ReportWire

Tag: government organizations – us

  • The US sanctioned Chinese companies to fight illicit fentanyl. But the drug’s ingredients keep coming | CNN

    The US sanctioned Chinese companies to fight illicit fentanyl. But the drug’s ingredients keep coming | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The seller, who went by the name Linda Wang, was curt when asked if she sold a chemical often used to create fentanyl.

    “That’s banned,” Wang replied, before quickly providing an alternative: “CAS79099 powder is best. U can have a try.” 

    After more than a week of back and forth, she seemed impatient. “Ok. 79099 powder in USA warehouse now…if you need. Pls order asap,” she wrote in a text message exchange.

    The interaction is part of a CNN investigation that explored whether US-sanctioned chemical companies in China are evading Washington DC’s crackdown on illicitly made fentanyl – finding at least one China-based company that had links to a sanctioned entity, and a seller eager to ship potential ingredients for the lethal drug.

    More than 100,000 Americans died from drug overdoses in 2021, and two-thirds of the fatalities involved synthetic opioids – much of it believed from illicitly made fentanyl, according to the Centers for Disease Control.

    The drug can be 50 times stronger than heroin and 100 times stronger than morphine – and pharmaceutical grade versions of it can be prescribed by doctors for severe pain. But illegally manufactured fentanyl has turbocharged the US’s opioid overdose crisis in the last decade, according to data from the CDC.

    Controlling the illegal trade of the drug has turned into a geopolitical headache for the Biden administration, as China’s vast chemicals market – which supplies the world with raw materials for everything from perfume to explosives– is also a major pipeline of the building blocks of fentanyl, known as fentanyl precursors, according to US officials. 

    Further complicating the fight against fentanyl is the sheer variety of precursors that can be used to make fentanyl and other illicit drugs. Most such precursors also have legitimate uses – including for medical research – and are perfectly legal to sell, making up part of the booming transnational trade.

    China has strict anti-drug policies domestically, but critics in the US say it is not doing enough to help monitor or regulate purchases from buyers aiming to use Chinese-made ingredients to manufacture illegal drugs overseas.

    In 2019, Beijing stepped up its crack down on the production and sale of finished fentanyl and its variants, but US-China anti-drug cooperation has since stalled amid disagreements on trade, human rights, the Covid-19 outbreak and Taiwan. Hopes that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken would bring up fentanyl during a planned visit to Beijing died in early February, when Blinken postponed his trip after a surveillance balloon from China floated over the continental US. 

    As the opioid crisis topped the domestic agenda in 2021, the US sanctioned four companies in China accused of exporting fentanyl or fentanyl precursor chemicals. Online commercial records suggest ties between one of those sanctioned companies, Hebei Atun Trading Co., Ltd., and another China-based company called Shanxi Naipu Import and Export Co., Ltd., that continues to sell fentanyl precursors legally.

    According to official public records in China, Hebei Atun Trading Co., Ltd., began liquidating in June 2021 and was formally dissolved in August that year. Shanxi Naipu Import and Export Co., Ltd. was registered in the same period, according to official records, and it shares a number of key things in common with Hebei Atun.

    For example, Hebei Atun’s still-active Facebook page once linked to a now-defunct website of Shanxi Naipu – which is where CNN found Wang’s phone number.

    The two companies’ websites are registered to the same email address, and at one time appeared to share an IP address. Today, Shanxi Naipu’s websites appear to be carbon copies of Hebei Atun’s since-deleted page – with the same navigation tabs, email address and stock photo of a pipette dropping amber-colored liquid into a cell tray. The Russian and Portuguese versions of the site list “Hebei Atun Trading Co. Ltd.” as their copyright holder.

    One post on a Shanxi Naipu website was titled, “Hebei ATUN Trading Co., Ltd. Wishes you a Happy New Year!” (sic). It has since been deleted. 

    When presented with CNN’s findings, Shanxi Naipu denied ties to Hebei Atun, saying, “we are not related at all.” In statements emailed to CNN, Shanxi Naipu said it had purchased the sanctioned company’s Facebook account, email and cell phone number in order to “attract internet traffic.”

    Shanxi Naipu also denied selling the fentanyl precursor that Wang offered by text, and stressed that everything they sell is legal, and said that they were taking steps to stop the repercussions from the apparent links to Hebei Atun.

    “To prevent further impact from Hebei Atun, we have immediately removed relevant promotional websites and platforms,” the company said in an emailed statement.”

    Logan Pauley, a China analyst who tracks criminal and drug networks, told CNN, “It’s easy on the Chinese side to start a new company to copy and paste the same text that you’re posting on social media or you’re posting on a trade website, and then just to recreate the same operation over and over again.”

    And Gary Hufbauer, trade expert at the Peterson Institute for International Economics and former US treasury official, likens it to a game of cat-and-mouse. While the US government can add an entity to its sanctions list “overnight,” said Hufbauer, there may not be the resources in the US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, which enforces sanctions, to keep tabs on new companies that may leverage sanctioned companies’ branding or operations. 

    In a statement to CNN, a spokesperson for the US Treasury said it “had not hesitated” to go after “bad actors” – citing the four sanctioned Chinese companies – and would continue to sanction companies and individuals involved in the drug trade.

    “Treasury continues to monitor the effects of our designations,” they said. “If additional information becomes available that can assist sanctions compliance efforts, when appropriate, we provide that information to industry and/or the public.”

    Asked if Beijing was knowingly lax in its efforts to stem the flow of precursor chemicals from its country, the Chinese Foreign Ministry pointed out that most were not controlled substances, in a lengthy statement that also questioned US efforts to treat addiction and demand for opioids.

    “China has always strictly controlled precursor chemicals in accordance with international conventions and domestic laws. The US side’s so-called ‘fentanyl precursors,’ a small number of them are listed substances by the United Nations, and China has always been resolute in implementing the listed measures. But most of the rest are common chemicals that are not listed by the United Nations, China or even the United States itself,” it said in a written statement to CNN.

    “Government departments do not have the right or the possibility to regulate non-listed chemicals and common commodities,” it added.

    The ministry statement went on to highlight China’s harsh domestic penalties on drug trade and consumption. “The Chinese people deeply resent drugs. the Opium War was the beginning of China’s modern history of humiliation. The Chinese government has always cracked down on drug crime, and China is a no-go area for international drug dealers.”

     Such unregulated precursors, like the one offered by Wang, are not illegal to sell but can be used in the manufacture of illicit substances like fentanyl, methamphetamine, and cocaine.

    Several precursors used to create fentanyl have been put under international control since 2017, but a savvy chemical engineer can combine legal precursors further up the synthesis chain to make similar compounds.

    “What we have seen illicit chemists doing now is that certain components of the synthesis are now … harder for them to purchase, so what they’re doing now is they’re buying compounds that are structurally very, very similar,” Alexandra Evans, a forensic chemist with the D.C. Department of Forensic Sciences, told CNN from her lab in the US capital.

    Or they can create fentanyl analogues, substitutes that are chemically similar to fentanyl and which has made the crisis more deadly in recent years. One fentanyl analogue was found to be 10,000 times stronger than morphine, according to a 2021 US government report.

    Controlling the stream of chemicals has turned into a deadly game of whack-a-mole – where manufacturers are able to use a variety of precursors to synthesize fentanyl and its analogues faster than either can be identified, banned, or regulated. 

    Many of the building blocks to fentanyl have benign purposes and are legal to buy, but a menu Wang sent of Shanxi Naipu’s chemical products for sale appeared designed to support illegal drug manufacture, according to a synthetic chemist who analyzed the list for CNN. 

    It was “obviously a list curated to help people create illicit drugs,” Lyle Isaacs, a professor in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at the University of Maryland, told CNN of the more than 25 chemical compounds on the menu. 

    At least three compounds on the list could be made into fentanyl, he said. One of the compounds, CAS 79099-07-3, also known as 1-Boc-4-piperidone, was what Wang offered to sell CNN; the other two compounds also have legitimate uses and can be found, for example, in academic laboratories researching future medicines, Isaacs said. 

    Still more compounds on the list appeared to be building blocks for meth, ecstasy, ketamine, and the cutting of cocaine, as well as over-the-counter drugs like paracetamol, a common pain medication that can also be used to cut heroin and other narcotics, he added. 

    Asked about the list, Shanxi Naipu reiterated in its statement to CNN that all products on it are legal in China, stating: “We are not professional chemists but just a trading company. Even though we don’t have an intimate knowledge of the composition and use of thousands of chemicals, we have always strictly ensured the legality of our products!”

    Attempts to contact Wang through the company for comment were not successful, and the company said in its statement that she no longer works for them.

    There are measures that responsible chemical sellers can take to avoid their products being used for illegal drugs.

    Identity checks are a hallmark of reputable sellers, said a former Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) official. The source spoke to CNN on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media. To sell non-listed chemicals, a good-faith seller would normally ask a buyer about the intended use of the compound, and whether the buyer had the backing of a company or institution, such as a research organization or university.  

    American buyers of regulated chemicals require licenses from the DEA, depending on how hazardous they are. Reputable sellers may also ask for tax identifications even for chemicals that are not controlled, like precursor materials, the source said.

    At no point in the conversation was Wang aware, nor did she ask for the identities of the CNN reporters speaking to her or what CNN planned on using it for. She even offered a “door to door” precursor delivery service via warehouses in the US or Mexico – locations that CNN has been unable to verify.

    In its statement to CNN, Shanxi Naipu denied that it had warehouses in either country.

    The small quantity of precursor needed to manufacture fentanyl ultimately makes shipments destined for illicit ends hard to catch at the border, points out Martin Raithelhuber, an illicit synthetic drugs expert at the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

    “You have hundreds of thousands of tonnes (of chemicals in a shipment), and you are looking for a few kilograms, which are sufficient to produce a supply of millions of doses (of fentanyl),” he said. 

    Since China banned the production of fentanyl and related substances in 2019, Mexican criminal organizations have largely taken control of the drug’s production and sale, smuggling finished fentanyl to consumers in the US, according to a 2022 report from the Congressional Research Service.

    Mexico is now the source of “the vast majority” of meth, heroin and illicit fentanyl seized in the US, according to the US International Narcotics Control Strategy Report (INCSR) released in March 2023. “In 2022, the United States identified Mexico as the sole significant source of illicit fentanyl and fentanyl analogues significantly affecting the United States,” it reads.

    “Criminal elements, mostly in the People’s Republic of China, ship precursor chemicals to Mexico, where they are used to produce illicit fentanyl,” Dr. Rahul Gupta, director of the White House’s Office of National Drug Control Policy, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee earlier this year. 

    “The only limit on how much fentanyl they can make is the amount of precursor chemicals they can get,” DEA Administrator Anne Milgram told CNN in early March.

    The Biden administration has taken aim at these groups and in February sanctioned a network of Sinaloa Cartel members and associated entities for their involvement in the fentanyl and methamphetamine trade. 

    Mexico’s law enforcement has also fought the trade, seizing and impounding hundreds of kilos of fentanyl precursors and pills – including a cache of over a million potential fentanyl pills in the Mexican border city of Tijuana on March 13.

    Ultimately, tackling fentanyl requires close coordination between the US, Mexico, and China. Even if countries like Mexico had the best national control measures, international cooperation is needed to understand “which flows are the ones we need to watch or [be] worried about,” Raithelhuber said.

    Former DEA official Matthew Donahue told CNN he would like to see Mexico do more, including cracking down on properties and other assets of those involved in the drug trade.

    But as the US pressures other governments to help slow the flow of illicit fentanyl, relations between the three countries have turned into a three-way blame game.

    Following the kidnapping of four Americans in a Mexican border town by cartel members in early March, US Republicans called for the US military to be allowed to fight cartels and destroy drug labs in Mexico – something Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador called “an offense to the people of Mexico.” 

    “We are not a protectorate of the United States or a colony of the United States. Mexico is a free, independent, sovereign country. We don’t take orders from anyone,” López Obrador said at a news conference on March 9. 

    Washington has also called on Beijing to do more, with the latest US INCSR report describing China’s oversight functions as “poorly staffed and under-resourced to oversee its massive chemical industry.” Though it acknowledges Beijing’s harsh penalties for drug trafficking, the report laments ineffective controls on shipment labeling, customer vetting and pill-making equipment.

    The Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ statement to CNN emphasizes its “stringent” control of listed chemicals that could be used for drug-making and argues that Beijing has “improved” several “regulatory mechanisms such as end-user verification, leakage monitoring, and source backtracking, and has strengthened management of more than 200,000 chemical companies.”

    Both China and Mexico have called on the US to do some soul-searching about demand for illicit fentanyl.

    “US legislators and the authorities there are not doing their job because they are not addressing the causes (of addiction); there are no care programs for young people in the US,” López-Obrador said last week.

    “Using China as a scapegoat will not solve the drug crisis in the United States … ,” the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s statement to CNN read. “We advise the US side to reflect on itself, stop shifting blame, strengthen domestic prescription drug control, enhance publicity on the dangers of drugs, and take practical measures to reduce domestic drug demand.”

    Prescription opioids like oxycodone and hydrocodone – which have a similar chemical structure to heroin and fentanyl – were major contributors to the early opioid crisis in the US. Pharmaceutical giants, notably Purdue Pharma, downplayed the potentially addictive properties of the drugs and incentivized US doctors to prescribe the painkillers. But prescribing was curtailed as overdoses from prescription opioids climbed and now waves of heroin and illicit fentanyl took over, making the crisis far more deadly. 

    Amid the recriminations, fentanyl products continue to pour through US borders and Americans continue to die. 

    To raise awareness of the human toll, the US Drug Enforcement Administration last year created “The Faces of Fentanyl” exhibit at its headquarters in Arlington, Virginia where families can submit a photo of a loved one lost to the fentanyl crisis. So far more than 5,000 photos have been submitted.

    “We can’t be desensitized” to the number of lives lost to drug overdoses,” Donahue, the former DEA official, said. “The pain and suffering that these families are going through. That has got to mean something.” 

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Bolsonaro greeted by small group of supporters on return to Brazil for first time since riots | CNN

    Bolsonaro greeted by small group of supporters on return to Brazil for first time since riots | CNN

    [ad_1]


    Brasilia, Brazil
    CNN
     — 

    Brazil’s former President Jair Bolsonaro returned to the country on Thursday for the first time since his election defeat that culminated in thousands of his supporters rioting in protest at the result.

    The far-right politician flew back to Brasilia from Florida, where he stayed for three months in self-imposed exile after he failed to win reelection in last year’s presidential election. Bolsonaro has never formally conceded defeat and filed a petition contesting the result, but it was rejected by the country’s electoral court.

    Military police were on high alert in and around the airport, setting up checkpoints on the main road as about 50 Bolsonaro supporters gathered to welcome him. Authorities had earlier asked supporters to stay away from the airport.

    The small group of supporters at the airport’s international arrival hall all wore yellow and green Brazilian soccer jerseys, some draped in flags.

    One man on a motorcycle carrying a large Brazilian flag was turned away by police at the checkpoint, a CNN team on the ground reported, in line with the tight security plan announced by authorities Wednesday.

    Bolsonaro then traveled to the headquarters of his center-right Liberal Party in Brasilia, where a small group of supporters were waiting outside to greet him.

    He was set to attend a reception hosted by his party before traveling to his residence, CNN Brasil reported.

    Bolsonaro waves from the Liberal Party headquarters in Brasilia on Thursday.

    Bolsonaro, who denies inciting violent attacks in the capital Brasilia on January 8, faces an investigation into his alleged involvement upon his return, among other legal troubles.

    Speaking to CNN affiliate CNN Brasil at Florida’s Orlando airport late Wednesday, Bolsonaro said he would not lead the opposition to Brazilian President Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva on his return – despite rallying support from conservative activists and far-right groups during his three-month stay in the United States.

    “You don’t have to oppose this government. This government is an opposition in itself,” Bolsonaro told CNN Brasil.

    Instead, Bolsonaro said he planned to help his party center-right Liberal Party “as an experienced person,” collaborating with “whatever they wish,” CNN Brasil quoted the former president as saying. He added that he will tour the country in preparation for next year’s municipal elections.

    Bolsonaro’s return comes as political divisions run deep in Brazil after he left the country in December last year just days before Lula’s inauguration.

    Though he denounced the invasion of Brasilia by his supporters, in the days following the election he welcomed peaceful demonstrations while his party filed petitions for an audit of voting machines, alleging fraud. He fed his followers crumbs of misinformation about election fraud and made vague comments hinting at a potential coup.

    The attacks in Brasilia bore similarities to the January 6, 2021 insurrection at the US Capitol in Washington, DC, when supporters of ex-US President Donald Trump – a close ally of Bolsonaro – stormed Congress in an effort to prevent the certification of his election defeat.

    Brazil’s Supreme Court is investigating Bolsonaro’s alleged involvement in the Brasilia riots, particularly to find out who or how far-right mobs that support the ex-leader ended up ransacking the seats of government.

    Bolsonaro is also under scrutiny over jewelry he allegedly received as a gift from the Saudi Arabian government while in office. On Wednesday, he denied any “irregularities,” stating that “the objects were registered,” CNN Brasil reported.

    Brazilian federal prosecutors are also investigating whether Bolsonaro tried to smuggle two sets of diamond jewels into the country without paying import taxes.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fetterman to return to Senate week of April 17 | CNN Politics

    Fetterman to return to Senate week of April 17 | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Sen. John Fetterman, who checked himself into Walter Reed National Military Medical Center last month for treatment for clinical depression, will return to the Senate during the week of April 17, according to a person familiar with his plans.

    The Pennsylvania Democrat has made progress throughout his treatment, the source said, adding that his stay has been this long because doctors have tried to ensure his medication was effective.

    Fetterman is one of three senators who have been sidelined for months due to injuries and ailments. Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell, 81, who suffered a concussion and broken rib after falling earlier this month, is expected to return to the Senate in mid-April as well, while Sen. Dianne Feinstein, an 89-year-old California Democrat, has been recovering from home this month after being hospitalized for shingles. It is not yet known when Feinstein will return.

    Fetterman, the 53-year-old freshman who helped cement Democrats’ 51-49 Senate majority last fall, suffered a stroke last year during the days ahead of the primary. And when he returned to the campaign trail, Fetterman often struggled to communicate with lingering auditory processing issues, relying on assistance through devices with closed captioning in order to properly have conversations and answer questions.

    The same auditory processing issues impacted him in his early days in the Senate. And when he struggled with substantial weight loss and a loss of appetite in recent weeks, he was diagnosed with clinical depression, later checking himself into Walter Reed for treatment.

    Politico first reported Fetterman’s plans to return to the Senate April 17.

    CNN earlier reported that Fetterman was expected to soon leave the hospital due to progress with his treatment.

    The source, who has spent ample time with Fetterman since he checked in on February 16, said the senator’s physician recently informed him that he will be “as good or better than his best days post-stroke,” referring to the near-fatal stroke he suffered last May.

    “He’s doing extremely well,” the source said.

    Fetterman’s stay at Walter Reed has lasted this long because the doctors have been trying to get his “medication balance exactly right,” the source said. For instance, doctors learned that his blood pressure medication was too high, which they believed contributed to his dizziness when he checked into George Washington University Hospital last month. A few days after that hospital visit, Fetterman was diagnosed with clinical depression, an illness many stroke survivors have struggled with.

    The goal, the source said, has been to take full advantage of his care at Walter Reed to help with other major impacts from his stroke. For instance, neuropsychiatric doctors have helped with the auditory processing issues he’s struggled with in the aftermath of the stroke.

    While Fetterman hasn’t left Walter Reed since checking himself in, he hasn’t been confined to his room. There are trails, restaurants like Wendy’s and other parts of the facility that he spends time in, the source said.

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FDA sketches out plan to bolster fragile US infant formula supply management | CNN

    FDA sketches out plan to bolster fragile US infant formula supply management | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The US Food and Drug Administration announced Tuesday its initial strategy to boost and strengthen the management of the country’s supply of infant formula.

    The announcement came just ahead of a hearing of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee about what went wrong during last year’s infant formula shortage.

    Committee members and experts who testified were critical of formula makers and the FDA’s food safety program, which the agency has pledged to revamp in order to protect the nation’s food supply and promote better nutrition. Many experts are concerned that the formula shortage of 2022 could easily happen again, even with those changes.

    “While we stand here today, more than a year since the recall, it is my view that the state of the infant formula industry today is not much different than it was then,” testified Frank Yiannas, who stepped down from his role as the agency’s deputy commissioner of food policy and response in late February.

    “The nation remains one outbreak, one tornado, flood or cyberattack away from finding itself in a similar place to that of February 17, 2022.”

    A formula shortage that started in 2021 was exacerbated when the United States’ largest infant formula maker, Abbott Nutrition, recalled multiple products in mid-February and had to pause production after FDA inspectors found potentially dangerous bacteria at its Sturgis, Michigan, plant.

    A former Abbott employee filed a whistleblower complaint about the plant with the US Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration in February 2021. The complaint suggested that the plant lacked proper cleaning practices and that workers falsified records and hid information from inspectors.

    The complaint was filed February 16, 2021, and was passed on to Abbott and the FDA three days later.

    Yiannas testified that because of the siloed nature of the agency, he wasn’t made aware of the complaint until February 2022. It was only then that he learned that children had gotten sick with Cronobacter after consuming powdered formula made at the plant.

    The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention investigated at least four illnesses and two deaths in three states in connection. The agency sequenced bacteria from two of the children to compare against the samples the FDA took at the facility, but it did not find that the samples were closely related.

    Cronobacter infections are rare but can be serious and even fatal, especially in newborns. The bacteria lives in the environment, but when these infections are diagnosed in infants, they are often linked to powdered formula.

    “Clearly, I really wish, and I should have been notified sooner, so I could have initiated containment steps earlier. Had that happened, I believe we might not be here today,” Yiannas said Tuesday. “Had the agency responded quicker to some of the earlier signals, I believe this crisis could have been averted or at least the magnitude lessened.”

    With more demand for other brands after the Abbott recalls, families across the country had to hunt through multiple stores for formula last year. Stock rates of baby formula stayed lower than they were the year before for much of 2022. Even in October, when rates had improved, nearly a third of households with a baby younger than 1 said they had trouble finding formula over the course of one week, according to a survey by the US Census Bureau.

    The FDA said Tuesday that its new national strategy helps ensure that the country’s supply of formula will remain constant and safe.

    The agency said it will work with the industry on redundancy risk management plans that will help companies identify possible supply chain problems. It will also continue to enhance inspections of infant formula plants by expanding and improving training for agency investigators.

    According to the strategy, the FDA will expedite review of premarket submissions for new products to prevent shortages. It will continue to closely monitor the formula supply and has developed a model to forecast any potential disruptions.

    It also plans to work closely with the US Department of Agriculture to build in more resiliency with its Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children program, or WIC, the nation’s largest purchaser of infant formula.

    The new strategy is just a first step; the long-term strategy is expected to be released in early 2024.

    Dr. Susan Mayne, director of the FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, said in a statement that the new strategy aims to incentivize “additional infant formula manufacturers to enter the market.”

    Many parts of the strategy are underway, the FDA said.

    “Safety and supply go hand-in-hand. We witnessed last year how a safety concern at one facility could be the catalyst for a nationwide shortage. That’s why we are looking to both strengthen and diversify the market, while also ensuring that manufacturers are producing infant formula under the safest conditions possible,” FDA Commissioner Dr. Robert Califf said in a news release. “Now, with this strategy, we are looking at how to advance long-term stability in this market and mitigate future shortages, while ensuring formula is safe.”

    Formula stock rates are still not where they once were before last year’s crisis, Yiannas said, but the problem can’t be solved overnight. He said it was a good step for Congress to ask for a resiliency report from the industry.

    One positive development that came out of the crisis is that manufacturers are reporting formula volume to the FDA on a weekly basis even though there is no legal requirement to do so, he said.

    Historically, the FDA has focused on food safety and nutrition, not supply chain availability, but the Covid-19 pandemic opened eyes and served as the “biggest test on the US food system in 100 years,” Yiannas said. Food supply shortages made experts realize that the agency needed more intelligence on how companies’ supply chains worked.

    “Progress is being made, but it’s not being made fast enough,” Yiannas said.

    The FDA is now tracking sales and stock rates of baby formula. He said he’s talked to formula companies that say they have ramped up production, even though they might have cut back on the number of varieties of product they offer.

    The FDA said Tuesday that it has also done a study to better understand what led to the recall of infant formula at the Abbott plant. The agency had conducted a routine surveillance inspection at the plant in September 2021 and even then found problems like standing water and inadequate handwashing among employees.

    Abbott is facing additional investigations from the US Securities and Exchange Commission, the US Federal Trade Commission and the US Department of Justice as well as lawsuits from customers.

    Yiannas told the House committee Tuesday that one strategy to head off similar shutdowns would be to require manufacturers to report Cronobacter bacteria found in its products. Currently, only the Abbott plant in Michigan is required to report the bacteria as part of the consent decree that allowed it to reopen.

    The FDA said in November that it would like Cronobacter infections added to the CDC’s list of national notifiable diseases, which would require doctors to report cases to public health officials so the CDC and the FDA could keep better track of infections. Only two states have such a reporting requirement now.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Justice Department moves to end consent decree with Seattle Police Department | CNN Politics

    Justice Department moves to end consent decree with Seattle Police Department | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The Justice Department moved Tuesday to end a consent decree with the Seattle Police Department, bringing to a close more than a decade of federal supervision of the police department.

    The Seattle consent decree was established under the Obama administration in 2012 after a Justice Department investigation found that the police department there had a pattern of using excessive force.

    Specifically, the Justice Department found at the time that the police department used weapons either excessively or unnecessarily more than half the time during arrests, and that officers engaged in a pattern of discriminatory policing during pedestrian encounters.

    The Seattle Police Department has made “far-reaching reforms” since the institution of the consent decree and is now a “transformed organization,” the city of Seattle and the Justice Department said in a court filing Tuesday.

    The Seattle Police Department “achieved remarkable progress,” they said, highlighting that the department has complied with stringent use of force policies and implemented a crisis intervention program, the filing said. “Any pattern or practice of unconstitutional force that existed has been eliminated.”

    The request will go to the federal judge in Washington state who oversaw the police department’s progress and compliance in implementing police reform since the consent decree was signed in 2012.

    If approved, the end of the consent decree will mark a significant milestone in the function of federally supervised implementation of police reforms. There are several similar and ongoing consent decrees with police departments across the country, as well as pattern-and-practice investigations like the one conducted in Seattle.

    Critics of consent decrees point to the years-long agreements as proof that federal oversight and investigations can last several years. Early in the Biden administration, the Justice Department implemented new reforms to try and curtail the length of the federal oversight.

    Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of DOJ’s Civil Rights Division said during a news conference Tuesday that the Seattle Police Department “reached and sustained compliance with our consent decree by consistently implementing reforms necessary to change policing in this city.”

    “Seattle stands as a model for the kind of change and reform that can be achieved when communities, police departments, and cities come together to repair and address systemic misconduct,” Clarke said.

    She continued: “The overall message today is that policing in Seattle looks dramatically different today than it did 10 years ago. The consent degree in Seattle has provided the strong medicine necessary to cure the problems and improve the way policing is carried out across the city of Seattle.”

    The city established a community policing commission and fostered better trust between residents and the police department, Clarke said. The use of force has become rare, appearing in “fewer than one quarter of one percent” of instances, she said. In addition, the department has adopted a “bias-free policing policy,” and more than 90% of police stops are now supported by “reasonable, articulable suspicion.”

    The police department, Clarke said, has pledged to continue monitoring their reforms.

    The Justice Department and the city of Seattle asked for continued, narrow federal oversight in two instances where they say the police department still struggles, “ensuring a sustainable system of accountability” and “improving the use, reporting, and review of force in crowd settings.” Clarke said Seattle is still reviewing the use of police force during the racial justice protests in 2020, and “that work must be completed before it’s appropriate to fully end court oversight on that issue.”

    “While the Justice Department is opening new pattern or practice investigations into police departments across the country,” Clarke said, “we are also achieving significant progress in cities that have worked for years to institute reforms that are called for by our consent decrees.”

    The Justice Department has initiated several probes, including into the police departments in Minneapolis, Phoenix, and Mount Vernon, New York.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Proud Boy testifies that talk of ‘stacking bodies’ was locker-room banter | CNN Politics

    Proud Boy testifies that talk of ‘stacking bodies’ was locker-room banter | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Proud Boys member Fernando Alonso, who was with members of the group in Washington, DC, on January 6, 2021, testified on Monday that text messages about “stacking bodies” on the White House lawn were akin to locker-room banter and that members of the group were simply “knuckleheads.”

    During his testimony in the trial against five members of the Proud Boys charged with seditious conspiracy for their alleged actions around the US Capitol attack, Alonso testified that the idea Proud Boys wanted to take over the government was “offensive.”

    But then prosecutors pressed him about text messages he sent weeks earlier.

    In one message, an individual named Al messaged Alonso on December 24, 2020, asking: “When do we start stacking bodies on the White House Lawn?”

    “Jan 7th,” Alonso wrote back, according to evidence presented at the trial.

    Al responded: “The RINOs first, make the Democrats watch…”

    Alonso answered: “yes.”

    When asked about the message, Alonso testified it was all “‘locker room talk,’ if you will.”

    The Proud Boy also testified that defendant Enrique Tarrio – chairman of the group – never wanted violence. Alonso said the idea that they wanted to overtake the government “is insulting” and “ridiculous.”

    The five defendants – Tarrio, Zachary Rehl, Ethan Nordean, Dominic Pezzola and Joseph Biggs – have pleaded not guilty.

    Alonso said that, around the time of January 6, Proud Boys were irritated by police who, in his view, didn’t do enough to stop violence perpetrated by the left-wing group Antifa, calling them “coptifa.”

    “Antifa did a lot of things, and I don’t see any trials for them,” he said.

    Alonso testified that on January 6, he followed Proud Boys leaders around the Capitol but said he never went inside. Alonso has not been charged in connection with his actions on January 6.

    “I wasn’t going to go in when there’s armed police pointing guns at us,” Alonso said, adding that it “was pretty extreme” to go inside.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The US case against Binance calls out one of the worst-kept secrets in crypto | CNN Business

    The US case against Binance calls out one of the worst-kept secrets in crypto | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    Editor’s Note: A version of this story appeared in CNN Business’ Nightcap newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free, here.


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    If you live in America, you’re not allowed to trade crypto derivatives. And if you’re a big international platform for trading crypto derivatives, you can’t let Americans trade those products if you haven’t registered with the boring-sounding but not-to-be-trifled-with federal regulator known as the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, or CFTC.

    Today, that regulator sued Binance, the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange, for allegedly doing just that. (And if that name sounds familiar, it may because back in November, Binance briefly flirted with bailing out its smaller rival, FTX. Obviously, Binance took one look under the hood at FTX, now at the center of a massive federal fraud investigation, and promptly bailed.)

    Here’s the deal: The CFTC alleges that Binance and its CEO violated US trading laws by, among other things, secretly coaching “VIP” customers within the United States on how to evade compliance controls.

    The commission, which regulates US derivatives trading, said the company and its CEO, Changpeng Zhao, “instructed its employees and customers to circumvent compliance controls in order to maximize corporate profits.”

    Which, you know, isn’t something you want to be caught doing. The CFTC can’t bring criminal charges, but it can seek heavy fines and potentially ban Binance from registering in the US in the future.

    Binance said the lawsuit was “unexpected and disappointing,” adding that it has made “significant investments” in the past two years to ensure that US-based investors are not active on the platform.

    As news of the lawsuit broke Monday, Zhao, known as “CZ,” tweeted the number 4, pointing to a part of a previous statement: “Ignore FUD, fake news, attacks, etc.” (FUD is a commonly used acronym among crypto folks that stands for “fear, uncertainty, doubt.”)

    Binance has long argued that it isn’t subject to US laws because it doesn’t have a physical headquarters in America. Or anywhere, really — CZ claims that the company’s headquarters are wherever he is at any point in time, “reflecting a deliberate approach to attempt to avoid regulation,” according to the CFTC’s lawsuit.

    The CFTC’s lawsuit is certainly not great news for Binance, or for crypto more broadly. But it’s not quite the seismic event that was FTX’s collapse, or even the Terra/Luna meltdown. (You can read more about those here and here but, tl;dr: Those 2022 events were, to use a technical term, holy-crap-sell-everything-call-your-dad-and-cry moments for crypto investors.)

    Prices of bitcoin and ethereum, the two most popular cryptocurrencies, fell more than 3% Monday. Which is to say, it was just another day trading virtual currencies.

    Perhaps the most significant part of the lawsuit is the way the CFTC loudly calls out one of the worst-kept secrets in all of crypto: That not only are US customers gaining access to risky offshore crypto derivatives they shouldn’t be allowed to access, but it’s also pretty darn easy to do so. All anyone needs is a VPN and an iron stomach, because crypto derivatives are leveraged bets on wildly unstable assets. (And like everything in this newsletter, that shouldn’t be taken as any kind of advice.)

    The likely outcome, said Timothy Cradle, a crypto compliance and regulation expert at Blockchain Intelligence Group, will be that Binance ends up paying “hundreds of millions of dollars” in fines and will be prevented from registering a derivatives exchange in the future. That’s “a terminal blow for users of their service located in the US and a significant hit to Binance’s revenue” as the suit alleges US users make up 16% of the revenue for Binance’s derivatives product.

    Monday’s news adds yet another layer of regulatory scrutiny on crypto’s biggest players. The Internal Revenue Service and Securities and Exchange Commission are also reportedly also investigating Binance, per Bloomberg.

    Meanwhile, Coinbase, the largest US-listed crypto exchange, received a so-called Wells notice (typically a precursor to enforcement action) last week from the SEC for possible securities law violations.

    And just to pile on: The crypto industry earlier this month lost two of its biggest connections to the mainstream finance world — Silvergate and Signature Bank.

    All in all, not a great month for the industry that is perpetually straining credibility even when it’s hot. And right now, it is decidedly not.

    Enjoying Nightcap? Sign up and you’ll get all of this, plus some other funny stuff we liked on the internet, in your inbox every night. (OK, most nights — we believe in a four-day work week around here.)

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • This is why SVB imploded, says top Fed official | CNN Business

    This is why SVB imploded, says top Fed official | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Silicon Valley Bank imploded due to mismanagement and a sudden panic among depositors, a top Federal Reserve official plans to tell lawmakers at a hearing on Tuesday.

    In prepared testimony released on Monday, Michael Barr, the Fed’s vice chair for supervision, details how SVB leadership failed to effectively manage interest rate and liquidity risk.

    “SVB’s failure is a textbook case of mismanagement,” Barr says in testimony to be delivered before the Senate Banking Committee.

    The Fed official points out that SVB’s belated effort to fix its balance sheet only made matters worse.

    “The bank waited too long to address its problems and, ironically, the overdue actions it finally took to strengthen its balance sheet sparked the uninsured depositor run that led to the bank’s failure,” said Barr, adding that there was “inadequate” risk management and internal controls.

    Depositors yanked $42 billion from SVB on March 9 alone in a bank run, a panic that appeared to be fueled in part by venture capitalists urging tech startups to pull their funds.

    “Social media saw a surge in talk about a run, and uninsured depositors acted quickly to flee,” said Barr.

    The Fed official echoed comments from other top regulators in assuring the public about the safety of banks.

    “Our banking system is sound and resilient, with strong capital and liquidity,” Barr said. “We are committed to ensuring that all deposits are safe. We will continue to closely monitor conditions in the banking system and are prepared to use all of our tools for any size institution, as needed, to keep the system safe and sound.”

    Facing questions over how regulators — including at the Fed itself — missed red flags at SVB, the Fed has launched a review of oversight of the bank. Barr, who is leading that review, promised to take an “unflinching look” at the supervision and regulation of SVB. He said the review will be thorough and transparent and officials welcome and expert external reviews as well.

    In his testimony, Barr discloses that near the end of 2021, bank supervisors found “deficiencies” in the bank’s liquidity risk management. That resulted in six supervisory findings linked to SVB’s liquidity stress testing, contingency funding and liquidity risk management.

    Then, in May 2022, supervisors issued three findings related to “ineffective” board oversight, risk management weaknesses and internal audit function lapses, Barr said. Bank supervisors took further steps last year that show regulators were aware of problems at SVB.

    Barr’s testimony indicates the Fed’s review will examine how the 2018 rollback of Dodd-Frank may have contributed to SVB’s failure. That rollback, under then-President Donald Trump, allowed SVB to avoid tougher stress testing and rules on liquidity, funding, leverage and capital.

    Barr said the Fed will weigh whether the applying those tougher rules to SVB would have helped the bank manage the risks that led to its failure.

    Looking ahead, Barr said the recent events have underscored how regulators must enhance rules applying to banks and study banking has been changed by social media, customer behavior, rapid growth and other developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump leans into extremism at first 2024 rally as legal woes mount | CNN Politics

    Trump leans into extremism at first 2024 rally as legal woes mount | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Donald Trump is igniting his White House bid at a moment of unprecedented peril in the criminal investigations against him – a confluence that could send America into a new political and legal collision.

    Trump’s wild rhetoric at his first official 2024 campaign rally Saturday previewed the divisive national moment ahead should he be indicted in any of multiple criminal probes. As he whipped up a demagogic fervor in Waco, Texas, to try to secure a new presidency dedicated to “retribution,” Trump’s extremism – laced with suggestions of violence – left no doubt he would be willing to take the country to a dark place to save himself.

    Yet Trump’s chilling warnings that the Biden administration’s “thugs and criminals” have created a “Stalinist Russia horror show” by “weaponizing” justice against him also spelled electoral danger for a GOP hurt by his authoritarianism in recent elections. An extraordinary prolonged character attack on Ron DeSantis, in which Trump depicted his biggest potential rival of 2024 tearfully begging for his endorsement in 2018, demonstrated the political firestorm the Florida governor will have to deal with if he jumps into the White House campaign.

    Even with the ex-president’s reputation for hyperbole and inflammatory rhetoric, such demagoguery has never previously been heard in the first official rally of any modern American election campaign.

    Meanwhile, House committee chairs eager to appeal to the Trump base are increasing their efforts to use the power of their Republican majority to thwart Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s inquiry into Trump – even before it releases any possible indictment or evidence. House Oversight Chair James Comer told CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday that the GOP moves were justified because the investigation into Trump’s alleged role in a hush money scheme to pay an adult film actress was based purely on politics.

    “This is the, for better or worse, leading contender for the Republican nomination of the presidential election next year, as well as a former president of the United States,” the Kentucky Republican told Jake Tapper.

    Many legal experts have questioned whether the potential Bragg investigation will produce the strongest of cases against Trump, who’s also facing several other probes over his actions around the 2020 election and his handling of classified documents. (Trump, who maintains he’s done nothing wrong, so far has not been charged in any of the criminal probes against him.)

    And given the greater national impact of those other investigations, a possible attempt to use a business accounting violation in this yearslong hush money case to suggest a possible violation of campaign finance law could be especially controversial. Yet Comer’s comments also created the implication that an ex-president or White House candidate could be protected from investigation even if they had committed a criminal offense. This gets to the core of the possible cases against Trump: Would failing to investigate him and charge him, if the evidence justifies such a step, mean an ex-president is above the law? Or would some attempts to call him to account risk subjecting him to a level of scrutiny that other citizens might not face?

    Comer and House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, who were among the three committee chairs writing to Bragg this weekend with intensifying demands for his testimony, won a warm shout-out from Trump at his rally in Texas, reflecting the way the new House GOP is acting as a political tool for the ex-president and his radical campaign. Bragg responded to the chairmen in a statement saying it was not appropriate for Congress to interfere with local investigations and vowed to be guided by the rule of law. He was backed up this weekend by nearly 200 former federal prosecutors who wrote a letter denouncing efforts to intimidate him.

    The grand jury in the Trump case is expected to reconvene on Monday, following a week of rampant public speculation over whether Bragg would call more witnesses and whether the case was sufficiently serious to merit the potential first indictment ever of an ex-president. Trump falsely predicted earlier this month that he would be arrested last Tuesday – a move that fired up an effort by his allies to intimidate Bragg. But the week came and went without any indictment news.

    CNN reported last week that the district attorney’s office was trying to determine whether to call back Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen, to refute the testimony provided by attorney Robert Costello, who appeared at the request of Trump lawyers – or to call an additional witness to buttress its case before the grand jurors consider a vote on whether to indict the former president.

    The escalating confrontation over Bragg’s inquiry came as other investigations around Trump seemed to be nearing their own conclusions.

    In a totally separate case on Friday, Trump’s primary defense attorney, Evan Corcoran, appeared before a grand jury in Washington, DC, that is hearing evidence over the ex-president’s handling of classified documents at his home in Florida, including possible obstruction of justice when the government tried to get those documents back. Prosecutors have made clear in court proceedings that are still under seal that they believe Trump tried to use Corcoran to advance a crime.

    Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe told CNN’s Erin Burnett on Friday that Corcoran’s appearance represented a serious development for Trump. “That is an unprecedented thing that we’re seeing, and Evan Corcoran is in a position to provide unbelievably damaging testimony against him,” he said.

    Besides looking into the documents issue, special counsel Jack Smith is investigating Trump’s conduct around the 2020 election – which even this weekend the former president again falsely claimed he had won – and in the run-up to the attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.

    In another probe related to the 2020 election, a district attorney in Georgia said at the end of January that decisions were “imminent” in the investigation into Trump’s attempts to overturn President Joe Biden’s victory in the key swing state. CNN reported last week that prosecutors are considering bringing racketeering and conspiracy charges.

    Charges in any one of these investigations would test the strength of the country’s political and judicial institutions, given that an ex-president and current presidential candidate is involved. And the fact that Trump is showing such willingness to inflame the country’s politics in his own defense makes this a deeply serious moment for the nation.

    Trump’s fiery rally in Waco pulsated with falsehoods about the 2020 election and his one-term presidency and misrepresented the legal cases against him. Coming a day after he warned in a social media post about “death and destruction” if he is indicted, his speech boiled with conspiracy theories and personal resentments – rhetoric that is especially dangerous in the aftermath of January 6. It wasn’t lost on observers that his event coincided with the 30th anniversary of a law enforcement raid on a cult compound in Waco that’s seen on the far right as a symbol of government overreach, although the campaign maintained the location had been chosen for convenience.

    The ex-president has often used extremist speeches to try to get more time in the limelight or more attention, whether from adoring onlookers or outraged critics. It is too early to judge how well his tactic is working in the 2024 campaign and as his legal plight seems to worsen. To date, there have been no big protests of the kind Trump has repeatedly called for. The price his supporters could pay for turning violent has also been demonstrated by the hundreds of convictions of those who invaded the Capitol more than two years ago after his big Washington rally. So there is at least the possibility that while Trump remains widely popular with his GOP base, his angry rhetoric lacks the power that it once did.

    But it is also clear after this first campaign rally that Trump, who is still leading the Republican pack for 2024, has crossed a new political line. He is painting a picture of a decrepit and powerless nation – plagued by corruption, rigged elections and the criminal manipulation of the law against his supporters – that is far more extreme than the “American carnage” he invoked in his inaugural address in 2017.

    “The abuses of power that are currently with us at all levels of government will go down as among the most shameful, corrupt and depraved chapters in all of American history,” Trump said, lashing the US as a “third world banana republic.”

    “Either the deep state destroys America, or we destroy the deep state,” he said at one point.

    And while Trump’s intent is to shock, history suggests that authoritarians seeking power follow exactly the same playbook of populist nationalism – discrediting free elections, demonizing the legal system and taking aim at vulnerable sectors of society – that Trump is pioneering in his new campaign.

    His rally was also notable for the fact that it was almost totally dominated by his grievances and complaints, which may well hint at a sense of foreboding over his legal position. “Every piece of my personal life, financial life, business life and public life has been turned upside down and dissected like no one in the history of our country,” Trump said.

    This raises a question of whether he’s offering a message, rooted in his obsessions, that a majority of Republican voters would actually want to sign up for, even those who considered his presidency a success. In 2016, Trump emerged as an unlikely but highly skilled vehicle for the conservative grassroots, much of which felt patronized by politicians and left behind in a wave of globalization that sent millions of blue-collar jobs overseas.

    DeSantis may be trying something similar in 2024. In the early moves of his yet-to-be-declared campaign, the Florida governor has positioned himself as the champion of conservative voters who believe their way of life is under attack from liberals and multiculturalists pushing a “woke” ideology. One of the key questions of the GOP primary campaign will be whether this approach could appeal to more Republican voters than Trump’s incessant attempts to portray investigations into him as a symptom of a wider attack by a corrupt government on his followers.

    But ahead of yet another potentially pivotal week, Trump is proving that he will not turn away from the defining tactic of his political career: subjecting the country’s institutions to ever more intense and unprecedented stress tests.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Delta passenger opens door, deploys emergency exit slide on plane at Los Angeles airport | CNN

    Delta passenger opens door, deploys emergency exit slide on plane at Los Angeles airport | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A Delta Air Lines passenger was arrested after opening one of the plane’s doors and sliding down an emergency exit slide as the plane prepared for takeoff from Los Angeles to Seattle Saturday, officials said.

    The incident on Delta Flight 1714 took place around 10:40 a.m. local time, while the plane was stationary at the Los Angeles International Airport, according to the Federal Aviation Administration.

    The plane, a Boeing 737, was on the runway holding to taxi for takeoff when the passenger exited the aircraft after activating the emergency exit slide, the FAA said.

    The passenger was initially detained by Delta staff before being arrested by local law enforcement, the statement read.

    “Customers are being reaccommodated on a new aircraft and we apologize for the inconvenience and delay in their travel plans,” the FAA said.

    The FAA is investigating the incident. CNN has reached out to Delta and Los Angeles airport police for additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden’s pick to lead the FAA withdraws from nomination | CNN Politics

    Biden’s pick to lead the FAA withdraws from nomination | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    President Joe Biden’s pick to lead the Federal Aviation Administration is withdrawing his name from nomination due to “an onslaught of unfounded Republican attacks” on the nominee’s service and experience, a White House official told CNN.

    Phillip Washington’s nomination was first announced by the White House last year, but has faced strong criticism from Republican lawmakers over a number of issues, including Washington’s slim aviation credentials and his potential legal entanglements.

    The White House respects Washington’s decision to withdraw his name and praised his public service record and qualifications to lead the FAA, the official said.

    The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation was scheduled to vote on Washington’s nomination on Wednesday, but that vote was postponed. A Republican Senate aide told CNN after the postponed vote that “he was pulled because they don’t have the votes to report him out of committee.”

    Because Republicans remained unified in their opposition to Washington’s prospective leadership, “his nomination is on life support,” the aide said.

    The nomination withdrawal was first reported by Reuters.

    Washington, the current CEO of the Denver International Airport, has held leadership roles at municipal transit organizations, including in Denver and Los Angeles, focused on bus and rail lines. He also led the Biden-Harris transition team for the Department of Transportation. Prior to his work in transportation, Washington served in the military for 24 years.

    While Washington has worked in transportation-related positions since 2000, he had no experience in the aviation industry prior to joining the Denver airport in 2021 – something that became a major concern among committee members.

    Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg on Saturday highlighted the need for a confirmed FAA administrator as he condemned the “partisan attacks” on Washington.

    “The FAA needs a confirmed Administrator, and Phil Washington’s transportation & military experience made him an excellent nominee. The partisan attacks and procedural obstruction he has faced are undeserved, but I respect his decision to withdraw and am grateful for his service,” Buttigieg said in a tweet.

    The White House will work to select a new nominee to lead the FAA, the official said.

    “Politics must not hold up confirming an Administrator to lead the FAA, and we will move expeditiously to nominate a new candidate for FAA Administrator. We believe the Senate owes it to the American people to swiftly consider and confirm a leader to this key safety agency,” the official said.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House committee chairmen double down on Manhattan DA oversight efforts | CNN Politics

    House committee chairmen double down on Manhattan DA oversight efforts | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The chairmen of three House committees sent a letter Saturday to the Manhattan district attorney leading the probe into Donald Trump, doubling down on their efforts to intervene in the hush money investigation ahead of possible criminal charges against the former president.

    The letter from the chairmen of the House Judiciary, Oversight and Administration committees to Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg pushed back on his case against appearing for a transcribed interview with their panels and argued that they now feel compelled to consider whether Congress should take legislative action on three separate issues “to protect former and/or current Presidents from politically motivated prosecutions by state and local officials.”

    The letter – written by Republicans Jim Jordan, James Comer and Bryan Steil – comes after they initially called on Bragg earlier this week to testify before their committees and criticized his investigation into Trump as an “unprecedented abuse of prosecutorial authority.”

    Bragg is investigating Trump’s alleged role in a scheme to pay adult-film star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 presidential election to keep silent about an alleged affair with Trump a decade earlier. Trump has denied having an affair with Daniels.

    Bragg’s general counsel had initially responded on Thursday, telling the House committee leaders that they lacked a “legitimate basis for congressional inquiry” and noting that their requests for information “only came after Donald Trump created a false expectation that he would be arrested the next day and his lawyers reportedly urged you to intervene.”

    The chairmen claimed in Saturday’s letter that Bragg had not disputed “the central allegations at issue” — that his office is under “political pressure from left-wing activists and former prosecutors” and is “planning to use an alleged federal campaign finance violation, previously declined by federal prosecutors, as a vehicle to extend the statute of limitations on an otherwise misdemeanor offense and indict for the first time in history a former President of the United States.”

    They argued that the potential criminal indictment of a former president and 2024 presidential candidate “implicates substantial federal interests, particularly in a jurisdiction where trial-level judges also are popularly elected.”

    Bragg responded to the chairmen’s letter Saturday evening on Twitter, writing, “We evaluate cases in our jurisdiction based on the facts, the law, and the evidence. It is not appropriate for Congress to interfere with pending local investigations. This unprecedented inquiry by federal elected officials into an ongoing matter serves only to hinder, disrupt and undermine the legitimate work of our dedicated prosecutors. As always, we will continue to follow the facts and be guided by the rule of law in everything we do.”

    Going further than they have before, Jordan, Comer and Steil wrote in the letter that they may choose to consider three areas of legislation, including broadening “the preemption provision in the Federal Election Campaign Act,” adding that such a measure could “have the effect of better delineating the prosecutorial authorities of federal and local officials in this area and blocking the selective or politicized enforcement by state and local prosecutors of campaign finance restrictions pertaining to federal elections.”

    The second piece of legislation they may consider regards tying federal funds to improved metrics for public safety funds — a measure they say would be prompted by allegations that the Manhattan DA is using public safety funds for his investigation into Trump.

    They also may consider a measure overhauling the authorities of special counsels and better delineating their relationships with other prosecuting entities, they said, arguing that the circumstances of the Trump investigation “stem, in part, from Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation.”

    This story has been updated with a response from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Sen. Mitch McConnell released from physical therapy rehab after fall | CNN Politics

    Sen. Mitch McConnell released from physical therapy rehab after fall | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Saturday that he has been released from an inpatient physical therapy facility after he fell earlier this month and was treated for a concussion and rib fracture.

    “I want to sincerely thank everyone for all the kind wishes. I’m happy to say I finished inpatient physical therapy earlier today and I’m glad to be home,” McConnell said in a statement.

    “I’m going to follow the advice of my physical therapists and spend the next few days working for Kentuckians and the Republican Conference from home. I’m in frequent touch with my Senate colleagues and my staff. I look forward to returning in person to the Senate soon.”

    McConnell will work from his Washington, DC, home this week and is not expected to return to the Senate before the chamber breaks for their two-week recess, a McConnell aide told CNN.

    The Senate minority leader was admitted to a hospital after he tripped and fell at a dinner event earlier this month. He remained in the hospital for several days. After that, he began physical therapy at an inpatient rehabilitation facility.

    Previously, a McConnell aide had said that the length of the 81-year-old Senate Republican leader’s stay at the facility would be decided “by the Leader’s physicians and the therapists.” The aide said, “It is very common to undergo physical therapy to regain strength after a hospital stay and this ranges anywhere from a week to two weeks.”

    Republican senators who have spoken with McConnell have told CNN that he wants to get back to work. Texas Sen. John Cornyn said recently that McConnell is “chomping at the bit” to return to the Capitol, and Senate Minority Whip John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, noted that he was “anxious” to come back.

    This was not McConnell’s first fall. In 2019, he fractured his shoulder in a fall at his home in Kentucky.

    The top Republican is not the only absent senator. Across the aisle, 89-year-old Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California has been receiving treatment for shingles at home following a brief stay in the hospital. And Pennsylvania Democratic Sen. John Fetterman is undergoing inpatient treatment for clinical depression at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden, DOJ won’t assert privilege in Trump deposition in lawsuit brought by fired FBI official | CNN Politics

    Biden, DOJ won’t assert privilege in Trump deposition in lawsuit brought by fired FBI official | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Justice Department said Friday that neither it nor the Biden White House would assert certain privileges in depositions of former President Donald Trump and FBI Director Christopher Wray that have been ordered in a lawsuit brought by an ex-FBI official whose termination Trump pushed for when he was president.

    The new filing from the Justice Department in the lawsuit brought by former FBI official Peter Strzok is the latest example of the Biden administration having to weigh the protections of the presidency against the extraordinary legal cases related to President Joe Biden’s predecessor.

    Strzok’s lawsuit alleges that Trump’s political agenda prompted his firing and that the Justice Department broke the law in publicly releasing texts he had exchanged with former FBI lawyer Lisa Page. The texts revealed that Page and Strzok – who both worked on the Trump-Russia probe when it was in its early stages – had expressed anti-Trump sentiments and that they were engaged in a romantic, extramarital affair. Trump repeatedly called for Strzok’s ouster before he was terminated in 2018. Page has also brought her own lawsuit over the release of texts.

    The Justice Department had sought to quash the subpoenas of Trump and Wray, but was unsuccessful, with DC District Judge Amy Berman Jackson ruling that both men had to sit for depositions. Jackson’s ruling, which she issued after a sealed hearing in February, also said the depositions must be limited to less than two hours and that they must focus on a narrow set of issues in the case.

    When the Justice Department was seeking to quash the subpoenas, it had indicated that the presidential communications privilege could limit what questions Wray could answer about his communications with Trump concerning the matters in dispute in the lawsuit. Jackson ordered the DOJ to indicate by late March whether Biden would assert privilege in the depositions and Friday’s filing indicated the administration would not engage in a privilege fight.

    “The Executive Office of the President will not assert the Presidential Communications Privilege, and Defendants will not assert the Deliberative Process Privilege, with respect to the authorized topics,” the filing said. It added that a representative of Trump was made aware of the ruling ordering the depositions and said that “Former President Trump has not requested an assertion of privilege over any of the information within the scope of the authorized deposition.”

    The department, however, signaled in the filing that it still might appeal Jackson’s order, with a footnote stating that “Defendants expressly reserve their rights to seek further review of this Court’s February 23, 2023 decision.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • TikTok users are making fun of Congress members for their questions to app CEO Shou Chew | CNN Business

    TikTok users are making fun of Congress members for their questions to app CEO Shou Chew | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    TikTok creators have had enough of Congress seemingly not understanding how the internet works.

    What happened: On Thursday, TikTok CEO Shou Chew testified before the House Committee for Energy and Commerce, where he was peppered with questions about concerns over the popular app’s potential national security threats and its connections to China. Governments around the world banned the app on official devices, and there is concern that the app’s parent company ByteDance could be forced to cooperate with the Chinese government. (TikTok doesn’t operate in China.)

    The tone from some of its members was combative — something that creators noticed, and mocked, immediately.

    Meanwhile, TikTok creators are leading the way ridiculing members of Congress.

    There needs to be an age limit in Congress,” one caption by user @rachelhannahh said about a clip of US Rep. Buddy Carter, who represents Georgia’s 1st district, asking Chew whether the app tracks pupil dilation as a form of facial recognition to drive algorithms.

    Chew responded by saying the app does not use body, face or voice data to identify users, and the only face data the app collects is for “filters to have sunglasses on your face.”

    ‘Why do you need to know where the eyes are if you’re not seeing if they’re dilated?” Carter then asked, resulting in a barrage of comments ridiculing the congressman’s questions.

    A spokesperson for Carter said the congressman is not on TikTok because it poses a national security risk.

    “TikTok recently updated its privacy policy allowing it to collect biometric data, so it was important that its CEO be on-the-record, under oath detailing what data TikTok collects and whether the Chinese Communist Party has access to that data,” the spokesperson said.

    TechCrunch previously reported that TikTok updated its privacy policy “to allow the app to collect biometric data on US users.” However, the company has said it only uses biometrics for video effects and ByteDance employees in China would not be able to access it, TechCrunch reported.

    Many of the TikTok video clips suggested Congress members don’t know how modern technology works. They believe members of Congress are detached from technology and unaware of how tech companies within their own country operate, resulting in easily mockable questions.

    The app, which has 150 million US users, is facing a potential ban. Among those who’ve heard of TikTok, only 39% of those younger than 30 support a TikTok ban, according to a CBS News/YouGov poll released Thursday.

    US Rep. Mike Gallagher, who represents Wisconsin’s 8th district, told CNN during its primetime special Thursday night that the government needs to address TikTok as a national security threat, despite the popularity of the app among younger voters.

    “Republicans [and] Democrats agreed this is a threat,” Gallagher, a Republican who chairs the House Select Committee on China, told CNN. “So we can’t ignore it just because of concerns about alienating some teenagers on this app.”

    “It’s a national security issue,” he said. “We have to deal with it before it’s too late.”

    It’s a bipartisan opinion. The Biden administration threatened a ban if the app’s Chinese owners don’t spin off their share of the social media platform.

    “Bro outta pocket,” a user who goes by Whittington said on a clip of US Rep. August Pfluger, who represents Texas’ 11th district.

    In the clip, Pfluger said the only other person who united Democrats and Republicans was Vladimir Putin.

    CNN has reached out to Pfluger for comment.

    The hearing may also have created a new group of lobbyists. ByteDance, the company that owns TikTok, flew out more than 30 famous TikTokkers to Washington to advocate for the app, the New York Times reported.

    Another clip that has been widely circulating on the app is one of US Rep. Richard Hudson, who represents North Carolina’s 9th district, questioning Chew on how WiFi connectivity works. The “yes or no” style of interrogating on topics that were complex, or frankly irrelevant, were a major point of exasperation for users.

    “So if I have a TikTok app on my phone and my phone is on my home WiFi network,” Hudson asked, “does TikTok access that network?”

    “Does TikTok access my battery to steal my electricity?” one user said, mocking Hudson.

    CNN has reached out to Hudson for comment.

    Users are also posting POV’s on the app, renacting their own versions of the hearing.

    “What color is the algorithm?” said user Christian Divyne in a video mocking some of the questions Congress members asked Chew.

    The video ended up getting over one million views, with over 250,000 likes as of this writing.

    – CNN’s Samantha Murphy Kelly and Brian Fung contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 2024 GOP field tests their messages — while largely avoiding conflict with Trump | CNN Politics

    2024 GOP field tests their messages — while largely avoiding conflict with Trump | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    As former President Donald Trump heads to Texas on Saturday for his first major campaign rally, the handbrake remains on for most of his potential 2024 rivals.

    Trump will appear in Waco just a week after he predicted his own arrest in connection with a hush money case from 2016. In the days since, anticipation grew over a potential indictment from a Manhattan grand jury, with Trump warning early Friday of “potential death and destruction” if he’s charged, though no action was taken this week.

    This latest melodrama for the former president is unfolding during an uneasy period for the rest of the 2024 GOP presidential field, which is mostly frozen in place as a host of rumored contenders travel the country to test-run their messages while also seeking to avoid conflict with Trump.

    The former president, though, operates on his own schedule and, along with his allies, used his own announcement about a coming indictment to test the loyalties of his fellow Republicans.

    “We all need to be speaking up against the political persecution of President Trump,” right-wing Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert tweeted last weekend. “This is not the time for silence.”

    What Trump and his supporters eventually heard was a field of would-be opponents rushing to their defense – yet another sign that former president’s grip on the Republican Party remains firmly in place.

    Former Vice President Mike Pence, who has at times harshly criticized Trump over the latter’s role in the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot, fell into line almost immediately after Trump’s prediction last week.

    “The fact that the Manhattan DA thinks that indicting President Trump is his top priority, I think, it just tells you everything you need to know about the radical left in this country,” Pence said in an ABC News interview last Sunday. “It just feels like a politically charged prosecution here.”

    Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, who served as Trump’s ambassador to the United Nations, remains the only other candidate with an established national profile to formally enter the race. She too backed Trump after he floated his expected arrest, saying the potential case against him was “more about revenge than it is about justice.”

    Meanwhile, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has projected a warrior-like persona in the run-up to his own expected campaign, is still months out from an announcement. Though he took a sharper, snarkier tone when discussing Trump’s legal troubles this week, it came as he faced the fallout from his own messy, conflicting series of remarks on the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

    South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, another potential contender, parried questions about Trump, and whether he was concerned by the behavior underlying the hush money case. Instead, he turned his ire on reporters and President Joe Biden.

    “You know, one of the things I’d say is that red-on-red violence, so to speak, is something that the mass media enjoys,” Scott said on Fox New Thursday. “The road to socialism runs through a divided Republican Party. One thing we should do is keep our focus on the actual problem: That is President Biden.”

    Further complicating DeSantis’s bid to shave support from Trump while energizing his own conservative base, his other would-be rivals – led by Haley and Pence – are increasingly framing him as a carbon copy of the former president.

    The main difference: They can go after DeSantis without fear of reprisal from Trump or his supporters.

    Pence has taken aim at DeSantis over the Florida governor’s home state war with Disney, which he targeted after the company pushed back against state GOP legislation banning certain instruction about sexual orientation and gender identity in the classroom, dubbed by critics as the “Don’t Say Gay” law.

    The former vice president argued that DeSantis’ revocation of Disney’s special tax status went too far, and that such interventions violated his principles as a “limited government Republican.”

    Both Pence and Haley have also insisted that “entitlement reform,” in the form of cutting benefits for seniors in an effort to combat what they’ve described as a funding crisis, would be on the table if they were elected. That position separates them from Trump and DeSantis – at least rhetorically – who have both pledged not to touch popular programs like Medicare and Social Security.

    For his part, DeSantis has ignored pokes from more establishment-aligned Republicans, instead attempting to land subtle jabs on Trump. Asked about the rumors of Trump’s coming indictment, DeSantis on Monday said he “no interest in getting involved in some type of manufactured circus by some Soros DA,” a reference to Democrat Alvin Bragg and billionaire liberal donor George Soros.

    But he followed that with a dig that raised the hackles of Trump and his top advisers.

    “I don’t know what goes into paying hush money to a porn star to secure silence over some type of alleged affair,” DeSantis said to laughs from some in the press corps. “I just, I can’t speak to that.”

    Trump promptly responded by posting a series of personal attacks against DeSantis on social media.

    “Ron DeSanctimonious will probably find out about FALSE ACCUSATIONS & FAKE STORIES sometime in the future, as he gets older, wiser, and better known, when he’s unfairly and illegally attacked by a woman, even classmates that are ‘underage’ (or possibly a man!),” Trump wrote. “I’m sure he will want to fight these misfits just like I do!”

    But his back-and-forth with Trump, which carried on after DeSantis landed a few more shots during an interview with Piers Morgan, was arguably less damaging to the Florida governor than his continued about-faces on Ukraine.

    After being met with a barrage of criticism from prominent Republicans for initially describing Russia’s war in Ukraine as a “territorial dispute” in a statement to Fox News host Tucker Carlson, DeSantis subsequently insisted to Morgan that he had only been addressing a longer-running part of the conflict focused in eastern Ukraine and Crimea.

    “That’s some difficult fighting,” DeSantis said of the region, “and that’s what I was referring to. And so it wasn’t that I thought Russia had a right to that (land), and so if I should have made that more clear, I could have done it.”

    By Thursday, though, DeSantis has tracked back to a more populist position, saying in an interview with Newsmax that he cares “more about securing our own border in the United States than I do about the Russia-Ukraine border.”

    The back-and-forth over Ukraine invited reproaches from Pence and Haley, along with foreign policy hawks like South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and former Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, who all at various times either mocked or scorned DeSantis’ comments

    “When the United States supports Ukraine in their fight against Putin, we follow the Reagan doctrine, and we support those who fight our enemies on their shores, so we will not have to fight them ourselves,” Pence said in a statement. “There is no room for Putin apologists in the Republican Party.”

    The broad backlash underscored DeSantis’ uniquely tricky path to the nomination. When he hewed to Trump’s position in his initial remarks, the party establishment and anti-Trump conservatives raced to condemn him.

    But because DeSantis largely shares a voter base with the former president, staking out a clear position opposing Trump would be politically untenable.

    It is a challenge he will need to meet – and solve – as the race becomes more intense and the waiting, for candidates and action in Trump’s legal cases, comes to an end.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • A threat to democracy or much-needed reform? Israel’s judicial overhaul explained | CNN

    A threat to democracy or much-needed reform? Israel’s judicial overhaul explained | CNN

    [ad_1]


    Jerusalem
    CNN
     — 

    For months hundreds of thousands of Israelis have been taking to the streets across the country to regularly protest far-reaching changes to the Israel’s legal system some say threaten the country’s democratic foundations.

    At its core, the judicial overhaul would give the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, and therefore the parties in power, more control over Israel’s judiciary.

    From how judges are selected, to what laws the Supreme Court can rule on, to even giving parliament power to overturn Supreme Court decisions, the changes would be the most significant shakeups to Israel’s judiciary since its founding in 1948.

    The proposed reforms do not come out of nowhere.

    Figures from across the political spectrum have in the past called for changes to Israel’s judiciary.

    Israel has no written constitution, only a set of quasi-constitutional basic laws, making the Supreme Court even more powerful. But Israel also has no check on the power of the Knesset other than the Supreme Court.

    Here’s what you need to know.

    The judicial overhaul is a package of bills, all of which need to pass three votes in the Knesset before they become law.

    One of the most important elements for the Netanyahu government is the bill that changes the makeup of the nine-member committee that selects judges, in order to give the government a majority of the seats on the committee.

    Netanyahu and his supporters argue that the Supreme Court has become an insular, elitist group that does not represent the Israeli people. They argue the Supreme Court has overstepped its role, getting into issues it should not rule on.

    But the anger has also reached the business community, academia and even the military

    Defending his plans, the prime minister has pointed to countries like the United States, where politicians control which federal judges are appointed and approved.

    Another significant element of the changes is known as the override clause, which would give the Israeli parliament the power to pass laws previously ruled invalid by the court, essentially overriding Supreme Court decisions.

    Supporters say the Supreme Court should not interfere in the will of the people, who vote the politicians into power.

    “We go to the polls, vote, and time after time, people we did not elect decide for us,” Justice Minister Yariv Levin said while unveiling the reforms at the beginning of January.

    Another bill, now voted through, makes it more difficult for a sitting Prime Minister to be declared unfit for office, restricting the reasons to physical or mental incapacity and requiring either the prime minister themselves, or two-thirds of the cabinet, to vote for such a declaration.

    Although several bills could affect Netanyahu it is the one about declaring a prime minister “unfit for office” that has the biggest implication for the Israeli prime minister.

    Critics say Netanyahu is pushing the overhaul forward because of his own ongoing corruption trial, where he faces charges of fraud, bribery and breach of trust. He denies any wrongdoing.

    That bill is largely seen by opposition leaders as a way to protect Netanyahu from being declared unfit for office as a result of the trial.

    As part of a deal with the court to serve as a prime minister despite being on trial, Netanyahu accepted a conflict of interest declaration. The Attorney General determined that the declaration meant Netanyahu could not be involved in the policy-making of the judicial overhaul. A petition is currently in front of the Israeli Supreme Court to declare Netanyahu unfit for office on the grounds he has violated that conflict of interest declaration and the attorney general has written an open letter to Netanyahu saying he is in breach of the deal and the law.

    Critics also argue that if the government has a greater say in which judges are appointed, Netanyahu’s allies will appoint judges they know will rule in Netanyahu’s favor.

    Netanyahu is accused of self-interest in pursuing the legal shake-up

    Netanyahu, it should be said, has completely denied this and has claimed his trial is “unraveling” on its own.

    In the past, Netanyahu has publicly expressed strong support for an independent judiciary. Asked why he’s supporting such an overhaul despite those public proclamations, Netanyahu told CNN’s Jake Tapper: “I haven’t changed my view. I think we need a strong, independent judiciary. But an independent judiciary doesn’t mean an unbridled judiciary, which is what has happened here, I mean, over the last 25 years.”

    Weakening the judicial branch could limit both Israelis and Palestinians in seeking the court’s defense of their rights if they believe they are compromised by the government.

    Palestinians in the occupied West Bank could be affected, and of course Palestinian citizens of Israel or those who hold residency cards would be directly affected. Israel’s Supreme Court has no influence on what happens in Gaza, which is ruled by the Palestinian militant group Hamas.

    Critics of the changes worry that if the politicians have more control, the rights of minorities in Israel, especially Palestinians living in Israel, would be impacted.

    Last year, for example, the court halted the evictions of Palestinian families in the flashpoint neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah in East Jerusalem, where Jewish groups have claimed ownership of land the families have lived on for decades.

    The protesters have vowed to fight on, but Netanyahu has given no indication he will back down

    At the same time, Palestinian activists have argued that the high court has further entrenched Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, having never considered the legality of Israeli settlements there, even though they’re considered illegal by most of the international community.

    The high court has also been the subject of complaints from Israel’s far right and settlers, who say it is biased against settlers; they have condemned the court’s involvement in approving the eviction of settlers from Gaza and the Northern West Bank in 2005.

    The overhaul has caused concern across Israel’s financial, business, security and academic sectors.

    Critics say the overhaul goes too far, and will completely destroy the only avenue available to provide checks and balances to the Israeli legislative branch.

    They warn it will harm the independence of the Israeli judiciary, and will hurt rights not enshrined in Israel’s quasi-constitutional basic laws, like minority rights and freedom of expression.

    According to polling released in February by the Israel Democracy Institute, only a minority of Israelis support the reforms. The vast majority – 72% – want a compromise to be reached and, even then, 66% think the Supreme Court should have the power to strike down lawa and 63% of Israelis think the current method of appointing judges should stay as it is.

    Members of the typically apolitical high-tech sector have also spoken out against the reforms. Assaf Rappaport, CEO of cybersecurity firm Wiz, has said the firm won’t be moving any of the $300 million capital it recently raised to Israel because of the unrest over the overhaul.

    Israel’s Central Bank Governor Amir Yaron told CNN’s Richard Quest that the reforms are too “hasty” and risk harming the economy.

    Several former Mossad chiefs have also spoken out against the reforms, warning division over the issue is harming Israeli security. Hundreds of reservists in Israel’s army have warned they will not answer the call to serve if the reforms pass, saying they believe Israel will no longer be a full democracy under the changes.

    Israeli President Isaac Herzog said the government’s legislation was “misguided, brutal and undermines our democratic foundations,” and warned Israel was potentially on the brink of a “civil war.” Although the Israeli presidency is largely a ceremonial role, Herzog has been actively speaking with all parties calling for negotiations.

    And on the international front, Israel’s allies, including the United States, have also expressed concern about the overhaul.

    According to the White House, US President Joe Biden told Netanyahu in a mid-March phone call “democratic societies are strengthened by genuine checks and balances, and that fundamental changes should be pursued with the broadest possible base of popular support.”

    Protest organizers say they plan to intensify their demonstrations until the legislation is halted. But the government says it received a mandate from voters to pass the reform when it was elected last November.

    But in mid-March, the coalition government softened its plans for the first time, announcing that it had amended the bill that would reform the committee that selects judges. Instead of having the vast majority of the appointed seats on the committee, the government-appointed members would have a one-seat majority.

    On March 23, even after his own defense minister nearly gave a speech calling for the legislation to be halted out of concern for how it would affect Israeli national security, Netanyahu vowed to keep advancing the reforms.

    He called for opposition politicians to meet with him to negotiate, something they have said they will only do if the legislative process is halted.

    Complicating matters further, should the bills pass parliament the Supreme Court must then potentially decide on laws curbing its own power. This raises the possibility of a constitutional standoff. Would the Supreme Court strike down the laws, and if so, how would the government respond?

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • TikTok and its CEO are fighting to save the app in the US | CNN Business

    TikTok and its CEO are fighting to save the app in the US | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    As a growing number of lawmakers raise national security concerns about TikTok’s ties to China, and some experts worry about the app’s impact on young people’s mental health, CNN is hosting a special to dig into these issues. Watch “CNN Primetime: Is time up for TikTok?” Thursday, March 23 at 9 p.m. ET.



    CNN
     — 

    At a Harvard Business Review conference earlier this month, where executives, professors and artists appeared for talks on corporate leadership and emotional intelligence, Shou Chew attempted to save his company.

    In his talk, Chew, the CEO of TikTok, said the social network would not provide US user data to the Chinese government and has never been asked to do so. Chew stressed the steps TikTok has taken to protect US user data. And four separate times, Chew told the audience that the platform’s mission was to “inspire creativity and bring joy” to users.

    The Harvard event is just one of several media appearances Chew has made in recent weeks amid mounting scrutiny of TikTok and of himself. Chew is set to testify on Thursday for the first time before a Congressional committee about “TikTok’s consumer privacy and data security practices, the platforms’ impact on kids, and its relationship with the Chinese Communist Party,” according to a statement last week from the committee. Meanwhile, federal officials are now demanding the app’s Chinese owners sell their stake in the social media platform, or risk facing a US ban of the app.

    Chew, a Singaporean who has largely stayed out of the spotlight since taking over TikTok in 2021, recently sat for interviews with multiple US newspapers and this week showed up in a video on the corporate TikTok account to highlight the vast reach of the app, which he revealed now has more than 150 million users in the United States.

    “That’s almost half the US coming to TikTok to connect, to create, to share, to learn, or just to have some fun,” said Chew, wearing in a hoodie and t-shirt like any other American tech executive in the clip. “This comes at a pivotal moment for us. Some politicians have started talking about banning TikTok, now this could take TikTok away from all 150 million of you.”

    Chew’s heightened visibility appears to be part of a larger messaging campaign by TikTok to bolster its reputation in the US and remind voters – and their representatives – how essential the social network is to American culture.

    A press conference is planned for Wednesday with dozens of social media creators on the steps of the Capitol, some of whom have been flown out there by TikTok. The company is paying for a blitz of advertisements for a Beltway audience. And last week it put out a docuseries highlighting American small business owners who rely on the platform for their livelihoods.

    Behind the scenes, Chew has also met with members of Congress and TikTok recently invited researchers and academics to its Washington, D.C., offices to learn more about how it is working to address lawmakers concerns over its ties to China through its parent company, ByteDance. Its parent company has also ramped up federal lobbying, spending more than $5 million last year, according to data tracked by OpenSecrets.

    “It’s life or death for TikTok, from their perspective,” said Justin Sherman, the CEO of Global Cyber Strategies, D.C.-based research and advisory firm, who was among the researchers TikTok invited to be briefed on “Project Texas,” the company’s $1.5 billion initiative to address lawmakers’ security concerns. “They are throwing everything they can at the problem.”

    In a statement, TikTok spokesman Jamal Brown said: “A U.S. ban on TikTok could have a direct impact on the livelihoods of millions of Americans. Lawmakers in Washington debating TikTok should hear firsthand from people whose lives would be directly affected by their decisions.”

    For much of the past year, TikTok has been rolling out new features and policies to address privacy and security concerns that the Chinese government could gain access to US user data, as well as broader fears that its app, like other social platforms, can be harmful to some younger users.

    TikTok recently set a default one-hour daily screen time limit on every account for users under 18 in one of the most aggressive moves yet by a social media company to prevent teens from endlessly scrolling. It rolled out a feature that aimed to offer more information to users about why its powerful algorithm recommends certain videos. And the company pledged more transparency to researchers.

    Facing concerns about its parent company’s ties to China, TikTok has also taken a number of steps to more clearly separate its US operations and user data from other parts of the organization. That includes moving all its US user data to Oracle’s cloud platform, where it says it hosts “100% of US user traffic.”

    The messaging campaign has only ramped up this week ahead of the hearing. TikTok rolled out refreshed Community Guidelines for content, which the company framed as being “based on our commitment to uphold human rights and aligned with international legal frameworks.” And Chew once again stressed TikTok’s independence from China.

    “I understand that there are concerns stemming from the inaccurate belief that TikTok’s corporate structure makes it beholden to the Chinese government or that it shares information about U.S. users with the Chinese government,” Chew said in prepared remarks ahead of his testimony before Congress. “This is emphatically untrue.”

    At the same time, TikTok is now betting on a strategy from American tech companies who have faced scrutiny for other reasons, playing up the impact it has on small businesses in the United States, including with the CEO’s prepared remarks and a mini docuseries it released last week titled “TikTok Sparks Good.”

    The series spotlighted inspiring stories of American small business owners and creators. The first of the 60-second clips features a Mississippi soap maker with a deep Southern accent who built her company on the app, and the second features an educator who quit his job to focus on sharing informational videos on TikTok aimed at teaching toddlers how to read.

    “Because of TikTok, I’m reaching millions of families who want to teach their toddlers how to read,” the educator says.

    Dozens of TikTok creators who oppose a ban will also be holding a press conference on Capitol grounds on Wednesday evening with Congressman Jamaal Bowman, a Democrat from New York. TikTok flew out some of the creators, the company confirmed to CNN. (The Information was first to report the move.)

    The list of expected attendees includes a disabled Asian American creator using her platform to combat ableism, a small business owner from South Carolina who launched a greeting card company via TikTok, and an Ohio-based chef who built her bakery business via the app. Some of the creators have hundreds of thousand or even millions of followers on TikTok.

    Even with these efforts, Sherman expressed some skepticism about how persuasive the PR push will be, mostly because of how divided Washington is right now.

    “Not everyone wants a ban,” he said. “For some lawmakers, it will matter that TikTok is taking all these steps to address security concerns.”

    But for others, it won’t move the needle. “Some lawmakers, frankly, do not care what ads TikTok is taking out, what pledges it’s making on its blog about independence, data privacy … They see an unmitigable risk of Chinese government access to data and/or influence over content, and so are going to push for a complete ban.”

    Lindsay Gorman, a senior fellow for emerging technologies at the German Marshall Fund’s Alliance for Securing Democracy and a former Biden administration adviser, said that “by and large, TikTok’s lobbying efforts so far have been pretty ineffective.”

    The problem, she said, is two-fold. First, even if TikTok takes steps to bolster its safeguards today, as it has been doing with Project Texas, concerns remain that it’s always “one update away from becoming a vulnerability.” And second, TikTok’s PR efforts in Washington won’t undo previous moments when the company “shot itself in the foot” by making what she said were “inaccurate statements” to Congress, “and then having revelations come out showing that those were inaccurate.”

    After the initial, Trump-era calls for a TikTok ban appeared to fade in Washington, BuzzFeed reported in 2021 that US user data was repeatedly accessed from China and that “everything is seen in China.” The details in the report were seemingly at odds with remarks a TikTok executive gave before a Senate panel earlier that year, claiming that a US-based security team decides who can access US user data from China. Following the report, TikTok once again became a hot button issue in the nation’s capital.

    But even as suspicion among US lawmakers grew, so did the app’s popularity in the country.

    “I do think TikTok’s strongest argument to date is drawing on its creator user base,” Gorman said. But for some lawmakers with security concerns, the latest push “may be too little too late.”

    In his TikTok video on Tuesday, Chew appealed directly to users of the app. The CEO asked them to write in the comments section to share “what you want your elected representatives to know about what you love about TikTok.”

    The top comment on the clip, which has received upwards of 50,000 likes, simply reads: “You know something went wrong when the boss has to show up 😂”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FBI takes down cybercrime forum that touted data connected to breach affecting US lawmakers | CNN Politics

    FBI takes down cybercrime forum that touted data connected to breach affecting US lawmakers | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The FBI has arrested the alleged founder of a popular cybercriminal forum that touted data stolen in a hack affecting members of Congress and thousands of other people and taken the website down, the Justice Department said Friday.

    The website – known as BreachForums – trafficked in the stolen data of millions of Americans until the FBI recently took it offline, the department said in a news release.

    The alleged administrator of BreachForums, a 20-year-old New York man named Conor Brian Fitzpatrick, was arrested last week, according to the Justice Department. Fitzpatrick has been charged with conspiracy to commit access device fraud, which carries a sentence of five years in prison, the department said in the release.

    The forum gained greater notoriety this month when a hacker posted data they claimed was stolen from a DC health insurance service – an incident that roiled Capitol Hill and exposed the personal data of tens of thousands of people from different walks of life. House of Representatives officials have said hundreds of staff were affected by the incident. The number of lawmakers affected is believed to be less than two dozen, a source familiar told CNN earlier this month.

    Among the other victims of Fitzpatrick’s alleged hacking-related activities are a US electronic health care firm, a US internet services provider and a US-based investment firm, according to an affidavit filed in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. The affidavit did not name the companies.

    Fitzpatrick made his initial appearance in federal court on Friday, the Justice Department said. Fitzpatrick was released on a $300,000 bail, according to court documents, which was cosigned by members of his family.

    A judge ordered Fitzpatrick not to contact any victims or co-conspirators in the investigation, open any new lines of cryptocurrency nor possess the personal identification information of others.

    Nina Ginsberg, an attorney listed for Fitzpatrick in court records, declined to comment. Fitzpatrick has not yet entered a formal plea.

    It’s the latest move in a sustained international law enforcement effort to disrupt cybercriminal organizations that cost American business and residents billions of dollars a year. More than $10 billion in losses from online scams were reported to the FBI in 2022, the highest annual loss in the last five years, according to a recent FBI report.

    BreachForums emerged last year after US and international law enforcement agencies shut down a similar forum, RaidForums, and arrested its alleged founder in the United Kingdom.

    Despite the law enforcement crackdown, there are still several other online forums where criminals can hawk stolen data. And new illicit marketplaces will likely emerge, according to experts.

    “While BreachForums is likely permanently offline, it will invariably be replaced by something else,” Brett Callow, threat analyst at cybersecurity firm Emsisoft, told CNN. “Whether that something is a Telegram channel or another Breach-style forum remains to be seen.”

    US law enforcement agents have gotten increasingly adept at quietly infiltrating cybercriminal forums and collecting intelligence to feed indictments or arrests.

    In the demise of RaidForums, US authorities had access to the website’s computer infrastructure for several months before the seizure was announced, a law enforcement official familiar with the matter previously told CNN.

    The latest forum takedown is welcome news but “the resilience of the underground ecosystem as a whole remains mostly untouched as the criminal demand for illicit goods continues to rise,” Michael DeBolt, chief intelligence officer at security firm Intel 471, told CNN.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • TikTok collects a lot of data. But that’s not the main reason officials say it’s a security risk | CNN Business

    TikTok collects a lot of data. But that’s not the main reason officials say it’s a security risk | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    After TikTok CEO Shou Chew testified for more than five hours on Thursday before a Congressional committee, one thing was clear: US lawmakers remain convinced that TikTok is an urgent threat to national security.

    The hearing, Chew’s first appearance before Congress, kicked off with a lawmaker calling for TikTok to be banned and remained combative throughout. A number of lawmakers expressed deep skepticism about TikTok’s efforts to safeguard US user data and ease concerns about its ties to China. Nothing Chew said appeared to move the needle.

    The rhetoric inside and outside the hearing room highlighted the growing, bipartisan momentum for cracking down on the app in the United States. As the hearing was taking place, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said he supports legislation that would effectively ban TikTok; Secretary of State Antony Blinken said TikTok should be “ended one way or another,” and the Treasury Department issued a statement vowing to “safeguard national security,” without mentioning TikTok by name.

    Concerns about TikTok’s connections to China have led governments worldwide to ban the app on official devices, and those fears have factored into the increasingly tense US-China relationship. But the remarks across the federal government on Thursday, combined with a prior threat from the Biden administration to impose a nationwide ban unless TikTok’s Chinese owners sell their stakes, shows that a complete ban of the hugely popular app very much remains a live possibility.

    However, more than two years after the Trump administration first issued a similar threat to TikTok, evidence remains unclear about whether the app is a national security threat. Security experts say the government’s fears, while serious, currently appear to reflect only the potential for TikTok to be used for foreign intelligence, not that it has been. There is still no public evidence the Chinese government has actually spied on people through TikTok.

    TikTok doesn’t operate in China. But since the Chinese government enjoys significant leverage over businesses under its jurisdiction, the theory goes that ByteDance, and thus indirectly, TikTok, could be forced to cooperate with a broad range of security activities, including possibly the transfer of TikTok data.

    “It’s not that we know TikTok has done something, it’s that distrust of China and awareness of Chinese espionage has increased,” said James Lewis, an information security expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “The context for TikTok is much worse as trust in China vanishes.”

    When Rob Joyce, the National Security Agency’s director of cybersecurity, was asked by reporters in December to articulate his security concerns about TikTok, he offered a general warning rather than a specific allegation.

    “People are always looking for the smoking gun in these technologies,” Joyce said. “I characterize it much more as a loaded gun.”

    Technical experts also draw a distinction between the TikTok app — which appears to operate very similarly to American social media in the amount of user tracking and data collection it performs — and TikTok’s approach to governance and ownership. It’s the latter that’s been the biggest source of concern, not the former.

    The US government has said it’s worried China could use its national security laws to access the significant amount of personal information that TikTok, like most social media applications, collects from its US users.

    The laws in question are extraordinarily broad, according to western legal experts, requiring “any organization or citizen” in China to “support, assist and cooperate with state intelligence work,” without defining what “intelligence work” means.

    Should Beijing gain access to TikTok’s user data, one concern is that the information could be used to identify intelligence opportunities — for example, by helping China uncover the vices, predilections or pressure points of a potential spy recruit or blackmail target, or by building a holistic profile of foreign visitors to the country by cross-referencing that data against other databases it holds. Even if many of TikTok’s users are young teens with seemingly nothing to hide, it’s possible some of those Americans may grow up to be government or industry officials whose social media history could prove useful to a foreign adversary.

    Another concern is that if China has a view into TikTok’s algorithm or business operations, it could try to exert pressure on the company to shape what users see on the platform — either by removing content through censorship or by pushing preferred content and propaganda to users. This could have enormous repercussions for US elections, policymaking and other democratic discourse.

    Security experts say these scenarios are a possibility based on what’s publicly known about China’s laws and TikTok’s ownership structure, but stress that they are hypothetical at best. To date, there is no public evidence that Beijing has actually harvested TikTok’s commercial data for intelligence or other purposes.

    Chew, the TikTok CEO, has publicly said that the Chinese government has never asked TikTok for its data, and that the company would refuse any such request. In Thursday’s hearing, Chew said that what US officials fear is a hypothetical scenario that has not been proven.

    “I think a lot of risks that are pointed out are hypothetical and theoretical risks,” Chew said. “I have not seen any evidence. I am eagerly awaiting discussions where we can talk about evidence and then we can address the concerns that are being raised.”

    If there’s a risk, it’s primarily concentrated in the relationship between TikTok’s Chinese parent, ByteDance, and Beijing. The main issue is that the public has few ways of verifying whether or how that relationship, if it exists, might have been exploited.

    TikTok has been erecting technical and organizational barriers that it says will keep US user data safe from unauthorized access. Under the plan, known as Project Texas, the US government and third-party companies such as Oracle would also have some degree of oversight of TikTok’s data practices. TikTok is working on a similar plan for the European Union known as Project Clover.

    But that hasn’t assuaged the doubts of US officials. Multiple lawmakers at the hearing specifically said they were not persuaded by Project Texas. That’s likely because no matter what TikTok does internally, China would still theoretically have leverage over TikTok’s Chinese owners. Exactly what that implies is ambiguous, and because it is ambiguous, it is unsettling.

    In congressional testimony, TikTok has sought to assure US lawmakers it is free from Chinese government influence, but it has not spoken to the degree that ByteDance may be susceptible. TikTok has also acknowledged that some China-based employees have accessed US user data, though it’s unclear for what purpose, and it has disclosed to European users that China-based employees may access their data as part of doing their jobs.

    Multiple privacy and security researchers who’ve examined TikTok’s app say there aren’t any glaring flaws suggesting the app itself is currently spying on people or leaking their information.

    In 2020, The Washington Post worked with a privacy researcher to look under the hood at TikTok, concluding that the app does not appear to collect any more data than your typical mainstream social network. The following year, Pellaeon Lin, a Taiwan-based researcher at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab, performed another technical analysis that reached similar conclusions.

    But even if TikTok collects about the same amount of information as Facebook or Twitter, that’s still quite a lot of data, including information about the videos you watch, comments you write, private messages you send, and — if you agree to grant this level of access — your exact geolocation and contact lists. TikTok’s privacy policy also says the company collects your email address, phone number, age, search and browsing history, information about what’s in the photos and videos you upload, and if you consent, the contents of your device’s clipboard so that you can copy and paste information into the app.

    TikTok’s source code closely resembles that of its China-based analogue, Douyin, said Lin in an interview. That implies both apps are developed on the same code base and customized for their respective markets, he said. Theoretically, TikTok could have “privacy-violating hidden features” that can be turned on and off with a tweak to its server code and that the public might not know about, but the limitations of trying to reverse-engineer an app made it impossible for Lin to find out whether those configurations or features exist.

    If TikTok used unencrypted communications protocols, or if it tried to access contact lists or precise geolocation data without permission, or if it moved to circumvent system-level privacy safeguards built into iOS or Android, then that would be evidence of a problem, Lin said. But he found none of those things.

    “We did not find any overt vulnerabilities regarding their communication protocols, nor did we find any overt security problems within the app,” Lin said. “Regarding privacy, we also did not see the TikTok app exhibiting any behaviors similar to malware.”

    TikTok has cited Lin’s research as part of its defense. But Citizen Lab came out swinging this week at the company’s characterizations of the paper, saying in a statement that TikTok has presented the research as “somehow exculpatory” when a key finding was that Lin couldn’t see what happens to user data after it is collected.

    Chew, in a rare moment of apparent frustration, told lawmakers at the hearing that TikTok and Citizen Lab were really saying a version of the same thing. “Citizen Lab is saying they cannot prove a negative, which is what I’ve been trying to do for the last four hours,” he said.

    TikTok has faced claims that its in-app browser tracks its users’ keyboard entries, and that this type of conduct, known as keylogging, could be a security risk. The privacy researcher who performed the analysis last year, Felix Krause, said that keylogging is not an inherently malicious activity, but it theoretically means TikTok could collect passwords, credit card information or other sensitive data that users may submit to websites when they visit them through TikTok’s in-app browser.

    There is no public evidence TikTok has actually done that, however. TikTok has said the keylogging function is used for “debugging, troubleshooting, and performance monitoring,” as well as to detect bots and spam. Other research has shown that the use of keyloggers is extremely widespread in the technology industry. That does not necessarily excuse TikTok or its peers for using a keylogger in the first place, but neither is it proof positive that TikTok’s product, by itself, is any more of a national security threat than other websites.

    There have also been a number of studies that report TikTok is tracking users around the internet even when they are not using the app. By embedding tracking pixels on third-party websites, TikTok can collect information about a website’s visitors, the studies have found. TikTok has said it uses the data to bolster its advertising business. And in this respect, TikTok is not unique: the same tool is used by US tech giants including Facebook-parent Meta and Google on a far larger scale, according to Malwarebytes, a leading cybersecurity firm.

    At the hearing, Chew said the company does keystroke logging to “identify bots,” not to track what users say. He also repeatedly noted that TikTok does not collect more user data than most of its peers in the industry.

    As with the keylogging tech, the fact TikTok uses tracking pixels does not on its own transform the company into a national security threat; the risk is that the Chinese government could compel or influence TikTok, through ByteDance, to abuse its data collection capabilities.

    Separately, a report last year found TikTok was spying on journalists, snooping on their user data and IP addresses to find out when or if certain reporters were sharing the same location as company employees. TikTok later confirmed the incident and ByteDance fired several employees who had improperly accessed the TikTok data of two journalists.

    The circumstances surrounding the incident suggest it was not the type of wide-scale, government-directed intelligence effort that US national security officials primarily fear. Instead, it appeared to be part of a specific internal effort by some ByteDance employees to hunt down leaks to the press, which may be deplorable but hardly uncommon for an organization under public scrutiny. (Nevertheless, the US government is reportedly investigating the incident.)

    Joyce, the NSA’s top cyber official, told reporters in December that what he really worries about is “large-scale influence” campaigns leveraging TikTok’s data, not “individualized targeting through [TikTok] to do malicious things.”

    To date, however, there’s no public evidence of that taking place.

    TikTok may collect an extensive amount of data, much of it quietly, but as far as researchers can tell, it isn’t any more invasive or illegal than what other US tech companies do.

    According to security experts, that’s more a reflection of the broad leeway we’ve given to tech companies in general to handle our data, not an issue that’s unique or specific to TikTok.

    “We have to trust that those companies are doing the right thing with the information and access we’ve provided them,” said Peiter “Mudge” Zatko, a longtime ethical hacker and Twitter’s former head of security who turned whistleblower. “We probably shouldn’t. And this comes down to a concern about the ultimate governance of these companies.”

    Lin told CNN that TikTok and other social media companies’ appetite for data highlights policy failures to pass strong privacy laws that regulate the tech industry writ large.

    “TikTok is only a product of the entire surveillance capitalism economy,” Lin said. “And governments around the world are ignoring their duty to protect citizens’ private information, allowing big tech companies to exploit user information for gain. Governments should try to better protect user information, instead of focusing on one particular app without good evidence.”

    Asked how he would advise policymakers to look at TikTok instead, Lin said: “What I would call for is more evidence-based policy.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link