Month: March 2017

Seemingly no amount of brand destruction will ever be sufficient to convince Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz that while most adult-aged Americans seem to like his company’s coffee, roughly 50% of them couldn’t give a flying flip about his leftist political opinions that he’s constantly try to shove down their throats along with their morning java.

The latest gimmick comes via a partnership with Boston-based startup “Hi From the Other Side” and offers free coffee to people with opposing political opinions who agree to meet up at Starbucks to “engage in a civil conversation” about their political differences.  Per The Hill:

Participants who sign up (there’s currently a waitlist) for the app through Facebook are paired up with another local from the opposing political party.

 

The app brings together “nice people across the political divide to talk like neighbors. Not to convince, but to understand,” the Hi From the Other Side website states. The company says it’s “hopeful there are people who really want to engage in a civil conversation.”

 

As part of a recently launched, limited promotion, the startup says those who sign up and are matched will receive a Starbucks e-gift card.
“This means you’ll have to show up and work together to unlock the gift card!” according to its site.

And here’s “Hi From the Other Side’s” take on the program:

“Hi From The Other Side has a way for you to make a connection over a great cup of coffee at Starbucks. If you are one of the first to be matched during this limited offer, you will receive a Starbucks e-gift card to redeem together at a nearby store. This means you’ll have to show up and work together to unlock the gift card!”

Of course, all of this comes just a few weeks after Schultz’s public announcement to hire 10,000 refugees, a clear shot at the Trump administration’s immigration policies, seemingly backfired with his “brand perception” taking a sudden and massive hit (we wrote about it here: “Starbucks’ ‘Brand Perception’ Takes A Massive Hit After Announcing Plans To Hire 10,000 Refugees“).

Credit Suisse’s Restaurant team, led by Jason West, also took note of the constant damaging political campaigns and warned that Schultz’s refugee stunt could cause the company to miss upcoming same-store-sales estimates.

We have analyzed online “net sentiment” data (positive vs. negative online mentions) provided by NetBase to gauge changes in Starbucks’ brand perception. This follows recent media reports that SBUX’s decision to hire 10,000 refugees over the next five years could have upset some customers, perhaps negatively impacting sales trends. Our work shows a sudden drop in brand sentiment following announcement of the refugee hiring initiative on Jan. 29th, to flattish from a run-rate of ~+80 (on an index of -100 to +100). Net sentiment has since recovered, but has seen significant volatility in recent weeks. While this is only one data point, the analysis leaves us incrementally cautious on SBUX’s ability to meet consensus US SSS forecasts, which call for SSS to accelerate from +3% in F1Q17 (Dec. qtr.) to ~+3.5% in F2Q and ~+5.5% in 2H17.

 

Potential impact to F2Q SSS: NetBase data show that net sentiment remained depressed for 10 days in late Jan. and early Feb. and was particularly volatile through the remainder of Feb. We see potential for a scenario in which US SSS slowed for a few weeks following news of the refugee hiring initiative, negatively impacting full-quarter SSS by ~70-80bps under a reasonable bear case. This assumes that (1) SSS during the initial 10-day stretch were ~flat, (2) SSS averaged +2% during the remaining 3 weeks of Feb. (when net sentiment saw particularly high volatility) and (3) SSS during the rest of the qtr (Jan. and Mar.) average +3.5% (in line with consensus forecasts for F2Q), putting F2Q US SSS at ~+2.8%. We caveat that we found little to no correlation over longer time periods between the net sentiment data and US SSS. However, in our past work on Chipotle (CMG: Neutral), we found that large and sudden spikes in net sentiment coincided with similar shifts in SSS trends.

For those who missed it, here are some excerpts from the politically charged message drafted by Schultz to his employees with “deep concern and a heavy heart”:

I write to you today with deep concern, a heavy heart and a resolute promise. Let me begin with the news that is immediately in front of us: we have all been witness to the confusion, surprise and opposition to the Executive Order that President Trump issued on Friday, effectively banning people from several predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States, including refugees fleeing wars. I can assure you that our Partner Resources team has been in direct contact with the partners who are impacted by this immigration ban, and we are doing everything possible to support and help them to navigate through this confusing period.

 

Hiring Refugees: We have a long history of hiring young people looking for opportunities and a pathway to a new life around the world. This is why we are doubling down on this commitment by working with our equity market employees as well as joint venture and licensed market partners in a concerted effort to welcome and seek opportunities for those fleeing war, violence, persecution and discrimination.  There are more than 65 million citizens of the world recognized as refugees by the United Nations, and we are developing plans to hire 10,000 of them over five years in the 75 countries around the world where Starbucks does business.

 

Building Bridges, Not Walls, With Mexico: We have been open for business in Mexico since 2002, and have since opened almost 600 stores in 60 cities across the country, which together employ over 7,000 Mexican partners who proudly wear the green apron. Coffee is what unites our common heritage, and as I told Alberto Torrado, the leader of our partnership with Alsea in Mexico, we stand ready to help and support our Mexican customers, partners and their families as they navigate what impact proposed trade sanctions, immigration restrictions and taxes might have on their business and their trust of Americans.

Apparently nothing will ever convince some of America’s leftist billionaires that, no matter how rich they become, they will never be able to force their political opinions on Americans who see through their propaganda…just ask all the rich people that just lost a fortune trying to elect Hillary.

via http://ift.tt/2onmT1D Tyler Durden

Authored by James Holbrooks via TheAntiMedia.org,

Adding fuel to an already highly combustible situation in Southeast Asia, Reuters reported Tuesday that China has “largely completed major construction of military infrastructure on artificial islands it has built in the South China Sea,” and that the Asian superpower “can now deploy combat planes and other military hardware there at any time.”

Citing satellite imagery analyzed by the Asian Maritime Transparency Initiative, part of Washington, D.C.’s Center for Strategic and International Studies, the news agency writes that “work on Fiery Cross, Subi and Mischief Reefs in the Spratly Islands included naval, air, radar and defensive facilities.”

Sticking to the mainstream narrative that China is an aggressor in claiming sovereign rights to the majority of the South China Sea, Pentagon spokesman Commander Gary Ross says the new images confirm what the U.S. military already knows.

“China’s continued construction in the South China Sea is part of a growing body of evidence that they continue to take unilateral actions which are increasing tensions in the region and are counterproductive to the peaceful resolution of disputes,” he told Reuters.

China, as it has repeatedly, downplayed this notion and stuck to the position that it’s simply erecting defensive infrastructure within its own borders, as would any nation.

“As for China deploying or not deploying necessary territorial defensive facilities on its own territory, this is a matter that is within the scope of Chinese sovereignty,” Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said at a press briefing Tuesday.

Despite comments such as these — and the very real fact that China hasn’t actually invaded anyone — the corporate media jumped on the news of the new images.

Forbes, for instance, ran a piece that essentially listed all the reasons why China is a really bad actor in the region, and CNN talked to analysts who explained how the military buildup on the artificial islands will be gradual as China continues to exert its authoritarian influence over neighboring countries.

That’s the narrative. Believe as you will.

But the reality of the situation in the South China Sea – all geopolitical analysis aside – is that there’s about to be a hell of a lot of military hardware in those waters.

As Anti-Media has been reporting, U.S. forces are already in the region, taking part in joint drills with ally South Korea that will last until the end of April. Then, at the beginning of May, Japan — another U.S. ally — will sail its navy’s most powerful warship through the South China Sea on a three-month tour.

That means that just as the joint drills with South Korea end — which, incidentally, units from Delta Force, the Navy SEALS and Army Rangers are taking part in — Japan will shove off a warship aimed at waters claimed by China.

If that timing seems a little curious, also consider that the U.S. just deployed its Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile system in South Korea, which both China and Russia cared none too much for.

With China showing no signs of backing away from its stance in the South China Sea — both ideologically and physically —  and with the corporate media willing and eager to push the “evil China” narrative that the U.S. military appears hell-bent on capitalizing on, it appears the long-dreaded collision course with China may, indeed, be not far off on the horizon.

via http://ift.tt/2oh79AP Tyler Durden

John Podesta slapped the Daily Caller with a cease-and-desist letter after the conservative news outlet published a story alleging that the former Clinton campaign chairman violated federal laws by failing to disclose the receipt of 75,000 shares of stock from a Kremlin-financed company when he joined the Obama White House in 2014. 

Despite the C&D letter, sent by Podesta attorney Marc Elias, as of this afternoon the Daily Caller article, entitled “EXCLUSIVE: John Podesta May Have Violated Federal Law By Not Disclosing 75,000 Stock Shares,” was still published on the company’s website.  Within the article, the Daily Caller summarized the alleged financial disclosure violation by Podesta as follows:

Joule Unlimited Technologies — financed in part by a Russian firm —  originally awarded Podesta 100,000 shares of stock options when in 2010 he joined that board along with its Dutch-based entities: Joule Global Holdings, BV and the Stichting Joule Global Foundation.

 

When Podesta announced his departure from the Joule board in January 2014 to become President Barack Obama’s special counselor, the company officially issued him 75,000 common shares of stock.

 

The Schedule B section of the federal government’s form 278, which requires financial disclosures for government officials, required Podesta to “report any purchase, sale or exchange by you, your spouse, or dependent children…of any property, stocks, bonds, commodity futures and other securities when the amount of the transaction exceeded $1,000.”

 

Podesta’s form 278 Schedule B is blank regarding his receipt of any stock from any company.

 

Liberals and conservatives alike tell TheDCNF Podesta should have disclosed the stock.

Elias shared his legal handy work with his twitter followers…

I sent a cease & desist letter demanding the Daily Caller correct the lies about @johnpodesta‘s financial disclosure. Waiting for response. http://pic.twitter.com/5Nfi0yG8sL

— Marc E. Elias (@marceelias) March 29, 2017

…But, as the Washington Examiner subsequently pointed out, he apparently sent the letter to the wrong address…he’s really more a ‘big picture’ guy.

Of course, whether DC’s article is true or not, now that allegations have been made we demand that multiple House and Senate committees immediately launch numerous investigations into Podesta’s ties to Russia…it’s only fair given the amount of time and taxpayer money that Democrats have spent tracking down CNN’s conspiracy theories. 

via http://ift.tt/2oEvwV8 Tyler Durden

Ed Murray, the Mayor of the city of Seattle, has just launched yet another federal lawsuit against the Trump administration’s threat to withhold federal grants to so-called “sanctuary cities,” citing the 10th Amendment that deals with states’ rights.  Murray also took to his bully pulpit to blast the Trump administration’s “war on cities” while simultaneously declaring that Seattle isn’t “breaking any laws” by simply choosing to ignore certain federal mandates.  Per NBC News:

“Apparently the Trump administration, their war on facts, has now become a war on cities,” Seattle Mayor Ed Murray said. He said the goal of the suit is to have a judge declare the order unconstitutional.

 

“Let me be clear about the facts: We are not breaking any laws and we are prioritizing safety,” Murray said.

Communities become LESS safe every day under Trump’s orders as residents become more afraid to report crimes. That’s why we must act now.

— Ed Murray (@MayorEdMurray) March 29, 2017

Of course, the comments from Murray followed Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ surprise appearance at Sean Spicer’s daily White House press briefing earlier this week to announce that his DOJ would be taking steps to not only require that so-called “sanctuary cities” enforce federal immigration laws but would also be seeking to claw back past DOJ awards granted to those cities if they refuse to certify compliance.

“Today, I’m urging states and local jurisdictions to comply with these federal laws.  Moreover, the Department of Justice will require that jurisdictions seeking or applying for DOJ grants to certify compliance with 1373 as a condition for receiving those awards.”

 

“This policy is entirely consistent with the DOJ’s Office of Justice Programs guidance that was issued just last summer under the previous administration.”

 

“This guidance requires jurisdictions to comply and certify compliance with Section 1373 in order to be eligible for OJP grants.  It also made clear that failure to remedy violations could result in withholding grants, termination of grants and disbarment or ineligibility for future grants.”

 

“The DOJ will also take all lawful steps to claw back any fines awarded to a jurisdiction that willfully violates Section 1373.”

Sessions’ full comments can be viewed below:

Attorney General Sessions says sanctuary cities ‘cannot continue’ https://t.co/YiS9doT3IE http://pic.twitter.com/nGmICgmiA6

— FOX Business (@FoxBusiness) March 27, 2017

Meanwhile, Seattle’s AG also decided to chime in:

Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes said the effects of the executive order have already been felt, with victims in domestic violence cases choosing not to pursue prosecution due to immigration status. He said local governments do not enforce federal immigration laws. Holmes noted that terms like “sanctuary cities” are nebulous and ill defined.

 

“Instead of the press conferences from Washington, instead of the Tweets from the White House, we want to have a sober statement of the law that can be reassuring to the communities that this is still the rule of law, and it’s still a nation of laws,” he said.

Of course, the snowflake bastion of San Francisco has already filed suit against the Trump administration’s executive order, also citing the 10th Amendment. “This strikes at the heart of established principles of federalism and violates the United States Constitution,” attorneys for the city and county of San Francisco wrote in its complaint.  A federal judge set a hearing for the city’s motion for a preliminary injunction to block the executive order for April 14.

Seems like the Trump administration, and few billion dollars in federal taxpayer subsidies, have struck a nerve.

via http://ift.tt/2nBeWG7 Tyler Durden

Hot on the heels of the WSJ report that Trump’s former National Security Advisor, Mike Flynn, has offered to testify in exchange for immunity from prosecution, Flynn’s lawyer, Robert Kelner of the law firm Covington, issued the following statement, in which judging by Kelner’s language, Flynn’s offer is not so much to “turn” on Trump, as to set the record straight, while putting an end to the ongoing “media witch hunt”, to wit:

the media are awash with unfounded allegations, outrageous claims of treason, and vicious innuendo directed against him. He is now the target of unsubstantiated public demands by Members of Congress and other political critics that he be criminally investigated. No reasonable person, who has the benefit of advice from counsel, would submit to questioning in such a highly politicized, witch hunt environment without assurances against unfair prosecution.

The full statement by Robert Kelner is below

Counsel to Lt. General Mike Flynn (Retired)

 

General Flynn certainly has a story to tell, and he very much wants to tell it, should the circumstances permit.

 

Out of respect for the Committees, we will not comment right now on the details of discussions between counsel for General Flynn and the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, other than to confirm that those discussions have taken place. But it is important to acknowledge the circumstances in which those discussions are occurring.

 

General Flynn is a highly decorated 33-year veteran of the U.S. Army. He devoted most of his life to serving his country, spending many years away from his family fighting this nation’s battles around the world. He was awarded four Bronze Stars for actions in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere in the war on terror. He received the Legion of Merit twice, and the Defense Superior Service Medal four times. He is a recipient of the Defense Department’s Distinguished Service Award and the Intelligence Community Gold Seal Medallion for Distinguished Service, as well as numerous other decorations.

 

Notwithstanding his life of national service, the media are awash with unfounded allegations, outrageous claims of treason, and vicious innuendo directed against him. He is now the target of unsubstantiated public demands by Members of Congress and other political critics that he be criminally investigated. No reasonable person, who has the benefit of advice from counsel, would submit to questioning in such a highly politicized, witch hunt environment without assurances against unfair prosecution.

h/t @ChuckRossDC

via http://ift.tt/2mUhJx4 Tyler Durden

Even as another scandal appears to be emerging, involving Donald Trump’s former national security advisor, Mike Flynn who according to the WSJ has offered to testify in exchange for immunity, the Trump administration on Thursday invited leaders of congressional intelligence panels to review the documents it said raise indicate government spy agencies improperly identified President Donald Trump’s campaign officials and associates in the course of routine foreign surveillance.

According to Bloomberg, in a letter signed by White House Counsel Donald McGahn, the administration said Thursday it was responding to a March 15 request from intelligence committees for “documents necessary to determine whether information collected on U.S. persons was mishandled and leaked.” Specifically, it asks the committees to probe whether the intelligence was properly gathered, whether names were improperly revealed and “to the extent that U.S. citizens were subject to such surveillance, were civil liberties violated?”

The invitation announcement was made Sean Spicer during a briefing with reporters in Washington Thursday, shortly after a New York Times report that two White House officials had provided House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes with reports showing that Trump and his associates were “incidentally surveilled” by U.S. spy agencies.

The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff who previously called for Nunes to recuse himself of the Russian investigation, said he’s “more than willing” to review the material but questioned the administration’s motives, saying officials may be trying to disseminate information that helps Trump’s case. “I hope they’ll have some kind of explanation for why they chose this path,” Schiff told reporters at the Capitol.

Schiff has also accused Nunes of doing the president’s bidding. On Thursday, Schiff also said that the broader investigation must continue. “This is not going to distract us from doing our Russia investigation,” Schiff said, adding that the White House action “raises profound questions.” Schiff also said he didn’t know whether the material being offered is the same as the documents that were viewed by Nunes.

Meanwhile, at an open Senate Intelligence Committee hearing Thursday on Russian interference in the elections, several experts testified that Russia’s efforts began as early as 2008 and peaked during last year’s election. In a depature from the conventional narrative that only Democrats were hacked, Clint Watts, former FBI agent who is now a national security expert at the Foreign Policy Research Institute, said other targets were prominent Republicans, including House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senator Marco Rubio, a member of the intelligence panel.

Rubio of Florida said Thursday that staff members on his presidential campaign were unsuccessfully targeted in July 2016 by hackers using an address in Russia and that former campaign aides were again targeted on Wednesday.

Ah yes, the old government-sponsored Russian hackers using “an address in Russia” to make sure they are not discovered by a cybersleuthing US senator.

In any case, while Nunes had refused to disclose who showed him the classified material, the New York Times reported on Thursday that Nunes was shown the material by Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the senior director for intelligence at the National Security Council, and Michael Ellis, who works at the White House Counsel’s Office and previously worked on the House Intelligence Committee staff. As reported earlier, Cohen-Watnick was an aide brought into the White House by Michael Flynn, who was fired as national security adviser in February after Trump concluded Flynn had given misleading information about contacts with Russian officials.

Nunes has said, and the Times said it confirmed, that the material isn’t related to the investigation into Russian attempts to influence the election, nor did it necessarily show any illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens.

While the House investigation has been stymied by the dispute over the material shown to Nunes, the Senate Intelligence Committee is proceeding with its own investigation. Panel Chairman Richard Burr, a North Carolina Republican, vowed that the probe won’t be politicized.  “The public deserves to hear the truth about possible Russian involvement in our elections,” Burr said.

In light of the events in just the past several hours, we find that rather improbable.

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

One day after Kushner’s family confirmed they had ended talks with China’s Anbang Insurance Group concerning their interests in 666 Fifth Avenue in New York, a deal that would have netted the Kushner’s $400 million in cash, President Trump has decided to strike an aggressive tone ahead of his first meeting with China’s President Xi Jinping scheduled for next Thursday and Friday at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

After recent reports suggested that his administration may be softening on trade-related issues, Trump once again took to twitter to caution that his meetings with Xi may get a little turbulent, saying “we can no longer have massive trade deficits and job losses. American companies must be prepared to look at other alternatives.”

“The meeting next week with China will be a very difficult one in that we can no longer have massive trade deficits and job losses. American companies must be prepared to look at other alternatives.”

The meeting next week with China will be a very difficult one in that we can no longer have massive trade deficits…

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 30, 2017

…and job losses. American companies must be prepared to look at other alternatives.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 30, 2017

Of course, these tweets follow a similar tone from Sean Spicer earlier today during his daily press briefing in which he said “there are big issues of national and economic security that need to get addressed.”  Per Reuters:

U.S. administration officials say the need for China to do more on North Korea, the large U.S. trade imbalance with China, and Beijing’s pursuit of expansive claims in the South China Sea will top the agenda. Trump has sharply criticized China on all of the issues.

 

White House spokesman Sean Spicer told a news briefing the meeting was be an opportunity for Trump “to develop a relationship in person with President Xi.”

 

“He’s spoken to him on the phone a few times, but we have big problems … everything from the South China Sea, to trade, to North Korea. There are big issues of national and economic security that need to get addressed.”

 

“Right now we’re not worried so much about slogans as much as progress. There’s a lot of big things that we need to accomplish with China, and I think that we will – we will work on them.”

 

The summit will follow a string of U.S.-China meetings and conversations aimed at mending ties after strong criticism of China by Trump during his election campaign.

Meanwhile, China has also been irritated at being told repeatedly by Washington to rein in North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs, or face U.S. sanctions on Chinese businesses trading with North Korea, and by the U.S. decision to base an advanced missile defense system in South Korea. 

Beijing is also deeply suspicious of U.S. intentions toward self-ruled Taiwan, which China claims as its own, after Trump broke with decades of U.S. policy by taking a phone call from Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen and saying that Washington did not have to stick to a “one China” policy.

Of course, only time will tell if Trump will take the same approach with China that he did with Merkel and pass Xi a bill for the present value of past trade deficits.

via http://ift.tt/2nB7wmi Tyler Durden

Authored by Wayne Madsen via Strategic Culture Foundation,

In a rare public announcement, Britain’s signals intelligence agency, the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), issued a rare public statement concerning a charge by an American former judge that it conducted electronic surveillance of president-elect Donald Trump after his upset victory on November 8, 2016. GCHQ stated:

“Recent allegations made by media commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano about GCHQ being asked to conduct ‘wiretapping’ against the then president-elect are nonsense. They are utterly ridiculous and should be ignored”.

Its public announcement belied the fact that GCHQ and its four ‘Five Eyes’ partners have spied on each other’s citizens as a legal ‘work around’ to their national laws designed to prevent such domestic eavesdropping on citizens by their respective agencies.

In the U.S., domestic surveillance orders are issued by a special Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), pursuant to the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The other nations, the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, have similar restrictive laws in place.

Such spying took place against two British Cabinet members in 1983 by Canada’s SIGINT agency. Former Canadian Communications Security Establishment (now known as Communications Security Establishment Canada or CSEC) officer Mike Frost said that Margaret Thatcher used the five-power global surveillance network to spy on two of her Cabinet members because she did not believe they were loyal in supporting Thatcher’s policies. Frost told CBS’s “60 Minutes”, “[Thatcher] had two ministers that she said, ‘They weren’t onside’… so my boss went to London and did intercept traffic from those two ministers”. Frost confirmed that the five countries could circumvent domestic laws against spying on citizens by asking another member of the alliance to do it for them.

One of the British ministers spied upon and then fired by Thatcher after her resounding re-election in 1983 was Foreign Secretary Francis Pym, a Conservative Party moderate who, ironically, was also in charge of GCHQ and the MI6 Secret Intelligence Service. The other was Deputy Prime Minister and Home Secretary William Whitelaw, who was moved to be Speaker of the House of Lords, an insignificant position.

In 1998, it was revealed by Margaret Newsham, a former Lockheed contractor for the National Security Agency, that the GCHQ and NSA were involved in warrantless surveillance of U.S. Senator Strom Thurmond’s overseas phone calls. In the early 1970s, NSA and GCHQ reportedly cooperated in conducting warrantless eavesdropping on the communications in New York City of Beatles singer John Lennon.

The Canadian agency also eavesdropped the car phone of the U.S. ambassador in Ottawa, with NSA liaison officers fully aware of the espionage. In the 1960s, when French President Charles de Gaulle made common cause with the independence movement of French-speaking Quebec, the Canadians had the Norwegian, Danish, and Swedish SIGINT agencies (“THIRDPARTY” members of the five-party SIGINT alliance) conduct surveillance of communications between Paris and the Parti Quebecois Premier of Quebec Rene Levesque and his separatist movement.

During the 1980s, the Canadians were used by NSA to conduct “black bag” surveillance, including breaking and entering into the homes of U.S. citizens believed to be working with the Soviets. It was a work-around designed to circumvent the lack of evidence, which made a court order from the FISC nearly impossible to obtain. In the late 1990s, NSA eavesdropping devices were discovered in email routers located in the European Parliament headquarters in Brussels. Among the email being intercepted was that of British Members of the European Parliament.

In 2015, New Zealand’s then-Prime Minister John Key was placed under surveillance by the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) in Canberra. The transcripts were not only passed on to Australia’s government and the NSA, but also to the New Zealand Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB). The Australian eavesdrops detailed Key’s negotiating stance with regard to Pharmac, the government’s drug purchasing agency, and the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal. In December 2016, Key abruptly resigned as prime minister for «personal reasons». Asian trade negotiations also resulted in the ASD conducting surveillance of the Chicago-based law firm Mayer Brown on behalf of NSA. In 2013, Mayer Brown was representing the government of Indonesia in trade talks with the Unites States.

GCHQ also owes the United States a few favors. in 2007, the U.S. Defense Department, which oversees the NSA, confirmed that the NSA did “download [Princess] Diana’s conversations” in the years before her death in 1997, but insisted it was only part of a security operation involving “other targets”. British law prohibited GCHQ from monitoring Diana, so the NSA gladly conducted the surveillance on behalf of its British counterpart.

Legal work around surveillance operations are detailed in a 2005 Secret NSA draft directive, titled “Collection, Processing and Dissemination of Allied Communications,” which was revealed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. The draft states:

“[The 1946 UKUSA] agreement has evolved to include a common understanding that both governments will not target each other’s citizens/persons. However, when it is in the best interest of each nation, each reserved the right to conduct unilateral COMINT [communications intelligence] action against each other’s citizens/persons… Under certain circumstances, it may be advisable and allowable to target second party persons and second party communications systems unilaterally when it is in the best interests of the US and necessary for US national security… Such targeting must be performed exclusively within the direction, procedures and decision processes outlined in this directive… There are circumstances when targeting of second party persons and communications systems, with the full knowledge and co-operation of one or more second parties, is allowed when it is in the best interests of both nations. This targeting will conform to guidelines set forth in this directive”.

At a meeting of Five Eyes agencies at GCHQ headquarters on April 22-23, 2008, it was agreed that the five agencies would share their intercepted bulk data with one another, even if it includes their own citizens. The Australian Defense Signals Directorate (DSD), now the ASD, showed the least concern about its citizens being caught up in bulk data sharing. The Australians also appeared willing to share intercepted data with «non-intelligence agencies, for example, the Australian Federal Police.

The targeting of other Five Eyes partners was carried out by the CSEC during the G20 summit in London in 2009. Members of the delegations of Canada, the United States, and Australia saw their cell phone and email communications intercepted by CSEC eavesdroppers who conducted their operations on British soil. A document classified TOP SECRET STRAP 1 states the inter-Five Eyes eavesdropping was conducted by CSEC on behalf of GCHQ to “ensure that intelligence relevant to HMG’s [Her Majesty’s Government] desired outcomes for its presidency of the G20 reaches customers at the right time and in a form which allows them to make full use of it”.

A similar legal work around occurred during the 2010 G8 and G20 summits in Toronto. There, a special NSA surveillance operation conducted at the U.S. embassy in Ottawa targeted the communications of members of the Canadian, British, and Australian delegations. At the same, the CSEC, from its headquarters in Leitrim, outside of Ottawa, intercepted the communications of American, British, and Australian delegates. Technically, no laws were broken.

The GCHQ and the British government have cried foul over reports they surveilled Trump’s transition team on behalf of the Obama administration. However, there is a wealth of historical information on such cooperation between the Five Eyes. The fact that GCHQ squawked publicly about it being implicated in political eavesdropping makes it more likely that it was caught red-handed. GCHQ and its partners have come a long way from simply offering ‘no comment’ to such press accounts.

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

In a dramatic development involving Mike Flynn, President Trump’s former national security adviser who resigned just a few weeks into his tenure over allegations surrounding his Russian connections, the WSJ reports that he has told the FBI and congressional officials investigating the Trump campaign’s potential ties to Russia that he is willing to testify and be interviewed in exchange for immunity from prosecution, “according to officials with knowledge of the matter.”

As the WSJ adds, “as an adviser to Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign, and later one of Mr. Trump’s top aides in the White House, Mr. Flynn was privy to some of the most sensitive foreign-policy deliberations of the new administration and was directly involved in discussions about the possible lifting of sanctions on Russia imposed by the Obama administration.”

He has made the offer to the FBI and the House and Senate intelligence committees though his lawyer but so far officials have not accepted his deal.

It was not immediately clear why Flynn would need immunity from prosecution, or whether the offer was made after coordination with the Trump administration. 

As the WSJ adds, “it wasn’t clear if Mr. Flynn had offered to talk about specific aspects of his time working for Mr. Trump, but the fact that he was seeking immunity suggested Mr. Flynn feels he may be in legal jeopardy following his brief stint as the national security adviser, one official said.

As a reminder, Flynn was forced to resign after acknowledging that he misled White House officials about the nature of his phone conversations with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. during the presidential transition.

Flynn’s communications with the Russian ambassador, Sergei Kislyak, have been scrutinized by the FBI, which is examining whether Trump campaign personnel colluded with Russian officials who are alleged to have interfered with the presidential election, according to current and former U.S. officials. Russia has denied the allegations. Flynn also was paid tens of thousands of dollars by three Russian companies, including the state-sponsored media network RT, for speeches he made shortly before he became a formal adviser to Mr. Trump’s campaign, according to documents obtained by a congressional oversight committee.

As the WSJ adds, Democratic lawmakers have requested a copy of the security-clearance form that Mr. Flynn was required to file before joining Mr. Trump in the White House, to see if he disclosed sources of foreign income.

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

European Union Chief  Jean-Claude Juncker is apparently not thrilled with Trump’s support of the Brexit referendum and, in speaking at the centre-right European People Party’s (EPP) annual conference today, has vowed to “promote the independence of Ohio and Austin, Texas in the United States of America” if he “goes on like that.”

“A lot of people would like it that way.  Even people on another continent where the newly elected U.S. President was happy that the Brexit was taking place and has asked other countries to do the same.  And, if he goes on like that, I am going to promote the indenpendence of Ohio and Austin, Texas in the United States of America.”

Of course, ‘there is truth in jest’ and behind the humor, there’s real anger among EU chiefs that President Trump stoked the Brexit fire and, with it, egged on other countries to follow the U.K.’s lead.

Mr Juncker’s comments came in the middle of an angry speech in which he railed against critics of the EU Commission.

 

They will be seen as totally inexplicable at a time when EU-US relations appeared to be on the mend, with Vice-President Mike Pence having completed a largely successful trip to Brussels and the commander-in-chief himself significantly softening his tone towards the EU project.

 

Mr Juncker did not criticise Britain at all during his speech, and only made reference to Brexit in relation to Mr Trump and the opportunities it presents for Europe to reform itself.

As Express points out, Juncker’s comments are “diplomatic dynamite,” particularly after Trump recently passed Merkel her $375 billion ‘NATO invoice.’

The remarks are diplomatic dynamite at a time when relations between Washington and Brussels are already strained over Europe’s meagre contributions to NATO and the US leader’s open preference for dealing with national governments.

 

They are by far the most outspoken intervention any senior EU figure has made about Mr Trump and are likely to dismay some European leaders who were hoping to seek a policy of rapprochement with their most important ally.

Of course, if Juncker is really serious about his threats, we would kindly suggest that he start by promoting CalExit.

via http://ift.tt/2nB2K8k Tyler Durden