Month: February 2019

The United States has sent food and medicine to Colombia’s border with Venezuela, U.S. officials said on Tuesday, although it is still unclear how the aid will get past the objections of President Nicolas Maduro, who has blocked shipments in the past.

Two officials who spoke on condition of anonymity said the aid will be staged at the main Colombian-Venezuelan border crossing at Cucuta. One official said more supplies would be staged in Brazil and in the Caribbean.

“I anticipate having perhaps a dozen locations all around Venezuela where such aid will be staged,” the official said. The U.S. officials said trucks carrying the aid, including high-protein foods, would arrive in Cucuta this week at the request of Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido, who last month declared himself to be the South American nation’s interim president.

Opposition lawmaker Miguel Pizarro told reporters in Caracas on Tuesday that Guaido’s team would talk about how the aid would move once it was in place. Shipments were also coming from Venezuelan companies abroad, Colombia, Canada and Germany.

A senior U.S. administration official said it was up to Guaido to decide when and how to move the supplies into the country. “We will seek to help him to do so by whatever means possible,” the official said.

Prepositioning aid in warehouses or in truck convoys at border posts for weeks, or sometimes months, is common while officials negotiate safe passage.

Franklin Graham, chief executive of relief group Samaritan’s Purse and the son of renowned Christian evangelist Billy Graham, said until humanitarian groups had access inside Venezuela, most aid likely would remain outside.

Samaritan’s Purse has operated for the past three years in Cucuta, giving food, medicine and backpacks to Venezuelans heading to Colombia on foot. The group also has managed to get a small amount of aid inside the country, which Graham called “a drop in the bucket” compared to what is needed.

“The government of Venezuela needs to open the borders, that’s it: Open the borders and let food convoys come into your country, open up your airports and let food flights fly in,” said Graham, who said he spoke to U.S. President Donald Trump about the situation in December.

“We are preparing to fly in as soon as we get the green light,” he said.

Flow of migrants

The Cucuta crossing was mainly quiet on Tuesday, but police officials told Reuters that more migrants have been asking where humanitarian aid will be delivered.

In the nearby border town of La Parada, hundreds of people, some in wheelchairs, lined up in the hot sun to buy medicine. Maria Gomez, a 53-year-old seamstress, arrived from San Cristobal in northern Venezuela to buy her elderly mother the Losartan pills she needs for hypertension.

“It’s cheap here, I always come,” she said as a pharmacist handed over the pills. “We cannot buy drugs in Venezuela, you die before you get them.”

Pressure is growing on Maduro to step down after more than a dozen European Union nations on Monday joined the United States, Canada and a group of Latin American countries in recognizing Guaido as Venezuela’s legitimate leader.

However Russia, China and Turkey continue to back Maduro, accusing Western nations of meddling.

The 35-year-old Guaido, the head of Venezuela’s National Assembly, has galvanized the opposition with a hopeful message. He has repeatedly called on Venezuela’s military, which has remained loyal to Maduro, to support a transition to democracy.

The United States could attempt to seek the approval of the United Nations Security Council to deliver aid without Maduro’s cooperation, but Russia would likely block such a move.

So far, Maduro has rejected foreign aid. 

“We are not beggars. You want to humiliate Venezuela, and I will not let our people be humiliated,” he said on Monday.

Maduro’s government, overseeing an economic collapse that has prompted 3 million Venezuelans to flee the country, lashed out at the EU nations for recognizing Guaido, accusing them of submitting to a U.S. “strategy to overthrow the legitimate government.”

With Maduro in control of Venezuela’s military and all the territory, getting aid in will be hard, said Jeremy Konyndyk, a senior fellow at the Center for Global Development, who cautioned against politicizing the assistance.

“The more it looks like an overt attack on the authority of Maduro, that makes the aid more of a target,” said Konyndyk, who has led U.S. government responses to international disasters.
…

your ad here

The Russia investigation may be winding down, but President Donald Trump’s legal problems are far from over.

 

A sweeping subpoena served on Trump’s inaugural committee Monday is just the latest sign that his presidency will continue to be shadowed by federal prosecutors looking into all things Trump long after special counsel Robert Mueller submits his report on possible coordination between the Kremlin and the Trump campaign.

Here’s a look at some of the legal troubles hanging over the president:

What’s Under Investigation?  

Several entities connected to the president by several different prosecutors. It generally breaks down like this:  

Mueller is handling Russia. That includes looking into the Trump campaign and any potential coordination with Russia’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. The special counsel is also investigating whether Trump obstructed justice.

The U.S. Attorney’s office in the Southern District of New York is looking into potential campaign finance violations related to hush money payments arranged by former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen. They are also scrutinizing the Presidential Inaugural Committee, looking for any illegal foreign donations or favors given in exchange for contributions.  

What’s This Latest Probe of the Inaugural Committee About?

Foreign money, political favors and how the Presidential Inaugural Committee spent the nearly $107 million it raised.

According to a subpoena served on the committee Monday, prosecutors want all of the committee’s donation records including any showing donors received “benefits” after making contributions. The subpoena also shows that prosecutors are looking at whether the committee violated federal law by accepting foreign contributions or in how it paid vendors.

Inaugural committees are barred from accepting foreign donations. They also must report their donors, meaning that if the committee had contributors pay vendors directly without passing the money through the committee, it could violate public disclosure laws.

The committee has not been formally accused of wrongdoing and the subpoena does not name the head of the inaugural committee, Tom Barrack, or any other members of the inaugural committee. Through a spokeswoman, the committee said it plans to cooperate.

Have Any Crimes Related to the Inauguration Surfaced So Far?

Yes.

In a criminal case referred by Mueller’s office, Washington lobbyist W. Samuel Patten admitted that he participated in a scheme to circumvent the ban on foreign contributions to the inaugural committee.

As part of a plea deal, Patten said he lined up an unidentified American to serve as a straw donor to conceal that $50,000 paid to the committee for event tickets came from a wealthy Ukrainian businessman.

What’s the Campaign Finance Investigation About?

 

It all goes back to a porn star, a former Playboy playmate and efforts to keep allegations of Trump extramarital affairs quiet.

Prosecutors in New York have been looking into reimbursements the Trump Organization made to Cohen for $130,000 in hush money he paid to buy the silence of porn actress Stormy Daniels during the election. They have also been scrutinizing an arrangement Cohen made on Trump’s behalf with the publisher of the National Enquirer. As part of that deal, the publication helped Trump’s presidential bid by paying $150,000 to former Playboy playmate Karen McDougal to buy and bury her story.

Prosecutors have been scrutinizing whether the payments amounted to illegal contributions to the campaign, which didn’t report them on public filings.

Trump initially denied knowing about the payments. But Cohen — in pleading guilty to campaign finance violations — said Trump personally directed him to make them. The president has since acknowledged the payments but said any legal liability lies with Cohen, not him.

In an agreement announced late year, prosecutors agreed not to prosecute the publisher, American Media Inc., in exchange for continued cooperation. The Trump Organization has denied any wrongdoing.

What Does This Mean for Trump?

It’s going to be a rough road for a while.

It’s not clear yet whether Trump has any personal legal exposure in the probe of the inaugural committee. But prosecutors are looking at any favors given in exchange for donations, which could lead to scrutiny of his White House or others around him.

The more direct threat to Trump comes from Cohen, his former lawyer who implicated Trump in campaign finance violations. And there’s also the remaining unknown of what Mueller will say in his report.

Still, it’s unlikely Trump will face any charges while in office because the Justice Department has maintained that a sitting president cannot be indicted.

For his part, the president has denied that he broke any laws and he casts Cohen as a liar.

On Tuesday, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders chalked up the president’s legal problems to anti-Trump “hysteria,” saying on CNN that it’s coming from people who look for “anything to try to create and tie problems to this president.”

What’s Left in Mueller’s Probe?

We don’t know for sure, but Mueller is embroiled in two court fights that point to more criminal charges.

Prosecutors still want to talk to Andrew Miller, an aide to longtime Trump friend Roger Stone who investigators have wanted to question about hacked material released by WikiLeaks and others during the 2016 presidential campaign. Miller, who has denied knowing anything about the topics, is fighting a grand jury subpoena and awaiting an appellate court’s ruling.

Separately, an unidentified company owned by an unidentified foreign country is fighting a Mueller grand jury subpoena. The case, which has gone up to the Supreme Court, has been shrouded in mystery but it’s another indication Mueller isn’t quite done with his grand jury.

Prosecutors also have yet to make good on a threat to charge conservative author and conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi.

According to draft court documents Corsi released last year, the special counsel wanted him to plead guilty to lying to investigators about his conversations with Stone. But Corsi rejected that deal and no charges have been filed since.

When Will It Wrap Up?

It’s unclear but some recent moves suggest it could be sometime soon.

Last week, acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker said he had been “fully briefed” on Mueller’s investigation and it is “close to being completed.” But he didn’t provide any additional specifics. 
…

your ad here

The U.S. Senate voted overwhelmingly Tuesday to caution President Donald Trump against swift U.S. troop withdrawals from Syria and Afghanistan.

Trump revealed his decision to withdraw all U.S. forces from Syria in December, declaring that the U.S. had defeated Islamic State and no longer needed to deploy troops in Syria.

The Senate vote came just hours before Trump was scheduled to deliver his nationally televised State of the Union address before a joint session of Congress.

“While I understand and respect President Trump’s desire to bring our troops home and to end these protracted wars, we must do so in a way that ensures enduring stability and protects our interests and those of our allies, the need for caution and reflection as we consider troops withdrawals,” South Dakota Republican John Thune said late last week in arguing for the reprimand of the president’s decision.

The Senate-passed bill also would facilitate penalties against U.S. companies that boycott Israel, a move that sorely divided Democrats and was portrayed by some Republicans as a litmus test of support for the Jewish state.

The chamber approved the Strengthening America’s Security in the Middle East Act, 77 to 23. All of the votes in opposition came from Democrats, who rejected the anti-boycott measure in a bill that also provides military assistance for Israel, extends defense cooperation with Jordan and imposes new sanctions against the Syrian government.

The bill would allow U.S. states and cities to decline to do business with American companies that take part in a campaign to boycott and divest from Israel in order to pressure the Jewish state to alter its policies with regard to Palestinians and Israeli settlements.

Senate reaction

Known as BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions), the campaign describes itself as “Palestinian-led” and aims to end “international support for Israeli apartheid and settler-colonialism.”

“This anti-Israel crusade has waged economic war against the Jewish state by pushing companies around the world to boycott any business with Israel or its entities,” Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn said.

The legislation’s chief sponsor, Republican Marco Rubio of Florida, said the bill was designed to allow local governments “to boycott the boycotters.”

Democrats derided the legislation as an assault on America’s First Amendment constitutional right to free speech.

Maryland Democrat Chris Van Hollen called the measure “state-sponsored discrimination against disfavored political expression.”

“There’s not a single senator that voted against that bill that supports the BDS movement,” Democrat Chris Murphy of Connecticut told VOA. “This is simply a concern about First Amendment issues.”
…

your ad here