‘Rape Is Sexy’ Trump Accuser Sues President For Defamation

‘Rape Is Sexy’ Trump Accuser Sues President For Defamation

Columnist E. Jean Carroll – who gave a bizarre series of interviews and wrote a book (which bombed) claiming that President Trump sexually assaulted her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in the 1990’s, is back.

The 75-year-old Carroll, who stunned CNN‘s Anderson Cooper when she said “I think most people think of rape as being sexy,” is now suing Trump for defamation.

And while Carroll can’t remember if Trump penetrated her “halfway – or completely,” she refuses to use the term ‘rape’ for what she says happened.

I am filing this on behalf of every woman who has ever been harassed, assaulted, silenced, or spoken up only to be shamed, fired, ridiculed and belittled,” said Carrol, who seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, according to the Washington Post.

Responding to the news, White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham on Monday called the lawsuit “frivolous,” saying Carroll is a “fraud.”

“Let me get this straight – Ms. Carroll is suing the President for defending himself against false allegations?” she asked. “I guess since the book did not make any money she’s trying to get paid another way. The story she used to try and sell her trash book never happened, period. Her version of events is not even feasible if you’ve ever tried on clothing in a dressing room of a crowded department store. The lawsuit is frivolous and the story is a fraud – just like the author.”


Tyler Durden

Mon, 11/04/2019 – 15:50

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Nh28Dx Tyler Durden

Survey: Only 2% of Hispanics Prefer the Politically Correct Term ‘Latinx’

“Latinx,” the progressive, gender-neutral alternative to Latino/Latina, is a favorite of campus activists and ethnic studies departments. But among the broader population of Hispanic people, it’s wildly unpopular: Just 2 percent of respondents to a nationwide poll chose it as their preferred term.

So says Mario Carrasco of the market research agency Think Now. Although his group is “progressive on social issues,” he writes, “as researchers, we have to put aside our personal biases and render advice based on the best available empirical evidence.” And the evidence shows that practically nobody wants to be called Latinx:

The Stranger‘s Katie Herzog interviewed Carrasco, who was a little surprised at how unpopular Latinx was.

“We went into it with the hypothesis that awareness was going to be lower than social media makes it seem,” said Carrasco. “We didn’t think it was going to be as low as it is. We also thought that it was going to be significantly more popular among young people, and it’s not. There’s no significant difference there.”

The term may not be popular with actual Hispanics, but Democratic presidential frontrunner Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) sure seems to like it. She referenced “African American and Latinx families” during her remarks at the June debate. This kind of thing—embracing politically correct terminology that a tiny minority of extremely progressive people embraces—could easily backfire on a general election candidate, perhaps Warren most of all.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2Ni7QF7
via IFTTT

Survey: Only 2% of Hispanics Prefer the Politically Correct Term ‘Latinx’

“Latinx,” the progressive, gender-neutral alternative to Latino/Latina, is a favorite of campus activists and ethnic studies departments. But among the broader population of Hispanic people, it’s wildly unpopular: Just 2 percent of respondents to a nationwide poll chose it as their preferred term.

So says Mario Carrasco of the market research agency Think Now. Although his group is “progressive on social issues,” he writes, “as researchers, we have to put aside our personal biases and render advice based on the best available empirical evidence.” And the evidence shows that practically nobody wants to be called Latinx:

The Stranger‘s Katie Herzog interviewed Carrasco, who was a little surprised at how unpopular Latinx was.

“We went into it with the hypothesis that awareness was going to be lower than social media makes it seem,” said Carrasco. “We didn’t think it was going to be as low as it is. We also thought that it was going to be significantly more popular among young people, and it’s not. There’s no significant difference there.”

The term may not be popular with actual Hispanics, but Democratic presidential frontrunner Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) sure seems to like it. She referenced “African American and Latinx families” during her remarks at the June debate. This kind of thing—embracing politically correct terminology that a tiny minority of extremely progressive people embraces—could easily backfire on a general election candidate, perhaps Warren most of all.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2Ni7QF7
via IFTTT

Elizabeth Warren Is Lying About Her Own Medicare Plan

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.), the Democratic presidential contender, used the following words over the weekend to defend her plan to pay for Medicare for All: “It doesn’t raise taxes on anybody but billionaires….Understand this. This is no increase in taxes for anyone except billionaires….Period. Done.” Non-billionaires will not pay “a penny more.”

This claim is a straight-up lie, says Reason features editor and resident health care policy specialist Peter Suderman in today’s Reason Roundtable podcast. Co-roundtableists Nick Gillespie, Matt Welch, and Katherine Mangu-Ward dive into the weeds of Medicare policy and politics, jump into the fray of the latest social media panicking, and leave time enough for Ed Clark references and a bit of Libertarian Party presidential news.

Audio production by Ian Keyser and Regan Taylor.

Music credits:

‘Evil Plan’ by Kevin MacLeod is licensed under CC BY 3.0

‘ok boomer w/jedwill’ by Peter Kuli

Relevant links from the show:

The Reason Podcast Is Now 3 Great New Podcasts. Subscribe!” by Katherine Mangu-Ward

Elizabeth Warren Wants To Pay for Medicare for All With a $9 Trillion Tax That Will Hit the Middle Class,” by Peter Suderman

Aaron Sorkin, Mark Zuckerberg Feud Over Political Ads. Here’s Why Sorkin’s Wrong,” by Elizabeth Nolan Brown

‘We Can Fact Check Your Ass,’ but Not When It Comes to Political Ads,” by Nick Gillespie

Twitter’s Ban on Political Ads Will Help Incumbent Politicians Maintain Power,” by Scott Shackford

Can Big Tech Save Us From the Power of Government?” by Scott Shackford

Former Time Editor and CEO of Constitution Center (!) Wants To Cancel First Amendment, Pass Hate Speech Laws,” by Nick Gillespie

 

 

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2WG9inO
via IFTTT

US Media Is “Carrying Buckets Of Muddy Water For The ‘Coup Team'”

US Media Is “Carrying Buckets Of Muddy Water For The ‘Coup Team'”

Authored by James Howard Kunstler via Kunstler.com,

How Far Will They Go?

CBS-News carried another bucket of muddy water for the coup team Sunday night with a lead 60 Minutes agit-prop story on Maria Butina, an ambitious Russian cutie who worked the American NRA circuit in the most public manner imaginable to make herself into a sex-bomb celebrity at the exact the moment in history when the US Deep State wished to reinforce the fantasy, as Lesley Stahl put it, that “Russia was interfering in our electoral process.”

Of course, Ms. Stahl and her shifty producers left out half the story: how Maria Butina was manipulated by her FBI-handler and sometime-boyfriend, Patrick Byrne, the former Overstock.com CEO who had been employed by the Bureau over the years on other undercover assignments. They didn’t mention him or seek to understand his role in the operation. But they gave plenty of air-time to the DOJ lawyer, John C Demers, who prosecuted Ms. Butina, and never bothered to ask Demers why Butina was not charged with espionage — perhaps because nothing remotely like that occurred.

How media giants like Ms. Stahl can keep mouthing this malarkey designed to stoke a new cold war is one of the great mysteries of our national psychology these days. You’d think they’d learned something from the train wreck of the Mueller Investigation, the Brett Kavanaugh fiasco, and the current debacle of Adam Schiff’s imploding Ukraine whistleblower caper — namely, that spouting lies will eventually get you found-out and disgraced.

But the coup team is now dangerously stuck tripling and quadrupling down on its fairy tale narrative as the reckoning of its dark deeds approaches and its star players await their turns on the witness stand. Half the country has been waiting patiently for authorities-of-standing to put an end to this Hitchcockian campaign of seditious fog that has driven us close to the brink of a second civil war. That half of the country has actually been reading the evidence of this treason and sedition — underwritten by Hillary Clinton and her allies — on the back-channels of the Internet. None of that evidence has been posted through the main media outlets wholly owned by the coup team, gospel to the other half of America, and soon millions of credulous bystanders who got high on three years of CIA-issued RussiaGate Kool-Aid will get the surprise of their lives when they discover how deeply they were played.

The CIA and the FBI are in a fight for their lives now. The evidence shows pretty clearly that these rogue agencies conducted all the election “meddling” of 2016 and that the RussiaGate hysteria was an engineered smokescreen to hide their tracks and cover their asses when the certainty of a Hillary election triumph nauseatingly resolved unfavorably in the cold, gray dawn of 11/8/16. Despite the chatter about an “insurance policy,” they were quite unprepared for the exposure that loomed.

They also badly underestimated the resources of what is now a very sturdy alt.media which has managed to weave the real story of what happened over the past three years into a shocking tapestry of massive subversion and treachery. A big part of the true story is how amazingly incompetent the RussiaGate coupsters were. Did they really believe they could conceal the ties between their agencies and Glenn Simpson’s Fusion GPS operation, and its feckless front man, British ex-spy Christopher Steele, and the whole outfit’s connection to Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee? Did they suppose they could pass off Stephan Halper and Joseph Mifsud as Russian agents when the two have consorted with US and allied intelligence for decades? The US Department of Defense even holds Mr. Halper’s million-dollar pay stubs and Mr. Mifsud appears in photographs of every Western cloak-and-dagger cocktail get-together of spook officialdom for the last twenty years.

The latest, and most desperate gambit is the UkraineGate whistleblower, a CIA employee blatantly playing errand-boy for his mentor John Brennan and deeply tied to 2016 election shenanigans emanating from Ukraine, featuring his former employee, ex-Vice-President Joe Biden. This shadowy figure, pegged as Eric Ciaramella, 33, may shortly find himself in a grand jury chamber answering for his role in this charade. Ciaramella has just been hung out to dry by his sponsor, Rep. Adam Schiff in a desperate attempt to dissociate himself from the huggermugger within his House Intel Committee that preceded the falsely blown whistle.

It’s not an overstatement to say that many of the figures behind this gigantic web of lies and deceit ought to answer charges up to and including treason. The question is whether Messers Barr & Durham have the cojones to cater the banquet of consequences that this huge cast of characters should be made to feast from. Another question is whether these desperate characters and the agencies they represent will go all the way now and attempt to enlist the military brass in an outright overthrow of the executive. There are already intimations of this. It would be answered by the kind of civil violence that has broken out in other parts of world where other Deep States have worn out their welcome — and their legitimacy.


Tyler Durden

Mon, 11/04/2019 – 15:35

Tags

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/32eB8c1 Tyler Durden

Elizabeth Warren Is Lying About Her Own Medicare Plan

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.), the Democratic presidential contender, used the following words over the weekend to defend her plan to pay for Medicare for All: “It doesn’t raise taxes on anybody but billionaires….Understand this. This is no increase in taxes for anyone except billionaires….Period. Done.” Non-billionaires will not pay “a penny more.”

This claim is a straight-up lie, says Reason features editor and resident health care policy specialist Peter Suderman in today’s Reason Roundtable podcast. Co-roundtableists Nick Gillespie, Matt Welch, and Katherine Mangu-Ward dive into the weeds of Medicare policy and politics, jump into the fray of the latest social media panicking, and leave time enough for Ed Clark references and a bit of Libertarian Party presidential news.

Audio production by Ian Keyser and Regan Taylor.

Music credits:

‘Evil Plan’ by Kevin MacLeod is licensed under CC BY 3.0

‘ok boomer w/jedwill’ by Peter Kuli

Relevant links from the show:

The Reason Podcast Is Now 3 Great New Podcasts. Subscribe!” by Katherine Mangu-Ward

Elizabeth Warren Wants To Pay for Medicare for All With a $9 Trillion Tax That Will Hit the Middle Class,” by Peter Suderman

Aaron Sorkin, Mark Zuckerberg Feud Over Political Ads. Here’s Why Sorkin’s Wrong,” by Elizabeth Nolan Brown

‘We Can Fact Check Your Ass,’ but Not When It Comes to Political Ads,” by Nick Gillespie

Twitter’s Ban on Political Ads Will Help Incumbent Politicians Maintain Power,” by Scott Shackford

Can Big Tech Save Us From the Power of Government?” by Scott Shackford

Former Time Editor and CEO of Constitution Center (!) Wants To Cancel First Amendment, Pass Hate Speech Laws,” by Nick Gillespie

 

 

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2WG9inO
via IFTTT

“It’s Incredible. The Scale Of What JPMorgan Is Doing Is Mind-Boggling”

“It’s Incredible. The Scale Of What JPMorgan Is Doing Is Mind-Boggling”

Shortly after our latest discussion how JPM’s drain of liquidity via Money Markets and reserves parked at the Fed may have prompted the September repo crisis and subsequent repo and “Not QE” in order to reduce its at risk capital and potentially lower its G-SIB charge currently the highest of all major US banks, we not only got confirmation that the biggest US bank has been quietly rotating out of cash, but was also busy repositioning its balance sheet in another major way.

According to an overnight report from the FT, one which confirms what we already disclosed previously, namely that JPMorgan pushed more than $130bn of excess cash away from reserves in the process significantly tightening overall liquidity in the interbank market , the bulk of this money was allocated to long-dated bonds while cutting the amount of loans it holds, in what the FT dubbed was a “major shift in how the largest US bank by assets manages its enormous balance sheet.”

The moves saw the bank’s bond portfolio soar by 50%, and were prompted by capital rules that treat loans as riskier than bonds. And since JPM has been aggressively returning billions of dollars to shareholders in dividends and share buybacks each year, JPMorgan has far less room than most rivals to hold riskier assets, explaining its substantially higher G-SIB surcharge.

An executive at a large institutional investors told the FT that what JPM did “is incredible”, adding that “the scale of what JPMorgan is doing is mind-boggling . . . migrating out of cash into securities while loans are flat.”

The dramatic change, which occurred gradually over the year, and which may have catalyzed the spike in repo rates in September, was first flagged by JPMorgan at an investor event back in February. Then CFO Marianne Lake said that, after years of industry-leading loan growth, “we have to recognize the reality of the capital regime that we live in”.

So what exactly did JPMorgan do?

The biggest US bank by assets shrank its loans portfolio by 4%, or about $40bn, year to date; at the same time as selling off mortgages, the bank has reduced the amount of cash on its balance sheet and used it to buy long-dated bonds.

And in what may perhaps be a bet that sooner or later the Fed will launch a full-blown QE which again targets mortgage-backed securities, the FT notes that MBS account for the bulk of securities growth; an alternative regulatory reason is that banks can hold much less capital against mortgage bonds than the underlying home loans themselves.

Commenting on JPM’s strategist capital reallocation, Jeffery Harte of Sandler O’Neill said that JPMorgan’s revisewd approach “comes down to an economic decision: they can make more money selling [loans] than buying them.”

As the FT notes, Bank of America, JPM’s closest competitor, has more headroom under the Federal Reserve’s capital rules and continues to grow its loan portfolio. It has added $43bn in loans so far in 2019, largely but not exclusively mortgages. The contrasting strategy, analysts said, reflects its larger cushion under the Federal Reserve’s stress-testing regime.

And while JPMorgan continues to generate strong profits “and could add more risk to its balance sheet if it wanted to” it prefers to send the ample money it generates back to its shareholders. As a reminder, as disclosed during the latest stress test, JPM’s plans for the year ahead include $32bn in buybacks and dividends, more than the total net income the bank earned last year.

Steven Chubak of Wolfe Research said that JPMorgan “is doing the right thing given its idiosyncratic capital constraints,”  but the greater freedom afforded to BofA means it has “more capacity to grow loans which typically generate a higher spread” — and as such more room for profit growth.

Others are more skeptical: according to Charles Peabody of Portales Partners, who projects a bleak outlook for the banking industry, sees JPMorgan’s balance sheet choices as part of a larger risk-reduction strategy. The bank, he said, was “acting like the [next] recession is here — everything the bank is doing points that way.”

That’s certainly true, but the bigger picture here is just as fascinating: in order to boost interbank funding, and to force the Fed to inject more liquidity into the system, JPM first drained reserves and hit money markets…

Source: Monday Morning Macro

… which in turn forced the Fed to boost its balance sheet by a whopping $250 billion in just the past 7 weeks as we noted earlier.

In other words, to ensure that JPM’s tens of billions in buybacks and divdends continue smoothly, Jamie Dimon may have held the entire US financial system hostage, forcing the Fed’s hand to restart “Not QE.”


Tyler Durden

Mon, 11/04/2019 – 15:21

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/32cPrh1 Tyler Durden

NYPD Commissioner James O’Neill Steps Down As City’s Murder Rate Hits All-Time Low

NYPD Commissioner James O’Neill Steps Down As City’s Murder Rate Hits All-Time Low

In a development that doesn’t bode well for the future of public safety in America’s largest city, veteran NYPD Commissioner James O’Neill is reportedly expected to resign his post as soon as Monday, according to a report in the New York Post.

James O’Neill

The city’s top police official has been rumored to be on the cusp of resigning for months now, and it’s likely that he will make it official during a press briefing scheduled for Monday afternoon. His departure comes just over three years into his tenure.

The impetus for his departure is obvious: He refused to fire Officer Daniel Pantaleo, the cop who killed Staten Island resident Eric Garner back in 2014 as officers were trying to subdue him while placing him under arrest for selling untaxed cigarettes. Pantaleo was finally fired in August for allegedly placing Garner in an illegal chokehold that led to his death. Pantaleo is now suing the city, and O’Neill’s decision to go along with a judge’s recommendation to fire Pantaleo – who was acquitted on murder charges stemming from the killing – badly damaged his support among rank-and-file cops.

O’Neill’s departure caps off a career in policing that began more than 30 years ago when the East Flatbush native joined the NYC Transit Police at the age of 25 back in 1983. The transit police merged with the NYPD in 1995, and O’Neill subsequently worked his way up the ranks in the department, serving as a commanding officer in three districts.

O’Neill’s decision comes at a difficult time for the NYPD. NYC residents who have been incensed by the rash of police shootings that helped launched the “Black Lives Matter” movement are becoming increasingly hostile to the NYPD, often treating them more like an occupying force than the public servants responsible for a staggering drop in the city’s crime rate since it peaked in the early 1990s. Under O’Neill’s leadership, the city’s murder rate hit an all-time low during the first half of this year.

Without the work of the NYPD, the many “hip” Brooklyn neighborhoods that have been caught up in the wave of gentrification in the borough over the past 15 years would still be too dangerous for all the young, white twentysomethings who migrated there to find work (or to waste their rich parents’ money).

New York’s CBS News affiliate reported last week that an NYPD vehicle was vandalized on Halloween Night. A small group of residents were seen laughing and taunting two police officers cleaning up the vehicle in a brazen show of disrespect.

Still, the officers at the scene showed tremendous restraint while cleaning the broken eggs, rotten food and cardboard covering their vehicle. The officers were responding to a domestic dispute call nearby when the incident occurred.

Over the summer, a similar incident garnered national attention when gang members dumped buckets of water on an NYPD officer’s head.

With Mayor Bill de Blasio still in power, finding a replacement for O’Neill could prove difficult: De Blasio has developed a reputation for being hostile to his own police force, often taking the side of SJW activists over his own top police officials. Given the utter lack of support he has been shown during his tenure, the only surprising thing about O’Neill’s departure is that he managed to hang on for this long.


Tyler Durden

Mon, 11/04/2019 – 15:04

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2C9Jve7 Tyler Durden

L.A. to Uber: Either Hand Over Realtime Data on Scooter Riders or Get Out of Town

Uber and Los Angeles are headed for a showdown over the city’s controversial data-sharing demands. If Uber loses, the company’s dockless electric scooters and bikes could disappear from city streets.

Jump, a dockless mobility company acquired by Uber last year, has a permit to rent out those scooters and bikes for use on city streets. But last week the Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) threatened to suspend the permit over the company’s failure to provide the city with data on the riders’ realtime locations.

Uber has argued, with the support of several privacy organizations, that this requirement violates both its customers’ privacy and California law. Rather than submit to LADOT’s demands, the company promises to sue.

“Jump riders in Los Angeles have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the trip data created from riding on our bikes and scooters,” an Uber spokesperson told Reason. “Therefore, we had no choice but to pursue a legal challenge.”

LADOT argues that its data-sharing rules are needed to enforce the city’s scooter regulations and that Uber is an outlier in refusing to comply with them.

“Every other company that is permitted in Los Angeles is following the rules,” an LADOT spokesperson told the Los Angeles Times. “We look forward to being able to work with Uber on getting them into compliance.”

For now, Jump scooters and bikes are still available for hire on L.A. streets. The company has until Friday to appeal LADOT’s decision.

The origins of this dispute go back to late 2018, when Los Angeles unveiled a pilot permitting program for dockless mobility companies. To obtain one of these permits, companies were required to obtain insurance for their vehicles, to ensure their vehicles were properly parked, and to develop an equity plan for low-income riders.

Scooter providers were also required to submit realtime data on rides, including time-stamped location data and start and end points, to the city.

At the time, LADOT promised to treat the data as confidential. It also argued that its data-sharing requirements respected users’ privacy because the city was not demanding personally identifiable information.

Privacy groups were unimpressed. In a November letter to Seleta Reynolds, LADOT’s general manager, the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) argued that the department did not sufficiently specify how it would prevent the theft or abuse of the data.

The CDT also argued that the data could easily be used to identify individual users, noting that “when persistent identifiers are connected to historical location information, individuals can be personally identified with reasonable ease.”

To allay these concerns, LADOT published a list of data protection principles in March, promising to collect only the data necessary for its mission of protecting public rights-of-way, to limit third-party and law enforcement access to that data, and to adopt stringent security safeguards.

In an April blog post, Nathan Sheard of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) declared LADOT’s data protection principles a “list of aspirations and buzz words” that are “a far cry from the transparent, actionable, and enforceable data privacy policies we would expect of any city agency demanding this level of sensitive information about Los Angeles residents.”

Both the EFF and CDT argue that collecting realtime, individualized data on the companies’ customers amounts to government surveillance that with minimal effort could reveal reams of sensitive information about an individual user. As EFF pointed out in an April letter to the city, the data collection system “could reveal trips to Planned Parenthood, specific places of prayer, and gay-friendly neighborhoods or bars. Patterns in the data could reveal social relationships, and potentially even extramarital affairs, as well as personal habits, such as when people typically leave for work, go to the gym, or run errands, how often they go out on evenings and weekends, and where they like to go.”

LADOT’s data requirements could also violate the California Electronic Communications Privacy Act (CalECPA), which requires government entities to obtain a warrant before accessing electronic user information.

In August, the state legislature’s Legislative Counsel—a government body that drafts state bills and provides legal advice to legislators—issued an opinion finding that CalECPA prohibits local government departments from “imposing a real time data sharing requirement on a dockless mobility provider as a condition of granting a permit.”

Reynolds has challenged that opinion, arguing that CalECPA was intended to restrict law enforcement agencies trying to access electronic communications, not regulatory bodies trying to keep the sidewalks clear.

The question of how much CalECPA ties L.A.’s hands will now probably be hashed out in court. Uber has yet to file a lawsuit, but it is likely do so in the near future.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/34vkDtI
via IFTTT

Watch As Iraq Protesters Torch Iranian Consulate Over ‘Foreign Interference’ 

Watch As Iraq Protesters Torch Iranian Consulate Over ‘Foreign Interference’ 

As anti-corruption protests in Lebanon and Iraq have raged and quickly turned into massive anti-government protests, with the latter much fiercer and more violent, now with over 250 Iraqis killed and nearly 10,000 wounded, there’s growing fears that in both countries a Syria-style broader proxy war could emerge. 

Iran has accused the US and Israel for stoking unrest, while Washington and Tel Aviv officials see ‘Iranian expansion’ and meddling as the true culprit. It appears that some Iraqis agree, given the Iranian consulate in the city of Karbala came under attack Sunday, in the latest sign of public backlash over perceived Iranian control of Baghdad political leaders. 

“Protesters scaled the consulate’s walls late Sunday while hauling an Iraqi flag. Security forces fired rubber bullets to disperse protesters who were throwing Molotov cocktails over the wall,” The Wall Street Journal reported based on local video of the attack. 

Iranian consulate in Karbala on fire during Sunday protests, via Reuters.

It came after last week Ayatollah Ali Khamenei blamed foreign powers for unrest gripping Iraq and Lebanon. “I recommend those who care in Iraq and Lebanon remedy the insecurity and turmoil created in their countries by the US, the Zionist regime, some western countries, and the money of some reactionary countries,” Khamenei stated using his official social media accounts.  

This also as Iran has been blamed for intervening to prevent the ouster, via forced resignation, of Iraq’s Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi amid the popular protests and mayhem. 

We reported last week that during a surprise visit by Qassem Soleimani, the head of the IRGC international offshot Quds Force, the powerful military chief intervened by asking al-Amiri and his Iranian-backed militias to continue supporting Abdul Mahdi. Several senior Iraqi officials have told reporters that Soleimani showed up at a secret meeting in Baghdad on Wednesday that was supposed to be run by Abdul Mahdi, according to Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

Soleimani and many of the militia leaders who are loyal to Amiri raised concerns at the meeting that ousting Abdul Mahdi could weaken the Popular Mobilization Forces, an umbrella group of mostly Iran-backed Shiite militias who have allies in the Iraq’s parliament and government.

Watch as the Iranian consulate in the central Iraqi city of Karbala, south of Baghdad is torched:

And now, with his position firmly in place for now, PM Abdul Mahdi on Sunday issued a public message calling on demonstrators to “return the country to normal” — but made no mention of plans to step down. 

“Threatening the oil interests and blocking roads leading to Iraq’s ports is causing big losses exceeding billions of dollars,” he said, according to the WSJ

Anti-Iran anger has been particularly fierce in the restive southern provinces, given the important Shia pilgrimage centers in places like Karbala, where it’s believed Iran’s influence is felt most strongly and directly.  

Indeed the ‘proxy war’ nature of what’s unfolding in Iraq is increasingly tanking center stage, as President Trump himself tweeted about Monday morning:

For example the Iranian consulate in Basra was torched by a mob last year, in events very similar to Sunday’s incident. During Sunday night’s unrest which saw the consulate in Karbala set ablaze, at least three protesters were killed by security forces.

Iran-backed Iraqi Shia militias have reportedly been increasingly involved in assisting security forces in putting down the popular unrest which has swept the country – by some accounts even deploying snipers.


Tyler Durden

Mon, 11/04/2019 – 14:29

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2NIkEnh Tyler Durden