Monday, June 26, 2017

Erdogan's thugs disinvited from G20



Germany warns Erdogan bodyguards not to attend G20

  • 26 June 2017
  •  
  • From the section Europe
Media captionThe violence took place outside the Turkish ambassador's residence in Washington DC
Germany says it does not expect Turkish security agents who were charged for violent scuffles in Washington last month to join President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in a G20 summit next week.
A spokesman said leaders can bring their own bodyguards to the summit in Hamburg, but the law must be respected.
A list of Turkish officials expected to travel to the event reportedly included several people involved in the brawl.
US prosecutors charged 12 agents with assault last week for the incident.
Police called it a "brutal attack" on protesters by Turkish security personnel, but Turkey blamed the violence on pro-Kurdish demonstrators who were outside the Turkish ambassador's residence in Washington.
The case strained US-Turkey relations and could inflict more damage on already soured relations between Ankara and Berlin, correspondents say.
Germany's foreign ministry spokesman Martin Schaefer said: "I have reason to expect that these people, who have been incriminated by the American criminal justice (system) will not step onto German soil in the foreseeable future, including during the G20 summit."
German media reported that a list of 50 people who were expected to accompany Mr Erdogan included agents that had participated in the incident.
In response, German authorities told Turkey to not bring those security personnel, newspaper Die Welt reports (in German). 
Officials say they expect violent protests during the summit, to be held on 7 and 8 July. Some 15,000 security agents are expected to be deployed in Hamburg.

So enforcing the law is too much of an inconvenience for this business owner? I thought Democrats wanted to punish business that hire illegals?

(WJZ) — The owner of one of Canton’s most popularwaterfront restaurants, The Boathouse, says more than 30 immigrant workers left in fear after a Department of Homeland Security worker hand-delivered a letter demanding documentation of their immigration status.
That stunned the eatery’s customers.
“It seems like terrorizing people who are trying to work at the restaurant,” says customer Michelle Zhang. “It’s not only bad for for the business but it’s bad for the families.”
“If that many left… are they not following the policy?” asks Ryan Horan, another customer. “Are they not doing it the way they should be doing it?”
Owner Gene Singleton insists his business was in compliance with immigration law.
He posted a letter posted online Saturday, he wrote:
“Based on our Government’s current practices of targeting the Hispanic Community, properly documented and potentially less than properly documented are all fearful of being separated from their families, many with small children. Many went home to pack up and leave.”
Singleton declined to speak on camera, but one first generation Mexican-American customer, Roman, says he sees no problem with immigration officials checking the status of workers.
“We’ve just got to make sure that everybody is playing by the same rules,” he says.
WJZ has learned that The Boathouse was not the only business targeted.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement won’t confirm or deny any ongoing investigations in Baltimore, but the Trump administration has increasingly been cracking down.
Immigration officers are now forcing out undocumented immigrants without criminal records, fast-tracking almost 1 million nationwide for deportation.
“More phone calls from family members and friends of my clients saying I have to check in and my friend checked in and she just got arrested and she’s gone now,” says immigration attorney George Lobb.

The Left is either delusional or unable to acknowledge their lies


Jeff Zucker: Viewers trust CNN ‘more than ever’

MORE FROM:

EMILY SMITH
Emily Smith

CANNES — CNN boss Jeff Zucker says despite Donald Trump’s war on the network and what the president says is “fake news,” he is certain that CNN maintains the trust of its viewers, as it extends into digital brands to attract a younger audience.
Speaking at Cannes Lions, he said, “CNN has been around for 37 years, our trustworthiness today is the same as it was a year ago, before people in high offices started questioning it. We know that through our own brand research. Just because somebody says you are not trustworthy, that doesn’t mean it is so … CNN’s brand equity is built over 37 years doing hard work in very dangerous places … those who rely on CNN trust CNN more than ever.”
He appeared on a panel with YouTube star Casey Neistat, who attracts nearly 6 million viewers a day and who just signed a deal to produce an original video brand and a daily news show for CNN. The network, which acquired Neistat’s mobile video sharing app Beme for a reported $25 million earlier this year, is banking on Neistat’s appeal to entice millennials to tune in.
Zucker said, “The world has changed — we can all get news 24/7 from any device, any outlet … but we want to tell different stories in different ways, and add to the news. We are not going to attract new viewers by just feeding CNN onto different platforms.
“Everybody has an iPhone, everyone can be a reporter now. Everybody can tell a story from every part of the world. Why places like CNN matter is that it is still important to bring them together, put context around it and explain it.”
He added that CNN and other media organizations need personalities like Neistat: “The way that CNN would traditionally tell a story is so different from the way Casey and Beme would tell a story, both are incredibly valuable, both will find their audiences, and that is what I think the new CNN is about, being a multi-platform company that reaches many different audience members on many different platforms.”
Talking about Neistat’s appeal to CNN, he noted, “He does great work, he has a huge following and he can reach a different market that CNN never could.
“We have hundreds and hundreds of reporters and people who can tell video stories and stand there with a microphone and a trench coat and tell a story, but we don’t have Casey.
“I think that’s what is missing, not just from CNN, but all the legacy television news broadcasters who think it’s enough to take a video report and put it on a platform where young people go. It just doesn’t work.”

The FBI retaliates against its perceived enemies.



Did the FBI retaliate against Michael Flynn by launching Russia probe?by John Solomon and Sara Carter
Accountability

WATCH| Secret memos show Trump adviser roiled bureau by intervening in agent’s discrimination case before he was targeted in Russia case.
The FBI launched a criminal probe against former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn two years after the retired Army general roiled the bureau’s leadership by intervening on behalf of a decorated counterterrorism agent who accused now-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and other top officials of sexual discrimination, according to documents and interviews.
Flynn’s intervention on behalf of Supervisory Special Agent Robyn Gritz was highly unusual, and included a letter in 2014 on his official Pentagon stationary, a public interview in 2015 supporting Gritz’s case and an offer to testify on her behalf. His offer put him as a hostile witness in a case against McCabe, who was soaring through the bureau’s leadership ranks.
The FBI sought to block Flynn’s support for the agent, asking a federal administrative law judge in May 2014 to keep Flynn and others from becoming a witness in her Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) case, memos obtained by Circa show. Two years later, the FBI opened its inquiry of Flynn.
The EEOC case, which is still pending, was serious enough to require McCabe to submit to a sworn statement to investigators, the documents show.
The deputy director’s testimony provided some of the strongest evidence in the case of possible retaliation, because he admitted the FBI opened an internal investigation into Gritz’s personal conduct after learning the agent “had filed or intended to file” a sex discrimination complaint against her supervisors.
McCabe eventually became the bureau’s No. 2 executive and emerged as a central player in the FBI’s Russia election tampering investigation, putting him in a position to impact the criminal inquiry against Flynn.
Three FBI employees told Circa they personally witnessed McCabe make disparaging remarks about Flynn before and during the time the retired Army general emerged as a figure in the Russia case.
The bureau employees, who spoke only on condition of anonymity for fear of retribution, said they did not know the reason for McCabe’s displeasure with Flynn, but that it made them uncomfortable as the Russia probe began to unfold and pressure built to investigate Flynn. One employee even consulted a private lawyer.
“As far as the troops in the field, the vast-majority were disgusted with the Russia decision, but that was McCabe driving the result that eventually led [former FBI Director James] Comey to make the decision,” said a senior federal law enforcement official, with direct knowledge of the investigation.
FBI agents’ concerns became more pronounced when a highly-classified piece of evidence -- an intercepted conversation between Flynn and Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak -- suddenly leaked to the news media and prompted Flynn’s resignation as Trump’s top security adviser.
“The Flynn leaks were nothing short of political,” one FBI employee said, noting the specific contents of the conversation were known by only a handful of government officials when they leaked. “The leaks appeared to be targeted to take Flynn out.” 
Eventually the probe on Flynn moved beyond Russia to questions about whether he properly disclosed foreign payments affecting his security clearance.
FBI officials declined to answer any questions from Circa, including whether McCabe ever considered recusing himself or has recused himself from the Flynn aspects of the Russia probe. McCabe declined comment via the FBI press office.
But one of the FBI’s most famous whistleblowers says McCabe has an ethical obligation to recuse himself in the Flynn probe to avoid the appearance of retribution or bias.

“I don't think they have any choice. He has to step aside,” said Frederic Whitehurst, who as an FBI special agent and forensic chemist blew the whistle on misdeeds inside the FBI crime lab two decades ago and prompted widespread reforms.
“If he stays involved, the case against Flynn has no credibility,” explained Whitehurst, now often called as an expert witness in court cases. “If there are criminal charges that could go against Flynn, that's got to go to court. And those agents at some point may be called before a grand jury and anything he (McCabe) said to them about Flynn could be used as exonerating information or evidence of misconduct.”
Whitehurst said he saw senior FBI officials, including then-Director Louis Freeh and then-General Counsel Howard Shapiro, recuse themselves in the 1990s from his whistleblowing case to avoid looking they were involved in retribution after he made allegations of wrongdoing by the bureau
“Louie and Howie did it, and that sets the precedent I think,” Whitehurst said.
Documents and memos obtained by Circa detail how Flynn and other top officials at other government agencies in 2014 and 2015 came to intervene in the EEOC case of Gritz, who rose over two decades to a supervisory special agent inside the FBI on the strength of her counterterrorism work.
For nearly a decade, Gritz worked with the intelligence community to help successfully track down global terrorists or rescue Western hostages, and was even occasionally called upon to personally brief then-Director Robert Mueller on sensitive cases like the disappearance of a retired agent Robert Levinson inside Iran, memos show.
But her career took a sudden downward turn after she went to work under McCabe and his leadership team in 2012, resulting in her first negative rating after years of outstanding performance reviews. She filed an EEOC complain inside the FBI against a handful of bureau executives in 2012, alleging her career was being derailed by sexual discrimination.
The FBI referred her for an Office of Professional Responsibility investigation for timecard irregularities. As hostilities rose between the two sides, emails and testimony showed senior FBI officials castigated Gritz for being too “emotional,” having a possible mental illness and sending inappropriate emails.
The FBI concluded there was no discrimination, arguing Gritz was referred to OPR for investigation on June 20, 2012 before she ever filed her EEOC complaint.
But McCabe’s sworn statement offered evidence that actually supported Gritz’s claim of retaliation and discrimination, recounting a conversation on June 19, 2012 in which he authorized the OPR investigation of Gritz after one of his deputies told him Gritz was about to file an EEO complaint, his sworn statement shows.
“I first learned of the issues that led to Ms. Gritz’s current OPR investigation during a telephone call with Deputy Assistant Director (DAD) Jennifer Ley on June 19, 2012,” McCabe testified. 
“I recalled that during the course of our conversation DAD Ley mentioned to me that Ms. Gritz had filed or intended to file an EEO complaint against her immediate supervisor.”
The very next day, the FBI initiated the OPR investigation of Gritz, according to evidence in the FBI’s official personnel files. FBI records support McCabe’s version of events, showing Gritz had contacted FBI EEO officials in mid-June before the OPR probe was initiated, then filed her formal complaint a few weeks later. The FBI ‘s official report of investigation on Gritz’s EEO complaint, which absolved the FBI of any discrimination, omitted any mention that McCabe had been aware of the EEO complaint before the bureau filed its OPR action against Gritz.
Gritz’s initial complaint in 2012 named the FBI supervisor below McCabe. She chose to resign from the FBI in 2013, her case becoming the poster child for a National Public Radio story on the FBI’s allegedly hostile environment for women agents in 2015.
In 2014, Gritz amended her EEOC complaint to specifically name McCabe, alleging she suffered “a hostile environment, defamation of character through continued targeting by Andrew McCabe in official documents, and continuous patterns and instances of severe and excessive hostile behavior/attitude toward complainant. These actions have a negative impact on the complainant, professionally, financially, and personally.”
Flynn’s intervention in the case occurred around the time that McCabe’s name was added to the complaint. Flynn's first act was to write a letter of support in her case.
“SSA Gritz was well-known, liked and respected in the military counter-terrorism community for her energy, commitment and professional capacity, and over the years worked in several interagency groups on counter-terrorism targeting initiatives,” Flynn wrote May 9, 2014.
At the time, Flynn was an Army lieutenant general and the chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency, and he put his letter on official agency stationary to be submitted in Gritz’s case.
As soon as Gritz revealed to the FBI that Flynn and other top federal figures had written letters to support her case and likely would be called as witnesses, the bureau dispatched a lawyer to try to block the evidence from being included in the EEO case, documents show.
The FBI “has reviewed the letters submitted by the Complainant and objects to their inclusion in the record,” the bureau’s lawyer wrote. “They are selfserving letters, not part of any personnel file nor contemporaneous generated during the period of Ms. Gritz’s employment with the FBI, and which she has unilaterally solicited and obtained. They should be excluded.”
While the FBI argued Gritz’s had become underperforming, tardy to work, insurbordinate, possibly mentally ill or emotional and deserving of a poor performance review, Flynn argued just the opposite, saying he saw the agent excel while working with the DIA and other intelligence community agencies.
“Her work consistently made a positive difference,” Flynn wrote. “.Her tenacity and personal commitment consistently produced outstanding results in the most challenging environments.”