Month: June 2018

Bombshell Accusation: Israeli Ex-Energy Minister Charged With Spying For Iran

A bombshell report has sent shock waves through Israeli government and media as it’s been revealed that a former high ranking government official has been arrested on charges of spying for Iran, allegedly giving Israel’s chief regional foe classified information on the locations of security centers and the country’s energy industry.

Gonen Segev served as Israeli Minister of Energy and Infrastructure (now called the Ministry of National Infrastructure, Energy, and Water Resources) at the end of PM Yitzhak Rabin’s government (who was assassinated) and at the start Shimon Peres’ term as prime minister, and is well-known for having cast a key vote for the Oslo Accords in Israeli parliament. 

Former Knesset member and Minister of Energy Gonen Segev pictured in 2004. Image source: Getty via the Jewish Chronicle 

After his political career, however, Segev had frequent legal troubles leading to jail time for charges of drug smuggling, forgery, and electronic commerce fraud, and lived in Nigeria in recent years. This included a prior 5-year stint in prison (2005-2010) for attempting to smuggle 32,000 ecstasy (MDMA) tablets from the Netherlands into Israel.

Israel’s domestic national intelligence service, Shin Bet, announced Monday that Segev was extradited to Israel from Guinea after being monitored by Israeli intelligence on suspicion of maintaining contacts with Iranian intelligence officials. He is alleged to have met Iranian agents in foreign capitals, including in Nigeria, to pass along sensitive information related to Israel’s security infrastructure and systems. 

The charges, according to multiple Israeli media reports, include “assisting the enemy in a time of war and spying against the State of Israel.”

Shin Bet issued an official statement, indicating “Segev gave his operators information about [Israel’s] energy sector, about security locations in Israel, and about buildings and officials in diplomatic and security bodies, and more.”

Though most of the case information has been marked “confidential at the request of the state” according to a statement by Segev’s attorneys, Israel’s English language Arutz Sheva national news reports the following details of the case: 

An investigation by the Shin Bet and the police found that Segev was recruited and acted as an agent on behalf of Iranian intelligence, and that in 2012 a connection was established between Segev and elements of the Iranian embassy in Nigeria. He later came twice to meetings with his operators in Iran.

The investigation revealed that Segev met with his Iranian operators around the world, in hotels and apartments which are believed to be used for secret Iranian activity. Segev also received a secret communications system to encrypt the messages between him and his operators.

The investigation also revealed that Segev gave his operators information related to the energy market, security sites in Israel, buildings and officials in Israeli political and security bodies, and more.

Segev is also alleged to have tried to serve as a mediator between his Iranian handlers and Israeli citizens working in sensitive posts related to Israel’s security and foreign relations. In some instances, according to Israeli media reports, Iranian foreign agents would be presented as “business contacts” when being presented to Israeli citizens abroad. 

Further details of the case have been slow to come out, however, as the Jerusalem District Court has issued a gag order on other details at the request of the General Security Service and the Israel Police, due to issues of intelligence and national security. 

Israel has long claimed that Iranian intelligence operatives are highly active in Africa. In January Israel said it had disrupted a Palestinian militant cell which had been operating under the direction of Iranian intelligence unit based on South Africa, according to Reuters.

Though treason can theoretically bring the highest punishment of execution under Israeli law, the country has only ever put to death an Israeli citizen one time in its history. 

Meanwhile in Iran…

via RSS https://ift.tt/2JNQDmW Tyler Durden

Trump Orders Pentagon To Create US “Space Force”

During a press conference Monday, President Trump announced that he’s ordering the Pentagon to create the “Space Force” as an independent service branch. That’s right: Today might be the day that future generations look back on as the anniversary of the creation of the legendary US Space Force, guardians of intergalactic order.

Space

Space

Specifically, Trump said “we must have American dominance in space. Very importantly, I am hereby directing the Department of Defense and Pentagon to immediately begin the process necessary to establish a Space Force as the Sixth Branch of the Armed Forces.”

The force will allow the US to become “the leader by far” in space as it looks to revive the space program, which once fascinated a generation of Americans. Trump also vowed to return the US to the moon, and to reach mars, according to the Washington Post.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2tcroPY Tyler Durden

Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Significant New Case About Civil Asset Forfeiture and the Bill of Rights

Today the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a significant new case that raises important questions about the Bill of Rights, the 14th Amendment, criminal justice, and civil asset forfeiture.

The case is Timbs v. Indiana. It arose in 2013 when a man named Tyson Timbs was arrested on drug charges and sentenced to one year on home detention and five years on probation. A few months after his arrest, the state of Indiana also moved to seize Timbs’ brand new Land Rover LR2, a vehicle worth around $40,000. A state trial court rejected that civil asset forfeiture effort, however, on the grounds that it would be “grossly disproportionate to the gravity of [Timbs’] offense” and therefore in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which forbids the imposition of “excessive fines.”

The state’s forfeiture effort clearly qualifies as excessive. Timbs’ original crime carried a maximum financial penalty of just $10,000. And as the trial court observed, “a forfeiture of approximately four (4) times the maximum monetary fine is disproportional.” The trial court was right to deem the state’s actions unconstitutional.

But the Indiana Supreme Court took a different view when it decided the case in 2017. “We conclude the Excessive Fines Clause does not bar the State from forfeiting Defendant’s vehicle because the United States Supreme Court has not held that the Clause applies to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment,” that court said.

Timbs, represented by the libertarian lawyers at the Institute for Justice, then asked the U.S. Supreme Court to clarify that the Eighth Amendment’s ban on excessive fines does indeed apply in all 50 states. That is the case that SCOTUS agreed to hear today.

This one should be a no-brainer. Since the late 19th century, the Supreme Court has been applying, or incorporating, the various provisions contained in the Bill of Rights against the states under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, which forbids state governments from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. The Eighth Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, for instance, is now a well-settled part of every state death penalty case that is litigated in both state and federal court. The Excessive Fines Clause is entitled to the same judicial respect.

This case also gives the Supreme Court an opportunity to consider the broader injustices that occur in the name of civil asset forfeiture. As Justice Clarence Thomas observed last year, “this system—where police can seize property with limited judicial oversight and retain it for their own use—has led to egregious and well-chronicled abuses.” By ruling in favor of Tyson Timbs, the justices can rein in at least some of this abuse.

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Timbs v. Indiana sometime in its 2018-2019 term.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2JLu02g
via IFTTT

Cryptos Spike After Jack Dorsey Tweets About ‘Cash App’

Having slipped lower on the back of a negative report by BIS, cryptocurrencies are kneejerking higher (with Bitcoin back above $6500) after a tweet from Square and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey…

“We are thrilled to now provide New Yorkers with Cash App’s quick and simple way to buy and sell bitcoin,” said Brian Grassadonia, Head of Cash App.

“Square and the New York State DFS share a vision of empowering people with greater access to the financial system and today’s news is an important step in realizing that goal.”

Early weakness has turned around following this tweet:

Which has pushed Bitcoin and Ethereum green from Friday…

 

And Bitcoin is back above $6500…

As Bloomberg Law reports, Square Inc. is the latest company to snag a BitLicense for virtual currency products from the state of New York.

The license will allow the small business-oriented fintech company to offer financial services to New York residents through its Cash App, including buying and selling Bitcoin, according to a June 18 release from the New York Department of Financial Services.

“DFS is pleased to approve Square’s application and welcomes them to New York’s expanding and well-regulated virtual currency market,” said Superintendent Vullo. “DFS continues to work in support of a vibrant and competitive virtual currency market that connects and empowers New Yorkers in a global marketplace while ensuring strong state-regulatory oversight is in place.”

There are now nine companies with crypto licenses or charters granted by New York.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2lfhnhe Tyler Durden

Tesla Responds To Viral Video Of Spontaneously Combusting Model S

In the aftermath of the viral video showing the spontaneous combustion of a Tesla Model S belonging to the husband of actress Mary McCormack, Tesla has found itself in a place Elon Musk hates: without an appropriate and witty response, one which blames the shorts for Tesla’s troubles.

As we showed on Saturday, a Model S caught fire Friday afternoon in West Hollywood, California when its battery pack seemingly ignited. Actress Mary McCormack tweeted cell phone video of the fire, saying, “Tesla this is what happened to my husband and his car today …. no accident, out of the blue, in traffic….”

In a subsequent tweet, McCormack clarified that “it wasn’t a Tesla with auto pilot or whatever. It was a normal Tesla.”

So what happened? Local authorities – and anyone else who watched the video – said it could have been a faulty battery, but Tesla says it’s still too early to know exactly what happened, and on Monday Tesla was investigating how one of its cars appeared to suddenly catch fire.

Overnight, Tesla issued the following statement addressing the “extraordinarily unusual” incident:

“This is an extraordinarily unusual occurrence, and we are investigating the incident to find out what happened.

Our initial investigation shows that the cabin of the vehicle was totally unaffected by the fire due to our battery architecture, which is designed to protect the cabin in the very rare event that a battery fire occurs.

While our customer had time to safely exit the car, we are working to understand the cause of the fire. We’re glad our customer is safe.”

Others quickly jumped to Tesla’s defense.

“Well, of course the video footage itself looks alarmist,” Alistair Weaver, editor-in-chief at Edmunds, told CBS News correspondent Jamie Yuccas. “There’s obviously been some issues with lithium ion batteries in the past, particularly around cell phones, but electric car batteries are very different. It’s a lot of sophisticated technology.”

Tesla has maintained that it takes extraordinary measures to protect passengers from fires, which it says are at least 10 times less likely in a Tesla than in a gas-powered car.

“We’ve driven over 50,000 miles in these vehicles and have never replicated this or anything like it, nor have we seen any evidence elsewhere of other cars spontaneously catching fire, so I think it needs more investigation,” said Weaver.

Actually, there are plenty of incidents of Tesla spontaneously combusting (recent incidents in France and Norway spring to mind), but what is more worrisome is that virtually every time a Tesla suffers a crash, its batteries explode, in many cases with tragic consequences.

However, what is perhaps most troubling is that as Tesla was scrambling to extinguish the damage from the viral “spontaneous combustion” video – so to speak – Tesla CEO Musk was engaged in another bitter back and forth on Twitter with Tesla skeptics and shorts.

This took place shortly after Musk showed off the new Model 3 production facility, which in retrospect turned out to be a tent whose modular components were not even secured and prompted some to wonder if Musk is now resorting to stage props to give the impression that all is well.

Judging by Tesla’s rising stock price, whatever Musk said to ease concerns about the company is working, and this morning the short squeeze continued, although look forward to finding out shortly if Musk was again the catalyst for today’s buying spree with another pre-market purchase of illiquid TSLA stock meant to spark the latest short squeeze.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2t7D2MJ Tyler Durden

Trump’s Bromance with Kim Jung Un: New at Reason

The Atlantic’s Jeffery Golderg reported that senior Trump staffers note that Trump has a coherent foreign policy and it is “We’reTrump Un America, Bitch.” But Reason Foundation Senior Analyst Shikha Dalmia argues that is not right.

Trump’s love fest with Kim Jong Un and his subsequent concessions mean that North Korea nuclear deal is likely to be weaker than the one that Obama signed with Iran, which he derided as “weak” and “terrible” and tore up. It is also likely to be weaker than the nuclear deal that Bill Clinton signed with the Hermit Kingdom.

So why is he doing this? Because he can. “This is Trump, Bitch!”

View this article.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2JOEjCX
via IFTTT

Obama-Land Fiasco Worsens – Chicago Taxpayers Now Face $224 Million Bill

Authored by Mark Glennon via Wirepoints.com,

The taxpayer bill for the Obama Center to be built on Chicago’s Southside now appears to be $224 million, not $172 million as initially reported, and it’s certainly not privately funded as initially promised.

And how many Chicagoans know they may be subject to a special property tax, in addition to those amounts, for the center?

Obamaland rendering, coming to Chicago

The elements of that $224 million are described in a Washington Examiner article yesterday. We shouldn’t be surprised because funding was stuck into the new Illinois budget — over 900 pages presented to the General Assembly only hours before being voted on it. It’s only now being read closely.

My monthly article in Crain’s, written early last week, is a polite request to former President Obama to turn down public funding and raise the money himself. Scratch that. With more known and public anger rising, a demand is in order, and maybe the whole project should be scrapped.

The public has been bamboozled. To see why, you should first understand what’s nicely laid out in the federal lawsuit filed last month by Protect Our Parks, a not-for-profit.

That lawsuit is focused mostly on how the transfer of parkland for the center to the Obama Foundation trampled state law. The case looks strong. The complaint is in plain English and straightforward so you can read it yourself. Jackson Park is among the finest parks in Chicago and beautiful by any city’s standards. Some of it is being taken for the center with no compensation.

To get the parkland transfer properly authorized, Springfield amended the state’s Museum Act to cover the center, which the complaint describes. That’s how authorization for additional property taxes also resulted because the Museum Act provides for that. See paragraph 119 of the complaint.

That tax money forms the basis of a First Amendment claim, which is also in the complaint. The First Amendment not only protects free speech, but has also frequently been used to strike down “compelled speech.” Using taxpayer money for political purposes can be challenged as compelled speech. (Coincidentally, compelled speech is also central to the Janus case on forced public union membership, an important decision on which will come this month.)

Why would the Obama Center be compelled speech? That’s where the “bait and switch” happened, which is the phrase used in the lawsuit. A presidential library became Obamaland.

The center was initially pitched as a presidential library to be privately funded. Per my Crain’s article:

“Your foundation’s request for proposals in 2014 explicitly described a presidential library and contained nothing about state funding. ‘Construction and maintenance will be funded by private donations, and no taxpayer money will go to the foundation,’ the foundation’s spokeswoman said, and the interpretation was that you and your wife assured 100 percent private funding.”

Planning how to spend your money.

But that’s not what we got.

The center will not be a presidential library because Obama’s archives and documents won’t be there there and it won’t be federally run. From my Crain’s article:

What’s left without the library is unquestionably political, at least in large part….

You’ve been open about its political mission. The RFP described “an institute that will enhance the pursuit of the president’s initiatives beyond 2017 and have local, regional and global impacts.” You’ve said, “What we want this to be is the world’s premier institution for training young people and leadership to make a difference in their communities, in their countries and in the world.”

And now, with no public debate or legislative hearings, $172 million appeared in the Illinois budget presented to the General Assembly for vote with no time for review. We know how that happened: Chicago politicians simply asked for it, and they control the General Assembly.

The money is for mass transit and roadways associated with the center, but that’s part and parcel of the project…. [M]uch of the state money will be reimbursed by the federal government, but that’s no consolation. Taxpayers outside Illinois, who won’t benefit from any economic impact, have even more reason to object than Illinoisans.

Protect Our Parks’ lawsuit was filed before the budget was published and the state money became known. I assume the complaint will be amended to describe the state funding, which bolsters the First Amendment claim.

But forget the legal aspect. This is just wrong. Taxpayers shouldn’t be funding an Obama political operation and the whole thing stinks. $224 million is a lot of many that Illinois desperately needs. Obama could easily raise it from his friends. Heck, just those folks giving a standing ovation to Robert De Niro at the Tony Awards probably would be glad to cover it and get their names somewhere on the center.

Beyond the Washington Examiner article, FOX News and others are now on the story. Our initial story on this from June 1 was also reproduced nationally. More will come.

Maybe the controversy would abate if Obama rejects the public money and raises it privately.

He probably won’t. He’ll take the money from taxpayers and the center will be known forever as Obamaland, a monument to little more than misuse of government power, hubris and Chicago machine control over Illinois government.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2tmBmhY Tyler Durden

Fatal Texas SUV Crash a Result of Irresponsible Policing, Not Poor Border Security

When a sheriff says it’s “good police work” that led to a high-speed chase that ended in a catastrophic collision and five deaths, we should be very, very concerned.

That’s what happened on Sunday in Texas when a chase by Border Patrol agents and Dimmit County deputies ended in deadly disaster. According to multiple media reports, Border Patrol agents suspected a trio of vehicles in Carrizo Springs, Texas, were transporting illegal immigrants. They gave chase and managed to get two of the vans to stop. The third kept on going and a Dimmit County deputy picked up the chase. The pursuit reached speeds of 100 miles per hour before the van apparently lost control and crashed near Big Wells:

The van was carrying 14 people. Four people died in the crash. A fifth died later at the hospital. While officials believe many of the people were in the country illegally (the driver, though, is apparently a U.S. citizen) there’s nothing in any of the reporting that suggests officials suspected any of these people were dangerous or engaged in violent activities. It may turn out that they were, but for now all we know is that authorities believed they were illegal immigrants.

If this high-speed chase involved American citizens we’d be asking some really tough questions about why law enforcement officials insisted on such a dangerous pursuit to stop people who, as far as they knew, were not involved in any violent behavior. People may recall that, in that famous case about the Utah nurse who was arrested for refusing to draw a comatose patient, that comatose man was in the hospital because he was struck by a car fleeing police. He later died. The case raised some questions as to whether the police involved were trying to get something on the victim that would protect themselves from criticism or legal liability for the chase.

But because this chase and deadly crash involved immigrants, there’s no discussion about safe policing practices at all. Instead, Sheriff Marion Boyd says this is all about border security, which is the equivalent of blaming a no-knock SWAT raid in which police intended to arrest a low-level marijuana dealer on the inability to stem the flow of synthetic fentanyl into the United States from China.

“I think we need a wall, in my opinion,” Boyd said in an interview after the deadly crash. He says he sees lots of drug and illegal immigrants crossing the border and thinks the problem is a lack of security.

If that wall ends up being built, he’s going to end up being disappointed when it doesn’t stop illegal immigration. Prohibitions have never stopped drug trafficking, so he should know better at this point.

The lack of a border wall or more advanced border security didn’t cause the reckless police decisions that led to this deadly crash any more than an American citizens’s drug habit caused police to shoot his dog during a militarized drug raid. It’s grotesque that the irresponsibility of the police is ignored because of the citizenship of the people they were pursuing.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2MC3lmz
via IFTTT

Iowa Farmers Could Lose $620 Million From U.S.-China Trade War

From small town Iowa farmers to big shot Wall Street traders, President Donald Trump’s President Donald Trump’s embrace of economic protectionism and trade war brinkmanship is raising the specter of financial losses.

Soybean farmers in the Midwest state stand to lose more than $620 million this year, according to Iowa State University economist Chad Hart, as China targets the crop with tariffs in response to the Trump administration’s announcement last week that it would go ahead with a plan to slap tariffs on $50 billion in Chinese imports.

“Any tariff or tax put in place will have a significant impact, not only to the U.S. soybean market, but to Iowa’s because we’re such a large producer,” Hart told The Des Moines Register for the paper’s front-page story on Saturday. “It will slow down the market.”

Even a minor slow-down adds up quick, because of the sheer size of the American soybean market. Farmers planted more than 89 million acres of soybeans across the United States in 2018, making it the most widely planted crop in the U.S. this year—yes, ahead of even the heavily subsidized corn crop—according to an annual survey by the Department of Agriculture.

If the Chinese market closes, “it could be devastating for local communities across the Midwest,” said Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) last month. “It’s also important to remember that when trade barriers go up, alternative sources of goods are found, and new trading relationships develop. A temporary setback could quickly develop into a permanent loss.”

America is the world’s biggest producer of soybeans and the world’s largest exporter of them. In 2015, nearly half of the U.S. soybean crop was exported. Meanwhile, China is the world’s largest importer of soybeans, buying more than $14 billion of American-grown soy last year. China purchases 61 percent of total U.S. soybean exports and more than 30 percent of overall U.S. soybean production, according to the American Soybean Association, a trade group.

Asked about the front-page Register story during an appearance Sunday on NBC’s Meet The Press, White House counsel Kellyanne Conway disagreed with host Chuck Todd’s suggestion that the tariffs could create a “political problem” in the Midwest.

“Many [Midwestern farmers] are very supportive of President Trump because they like his policies when it comes to the tax cuts, the deregulation,” Conway said. “This will play out over time, but he’s tired of the American workers getting screwed.”

The situation in Iowa is a perfect illustration of how trade between nations makes both parties better off, while erecting barriers to trade hurts both sides. The Trump administration is trying to sell their tariff plans as a way to punish China for unfair trade practices, but in reality tariffs are taxes on consumers—that is, American consumers buying Chinese products—and already the tariffs are forcing price increases across several sectors of the economy. If China is being pushed, Americans are getting hit too.

When it comes to soy, the obverse is true. China is hitting American farmers with reciprocal tariffs, which will cut off supplies to Chinese consumers and likely raise prices while creating a crisis for American exporters who will now have to find alternative markets—hence the $620 million projected loss.

Other commodities are being hit too. The Wall Street Journal reported over the weekend that benchmarks for crude oil, gold, copper, aluminum, lead, and cotton all fell at least two percent Friday after the White House announced that it would go ahead with Chinese tariffs and the Chinese government responded with threats of the same.

The commodity markets have enjoyed their best year since 2002, but it appears the tide is shifting amid fears of a devastasting trade war.

“We now have potential for a full-blown trade war,” Bart Melek, head of commodity strategy at TD Securities, told the Journal. “If I was an investor who made money, I may want to cash out here.”

For the farmers who have already planted this year’s crop, unfortunately, cashing out isn’t really an option.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2MCMS1o
via IFTTT

Surprise! Taxpayers have been footing the bill for sexual misconduct in Congress

On January 23, 1995, President Bill Clinton signed into law a piece of legislation that had been almost unanimously approved by both the United States Senate and the House of Representatives.

It was called the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995– CAA.

The idea behind the CAA was to force Congress to abide by the same rules of workplace health and safety that private companies have to follow.

And one notable example was sexual harrassment; until the CAA was passed, sexual harrassment rules didn’t really apply to Congress.

Here’s where it gets crazy, though: the CAA established an agency called the Office of Compliance to adjudicate various workplace complaints.

And the law further directed the Treasury Department to allocate taxpayer funds to pay claims and damages resulting from such workplace complaints.

In other words, for nearly a quarter of a century, taxpayers have been footing the bill to settle monetary damages every time a member of Congress was caught groping an intern.

What’s more, section 416 of the CAA requires that all mediation, hearings, and deliberation in sexual harrassment claims (or any other workplace complaint) be kept strictly confidential, i.e. NOT disclosed to the public.

Plus a lot of the settlements come with strings attached. In one case of sexual harrassment against former Congressman John Conyers, the legal settlement required the complainant sign an agreement with strict non-disparagement clauses:

“Complainant agrees that she will not disseminate or publish, or cause anyone else to disseminate or publish, in any manner, disparaging or defamatory remarks or comments adverse to the interests of Representative John Conyers . . .”

They’re finally in the midst of passing a law to change this.

There’s a new bill that was recently introduced in the Senate called the CAA Reform Act which aims to heavily revise the originaly 1995 bill.

Among other provisions, section 111 of the CAA Reform Act will require members of Congress to pay their own damn legal settlements… so they’ll no longer be able to grope interns on the taxpayer’s dime.

It’s amazing that this was actually the law of the land for more than two decades.

The United States fancies itself as having the most advanced republican democracy in the world. But this is banana republic stuff, plain and simple.

Source

from Sovereign Man https://ift.tt/2Myaa8t
via IFTTT