US Senate Subcommittee confirms: Obama sent US taxpayer money to Israel in bid to unseat Netanyahu - UPDATED AND PURGED EMAILS PROVING IT
During Israel's 2015 Knesset elections, a group called V15 attempted to mount a 'grass roots' challenge to Prime Minister Netanyahu. V15 was staffed by Obama campaign staff and financed by Obama supporters (or so we thought) S. Daniel Abraham, the billionaire founder of the Slim Fast food
line, Daniel Lubetzky, a social entrepreneur whose OneVoice Movement is partnered with V15 and Alon Kastiel, a Tel Aviv-based businessman and owner of multiple local venues, including bars, clubs and hotels.
Almost immediately, Senator Ted Cruz (R-Tx) and Congressman Lee Zeldin (R-NY) sent a letter to Secretary of State Kerry asking whether media reports that US taxpayer money was being used by V15 to unseat Netanyahu were true.
Today, we have an answer to that question. Under the auspices of Chairman Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI) has released a report
today confirming allegations that an NGO with connections to President
Obama’s 2008 campaign (that would be Lubetzky's One Voice, which partnered with V15) used U.S. taxpayer dollars attempting to oust
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 2015. This is from Jennifer Rubin.
A press release states:
Today,
U.S. Senators Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.),
Chairman and Ranking Member of the Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations (PSI), released a bipartisan report examining the U.S.
State Department’s grants to OneVoice—a non-governmental organization
operating in Israel and the Palestinian Territories. The group received
nearly $350,000 in grants from the U.S. State Department to support
peace negotiations between Israelis and the Palestinian Authority over a
14-month grant period ending in November 2014. In December 2014,
Israeli elections were called following the collapse of peace
negotiations.
The Subcommittee’s investigation concludes that
OneVoice Israel complied with the terms of its State Department grants.
Within days after the grant period ended, however, the group deployed
the campaign infrastructure and resources created, in part, using U.S.
grant funds to support a political campaign to defeat the incumbent
Israeli government known as V15. That use of government-funded
resources for political purposes after the end of the grant period was
permitted by the grant because the State Department failed to adequately
guard against the risk that campaign resources could be repurposed in
that manner or place limitations on the post-grant use of resources.
McCaskill tried to put the best face on it.
"While this report shows no wrongdoing by the Administration, and
should put to rest such allegations, it certainly highlights
deficiencies in the Department’s policies that should be addressed in
order to best protect taxpayer dollars.”
Really? No wrongdoing in using US taxpayer dollars to unseat the democratically elected Prime Minister of an ally? I must have been asleep in my Constitutional Law class when they said that was okay.
Through a spokesman, Portman had a different view.
The campaign’s explicit goal was to elect “anybody but Bibi [Netanyahu]” by mobilizing center-left voters. . . .
The
State Department permitted One Voice to use a taxpayer-funded grant to
build valuable political infrastructure—large voter contact lists, a
professionally trained network of grassroots organizers/activists, and
an impressive social media platform—for the putative purpose of
supporting peace negotiations. But during the federal grant period,
OneVoice devised a plan to target Prime Minister Netanyahu; immediately
after the grant period ended, OneVoice deployed its taxpayer-funded
campaign resources to launch the largest anti-Netanyahu grassroots
organizing campaign in Israel in 2015. Despite OneVoice’s known history
of political activism in Israel, the State Department did nothing to
guard against the clear risk that OneVoice could engage in
electioneering activities using a taxpayer-funded grassroots campaign
infrastructure after the grant period. Remarkably, according to the
State Department, OneVoice’s conduct was fully compliant with Department
regulations and guidelines.
And I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop and to hear that both the White House and the State Department enthusiastically approved OneVoice's activities.
But wait. There's more.
Among the report’s most damning findings, evidence was found that the
“durable campaign resources” built during the grant with taxpayer
dollars included “a larger voter contact database, a professionally
trained network of grassroots activists across the country, and an
enhanced social media presence on Facebook and Twitter. OneVoice was
even permitted to use State Department funds to hire an American
political consulting firm called 270 Strategies — run by Obama
2008 campaign veterans — to train its activists in how to execute a
‘grassroots mobilization’ campaign.”
Can't wait to hear all the lemmings tell us how this is the 'most pro-Israel administration evah.' UNbelievable.
PS For those wondering why I am up at this hour even though I'm in Israel.... I got counterparty comments and client comments on an agreement between 11:00pm and Midnight and the client asked that I read his comments and call. That's all for tonight....
UPDATE 1:47 AM
Sorry - not all for tonight. The State Department purged the emails that proved it. This is Adam Kredo.
A senior State Department official admitted to congressional
investigators that he deleted several emails pertaining to the
administration’s coordination with OneVoice.
“The State Department was unable to produce all documents responsive
to the Subcommittee’s requests due to its failure to retain complete
email records of Michael Ratney, who served as U.S. Consul General in
Jerusalem during the award and oversight of the OneVoice grants,” the
report states.
Investigators “discovered this retention problem because one
important email exchange between OneVoice and Mr. Ratney … was produced
to the Subcommittee only by OneVoice,” the report continues. “After
conducting additional searches, the Department informed the Subcommittee
that it was unable to locate any responsive emails from Mr. Ratney’s
inbox or sent mail.”
Ratney was ultimately forced to tell investigators that “[a]t times I
deleted emails with attachments I didn’t need in order to maintain my
inbox under the storage limit.”
While Ratney had the option to archive emails—as required by the
department—he did not do this. Ratney claimed he was not aware of the
rule, stating he “did not know [he] was required to archive routine
emails.”
The deletion of the email chains appears to be a violation of the
Federal Records Act, which mandates official records be archived for
future disclosure purposes.
Note - this is on John Kerry's watch and not on Hillary Clinton's. Yes, John Kerry is just as corrupt as Hillary Clinton.
One source with intimate knowledge of the situation told the Free Beacon that the deletion of these emails is highly suspicious given the seriousness of the claims about the administration’s behavior.
“The Obama administration had the money, skills, and personnel to
build a gigantic campaign infrastructure that was used to try to defeat
the prime minister of an ally,” the source said. “But apparently they
didn’t have what they needed to store the emails in which they did all
of those things. That’s certainly a lucky break for the State
Department.”
State Department spokesman John Kirby told reporters Tuesday
afternoon that he could not comment on the accusations due to the
department’s inability to thoroughly review the Senate’s report.
“We’ve not had time to go through it closely, so I’m not going to be
able to comment on specifics,” Kirby said. “But I would note that the
report makes clear there’s no evidence that OneVoice spent State
Department grant funds to influence the Israeli election. Again, I just
don’t have additional comment at this time.”
Even McCaskill admitted that OneVoice spent US government funds to influence the Israeli elections. She just claimed it didn't show 'wrongdoing.'
If you were expecting State Department spokesman John Kirby to say something about terror attacks in Israel last week, you were disappointed with Tuesday's State Department briefing. Here's the sum total of what they had to say about Israel.
QUESTION: Do you have a comment on the Israeli settlement construction announcement?
MR KIRBY: We’re aware of reports that the Government of Israel
intends to advance plans for hundreds of housing units in Israeli
settlements in the West Bank as well as East Jerusalem. If it’s true,
this report would be the latest step in what seems to be a systematic
process of land seizures, settlement expansions, and legalizations of
outposts that is fundamentally undermining the prospects for a two-state
solution. We oppose steps like these, which we believe are
counterproductive to the cause of peace. In general, we’re deeply
concerned about settlement construction and expansion in East Jerusalem
and the West Bank, and the design – and the – I’m sorry, the designation
of land throughout the West Bank for exclusive Israeli use.
As the Quartet report highlights, since the beginning of the Oslo
process in 1993, the population of settlements has more than doubled,
with a threefold increase in Area C alone. Currently, there is at least
570,000 Israeli settlers living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Moreover, approximately 100 settlement outposts in Area C have been
built without formal Israeli Government approval, making them illegal
even under Israeli law. Again, as the Quartet report makes clear, these
actions risk entrenching a one-state reality and raise serious questions
about Israel’s long-term intentions.
QUESTION: Given that you raise the idea of this as a
systematic process of land – land expropriation or land seizures or
however you put it, what is the U.S.’s systematic response beyond just
saying this is bad every time? Do you have a systematic approach to
counteracting this trend that is blocking peace, in your opinion?
MR KIRBY: Our approach has been consistent throughout. First
of all, calling it like we see it and not being afraid to do that;
having tough discussions with Israeli leaders about this and being
willing to continue to do that; working inside the Quartet, and the
Quartet report addresses this pretty clearly as I just said; as well as
working with other members of the international community to try to see
if we can advance a two-state solution.
QUESTION: Do you – do you – the way I understood it was this
is a response to the violence. Do you see the notion of settlement
expansion as a consequence of violence as an appropriate countermeasure?
MR KIRBY: Look, I’m – I really am loath to get into analyzing
cause and effect here in terms of connecting that particular dot. We’re
obviously deeply concerned about violence and we condemn the recent
attacks. There’s – and we’ve said this before – no justification for
terrorism, no justification for the violence, no justification for the
taking or maiming of innocent life. And so we’re going to continue to
look for leaders in the region to do what they need to do, take the
affirmative steps that are required, and act – demonstrate leadership to
take down the tensions to reduce the violence to get us to help create
the conditions for a two-state solution. That doesn’t change, however,
at all our opposition to settlement activity, which we believe is
illegitimate.
QUESTION: I have a last one, tangentially related. The wife of
a man killed in a West Bank attack was an American citizen. I think the
car was shot at and it was just another American – I think it might
have been Hebron – another American who almost died in this case. Are
you having conversations with the Palestinians about the rising American
death toll in this wave of violence?
MR KIRBY: Obviously, we’re – any death and any injury is
significant when it results from this sort of violence. And so our
conversations with leaders on both sides are about, again, taking steps
to reduce the violence so that innocent people can go about their lives –
all innocent people can go about their lives.
Okay, so the last question mentioned Chavi Mark (whose husband Rabbi Mickey Marc HY"D was murdered last Friday), but it didn't mention Hallel Yaffa Ariel HY" (May God Avenge her blood).
There was NO condemnation from the State Department - and certainly none from Hussein Obama.
And then there was a little more, but still no condemnation:
QUESTION: Do you think that that --
QUESTION: But your first job’s to protect Americans --
MR KIRBY: And we take that very --
QUESTION: -- and there are --
MR KIRBY: And we take that very seriously.
QUESTION: Well, a lot – there’s been several now, I think, killed in this wave of violence --
MR KIRBY: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- more than in a lot of places where you have --
MR KIRBY: We take that – no, we take that very seriously, but --
QUESTION: -- deeper engagement.
MR KIRBY: Well, I’m not going to --
QUESTION: Even military engagement in some places.
MR KIRBY: I’m not going to detail the specifics of diplomatic
discussions we may be having on this. I can tell you obviously we take
that responsibility very seriously. But more broadly speaking, we want
to see all innocent life protected.
QUESTION: And do you think that the Palestinian attackers are
attacking Americans on purpose? Do you think that they are targeting
Americans?
MR KIRBY: As I said, I’m not going to analyze each and every specific act here from the podium, Said.
QUESTION: Just to follow up on Brad’s question, do you ask the
Palestinians to investigate whether there’s actually been deliberate
attacking or deliberate targeting of Americans?
MR KIRBY: We want – first of all, we want the attacks to stop.
QUESTION: Right, I understand. But things that have already taken place.
MR KIRBY: And obviously – obviously we would – we – and we’ve
said this before – we welcome thorough, complete investigations on these
matters, transparent investigations by all sides. But I’m not going to
get into a discussion of each and every one.
QUESTION: According to the Israeli press, the Palestinian
Authority is getting ready to cut off all relation with the Quartet
because they feel that the report was completely biased towards Israel.
First of all, are you aware of these reports? And second, are you having
a conversation with the Palestinians on this very issue?
MR KIRBY: I think what we’ve seen is a PLO statement that
takes issue with some aspects of the Quartet report, and that’s our
understanding, is that this is more a statement of their concerns and
objections to the report itself. And as I said last week, we fully
expected that there would be objections, that there will be concerns,
that not everybody would like everything that they read in there. But
I’ll say it like I said last week – I’ll say it again – both sides had
input and we valued – welcomed and valued that input.
QUESTION: Okay.
Again, no condemnation of 'Palestinian' terrorism.
And in case you missed it, look at Kirby's opening statement.
MR KIRBY: I have some comments here at the top that I want to
make, certainly regarding what happened over the weekend. We strongly
condemn the recent spate of deadly terrorist attacks that have been
focused on civilians, including women and children, and which have
brutally taken hundreds of lives from Istanbul to Dhaka to Baghdad to
the attacks in Saudi Arabia. These acts have shown no respect for human
life, whether young or old, male or female, Muslim or non-Muslim. These
terrorists murdered without discretion. We cannot say whether these
attacks were coordinated or whether they were conducted by independent
opportunists. As you know, investigations are still ongoing, and I’m not
going to get ahead of those processes. I’d refer you to those countries
to talk about it.
But what we do know is that the goal of these attacks was to attract
attention and to spread terror and to spread fear. They occurred during
and at the end of Ramadan, the holiest time of the year for Muslims.
Indeed, a Daesh spokesman himself called for targeting during this very
holy month. So what’s obviously evident is that Daesh certainly has no
respect for Muslim life, life in general, or any respect for Islam
itself.
Notice what's missing (added emphasis is mine).
Bottom line: No condemnation of the terror attacks against Jews. The message to the 'Palestinians' is clear.
.@APDiplowriter takes on State Department spox on state sanctions against Iran
In case you haven't heard yet, the State Department sent letters to all 50 US State Governors that apparently demand that they suspend any remaining sanctions that the States have against Iran.
At the State Department briefing on Monday, the AP's Matt Lee took on State Department spokesman John Kirby regarding the letters.
Much of the rest of this comes from an email I received from The Israel Project's Omri Ceren.
More than two dozen U.S. states have sanctions against Iran. Different states established their sanctions for different combinations of reasons: nuclear work, terrorism, human rights violations, ballistic missiles, etc. For example the Illinois law cited Iran's "support [for] international terrorism," the California law cited terrorism plus "egregious violations of human rights," the New York law cited both of those plus "unconventional weapons and ballistic missiles," and so on. [a][b][c].
Earlier today Bloomberg View revealed that the Obama administration has sent letters to all 50 governors suggesting that states will need to review their Iran sanctions as a result of last summer's nuclear deal. The letters were prompted by paragraph 25 of the deal, which requires the federal government to "take appropriate steps" against state laws that may prevent "the implementation of the sanctions lifting as specified in this JCPOA."
Associated Press reporter Matt Lee raised several questions about the letters in today's press briefing with State Department spokesman Kirby. The full video is below (the exchange runs from about 4:30 to 9:10), but there are two specific questions which Kirby declined to definitively answer.
Let's go to the videotape. More after the video.
Here are those two questions:
1. Are states being asked to dismantle non-nuclear sanctions? - This question is potentially problematic for the administration. The JCPOA is supposed to be a nuclear agreement that provides relief from only nuclear sanctions in exchange for concessions on only nuclear work. But state-based sanctions are based on concerns related to both Iranian nuclear and non-nuclear behavior. If the administration pushes states to dismantle their sanctions, they'll be providing Iran with non-nuclear relief in excess of the deal, but if they don't push states to dismantle their sanctions, Iran will claim the U.S. is violating the deal's paragraph 25 requirements.
Kirby wouldn't provide a definitive answer. First he suggested that non-nuclear sanctions weren't being discussed, then Lee pushed for an explicit clarification, then Kirby added that states would get pushed on anything that conflicted with the JCPOA:
LEE: All right. Last one. Does it mention anything about sanctions that state and local authorities might have put in place against Iran for reasons other than non -- other than nuclear reasons?
KIRBY: Not that I’m aware of.
LEE: So it only applies to nuclear-related sanctions?
KIRBY: And the JCPOA specifically, yes.
2. Will the administration take states to court to try to force them to dismantle sanctions? - This question is also potentially problematic for the Obama administration. If it taked states to court, it might very well lose. The Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 (CISADA) provides states with the authority to divest from Iran so long as any U.S. sanctions - not just nuclear sanctions - remain in place in response to Iranian behavior [d]. A few months ago Rep. DeSantis introduced legislation that would tighten up CISADA in order to further bolster states' sanctioning authority regarding Iran [e]. Last December both the Senate and the House reaffirmed bipartisan congressional support for state and local sanctions against Iran: H.Con.Res.100 (introduced by Rep. Roskam and cosponsored by Reps. Deutch, Lipinski, Pompeo, Sherman, and Zeldin) and S.Con.Res.26 (introduced by Sen. Kirk and cosponsored Sens. Manchin and Rubio) [f] [g].
This time Kirby simply punted:
LEE: Right. But so, would the administration be willing to take state and local governments to court to force their compliance with what it believes to be this...
KIRBY: I won't engage in a hypothetical.
Earlier today, the New York Times announced that it opposes a bill introduced by Senators Kirk and Rubio to try to 'fix' the Iran deal. It may yet be an interesting summer on Capitol Hill.... The Obama administration is likely to agree with the Times.
State Department spokesman John Kirby: 'We don't have to accept reality'
.@apdiplowriter (Matt Lee) demolishes State Department spokesman John Kirby at last Wednesday's State Department briefing. The subject was North Korea but it could as well have been Iran or the 'Middle East peace process.'
Let's go to the videotape.
If you had any doubts that the Obama administration is living in Fantasyland, this should resolve them.
Ambassador Shapiro puts distance between himself and Kerry
US Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro has put distance between himself and his boss - Secretary of State John Kerry - by telling Israel Radio that Israel's reaction to recent 'Palestinian' terror is not excessive.
Shapiro made the statement during an interview Friday on Israel Radio
about indignation by Israeli officials at what they viewed as a
suggestion by a State Department spokesperson that Israel was using
excessive force against Palestinians.
“The United States does not view Israeli actions as excessive,”
Shapiro said. “We recognize the Israeli government’s right and
responsibility to defend its citizens.”
Asked whether the United States considered excessive specifically the
shooting of knife-wielding persons intent on stabbing passersby,
Shapiro said: “We have always supported and continue to support Israel’s
right to defend itself. There is no justification, there is no excuse
whatsoever for these outrageous attacks. They present a difficult
situation to deal with.”
But on Wednesday, U.S. State Department spokesman John Kirby said that
although Israel “has a right and responsibility to protect” its
citizens, “we’ve certainly seen some reports of what many would consider
excessive use of force.”
Shapiro added that the United States “never suggested Israel changed
the status quo” at the Temple Mount — a claim which seems to be fueling
some Palestinian violence toward Israelis in the recent spate of
attacks.
In answer to a reporter’s question, Kirby on Wednesday said that the
status quo on the Temple Mount “has not been observed, which has led to a
lot of the violence.” Shortly thereafter, Kirby walked back that
statement, tweeting: “I did not intend to suggest that status quo at Temple Mount/Haram Al-Sharif has been broken.”
Here's hoping Shapiro can put some more distance between himself and Kerry.
State Department spox John Kirby reaches bottom, keeps digging
State Department spokesman John Kirby almost makes you long for the days of ditzy Marie Harf. Yesterday, he reached bottom and kept digging.
At a daily press briefing on Wednesday, U.S.
State Department spokesman John Kirby said Israel, which has set up
roadblocks in Palestinian neighborhoods of Israeli-occupied East
Jerusalem to try to stem attacks, has a right and responsibility to
protect its citizens.
He added:
"Now, we have seen some – I wouldn’t call the checkpoints this - but
we’ve certainly seen some reports of what many would consider excessive
use of force.
"Obviously, we don’t
like to see that, and we want to see restrictions that are elevated in
this time of violence to be as temporary as possible if they have to be
enacted," Kirby said, without citing specific incidents.
Asked on Army Radio
about the remarks, Yaalon said: "Are we exercising excessive force? If
someone wields a knife and they kill him, is that excessive force? What
are we talking about?"
...
Kirby's comments touched a nerve in Israel,
especially after allegations by Abbas, in a televised speech in Arabic
on Wednesday, that Israeli forces were "executing our sons in cold
blood, as they did with this child, Ahmed Manasra, and other children in
Jerusalem and other places in Palestine".
Many Palestinians
were incensed by amateur video that had shown Manasra, 13, lying on the
street in Pisgat Zeev, a Jewish settlement on the northern edge of
Jerusalem, with blood coming from his head. Israeli police said that he
and a cousin stabbed two Israelis there on Monday.
The
15-year-old cousin was shot dead, and Israel said that day that Manasra
was alive and taken to hospital after being hit by a car during the
attack. On Thursday, after Abbas's address, Israel's Government Press
Office released a video, without sound, showing a youth it identified as
Manasra being spoon-fed in a bed in Jerusalem's Hadassah hospital. A
doctor said he could be discharged soon.
I'll have that video for you in the next post, so make sure to check back. And the Prime Minister has called a press conference for this evening at which he will be flanked by Dore Gold (Director General of the Foreign Ministry these days) and Tzipi Hotovely (Deputy Foreign Minister) at which the video will undoubtedly be shown.
But at least Kirby was forced to walk back one outrageous comment.
Clarification from today's briefing: I did not intend to suggest that status quo at Temple Mount/Haram Al-Sharif has been broken.
Video: Matt Lee owns new State Department spokesperson John Kirby on Jerusalem
John Kirby just became State Department spokesperson last month and I can already tell you that he's no better than Marie Harf.
Watch him squirm as he tries to figure out US policy on Jerusalem while under questioning from @APDiploWriter Matt Lee about Monday's Supreme Court decision that Congress overstepped its bounds in trying to require the State Department to register Jewish children born in Jerusalem (like four of mine) as having been born in Israel.
Let's go to the videotape.
Keep making them feel uncomfortable Matt! They'll find a policy one of these days.
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for thirty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 13 to 33 years and nine grandchildren. Four of our children are married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
