Friday, June 21, 2013

Corker Amendment Permanently Offers Citizenship to Those Overstaying Their Visas


Print Article Send a Tip

Just as public anxiety about the weak border security provisions in the Senate immigration bill was building, GOP Sen. Bob Corker stepped forward with an amendment to "fix" the problem. The result of his efforts, however, has been a "Christmas tree" measure, covering items far beyond border security. Breitbart News has learned exclusively that one provision of Corker's amendment will allow workers who stay in the country past their visa will remain on the "path to citizenship." 

Even in the future, breaking the law won't stop progress on what VP Joe Biden calls the "unfettered path" to citizenship.
The Corker Amendment ostensibly addresses measures to beef up border security. It, however, is also likely to be the last amendment considered on the immigration bill. As such, it has become a 1,000+ page amendment to supplant the current proposal and provide multiple new provisions. It has become the vehicle for ObamaCare 2.0.
Buried within the text of the Amendment is a seemingly innocuous provision:
(f) APPLICABILITY OF CERTAIN GROUNDS OF INADMISSIBILITY.—In determining an alien’s inadmissibility under this section, section 212(a)(9)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(9)(B)) shall not apply.
What does that mean?
Current law states that those applying for green cards are ineligible if they are either "illegally present" at any point or overstay the terms of their work visa. Such an immigrant, in current law, would have to return to their home country and restart the immigration process. The Corker Amendment wipes away that enforcement mechanism.
In the current draft of the Corker Amendment, any worker in the country on a legal work visa for 10 years can get a green card, even if they overstay their visa. The Corker Amendment allows immigrants to break the law in the future and still be eligible for citizenship. It absolves prospective behavior, not simply past mistakes.
Prior to the Corker Amendment, the 4.5 million immigrants outside the country on a visa waiting-list were subject to laws restricting their presence in the US. The Gang Senate bill would offer them immediate green cards, as long as they hadn't violated current US Law.
The language in the new Corker Amendment referenced above, however, would remove this restriction. They would become immediately eligible for a green card, even if they lived illegally in this country. The Corker Amendment wipes away any immigration enforcement. It is designed to maximize the number of individuals who qualify for citizenship.
The Corker Amendment is an obvious attempt by the DC GOP establishment to find a path to vote for the Senate bill. It throws a lot more money at the border, but it also weakens internal enforcement and controls. The Corker Amendment actually stipulates that, in perpetuity, you can break the law, overstay your visa, and still be eligible for citizenship.

As Egypt unravels, Team Obama increases support for Muslim Brotherhood

The news from Egypt is grim.
Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood president, Mohammed Morsi made international headlines this week as he appointed Adel Al Khayat as governor of Luxor, an ancient Egyptian city that is key tourist destination.
The problem with Mr. Khayat? He just happens to lead the “political” arm of a terrorist organization that massacred tourists in Luxor in 1997. The details of the attack are beyond grisly, with many of the dead disemboweled and notes “praising Islam” placed inside their mutilated bodies.
When it comes to the Middle East, we have proven to be the worst of friends and the best of enemies.
And that’s not all.
On Tuesday, the New York Times reported on the rise of blasphemy prosecutions since Morsi ascended to power.
In recent cases, Egyptian courts have sentenced a writer to 5 years in prison for allegedly promoting atheism, sentenced a lawyer to a year in prison for allegedly insulting Islam in a private conversation, and fined a Christian schoolteacher $14,000 for allegedly insulting Muhammed in her classroom.
These recent revelations pile on top of the “old” news, including violations of the peace treaty with Israel, failing to protect our American embassy from attacks, and launching systematic crackdowns on Egypt’s Coptic Christian community.
Against this backdrop of Shariah and jihad – and hidden behind the blanket news coverage of the Obama administration’s other scandals – the White House has decided to increase its financial support for the Muslim Brotherhood, quietly clearing the way for the U.S. to give Egypt $1.3 billion in military aid.
On May 10, the very day that Lois Lerner issued her contrived apology for the IRS targeting conservative groups, Secretary of State John Kerry formally waived – on national security grounds – statutory requirements that he certify that Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood government was “implementing policies to protect freedom of expression, association, and religion, and due process of law” before providing any further American military aid.
Think about this for a moment: The Obama administration threw the Mubarak regime (for all its flaws, a stalwart American ally that kept peace with Israel) under the bus ostensibly because of its human rights violations but is waiving human rights conditions to prop up a more brutal jihadist government.
Let’s not forget the motto of the Muslim Brotherhood: "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Koran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."
That is the organization that we are empowering – that we are arming – at American taxpayer expense.
In the coming days and weeks, secular and Christian opposition leaders are planning nationwide protests against a Morsi regime that has proven competent at implementing Shariah law but not at running an economy.
Morsi’s jihadist allies plan a crackdown, and if and when they succeed, you may see the terrible sight of American-made and taxpayer-purchased tanks and other armored vehicles literally crushing the Christian opposition.
The saying goes that there is “no better friend and no worse enemy” than a United States Marine.
The Obama administration has turned this on its head. -- When it comes to the Middle East, we have proven to be the worst of friends and the best of enemies.
We sat on our hands during Iran’s Green Revolution, when the Mullahs were briefly in danger of being overthrown.
We similarly sat on our hands in the early days of the Syrian uprising against the brutal, Iran-allied Assad regime, before jihadists had taken over the Syrian opposition.
But we acted quickly to support the Egyptian uprising, tossing aside a longtime ally.
Across the Middle East, jihad is ascendant. The Mullahs remain comfortably in power in Iran (busy building a bomb), Syria’s opposition is dominated by Al Qaeda-affiliated militias, and Egypt is firmly in the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood.
And now we’re arming Egypt and considering arming jihadist rebels in Syria.
The Obama administration is doubling down on failure – at the expense of Egyptian Christians and the American taxpayer.
Jay Sekulow is Chief Counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ). Follow him on Twitter@JaySekulow.

Bank of America’s Foreclosure Frenzy

In one corner, we have five former Bank of America Corp. employees who told a federal court they were instructed to mislead customers on the verge of losing their homes and stall their applications for loan modifications.
In another corner, we have Bank of America, which says nothing could be further from the truth.
Jonathan Weil

About Jonathan Weil»

Jonathan Weil joined Bloomberg News as a columnist in 2007, and his columns on finance and accounting won Best ... MORE
Who’s right? If anything, the bank’s strident denials make me more inclined to believe the workers’ claims. “These allegations are absurd, patently false and contrary to Bank of America’s long-standing policy only to foreclose as a last resort when other available options to help keep people in their home have been exhausted,” Jumana Bauwens, a Bank of America spokeswoman, told Bloomberg News in an e-mail this week.
Perhaps some of the allegations may be wrong. But to say all of them are obviously false? You have to wonder. A lot of the former employees’ claims make sense.
We have known for years that the U.S. Treasury Department’s Home Affordable Modification Program failed miserably at its stated goal of helping struggling homeowners. In part, that’s because companies and divisions of major banks that service mortgage loans often can make more money from foreclosures than from loan modifications.
It didn’t bother the banking industry’s “robo-signers” that they risked committing perjury when they signed false affidavits filed in courthouses across the country to speed foreclosures along. Now, Bank of America would have us believe that all of these former employees were making things up under penalty of perjury when they came forward and told their stories.

Loan Modifications

The former employees’ statements were filed with a federal court in Boston as part of a lawsuit against Bank of America by homeowners who say they were improperly denied permanent loan modifications. Bank of America says it will respond to the statements in greater detail in a court filing.
The workers gave horrific accounts about Bank of America’s compliance with the Home Affordable Modification Program. One consistent theme was that they said they were told to deceive borrowers about the status of their applications.
“My colleagues and I were instructed to inform homeowners that modification documents were not received on time, not received at all, or that documents were missing, even when, in fact, all documents were received in full and on time,” said Theresa Terrelonge of Grand Prairie, Texas, who worked at Bank of America from 2009 to 2010 as a loan-servicing representative. She said workers “were awarded incentives such as $25 in cash, or as a restaurant gift card” based on “how many applications for loan modifications they could decline.”
Simone Gordon of Orange, New Jersey, who left Bank of America in 2012, gave a similar account. “Employees were rewarded by meeting a quota of placing a specific number of accounts into foreclosure, including accounts in which the borrower fulfilled a HAMP trial period,” Gordon said. “For example, a collector who placed ten or more accounts into foreclosure in a given month received a $500 bonus.” Other rewards for placing accounts into foreclosure included gift cards to Target or Bed Bath & Beyond.
“We were regularly drilled that it was our job to maximize fees for the bank by fostering and extending delay of the HAMP modification process by any means we could -- this included by lying to customers,” Gordon said.
William Wilson, a Bank of America underwriter and manager in Charlotte, North Carolina, from 2010 to 2012, described what he said was called a “blitz.” About twice a month, he said, Bank of America would order case managers and underwriters to clean out the backlog of HAMP applications by rejecting any file in which the documents were more than 60 days old. Employees were instructed to “enter a reason that would justify declining the modification to the Treasury Department,” Wilson said.

A Blitz

“Justifications commonly included claiming that the homeowner had failed to return requested documents or had failed to make payments,” he said. “In reality these justifications were untrue. I personally reviewed hundreds of files in which the computer systems showed that the homeowner had fulfilled a trial period plan and was entitled to a permanent loan modification,” but was nevertheless declined during a blitz.
“On many occasions, homeowners who did not receive the permanent modification that they were entitled to ultimately lost their homes to foreclosure,” he said.
After Bloomberg wrote last week about the former employees’ statements, the top Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, Maxine Waters, sent a letter to Christy Romero, the special inspector general of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, asking that her office investigate. Yet it’s hard to get one’s hopes up about the government’s desire to get at the truth.
There already has been a $25 billion nationwide whitewash of a settlement between regulators and big banks over improper foreclosure practices, along with billion-dollar payments under a different settlement to consultants who were hired to review those practices. Nobody was prosecuted, much less wrist-slapped.
This week, the court-appointed monitor overseeing compliance with the terms of the national mortgage settlement said he found “more work needs to be done” by big mortgage servicers to improve their treatment of customers. But neither he nor the regulators have ever reported anything as dubious as the conduct described in the former Bank of America employees’ court declarations. Perhaps they just missed a bunch of stuff.
If there was a good reason to believe that the government’s priority is to investigate big banks rather than protect them, maybe Bank of America’s blanket denial would seem more credible.
(Jonathan Weil is a Bloomberg View columnist.)
To contact the writer of this article: Jonathan Weil in New York at
To contact the editor responsible for this article: James Greiff at

Benghazi descends into chaos under U.S.-backed regime

Islamic militia firing indiscriminately on civilian protesters

author-image Jerome R. Corsi About | Email | Archive
Jerome R. Corsi, a Harvard Ph.D., is a WND senior staff reporter. He has authored many books, including No. 1 N.Y. Times best-sellers "The Obama Nation" and "Unfit for Command." Corsi's latest book is the forthcoming "What Went Wrong?: The Inside Story of the GOP Debacle of 2012 … And How It Can Be Avoided Next Time."
Benghazi has descended into a state of civil emergency in which lawless militia have begun killing protestors with impunity, in the name of the puppet government the United States has established in Tripoli.
A group of highly credible Libyan expatriates have provided WND with links to television news video clips from Libya dramatically showing armed militia in Benghazi on June 8, firing indiscriminately on civilians attempting to protest the increasing influence of radical Islam thug groups with loose ties to al-Qaida.

A key group promoting the violence is Libyan Shield, a militia originally known as the Free Libya Martyrs. It is commanded by Wesam Bin Hameed, the Islamic extremist who, as WND previously reported, has the personal effects of slain U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens locked in a safe.
The New York Times reported this week that the Libyan government has given Libya Shield under the control of Bin Hameed official status, rather than demanding it disband.
In the war against Gadhafi, Bin Hameed came to prominence commanding Libya Shield, then fighting under the banner of Free Libya Martyrs, in the takeover of Tripoli at the end of the NATO bombing operation.
In October 2012, Bin Hameed’s Libya Shield, a radical group composed primarily of violent Islamic fighters from Libya’s port city of Misrata, encircled and pummeled with mortar and artillery fire ethnic Libyans in Bani Walid, an area some 170 kilometers southeast of Tripoli that had remained loyal to Gadhafi during and after the so-called “Arab Spring.”
Last Sunday, Libya’s army chief, Gen. Yusef al-Mangoush, resigned under criticism for his failure to form a national army by bringing under control the various radical Islamic militia now terrorizing much of the Libyan population.
Jomaa Atiga, the vice president of the General National Congress, announced last week the Libyan government was being given two weeks to submit a planned to disband the armed militia and integrate their members into the regular security forces, an objective few unbiased observers feel will be accomplished any time soon.
In May, Muhammad al-Magarief, the chairman of the General National Congress, resigned under a new law banning from public office anyone who had worked for the Gadhafi government.
Directly contradicting the Obama administration narrative, Magaief insisted immediately after the Benghazi attack on Sept. 11, 2012, that the assault was a premeditated terrorist attack carried out by foreigners who had entered Libya a few months earlier.
Missing weapons
Peter Bouckaert, the emergency director at Human Rights Watch, confirmed to WND in an interview an Associated Press report Monday that Russian-made SA-7 portable, shoulder-fired surface-to-air missile systems, known as MANPADS, that likely came from Gadhafi’s arms depots in Libya are now in the possession of Islamic terrorists in Mali who have links to al-Qaida.
“I visited a lot of the weapons storage facilities in Libya after the fall of Gadhafi, and I found that a lot of the MANPADS were missing,” Bouckaert explained. “We also had the shipping documents from Russia. For many years, Russia was one of the main weapons suppliers to Gadhafi. We raised the alarm about the missing weapons back then.”
Bouckaert also confirmed there were Russian SA-7 MANPADS in the three cartons of weapons and ammunition confiscated in April 2012, when Lebanon intercepted the cargo vessel Luftfallah II, registered in Sierra Leone. The ship had departed from Libya bound for the Free Syrian Army, a coalition of rebel fighters seeking to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
In early 2011, when Bouckaert was in Libya making an inventory of weapons then in Libyan government weapons depots, he took photographs of pickup truckloads of SA-7 missiles being carted off and carried away.
“I myself could have removed several hundred [SA-7s] if I wanted to, and people can literally drive up with pickup trucks or even 18 wheelers and take away whatever they want,” Bouckaert told ABC News at the time. “Every time I arrive at one of these weapons facilities, the first thing we notice going missing is the surface-to-air missiles.”
In an interview given one month before the Benghazi attack, former Navy SEAL Glen Doherty, who died in the attack, told ABC News that he personally was going into the field to track down MANPADS and destroy them.
ABC News reported that after the fall of Gadhafi, the State Department launched a mission to find the thousands of MANPADS looted from military installations before the weapons fell in the hands of terrorists, causing a threat particularly to commercial airliners.
Doherty further told ABC News that he traveled throughout Libya chasing reports of the weapons, and once they were found, his team would destroy them on the spot by beating them with hammers or repeatedly running over the weapons with their vehicles.
In September 2011, a year prior to the Benghazi attack, ABC news reported the White House was working with “the rebel Transnational National Council” in Libya to find the looted SA-7 missiles.
U.S. running guns in Libya?
“We expect to deploy additional personnel to assist the TNC as they expand efforts to secure conventional arms storage sites,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said at the time. “We’re obviously at a governmental level – both State Department and at the U.N. and elsewhere – working with the TNC on this.”
Just five days before Ambassador Stevens and Doherty were killed in Benghazi, a Libyan-flagged vessel, the Al-Entisar, which means “The Victory,” was intercepted in the Turkish port of Iskenderun, 35 miles from the Syrian border, carrying weapons en route to rebel groups in Syria fighting Assad.
This discovery caused Fox News at the time to speculate that Ambassador Stevens may have been in Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012, to negotiate a weapons transfer in an effort to get SA-7 missiles out of the hands of Libya-based Islamic extremists.
Fox News reported that a State Department spokeswoman dismissed the speculation, insisting Stevens had been in Benghazi for diplomatic meetings and to attend the opening of a cultural center.
Last month, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., suggested to CNN that the U.S. State Department facility in Benghazi might have been an outpost for running guns from Libya to Syria.
“I never have quite understood the cover-up – if it was intentional or incompetence,” Sen. Paul explained to CNN. “But something went on. I mean, they had talking points that they were trying to make it about a movie when everybody seemed to be on the ground telling them it had nothing to do with a movie. I don’t know if this was for political reasons.”
Paul raised the issue of why Stevens, when he arrived in Libya in early 2011, was a liaison to Abdul Hakim Belhaj of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, as well as the U.S. deputy chief of mission and a special representative to the National Transition Council.
“I’ve always suspected, although I have no evidence, that maybe we were facilitating arms leaving Libya, going through Turkey into Syria,” Paul told CNN.
By November 2011, Belhaj, then acting as the head of the Tripoli Military Council and a former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, according to the London Telegraph, was holding meetings with officials from the rebel Free Syrian Army officials in Turkey about providing troops and arms to Syria to assist in the fight against the Assad government.
WND previously reported that Abdul Hakim Belhaj is the al-Qaida operative that Libyan expatriates claim was the principal organizer of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in Benghazi.

Look what U.S. just gave to al-Qaida-led rebels New transfers mark most advanced deliveries yet

TEL AVIV – The U.S. in recent weeks aided in the transfer of shoulder-launched anti-aircraft missiles, or man-portable air-defense systems, to the Syrian rebels, according to informed Middle Eastern security officials.
The arming of Syrian rebels is considered highly controversial. A major issue is the inclusion of jihadists, including al-Qaida, among the ranks of the Free Syrian Army and other Syrian opposition groups.
The Middle Eastern security officials speaking to WND said the latest U.S.-facilitated weapons transfers signify the most advanced deliveries yet to the Syrian rebels.
The officials said the deliveries included man-portable air-defense systems, or MANPADS, which are shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles typically used to down low-flying aircraft, especially helicopters. The missiles are meant for the rebels to utilize against the Syrian Air Force, said the officials.
The officials said the transfers were facilitated by the U.S. while the weapons themselves were purchased by Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
Confirming WND’s exclusive reporting for over a year, the New York Times last month reported that since early 2012, the CIA has been aiding Arab governments and Turkey in obtaining and shipping weapons to the Syrian rebels.
While the Times report claims most of the weapons shipments facilitated by the CIA began after the latest presidential election, Middle Eastern security officials speaking to WND have said U.S.-aided weapons shipments go back more than a year, escalating before the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. facilities in Benghazi.
In fact, the Middle Eastern security officials speaking to WND since last year describe the U.S. mission in Benghazi and nearby CIA annex attacked last September as an intelligence and planning center for U.S. aid to the rebels in the Middle East, particularly those fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime.
The aid, the sources stated, included weapons shipments and was being coordinated with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Last week, Reuters further reported Obama allegedly signed a secret order in 2012 authorizing U.S. agencies such as the CIA to provide support to rebel forces in Syria.
The support includes helping to run a secret military communications command center in Turkey to aid rebel groups. The Reuters article also said U.S. citizens are training rebels and possibly giving them equipment, at least since the summer.
The New York Times and Reuters both report the U.S. is working to vet the rebels for inclusion of al-Qaida, but it is not immediately known how successful such vetting has been and whether the rebels directly armed by the U.S. will share their weapons with jihadists within their ranks
Recruiting jihadists
Days after the Benghazi attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, WND broke the story that Stevens himself played a central role in recruiting jihadists to fight Assad’s regime in Syria, according to Egyptian and other Middle Eastern security officials.
Stevens served as a key contact with the Saudis to coordinate the recruitment by Saudi Arabia of Islamic fighters from North Africa and Libya. The jihadists were sent to Syria via Turkey to attack Assad’s forces, said the security officials.
The officials said Stevens also worked with the Saudis to send names of potential jihadi recruits to U.S. security organizations for review. Names found to be directly involved in previous attacks against the U.S., including in Iraq and Afghanistan, were ultimately not recruited by the Saudis to fight in Syria, said the officials.
Last month’s New York Times article has bolstered WND’s reporting, citing air traffic data, interviews with officials in several countries and the accounts of rebel commanders describing how the CIA has been working with Arab governments and Turkey to sharply increase arms shipments to Syrian rebels in recent months.
The Times reported that the weapons airlifts began on a small scale in early 2012 and continued intermittently through last fall, expanding into a steady and much heavier flow late last year, the data shows.
The Times further revealed that from offices at “secret locations,” American intelligence officers have helped the Arab governments shop for weapons, including a large procurement from Croatia. They have vetted rebel commanders and groups to determine who should receive the weapons as they arrive.
The CIA declined to comment to the Times on the shipments or its role in them.
The Times quoted a former American official as saying that David H. Petraeus, the C.I.A. director until November, had been instrumental in helping set up an aviation network to fly in the weapons. The paper said Petraeus had prodded various countries to work together on the plan.
Petraeus did not return multiple emails from the Times asking for comment.
Both WND’s reporting, which first revealed the U.S.-coordinated arms shipments, and the Times reporting starkly contrast with statements from top U.S. officials who have denied aiding the supply of weapons to the rebels.
Last month, the White House flatly denied involvement in arming the Syrian rebels, going so far as to say the Obama administration rejected a plan by former Secretary of State Clinton and then-CIA Director Petraeus to help arm the rebels.
Rebel training
This is not the first time WND’s original investigative reporting on U.S. support for the Syrian rebels was later confirmed by reporting in major media outlets.
Other WND reporting indicates support for the Syrian rebels that goes beyond supplying arms, painting a picture of larger U.S. involvement in the Middle East revolutions.
A story generating worldwide attention by the German weekly Der Spiegel last month reporting the U.S. is training Syrian rebels in Jordan was exclusively exposed by WND 14 months ago.
Quoting what it said were training participants and organizers, Der Spiegel reported it was not clear whether the Americans worked for private firms or were with the U.S. Army, but the magazine said some organizers wore uniforms.
The training in Jordan reportedly focused on use of anti-tank weaponry.
The German magazine reported some 200 men received the training over the past three months amid U.S. plans to train a total of 1,200 members of the Free Syrian Army in two camps in the south and the east of Jordan.
Britain’s Guardian newspaper also reported U.S. trainers were aiding Syrian rebels in Jordan along with British and French instructors.
Reuters reported a spokesman for the U.S. Defense Department declined immediate comment on the German magazine’s report. The French foreign ministry and Britain’s foreign and defense ministries also would not comment to Reuters.
While Der Spiegel quoted sources discussing training of the rebels in Jordan over the last three months, WND was first to report the training as far back as February 2012.
At the time, WND quoted knowledgeable Egyptian and Arab security officials claimed the U.S., Turkey and Jordan were running a training base for the Syrian rebels in the Jordanian town of Safawi in the country’s northern desert region
While details from President Barack Obama’s college years are scant, with the exception of a few acquaintances’ recollections, in 2008 one of his Harvard Law classmates offered a few seldom-heard remembrances of the president’s time at Harvard.
Conservative commentator Carol Platt Liebau, author of “Prude: How the Sex-Obsessed Culture Damages Girls (and America, Too!),” guest hosted Hugh Hewitt’s February 22, 2008 radio show and described her relationship with Obama during her law school years. Despite his liberal slant, she said Obama was respectful of the conservative perspective when he was president of the Harvard Law Review.
“I knew him reasonably well — as well as most people knew him, if not better — because quite in contrast to this image that Barack tries to project, as someone who is warm and all-embracing and all that kind of stuff,” Liebau said.
“I mean, I will tell you I’ve written a piece that has praised Barack for certain things and I stand by that piece: He was color-blind in the way he chose, staffed the law review when he was president. He did give both sides a fair hearing. He always went with the far-left side, but he did give both sides a respectful hearing, which was fairly atypical at Harvard Law School at that time.”
The essay she referred to was published by in 2007. It described President Obama as a listener but “a liberal’s liberal.”
At the time of Liebau’s radio broadcast, Obama was being portrayed as a great unifier, which inspired bizarre reactions from the likes of MSNBC’s Chris Matthews. But Liebau said that was hardly the way he was viewed at Harvard.
“Quite in contrast to this all-embracing kind of ‘earth father’ image — this sort of messianic blaze of glory with which he’s deemed to envelope our television screens — he was a pretty cold fish,” she said.
“He was not a warm person. He was not the type of person that gave you a warm and fuzzy [feeling]. And you got the sense that he even wasn’t even terribly fixated or focused on what he was doing.”
Liebau also describe Obama as a guy “whose eyes were always looking over your shoulder to see if anyone more important is in the room” and that he was always looking for “bigger and better things.”
Her longest one-on-one communication with Obama, she said, came when she was managing editor of the Harvard Law Review.
“So I guess it caused a lot of rumbling that I didn’t know about, and so we were all impressed with a return visit by our retired president, the former president, Barack Obama, who took me out on the back steps of Gannett House, which is where the review was housed and wanted to have a little one-on-one with me,” she said.
Liebau said his advice started off sound, but ultimately came off as disappointing.

In 2008, Harvard Law classmate, law review colleague remembered Obama as ‘a pretty cold fish’

“He said, ‘Look, what do you care who does the work?’” Liebau recalled Obama saying in reference to her management of the law review. “’It is the same amount of work for you to hand out the work no matter who it goes to, so why fight it? Do what’s easiest for you. Give the work to the people who will do the work, and just don’t worry about the people who don’t want to pull their weight.’”
Liebau wasn’t impressed.
“I guess I was young and na├»ve: I was like, ‘Ah but that wouldn’t be fair,’” she said.
“And what surprised me is apparently that didn’t bother Barack at all. It was just kind of like — take the easy way out. Why bother yourself with all these silly notions about justice and fairness? Do what works. Revealing? I don’t know. Good advice? I didn’t particularly think so.”

Read more:

More DHS insider from DC

Image courtesy of Canada Free Press
By Douglas J.  Hagmann
20 June 2013: As noted in my June 7, 2013 report titled DHS Insider: It’s about to get very ugly, the additional information provided to me that was temporarily withheld from publication is now being released. The methodical and incremental release of information was (and is) deliberate, to allow other things to play out, such as the public exposure to the name Edward Snowden and his revelations regarding just how extensive the domestic surveillance apparatus is – and who the surveillance is actually targeting.
Back to the early hours of June 7, 2013

“You’ve got to understand that they are trying to find the likes of me,” stated my source. Pretty soon, no one is going to be talking to anybody, especially in the alternative media, even about the damn weather. They won’t risk it, and I’m not just talking about a risk to their careers, either. There has been a systematic method of intimidation with some known and even ‘approved’ media contacts, not just against them, but against their families,” he emphasized.
“Just give it two weeks at most, it will come out that no one will talk to the media,” he added. [Author note: See this article about AP CEO confirming their sources won't talk anymore, dated 19 June 2013]. “But let me give you some details about some things I was told too. I know this is second-hand information, but it was from someone in a position of authority to know, someone I trust, and someone who I expect to reveal to [name of elected official deleted] the true extent of what has and in some cases, still is taking place. This individual is preparing to disclose much, and has obtained legal counsel, but the problem is that one misstep could be fatal in a literal sense, and [this source] knows that. If not fatal, there are other legal challenges, especially under a corrupt judiciary. By the time this appears in print, the disclosures will likely have already been made, just not made public.”
The Holder hammer & the Chicago plumbers
“The revelation last month that the Justice Department seized two months of telephone records from the Associated Press (AP) last year is only a small part of the story. The public admission is that the Holder Justice Department obtained only telephone records from three locations, something like 20 lines, and records of calls from the House press gallery for about two months. That’s one of the biggest lies ever told,” stated my source.
“The truth is that it was not limited to AP, and not limited to just number identification and call duration, but was an extensive and active wiretapping operation that included every reporter’s telephone conversations, landline and cell, text messages from their personal and business cellular telephones and other electronic devices. The primary focus is on the press gallery, where everything was monitored in real time.”
“Not only were the communications of reporters compromised, so were the private communications of congressmen and their aides. Listen to what I am saying,” he stressed, “the operation was much larger than anyone can imagine. Recordings, actual voice recordings, were turned over to the Obama administration, along with transcripts of texts, other communications and contacts.”
“NSA assets were used, with the NSA acting as the collection agency for their intermediate client, the DHS. Then, at the highest levels of DHS, they sifted through the information collected. But the ultimate client or recipient of the information was the Obama White House. I don’t know if other agencies were involved in sorting through the material, but DHS, and this was limited to the highest of levels at DHS under the personal direction of Janet Napolitano, provided volumes of data directly to the Obama administration. One person inside the administration I know received the data was Valerie Jarrett,” he stated.
“The other part of the lie is that this operation lasted only two months. That’s a lie. It went on well into late last year, was halted shortly after the election, but then picked back up sometime in January,” he said. Something happened in January where there appeared to be another active wiretapping operation started, but this one appeared to be more focused, or more limited in scope. Maybe, and I’m just guessing here based on some of the things I heard, that the Obama people had narrowed their interests based on the fruits of the previous operation.”
Now the ‘Holder hammer’ is coming down on anyone who opens their mouth, or previously leaked any information that could have been or be detrimental to Obama. I can tell you that Valerie Jarrett is working, out of the White House, with DHS and other agencies to co-ordinate their efforts with Justice,” the latter a reference to the Eric Holder Justice Department. “At the same time, on the media side, there is a ‘plumbers team’ headed out of Chicago, with a long reach to the New York and Washington press correspondents. So they are not only going after those on the inside, but the journalists from the other side.”
“The intimidation factor is huge if a media contact is outside of a small circle of ‘vetted’ journalists who are completely loyal to Obama and his agenda. If you are not part of that inner circle, you are a target, it’s that simple. You are seeing the formation of a state-run media and an administration that will intimidate, punish or prosecute anyone considered unfriendly to the Obama camp from the inside and the outside. Like I said, this also involves elected officials, their staffs and even in some cases, their families. And it is all being done under the color of authority and the pretext of national security,” he added.
Loyalty to the man, not the office
It was at this point I asked my source, what were or are they looking for?
“Anything and everything,” he responded. “Obviously, it’s about loyalty to the man, damn the country and damn the law. Protect the man and the agenda, which is not just his agenda, but the people who put him in office.”
Like who? I asked.
“Who benefits? This is about dismantling the United States and nothing less. This is about foreign interests who have taken over our government without a shot. Look at Syria and our economy, both issues that are expected, at least as discussed within DHS,  to play out this year. You had it correct on both counts when you wrote about our involvement in Syria, by way of weapons shipments from Benghazi, to open another war. You also had it correct when you wrote about the killing of the U.S. Dollar. You want to know how I know this? Because the blowback from those two issues alone, one foreign and the other domestic, are what DHS is gearing up for in our ‘homeland,’” he stated.
“Unless there are enough people who wake up fast enough, we will become involved in a war in Syria, with boots on the ground, facing not only Syrian troops but Russian forces. There will be blowback here in the United States. Along with this, you will see the U.S. dollar ‘collapse’ as the reserve currency, and social uprisings here in the U.S. over both. It will be DHS teamed with other federal agencies who will meet, with force, the uprisings. There will be chaos here, but it is expected to be different depending upon where you are at. Big cities will have the most problems, and plans are being made to cordon off cities and restrict travel at the time when these uprisings start. I really didn’t want to use this phrase, but expect martial law to be used ‘for the security’ of those affected by the turmoil.”
“Then, you will see the internet being regulated in a manner that will serve only the agenda of this administration. Either right before or during these events, so-called citizen journalists will be particularly vulnerable. Watch for a serious crackdown of bloggers, online news publications and websites, but not in the way that will be immediately obvious. The ‘plumbers team’ have coordinated their efforts with Internet Service Providers to identify the people like you and others who publish their information on web sites. At first they will cite violations of terms of service. Then, they will select a few ‘troublemakers’ and identify them for criminal prosecution. Others will experience hacking and other electronic attacks. And during all of that, there will be the Obama team flooding the internet with misinformation and disinformation. In fact, that is already taking place.”
During our conversation, I started to ask about certain journalists and bloggers who died, either from ‘natural causes’ or in accidents, suicides, and under other strange circumstances. My source interrupted before I could finish my question.
“Don’t even go there, don’t bother asking me, because I just don’t know, he stated in a rather agitated manner. I do have my suspicions about one, maybe two who got a bit too close to the truth and foolishly trusted certain people, but I really don’t know for sure.”
So, what will all of this look like, I asked, when it all comes down.
“I’ve thought about that myself, and have seen some DHS documents outlining different scenarios. Maybe not what you think,” he replied. “Outside of the rioting in certain urban areas, the low stocks at your local stores, and rationing of gas, maybe not as dire as you imagine. My best guess is a combination of the riots of the 1960′s along with the gasoline rationing of the 1970′s, at least at first. Once people who want to save the country, those with good intentions begin to organize, it will become incrementally worse,” he stated.
“Like a car careening off a cliff, but not hitting the bottom right away. It will hit jagged edges first, each time suffering more damage. Each blow will be worse than the next.”
“Let me try to sum it up for you. It’s getting late, and I mean it’s getting late this morning and late for our country. This is all about centralization of power and pursuing an agenda that makes no sense or has any benefit to the United States.  All of the things we are seeing are related. The IRS, Syria, Benghazi, the NSA, and just about everything you can name is about one thing: the consolidation of power and the centralization of authority. This party did not start with Obama, and might not end with him either.”
I interjected my surprise at this point, noting that I thought the worst, like others, that we might not see another presidential election. “When did I mention anything about an election?”
“You’re not thinking big enough,” he admonished. Nobody is thinking big enough, or has been thinking at all, which is why we’re in this position. This is a global agenda, or an agenda of the global interests, the money interests. Do you think for one second that if a person, and I don’t give a damn who it is or what position they hold, becomes a liability to those interests that they wouldn’t get rid of them? Don’t you think those in power know this?
Cryptically, he spoke of Obama’s apparent infatuation with Abraham Lincoln and asked, rhetorically whether that means anything. A country that will fall into a civil war of sorts, and all of the things common to both. Does Obama know something, or feel something? Is that playing in to his desire for oaths only to him, and not the country? Think about it.”
Time frame
As we were parting, I felt a bit like Peter Falk playing Columbo in the 1970′s television series when I said that I had “just one more question.” When is all of this going to start?
What? He turned and looked at me as if I had uttered an insult.
“It’s already begun. You’re seeing it now. If you want to know a date when our money will tank, or when the war goes hot, or when you won’t be able to get food or gas, I can’t tell you, and I don’t think anyone can. But remember what I said before, about the metals taking a hit and something happening after that. Look at the metals market. The U.S. has very little gold. Everything you see is being manipulated, from the economy to the metals to foreign policy. I believe that most politicians know how dire things are, and most are clawing their way for a seat at the global table. But if I had to answer you, and I guess I will so you’ll let me leave, I’d look for something to happen in early July as a precursor to the more major events later in the summer or fall, maybe in October.”
“But don’t try to look at dates for answers, look at events, even the small ones. Remember, their objectives haven’t changed, only their plans to adapt to the right conditions. To the unaware, it will look like everything was just one big unfortunate coincidence.”

Report: U.S. companies keeping $166 billion in offshore tax shelters


Businessman with money via Shutterstock
Like Raw Story on Facebook
  • 2

  • Print Friendly and PDF
  • Email this page
US companies are keeping more of their profits offshore, choosing overseas tax havens amid talk in Washington about closing corporate tax loopholes, The Wall Street Journal reported Monday.
The business newspaper said its analysis of 60 big American companies had found that they had collectively parked a total of $166 billion offshore last year.
That shielded more than 40 percent of their annual profits from US taxes, the report said.
Each of the 60 companies chosen for the analysis had held at least $5 billion offshore in 2011, according to The Journal.
The list included Abbott Laboratories, whose store of untaxed overseas earnings rose by $8.1 billion, to $40 billion, the paper said. The increase exceeded the pharmaceutical maker’s net income of $6 billion.
Industrial conglomerate Honeywell International Inc. boosted its store of untaxed earnings held by its offshore subsidiaries and earmarked for foreign investment by $3.5 billion last year to $11.6 billion, a rise equal to the company’s annual profit, excluding a pension adjustment, The Journal said.
The practice is a result of US tax rules that allow companies to not pay taxes on profits earned by overseas subsidiaries if the money is not brought back to the United States, the report pointed out.

Russian Leader Warns, “Get All Money Out Of Western Banks Now!”

Share This Article
A Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) “urgent bulletin” being sent to Embassies around the world today is advising both Russian citizens and companies to begin divesting their assets from Western banking and financial institutions “immediately” as Kremlin fears grow that both the European Union and United States are preparing for the largest theft of private wealth in modern history.
According to this “urgent bulletin,” this warning is being made at the behest of Prime Minister Medvedev who earlier today warned against the Western banking systems actions against EU Member Cyprus by stating:
“All possible mistakes that could be made have been made by them, the measure that was proposed is of a confiscation nature, and unprecedented in its character. I can’t compare it with anything but … decisions made by Soviet authorities … when they didn't think much about the savings of their population. But we are living in the 21st century, under market economic conditions. Everybody has been insisting that ownership rights should be respected.”
Medvedev’s statements echo those of President Putin who, likewise, warned about the EU’s unprecedented private asset grab in Cyprus calling it “unjust, unprofessional, and dangerous.
In our 17 March report “Europe Recoils In Shock After Bankster Raid, US Warned Is Next” we noted how Russian entities have €23-31 billion ($30-$40) in cross-border loans to Cypriot companies tied to Moscow, and €9 billion ($12 billion) on deposit with Cypriot banks [as compared to the €127 billion ($166 billion) being kept in similar circumstances by 60 of the United States largest corporations in offshore accounts to avoid paying American taxes] which are in danger of being confiscated by EU banksters.
Unbowed by the misery they have inflicted upon the entire continent, however, and in spite of Russian warnings,European Union officials hardened their stance against Cyprus today by announcing that if the Cypriot government did not allow the raiding of private bank accounts by Monday they would be forced to destroy their banks, which remain closed for the seventh straight day and have no signs of opening soon.
In an editorial agreeing with Russian leaders anger against the EU over Cyprus, Canada’s Globe and Mail News Service further writes:

“The parliament of Cyprus was right this week to reject a proposal to confiscate money from modest-sized bank deposits. The idea was a reductio ad absurdum of the euro zone’s policy on the sovereign debt of some of its member-countries.
It would be better for the government of Cyprus to default outright on some of its obligations rather than to seize part of the savings of the proverbial widows and orphans, as well as retirees or those approaching retirement – while purporting to levy a tax. This is especially true in a country that has deposit insurance for up to €100,000, in order to protect small savers.
Until a few years ago, Cyprus – which is really the ethnically Greek section of Cyprus, the Turkish section being a de facto protectorate of Turkey – had a fiscal surplus, but its close relationship to Greece resulted in a downturn when Greece fell into a severe recession. The government’s debt in itself is still manageable, but Cypriot banks have become shaky because of their loans to Greece.”
In the face of massive popular outrage, however, Cypriot MPs spectacularly voted earlier this week against the EU plan to steal their bank depositors money, thus leaving the Euro Zone reeling, a situation that was, in fact, created by European banksters who had forced Cyprus banks to lend money to nearly bankrupt Greece in the first place.
Even worse may be what is in store for the Americans, who on 31 January  lost an unlimited US government guarantee that was granted on over $1.5 trillion of their bank deposits during the 2008 financial crisis to assure skittish customers that their cash was safe.
According to Kremlin sources, though, President Obama’s sudden visit to Israel this week, the first he has made since being elected in 2008, was to personally warn top Israelis of his regimes “plan” to begin confiscating his citizen’s bank deposits too.

Interesting to note is that the Obama regimes “master plan” to steal their citizen’s wealth that is no longer protected was detailed by the global management consulting giant, and the world’s leading advisor on business strategy, The Boston Consulting Group (BCG) who in their 2011 September report titled Collateral Damage: Back to Mesopotamia? The Threat of Debt Restructuring warned of the US governments plan confiscate up to 30% of not just the Americans people bank accounts, but also of their other wealth.
The highly respected Zero Hedge financial newsletter in commenting on this dire  BCG report grimly stated:
“Denial. Denial is safe. Comforting. Religiously and relentlessly abused by politicians who don’t want nor can face reality. A word synonymous with “muddle through.” Ah yes, that “muddle through” which so many C-grade economists and pundits believe is the long-term status quo for the US and the world just because it worked for Japan for the past three decades, or, said otherwise, “just because.”
Well, too bad. As the following absolutely must read report, which comes not from some trader of dubious credibility interviewed by BBC, nor even from an impassioned executive from a doomed Italian bank, but from consultancy powerhouse Boston Consulting Group confirms, the “muddle through” is dead. And now it is time to face the facts.
What facts? The facts which state that between household, corporate and government debt, the developed world has $20 trillion in debt over and above the sustainable threshold by the definition of “stable” debt to GDP of 180%.
The facts according to which all attempts to eliminate the excess debt have failed, and for now even the Fed’s relentless pursuit of inflating our way out this insurmountable debt load have been for nothing.
The facts which state that the only way to resolve the massive debt load is through a global coordinated debt restructuring (which would, among other things, push all global banks into bankruptcy) which, when all is said and done, will have to be funded by the world’s financial asset holders: the middle-and upper-class, which, if BCS is right, have a ~30% one-time tax on all their assets to look forward to as the great mean reversion finally arrives and the world is set back on a viable path.
But not before the biggest episode of “transitory” pain, misery and suffering in the history of mankind. Good luck, politicians and holders of financial assets, you will need it because after Denial comes Anger, and only long after does Acceptance finally arrive.”
To the evidence that the masses of Americans or Europeans average citizens will begin protecting themselves against this apocalyptic outcome their remains little evidence as their so-called “mainstream” media continues to cover-up this coming catastrophe. But, and as Russia has now warned, the time for protecting oneself is fast running out, and the only survivors will be those who listened.