|
Rad
|
 |
« Reply #67 on: Sep 08, 2012, 06:51 AM » |
|
In the USA....
The corporate media in American has been, and will be, doing all that it can to have candidate Romney installed as the next president of that country. Here is but one example:
September 07, 2012 05:00 PM
Politico: CBS News Hires Frank Luntz For Election Coverage
By Susie Madrak
I don't know about you, but I've had enough of Republican policy architects appearing on the airwaves as if they were dispassionate bystanders. And Frank Luntz is perhaps the worst (see here, here, here and here). He doesn't simply message public opinion - he molds and shapes it. So I think it's important to contact CBS News and tell them what we think of hiring someone with a history of such rotten, anti-American agendas:
CBS News has reportedly hired Frank Luntz, the Republican strategist and pollster best known for helping Republicans craft often-deceptive messaging to torpedo liberal policies. In his post announcing the move, Politico media reporter Dylan Byers writes that Luntz will "make a number of appearances across the network between now and Election Day." Luntz's hiring comes only a few months after New York Times Magazine contributor Robert Draper reported that Luntz orchestrated a 2009 meeting where prominent Republicans formulated a plan to win back Congress and the White House.
In his book Do Not Ask What Good We Do: Inside the U.S. House of Representatives, Draper reported that Luntz "organized a dinner" on Obama's inauguration night featuring a handful of "the Republican Party's most energetic thinkers." The attendees -- which included current vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan -- reportedly emerged from the nearly four hour dinner "almost giddily" after having agreed on "a way forward." According to Draper, the Republican plan involved showing "united and unyielding opposition to the president's economic policies," with an eventual goal of defeating Obama and taking back the Senate in 2012:
Luntz had organized the dinner - telling the invitees, "You'll have nothing to do that night, and right now we don't matter anyway, so let's all be irrelevant together." He had selected these men because they were among the Republican Party's most energetic thinkers - and because they all got along with Luntz, who could be difficult. Three times during the 2008 election cycle, Sean Hannity had thrown him off the set at Fox Studios. The top Republican in the House, Minority Leader John Boehner, had nurtured a dislike of Luntz for more than a decade. No one had to ask why Boehner wasn't at the Caucus Room that evening.
[...]The dinner lasted nearly four hours. They parted company almost giddily. The Republicans had agreed on a way forward: Go after Geithner. (And indeed Kyl did, the next day: "Would you answer my question rather than dancing around it - please?")
Show united and unyielding opposition to the president's economic policies. (Eight days later, Minority Whip Cantor would hold the House Republicans to a unanimous No against Obama's economic stimulus plan.)
Begin attacking vulnerable Democrats on the airwaves. (The first National Republican Congressional Committee attack ads would run in less than two months.)
Win the spear point of the House in 2010. Jab Obama relentlessly in 2011. Win the White House and the Senate in 2012.
"You will remember this day," Newt Gingrich proclaimed to the others as they said goodbye. "You'll remember this days as the day the seeds of 2012 were sown." [Do Not Ask What Good We Do, pp. xvi-xix]
The inauguration night dinner was also reported in Election 2012: The Battle Begins by Real Clear Politics reporters Tom Bevan and Carl Cannon.Now, less than four years after this meeting, CBS will be inviting Luntz onto their airwaves as an "analyst."
No, I don't think so. CBS needs to hear from us.
and another
September 07, 2012 03:00 PM
If It's Sunday, It's Gonna Be Conservative
By Nicole Belle
So we just got done with the Democratic National Convention. By any measure, the convention was a rousing success, especially in comparison to the Republican National Convention the week before. The Romney/Ryan ticket got no real measurable bounce from their convention and then made the rather inexplicable choice to . Meanwhile, the Obama campaign is ramping up their appearances and bringing on attack dog Rahm Emanuel to spearhead the strategy to close the fundraising gap.
So while still riding this convention high, with aggressive campaigning and pumped up proxies, who would you supposed is the most natural person to book this Sunday on ABC News' This Week with George Stephanopoulos? Republican vice presidential candidate and official campaign liar Paul Ryan.
Wait, what?
Typical Sunday morning bias. It's been documented over and over and it never gets any better:
Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), a New York-based liberal organization, says that NBC's "Meet the Press," CBS' "Face the Nation," ABC's "This Week" and "Fox News Sunday" are "failing miserably" at getting diverse guests.
"[F]rom June 2011 through February 2012, FAIR found a distinct conservative, white and male skew" on the shows. Eighty-six percent of the guests booked for one-on-one interviews were male and 92% were white, FAIR says. Of the guests who were identified as having a partisan affiliation, 70% were Republican.
"The Sunday morning shows are the showcase debate programs for the national news networks," FAIR's Peter Hart wrote in a statement. "It's a shame they aren't interested in having many actual debates."
Damn straight. Maybe I'd feel a little better if George Stephanopoulos was better at his job and could offer up a tough interview on the massive amount of lies and the vague, fuzzy math of Ryan's economics plan. But we have post after post of Stephanopoulos' weak-kneed Villager speak to know that Ryan will repeat lies without consequence. Hell, I doubt Ryan would have even bothered to agree to the interview if he wasn't confident of that.
***************
Originally published Friday, September 7, 2012 at 5:31 AM
Hiring slows in August, putting pressure on Fed
American employers cut back sharply on hiring last month, crushing hopes that the job market was improving and putting more pressure on the Federal Reserve to give the sluggish economy another jolt.
By PAUL WISEMAN and CHRISTOPHER S RUGABER AP Economics Writers
WASHINGTON —
American employers cut back sharply on hiring last month, crushing hopes that the job market was improving and putting more pressure on the Federal Reserve to give the sluggish economy another jolt.
The Labor Department said Friday that employers added just 96,000 jobs in August, down from 141,000 in July and too few to keep up with population growth. The unemployment rate fell to 8.1 percent from 8.3 percent, but only because many people gave up looking for work, so they were no longer counted as unemployed.
The latest numbers were "downright dismal," TD Economics senior economist James Marple said in a description echoed by many others.
The economy remains hobbled in the aftermath of the deepest recession since the 1930s and simply isn't expanding fast enough to spark more hiring. Consumers, whose spending accounts for more than two-thirds of economic activity, have been whittling down debts and spending cautiously. The government reported last week that economic growth clocked a disappointing 1.7 percent annual pace in the April-June quarter.
The economy is expected to grow at an annual rate of around 2 percent for the rest of the year, consistent with only 90,000 new jobs a month.
The disappointing numbers are a blow to President Barack Obama's re-election campaign. Unemployment is down from a peak of 10 percent in October 2009, but no incumbent president since Franklin D. Roosevelt has faced re-election with unemployment higher than 7.8 percent.
Republican presidential challenger Mitt Romney declared that "the weak jobs report is devastating news for American workers and American families ... a harsh indictment of the president's handling of the economy."
Obama said August's hiring was "not good enough" and it's "a long tough journey" to recover from the recession that officially ended more than three years ago.
Despite the bad report, stock prices rose, most likely on expectations the Fed will act next week. The Dow Jones industrial average rose 14.64 points to 13,306.64. The Standard & Poor's 500 rose 5.80 to 1,437.92.
The job market got off to a strong start this year. Employers added an average 226,000 jobs a month from January through March. But they couldn't sustain that pace, and hiring slowed to a monthly average of 67,000 from April through June.
It looked like things got back on track in July, when the government initially reported 163,000 new jobs, but the Labor Department revised that gain down by 22,000 on Friday.
The August jobs report looks even uglier upon closer inspection. The unemployment rate fell largely because 368,000 Americans dropped out of the labor force. The government counts people without jobs as "unemployed" only if they are actively looking for work.
The percentage of adult Americans either working or seeking work fell from 63.7 percent in July to 63.5 percent in August. That was the lowest percentage in 31 years. The percentage has been falling steadily since peaking at 67.3 percent in 2000.
"A declining labor force is not (a) sign of an improving economy," says Joel Naroff, president of Naroff Economic Advisors.
Hourly pay fell. Manufacturers cut 15,000 jobs, the most in two years. And temporary help jobs, which often signal where the job market is headed, dropped by 4,900 in August.
The economy lost 7,000 more government jobs last month. Since the recession ended in June 2009, federal, state and local governments have slashed 670,000 jobs, partially offsetting hiring by private companies.
It's the first time since World War II that governments have shed jobs this deep into an economic recovery. At this point - three years and two months- into the nine previous postwar recoveries, government jobs had risen an average of 8 percent. This time, they're down 3 percent.
Most of the government cuts have been made by states and localities. Some school districts in Pennsylvania, for example, have had to lay off teachers after the state cut subsidies.
Kayla Middleton, 26, was one of about 70 teachers furloughed this year by the Reading School District. Middleton says because she has such little seniority "I knew there was no way I was escaping."
The job creation and unemployment numbers come from separate surveys. One asks mostly large companies and government agencies how many people they employed during the month. This survey produces the number of jobs gained or lost.
The other is the household survey. Government workers ask whether the adults in a household have a job. Those who don't are asked whether they're looking for one. If they are, they're considered unemployed. If they aren't, they're not considered in the workforce and aren't counted as unemployed. The household survey produces each month's unemployment rate.
The downbeat jobs news convinced many economists that the Fed will come to the rescue. At its last meeting, the Fed's policy committee decided that action "would likely be warranted fairly soon" unless it saw evidence of "a substantial and sustainable strengthening" of the economy. Many economists expect the Fed to announce a third round of bond purchases at its Sept. 12-13 meeting. The goal would be to drive down long-term interest rates to stimulate borrowing and spending.
Anthony Chan, chief economist at Chase Wealth Management, said further Fed action would likely send stock prices up, making consumers feel wealthier and more willing to spend.
As bad as things are, they could get worse.
Europe is in or close to a full-blown recession, which could dent the exports that have been one of the U.S. economy's few sources of strength. And a debt crisis threatens to force several European countries to stop using the euro currency. The breakup of the 17-country eurozone could cause a global financial panic as countries replaced solid euros with local currencies of dubious value.
Political bickering in Washington could plunge the U.S. economy back into recession if Democrats and Republicans can't reach a budget deal by the end of the year. Under rules designed to force a compromise, failure to reach agreement would trigger $600 billion worth of spending cuts and tax hikes starting next year. The draconian moves would send the economy over a so-called fiscal cliff and probably into recession.
Still, Sherry Cooper, chief economist at BMO Financial Group, saw reasons for optimism. Europe could be rescued by the European Central Bank, she says.
On Thursday, ECB President Mario Draghi unveiled an ambitious plan to buy unlimited amounts of European government bonds to help lower borrowing costs for countries straining to manage their debts.
Cooper also noted that "the U.S. housing market is finally on the upswing."
Pinnacle Homes, a construction-management company in Las Vegas, shrank from 20 employees to seven after the housing market collapsed five years ago. Company president Frank Wyatt says business is slowly picking up, but "we're not ready to add anybody yet."
For now, the American economy remains sluggish, and 12.5 million Americans are locked out of jobs. Megan Baker, 23, of Warrenton, Va., has "been applying to jobs almost nonstop" since she graduated from college last year. She hasn't landed one yet. Usually, she doesn't even hear back.
"I have applied to so many jobs that I've lost track," she says. "I try to tailor my resume and cover letters to each job, but now I am just becoming discouraged and want to give up."
---
Associated Press Writers Martin Crutsinger in Washington and Peter Jackson in Harrisburg, Pa., contributed to this story.
******************
Originally published Friday, September 7, 2012 at 10:42 AM Romney, Obama in battle for working-class whites
President Barack Obama and Republican rival Mitt Romney are working feverishly for an increasingly smaller but crucial slice of the electorate - white, working-class voters.
By THOMAS BEAUMONT
Associated Press DES MOINES, Iowa —
President Barack Obama and Republican rival Mitt Romney are working feverishly for an increasingly smaller but crucial slice of the electorate - white, working-class voters.
These clock-punching voters - from Iowa's tiny manufacturing cities to Virginia coal country to pockets of Ohio reliant on the auto industry - are considered the potential tipping point in battleground states that will decide the winner on Nov. 6. These voters are also critical to turning less competitive states such as Michigan into suddenly swing states in the final stretch.
Romney is trying to expand what polls show is an advantage for the Republican while Obama hopes to narrow the gap. Both candidates are trying to pit these voters against their opponent by stoking a sense of economic and social unfairness, and also by calling on surrogates with stronger ties to these voters. It's why Romney has seized on Obama's decision to give states greater flexibility on welfare work requirements and why Obama turned to former President Bill Clinton, long popular with working-class voters, to make the case for his second-term bid.
"In the richest country in the history of the world, this Obama economy has crushed the middle class," Romney said in accepting the Republican presidential nomination.
Obama counters that Romney's opposition to a federal bailout of U.S. automakers hurts his chances with working-class whites.
"I stood with American manufacturing. I believed in you. I bet on you," Obama told an audience in Toledo, Ohio, an automotive manufacturing hub within sight of Michigan, on Labor Day.
These voters are a hodge-podge of union households and gun-rights advocates, often from rural areas and smaller cities. They are found in a handful of competitive states where neither candidate has an appreciable advantage, including northern Florida and northwest and southeast Ohio. They are also found in key counties in states that have voted Democratic in presidential elections since the 1980s but are seen as more competitive this year. Those include areas outside Madison and Milwaukee in southern Wisconsin, mixed-income suburbs outside Detroit and rural parts of western Pennsylvania.
Neither Romney nor Obama has a natural connection with them.
Both are Harvard-educated and wealthy. But Obama, an African American raised politically in Chicago's Democratic network, has struggled with these voters. Obama famously dismissed their misgivings about his candidacy in 2008, saying "they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
Romney, the son of a former governor and car company president, made a fortune as a private equity firm executive before serving a term as Massachusetts governor.
Romney's profile varies from these working-class voters who are less educated and from smaller cities and rural areas.
He put himself more in league with NASCAR owners, noting his friends who own teams, than fans in February while attending the Daytona 500 in Florida.
But he'll seek to endear himself again to the sport's largely white audience Saturday, when he plans to attend the Federated Auto Parts 400 in Richmond, Va.
Still, he has a commanding lead among these voters: 57 percent preferred the Republican, compared to 35 percent for Obama, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll last month. Romney's support is on par with what 2008 Republican nominee John McCain received from this group, but Obama is doing worse, according to exit polls that showed him at 40 percent four years ago.
Romney sought an edge with Obama's decision to allow states to apply for waivers seeking flexibility in how to administer welfare work requirements, a key part of the sweeping welfare realignment President Bill Clinton signed in 1996.
Rick Santorum, who performed well among working-class whites during his unsuccessful bid for the GOP presidential nomination, has led the Romney campaign's charge that Obama supports lifting the work requirement, a claim widely debunked by independent fact-checking groups.
"(Obama) showed us once again he believes in government handouts and dependency by waiving the work requirement for welfare," Santorum said during his speech to the Republican convention.
Diane Carnes of Chillicothe, Ohio, in the state's rural south, said there is a cultural disconnect with Obama. "Southern Ohio is full of people who are disgusted with this president walking away from welfare reform," said Carnes, a Republican. "We are working people, who believe in work."
Santorum vigorously dismissed suggestions of racial politics, although Carnes and other Republicans said some rural white voters in swing states still harbor racial opposition to Obama.
Obama's policies fall outside this bloc's comfort zone, said Steve Schmidt, who managed McCain's 2008 campaign.
"President Obama is totally out of touch with these people in a fundamental way," Schmidt said. "In this environment, Romney's team is wise to be focused on this group."
Romney was in Chillicothe, the heart of southern Ohio, last month, promising to loosen restrictions on oil, coal and natural gas development industries. That signals to many voters here the promise of well-paying jobs in counties where unemployment has run well above the state and national averages.
Romney's choice of Rep. Paul Ryan is seen as another direct appeal. Ryan is from Janesville, Wis., a manufacturing hub between Madison, Wis., and Chicago.
"Remember when he said people in the Midwest, people like us like to cling to their guns and religion?" Ryan said of Obama while campaigning in Iowa this week. "This Catholic deer hunter is darn proud of that. Guilty as charged."
Many of these conservative Democrats helped elect Republican Ronald Reagan president in 1980.
But since then, a Republican has not won Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Ryan's place on the ticket, and Romney's direct appeals to working-class whites, may not tip the state to the GOP in November, but they could force Obama to spend money to capture states critical to his re-election chances.
This voting bloc has shrunk dramatically as a share of the overall electorate, now more diverse and college-educated. In 1980, 63 percent of voters were white, non-college-educated. In 2008, they made up just 39 percent. And Obama performs far better with minority voters.
Obama, in turn, is trying to hold down Romney's margins. He talks about his wife Michelle's upbringing in a working-class home on Chicago's South Side.
His campaign is working to undercut the businessman Romney's jobs argument by contending that the private-sector experience Romney touts was often at the expense of working families. Romney's former private equity firm Bain Capital helped launch some national chains, but also shuttered some plants.
"I continue to believe Gov. Romney is going to struggle in all the Midwestern states given his stance on the issues," Obama's campaign manager Jim Messina said in an interview.
Obama also has two weapons in his arsenal and is deploying them strategically.
Vice President Joe Biden, long a popular figure to working-class Democrats, grew up in Scranton, Pa., and has jabbed hard at Romney's credibility with these voters.
"Out of touch? Swiss bank account, untold millions in the Cayman Islands. Who's out of touch, man?" Biden said recently.
Clinton stars in an Obama campaign ad and was the prime-time speaker at the convention on Wednesday night. Clinton's profile as a former Arkansas governor helped him as a candidate. His wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, performed better than Obama with working-class whites in places like Pennsylvania and West Virginia during their battle for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.
Romney advisers said Clinton is the strongest counter-punch Obama has with these voters.
The former president went hard after them hard in his convention speech, using the term "middle class" no less than 10 times.
Clinton directed his closing pitch to them: "If you want a winner-take-all, you're-on-your-own society, you should support the Republican ticket. But if you want a country of shared opportunities and shared responsibility, a we're-all-in-this-together society, you should vote for Barack Obama and Joe Biden."
*************
Ohio Secretary of State apologizes for trying to stifle early voting
By Stephen C. Webster Friday, September 7, 2012 16:03 EDT
Ohio Secretary of State John Husted said in court documents filed Friday that he’s really, really sorry for refusing to allow early voting preparations in Ohio, and promises not to do it again unless another court gives him permission.
That was the result of Judge Peter C. Economus’s ruling Friday, which concluded a hearing that saw Sec. Husted rebuked by attorneys for the Obama campaign in a stinging victory over Republican voter suppression efforts.
“Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable injury if in-person early voting is not restored the last three days before Election Day, and there is no definitive evidence before the Court that elections boards will be tremendously burdened,” Judge Economus wrote. “Certainly, the public interest is served by restoring in person early voting to all Ohio voters.” He added that letting all Ohioans have access to early voting meets the standard of keeping voting “uniform, accessible for all, fair, and secure.”
Those last words are what Husted typically says when justifying the state’s odd struggle with early voting, which he’s moved to shut down for three days leading up to the presidential election. Judge Economus ordered Husted to restore early voting in a ruling issued last Friday, but Husted sent a memo to staff saying he would not comply with the order until a pending appeal could be resolved.
Reacting to Husted’s defiance, the judge ordered him to personally appear in court next week to explain himself. That apparently got his attention. Husted’s attorneys insisted on Friday that he immediately rescinded his earlier memo, effectively allowing Ohio elections officials to move forward with early voting preparations.
“The Secretary’s intention was not to create a stay of this Court’s Order,” Husted’s attorneys explain in a court filing obtained by the Election Law Blog. “The Secretary intends to pursue his differences with this Court’s judgment only through the expedited appeal process put in place by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. To the extent that Directive 2012-40 could be read to imply any different compliance disposition, the Secretary apologizes to the federal district court for creating that misimpression”.
***************
US declares Haqqani network a terrorist body
The Obama administration declared Friday that the Pakistan-based Haqqani network of militants is a terrorist body despite misgivings about how the largely symbolic act could further stall planned Afghan peace talks or put yet another chill on the United States' already fragile counterterrorism alliance with Islamabad.
By BRADLEY KLAPPER and MATTHEW LEE
Associated Press WASHINGTON —
The Obama administration declared Friday that the Pakistan-based Haqqani network of militants is a terrorist body despite misgivings about how the largely symbolic act could further stall planned Afghan peace talks or put yet another chill on the United States' already fragile counterterrorism alliance with Islamabad.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's decision, signed Friday ahead of a Sunday deadline set by Congress, bans Americans from doing business with members of the group and blocks any assets it holds in the United States. The order, which will go into effect within 10 days, completes an odyssey of sorts for the Haqqanis from the days they partnered with the CIA during the Cold War and were hailed as freedom fighters.
Clinton, whose advisers were of two minds about whether the designation was the right path, said in a statement Friday that the U.S. will "also continue our robust campaign of diplomatic, military and intelligence pressure on the network, demonstrating the United States' resolve to degrade the organization's ability to execute violent attacks."
Enraged by a string of high-profile attacks on U.S. and NATO troops, Congress insisted Clinton deliver a report on whether the Haqqanis should be designated a terrorist organization and all of its members subjected to U.S. financial sanctions.
A subsidiary of the Taliban and based in the remote North Waziristan region of Pakistan, the Haqqani network is responsible for several attacks in Kabul, including last September's rocket-propelled grenade assault on the U.S. Embassy and NATO headquarters. American officials estimate its force at 2,000 to 4,000 fighters and say it maintains close relationships with al-Qaida.
U.S. defense officials said the administration doesn't believe the Haqqanis have designs to attack the United States. But they said the group shelters al-Qaida and other militant groups, allowing them to plan and train for possible operations targeting the U.S.
The U.S. already has sanctioned many Haqqani leaders and is pursuing its members militarily. But it resisted the terrorist designation because of worries that it could jeopardize reconciliation efforts between the U.S. government and insurgents in Afghanistan, and ruffle feathers with Pakistan, the Haqqanis' longtime benefactor.
"The only reservation - and it's only a mild one - is whether this complicates reconciliation at all," said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said. "I see only a very small downside to the designation and that's more than offset by the financial pressure on the network."
Friday's decision also could complicate talks to free the only U.S. prisoner of war from the Afghan conflict, Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, a 26-year-old from Idaho who has been held by the Haqqanis since 2009.
State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell dodged questions about reported Haqqani threats to further mistreat Bergdhal as a result of the designation but said the U.S. was doing everything it could to free him.
"He's just been held for too long," Ventrell told reporters.
American officials have held talks with Ibrahim Haqqani, the brother of the network's founder, Jalauddin Haqqani, to try to further peace talks with the Taliban, according to two U.S. officials familiar with the negotiation attempts. The designation does not stop the U.S. from meeting with the Haqqanis, who've been among the least interested in talking reconciliation before American troops make an almost complete withdrawal from Afghanistan by the end of 2014, officials said.
Officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to speak publicly on the matter.
The designation risks straining U.S.-Pakistan relations. Last year, outgoing Joint Chiefs Chairman Mike Mullen argued that the Haqqani network "acts as a veritable arm" of Pakistani intelligence - the most far-reaching volley in a long dispute between Washington and Islamabad.
Other U.S. officials dispute that assessment but still accuse Islamabad of giving the network a free hand in North Waziristan region and providing it some logistical support. The accusation could take on added significance now that the Haqqanis are officially a foreign terrorist organization - something the U.S. hasn't issued for the Taliban.
Sherry Rehman, the Pakistani ambassador in Washington, brushed off the designation, calling it an internal U.S. matter and noting that Haqqanis are not Pakistani nationals.
"It's not our business," she said, but added that Pakistan would maintain its counterterrorism cooperation with the United States.
Islamabad says that its forces are stretched thin in fighting an insurgency that already has killed more than 30,000 people and that it cannot also take on the Haqqanis near the Afghan border. Many analysts attribute the military's reluctance to take them on to historical ties and an assessment that the group can be an important ally in Afghanistan after U.S. and allied forces withdraw.
Imtiaz Gul, head of the Islamabad-based Centre for Research and Security Studies, predicted little additional fallout in a relationship that has suffered severe blows in the last 20 months, including a CIA contractor's killing of two Pakistanis, the unilateral U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden and NATO's accidental killing of two dozen Pakistani soldiers. But he said the U.S. sanctions wouldn't prompt a Pakistani crackdown or hurt the Haqqanis significantly.
"They are not a corporate sector entity maintaining bank accounts and working via the Internet doing banking transactions online," said Gul. "They operate covertly through intermediaries."
Fighters for the head of the network, Jalauddin Haqqani, were among the leading recipients of CIA money during the 1980s Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, when U.S. money helped finance Afghan rebels. They ousted the Russians in February 1989, overthrowing the Moscow-backed government in Kabul three years later before turning their guns on each other.
Haqqani developed extensive foreign contacts over the years, getting money, weapons and supplies from Pakistani intelligence and serving as justice minister after the Soviets left, and minister of tribal and border affairs after Taliban fundamentalists seized power in 1996. He joined the Taliban insurgency when the U.S. helped overthrow the regime after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Since then, the network has developed a sophisticated, mafia-style financing operation that relies on extortion, kidnapping, smuggling and legitimate businesses, according to a recent report by the Combating Terrorism Center in West Point, N.Y.
Last month, the U.S. scored a major counterterror success when an unmanned drone strike in Pakistan near the Afghan border killed one of Haqqani's sons, Badruddin, considered the group's No. 3.
The State Department said in May 2011 that Badruddin Haqqani sat on the Miram Shah Shura, a group that controls all Haqqani network activities and coordinates attacks in southeastern Afghanistan. It also blamed him for the 2008 kidnapping of New York Times reporter David Rohde.
The U.S. already had designated Haqqani and his sons individually as terrorists, but Congress wanted tougher action. In July, it set a deadline to prod the administration into imposing blanket sanctions on the group.
---
Lee reported from Vladivostok, Russia. Associated Press writers Sebastian Abbot and Kathy Gannon in Islamabad, and Kimberly Dozier and Donna Cassata in Washington contributed to this report.--
****************
Originally published September 7, 2012 at 6:11 PM | Page modified September 7, 2012 at 6:16 PM
Wary US looks to calm rising tensions in Asia
Alarmed by a rise in nationalist sentiment around the Asia-Pacific, the Obama administration is looking for Russia to play a greater role in the region as it seeks to quell growing maritime tensions.
By MATTHEW LEE
VLADIVOSTOK, Russia —
Alarmed by a rise in nationalist sentiment around the Asia-Pacific, the Obama administration is looking for Russia to play a greater role in the region as it seeks to quell growing maritime tensions.
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is to meet on Saturday with Russian President Vladimir Putin at meeting of Pacific Rim leaders to gauge Moscow's intentions as it looks increasingly east after decades of European orientation. U.S. officials say they would welcome more sustained Russian engagement in Asia.
Clinton has spent the last week in the Asia-Pacific urging peaceful resolutions to competing territorial claims between China and its smaller neighbors in the South China Sea. In Vladivostok, she will see the leaders of U.S. allies Japan and South Korea which are embroiled in their own dispute.
****************
a tale of total corruption .. caused by out of control 'capitalism' ......
Top Bank Lawyer’s E-Mails Show Washington’s Inside Game
By Robert Schmidt and Jesse Hamilton - 2012-09-05T15:25:36Z Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg
It had been two days since U.S. lawmakers negotiated all night to finish rules that would reshape the business of Wall Street. The 20-hour session left legislators, aides, lobbyists and regulators exhausted. Almost no one had a grip on all the details.
Then Annette Nazareth stepped in. That Sunday morning, she e-mailed a dozen Securities and Exchange Commission officials about the bill that would become the 2,300-page Dodd-Frank Act.
Nazareth, herself a former SEC commissioner, represents the biggest banks and securities firms as a partner in the Washington office of Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP. She attached an annotated copy of the measure to her June 27, 2010, e-mail, marking changes made during the wee hours. It could be an invaluable tool for an agency hard-pressed to analyze the bill on a tight deadline.
“In case you would find it helpful,” Nazareth wrote to the group, many of them ex-colleagues.
Two hours later, SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro responded: “Thanks. We have our work cut out for us.”
Dodd-Frank, which took effect in July 2010, would shape the SEC’s agenda for the next two years as it labored to write some 100 regulations the law required. It also opened opportunities for Nazareth. With her connections and longtime SEC experience, she emerged as the preeminent legal advocate for financial services firms as they sought to scale back the new rules.
With Nazareth on board, Davis Polk was hired as outside counsel on Dodd-Frank by the six largest U.S. banks and the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, the Wall Street trade group, according to the law firm’s website. The firm also performed work for foreign lenders including Credit Suisse Group AG (CS) and Deutsche Bank AG. Friendly E-Mails
Nazareth’s e-mails to Schapiro and then-SEC General Counsel and Senior Policy Director David Becker, obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request filed by Bloomberg News, demonstrate how lobbyists and lawyers draw on bonds they formed in government service to gain access for clients, and how they work to maintain those ties.
It’s “a real advantage” to send a familiar face into the agency, said Adam Pritchard, a University of Michigan law professor and ex-SEC lawyer. “If I’m a client, I’m very pleased. I’m willing to pay top dollar for that.”
Rather than making specific policy requests, Nazareth’s messages asked for meetings, offered her firm’s products and opined on the debate in Congress. She told Becker the prospect of a consumer finance protection agency made her “feel ill” and that she’d asked Sifma, the Wall Street trade group, to “trash” a proposal for an investor advocacy office at the SEC. Translating Washington
Officials routinely leave federal agencies, Congress and the White House to work for the industries they once supervised. While that path is well-trod and legal -- with some time restrictions -- it still provokes handwringing in Washington. Nazareth’s communications provide an inside look at what happens when the revolving door spins.
Nazareth, 56, declined to discuss specific e-mails. She said that people like herself who have worked for both sides are valuable because they can “better translate to their clients” what the SEC is trying to achieve.
“It’s unfortunate where we are in an environment now where everybody thinks that is nefarious,” Nazareth said.
Nazareth added that she “absolutely” doesn’t get favorable treatment.
“I am not batting a thousand, let’s put it that way,” she said. “And I respect that.” Displaying Clout
Nazareth and her colleagues at Davis Polk played a central role as the financial industry shaped its Dodd-Frank priorities, helping write more than 80 comment letters to regulators. The firm’s clients, including Sifma, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) and Bank of America Corp., targeted rules such as the so-called Volcker ban on proprietary trading, arguing it could create excessive burdens on banks, choke off business and hurt the economy.
The Volcker rule has yet to be completed, along with other key Dodd-Frank components such as swap-trading and mortgage regulations, meaning the success of the banking pushback won’t be fully measured until next year at the earliest.
In May, Nazareth was named as the top woman lawyer in financial regulation at the Americas Women in Business Law awards in New York. Public disclosures from the SEC also underline her clout. In 2009 and 2010, she attended 11 meetings with Schapiro -- twice as many as any single competitor in the law and lobbying business -- according to the chairman’s appointment calendar. Since Dodd-Frank was enacted, Nazareth has taken executives from firms including Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) and Credit Suisse to the SEC, agency memos show.
Schapiro Contacts
Nazareth has also attended meetings at the Federal Reserve and represents clients at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, where she has met with Chairman Gary Gensler among other officials, according to public disclosures.
Lynn Turner, a former SEC chief accountant who is critical of the banks’ agenda, said that Nazareth is “at the top of that list of influential attorneys” who have access to regulators as former SEC officials.
John Nester, an SEC spokesman, said those who used to work at the commission don’t get special access to the chairman. Schapiro “knows a lot of people in government, law, academia and consumer advocacy” and it’s not surprising that she e-mails and meets with some of them, he said.
“In the end, whether she or anyone in the agency agrees with a particular viewpoint or a specific request depends on whether it furthers the mission of the agency,” Nester said. ‘Fantastic, Mary’
In her e-mails, Nazareth blended the personal and professional. For instance, she sympathized with Schapiro over a “frustrating” New York Times article in one message, and in another offered to sell the SEC a Davis Polk Web product “at an appropriate government rate.”
The overlap was sometimes evident in Nazareth’s salutations, which varied from “Dear SEC friends” and “Dear Mary and David” to “Hello All.” On March 10, 2010, for example, she wrote to “Chairman Schapiro” asking if she’d take a meeting with Credit Suisse “to discuss the SEC’s concept release on equity market structure.” After Schapiro agreed, Nazareth wrote back: “Fantastic, Mary!”
Schapiro answered the e-mails in a business-like way. The more numerous exchanges between Nazareth and Becker, who are friends, display an easy banter and a familiarity developed over the years.
Becker, now a partner at the Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP law firm in Washington, declined to comment for this story. His biography on the firm’s website says he was “intimately involved” in financial regulatory reform at the SEC and “served a central role in the commission’s efforts to implement the Dodd-Frank Act.” ‘Nap Time’
Early in the Dodd-Frank debate, in November 2009, Nazareth forwarded a summary of a Senate proposal to Becker, who noted that the actual text ran to 1,100 pages. “More nap time for me,” he wrote.
That prompted Nazareth to ask, “Yea, but what about me? No rest for the outside counsel.”
Becker responded about 25 minutes later with an offer to connect Nazareth with the agency’s newly named director of trading and markets, who had worked with Becker in private practice. “I’m going to encourage Robert Cook to call you for the scoop,” he wrote. Cook said through an SEC spokesman that he doesn’t recall discussing the Davis Polk document with anyone at the time. Bush Appointment
Nazareth joined Davis Polk in September 2008, eight months after leaving the five-member commission. A graduate of Brown University and Columbia Law School, she began her career at the same law firm in 1981, then moved to Wall Street, working at Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and Salomon Smith Barney. (SPFSDX)
She joined the SEC in 1998 as an aide to then-chairman Arthur Levitt and the next year became director of the trading and markets division. (Levitt is a board member of Bloomberg LP, parent of Bloomberg News.) President George W. Bush appointed her to a Democratic seat on the SEC in 2005.
Nazareth is married to former Federal Reserve Board Vice Chairman Roger Ferguson Jr., now chief executive officer of TIAA-CREF, the manager of retirement funds for employees of nonprofits. Some e-mails refer to a party they host during the December holidays, where regulators and lawyers mingle.
In one note, Nazareth jokingly told Becker, “We expect Greenspan to lead us in a sing-along,” referring to former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan. When Becker gave his regrets for her 2010 party he noted that, “In truth, I enjoy your holiday parties very much, not to mention seeing the host and hostess. It’s the only place I get to see famous economists.” Not ‘Door-Opener’
Nazareth isn’t a registered lobbyist -- a designation that is triggered under federal rules when a person spends 20 percent or more of his or her time engaged in “lobbying activities” for a client over a three-month period.
Other Davis Polk attorneys have filed documents with Congress registering as lobbyists on behalf of Sifma, the finance trade association. Sifma paid Davis Polk $1.3 million from November 2009 through October 2010, its tax filings show.
Nazareth said she doesn’t lobby. “I am not a door opener,” she said. “I am a substantive lawyer.”
Andrew DeSouza, a Sifma spokesman, declined to comment on Nazareth’s work.
There’s no indication Nazareth violated the federal ethics law that bars senior officials from representing clients before their agency for one year after they leave.
The law imposes a two-year ban on the most senior officials, including cabinet heads, the vice president and top members of the White House staff. President Barack Obama has expanded the two-year ban to his appointees, meaning that if Nazareth had been named by Obama she wouldn’t have been able to represent clients at the SEC until 2010.
Powerful Agency
“Every one of those commissioners should have the two-year ban,” said Richard Painter, who served as White House ethics lawyer in the Bush administration and is now a professor at University of Minnesota Law School. “They are in charge of a very powerful independent agency.”
Painter said the longer time-out would help reduce the influence that former SEC leaders might have on the people they worked with at the agency. That could diminish any advantage over others seeking the attention of the regulators.
The potential for a high-paying job after an SEC stint helps the agency recruit people with expertise in arcane areas. SEC pay scales generally can’t compete with industry; they top out at about $240,000 for staff and $156,000 for commissioners. At Davis Polk, profits per partner reached $2.3 million in 2011, according to the American Lawyer magazine. ‘Economic Opportunities’
The SEC gets “top-notch, high-quality people because it’s fun, because it’s challenging, because it’s exciting and because of the economic opportunities after they leave,” said David Gourevitch, a former agency enforcement lawyer who is now in private practice in New York.
Gourevitch, in comments echoed by other SEC alumni, said the back-and-forth between the industry and the commission doesn’t help ex-officials tip the scale toward their clients.
“There clearly is a revolving door,” he said. “I don’t see it influencing the results.”
Others aren’t so sure. Markets are so complex that regulators operate under an “informational disadvantage” with those they police, and it’s natural for SEC officials to listen more closely to lawyers and lobbyists who once worked at the agency, said Pritchard, the Michigan law professor.
Nazareth is recognized as an expert since she ran the SEC’s markets division before she served as a commissioner. “She knows how to pitch the arguments to the SEC in a way that they’re likely to respond to,” Pritchard said.
Marketing Push
The e-mails reviewed by Bloomberg News begin in February 2009, just as Dodd-Frank was being crafted by the Obama administration and half a dozen agencies, and end in May 2011, when the public records request originally was made.
The time period coincided with an effort by Davis Polk, a New York-based firm that has long represented prominent Wall Street clients, to market its financial regulatory work. It sought to outdistance rival Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, people in the legal and banking industries say. Besides JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs and Bank of America, Davis Polk has done work for Citigroup Inc. (C) and Morgan Stanley (MS) on Dodd-Frank matters.
The correspondence illustrates how Nazareth tended her relationships and pushed for access. She was able to arrange an unscheduled meeting with Becker on June 24, 2009, when she e- mailed him from the SEC’s lobby: “My meeting has just ended with Trading and Markets. Do you have time to meet?” Five minutes later, Becker replied, “I do.” ‘Very Peculiar’
The next month, on July 11, Nazareth e-mailed Becker to offer “just some Saturday morning thoughts” about the Treasury Department’s draft of the regulatory bill, noting that she found it “very peculiar in places, causing me to believe that it was not written by the SEC or fully vetted.”
That included a section of the legislation concerning whether brokers should have a fiduciary duty to their clients. Sifma was fighting to make sure brokers weren’t covered by the same requirement as investment advisers.
“The language is broad enough to suggest that any compensation creates a conflict of interest,” Nazareth wrote. “Are these services now going to be provided for free?”
Becker responded that the draft was left vague on purpose, to give the SEC the authority to set the rules itself, rather than have Congress do it. Still, he told Nazareth: “This has been unbelievably messy.” Observing Schapiro
After a month had gone by without any e-mails, Nazareth contacted Becker at 5:46 a.m. on Aug. 13.
“You never call. You never write. Do you have any time for lunch?” she wrote. They met the following week at an eatery in Washington’s Union Station, which is connected to the SEC offices.
Nazareth and Becker sometimes discussed Schapiro. In October 2009, Nazareth wrote that the chairman appeared “really exhausted and downbeat” when she spoke to a New York conference sponsored by Sifma. “It must be very difficult,” Nazareth said in the e-mail.
Becker responded that it “is an impossible job” to be SEC chairman.
“The demands from various quarters are strident and irreconcilable, and the agency, as you well know, is a huge management challenge,” he added.
Nazareth’s e-mails to Becker and Schapiro increased when there were developments on Capitol Hill. On November 10, 2009, then-Senator Chris Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat, released his 1,100-page version of the regulatory bill.
Investor Advocate
The next morning Nazareth sent the copy of her firm’s bill summary to Becker, Schapiro and the four other SEC commissioners.
“Thanks, this is very helpful,” Schapiro responded.
Becker told Nazareth that the summary was “really good” and noted that it “should go into extensive detail about the inanity of the Investor Advocate,” a new SEC position dedicated to protecting investors.
“Give me time!” Nazareth replied. “I have also asked Sifma to trash it. They need to understand how terrible it could be for all.” The idea stayed in the bill, though the agency has yet to fill the job.
Congress continued to work on the bill into 2010. As lawmakers neared a deal to create a new consumer agency to police products like credit cards and mortgages, Nazareth forwarded Becker a news article about the agreement. “I am beginning to feel ill!” she wrote on March 1. ‘Overworked Friends’
Toward the end of the month, when a later version of the Senate bill was released, Nazareth sent Becker and Schapiro another Davis Polk document outlining changes. “To assist all of my overworked friends at the commission,” Nazareth wrote. She passed along four more during the next few months.
President Obama signed Dodd-Frank on July 21, 2010, ending the legislative fight but opening a new front for banks and their lobbyists at the rule-making agencies. Nazareth marked the occasion with an e-mail to Schapiro, copied to Becker.
“Dear Mary, today is certainly a big day!” she wrote. “Congratulations on the end of the beginning.”
In the message, Nazareth offered to come in and give a demonstration of the Davis Polk Web product to track the regulatory developments.
Schapiro, responding the next evening, said she would defer to Becker on the meeting. “Hope you are well,” she concluded, prompting Nazareth to reply, “Thanks Mary, I always defer to David as well!”
Schapiro then replied: “It’s the safest thing to do!”
The SEC never purchased the product, the agency said.
Other E-Mails
The e-mails include matters beyond Dodd-Frank.
In February 2011, Nazareth forwarded Schapiro an exchange with New York Times reporter Edward Wyatt, who was writing an SEC story. Wyatt asked Nazareth to let him use a laudatory comment she had given him about Schapiro.
Nazareth asked Wyatt to include the name of her law firm. She objected to his identifying her solely as someone who “represents clients before the commission,” saying it might imply she was praising the chairman to benefit clients. “That is not the case,” Nazareth wrote. “I believe what I said.”
When she sent the e-mails to Schapiro two minutes later, Nazareth wrote: “The following seems to indicate that at least part of the piece will be positive.”
Schapiro replied: “Thanks so much. I have fingers (and toes) crossed.”
‘Remarkably Narrow’
However, the story, released online later that day, Feb. 2, was mainly about how the SEC failed to properly account for its finances.
“It’s hard to imagine that I gave him an hour of my time, talked about real issues from market structure to rules and lots in between and this is what he produces,” Schapiro wrote to Nazareth.
Nazareth called the article “remarkably narrow and largely off the point,” and added that, “the good news is that it says very little and therefore will not get much attention.”
Schapiro then thanked Nazareth: “I really, really appreciate your comments.”
In an interview, Wyatt said he wrote “a tough story” and added, “What Annette Nazareth does with her e-mails is her decision.”
In another set of e-mails, Becker wrote Nazareth in November 2009 to “beg for help” in finding an attorney with a background in administrative law to work at the SEC.
Nazareth passed along a name and said, “we can give her a call to let her know that you would like to speak to her.”
Becker replied: “You are a peach.”
‘Very Flattering’
In March 2010, Nazareth sent Becker a message on a Saturday afternoon that said she had “been getting pressure from headhunters” to consider taking a new job.
“I told them you would be great,” Nazareth told Becker. “You may get a call.” She signed off, “Your Faithful PR Department.”
Becker, responding two minutes later, demurred.
“That’s very flattering,” he wrote. “Probably out of the question.”
In February 2011, as Becker prepared to leave his post at the SEC and return to his law firm, he e-mailed Nazareth asking if she’d seen the press announcement.
Nazareth wrote back: “Yup! And I talked Mary off the ledge.”
It was the second time Becker had left the agency. He had been general counsel from 2000 to 2002 before rejoining the SEC in 2009 to be Schapiro’s top lawyer. ‘Degree of Influence’
Becker publicly addressed the revolving door at an Oct. 8, 2010, Cleveland conference on securities regulation, where he sat next to Nazareth on the panel. The two discussed the event in advance, the e-mails show. Becker’s remarks were prompted by suggestions from participants that the agency’s enforcers tend to go easy on firms represented by former SEC lawyers.
“When you’re an SEC alum, particularly someone who’s high- level, certainly your clients think you have a certain degree of influence,” Becker told the conference at Case Western Reserve University’s law school. “I have told them this: What you’re getting from me is good lawyering. I’m not in the influence business.”
While SEC officials may be more likely to return phone calls from former colleagues, “they don’t do anything for me that they wouldn’t otherwise do,” Becker said.
|