Source: Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines — 21st October 2019 at 08:16 (about 25 minutes ago)
The former New York mayor?s attitude towards wealth is staunchly opposite Elizabeth Warren?s, with whom he?s repeatedly clashedMichael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York, is teasing a presidential run if former vice-president Joe Biden were to fall back. Photograph: Ritzau Scanpix/ReutersFormer New York mayor Michael Bloomberg is at it again ? teasing a presidential run. At 77, he won?t even be the oldest in the field, and the billionaire is certainly not short of funding to be able to throw his hat in the ring.Over the past several weeks, he?s signaled renewed interest in the democratic nomination, telling friends and associates he?s ?still looking at? running for president. But he has cautioned he?d only join the race if former vice-president Joe Biden?s faltering centrist campaign takes a decisive hit or pulls out early in primary season, according to a report by CNBC.Biden?s collapse would likely leave Elizabeth Warren as frontrunner, a liberal candidate with whom he has repeatedly clashed over her anti-corporate policies and fears she will push the party too far to the left and eliminate the chance of a Democratic candidate unseating Donald Trump next year.Bloomberg?s disagreements with Warren are stark. In January, when he was considering a run for president, he described Warren?s wealth tax proposals in extreme terms .?We shouldn?t be embarrassed about our system,? he said. ?You want to look at a system that?s not capitalistic, just take a look at what was perhaps the wealthiest country in the world and now people are starving to death. It?s called Venezuela.?More recently, at an anti-gun event in Iowa hosted by the Everytown for Gun Safety Action Fund, a group Bloomberg founded and supports, he was again asked about Warren?s wealth tax proposals.?I just said to Senator Warren on the way out, ?Senator, congratulations, it?s a nice talk. But let me just remind you if my company hadn?t been successful, we wouldn?t be here today, so enough with this stuff?,? he said.Bloomberg?s attitude to wealth is diametrically opposed to Warren, whose criticisms of the financial sector?s excesses are legion. Before he ever ran for New York mayor, his company threw a party in London complete with entertainers ? representing avarice ? instructed to wave bundles of cash and shout: ?Money, ain?t it gorgeous??Forbes recently put his wealth at $51bn.Bloomberg has previously flirted with presidential ambitions, but he decided not to run in 2016 after concluding he might split the Democratic vote. It is not clear that dynamic has changed, nor whether Democratic primary voters really have the taste for a billionaire candidate. But others see a possible centrist path to the White House.?The reality is both parties, Republican and Democrat, are in serious trouble, they are not functioning, and they?ve gone to extremes,? says veteran strategist Hank Sheinkopf. ?Could Mike Bloomberg unite the centre of the party and bring people to the center if he can prove he can win? The answer is yes.??Bloomberg has up-top professionals ready if he needs them, and he could assemble an operation in days and go to work. Whether the Democrats like him as centrist or not, they want to win the White House. He provides an extraordinary alternative to losing.?People familiar with Bloomberg?s thinking says his aims are clear ? and they?re grouped neatly as gun control, climate change, coal, education and health.?He doesn?t understand why people don?t talk about his five points more. If he happens to mention something about the presidency at a cocktail party and they get talked about more, that?s a good thing for him,? one source said.Strengthening the rumor mill is Bloomberg?s appointment of his former deputy Patti Harris to his company?s management committee. Harris has been at the company since 1994. As Bloomberg?s deputy during his three terms as New York mayor, Harris was regarded, in personal and political terms, as the keeper of the Bloomberg brand, his personal gate keeper and point person on all strategic and staffing decisions.?She?s the most important person in his life and director of all his political aspiration,? says the source. ?If you believe in this line of gossip, putting Harris in to run the company frees him up to run for president. You can argue that he?s setting himself up to do something.?When Bloomberg was last considering a run, almost exactly a year ago, a Quinnipiac University poll found he had an overall unfavorable rating of 32%, and 19% of Democrats viewed him negatively. Howard Wolfson, a top political advisor, hinted at how much Bloomberg would look to invest in a campaign for president.?Mike spent more than $100m in his last mayor?s race. Last time I looked, NYC is a fraction of the size of the country as a whole,? Wolfson explained, pointing out that he spent at least more than $110m backing Democrats during the 2018 congressional midterm elections.Asked what Bloomberg would spend on his own campaign, Wolfson replied, ?Whatever is required.?With Biden appearing to be running low on funds, and a Warren or possibly Bernie Sanders candidacy looming, it?s not surprising that Bloomberg?s interest is again stirring. Last month, Fox Business reported that he still has a team of political advisors on the payroll.?I think it?s something he wants. He has not been shy about that,? a Bloomberg ally told CNBC. ?Bloomberg is in if Biden is out,? a billionaire friend added. #
Source: Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines — 21st October 2019 at 08:16 (about 25 minutes ago)
Photo Illustration by The Daily Beast/GettyDonald Trump?s raison d'être has been to repeal and replace Barack Obama?s presidency, so why did he choose to replicate what might have been the worst part of his legacy, namely Obama?s infamous ?red line? debacle in Syria (which signaled weakness and empowered Russia) and his withdrawal from Iraq (which led to the rise of ISIS)?In case you?ve forgotten, not long ago, Trump was calling Obama literally the founder of ISIS. The literal part was, of course, absurd. But by failing to leave a residual force behind in Iraq, Obama squandered the hard-fought gains made during the Iraq surge, allowing for the rise of the Islamic State. But isn?t that exactly what Trump has done in Syria? According to Kurdish forces on the ground, hundreds of ISIS family members and militants have already escaped. Of course, another problem is that weakness invites provocation. By allowing his red line in Syria to be trampled, Obama signaled weakness to authoritarians like Vladimir Putin. In fact, Donald Trump has been arguing for some time that the reason Russian President Putin was so bold to invade and occupy Crimea was that he had so little ?respect? for Barack Obama. The ?Serious? Senate Republicans Chiding Trump Are Profiles in ChickenshitBut by that same logic, one could conclude that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan respects Trump even less than Putin respected Obama (at least in Crimea the U.S. didn't have troops). Erdogan had so little respect that he told Trump he planned to invade northern Syria whether or not U.S. troops were there. Or, at least, that seems to be what Donald Trump's own administration officials have said while defending the president. Whether they understand how pathetic such a defense paints the president is another question. To be sure, we will have to see how this so-called ?ceasefire? or ?pause? plays out, but by betraying our allies, and by empowering Turkey, Syria, Russia, and Iran (what a quadrifecta!), America has created a situation where our allies no longer trust us and our adversaries no longer fear us. That is the (very) bad news.If there has been one bright spot to this, it?s the fact that so many Republicans did publicly criticize Trump for his behavior in Syria. Illinois Rep. Adam Kinzinger was especially outspoken, calling Trump?s decision to pull out of northern Syria ?a shortsighted decision with very real and long-lasting implications.? And he?s far from being alone, even if some of Trump?s newfound Republican critics?see Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, and Rep. Dan Crenshaw?are still too afraid to tag (or even mention) Trump?s name in their critical tweets. I?m left wondering if this criticism of Trump?s policy in Syria might signal that some Republicans are moving toward impeachment over his Ukraine call? On one hand, it has now been demonstrated that Republicans (especially when they join together) can criticize Trump with impunity. Might this embolden Republicans to criticize Trump on other things? Could it be that they are learning his bark is worse than his bite? That?s one possibility. It?s also possible that criticizing Trump on Syria could actually have the opposite effect, providing cover for Republicans to oppose impeachment. Think of it. A Republican who distances himself from Trump on Syria can then proudly boast that he has bravely criticized Trump, but that ?what he did with Ukraine was bad?but not impeachable.?Regardless, the Syria debacle has introduced a new variable into the impeachment drama, and it?s fair to say that the world could look very different by the time the Senate considers whether to remove Trump from office.Here are a couple of possible scenarios: Now that Trump has shown just how little he cares about American commitments abroad, and about defending borders other than the U.S-Mexico border, what happens if Putin tests him on the edges of NATO?or if Iran gets the message and starts a war with Israel?People who are utterly confident in Trump?s ability to constantly escape consequences for his actions fail to factor in that, eventually, his chickens may come home to roost. Political gravity, eventually, reasserts itself. Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more. #
Source: Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines — 21st October 2019 at 08:16 (about 25 minutes ago)
Mark Esper sought a firsthand assessment Sunday of the U.S. military's future role in America's longest war as he made his initial visit to Afghanistan as Pentagon chief. Stalled peace talks with the Taliban and unrelenting attacks by the insurgent group and Islamic State militants have complicated the Trump administration's pledge to withdraw more than 5,000 American troops. Esper told reporters traveling with him that he believes the U.S. can reduce its force in Afghanistan to 8,600 without hurting the counterterrorism fight against al-Qaida and the Islamic State group. #
Source: Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines — 21st October 2019 at 08:16 (about 25 minutes ago)
Trump and Giuliani used the State Department to circumvent career diplomats and policy experts and carry out a shadow foreign-policy agenda. #
Source: Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines — 21st October 2019 at 08:16 (about 25 minutes ago)
Thundering explosions toppled two cranes Sunday that had loomed precariously for days over a partially collapsed hotel in New Orleans, in what city officials hailed as a success and said efforts now would focus on retrieving two bodies still inside the ruined building. The fiery afternoon explosions sent up massive clouds of dust and sent one crane crashing to the street while the second fell in a way that left much of it resting atop the hotel where officials said it was "stable" and could be removed piecemeal. "We know that we are safer now than we have been in the past eight days," said Mayor LaToya Cantrell, speaking at a news conference after the explosions roared through the city's downtown. #
Source: Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines — 21st October 2019 at 08:16 (about 25 minutes ago)
Rioting migrants in Malta set at least five staff cars on fire and injured a policeman in their holding centre as they demanded their freedom. The violence broke out Sunday night at a former British army barrack in Hal Far, close to Malta's airport. The migrants took control of part of the compound, but a police spokesman said the situation was brought back under control in the early hours of Monday. #
Source: Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines — 21st October 2019 at 08:16 (about 25 minutes ago)
(Bloomberg) -- Prime Minister Boris Johnson failed in his first attempt to get his Brexit deal approved in a vote in the British Parliament. He?s been forced to seek an extension to the Oct. 31 deadline, but says he?s going to fight all the way to complete the U.K.?s divorce from the European Union on time.Here?s what could happen next, according to government plans.Monday, Oct. 21Hundreds of civil servants get to work on the government?s no-deal Brexit contingency plan, Operation Yellowhammer, in preparation for a split on Oct. 31.Johnson will propose another ?meaningful vote? on his Brexit dealThe government thinks there is a good chance Speaker of the House of Commons John Bercow will not allow this to happen on the grounds MPs have already considered the exact same question, and convention bars a repeatThe House of Commons opens for business at 2:30 p.m. and Bercow will make his decision at some point after that; if it does happen, the vote is likely to be before 10 p.m.The government is also expecting to publish the draft law implementing the Brexit deal -- this is called the Withdrawal Agreement Bill. It won?t be debated until later in the weekA Scottish court will decide whether Johnson has complied with the Benn Act that requires him to seek a delay to Brexit if he hasn?t reached a deal. Johnson?s lawyers previously promised the judge hearing the case that the premier would act according to the lawTuesday, Oct. 22Government will propose a motion designed to speed up progress of the Withdrawal Agreement Bill -- the crucial piece of law that will incorporate Johnson?s Brexit deal into British statute, preventing a no-deal divorceThis ?programme motion? will lay out a timetable for rushing the law through Parliament before the Oct. 31 deadline, potentially by completing all its House of Commons stages before the end of Friday, with an emergency House of Lords sitting over the weekendBut the government fears it could lose a vote on this timetable, and that could mean the Bill does not get put forward at all. Or that there will be no way to get the legislation through before the Oct. 31 deadline. That could mean a no-deal Brexit -- or more likely a delay If the government wins the motion on the timetable for the bill, members of Parliament will begin debating it immediatelyTo Be Decided:The EU is considering Johnson?s formal request for a Brexit extension. It is possible an emergency EU summit will be convenedTo contact the reporter on this story: Tim Ross in London at tross54@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Flavia Krause-Jackson at fjackson@bloomberg.net, Steve Geimann, Stuart BiggsFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P. #
Source: Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines — 21st October 2019 at 08:16 (about 25 minutes ago)
Now retired and living in Portland, Oregon, the 66-year-old former Army Special Forces soldier is among legions of U.S. servicemembers with a deep gratitude and respect for Kurdish fighters they served alongside through the Iraq war and, more recently, conflicts with the Islamic State. Walker's rage was echoed in Reuters interviews with a half dozen other current and former U.S. soldiers who have served with Kurdish forces. #
Source: Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines — 21st October 2019 at 08:16 (about 25 minutes ago)
Witnesses in House impeachment inquiry called President Donald Trump's Ukraine policy "crazy" under personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani. #
Source: Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines — 21st October 2019 at 08:16 (about 25 minutes ago)
Chip SomodevillaProPublica published a piece Wednesday that put the spotlight once again on some questionable financial practices of the Trump Organization, which showed one set of books to banks (inflating value) and another to New York City tax authorities (deflating value).Is this just the usual Trump mendacity, or can prosecutors see this as part of a pattern? And if so, could it be prosecuted? Who would be tagged as the defendant(s)? If not, what more is needed to bring the guilty parties to justice?Before we explore these questions, let?s look at the facts. Both versions of them.ProPublica obtained property tax docs for four Trump properties. These docs became public when Trump appealed the tax bills, and the loan records became public when Trump?s lenders sold the debt on the properties. Significant discrepancies were unearthed between the tax records and loan records for two of the properties: Trump International Hotel & Tower, on Central Park West, and 40 Wall St.Tax and loan documents for 40 Wall St. showed significant discrepancies in how certain costs such as insurance were reported. Further, Trump representatives reported different occupancy rates to lenders and tax officials: 81 percent to lenders (rising later to 95 percent), and just 59 percent to tax authorities. Rising occupancy rates are valued by lenders because they are indicative of rising income level which is material to securing refinancing, while lower rates, of course, mean lower taxes.Meanwhile, documents for the Trump International Hotel & Tower showed that city tax officials were advised that this property made about $822,000 in 2017 from renting space in the building to other businesses, while loan officials were told that the building made about $1.67 million. ProPublica further notes that Trump appeared not to report income from leasing space for television antennas on tax documents but did report the income on loan docs.Each of the above-noted discrepancies is indicative of potential fraud. But do they represent instances of a prosecutable case?The short answer is: not yet. The discrepancies do reflect a situational ethics approach toward financial obligations and responsibilities. But more evidence will be needed to prosecute anyone should criminal prosecution be considered by the authorities.Who might be prosecuted here? It is unclear just who is responsible for submitting the doctored financial statements to the lending authorities and tax officials. Were the folks who submitted the documents the same folks who prepared them? If so, what were their marching orders? Who directed the Trump Organization officials to tailor the financial statements to minimize property taxes or maximize occupancy rates to obtain loans?Investigators need to home in on the work papers prepared to support the finagled financial statements in order to determine ?willful intent,? or ?mens rea? that James Comey so infamously referenced. Such evidence may well be found at Mazars USA?the Trump Organization accounting firm that is the subject of intensive litigation with regard to subpoenas served by both the U.S. Congress and the Manhattan DA?s office.Accountant work papers have been found to be beneficial when uncovering evidence of intent to defraud in case after case of white-collar fraud, specifically tax fraud. In fact, accountant work files and testimony provided critical evidence leading to the conviction of Paul Manafort in the Mueller investigations and prosecutions. It should be noted that tax fraud, bank fraud, and the falsification of business records may result in felony charges that could be contemplated by the Manhattan DA and provide for prison sentences that could lead the convicted defendants to land in Rikers Island for a stretch with the aforementioned Manafort. Evidence of corrupt intent to defraud either a financial institution or a public tax authority is critical to a successful criminal prosecution. The use of a double or triple set of books and records by company officials for fraudulent purposes is a terrific example of overt acts of corrupt intent. But further evidence will be needed here to link all those involved in each of the instances denoted above. Email, texts, voice mail, notes to the file and other evidence of directions to finagle the financial docs are needed. Further forensic analysis of the documents, for example fingerprint analysis, ink chemistry analysis and handwriting analysis are investigative tools available to the prosecutors to tighten the vise and provide the links in the chain of potential targets.Cohen was reportedly debriefed in detail recently by the Manhattan DA?s office. His testimony will be needed to outline just who in the Trump Organization was responsible for the preparation of the questionable documents referenced above. Cohen?s credibility will clearly be attacked in court by the defendant(s) and will become a question for the jury to grapple with. Cohen provided the Southern District of New York with a prosecutive path for those responsible for cooking the books at the Trump Organization with regard to the reimbursement of ?hush money? payments to Cohen. That path is now available to the Manhattan DA. Add Cohen?s now corroborated congressional testimony outlining the transactional financial ethics referenced above, used by the Trump team in their shady business dealings and the jury will likely be sitting on the edge of their seats. All the DA needs to do now is fill in some blanks in combination with demonstrating a pattern of fraud over time?the closing argument is shaping up to be very persuasive.The allegation that the Trump Organization appeared not to report income from leasing space for television antennas to tax authorities but did report the income on loan docs revives memories of the landmark New York Times tax fraud series on Fred Trump and Donald Trump?s financial shenanigans in the ?90s wherein the Times detailed multiple instances of unreported income streams tailored by Fred Trump for the Donald. While the statute of limitations has long expired with regard to the multi-million dollar gift tax evasion schemes entered into by Donald Trump, prosecutors can use evidence of historical frauds to depict a pattern of fraudulent conduct on the part of a defendant no matter how long ago the fraud occurred. It goes to willfulness or corrupt intent exhibited by Individual-1.The Manhattan DA?s case against the Trump Organization may appear to be on its surface just a mundane business fraud type of case. But fraudulent documents don?t change stories, particularly when there are witnesses available to tie the documents and the corrupt intent together. Add the historical pattern of fraud engaged in by Individual-1 and the Manhattan DA?s case appears to be silently moving along like a stealth nuclear submarine under the radar and there are no available defenses available like an Office of Legal Counsel opinion to protect the prospective defendants from a potentially lethal prosecutorial attack.Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more. #