Arrest Of Russian Hacker Calls Attention To Unfinished Business In Prague

Submitted by James Durso via RealClearDefense.com,

Yevgeniy Nikulin, a Russian hacker wanted in the U.S. for hacking private firms, was arrested in Prague last October. The U.S. has requested his extradition, suspecting he has information on Russian government hacking.  With Russian hackers so much in the news, there will be close attention to this case, but Prague denied an extradition request last year, causing serious damage to American interests.

In February 2016, the Czech government refused to extradite a Lebanese-born terrorist arrested in a DEA sting in Prague.  Ali Fayyad, a former associate of notorious Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout, was the connection for illicit arms, drugs, and money laundering between Hezbollah, ISIS, and South American Marxist rebels and drug cartels.  He had plotted the assassination of U.S. officials, and his release enraged some U.S. officials and strained U.S.-Czech relations.

Congressman Chris Stewart of the House Intelligence Committee called for targeted sanctions on Czech officials involved in Fayyad’s release.  “Mr. Fayyad is likely to continue plotting to harm the U.S., and his release is not a simple oversight that we should ignore.”

Although the Czech government approved extradition, Justice Minister Robert Pelikan rejected the request and released him into Lebanese custody.  Defense Minister Martin Stropnicky claimed he was exchanged for five Czech citizens held in Lebanon, after a bizarre kidnapping scheme that looked more like a farce than international terrorism.

As I wrote at the time, “the U.S., Israeli, Czech, Ukrainian and Lebanese media alleged that the kidnapping was staged, pointing out that . . . one of the team was a publicly identified Czech Military Intelligence officer; two of the putative hostages were members of Fayyad’s legal defense team, another was Fayyad’s brother, and the cost of their travel was borne by Mr. Fayyad. A diplomatic source told Lebanese papers that Fayyad’s attorney was well paid for playing his part as a ‘hostage.’”

Every aspect of the case was handled by officials associated with the Czech ANO party: Pelikan, Stropnicky, Military Intelligence Director Jan Beroun, and discredited former police colonel Robert Slachta.  It was my opinion then that the top Party leaders orchestrated the scheme, and implemented by the head of military intelligence, all to create a pretext to avoid extraditing Fayyad to America.  My opinion is unchanged, but the question remains why?  Whom were they protecting in the Czech establishment?   Fayyad was an arms dealer; was he working with some arms company with legacy connections to the former Czechoslovak intelligence service StB?  Was it the firm that smuggled arms to ISIS in a shipment to Suleimaniya, Iraq marked as cigarettes?

Except for “strongly condemning” Fayyad’s release, the Obama Administration did nothing, in spite of Republican congressional inquiries.    The Czechs involved in his release believe they have gotten away with it.  In a sign of hubris, one has repeatedly tried to promote the implementing officer to General, but so far has been blocked by the Cabinet.

However, the luck of those officials may soon run out, because Trump is not Obama.  He will not ignore such a slight to American law enforcement, and neither will National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, or CIA Director Mike Pompeo.  In fact, not only did one of Pompeo’s fellow Republicans on the Intelligence Committee call for an investigation but in an almost comical twist, one of the main actors in the drama, ANO Party Chairman Andrej Babis, has been boasting in Prague of his relationship with the incoming CIA Director.  To buttress his claims, he is showing a picture from a courtesy photo-op taken last year when he visited Washington, D.C.

The Fayyad affair remains an open wound among working-level law enforcement and intelligence officers.  Fayyad already threatened to kill American officials, and he now knows the faces and identities of people who assisted in the two-year sting operation that led to his arrest.  

Conversations with people close to the Trump transition indicate support for an investigation into the Ali Fayyad affair, drawing on American law enforcement and intelligence capabilities.  This law and order approach will identify the Czech officials who were complicit in his release, and bring charges against them, pull any NATO security clearances, or otherwise punish each one of them, from the Ministerial level down to the commanding officer.  Pro-West Prime Minister Sobotka should not wait for Washington to act but should clean his own house.  How will he explain his failure to act, if the terrorist his government released is tied to an attack?

Obama’s failure to act stands in stark contrast to the energy displayed by President-elect Trump.  With Intelligence Committee members and staff so heavily involved in the new Administration, Congressman Stewart’s call for sanctions will likely be answered soon.

via http://ift.tt/2id5LMG Tyler Durden

The Last Time This Happened, We Saw Gains of 429%.

While CNBC and the financial media are pushing investors to buy into the “Stocks going to the moon” narrative, another asset class as just staged a once in a decade breakout.

That asset is Gold. The breakout is a bullish cross over in which the 50-WMA breaking about the 200-WMA.

GPC111171.png

This has only happened ONE other time in the last 16 years: in 2002.

That was the start of the last MAJOR bull market in Gold.

GPC111172.png

Over the next nine years, Gold rose an incredible 429%.

GPC111173.png

On that note, we just published a Special Investment Report to our clients concerning a unique play on Gold that less than 1% of investors know about.

This gives you exposure to 25 million ounces of Gold. The market is completely mispricing the value here, valuing the entire resource at just $273 per ounce.

Our report is titled The Gold Mountain: How to Buy Gold at $273 Per Ounce…

To pick up yours, swing by:

http://ift.tt/2dGZ3Yg

Best Regards

Graham Summers

Chief Market Strategist

Phoenix Capital Research

 

via http://ift.tt/2ijoXqu Phoenix Capital Research

Land of the Free: Michigan man issued parking ticket in his own driveway

The state of Michigan is not exactly known for its balmy weather this time of year.

And residents reasonably do what they have to do to cope with often extreme winter temperatures.

Last Thursday a man named Taylor Trupiano of Roseville, Michigan did what a lot of people do in cold climates.

He walked out of his house, started his car, turned on the heat, and went back inside for a few minutes while his engine and vehicle interior warmed up.

According to Mr. Trupiano, he was only inside for about 7 or 8 minutes.

But by the time he came back to his car, there was already a parking ticket on his windshield– with a fine totaling $128.

Some local police officer had apparently driven by, noticed the vehicle was unattended, written up this heinous infraction, and left.

There are so many things wrong with this picture it’s hard to know where to begin.

First off, the citation that Mr. Trupiano received was a parking ticket. Yet his car was parked on his own private property.

Let that sink in: this man received a parking ticket while his car was parked on his own property.

You can’t even park your car on your own property anymore without being in violation of some series of laws, rules, or local ordinances.

The city government’s reasoning is that, if you leave a vehicle unattended, it may encourage car thieves to steal it.

This is pretty flimsy logic.

Sure, maybe if a car thief is standing right there he/she may take the opportunity.

But it’s not like some lowlife felon is going to turn the other cheek and stop stealing cars just because there are no unattended vehicles with the keys in the ignition.

Criminals bent on theft are going to steal no matter what, just like some murderous thug in Chicago is going to find a gun and kill people regardless of local firearm regulations.

When the story broke on local news, Roseville’s Police Chief told reporters that his department is unapologetic about issuing the citation to Mr. Trupiano.

Sounding like a man who cares more about statistics than actually catching criminals, the Chief claimed that 5-10 unattended vehicles are stolen every winter, which “drives our crime rates up.”

I looked at Roseville’s crime rates. They’re high. This is not a safe place.

With a population of less than 50,000, there are nearly 2,000 property crime incidents per year.

That includes at least a few hundred car thefts– which means that 5-10 vehicles is statistically trivial.

Clearly this issue of unattended vehicles is NOT the root of the problem.

And even if all the citizens of Roseville never again left their vehicles unattended, even on a cold winter day for just a few minutes to let the car warm up, it still wouldn’t make a dent in the larger crime rate.

But that doesn’t matter.

Roseville’s city government deals with its crime problem by establishing obscure regulations to restrict what law-abiding people are allowed to do in their own homes with their private property.

It doesn’t matter whether you are aware that these ridiculous rules even exist: ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

You’re probably in violation of half a dozen rules and regulations right now without even knowing about them.

Naturally, they’re all for your own good… to protect you against all the terrible choices that you might make as a grown adult.

Thank goodness these people are here to save us from ourselves! Of course, there’s always more work to do.

Speaking of statistically trivial risks, I read recently that falling vending machines kill a handful of people each year. Let’s get rid of them.

Roller coaster malfunctions claim 4 lives each year. Maybe they should ban those too.

Sugary drinks are clearly bad for you. Perhaps they should outlaw those, at least above a certain size.

Oh wait, they’re already trying to do that.

This is what freedom means today in the United Nanny States of America.

from Sovereign Man http://ift.tt/2jDuR81
via IFTTT

FDA Says Explaining the Main Advantages of E-Cigarettes Would Confuse Consumers

In a “clarification” published this week in the Federal Register, the Food and Drug Administration indicates that e-cigarettes cannot legally be sold as tools to quit smoking unless their manufacturers go through the prohibitively expensive process of getting them approved as new pharmaceutical products. The FDA also says e-cigarettes cannot legally be sold as a less hazardous alternative to the conventional kind unless their manufacturers go through the prohibitively expensive process of getting them approved as “modified risk tobacco products.” The upshot is that e-cigarette companies are forbidden to be honest about the main benefits offered by their products, a form of censorship that is bound to retard the shift from smoking to vaping, thereby endangering lives that could have been saved by switching to a much less dangerous nicotine habit.

The FDA’s new rule is supposed to clarify when “a product made or derived from tobacco that is intended for human consumption will be subject to regulation as a drug, device, or a combination product.” That can happen in two ways, one of which is “if the product is intended for use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions, or in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease.” The FDA regulates nicotine products such as gum and patches as medical products, based on the dubious premise that nicotine addiction is a disease, the treatment for which is nicotine in a different form. The label on Nicorette gum, for instance, identifies it as a “stop smoking aid” that “reduces withdrawal symptoms, including nicotine craving, associated with quitting smoking.” As far as the FDA is concerned, selling e-cigarettes as a competing form of nicotine replacement for smokers trying to quit (which is what they are) puts them in the same regulatory category as Nicorette:

Claims related to smoking cessation have long been recognized as evidence of intended use conferring drug or device jurisdiction. Smoking cessation claims have also long been associated with intended uses of curing or treating nicotine addiction and its symptoms….Against this backdrop, smoking cessation claims on any product generally create a strong suggestion of intended therapeutic benefit to the user that generally will be difficult to overcome absent clear context indicating that the product is not intended for use to cure or treat nicotine addiction or its symptoms, or for another therapeutic purpose.

The FDA does not explicitly rule out any reference or allusion to smoking cessation in the marketing of e-cigarettes. The agency even allows that “evidence may be developed showing that, in some situations, ‘smoking cessation’ is understood in context as referring to ending the use of traditional cigarettes and switching to a non-combustible product made or derived from tobacco.” It’s a mystery why new evidence would be required to prove that point, since that surely is the way that millions of people who have used e-cigarettes to quit smoking understand the concept. In any case, the FDA promises to “closely scrutinize ‘smoking cessation’ claims,” creating a strong presumption that will encourage manufacturers to steer clear of the subject. The FDA says “the rule’s treatment of smoking cessation claims as generally suggestive of a therapeutic purpose means that products marketed with such claims would generally be regulated as medical products.” It adds that disclaimers of therapeutic intent generally will not be sufficient to keep e-cigarettes out of that category.

Boston University public health professor Michael Siegel, an advocate of vaping as a harm-reducing alternative to smoking, questions the FDA’s legal reasoning, arguing that smoking (unlike nicotine addiction), is a “health-related behavior,” not a disease. Hence “a claim that e-cigarettes are intended to help someone quit smoking is not necessarily a claim that the product is intended to treat a disease.” Rather, “The intention is to help alter a health-related behavior.” The FDA pretends to address this argument but conspicuously fails to do so:

Several comments objected that smoking is not a disease, but a behavior, and that a product that claims to help individuals quit smoking should not be regulated as a medical product absent any assertions that it will prevent disease or treat nicotine dependence….

Over the past 50 years, smoking has been causally linked to diseases of nearly all organs of the body, diminished health status, and fetal harm. Most current adult smokers want to quit smoking completely for health reasons. Given these facts, we believe that statements related to quitting smoking generally create a strong suggestion that a product is intended for a therapeutic purpose.

The FDA seems to be saying a product that helps people quit smoking is a drug because it prevents disease. By that logic, a host of products aimed at achieving a healthier lifestyle, ranging from motivational calendars (an example Siegel mentions) to exercise equipment, would qualify as drugs under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

The FDA claims it is trying to prevent the “consumer confusion” that would be caused by an honest and open discussion of the benefits offered by e-cigarettes:

FDA believes that the potential for consumer confusion is increasing. This is especially true when tobacco-derived products that may otherwise appear to be products intended for recreational use make claims related to quitting smoking and treatment of nicotine addiction….

FDA continues to believe that there is consumer confusion about the intended uses of marketed products made or derived from tobacco. Evidence that at least some consumers are confused about the intended uses of products can be found in the comments themselves. We received many comments from individuals who began using e-cigarettes because they believed that e-cigarettes would help them quit smoking. Moreover, as noted in two comments, studies have shown that many consumers are using e-cigarettes to attempt to quit smoking despite the fact that no e-cigarette has been approved for use as a smoking cessation aid. We believe that the rule will help to mitigate this confusion and help ensure that consumers do not mistakenly use tobacco products, which are inherently dangerous, for medical uses.

It is hard to overstate the bureaucratic, pseudoscientific arrogance on display here. According to the FDA, smokers who switch to vaping in the hope of reducing the health risks they face are making a mistake, even though it is clear that the hazards posed by vaping pale beside the hazards posed by smoking, and the fact that smokers insist on making that mistake shows how confused they are. It stands to reason that encouraging such behavior can only lead to further confusion. E-cigarette suppliers must therefore be prohibited from suggesting their products might help smokers quit, even though that is their biggest selling point and happens to be true.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2j1e8bv
via IFTTT

NYT Suggests CNN, BuzzFeed Peddled “Fake News”

In a fascinating retort by the NYT to the story of the day, namely the CNN-BuzzFeed narrative based on an unverified 35-page memo allegedly prepared by a UK intelligence officer, even the paper of record takes the two media outlets to town, and in an article titled “BuzzFeed Posts Unverified Claims on Trump, Stirring Debate” essentially accuses them of doing what CNN has accused so much of the ‘alternative media’ in doing when distributing “fake news.”

Here are the key excerpts:

The reports by CNN and Buzzfeed sent other news organizations, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, scrambling to publish their own articles, some of which included generalized descriptions of the unverified allegations about Mr. Trump. By late Tuesday, though, only BuzzFeed had published the full document.

 

BuzzFeed’s decision, besides its immediate political ramifications for a president-elect who is to be inaugurated in 10 days, was sure to accelerate a roiling debate about the role and credibility of the traditional media in today’s frenetic, polarized information age.

And the punchline, where the NYT essentially accuses both CNN and BuzzFeed of stooping to the level of “fake news” disseminators:

Of particular interest was the use of unsubstantiated information from anonymous sources, a practice that fueled some of the so-called fake news — false rumors passed off as legitimate journalism — that proliferated during the presidential election.

It then continues its scathing critique of what now passes as “journalism”

CNN said that its journalists had reviewed the full 35-page compilation of memos, the same document later published in full by BuzzFeed, but declined to include some details, saying that the network “has not independently corroborated the specific allegations.” CNN said its reporters spoke with multiple high-ranking intelligence and government officials before publishing its report.

Meanwhile, the NYT held off for one simple reason: “In a brief interview in the Times newsroom on Tuesday evening, Dean Baquet, the executive editor of The Times, said the paper would not publish the document because the allegations were “totally unsubstantiated.” “We, like others, investigated the allegations and haven’t corroborated them, and we felt we’re not in the business of publishing things we can’t stand by,” Mr. Baquet said.

But BuzzFeed could.

It wasn’t just the NYT who lashed out at the “report” – on social media, some left-leaning writers who generally oppose Mr. Trump expressed skepticism about the document published by BuzzFeed. “An anonymous person, claiming to be an ex-British intel agent & working as a Dem oppo researcher, said anonymous people told him things,” wrote Glenn Greenwald.

Immediately after BuzzFeed’s publication, some reporters volunteered that they, too, had received copies of the report. “Raise your hand if you too were approached with this story,” Julia Ioffe, a journalist who has written extensively on Russia, wrote on Twitter, adding that she had not reported on the information in the document “because it was impossible to verify.”

 

Writers at the blog Lawfare, which covers national security issues, said they had been in possession of the document “for a couple of weeks” but opted not to publish because the allegations were unproven.

 

“Yes, they are explosive; they are also entirely unsubstantiated, at least to our knowledge, at this stage,” the site wrote on Tuesday night. “For this reason, even now, we are not going to discuss the specific allegations within the document.”

To be sure, BuzzFeed’s move was welcomed by some people, who expressed concern that news outlets and government officials with access to the allegations had not disclosed them sooner. Almost immediately, the report’s publication prompted questions from Hillary Clinton’s camp about why the claims had not surfaced earlier.  “Today has brought a gush of reporting that outlets knew about and sat on prior to November 8,” Brian Fallon, Mrs. Clinton’s chief campaign spokesman, wrote on Twitter. He added, in a second message: “I repeat: certain media outlets were told this prior to November 8.”

Ultimately, the reaction to the report simply confirmed just how polarized US society has become, and that when it comes to information, virtually anything can now pass as “fake news” if not factually checked and corroborated by evidence, which incidentally in the entire “Russia hacking” means everything.

Finally, we would find it supremely delightful if, indeed, it was 4Chan who hoaxed not only CNN and BuzzFeed but the US intelligence agencies, into posting the “golden showers” scene. If so, then faith in conventional US media (and US intelligence) will fully disintegrate.

via http://ift.tt/2ijj7pg Tyler Durden

Trump Asks If We’re Living In Nazi Germany, Violent Crime Up in 2016, Obama Says Goodbye: A.M. Links

  • In response to a Buzzfeed report that president-elect Donald Trump is sexually aroused by pee and Russia knows it, Trump took to Twitter to declare it “FAKE NEWS” and ponder whether we’re living in Nazi Germany. Trump also tweeted that “Russia has never tried to use leverage over me. I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH RUSSIA – NO DEALS, NO LOANS, NO NOTHING! … I win an election easily, a great “movement” is verified, and crooked opponents try to belittle our victory with FAKE NEWS. A sorry state!”
  • President Obama gave his farewell address to the nation last night, brandishing an inflated sense of his administration’s accomplishments that was, regardless, overshadowed by everyone talking about Trump and urine. Read the whole speech here; read Robby Soave on the speech here.
  • A measure that would’ve put $80 million into a new St. Louis soccer stadium will not move forward.
  • Violent crime was up, property crime down in the first half of 2016, according to new federal data.
  • Edward Snowden is pleading with President Obama to pardon Chelsea Manning before he leaves office.
  • Confirmation hearings for Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson, Trump’s pick for Secretary of State, begin this morning.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don’t forget to sign up for Reason’s daily updates for more content.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2jDq7yW
via IFTTT

Turkish Lira Carnage Continues – World’s Most Volatile Currency Crashes Most Since Lehman

The Lira – officially the world's most volatile currency – has lost 11% of its value since the start of 2017 (down 8 of the last 9 days against the USD).

 

In fact, the lira headed for its biggest five-day loss since Lehman (Oct 2008) after a pledge by Turkey’s central bank to support the currency failed to convince investors.

 

As we noted previously, as Turkey deals with rising domestic instability (and Erdogan's push for total rule), the Lira has become the world's most unstable currency…

As we noted earlier, market focus has turned on the lira as a result of Turkey's large external borrowing requirement which makes its currency one of the most vulnerable currencies to tightening by the Fed.

Not helping matters is that Turkish residents have been flocking to the stability of hard currencies, the opposite of what President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been urging. As the following Bloomberg chart shows, deposits in foreign exchange for individuals and companies excluding banks rose for a third week, signaling a lack of confidence in the lira. It’s the biggest loser among world currencies so far in 2017.

 

 

Additionally, Turkish economic growth has remained sluggish and inflation is rising, yet the central bank has been under pressure from President Tayyip Erdogan not to hike interest rates. A series of gun and bomb attacks have heightened security concerns. On Tuesday the Turkish parliament voted to press on with a debate about constitutional reform to strengthen the powers of President Tayyip Erdogan.

 

"Nobody wants to be the last one in there and everyone is running for the door. There are no signs from the authorities that they are taking it seriously," said Jakob Christensen, head of EM research at Danske Bank. Christensen said the risk of further attacks was undermining the tourist sector, which is vital for the economy and balance of payments.

It;s not just the currency that is in trouble though. The yield on the nation’s 10-year debt surged 45 basis points. The monetary authority said yesterday that it is monitoring “excessive volatility” in the markets and pledged to tackle “unhealthy price formations inconsistent with economic fundamentals.”

via http://ift.tt/2iFxnX2 Tyler Durden

How 4Chan McFooled John McCain, Buzzfeed, and the CIA Into Believing Trump’s Golden Showers

Ok, there is a lot to go through with this story, which is going to end up being one of the biggest embarrassments for Buzzfeed, the CIA, and old man McCain ever.

First let’s go over what happened, in reference to the pesudo intelligence report aka ‘dossier’ published by the high level retards over at Buzzfeed.

img_6067

I know this appears to be unbelievable, but it’s all verifiable. The neocon shill of a reporter from Buzzfeed, Rick Wilson, was catfished by some autist from the Hitler loving 4chan message boards and made to believe Trump enjoyed getting urinated on and all sorts of outlandish stuff. Truly, this is incredible. Let me post some screen shots.

img_6062 img_6063 img_6064

img_6066

That right there is the head of Buzzfeed explaining why he published a dodgy report of utter nonsense that was, apparently, fished around to other news agencies and summarily rejected — because it’s retard level was too high even for The NY Times.

img_6056 img_6057

Since the 4chan ruse was revealed, Rick Wilson has been made out to be a top moron with a propeller helmet, laughed at and derided as a person of very low standing. The heat is, apparently, getting to him.

img_6059

img_6058

Wikileaks calls bullshit on the report.

img_6068

img_6069

What sort of nonsense is in this top secret dossier? How about this?
img_6070

And now to the curious case of John McCain, war shill, neocon lover of death of agony.

Source: Guardian

Senator John McCain passed documents to the FBI director, James Comey, last month alleging secret contacts between the Trump campaign and Moscow and that Russian intelligence had personally compromising material on the president-elect himself.
 
The material, which has been seen by the Guardian, is a series of reports on Trump’s relationship with Moscow. They were drawn up by a former western counter-intelligence official, now working as a private consultant. BuzzFeed on Tuesday published the documents, which it said were “unverified and potentially unverifiable”.
 
The Guardian has not been able to confirm the veracity of the documents’ contents, and the Trump team has consistently denied any hidden contacts with the Russian government.

The media ran with the ‘explosive news’ and will now get to enjoy its explosion — as they hold it near their tiny little hearts.
 
img_6073

Trump is now pissing all over these guys.
img_6072

via http://ift.tt/2ijiMCO The_Real_Fly

Tillerson To Call Russia A “Danger” Which Must “Be Held Accountable For Its Actions”

Anticipating questions at his upcoming confirmation hearing, in which his “close relationship” with Russia will likely be in the spotlight for most of the session, Donald Trump’s nominee for secretary of State on Wednesday will tell senators that Russia “must be held accountable for its actions” and that “Russia today poses a danger, but it is not unpredictable in advancing its own interests.”

“Our NATO allies are right to be alarmed at a resurgent Russia,” Tillerson, 64, will say before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday, according to his prepared remarks. At the same time, he faults a lack of U.S. leadership for Russia’s aggressiveness, citing “weak or mixed signals with ‘red lines’ that turned into green lights” adding “we must also be clear-eyed about our relationship with Russia.”

Having been accused of being friendly with Putin during his tenure as Exxon CEO, it should not come as a surprise that his remarks are a sharp departure from comments by Trump, who has called for a friendlier relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Critics have raised questions over Tillerson’s close ties to Russia since his nomination for secretary of State. He received Russia’s Order of Friendship Award from President Vladimir Putin in 2013 and he opposed sanctions against the country following its annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea region in 2014.

As Bloomberg adds, “it’s also a stark turnaround for an oil baron who staked billions of dollars on Russia’s crude bonanza and as recently as 3 1/2 years ago was feted by Russia with its Order of Friendship. One of Tillerson’s most decisive moves as chief executive officer and chairman of Exxon was to make Russia the company’s biggest single exploration prospect globally.”

Now, Tillerson faces the challenge of assuring lawmakers that he can pursue the broader interests of U.S. foreign policy after his 41-year career at Exxon, the world’s largest energy company by market value.

Tillerson’s hearing comes at an awkward time, just a day after reports surfaced that intelligence officials had briefed the president-elect on a shadowy, unverifiable dossier alleging the Russian government had compromising information on him. The 35-page document, made up of a collection of memos filled with explosive claims about Trump’s relationship to Russia – which may or may not have been originated on 4chan – has been circulating among journalists and officials for months.

Still, despite the recent surge in hacking-related newsflow, Tillerson will avoid the topic. In his testimony, Tillerson says Russia has acted against U.S. interests and urges an “open and frank dialogue” so that “we know how to chart our own course.” But, as Bloomberg adds, he makes no mention of U.S. intelligence findings that Russia hacked into last year’s presidential campaign, leaking documents in what the spy agencies say became an effort to help Trump win. Russia has denied responsibility for the hacking.

It’s an issue likely to come up in questioning, as are news reports that U.S. intelligence officials have informed Trump they’ve received unsubstantiated information that the Russian government had compiled potentially damaging personal and financial information on him. Trump denounced those reports on Twitter as “FAKE NEWS – A TOTAL POLITICAL WITCH HUNT!”

The Kremlin denied those allegations Wednesday. Asked to comment on Tillerson’s prepared statement, spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that the Kremlin’s past “positive” assessments of the nominee referred to his professional qualities. “This doesn’t mean we are wearing rose-colored glasses,” Peskov said. “We understand that Mr. Tillerson will continue to be rather firm in following his line.”

While avoiding the topic of hacking, Tillerson does touch upon a more sensitive, to Russia issue, namely sanctions: in a nod to senators from both parties who are seeking tighter restrictions on Russia after the hacking, Tillerson does say the U.S. should use “economic aid and economic sanctions as instruments of foreign policy when appropriate.” Exxon has been hurt by sanctions against Russia that stalled its drilling plans there.

Tillerson says he is trying to explain what he calls Trump’s “bold new commitment” to advancing U.S. priorities abroad. At the same time, the speech charts a foreign policy vision that differs with Trump’s in important ways. Tillerson says the world risks plunging “deeper into confusion and danger” without American leadership, while Trump has cast the U.S. as overextended and in need of an “America First” policy.

 

In an implicit criticism of President Barack Obama’s policies, Tillerson paints a portrait of a U.S. government that has abrogated its leadership position in the world and no longer lives up to its commitments. Citing his time in the Boy Scouts — he was an Eagle Scout and went on to lead the organization — he says the U.S. must abide by the phrase the Boy Scouts cherish: “On my honor.”

Away from Russia-related topics, one sensitive issue Tillerson mentions is “radical Islam” – he says defeating Islamic State terrorists must be “our foremost priority in the Middle East.” He calls out North Korea and Iran, which he says has been allowed to get away with violations of the agreement that limited its nuclear program.

Tillerson also faults China for failing to rein in North Korea’s nuclear program and for stealing U.S. intellectual property.

In laying out a modest olive branch to China, Tillerson will say that “we need to see the positive dimensions in our relationship with China as well,” he will say. “The economic well-being of our two nations is deeply intertwined. China has been a valuable ally in curtailing elements of radical Islam. We should not let disagreements over other issues exclude areas for productive partnership.”

According to Bloomberg, those remarks will please leaders in Beijing, who have been unnerved by a litany of tweets in which Trump has questioned 40 years of protocol on Taiwan while saying that China dumps cheap goods on the U.S. market and continues to manipulate its currency.

 

via http://ift.tt/2jv2uVn Tyler Durden

Supreme Court Rules Unanimously to Protect Qualified Immunity for Police

The Supreme Court reversed a decision of the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, handing down an 8-0 decision in the case of White v. Paulie that will serve to strengthen qualified immunity for police officers.

The case revolved around the fatal police shooting of Samuel Paulie in New Mexico. Police officers arrived at the Paulie brothers’ home after two women called police to report one of the Paulies allegedly driving drunk. According to the facts presented in the ruling, police determined after talking to the women that they did not have probable cause to arrest Paulie but wanted to go to his house anyway to “get his side of the story,” to see if he was drunk, and to see if there was anything else going on. The officers went separately. The first two officers to arrive didn’t identify themselves as police, instead telling the Paulies they were surrounded and to come out or they would come in, causing the Paulies to believe they were being targeted for a home invasion and to arm themselves.

That’s when the third officer, Ray White, the plaintiff of the case that made it to the Supreme Court, arrived, just in time to hear the Paulies yell “we have guns.” He took cover behind a wall. Sam Paulie then exited his house with a shotgun, firing one shot that didn’t hit anyone. One of the officers shot at Paulie but missed. Then White left his cover and fired at Paulie, killing him.

The Supreme Court ruled that White deserved qualified immunity (a concept that, in essence, protects government employees from liability and civil damages so long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known,” as the Supreme Court decided in the 1982 case Harlow v. Fitzgerald.

“In the last five years, this Court has issued a number of opinions reversing federal courts in qualified immunity cases,” the court noted in its White v. Paulie decision, appearing to signal that there ought to be less of these making it all the way to the Supreme Court. “The Court has found this necessary both because qualified immunity is important to ‘society as a whole,’ and because as ‘an immunity from suit’, qualified immunity ‘is effectively lost if a case is erroneously permitted to go to trial.'”

The crux of the court’s decision is that, as “this Court explained decades ago, the clearly established law must be ‘particularized’ to the facts of the case.” The court admonished the appeals court for misunderstanding “the ‘clearly established analysis,'” writing that the 10th circuit had “failed to identify a case where an officer acting under similar circumstances as Officer White was held to have violated the Fourth Amendment.” Given that every police shooting is different in its own way, this is a troubling standard from the perspective of reducing police violence and increasing accountability for it.

The appeals court, the Supreme Court continued, “did not conclude that White’s conduct—such as his failure to shout a warning—constituted a run-of-the-mill Fourth Amendment violation.” The Supreme Court did not explain what they believed a “run-of-the-mill” Fourth Amendment looks like—the phrase is not a legal term of art.

The appeals court “recognized that ‘this case presents a unique set of facts and circumstances’ in light of White’s late arrival on the scene. This alone should have been an important indication to the majority that White’s conduct did not violate a ‘clearly established’ right.”

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg offered a concurring opinion that North Carolina criminal defense attorney and prolific legal tweeter Greg Doucette called an “after-the-fact ‘this isn’t as bad as it looks’ concurrence,” one “that would be totally unnecessary if it wasn’t actually just as bad as it looks.”

“The Supreme Court’s (unanimous) ruling means that absolutely no §1983 case will survive summary judgment on qualified immunity,” Doucette tweeted, “Unless there is preexisting precedent with the exact same facts.”

It’s important to stress that this decision was unanimous. The court may be divided evenly between liberals and conservatives, but when it comes to advocates of government power, they have an overwhelming majority. Even Justice Sonia Sotomayor, whose dissent in Utah v. Strieff, a case about the Fourth Amendment and police searches, Slate called an “atomic bomb of a dissent slamming racial profiling and mass imprisonment,” didn’t dissent here.

The Supreme Court’s latest ruling also highlights how crucial police reforms at the local level are to the cause of lowering police violence. Cops with the propensity to use excessive force or otherwise habitually violate Constitutional rights have to be removed from the force before they have a chance to kill anyone—that requires higher hiring standards, more accountability and discipline, and eliminating the largely union contract-driven privileges and protections that enable all of it.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2j5RCA6
via IFTTT