King County Washington, which identifies as a sanctuary county, has spent the last two years releasing hundreds of illegal aliens charged with crimes, including felonies such as homicide, sexual assault and kidnapping, according to Breitbart, citing records obtained by the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI).
The county, which includes Seattle, refused to honor over 370 detention requests by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for a 27-month period ending on December 31, 2017.
Of those, 290 of which were classified by ICE as under suspicion of threat level 1 or 2 offenses.
Level 1 offenses include the following state or federal crimes: national security violations, homicide, kidnapping, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, threats of bodily harm, extortion or threat to injure a person, sex offenses, cruelty toward child or spouse, resisting an officer, weapons violations, hit and run involving injury or death, and drug offenses involving a sentencing to a term of imprisonment greater than one year.
Level 2 offenses are primarily property crimes and Level 3 offenses are other crimes, primarily misdemeanors.
According to RLI Executive Director Dale Wilcox: “State and local elected leaders like to congratulate themselves for the compassion of their sanctuary policies, but they are actually bringing violent crime and even death to their residents. The people of King County should be outraged and demand accountability from their leaders. Refusing ICE detainer requests means releasing dangerous criminals into the community, period.”
Breitbart‘s John Binder notes that “recently in King County, a 32-year-old woman who is bound to a wheelchair was allegedly raped by 35-year-old illegal alien Francisco Carranza Ramirez, as Breitbart News reported.”
Sanctuary City: Illegal Alien Wanted for Attacking His Rape Victim After Being Releasedhttps://t.co/yK02JvrJzE
The victim pleaded with the court to give the illegal alien the highest penalty possible, but instead, he was given just 12 months in prison which had already been served and he was released and ordered deported to Mexico.
Just three days after being released from prison, Ramirez found his rape victim and attacked her while she was with her three-year-old son, pushing her out of her wheelchair and fleeing the scene. Today, Ramirez is wanted by local and state officials and is now an illegal alien fugitive. –Breitbart
According to former ICE Acting Director Tom Homan, “ICE’s ability to access a jail to speak with an illegal immigrant who’s in violation of federal law and has been locked up for a crime presents no danger at all to victims or witnesses. The fact is if you look up recidivism rates, 50 percent of those criminals will re-offend within the first year, and as many as 75 percent will re-offend within five years.”
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2LKzlaT Tyler Durden
Having watched some of the questions to former Special Counsel Robert Mueller by congress on Wednesday July 24, 2019, as well as Mueller’s dithering deflections – it was obvious the entire affair was another distraction; more of the same ongoing circus show.
Of course, no minds were changed. Those on the Left still consider Trump to be a comprised capitalist pig guarding his tax returns with all the fervor of any good Manchurian Candidate and those on the Right still viewing Mueller as a tyrannical tool of the Deep State.
After Mueller’s live testimony, this blogger listened to roughly thirty Americans calling into CNN with their comments. Of those callers, only three were in support of Trump and with the rest of them effusively expressing gratitude to Mueller for his service in revealing Trump’s threat to American Democracy.
Many conservatives, including talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh and some his callers, agreed that Mueller didn’t seem familiar with the contents of his report, let alone the Steele Dossier, Fusion GPS, and other points-of-factbrought up by the Republicans as they were grilling the former special counsel. To be sure, Limbaugh commented on Mueller’s less-than-stellardemeanor and lack of preparedness – even going so far as to say Mueller deserved absolutely zero sympathies for his contributory efforts in the never-ending farce that the former special counsel has perpetrated on the American people.
But, at the same time, L-Rushbo painted a picture of Mueller simply being (for lack of better terminology) parochial in his search for justice; as if Mueller was simply a Never-Trumper like Mittens Romney or John Kasich.
In fact, at the close of the Mueller hearing, even House Republican Devin Nunes complimented Mueller, thanked him for his service, and refused to scorch the doddering old fool in the end.
Unfortunately, a majority of Americans today, including many conservatives, have swallowed hook, line, and sinker one or more of the following five (5) faulty premises of Russiagate:
1.) The Russians actually hacked the 2016 elections
The Mueller Report, as well as most of the Democrats who questioned Robert Mueller on July 24, 2019 claimed Russia interfered in the 2016 Presidential Election in a “sweeping and systematic fashion”.
This is not true. It did not happen; at least not sweepingly or systematically.
What did happen one year ago, on July 13, 2018, was Mueller’s boss at the time, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, announced the Mueller Investigation’s single indictment of Twelve Russian intelligence officers for alleged election hacking under President Obama’s watch. Of course, this was done in an effort to divert publicity away from the July 12, 2018 Capitol Hill testimony of disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok and to subvert President Trump’s impending Russian summit on July 16, 2018.
Even so, in his very conveniently-timed press conference, Rosenstein acknowledged that “no American was a knowing participant” in the Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election and there was “no allegation in the indictment of any effect on the outcome of the election”.
In other words, much ado about nothing, in the same way the Mueller Report offered zero forensic evidence other than the reliance of the two (2) now discredited Democratic National Committee (DNC) contractors: CrowdStrike and “Russian dossier compiler Christopher Steele”.
Furthermore, other so-called “established” and “confirmed” claims in Mueller’s bogus report cited the Russian company, Concord Management, as “sowing discord” throughout U.S. social media prior to the 2016 Presidential Election – and this was shot down by U.S. District Judge Dabney L. Friedrich’s May 28, 2019 ruling which concluded that Mueller had “no evidence”.
Did you get that? No evidence.
Squat. Zip. Nada. Zilch.
2.) Wikileaks was affiliated with Russia
Another key premise of Democrats, the U.S. Corporate Media, and The Mueller Report, is that Russian Intelligence hacked into the DNC servers and provided stolen e-mails to WikiLeaks through (according to the Mueller Report) “fictitious online personas including DCLeaks” and Guccifer 2.0”.
Again, this did not happen because reporting as far back as 2017 indicated that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange possessed the DNC e-mails beforeDCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0 were created, yet Assange used these entities to obfuscate his true source.
Veteran intelligence whistleblowers also reported in 2017 on how the Democratic National Committee (DNC) servers were not hacked by Guccifer 2.0 and released to WikiLeaks but, instead, the data actually originated via an external storage device.
All of this means the “fictitious online personas” allegedly linked to Russian intelligence, according to the Mueller Report, were created after-the-fact in order to conceal the true source of the DNC leaks.
Additionally, when WikiLeaks released the password to Vault 7, also known as: “The Largest Publication of Confidential CIA Documents Ever”, a program entitled UMBRAGE was revealed. This was a formerly top-secret initiative whereby American intelligence agencies could mimic internet hacks from other countries, including Russia.
Yet, none of that information was revealed in Robert Mueller’s report, was it? Why? Probably, for the same reason Team Mueller refused to interview Julian Assange. Because, had Mueller done so, he might have been asked later by congress why WikiLeaks offered a $20,000 reward for information in the case involving Seth Rich. Rich was the former voter expansion data director for the DNC who was murdered in Washington DC on July 10, 2016.
But Team Mueller didn’t care about any of that and, instead, disseminated false conclusions regarding Russian election meddling.
Are you surprised?
3.) Robert Mueller is an honorable guy
Even in light of Robert Mueller’s doddering downfall on Congressional Hill, there are those on both sides of the political aisle who consider him, still, as an ethical and honorable man.
He is neither.
Former Texas State Court judge, and now sitting Congressman, Louis Buller Gohmert Jr (R-Texas), has unmasked Mueller’s “long and sordid history of illicitly targeting innocent people that is a stain upon the legacy of American jurisprudence”, citing 18 specific examples, including:
– Collusion with Boston mobster Whitey Bulger in criminality and framing innocent men for murder that resulted eventually in the release of innocent parties and 100 million dollars in compensation for DOJ Boston Office misconduct.
– The FBI with Mueller as director harassed and hounded Congressman Curt Weldon in revenge for criticizing FBI failures related to 9-11.
– Dishonest prosecutions of Senator Ted Stevens.
– Prosecutorial abuses in the anthrax murder investigations post 9-11, producing one suicide and one award of 6.8 million dollars to the other innocent target.
– Mueller’s unethical acceptance of the special prosecutor position when he was conflicted by his longtime personal and professional relationship with James Comey.
– Mueller hired extremely partisan, biased, and conflicted attorneys for his special counsel team.
– Mueller’s investigation ignored that FISA applications evidence presented to justify warrants to surveil Trump associates were not verified and thus a fraud on the court and illegal.
As was adequately revealed by the Republicans who grilled Robert Mueller during his congressional hearing, the entire special counsel investigation (and it’s ensuing report) amounted to little more than political opposition research on behalf of the Democratic Party; and a concerted effort to gaslight the American public via it’s bizarre, and even Orwellian, deceptions.
Congressman Tom McClintock (R-California) asked Mueller why he couldn’t provide connecting evidence of Russian trolls to the Russian government. Chris Stewart (R-Utah) questioned Mueller on why his team of angry Democrats always leaked information detrimental to Trump but never a single leak of anything placing Trump in a positive light. And other Republicans wondered why Hillary Clinton’s “Dirty Dossier” received such extra-special “kid-glove” treatment by Team Mueller.
Indeed, we now know the following: In spite of the Mueller probe breaking multiple prosecutorial rules that ensured justice, they were “outfoxed” by Trump’s legal team beginning as far back as June, 2018 – when none other than William Barr sent a 19-page memorandum to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein checkmating Mueller’s apparent “interpretation of a single subsection of a single obstruction-of-justice statute:18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2)“. It was Barr’s contention that Trump could not have violated that particular statute because “he [Trump] was not accused of engaging in any wrongful act of evidence impairment”.
In his memo to Rosenstein, Barr also claimed Mueller was giving the statute a “new unbounded interpretation” that “would have potentially disastrous implications” for the Executive Branch of government.
Oh, that Robert Mueller. What a guy. He folded on collusion and conspiracy before upping the stakes on obstruction via volume two of his report which presented like a legal Chinese finger-trap or Gordian Knot. Mueller’s “not exonerating” Trump inverted “innocent until proven guilty” into “guilty until proven innocent” and demonstrated the special counsel investigation’s very palpable political prejudice – which was further proven by the specific misrepresentations and selective editing in the final Mueller Report.
Even, now, if it appears Robert Mueller was a moderately senile figurehead for Andrew Weissmann & Company’s attempted takedown of a sitting president, certainly, history will not be kind to the former special counsel who lent his name to the farce. Undeniably, the former special counsel’s recent fiasco before congress was just the beginning of his once illustrious and ill-deserved reputation becoming a national joke.
4.) The Democrats actually care about Democracy
The Democratic Party does not have a political platform beyond Santa Clausian economic initiatives, genitalia, skin color, and disproven conspiracy theories rooted in fraudulent Russiaphobia. They do not care to secure American elections. On the contrary. Why else would they be seeking to turn Texas into a blue state via ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION? Right?
In truth, the Socialist Party cares only about power; even (as the Mueller hearing demonstrated) to the point of weaponizing their own hypocrisy.
All throughout The Robert Mueller Show on Wednesday, the former special counsel’s bias and the hypocrisy of the Democrats and sycophants in the media, could not have been more obvious. Mueller’s appearance was meant to provide amplification on behalf of Trump’s political opponents for impeachment, more hearings, and additional investigations.
Although Mueller received top billing, the Dems and their enablers in the media were always going to be the stars. Mueller was called to testify in order to expand the audience in order to resurrect the dying efforts of Trump’s enemies.
And it all backfired yugely.
Even so, during his testimony, Mueller “included some stark warnings” of how the Russians were already attempting to interfere in the 2020 elections. This allowed the Democrats to continue their Chicken Little cries of how the “sky is falling” while citing Trump’s lackadaisicalness as proof of the president’s political puppetry under Putin.
Yet, if the Democrats were concerned in the least over alleged Russian election hacking, then why are they not interviewing those who allowed it to happen under the Obama Administration’s watch? They won’t because they don’t care about democracy or to secure America’s elections. Instead, they desire to undermine the U.S. electoral process.
The Democrats currently serving in congress are liars who seek America’s demise. Sadly, that is the truth.
5.) Intelligence Agencies under the Obama Administration were working to ensure secure elections
Anyone even remotely paying attention over the past few years knows that Hillary Clinton and the DNC financed the Russian Dossier on Trump. According to former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, the dossier was then used to obtain the FISA warrant required to spy on Team Trump. A 90-day surveillance warrant on Carter Page was then renewed three times and this was done in order to dig up political dirt and diminish Trump’s chances of winning the 2016 Presidential Election. Then, later, the FISA warrants were illegally issued to undermine Trump’s presidency.
At the same time, the now well-known culprits in the Obama Administration (i.e. James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and Bruce Ohr) were actively concealing the multifarious crimes of Hillary Clinton.
A mole in Trump’s campaign was also later revealed as Stefan Halper, a 73-year-old Oxford University professor and former U.S. government official who was paid over $1 million by the Obama administration including $411,575 that was made in two payments by September 26, 2016. That date was three days after a Yahoo News article was published by Michael Isikoff on Trump aide, Carter Page; which the FBI later illicitly used as supporting evidence in the FISA warrant application for Page.
Then, after Trump won the election, the phony Russian conspiracy was utilized:
– By deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein, to appoint his trusted, dear friend and collaborator, Robert Mueller, as Special Counsel to investigate President Trump’s non-existent collusion with Russia
– By Robert Mueller to transition the imaginary Russiagate Collusion into illusions of Obstruction of Justice against Trump
– By Robert Mueller to obtain minor process crimes on Paul Manafort(Trump’s former campaign chairman), Rick Gates (business associate of Manafort), George Papadopoulos (Trump’s former foreign policy advisor) and Michael Flynn (Trump’s former national security advisor) and others
– By AP reporters and FBI agents to collude in a conspiracy against Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort
– By Team Mueller to falsely accuse Russia of meddling in order to undermine the trust of Americans in their electoral process
– In order to summarily rescind a sitting president’s attorney-client privilege; as well as his presumption of innocence through the special counsel’s “lack of exoneration”.
– To allow the Democratic candidates in the 2018 Midterm Elections to leverage the issue of election hacking and illegitimately win key senate races as well as control of the U.S. House
All this from America’s “heroes” who swore an oath to defend America’s constitution.
Thanks for nothing, you treasonous tribe of traitors.
Conclusion
As long as even some of the premises of those who oppose the U.S. Constitution are swallowed hook, line, and sinker by a significant percentage of the U.S. body politic – then these may, in the end, present as evidence in the historical record delineating the downfall of our once-great republic.
One would like to believe this sordid chapter of corruption will result in the ultimate draining of the American swamp. The nation now awaits reports from Inspector General Michael Horwitz on FISA Abuse and corruption in the Department of Justice; U.S. Attorney John Huber on Clinton Foundation illegalities; and U.S. Attorney John Durham on the malevolent origins of Russiagate.
Godspeed gentlemen. Because a very significant percentage of the American public is growing more impatient by the day. Time is of the essence. Tick tock.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2JTnDZf Tyler Durden
In northwest Saudi Arabia, where most people see a barren wasteland, Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman has envisioned the future, and according to the Wall Street Journal, it is something straight out of an Elon Musk wet dream, complete with flying taxis, robot maids, robot dinosaurs, robot martial arts, endless booze and glow-in-the-dark sand, among other things.
Perhaps MbS has been following Elon Musk’s Twitter account a little too closely. Or perhaps he has joined him in a microdosing regimen. Regardless,MbS has hatched a $500 billion plan to cover 10,000 square miles of this desert to attract the “world’s greatest minds and best talents” to the world’s best paying jobs in the world’s most livable city.
A true modern day, pardon, future Shangri-La.
The ideas have been laid out in 2300 pages of confidential documents at Boston Consulting Group, McKinsey and Company and Oliver Wyman that the Wall Street Journal was able to review. The project is called “Neom”, which – it will come as no surprise – is a mash up of the Greek word for “new” and the Arabic word for “future”. The documents were dated September 2018.
The consultants employed an expansive (and expensive) mix of science fiction and corporate buzzwords to turn the Prince’s imaginary city into a reality. Local tribes would have to be forcibly relocated and a court system developed by law firm Latham & Watkins would have judges reporting directly to the king and operating under Sharia law.
Neom’s MbS-led founding board said: “This should be an automated city where we can watch everything. A city where a computer can notify crimes without having to report them or where all citizens can be tracked.”
Perhaps the inspiration was not the Jetsons, but rather 1984. Also, it sounds like what the US is desperately trying to become. The board has adopted the recommendations of its consultants and people familiar with the project say they don’t know how much the plan will become a reality due to both funding issues and potential technological limitations.
Neom Chief Executive Nadhmi al Nasr said: “Neom is all about things that are necessarily future-oriented and visionary. So we are talking about technology that is cutting edge and beyond—and in some cases still in development and maybe theoretical.”
Perhaps inspired by the movie Syriana, the project marks the centerpiece of MbS’s effort to transform Saudi Arabia from an oil-dependent desert wasteland to a forward looking diversified economy. Rather than relying on just petroleum revenue, MbS has stated that he wants Saudi Arabia to produce goods and services that it currently buys abroad (such as chainsaws and sulfuric acid?) He also proposed Neom as a way to keep Saudis spending domestically.
To ensure that his vision of Future World is truly unique, MbS plans to roll out the following :
1. Flying Taxis: Scientists might take a flying taxi to work. “Driving is just for fun, no longer for transportation (e.g. driving Ferrari next to the coast with a nice view),” planning documents show.
2. Cloud Seeding: The desert won’t always feel like the desert. “Cloud seeding” could make it rain.
3. Robot Maids: Don’t worry about household chores. While scientists are at work, their homes would be cleaned by robot maids.
4. State-of-the-Art Medical Facilities: Scientists would work on a project to modify the human genome to make people stronger.
5. World Class Restaurants: There would be fine dining galore in a city with the “highest rate of Michelin-starred restaurants per inhabitant.”
6. Dinosaur Robots: Residents could visit a Jurassic Park-style island of robot reptiles.
7. Glow-in-the-Dark Sand: The crown prince wants a beach that glows in the dark, like the face of a watch.
8. Alcohol: Alcohol is banned in the rest of Saudi Arabia. But it likely won’t be here, say people familiar with the plan.
9. Robot Martial Arts: Robots would do more than just clean your house. They also could spar head to head in a “robo-cage fight,” one of many sports on offer.
10. Security: Cameras, drones and facial-recognition technology are planned to track everyone at all times.
11. Moon: A giant artificial moon would light up each night. One proposal suggests it could live-stream images from outer space, acting as an iconic landmark.
For those concerned about their safety there, fear not – the Saudi state will have everything under control. Cameras, drones and facial-recognition technology will allow state intelligence to track every single person there. “Everything can be recorded,” the founders’ Board stated. Neom has already engaged IBM for potential facial recognition software.
The Board even thought of offering Tesla billions in subsidies to move to Neom, while giving the kingdom a stake.
Clearly, since it is deep in the realm of science fiction, MbS also considered partnering with unicorn-specialist SoftBank on its “Apollo” project, which seeks to create “a new way of life from birth to death reaching genetic mutations to increase human strength and IQ.”
Unfortunately, the $500 billion futuristic nirvana doesn’t come without headwinds.
According to the Journal, the Saudi government plans to forcibly relocate more than 20,000 people, many whose families have inhabited the area for generations. One resident of the area said “You are dismembering an entire society. For us, it’s like death.”
Additionally, companies have often avoided investing in Saudi Arabia due to the country’s opaque legal system, corruption, alcohol ban and rules that require women to get a male relative’s permission to travel. MbS has adopted the stance that these rules are so difficult to change because they are so ingrained in existing Saudi cities, that it is simply easier to just develop a new city and start over.
“Starting Neom from scratch, with independent systems and regulations, will ensure the availability of best services without social limitations,” MbS said at Neom’s first board meeting.
None of this is hindering MbS’ enthusiasm to come up with a Disney World for the world’s richest and most powerful. Construction on Neom is under way using thousands of foreign workers that in one section of the development were housed six to a tiny room as of June 17. Earlier this year, MBS issued a decree about an area called Silver Beach. “I want the sand to glow,” he said, according to two people familiar with the project. Engineers haven’t figured out a safe way to do it, the WSJ adds sardonically.
Each night, he told underlings, a fleet of drones should create the illusion of a rising moon—crescent, half, full. “That’s what he wants this future to be,” a former executive said.
To make that happen, Boston Consulting Group suggested partnering with NASA to make the fake moon “the biggest in the world.”
All bets are off in the geopolitical insanity stakes when we have the President of the United States (POTUS) glibly announcing he could launch a nuclear first strike to end the war in Afghanistan and wipe it “off the face of the earth” in one week. But he’d rather not, so he doesn’t have to kill 10 million people.
Apart from the fact that not even a nuclear strike would subdue the legendary fighting spirit of Afghan Pashtuns, the same warped logic – ordering a nuclear first strike as one orders a cheeseburger – could apply to Iran instead of Afghanistan.
Trump once again flip-flopped by declaring that the prospect of a potential war in the Persian Gulf “could go either way, and I’m OK either way it goes,” much to the delight of Beltway-related psychopaths who peddle the notion that Iran is begging to be bombed.
No wonder the whole Global South – not to mention the Russia-China strategic partnership – simply cannot trust anything coming from Trump’s mouth or tweets, a non-stop firefight deployed as intimidation tactics.
At least Trump’s impotence facing such a determined adversary as Iran is now clear: “It’s getting harder for me to want to make a deal with Iran.” What remains are empty clichés, such as Iran “behaving very badly” and “the number one state of terror in the world” – the marching order mantra emanating from Tel Aviv.
Even the – illegal – all-out economic war and total blockade against Tehran seems not to be enough. Trump has announced extra sanctions on China because Beijing is “accepting crude oil” from Iran. Chinese companies will simply ignore them.
Okay With ‘OK Either Way’
“OK either way” is exactly the kind of response expected by the leadership in Tehran. Prof. Mohammad Marandi of the University of Tehran confirmed to me that Tehran did not offer Trump a “renegotiation” of the JCPOA, or Iran nuclear deal, in exchange for the end of sanctions: “It’s not a renegotiation. Iran offered to move forward ratification of additional protocols if Congress removes all sanctions. That would be a big win for Iran. But the US will never accept it.”
Dehghan: U.S. bases would be targeted. (Wikimedia Commons)
Marandi also confirmed “there is nothing big going on” between Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif and tentative Trump administration negotiator Sen. Rand Paul: “Bolton and Pompeo remain in charge.”
The crucial fact is that Tehran rejects a new negotiation with the White House “under any circumstances,” as expressed by Hossein Dehghan, the top military adviser to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei.
Dehghan once again made it very clear that in case of any sort of military adventure, every single base of the U.S. Empire of Bases across Southwest Asia will be targeted.
This neatly ties in with Iran’s by now consolidated new rules of engagement, duly detailed by correspondent Elijah Magnier. We are well into “an-eye-for-an-eye” territory.
And that brings us to the alarming expansion of the sanctions dementia, represented by two Iranian ships loaded with corn stranded off the coast of southern Brazil because energy giant Petrobras, afraid of U.S. sanctions, refuses to refuel them.
Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, a fervent Trump groupie, has turned the country into a tropical U.S. neo-colony in less than seven months. On U.S. sanctions, Bolsonaro said, “We are aligned to their policies. So we do what we have to.” Tehran for its part has threatened to cut its imports of corn, soybeans and meat from Brazil – $2 billion worth of trade a year – unless the refueling is allowed.
This is an extremely serious development. Food is not supposed to be — illegally — sanctioned by the Trump administration. Iran now has to use mostly barter to obtain food — as Tehran cannot remit through the CHIPS-SWIFT banking clearinghouse. If food supplies are also blocked that means that sooner rather than later the Strait of Hormuz may be blocked as well.
Beltway sources confirmed that the highest level of the U.S. government gave the order for Brasilia to stop this food shipment.
Tehran knows it well – as this is part of the “maximum pressure” campaign, whose goal is ultimately to starve the Iranian population to death in a harrowing game of chicken.
Chokepoint: The Strait of Hormuz. (Flickr)
How this may end is described by an ominous quote I already used in some of my previous columns, from a Goldman Sachs derivatives specialist: “If the Strait of Hormuz is closed, the price of oil will rise to a thousand dollars a barrel representing over 45 percent of global GDP, crashing the $2.5 quadrillion derivatives market and creating a world depression of unprecedented proportions.”
At least the Pentagon seems to understand that a war on Iran will collapse the world economy.
And Now for Something Completely Different
But then, last but not least, there’s the tanker war.
Dutch analyst Maarten van Mourik has noted significant discrepancies involving the UK piracy episode in Gibraltar – the origin of the tanker war. The Grace 1 tanker “was pirated by the Royal Marines in international waters. Gibraltar Straits is an international passage, like the Strait of Hormuz. There is only 3 nautical miles of territorial water around Gibraltar, and even that is disputed.”
Mourik adds, “The size of the Grace 1 ship is 300,000 MT of crude oil, it has a maximum draught of about 22.2 meters and the latest draught via AIS indicated that she was at 22.1 meters, or fully laden. Now, the port of Banyas in Syria, which is where the offshore oil port is, has a maximum draft of 15 meters. So, in no way could the Grace 1 go there, without first having to offload elsewhere. Probably a very large quantity to get within max draught limitations.”
Zarif (r.) negotiating nuclear deal with then US Secretary of State John Kerry in July, 2015. (Wikimedia Common)
That ties in with Foreign Minister Javad Zarif refusing on the record to say where Grace 1 was actually heading to, while not confirming the destination was Syria.
The tit-for-tat Iranian response, with the seizure of the Stena Impero navigating under the British flag, is now evolving into Britain calling for a “European-led maritime protection mission” in the Persian Gulf, purportedly to protect ships from Iranian “state piracy.”
Observers may be excused for mistaking it for a Monty Python sketch. Here we have the Ministry of Silly Seizures, which is exiting the EU, begging the EU to embark on a “mission” that is not the same mission of the U.S. “maximum pressure” campaign. And on top of it the mission should not undermine Britain’s commitment to keep the JCPOA in place.
As European nations never recede on a chance to flaunt their dwindling “power” across the Global South, Britain, Germany and France now seem bent on their “mission” to “observe maritime security in the Gulf,” in the words of French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian. At least this won’t be a deployment of joint naval forces – as London insisted. Brussels diplomats confirmed the initial muscular request came from London, but then it was diluted: the EU, NATO and the U.S. should not be involved – at least not directly.
Now compare this with the phone call last week between Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and French President Emmanuel Macron, with Tehran expressing the determination to “keep all doors open” for the JCPOA. Well, certainly not open to the Monty Python sketch.
That was duly confirmed by Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who said Iran will “not allow disturbance in shipping in this sensitive area,” while Iranian vice-president Eshaq Jahangiri rejected the notion of a “joint European task force” protecting international shipping: “These kinds of coalitions and the presence of foreigners in the region by itself creates insecurity.”
Iran has always been perfectly capable, historically, of protecting that Pentagonese Holy Grail – “freedom of navigation” – in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz. Tehran certainly doesn’t need former colonial powers to enforce it. It’s so easy to lose the plot; the current, alarming escalation is only taking place because of the “art of the deal” obsession on imposing an illegal, total economic war on Iran.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/31305Hh Tyler Durden
The global central bank experiment with renormalization is officially over.
After roughly half the world’s central banks hiked rates at least once in 2018, the major central banks have returned to easing mode, and as the chart below shows, for the first time since 2013, not a single central bank is hiking rates.
Commenting on the violent reversal away from tightening financial conditions which emerged following the Q4 2018 selloff, Goldman’s Jan Hatzius writes that “The FOMC looks set to cut the funds rate next week, the ECB today sent a strong signal that action in September is likely, and China has resumed easing policy after a spring pause. With global growth running at a below-trend rate of 2¾%—down from about 4% a year ago—a synchronized tilt towards easing looks like a natural response to a weaker outlook.”
Yet even Goldman can’t help but ask just why the Fed is rushing to commence the first easing cycle in years, pointing out that “the US economy is in decent shape, with a tight labor market, inflation close to target and— in our forecast— growth running a little above 2% both this year and next. We are modestly above consensus because we expect the negative inventory cycle to end and final demand to continue growing robustly on the back of easier financial conditions.”
This, according to the Goldman economist, should limit Fed easing to two 25bp insurance cuts, one next week and another in September, although the bank, which until very recently did not expect any rate cuts at all, fails to justify just why the Fed is doing what it is about to do, unless of course Powell is merely folding to Trump pressure.
But if the Fed’s upcoming rate cut remains a mystery, what the ECB is about to do is relatively straightforward, as the European picture has continued to deteriorate, and as Draghi defined it yesterday, the outlook is “getting worse and worse.” Following the weak manufacturing flash PMIs, Goldman’s Current Activity Indicator for Europe in July stood at just +0.5% on an area-wide basis, and at -0.6% in Germany. Underlying inflation remains stuck at 1% “and the slide in inflation expectations points to risks of de-anchoring.” Moreover, fears of a “no deal” Brexit have re-intensified and volatility is likely to return in Italy as the 2020 budget is prepared. Therefore, Goldman expects forceful action from the ECB in September, “including a 20bp deposit rate cut (flanked by a move to a tiered reserve system), a return to QE (including corporate and sovereign debt) and a further strengthening of forward guidance.”
Elsewhere the picture is similar, and after what looked like a strong Q1 rebound, Goldman notes that Chinese growth has slowed again to the bottom end of the government’s 6-6½% target range, with the “slower growth and the threat of trade war escalation have persuaded policymakers to return to a gradual easing path.” As a result, short-term interest rates remain in the mid-2% range, fiscal borrowing has stepped up, and credit growth beat expectations in June. Finally, with the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic coming up in October, Goldman expects policy settings to stay supportive in coming months, “likely easing slightly further on the margin.”
Additionally, in a world where China has long become the marginal source of growth for much of the emerging world, EM growth outside of China remains sluggish as well, and most large EMs are growing below Goldman’s estimates of long-term potential, and well below policymakers’ aspirations, to wit:
Exports have decelerated sharply (mainly due to weak DM growth) and domestic demand has disappointed (reflecting tighter financial conditions, especially where policy tightened in 2018). That said, we see slightly brighter prospects for the second half, as low inflation and a dovish Fed will allow EM policymakers to ease policy and support growth.
And visually:
Finally, the risk of a no deal Brexit has returned to center stage as Boris Jonson took over as Prime Minister, pledging that the UK will leave the EU by October 31 with “no ifs, no buts” according to Hatzius, who expects the tail risks to intensify into Q4 and raised Goldman’s odds of a no deal Brexit to 20%. Even so, Goldman thinks PM Johnson will, on balance, seek to avoid a general election before having delivered Brexit. The only way to avoid a general election may be to avoid a no deal Brexit, and the only way to avoid a no deal Brexit may be to deliver Brexit with a deal. From this perspective, the scope for the new Prime Minister to depart from his predecessor looks very limited, and Goldman’s base case remains a negotiated Brexit deal (with a 45% probability).
So with the entire world now in easing mode, it is relative easy to predict that Goldman expects smooth sailing. As Hatzius summarizes, “following the sharp rally in most asset prices this year, our near-term market views are fairly neutral.
On the rates side, we see scope for a further duration rally as the ECB over-delivers relative to current market pricing, but ultimately see rates drifting higher again as the Fed only delivers two insurance cuts and returns to tightening policy after the presidential election.
Pressure on the Euro looks likely in the near term, but we do not expect a large move given that the Euro is already undervalued relative to long-run fundamentals.
On the equity side, the S&P 500 trades near fair value relative to interest rates, although we believe policy uncertainty and negative revisions to 2020 earnings forecasts will limit the upside from here.
Finally, we see commodity prices stuck in a mid-cycle pause, with no strong near-term direction.
And now we look ahead to next week’s historic catalyst: the Fed’s first rate cut in over a decade… just as the S&P closes at 3,205 – a new all time high.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2JXf7bR Tyler Durden
The United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is sending letters to crypto investors to apparently scare them into accurately reporting their crypto-related income.
“Taxpayers should take these letters very seriously by reviewing their tax filings and when appropriate, amend past returns and pay back taxes, interest and penalties,” IRS Commissioner Chuck Rettig said in a statement.
“The IRS is expanding our efforts involving virtual currency, including increased use of data analytics. We are focused on enforcing the law and helping taxpayers fully understand and meet their obligations.”
‘Don’t Panic’
According to a Forbes report by crypto tax attorney Tyson Cross, published on July 26, a number of Cross’s clients have received a letter “6174-A” from the IRS, threatening “future civil and criminal enforcement activity” if they fail to fully comply with reporting requirements.
While Cross notes that the letter may give the impression that it is a personally targeted enforcement action, he argues that it is much more likely to be a generic mailing campaign intended to encourage voluntary compliance — one year after the IRS first launched its cryptocurrency compliance push.
Although the agency could feasibly have identified tax cheats and sent the letter to specific individuals, Cross notes that over a dozen of his clients — all of whom accurately reported their crypto-derived income — had received the letter.
Much more likely, he claims, is that the IRS has used its list of taxpayers identified in 2017 by Coinbase and conducted a blanket campaign to exert psychological pressure on investors. He notes:
“This would seem to indicate the IRS is sending these letters to taxpayers as a fishing attempt without any real belief that each recipient has under-reported.”
Cross writes that several other tax professionals have revealed to him that their own clients — despite accurate reporting — had also received Letter 6174-A.
Cross advised investors not to panic should they receive the letter, but to thoroughly ensure the accuracy of their tax returns, given that at the very least it means they are on the agency’s radar.
As previously reported, data released ahead of the close of the preceding tax year indicated that just 0.04% of tax filers were reporting capital gains from crypto investments to the IRS.
Back in July 2017, the IRS had required that major U.S. crypto exchange Coinbase hand over detailed information on every one of its then 500,000+ users in an attempt to prevent tax evasion. However, a court order in November 2017 reduced this number to around 14,000 “high-transacting” users, which the platform later reported as 13,000.
An alleged presentation by the agency earlier this month reportedly revealed that the IRS hopes to use Grand Jury subpoenas on firms such as Apple, Google and Microsoft to check taxpayers’ download history for crypto-related applications.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Yw8ViU Tyler Durden
“The 2018 general fertility rate fell to another all-time low for the United States,” the report said.
Researchers used data from the National Vital Statistics System, discovered that the general fertility rate dropped 2% between 2017 and 2018 among females aged 15 to 44.
Overall fertility dipped to 59.1 per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44. In non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic black women, it fell 2% in 2018, while a 3% drop in rates was observed in Hispanic women.
Teen pregnancy rates plunged to record lows, the report revealed. The rate dropped 7% from 2017 to 2018, falling from 18.8 per 1,000 to 17.4 per 1,000. Teen births in non-Hispanic black teenagers declined 4% in 2018, and 8% in non-Hispanic white and Hispanic teenagers.
NCHS stated in a separate report that the total fertility rate continues to dip underneath the level of what is needed to sustain a healthy population.
We have routinely suggested why Millennials are delaying marriage and childbirth. And in our view – this life choice is tied explicitly to economics.
Insurmountable student loans, credit card debt, and auto loans have delayed starting a family for many.
A typical child costs $14k per year, or $234k from 0 to 17, the Department of Agriculture said, money that millennials would instead use to service their debts and or use it on life experiences, like vacations.
So if the economy were so great, millennials would be able to start families, buy homes, and continue living the American dream like generations before them. But in reality, the dream died after the 2008 financial crisis, their standard of living was abruptly thrown into reverse, history will look by at millennials as the “lost generation.”
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Zdu8v3 Tyler Durden
Earlier today, the Supreme Court issued a stay against a lower-court injunction blocking President Donald Trump from diverting military funds to build his border wall. At least for the moment, Trump can therefore continue to divert the funds for wall construction until the lower courts (and possibly the Supreme Court) issue a final decision on the case. The decision was a 5-4 split along ideological lines, with the five conservative justices voting to stay the injunction, while the four liberals all dissented. Three of the liberal justices would have denied the stay completely. Justice Stephen Breyer wrote an opinion indicating that he would have upheld the lower court injunction against actually using funds to build the wall, but would have permitted the government to “finalize the contracts” for construction. The latter, Breyer contends, would not cause any “irreparable harm” to the plaintiffs, and therefore need not be blocked by a preliminary injunction.
As is the usual practice with stay rulings, the majority issued very little in the way of an explanation. But it did indicate that “[a]mong the reasons is that the Government has made a sufficient showing at this stage that the plaintiffs have no cause of action to obtain review of the Acting Secretary’s compliance with Section 8005 [of the the 2019 Department of Defense Appropriations Act].”
In other words, this seems to be a purely a procedural ruling suggesting that the majority justices think the plaintiffs in the case—the Sierra Club and the Southern Border Community Coalition an alliance of various liberal/progressive groups in the border area—lacked the procedural right to challenge the diversion of funds. The Court may be referring here to Judge N. Randy Smith’s argument in his dissent in the Ninth Circuit ruling on this issue, where he argued that only plaintiffs with “economic interests” at stake are legally permitted to challenge the funding diversion. In my view, Judge Smith’s distinction between “economic” and “recreational” interests in dubious.
If that is indeed the basis for the majority justices’ ruling, it is notable that it does not address the underlying merits of the legality of Trump’s plan to divert the funds. And, if the Supreme Court ultimately reverses the Ninth Circuit on this basis, the legal battle over the wall will be far from over.
In my view, Judge Smith’s distinction between “economic” and “recreational” interests in dubious. But, even if the Supreme Court ultimately endorses his reasoning or something like it, there are plenty of other cases challenging the wall funding that have been brought by parties who do have “economic” interests, even on Smith’s narrow definition thereof. They include local governments and private individuals who own property in the areas where parts of the wall would be built.
Thus, even if the administration ultimately prevails in this case, on the procedural ground highlighted by today’s decision, the legal battle over the wall is going to continue, and these procedural considerations will not prevent many other plaintiffs from challenging the wall diversion.
However, the fact that the justices split along ideological lines on this procedural issue may presage a similar division on the merits, should the Supreme Court ever address the latter. If so, that would be a bad sign for opponents of the wall, since the Court has a 5-4 conservative majority.
As I have pointed out in previous posts on this issue (e.g. here and here), the stakes here go far beyond the specifics of the wall issue. If Trump can use a combination of “emergency” powers and other dubious legal maneuvers to divert funds for wall construction, future presidents can do the same thing for all sorts of other expenditures that were never authorized by Congress. Conservatives who might cheer Trump now will not be so thrilled if the next Democratic president uses similar tactics to build projects he or she claims are needed for the “Green New Deal” or other liberal policies. More generally, a victory for Trump would concentrate extensive new power in the hands of the president and undermine Congress’ control over the power of the purse.
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2yleBxr
via IFTTT
Earlier today, the Supreme Court issued a stay against a lower-court injunction blocking President Donald Trump from diverting military funds to build his border wall. At least for the moment, Trump can therefore continue to divert the funds for wall construction until the lower courts (and possibly the Supreme Court) issue a final decision on the case. The decision was a 5-4 split along ideological lines, with the five conservative justices voting to stay the injunction, while the four liberals all dissented. Three of the liberal justices would have denied the stay completely. Justice Stephen Breyer wrote an opinion indicating that he would have upheld the lower court injunction against actually using funds to build the wall, but would have permitted the government to “finalize the contracts” for construction. The latter, Breyer contends, would not cause any “irreparable harm” to the plaintiffs, and therefore need not be blocked by a preliminary injunction.
As is the usual practice with stay rulings, the majority issued very little in the way of an explanation. But it did indicate that “[a]mong the reasons is that the Government has made a sufficient showing at this stage that the plaintiffs have no cause of action to obtain review of the Acting Secretary’s compliance with Section 8005 [of the the 2019 Department of Defense Appropriations Act].”
In other words, this seems to be a purely a procedural ruling suggesting that the majority justices think the plaintiffs in the case—the Sierra Club and the Southern Border Community Coalition an alliance of various liberal/progressive groups in the border area—lacked the procedural right to challenge the diversion of funds. The Court may be referring here to Judge N. Randy Smith’s argument in his dissent in the Ninth Circuit ruling on this issue, where he argued that only plaintiffs with “economic interests” at stake are legally permitted to challenge the funding diversion. In my view, Judge Smith’s distinction between “economic” and “recreational” interests in dubious. The Court should have simply denied the stay, or at least adopted Justice Breyer’s approach.
But if Smith’s analysis is indeed the basis for the majority justices’ ruling, it is notable that it does not address the underlying merits of the legality of Trump’s plan to divert the funds. And, if the Supreme Court ultimately reverses the Ninth Circuit on this basis, the legal battle over the wall will be far from over.
In my view, Judge Smith’s distinction between “economic” and “recreational” interests in dubious. But, even if the Supreme Court ultimately endorses his reasoning or something like it, there are plenty of other cases challenging the wall funding that have been brought by parties who do have “economic” interests, even on Smith’s narrow definition thereof. They include local governments and private individuals who own property in the areas where parts of the wall would be built.
Thus, even if the administration ultimately prevails in this case, on the procedural ground highlighted by today’s decision, the legal battle over the wall is going to continue, and these procedural considerations will not prevent many other plaintiffs from challenging the wall diversion.
However, the fact that the justices split along ideological lines on this procedural issue may presage a similar division on the merits, should the Supreme Court ever address the latter. If so, that would be a bad sign for opponents of the wall, since the Court has a 5-4 conservative majority.
As I have pointed out in previous posts on this issue (e.g. here and here), the stakes here go far beyond the specifics of the wall issue. If Trump can use a combination of “emergency” powers and other dubious legal maneuvers to divert funds for wall construction, future presidents can do the same thing for all sorts of other expenditures that were never authorized by Congress. Conservatives who might cheer Trump now will not be so thrilled if the next Democratic president uses similar tactics to build projects he or she claims are needed for the “Green New Deal” or other liberal policies. More generally, a victory for Trump would concentrate extensive new power in the hands of the president and undermine Congress’ control over the power of the purse.
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2yleBxr
via IFTTT
Singer R. Kelly, 52, is being held without bond in Chicago on charges that include producing child pornography and coercing minors to engage in sex. He faces similar federal charges in New York.
Unfortunately, Epstein and R. Kelly are not the only alleged sexual predators in the news.
Reader discretion is advised. This article contains information that may be upsetting for some people.
Here are various reports of recent sexual abuse cases in the US.
Colorado
More than three dozen suspected online child sex offenders were arrested in Aurora, Colorado, during Operation Broken Heart. The nationwide operation was led by the US Department of Justice and resulted in nearly 1,700 arrests during April and May. On June 11, 2019, the DOJ announced that its “task forces identified 308 offenders who either produced child pornography or committed child sexual abuse, and 357 children who suffered recent, ongoing or historical sexual abuse or were exploited in the production of child pornography.”
The operation targeted suspects who: (1) produce, distribute, receive and possess child pornography; (2) engage in online enticement of children for sexual purposes; (3) engage in the sex trafficking of children; and (4) travel across state lines or to foreign countries and sexually abuse children. (source)
The Colorado Sentinel reports 32-year-old Raymond Fredericks was sentenced to 22 years in prison Tuesday after pleading guilty to a felony sex trafficking charge in May.
Florida
Todd Bush, a 42-year-old former teacher, was arrested in an undercover sting on July 18 after agreeing to pay $100 to who he thought was the mother of an 11-year-old girl for sex with her daughter, authorities said. He was charged with human trafficking of a child, obscene communication, and traveling to meet a minor for sex. Bush was already a registered sex offender and was on probation for a 2011 incident when he was busted in the sting last week.
Maryland
On July 18, a federal jury in Baltimore convicted Ryan Russell Parks, 26, on two counts of sex trafficking a minor and one count of using the internet to promote a prostitution business.
Parks faces a minimum mandatory sentence of 10 years in prison and a maximum of life in prison for each of the two counts of sex trafficking a minor, and a maximum of five years in prison for using the Internet to promote a business enterprise involving prostitution.
The case was investigated by the FBI-led Maryland Child Exploitation Task Force (MCETF), created in 2010 to combat child prostitution, with members from 10 state and federal law enforcement agencies. (source)
Minnesota
A two-day undercover operation in Minneapolis–Saint Paul earlier this month resulted in the arrests of 11 people on sex trafficking charges:
Three people were arrested for sex trafficking and promotion of prostitution while eight people were arrested for solicitation of a minor or solicitation of prostitution under 16 years of age.
In the operation, 18 trafficking victims were recovered from trafficking situations and offered help through victim services. (source)
Nebraska
A former first-grade teacher at an Omaha elementary school has been given 50 to 100 years in prison for sexually assaulting students. Douglas County District Court records show that 31-year-old Gregory Sedlacek was sentenced Tuesday. He’d pleaded guilty to three counts of sexual assault of a child.
New Hampshire
Yesterday, New Hampshire’s attorney general launched an investigation into the state youth detention center after two former counselors were charged with raping a teenage boy 82 times, at least once at gunpoint, in the late 1990s.
New York
Last month, the head of a sex cult was found guilty on multiple charges in New York, reports NPR:
The leader of NXIVM, a group that espoused a philosophy of self-improvement but was accused of recruiting, grooming and even branding an inner circle of female sex slaves, was found guilty Wednesday by a federal jury in Brooklyn, N.Y.
Keith Raniere, who was known as “Vanguard,” was convicted on all charges, including sex trafficking, forced labor conspiracy, human trafficking and multiple counts of racketeering — including sexual exploitation of a child. (source)
North Carolina
The victims of sexual assaults by a former North Carolina teacher are filing a class-action lawsuit against the school district:
News outlets report the victims of Michael Kelly filed the complaint Tuesday against him, the New Hanover County Board of Education and others.
Kelly pleaded guilty last month to child sex charges. Investigators say Kelly abused nearly 20 victims. He’s worked for New Hanover Schools since 1992. (source)
Ohio
Earlier this month, two concurrent Human Trafficking Task Force operations were conducted in the Cleveland region. A total of 49 arrests were made, and some of the individuals are facing felony charges of Attempted Unlawful Sexual Conduct with a Minor, Importuning, Possess Criminal Tools, and Attempting Corruption with Drugs, reports Richland Source.
You can read more about recent arrests on the DOJ’s dedicated page: Human Trafficking.
Cases of child sexual abuse by clergy continue to be reported.
Thousands of allegations of child sexual abuse by Catholic priests, nuns, and members of religious orders have been made over the last few decades. Many investigations, trials, and convictions – and revelations about decades of attempts by Church officials to cover up reported incidents – have resulted. These offenses are not limited to clergy in the US – cases have occurred all over the world.
I think it is important to note here that my family is Catholic, so I know how painful this subject can be for some followers.
According to a 2009 report, the founder of a religious order that treats Roman Catholic priests who molest children concluded decades ago that offenders were unlikely to change and should not be returned to ministry:
As early as the mid-1950s, decades before the clergy sexual-abuse crisis broke publicly across the U.S. Catholic landscape, the founder of a religious order that dealt regularly with priest sex abusers was so convinced of their inability to change that he searched for an island to purchase with the intent of using it as a place to isolate such offenders, according to documents recently obtained by NCR.
Fr. Gerald Fitzgerald, founder of the Servants of the Paracletes, an order established in 1947 to deal with problem priests, wrote regularly to bishops in the United States and to Vatican officials, including the pope, of his opinion that many sexual abusers in the priesthood should be laicized immediately. (source)
Yesterday, a Florida minister and registered sex offender was arrested after authorities found child pornography on his home computer, reports the Associated Press:
Sarasota County Sheriff’s officials tell news outlets that 66-year-old Charles Andrews was arrested Tuesday. He’s charged with 500 felony counts of possession of child pornography and three counts of failing to meet sex offender requirements.
Andrews is a pastor at Osprey Church of Christ. Andrews also is a registered sex offender who was convicted in 2006 of second-degree sexual abuse in Alabama. Now he’s in jail, his bond set at more than $5 million. (source)
The Associated Press has a Sexual Abuse by Clergy page that is dedicated to coverage of cases.
Here is a sampling of recent cases they have documented:
In Kansas, state authorities have opened more than 70 investigations into alleged sexual abuse by Catholic clergy after receiving over 100 abuse reports in less than six months, the Kansas Bureau of Investigation said Tuesday.
Also in Kansas, a priest has been charged with one count of possessing child pornography.
St. Norbert Abbey in Wisconsin has released the names of 22 priests who faced “credible” allegations of sexually abusing minors. The abbey says an independent review deemed more than 40 allegations credible.
Last week, a former Alabama youth pastor was sentenced to 20 years in prison for sexually abusing a young girl.
The Diocese of Crookston in Minnesota has reached a $5 million settlement with 15 people who were children when they were sexually abused by priests.
A Texas jury has sentenced a former Roman Catholic priest to 18 years in prison for sexually assaulting an altar server over several years.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has charged a 57-year-old Detroit-area priest with sexually abusing a minor.
Last Monday, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Providence, Rhode Island, released a list of clerics, religious order priests and deacons it deems to have been credibly accused of sexually abusing children.
In Illinois, a priest was removed from pastoral duties in the wake of allegations of sexual abuse that took place two decades ago.
The Vatican has been in the news this week for a very disturbing reason.
A genetics expert retained by the family of a girl who went missing in 1983 said Saturday that a cavernous underground space near a Vatican cemetery holds thousands of bones that appear to be from dozens of individuals, both “adult and non-adult.”
The expert, Giorgio Portera, said the “enormous” size of the collection under the Teutonic College was revealed when Vatican-appointed experts began cataloguing the remains, which were discovered last week .
“We didn’t expect such an enormous number” of bones and other remains which “had been thrown into a cavity,” Portera said. “We want to know why and how” the bones ended up there. (source)
Victims of abuse by religious and institutional authorities (priests, ministers, bishops, deacons, nuns, coaches, teachers, and others) can find support here: SNAP. BishopAccountability.org has an Abuse Tracker page that provides links to media coverage of clergy abuse.
How prevalent is child sexual abuse?
While Epstein’s arrest has increased awareness of predatory behavior by the elite, the wealthy and powerful are not the only ones committing such heinous acts.
According to The National Center for Victims of Crime, the prevalence of child sexual abuse (CSA) is difficult to determine because it is often not reported. Experts agree that the incidence is far greater than what is reported to authorities.
Statistics below represent some of the research done on child sexual abuse.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Children’s Bureau report Child Maltreatment 2010 found that 9.2% of victimized children were sexually assaulted (page 24).
1 in 5 girls and 1 in 20 boys is a victim of child sexual abuse;
Self-report studies show that 20% of adult females and 5-10% of adult males recall a childhood sexual assault or sexual abuse incident;
During a one-year period in the U.S., 16% of youth ages 14 to 17 had been sexually victimized;
Over the course of their lifetime, 28% of U.S. youth ages 14 to 17 had been sexually victimized;
Children are most vulnerable to CSA between the ages of 7 and 13.
According to Darkness to Light, a non-profit committed to empowering adults to prevent child sexual abuse, only about one-third of child sexual abuse incidents are identified, and even fewer are reported.
In 2018 the CyberTipline received more than 18.4 million reports, most of which related to:
Apparent child sexual abuse images.
Online enticement, including “sextortion.”
Child sex trafficking.
Child sexual molestation.
Since its inception, the CyberTipline has received more than 48 million reports.
Those statistics are grim.
Sex trafficking is a serious global issue.
There are various types of sex offenders and sex crimes, and that topic is beyond the scope of this article. Because sex trafficking and the vulnerability of minors are crucial issues, we will focus on them here.
US federal law refers to sex trafficking as any commercial sex act that is “induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age.”
A recent report from Insider sheds light on just how many people are victims of sex trafficking.
The statistics are alarming and heartbreaking:
It’s estimated that there are around 4.5 million victims of sex trafficking across the world. And though it’s difficult to know just how many people are involved in sex trafficking in the US, the Polaris Project, a non-profit dedicated to ending human trafficking, received more than 34,000 reports of sex trafficking on its Human Trafficking Hotline between 2007 and 2017.
End Slavery Now, an anti-human trafficking and slavery organization, estimates many of those trafficked into the US come from countries like Mexico, the Philippines, Thailand, Honduras, Guatemala, India and El Salvador. But experts say that plenty of sex trafficking victims are from the US, too. (source)
But the millions sex trafficked around the world don’t look like they do in movies. These people, often minors, can lead normal lives and pass through normal places, jobs, and homes.
The sex trafficking that goes on in the US largely takes place in a criminal underbelly ubiquitous in US cities and communities, which millions of Americans, for whatever reason, turn a blind eye to daily. (source)
There are various factors that motivate sexual predators.
It is mistakenly believed that sexual offenders are solely motivated by sexual gratification when they commit their crimes. Dr. Nicholas Groth developed three typologies to describe the motivations of rapists, two of which suggest sexual gratification is secondary. Anger rapists are fueled by rage towards their victims and rape is their way of seeking violent revenge. According to the Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM), these rapists may actually be extremely discontent with another area in their lives and thus take out their frustration on their victims. “Anger rapists tend to use a significant amount of physical force when they subdue their victims – in most cases, far more force than is necessary to perpetrate the abuse,” adds the CSOM. Verbal abuse is also a common component of these types of violations that are generally impulsive – not planned.
Power rapists on the other hand are less impulsive and rely on psychological manipulation more so than physical violence to subdue and sexually assault their victims. “The power rapist was motivated by his need to control and dominate his victim, and inversely, to avoid being controlled by [the victim],” describes Dr. Lisak. Those who rape their domestic partners are often characterized as power rapists. There are also sadistic rapists who receive sexual or erotic gratification from exerting power and control over the victims they rape. “Because they have an erotic response to power and control, extreme violence and torture often characterize their assaults,” says the CSOM. “In many cases, victims of sadistic rapists are murdered during the assaults”. The CSOM adds that these types of rapes are least common and account for between 2% and 5% of cases in the United States. (source)
Repeat sex offenders do not necessarily target only one category of victim or offend in the same manner, that report explains:
Dr. Lisak explains that a proportion of sexual offenders are ‘non-specialists’. “Multiple studies have now documented that between 33% and 66% of rapists have also sexually attacked children; that up to 82% of child molesters have also sexually attacked adults; and that between 50% and 66% of incest offenders have also sexually attacked children outside their families,” states Dr. Lisak.
Additionally, many of us tend to think a sex offender will keep on offending until he or she is caught. While in reality, recidivism does happen, it may not be as common as we think. According to Arkowitz and Lilienfeld, approximately 14% of sexual offenders reoffend within a five to six year period and 24% within a 15 year period. While this suggests recidivism is less often the case, it does suggest the longer it takes law enforcement to track down a sexual predator or criminal, the more likely he or she will reoffend. (source)
Not everyone who sexually abuses children is a pedophile, as Darkness to Light explains:
Child sexual abuse is perpetrated by a wide range of individuals with diverse motivations. It is impossible to identify specific characteristics that are common to all those who molest children. Situational offenders tend to offend at times of stress and begin offending later than pedophilic offenders. They also have fewer victims (often family), and have a general preference for adult partners.
Pedophilic offenders often start offending at an early age and often have a large number of victims (frequently not family members).
70% of child sex offenders have between one and 9 victims, while 20% have 10 to 40 victims. (source)
Often, sexual predators are people you know and trust.
It is important to understand that there are people who have or will sexually abuse children in churches, schools, and youth sports leagues, as Darkness to Light explains:
Abusers can be neighbors, friends, and family members. People who sexually abuse children can be found in families, schools, churches, recreation centers, youth sports leagues, and any other place children gather.
Significantly, abusers can be and often are other children.
About 90% of children who are victims of abuse know their abuser. Only 10% of sexually abused children are abused by a stranger.
Approximately 30% of children who are sexually abused are abused by family members. The younger the victim, the more likely it is that the abuser is a family member. Of those molesting a child under six, 50% were family members. Family members also accounted for 23% of those abusing children ages 12 to 17.
About 60% of children who are sexually abused are abused by the people the family trusts. (source)
Here’s how to keep your loved ones (and yourself) safe.
Sexual abuse is a challenging topic to discuss. It can be even more difficult when you’re talking about protecting your own children. Families can take steps to keep their children safe and give them the tools to speak up when something isn’t right.
Here is a list of resources that can help you keep your family safe.
