforehand with a Democrat committee member to deal with those concerns,” Citizens United said in a statement. “Citizens United will continue to release all new Benghazi emails we receive through our FOIA lawsuits as they come in — the American people have a right to know the full picture.”

Fox News asked the Clinton campaign as well as Menendez’s office if they coordinated before the 2013 Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing; what was meant by the term “wired;” and how the email exchange was consistent with the principle of independent congressional oversight. There was no immediate response from either.

In 2013, the New Jersey senator — who is now facing federal public corruption charges — at the time of the hearing was about to become chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, replacing John Kerry who was in line to replace Hillary Clinton as secretary of state. Menendez has denied any wrongdoing.

A previous release of emails from a separate FOIA action showed that on the night of the attack, Clinton told her daughter, who used the email pseudonym Diane Reynolds on clintonemail.com, that the attacks were the work of an “Al Queda-like group” – with no mention of an obscure anti-Islam video Clinton publicly linked to the 2012 terrorist attack. Chelsea Clinton uses the same pseudonym in the Menendez email.

Reines is a founding member of the Clinton-aligned consulting group Beacon Global Strategies. The online bios for its founders and managing director suggest no group knows more about the Benghazi terrorist attack and the Obama administration’s response.

One of its senior counselors is former CIA Acting Director Mike Morell, who heavily edited the controversial Benghazi talking points, which helped establish the administration’s initial flawed narrative about the attack. Morell recently endorsed Clinton to the New York Times, but later was criticized for not fully disclosing his relationship to Beacon.

In a follow up Q-and-A with the Times, Morell wrote: “Among the many things I do in my post-government life — teaching and writing, serving on corporate boards, speaking publicly on national security issues — is work with Beacon Global Strategies, a firm that has prioritized nonpartisanship. The firm’s advisory board — composed of appointees of both Republican and Democratic presidents, as well as career military officers — make that priority clear. It all stems from a strong and shared belief that our national security is paramount and needs to be devoid of partisan politics.”

Catherine Herridge is an award-winning Chief Intelligence correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC) based in Washington, D.C. She covers intelligence, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security.

****

 

US Attorney for District of Columbia Letter by Washington Examiner on Scribd

Conditions at the Border and the Cost of the Wall

Posted on by

Millions per mile for the border wall and defined by the General Accounting Office.

 BizPacReview

Mexico issuing transit visas to African migrants flocking to U.S.-Mexico border

MEXICO CITY (AP) –  Mexican immigration authorities say 424 migrants from African countries arrived at the southern state of Chiapas over two days last week.

The National Immigration Institute said Tuesday that it has issued them 20-day transit visas that will allow the migrants to reach the U.S.-Mexico border, where they plan to request asylum.

Officials call it an unusual surge and say most of the migrants first went to Brazil or Ecuador to start their journey through Latin America.

Most of the Africans presented themselves voluntarily to immigration officials in the Chiapas town of Tapachula. They did not specify their nationalities.

Immigration support staff in Tijuana has been aiding migrants from the Congo, Somalia and Ghana to arrive at the U.S. port of entry at San Isidro.

Meanwhile:

Shootouts in Mexico border city kill 11, including bystander

ABCNews: Two highway shootouts between soldiers and suspected drug gang members in a northern border city resulted in 11 dead Saturday, including a bystander caught in the crossfire, Mexican authorities reported.

The violence in Nuevo Laredo, across from Laredo, Texas, prompted the temporary closure of the highway, which is a major artery for travel and commerce between the United States and Mexico.

The Tamaulipas state government said in a statement that the armed confrontations began early Saturday when troops killed eight suspected criminals on the highway. Soldiers seized a truck and high-caliber weapons, it said.

An hour later another shootout broke out nearby in which two suspects were killed, along with a woman who was traveling in her car, authorities said.

Nuevo Laredo Mayor Carlos Canturosas said Saturday night via Facebook that the highway, which handles nearly half of the export-import cargo between Mexico and the United States, had reopened.

Nuevo Laredo has experienced high violence rates as rival factions of the Zetas drug cartel fight for control of the area.

****

In part from KGW:

Every appropriations bill has included money to secure the border. So much so that funding increased from $1.5 billion in 2005 to $2.3 billion in 2007 — eventually increasing to $3.8 billion in the 2015 fiscal year.

In 2013, Congress again tried to pass immigration reform. Again the effort failed. The border security proposals of that so-called “Gang of Eight” bill would have increased dramatically, doubling the number of full-time border patrol agents to more than 38,400. It also would have added to the construction of a physical border, including double fencing. And it would have added to the amount of virtual security like drones and mobile surveillance.

That bill would have set aside a whopping $46.3 billion over ten years to move toward the more militarized border. But with the federal government now spending nearly $4 billion per year on border security, it’s not much less than what the Gang of Eight would have hoped. Read more here.

From DHS:

Border Security Overview

Protecting our borders from the illegal movement of weapons, drugs, contraband, and people, while promoting lawful entry and exit, is essential to homeland security, economic prosperity, and national sovereignty.

Protecting Our Borders

America shares 7,000 miles of land border with Canada and Mexico, as well as rivers, lakes and coastal waters around the country. These borders are vital economic gateways that account for trillions of dollars in trade and travel each year. They are also home to some of our nation’s largest – and safest – cities and communities. Protecting our borders from the illegal movement of weapons, drugs, contraband, and people, while promoting lawful entry and exit, is essential to homeland security, economic prosperity, and national sovereignty.

Creating a Safer Border Environment

DHS works to secure our borders through the deployment of personnel, technology, and infrastructure; as well as working closely with our neighbors in Canada and Mexico, and our many federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial partners.

CBP Border Patrol agents, agriculture specialists, Air and Marine agents, and officers guard America’s front lines. These men and women prevent terrorists and their weapons from entering the United States while continuing their mission of seizing contraband and apprehending criminals and others who illegally attempt to enter the United States.

Through increases in Border Patrol staffing; construction of new infrastructure and fencing; use of advanced technology—including sensors, radar, and aerial assets –investments to modernize the ports of entry; and stronger partnerships and information sharing, we are creating a safer, more secure, and more efficient border environment.

Making Travel Faster and the Border Safer

 

 

Yup, More Hillary Emails, Bigger Violations Surface

Posted on by

Another day of CSS….Clinton Saturation Syndrome…

Judicial Watch: New Abedin Emails Reveal Top Clinton Foundation Executive Doug Band Sought Diplomatic Passport from Clinton State Department

Abedin responded to Band request: ‘Ok will figure it out’

Emails also reveal Bill Clinton/Doug Band Sought State Department Favors for Foundation supporters Paul Liveris, Chris Ruddy, and Lynn de Rothschild

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released 510 pages of new State Department documents, including a 2009 request by Clinton Foundation executive Doug Band for diplomatic passports for himself and an associate.  Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s aide Abedin responded to Band’s request positively, saying, “Ok will figure it out.”  The emails show Hillary Clinton forwarding classified information to Abedin’s unsecured, non-state.gov account. The emails also show Bill Clinton sought a meeting with Mrs. Clinton for a major Clinton donor with State Department officials and Hillary Clinton herself pushed for a joint event with the Clinton Global Initiative.  Band also pushed for and obtained special help from Abedin for seven-figure Clinton Foundation donor Chris Ruddy, of Newsmax.com.

Although an exchange sent from Sidney Blumenthal to Hillary Clinton concerning the “disastrous nature of the Obama trip” and the U.S. being “totally out of the loop in Berlin – no ambassador” with the expectation that “Germans and Russians will now cut their own separate deals on energy, regional security, etc….” had previously published by the State Department, it was unknown until now that Clinton forwarded this exchange containing classified information that was redacted for security reasons to Abedin’s unsecure non-state.gov account

The new documents included 37 Hillary Clinton email exchanges not previously turned over to the State Department, bringing the known total to date of such emails uncovered by Judicial Watch to 228 of new Clinton emails (not part of the 55,000 pages of emails that Clinton turned over to the State Department).  These records further appear to contradict statements by Clinton that, “as far as she knew,” all of her government emails were turned over to the State Department.

The Band request for a special diplomatic passport for himself and his associates – an unidentified “JD” and apparently Justin Cooper, formerly a key member of Bill Clinton’s personal office and the Clinton Foundation who has been linked to registration documents for and the shutting down of the email server at the center of Mrs. Clinton’s State Department emails controversy.

 

The Band-Abedin exchange went as follows:

From: Doug Band

To: Huma Abedin

Sent: Jul 27, 2009 10:32 AM

Subject:

Need get me/ justy and jd dip passports

We had them years ago but they lapsed and we didn’t bother getting them

From: Huma Abedin [[email protected]]

Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 10:38:39 PM

To: Doug Band

Subject: Re:

Ok will figure it out

The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations strictly limits the granting of diplomatic passports to members of the Foreign Service, their family members, or those working on U.S. government contracts. According to 22 CFR 51.3:

A diplomatic passport is issued to a Foreign Service officer or to a person having diplomatic status or comparable status because he or she is traveling abroad to carry out diplomatic duties on behalf of the U.S. Government. When authorized by the Department, spouses and family members of such persons may be issued diplomatic passports. When authorized by the Department, a diplomatic passport may be issued to a U.S. Government contractor if the contractor meets the eligibility requirements for a diplomatic passport and the diplomatic passport is necessary to complete his or her mission.

The newly released Abedin emails also contain additional instances of the Clinton State Department’s granting special favors to major contributors to the Clinton Foundation. A July 27, 2009, exchange of emails begins with Abedin advising Clinton scheduler Lona Valmoro that “wjc” (William Jefferson Clinton) wants special treatment for high-dollar Foundation donor and Dow Chemical’s CEO Andrew Liveris. Dow donated between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation, making it one of the largest corporate donors in Foundation history.

From: Huma Abedin [email protected]

To: Valmoro, Lona J

Sent: Monday, Jul 27 06:02:01 2009

Subject:

Wjc wants to be sure hrc sees Andrew Liveris, ceo of dow tomorrow night. Apparently he is head of us china business council. Is he definitely going to be there?

From: Valmoro, Lona J [[email protected]

Sent: July 27, 2009 6:03:54 AM

To: Huma Abedin

Subject: Re:

I will check. He declined our invitation to dinner tonight at State.

From: Valmoro, Lona J

Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 9:24:08 AM

To: Huma Abedin; Narain, Paul F [Clinton aide]

Subject: Re: CEO of dow

Paul, Andrew Leveris, CEO of Dow Chemical, is going to be at the dinner tomorrow night. We would like HRC to see him, perhaps they can do a brief pull aside upon arrival. Huma, would that work for you?

From: Huma Abedin [[email protected]]

Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 9:24:55 AM

To: Valmoro, Lona J, Huma Abedin, Narain, Paul F

Subject: Re: CEO of dow

Yes pull aside on arrival

From: Narain, Paul F

Sent, Monday, July 27, 2009 7:56 PM

To: Valmoro, Lona, Abedin Huma

Subject: RE: CEO of dow

Lona, I have arranged this pull aside for on the arrival in the Hold Room across the hall from the ballroom, immediately prior to the Secretary’s entrance and remarks.

The Abedin emails include a mid-August 2009, email exchange in which Band urges Abedin to follow up on a request from Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy to set up a meeting with then-Ambassador to Panama Barbara Stephenson on behalf of lobbyist Amb. Otto Reich, President Reagan’s ambassador to Venezuela who maintained high-level government positions during the tenure of both President George H.W. Bush and President George Bush.  In early September, Ruddy then was contacted by State Department Deputy Assistant for the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, Roberta S. Jacobson, at the behest of Band and Abedin, in reference to Ruddy’s concerns about Wilson Lucom, whose estate was embroiled in a heated multi-million-dollar lawsuit.  Ruddy’s Newsmax Media Inc, made a contribution to the Clinton Foundation of between $1 million and $5 million. The emails show the responsible official was put in contact with Ruddy.

From: Christopher [Redacted]

To: Doug Band [Redacted]

Sent: Mon Aug 17 3:40:56 2009

Subject: Panama

Otto Reich is arriving in Panama tonite on the matter I discussed. He was hoping to meet with Barbara Stephenson or her Charge this week. He has not heard back from her. Any “air’ support you can give for this meeting would be helpful. Thanks! – Christopher Ruddy

From: Doug Band

To: Huma Abedin

Sent: Aug 18, 2009 10:37 PM

Subject: Fw: Panama

Would be good to do quickly.

Even a call

From: Huma Abedin

To: Doug Band

Sent: Wed Aug 19 4:51:35 2009

Subject: Re: Panama

Both of our point people are out on vacation. I can ask someone junior to deal with this?

From: Doug Band

Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 5:20:13 PM

To: Huma Abedin

Subject: Re: Panama

Sure

From: Jacobson, Roberta S

Sent: Friday, September 04, 2009 7:32 AM

To: ruddy [Redacted]

Subject: Panama case

Mr. Ruddy: Your inquiry about the Lucom case has been passed to the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs here at State. I apologize for not getting you a response on our position last evening, but we will get back to you as soon as possible today. Many thanks. Roberta Jacobson.

From: Christopher Ruddy

To: dband

Sent: Fri Sep 04, 08:01:20 2009 7:32 AM

Subject: FW: Panama case

From: Doug Band

To: Huma Abedin

Sent: Fri Sep 04 08:18:43 2009

Subject: Fw: Panama case

From: Huma Abedin

Sent: Friday, September 04, 2009 8:37:21 AM

To: Doug Band

Subject: Re: Panama case

She’s the dep assistant secretary for the whole bureau.

The Panama desk guy is on leave so I asked that she at least reach out.

(Newsmax publishes a regular Judicial Watch column.)

The new Abedin emails also include an email exchange between Sidney Blumenthal and the then-Secretary of State in which Blumenthal proposes a Clinton Global Initiative meeting in Ireland. Hillary Clinton forwarded Blumenthal’s email to Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and Doug Band saying, “I think this is a good idea and see no conflict.” Band then responded that he and Bill Clinton think it is as “great idea.”

Again, Hillary Clinton’s involvement her ethics pledge to stay of out of Clinton Foundation and Clinton Global Initiative business.  Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton on January 5, 2009, in a letter to State Department Designated Agency Ethics Official James H. Thessin:

“For the duration of my appointment as Secretary if I am confirmed, I will not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter involving specific parties in which The William J. Clinton Foundation (or the Clinton Global Initiative) is a party or represents a party….”

In an email exchange in late August 2009, billionaire businesswoman Lynn Forester de Rothschild intervened directly with then Hillary Clinton to set up a Parade magazine interview for journalist Les Gelb, assuring Clinton, “He said he would give you a veto over content and looked me in the eye and said, ‘she will like it.’” Abedin then instructed State Department aide Phillip Reines. Reines acquiesced responding, “Yes, we’re trying to find a date that works for Les, but he is a little, shall we say, picky.” Rothschild is a longtime Clinton Foundation supporter who in mid-May of this year held a $100,000-a-plate fundraiser for the presidential candidate.

Also in the documents is an August 2009 communication from Hillary Clinton to her aides Abedin and Lauren Jiloty asking for the phone numbers of Declan Kelly, Clinton’s former economic envoy to Northern Ireland who is co-founder and CEO of Teneo.

“The idea that the State Department would even consider a diplomatic passport for Clinton Foundation executive is beyond belief,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.  “These emails show various violations of national security laws and ethics rules and further confirm that Hillary and Bill Clinton are personally implicated in the Clinton Foundation pay to play scandal.”

This is the eleventh set of records produced for Judicial Watch by the State Department from the non-state.gov email accounts of Huma Abedin.  The documents were produced under a court order in a May 5, 2015, Freedom of Information (FOIA) lawsuit against the State Department (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00684)) requiring the agency to produce “all emails of official State Department business received or sent by former Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin from January 1, 2009 through February 1, 2013, using a ‘non-state’.gov email address.”

On August 22, Judicial Watch released 725 pages of new State Department documents, including previously unreleased email exchanges in which Hillary Clinton top aide Huma Abedin provided influential Clinton Foundation donors special, expedited access to the secretary of state. In many instances, the preferential treatment provided to donors was at the specific request of Clinton Foundation executive Douglas Band.

###

Taxpayer $’s Paid for the Clinton Server(s) and Bed Bug Problems

Posted on by

This is going to be a long item but stick with it and you will learn some disgusting facts.

Primer:

The Former Presidents Act (FPA; 3 U.S.C. §102 note) was enacted to “maintain the dignity” of the Office of the President. The act provides the former President—and his or her spouse—certain benefits to help him respond to post-presidency mail and speaking requests, among other informal public duties often required of a former President. Prior to enactment of the FPA in 1958, former Presidents leaving office received no pension or other federal assistance. The FPA charges the General Services Administration (GSA) with providing former U.S. Presidents a pension, support staff, office support, travel funds, and mailing privileges.

Pursuant to statute, former Presidents currently receive a pension that is equal to pay for Cabinet Secretaries (Executive Level I), which for calendar year 2015 was $203,700. Executive Level I pay was increased to $205,700 for calendar year 2016. In addition to benefits provided pursuant to the FPA, former Presidents are also provided Secret Service protection and financial “transition” benefits to assist their transition to post-presidential life. Pursuant to the FPA, former Presidents are eligible for benefits unless they hold “an appointive or elective office or position in or under the Federal Government or the government of the District of Columbia to which is attached a rate of pay other than a nominal rate.”

The President’s FY2017 budget request seeks $3,865,000 in appropriations for expenditures for former Presidents, an increase of $588,000 (17.9%) from the FY2016 appropriation level. The increase in requested appropriations for FY2017 anticipates President Barack Obama’s transition from incumbent to former President. For FY2016, President Obama requested and received appropriations of $3,277,000 for expenditures for former Presidents—an increase of $25,000 from FY2015 appropriated levels.

By the way, former Vice Presidents have the same privilege.

***** Now for the real disgusting Clinton thing….

 Getty

Great investigative reporting by Politico: Bill Clinton used a decades-old federal government program, originally created to keep former presidents out of the poorhouse, to subsidize his family’s foundation and an associated business, and to support his wife’s private email server, a POLITICO investigation has found.

Taxpayer cash was used to buy IT equipment — including servers — housed at the Clinton Foundation, and also to supplement the pay and benefits of several aides now at the center of the email and cash-for-access scandals dogging Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

This investigation, which is based on records obtained from the General Services Administration through the Freedom of Information Act, does not reveal anything illegal. But it does offer fresh evidence of how the Clintons blurred the line between their non-profit foundation, Hillary Clinton’s State Department and the business dealings of Bill Clinton and the couple’s aides.

The thousands of pages of newly uncovered records reveal sometimes granular detail about how Bill Clinton’s representatives directed the spending of taxpayer cash allocated by the GSA under the Former President’s Act.

The Act authorizes the GSA to fund the pensions, correspondence, support staff and travel of ex-presidents. It was passed in 1958 to “maintain the dignity” of the presidency by helping former commanders in chief avoid hard times like those that befell Harry S. Truman. He complained that, without help from Uncle Sam, he would be forced to “go ahead with some contracts to keep ahead of the hounds.”

The Clintons did not have this problem.

After leaving the White House “dead broke”, in the words of Hillary Clinton, they quicklyraked in tens of millions of dollars from book deals, speaking fees and consulting gigs. At the same time, Bill Clinton was relying on his connections to some of the world’s deepest-pocketed donors, corporations and governments to seed a global philanthropy operation that overlapped with his consulting work and speaking fees and his wife’s work as Secretary of State — and served as a jumping off point for her presidential campaign.

But even as the Clintons got rich and grew their foundation into a $2 billion organization credited with major victories in the fights against childhood obesity and AIDS — while paying six figure salaries to top aides — Bill Clinton continued drawing more cash from the Former President’s Act than any other ex-president, according to a POLITICO analysis. The analysis also found that Clintons’ representatives, between 2001, when the Clintons left the White House, and the end of this year, had requested allocations under the Act totaling $16 million. That’s more than any of the other living former presidents — Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush — requested during that span.

The program supplemented the income of Clinton’s staff, while providing them with coveted federal government benefits, alleviating the need for the Clinton Foundation or other Clinton-linked entities to foot the bill for such benefits. Similarly, Clinton aides got the GSA to pay for computer technology used partly by the foundation.

An analysis of the records provided by GSA, combined with Clinton Foundation tax returns, found that at least 13 of the 22 staffers who have been paid by GSA to work for Clinton’s personal office also worked for the Clinton Foundation.

A Clinton aide said his boss’s use of the GSA program is entirely consistent with the Former Presidents Act.

Generally, the aide explained that Clinton “wears several hats — among them being former President of the United States and the founder of the Clinton Foundation. His staffing reflects those roles.”

The aide added “there is no legal prohibition that would preclude the former president’s staff from receiving compensation from other sources or doing personal work for the former presidents. We are unaware of any legal prohibition that would preclude these activities.”

The aide wouldn’t discuss specific employees, or their sources of income, explaining “the Office of Former President Bill Clinton does not discuss personnel matters.”

But using the GSA records, POLITICO pieced together a list of Clinton loyalists who at various times have had their earnings supplemented by federal payments of about $10,000-a-year using funds from the Former Presidents Act.

The list reads like a field guide to Clinton World.

It includes longtime Bill Clinton aide Justin Cooper, who despite not having a security clearance, any apparent training in cyber-security or a job at the State Department, in early 2009 helped set up the private email account that Hillary Clinton would use to send and receive classified information as Secretary of State. Her use of that system was dubbed “extremely careless” by the FBI director. Cooper continued working to maintain Clinton’s private email system — including advising her top aides Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills on attempted hacks — through at least 2012, according to emails released by the State Department.

During some of that period, Cooper was on the GSA payroll, drawing a federal government stipend from February 2011 through 2013, according to the records obtained by POLITICO.

At the same time, though, Cooper was working with Doug Band, a trusted Bill Clinton lieutenant, and Declan Kelly, a top Hillary Clinton fundraiser-turned-State Department official, to launch a global consulting firm called Teneo. It did lucrative work for foundation donors and entities with business before Clinton’s State Department. And it signed a contract reportedly worth $3.5 million with Bill Clinton to serve as a “honorary chairman” (though the former president ultimately kept only $100,000 of that, according to his tax returns and a source familiar with the arrangement). Teneo also paid Abedin as a “senior advisor.”

All the while, Band and Abedin were working together to broker meetings between Secretary of State Clinton and donors to the foundation, where Band served as an official until 2012, drawing a salary that in some years exceeded $111,000-a-year.

Yet, despite the profitable consulting business and his foundation compensation, Band continued drawing a taxpayer-funded stipend from the GSA until 2013.

Also receiving a salary from both the GSA and the Clinton Foundation was Laura Graham, who remained in extremely close contact with Clinton’s top aide at the State Department, swapping emails about sensitive foreign policy issues. During most of her time on the GSA payroll, Graham was earning a six-figure salary from the Clinton Foundation, which topped out at $190,000 per year in 2014.

Cooper, Band and Graham are no longer on the GSA payroll, nor are they working for the foundation. They all either declined to comment or did not respond to questions about the overlap between their taxpayer-funded work, the foundation and the State Department.

According to several people familiar with the former president’s operation, the rationale behind the interwoven payrolls is that they allow for a small team to assist Clinton in a variety of settings without having to do logistically complicated hockey-like line changes. In a given day, Clinton might deliver a paid private speech (during which time his employees’ salaries could be paid by the executive services corporation) and a public speech in his capacity as a former president (during which his staff could be paid by the GSA funds). And he could attend events for the foundation (where staff time would be paid by the foundation) as well as his wife’s presidential campaign (staff time would be paid by the campaign).

The records provided by GSA show that for each pay period, Clinton’s office submitted a list of personnel to GSA who were eligible to receive pay or reimbursement for travel done on behalf of the former president, along with the number of hours worked by each Clinton aide.

For many years, that list included two influential Clinton confidants who were listed as having worked zero hours each pay period — John Podesta, the former Clinton White House chief of staff who served as the foundation’s temporary CEO in 2011, and Bruce Lindsey, the Clintons’ Arkansas confidant who served as the foundation’s CEO from 2004 through mid-2013.

A spokesman for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign said Podesta, who is the campaign’s chairman, was on the list because, in 2001, he was paid less than $500 for helping “transition President Clinton from the White House to a DC-based personal office to the Harlem office. Beyond that, he received no compensation for his work.”

It’s unclear if Lindsey ever received GSA payments for work or travel on behalf of the former president. Neither he nor Podesta responded to requests for comment.

A GSA spokesperson declined to comment on specific employees, but said ex-presidents have broad discretion over how they choose to divvy up the $96,600 they are provided each year for staffing. They can give the entire sum to a single employee or divide it among multiple employees.

George H. W. Bush has four people on his taxpayer-funded staff, while Bill Clinton has 10, which has been roughly his staffing level for most of his post-presidency, according to the GSA documents. That means that each earned about $9,600 a year — far from a living wage in Manhattan, where both the Clinton Foundation and Clinton’s personal office are located.

But most Clinton aides on the GSA payroll also earned far more from other groups in the Clinton orbit — from the foundation to Teneo to an entity funded by the Clintons’ personal funds called the Clinton Executive Services Corporation or CESC.

The aide to Bill Clinton said that the former president “personally pays the costs over and above what is provided for by GSA,” adding that Clinton’s contribution “far exceeds the $96,000 provided by GSA.”

The key reason for adding staffers to the GSA payroll, according to two people familiar with the Clintons’ staffing arrangements, was that each employee became eligible for full federal employee benefits, including health and life insurance and pensions. The two people familiar with Bill Clinton’s staffing said the employees on his GSA payroll almost never received benefits from either the Clinton Foundation or the CESC.

Neither the CESC nor the Clinton Foundation are obligated to release their full payrolls, and GSA wouldn’t release the names of the staff being paid through the Former President’s Act.

So POLITICO in March 2015 filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act for GSA records detailing payments made through the Act to the offices of all former presidents between 1999 and the present. Nearly 18 months later, the agency partially fulfilled the request, this week delivering thousands of pages of emails, invoices and payroll documents covering 2009 through this year.

Correspondence related to Clinton’s payroll and requested purchases of computer equipment and other office gear through GSA under the Act comprise the overwhelming majority of the records provided in response to POLITICO’s FOIA request.

That could be a quirk of the FOIA search process.

But Clinton’s reimbursement requests also seem to generate far more back-and-forth with GSA about the justification for the spending (for instance, a GSA official asked in response to a request for a bed bug removal service, “is there currently a bed bug issue … or is the request for some type of on-going maintenance services.” The answer is not included in the documents). And Clinton’s requested purchases also prompted more debate about what’s allowable under the Act.

Part of that likely stems from Clinton’s approach to his ex-presidency, which is far more active and public than that of his former commander-in-chief peers — and that’s even before factoring in his wife’s history-making political career. But the GSA records also reveal just how tricky it can be to separate the various entities, players and controversies that have circulated for decades around Bill and Hillary Clinton.

In several cases, GSA officials raised questions about whether requested furniture and IT equipment including servers were intended for the Clinton Foundation, rather than Clinton’s personal office. In at least one instance, GSA paid to purchase and maintain a specialty Lockheed Martin database system called Intranet Quorom, the supporting systems for which were housed at one time at the Clinton Foundation’s offices, and used by both foundation staff and Bill Clinton’s personal office staff to store and process his correspondence.

The Clinton aide said servers supporting the Intranet Quorom system — which is used for data storage, not email — were the only pieces of equipment purchased by GSA that were housed at the Clinton Foundation at one point, but he said it was justified by the specific circumstances around it.

“As staff needs to have the full picture of all correspondence sent by President Clinton, both staff from the Office of the Former President and the Foundation have access to, and can input into, the Intranet Quorum database,” the aide said.

The Clinton Foundation’s website suggests that there’s a strict wall between the foundation and the ex-president’s personal office. “All Foundation employees are paid for work through the Foundation payroll,” the website says. “No Foundation staff are paid for Foundation work with taxpayer dollars.”

But the aide acknowledged “staff at the Foundation and staff at the Office of the Former President may have similar tasks, and need to coordinate this work — specifically staff that handles President Clinton’s correspondence.”

That shared work is facilitated by the Lockheed Martin IQ database system, the aide said.

But the system’s dual purpose raised questions among GSA officials, who pressed Clinton’s representatives when they submitted an invoice in September 2011 to the GSA to purchase a $7,700 Dell server and other IT equipment to support the Lockheed Martin IQ database.

Clinton Foundation officials explained to the GSA that they wanted the Dell server housed at foundation headquarters rather than at Clinton’s personal office. They explained in an email that the foundation office had better air conditioning, allowing it to support “about 10-15 more servers,” and also it was where IT staff were based, so “trouble shooting with the servers can be done ASAP.”

The GSA staff asked Graham, then serving as the foundation’s COO, to demonstrate that “safeguards are in place to ensure that the servers are solely for use by” Clinton’s personal office. A note affixed to the bottom of an email produced pursuant to POLITICO’s FOIA indicates that the GSA ultimately decided not to purchase the Dell server.

Asked about the reasoning this week, a GSA spokesman suggested that Clinton’s representatives failed to provide sufficient evidence that the Dell server was not for use by the foundation.

“Consistent with the support we provide to every former President, GSA does not approve purchases for entities other than the offices of former Presidents,” the spokesman said. “In this case, GSA staff sought clarification about the intended use of proposed purchases. Ultimately, the referenced server was not purchased.”

But, perhaps highlighting the confusion caused by the overlapping spheres in the Clinton’s universe, the Clinton aide offered a different recollection. “We believe that the information GSA provided you with is incomplete. Our files show that GSA purchased the Dell server that operates the IQ database in 2010.”

Rachael Bade, Cory Bennett and Eric Geller contributed to this report.