Special report: Banks continue robo-signing

Margery Gunter, who turns 87 later this month and is almost completely deaf, stands at the door of her home in Immokalee, Florida in this May 6, 2011 file photo. America’s leading mortgage lenders vowed in March to end the dubious foreclosure practices that caused a bruising scandal last year. But a Reuters investigation finds that many are still taking the same shortcuts they promised to shun, from sketchy paperwork to the use of ”robo-signers.” In its effort to seize the two-bedroom ranch house of 87-year-old Margery Gunter in this down-on-its-luck Florida town, OneWest Bank recently filed a court document that appears riddled with discrepancies.

18 July 2011

(Reuters) – America’s leading mortgage lenders vowed in March to end the dubious foreclosure practices that caused a bruising scandal last year.

But a Reuters investigation finds that many are still taking the same shortcuts they promised to shun, from sketchy paperwork to the use of “robo-signers.”

In its effort to seize the two-bedroom ranch house of 87-year-old Margery Gunter in this down-on-its-luck Florida town, OneWest Bank recently filed a court document that appears riddled with discrepancies. Mrs. Gunter, who has lived in the house for 40 years and gets around with the aid of a walker, stopped paying her loan back in 2009, her lawyer concedes. To foreclose, the bank submitted to the Collier County clerk’s office on March 3 a “mortgage assignment,” a document essential to proving who owns a mortgage once the original lender sells it off.

But OneWest’s paperwork is problematic. Among the snags: state law permits lenders to file to foreclose only if they already legally own a mortgage. Yet the key document establishing ownership wasn’t signed and officially recorded until months after OneWest filed to foreclose on Mrs. Gunter. OneWest declined to comment on the case.

Reuters has found that some of the biggest U.S. banks and other “loan servicers” continue to file questionable foreclosure documents with courts and county clerks. They are using tactics that late last year triggered an outcry, multiple investigations and temporary moratoriums on foreclosures.

In recent months, servicers have filed thousands of documents that appear to have been fabricated or improperly altered, or have sworn to false facts.

Reuters also identified at least six “robo-signers,” individuals who in recent months have each signed thousands of mortgage assignments — legal documents which pinpoint ownership of a property. These same individuals have been identified — in depositions, court testimony or court rulings — as previously having signed vast numbers of foreclosure documents that they never read or checked.

Among them: Christina Carter, an employee of Ocwen Loan Servicing of West Palm Beach, Florida, a “sub-servicer” which handles routine mortgage tasks for banks. Her signature — just two “C”s — has appeared on thousands of mortgage assignments and other documents this year.

In a case involving a foreclosure by HSBC Bank USA, a New York state court judge this month called Carter a “known robo-signer” and said he’d found multiple variations of her two-letter signature on documents, raising questions about whether others were using her name. That and other red flags prompted the judge to take the extraordinary step of threatening to sanction HSBC’s chief executive officer.

In a phone interview, Carter acknowledged signing large numbers of mortgage assignments this year, but said they all were legally done. To her knowledge, she added, no one else used her name.

‘CUTTING CORNERS’

One of the industry’s top representatives admits that the federal settlements haven’t put a stop to questionable practices.

Some loan servicers “continue to cut corners,” said David Stevens, president of the Mortgage Bankers Association. Nearly all borrowers facing foreclosure are delinquent, he said, but “the real question is whether the servicer complied with all legal requirements.” The loss of a home is “the most critical time in a family’s life,” and if foreclosure paperwork is faulty homeowners should contest it. “Families should be using every opportunity they can to protect their rights.”

Federal bank regulators signed settlements in March with 14 loan servicers — banks and other companies that perform tasks for mortgage investors such as collecting payments from homeowners and when necessary, filing to foreclose. The 14 firms promised further internal investigations, remediation for some who were harmed and a halt to the filing of false documents. All such behavior had stopped by the end of 2010, they said.

Of these companies, Reuters has found at least five that in recent months have filed foreclosure documents of questionable validity: OneWest, Bank of America, HSBC Bank USA, Wells Fargo and GMAC Mortgage.

So have half a dozen large servicers that weren’t party to the agreements, including Ocwen Financial Corp and units of Credit Suisse Group AG.

Spokesmen for the banks and servicers named in this article said that they halted any wrongdoing after disclosures last autumn of robo-signing led them to revise their practices, and they denied filing false documents since then.

In general, they said their foreclosure cases were legitimate, but for a small number of exceptions, and that criticism by defense lawyers and judges of some types of documentation is based on misinterpretation of the law.

The persistence of the paperwork mess poses a dilemma for American policymakers and society at large.

The vast majority of homeowners in foreclosure are in fact delinquent on their mortgage payments. Many bankers and judges view the issue as a technicality. Regardless of legal niceties, they say, people should pay up or lose the collateral on the loans — their houses and condos.

Increasingly, though, courts are holding that the trusts suing to foreclose don’t actually own the mortgages. Judges have ruled that foreclosing based on flawed or missing evidence violates longstanding laws meant to protect all Americans’ property rights.

In a landmark decision in January, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court overturned a foreclosure because of a lack of proper documentation.

“The holder of an assigned mortgage needs to take care to ensure that his legal paperwork is in order,” wrote Justice Robert Cordry in a concurring opinion. “Although there was no apparent actual unfairness here to the (homeowners), that is not the point. Foreclosure is a powerful act with significant consequences, and Massachusetts law has always required that it proceed strictly in accord with the statutes that govern it.”

(U.S. Bank National Association, trustee, vs. Antonio Ibanez, 458 Mass. 637.)

A THOUSAND QUESTIONS

Reuters reviewed records of individual county clerk offices in five states — Florida, Massachusetts, New York, and North and South Carolina — with searchable online databases. Reuters also examined hundreds of documents from court case files, some obtained online and others provided by attorneys.

The searches found more than 1,000 mortgage assignments that for multiple reasons appear questionable: promissory notes missing required endorsements or bearing faulty ones; and “complaints” (the legal documents that launch foreclosure suits) that appear to contain multiple incorrect facts.

These are practices that the 14 banks and other loan servicers said had occurred only on a small scale and were halted more than six months ago.

The settlements included the four largest banks in the United States — Bank of America Corp, Wells Fargo, JP Morgan Chase & Co, and Citigroup Inc. The other parties were lending units of Ally Financial Inc, HSBC Holdings PLC, MetLife Inc, PNC Financial Services Group Inc, SunTrust Banks Inc, U.S. Bancorp, Aurora Bank, EverBank, OneWest Bank and Sovereign Bank.

The pacts were struck with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the main regulator of national banks, as well as with the Federal Reserve, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and the Office of Thrift Supervision.

Some state and federal officials have called the settlements weak. Authorities are still working out financial penalties to be imposed on the 14 firms. The banks didn’t admit or deny wrongdoing, and many of the practices banned were previously illegal anyway, such as filing false affidavits and making false notarizations. And regulators left it to the banks to oversee their own internal investigations.

The OCC confirmed it has received complaints that questionable practices continue. But spokesman Bryan Hubbard said the settlements “are intended to address many of the root causes of improper foreclosure actions,” thus preventing future harm.

WAVE OF FORECLOSURES

The collapse of the housing boom in late 2006 led to a wave of foreclosures. Federal Reserve data show that some 4.5 percent of U.S. mortgages are in foreclosure. In 2010, 2.5 million foreclosures were initiated, with a similar number expected this year.

In the housing boom, lenders created millions of new mortgages, packaged them into pools, and securitized them rapidly for sale to investors in so-called mortgage-securities trusts.

The agreements setting up the trusts, called “pooling and servicing agreements,” require that key documents, properly executed and endorsed, be turned over immediately for each mortgage when a trust is established. The two most important ones are a promissory note and mortgage assignment.

A mortgage really has two parts. One is the actual mortgage (in some states called a “deed of trust”). Its purpose is to pledge the home as collateral for the loan. To transfer ownership of this collateral pledge, the seller must issue a document called a mortgage assignment. The other is the promissory note, which is the loan agreement itself. The homeowner signs it, promising to pay principal and interest.

The Reuters examination turned up thousands of instances –more than 2,000 in Florida alone — involving recently filed mortgage assignments which ostensibly transferred mortgages to these trusts years after they were formed.

The problem, according to Georgetown University law professor Adam Levitin, an expert on securitization: About 80 percent of all trust agreements provide that New York State law applies, and under New York law, any mortgage assignments made later than specified in the agreements would be void.

Reuters has also uncovered problems with the other key document used in foreclosure cases, the promissory note.

To foreclose, a trust, bank or mortgage finance giant such as Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac must possess the original “blue ink” signed promissory note. The crucial parts of the note are at the bottom — the endorsements, somewhat like those on the back of a check. The agreements establishing trusts require a proper chain of endorsements showing legal transfers of a note from the original lender, through any intermediary owners, and finally to the trust itself.

Attorneys defending homeowners contend that improper endorsements are rife. Reuters obtained from public court records and defense attorneys more than 100 examples of notes that for various reasons appear to be improper.

MYSTERY OF MARY ARTHUR

One example: The attempt by Credit Suisse unit DLJ Mortgage Capital to foreclose on Mary Arthur of Dobbs Ferry, New York. Mrs. Arthur, 63 and legally blind, works part time as an assistant in a doctor’s office. Originally from Trinidad, Mrs. Arthur became delinquent on her $427,500 loan after her parents and sister died and she ran up debts traveling home for the funerals, according to her attorney, Linda Tirelli.

The loan servicers, Select Portfolio Servicing of Salt Lake City, threatened to foreclose on DLJ’s behalf. Mrs. Arthur arranged with Select Portfolio a trial mortgage modification to see if she could keep up with the reduced payments. She made the payments but, Tirelli said, Select Portfolio filed to foreclose.

DLJ filed in two separate court cases what it said were authentic copies of Mrs. Arthur’s promissory note. Because they were supposed to be copies of the same document, the endorsements filed with both courts should be identical.

But a look at the documents shows that the version filed in state court and the one filed in bankruptcy court had completely different endorsements on them — naming different owner banks and signed by different people. Tirelli said she has brought this to the attention of the bankruptcy judge and is awaiting a ruling.

Credit Suisse, which owns both DLJ Mortgage Capital and Select Portfolio Servicing, declined to comment, as did Casey Howard, the lawyer representing DLJ in the bankruptcy case.

Bank of America, meanwhile, is coming under fire from a New York federal bankruptcy judge.

Last Tuesday, Judge Robert Drain ordered an investigation involving a foreclosure case brought by the bank. Two earlier copies of a promissory note filed in court had lacked any endorsement, but then one appeared on the note when bank lawyers produced the original.

The judge said the sudden appearance of an endorsement, and his own close look at it, raised questions about whether it had been added illegally to make the note look legitimate.

It “raises a sufficiently serious issue as to when and more importantly by whom this note was endorsed,” the judge said.

A Bank of America spokesman said the bank will produce evidence that “will demonstrate to the court’s satisfaction that the endorsement is proper.”

(In re: Priscilla C. Taylor, Debtor, United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Case # 10-22652.)

MISSING SIGNATURES

These banks aren’t alone in filing doubtful documents. Reuters found cases in which Wells Fargo didn’t obtain mortgage assignments — and hence the right to foreclose — until well after it had filed foreclosure cases.

Wells Fargo, as a trustee, has moved to foreclose on homeowners who have mortgages from now-defunct Option One Mortgage Corp. In June, a bankruptcy appellate panel of the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a decision to allow Wells Fargo to foreclose on an Option One mortgage. It said that there was no evidence that the note and mortgage had ever been turned over to Wells Fargo as trustee.

In court files of Florida foreclosure cases by Wells Fargo on Option One mortgages, none of the promissory notes filed as exhibits in 10 cases found by Reuters had any endorsements on them.

A Wells Fargo spokeswoman said it is possible that proper endorsements exist but were omitted from the copies of the promissory notes filed in court.

In other cases reviewed by Reuters, Wells Fargo and GMAC Mortgage, a unit of Ally Financial, this year assigned mortgages from defunct lender New Century Mortgage Corp., which went under in 2007. Securitization lawyers say it is technically impossible for a defunct company to directly assign a mortgage over to another owner.

Documents and statements made to courts that are found to be false can amount to crimes under state and federal laws. Daniel Richman, a Columbia University law professor and former federal prosecutor, said such acts can be perjury, and preparing fraudulent documents can be prosecuted under federal mail and wire fraud statutes. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act makes it a crime punishable by up to 20 years in jail to file false documents in a bankruptcy case, including foreclosures.

ROBO-SIGNERS RETURN

Reuters also found that loan servicers are still using the corner-cutting tactic that most captured the public imagination last year: robo-signing.

The investigation identified six known robo-signers who have continued to churn out large numbers of mortgage assignments since the beginning of 2011 – months after the industry vowed to stop the practice.

Among them is Bryan Bly, an employee of Nationwide Title Clearing of Palm Harbor, Florida.

Bly testified in a July 2010 foreclosure case in Florida that he signed up to 5,000 mortgage assignments per day at the loan-servicing company. Although he is an employee of Nationwide, he signed the documents as a “vice president” of Option One Mortgage, Deutsche Bank, CitiBank and other institutions. (Case # 2009-CA-1920, Circuit Court of the Fourth Judicial District, Clay County, FL)

In his deposition, Bly said Nationwide multiplied his output by electronically stamping his signature on additional mortgage assignments that Bly said he never saw. He testified, too, that all the documents then were falsely notarized. Nationwide’s notaries were given stacks of the already-signed documents, he said, and attested falsely that Bly had signed the legal papers in front of them. Bly said he didn’t verify the information in the papers he signed, and that he didn’t understand key words and expressions in them.

Despite these disclosures, a Reuters search of county clerk records in Florida, New York and Massachusetts shows that Bly continued to sign thousands of mortgage assignments this year.

A Nationwide spokeswoman said there is nothing illegal about signing large numbers of mortgage assignments. After Reuters inquired about Bly, however, she later said that because of recent questions raised about him by Nationwide customers, Bly has been moved to a job at the firm that doesn’t involve signing documents.

R. Christopher Rodems, a lawyer for Bly, said there is nothing improper about signing large numbers of mortgage assignments. Rodems said Bly had received death threats after a videotaped deposition Bly gave in November 2010 was posted briefly on YouTube, in which he testified about signing massive numbers of mortgage assignments.

A LAWYER’S NAME

Robo-signing isn’t limited to low-level employees at loan servicers.

Lawrence Buckley is a lawyer who manages the Dallas, Texas law firm Brice, Vander Linden and Wernick. In March, he testified that he had allowed his electronic signature to be affixed to sworn court documents that he had never seen. The documents, known as “proofs of claim,” included one filed with the federal bankruptcy court in New York. It sought permission for Deutsche Bank to seize the Bronx, New York, house of 59-year-old Virginia Obasi. (United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Case # 10-10494 MG)

Buckley said he had never seen the document, and that another lawyer at his firm had filed it using Buckley’s electronic signature. The signature appears on the document as “/s/ Lawrence J. Buckley.”

Buckley said that other lawyers at his firm were permitted to use his signature to file documents electronically with bankruptcy courts. He testified that it was standard practice at the firm not to review any of the original documents the claim was supposed to be based on, such as the original promissory note and mortgage.

Luke Madole, a lawyer for Buckley, said he saw nothing wrong with Buckley letting lawyers he directly managed use his electronic signature. Later, in an e-mailed statement, Madole added that what occurred “is nothing like ‘robo-signing'” and to use “that loaded term would be unfair in the extreme.”

A JUDGE INVESTIGATES

Robo-signer Christina Carter resurfaced in a ruling earlier this month, when Arthur Schack, a New York State court judge in Brooklyn, threw out an attempt by HSBC to foreclose on a Brooklyn house.

Schack said he had instructed HSBC’s chief lawyer in the case, Frank Cassara, to confirm key facts directly with HSBC officials. The judge said Cassara subsequently “affirmed ‘under the penalties of perjury'” that he had done so. But the judge said it turned out that Cassara had never checked with anyone at HSBC, and that the employees Cassara had said he spoke with at HSBC actually worked for a loan servicer.

The judge also said signatures on documents in the case were filed by known robo-signers, three of whom he identified by name, including Carter of Ocwen Loan Servicing. He personally had examined multiple examples of their signatures, the judge said, and found wide variations, raising the possibility that other people had been signing their names.

Judge Schack then took an unusual step: He formally threatened HSBC’s CEO, Irene Dorner, as well as lawyers for the firm, with sanctions for relying on known robo-signers, filing false documents and making false representations to the court. The possible sanctions could range from an oral reprimand to financial and other penalties.

“If HSBC has a duty to make money for its stockholders,” Schack wrote, “why is it purchasing nonperforming loans, and wasting the Court’s time with defective paperwork and the use of robo-signers?” [ID:nN1E76612C]

HSBC spokesman Neil Brazil said that the servicer, Ocwen, was responsible for what occurred in the case, and that HSBC had had no role in it.

Paul Koches, Ocwen’s general counsel, said in an e-mail: “To our knowledge, there was nothing submitted by our legal counsel to the court that was in any way misleading as to who is the owner of this mortgage and note, nor was there any conduct of any kind that would justify sanctions.”

Carter says she did nothing improper, and left Ocwen voluntarily in May for another job.

DOWN IN FLORIDA

The bank now trying to foreclose on Marjorie Gunter has produced a troubled paper trail. OneWest submitted a document signed this February to prove that the original lender for her mortgage, a company called MortgageIT, had signed over ownership to OneWest. But MortgageIT, owned by Deutsche Bank, wasn’t in business in February. It had ceased operations three years earlier, in 2008.

A Deutsche Bank spokesman declined to comment.

Even if the February document were authentic, it wasn’t recorded until nearly 10 months after OneWest had launched its foreclosure action, which began in May 2010. Real estate law throughout the United States requires that before moving to foreclose, a trust or bank must already own the mortgage and related promissory note. Otherwise, courts have ruled, a forecloser has no right to seize a house.

OneWest also filed two separate copies of what it said was the 87-year-old homeowner’s original promissory note. The first had an endorsement only from MortgageIT to now-defunct IndyMac Bank. Weeks later, OneWest filed a second copy of the note, with the addition of a “blank” endorsement — an endorsement by IndyMac, but with the name of the payee left empty. OneWest has filed no evidence in the case that the note was subsequently transferred to Fannie Mae.

OneWest declined to explain the multiple apparent discrepancies in the Gunter foreclosure documents. A spokesman said in an e-mail: “OneWest is dedicated to ensuring that it meets the needs of its customers, acts in accordance with applicable laws, and complies with its contractual mortgage servicing duties to the highest standards.”

A Fannie Mae spokeswoman said Fannie does own the Gunter note, but declined to explain how the mortgage finance giant obtained it, “due to it being in active litigation.”

The judge in the Gunter case hasn’t ruled yet on OneWest’s documents. (20th Judicial Circuit Court in Collier County, FL, Case number 10-2982-CA).

Mrs. Gunter lives in Immokalee, a scrubby town 34 miles inland from Fort Myers on Florida’s Gulf coast. About 40 per cent of the townspeople live below the poverty line, census data show. She shares her home with her three dogs; her one surviving son lives in a nursing home.

In an interview at her house, on a dusty road off the main highway, Mrs. Gunter said she doesn’t understand why the bank is foreclosing.

OneWest says that Mrs. Gunter now is delinquent by more than $160,000. Her lawyer, Joseph Klein of the Legal Aid Service of Collier County, argues there are extenuating circumstances.

Copies of her mortgage application forms show that in December 2006, an agent for Deutsche Bank’s MortgageIT unit signed up Mrs. Gunter for a $149,900 mortgage. The forms, listing her income, show that the agent knew that the monthly payments — $1,151, including insurance — were more than her monthly income of $800 from Social Security plus about $200 in food stamps.

In an affidavit filed in court, Mrs. Gunter said she had asked the salesman for a “reverse mortgage,” which allows senior citizens to remain in their homes without making mortgage payments, with the value of the house going to the bank when they die. But the documents the salesman gave her to sign were for an ordinary 30-year mortgage.

Losing her place would be a devastating blow, Mrs. Gunter said. “If they take the house,” she said, “they’ll take me, too.”

15,000 US Troops to Remain In Iraq, Renamed “Diplomats”

Role will be to occupy military bases and protect oilfields

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, July 18, 2011

At least 15,000 US troops will stay in Iraq beyond the December 31 deadline which the Obama administration promised would bring a complete withdrawal of American forces. The majority of the troops will receive a “cover designation” and be labeled “diplomats,” but their job will be to protect oilfields and serve four giant military bases that will ensure the occupation remains permanent.

Confirming our earlier reports, the Israeli intelligence news source DebkaFile released a briefing to its subscribers this past weekend entitled, Four Big Air Bases, 15,000 Troops: For Defending Baghdad and Oil, and Facing Iran, which detailed how the occupation would be prolonged under false pretenses, with the Obama administration categorizing active duty US troops as “military trainers, expert advisers and diplomats.”

The report cites military intelligence sources in describing a meeting between US Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, during which it was agreed that “15,000 US troops would be allowed to stay on in Iraq after December 2011.”

“The formation will be distributed as follows: 8,000 servicemen labeled US diplomats would be attached to operations command centers housed in secret, secure quarters at the embassy in Baghdad and in US consulates in Iraqi cities, including missions yet to be opened,” states the report. “Another 7,000 troops were classified as US security officers – 4,000 for protecting “US diplomats” and 3,000 as military instructors.”

Panetta’s recent complaints about the Iraqi government’s failure to make it clear whether it wanted US troops to remain in the country was apparently an act of “theatre” to camouflage the fact that a decision has already been made. Al-Maliki’s failure to appoint a defense minister is also “a device for throwing off US demands to file a formal request for US forces to stay in Iraq,” because the Iraqi government would not be in a position to formally respond to such a request, according to the briefing.

Last month we reported that the occupation of Iraq would be “prolonged indefinitely” and that a substantial number of U.S. troops would remain in the country beyond the December 31 deadline.

Shortly after, the Obama administration announced that it was considering how many troops to keep in Iraq despite promising that all US forces would be withdrawn at the end of the year.

This occurred just weeks after sources within the powerful Bilderberg Group intimated that the US had “no intentions of ever leaving Iraq” and that the country will merely be used as a launch pad for a wider regional war that will “include every nation in the Middle East except for Israel.”

The target of that war is likely to be Iran. Rumors of an Israeli strike against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s regime seem to surface almost every summer and this year is no different. On July 8, we first reported rumblings that an assault was being planned, citing intelligence sources that suggest Israel is preparing a surgical strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities in September as a means of distracting from and ultimately derailing the prospect of Palestinian statehood.

In addition, Veteran CIA agent Robert Baer recently told KPFK Los Angeles that Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu was “likely to ignite a war with Iran in the very near future.”

Indeed, one of the justifications cited by US officials behind maintaining a substantial US presence in Iraq is to defend against Shiite militias armed by Iran. Panetta is keen to ward off any “deepening of Iran’s military penetration of Iraq,” concerns that were heightened after Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki ordered Iraqi troops out of Baghdad and sent them to the Syrian border in aid of Tehran’s ally, Syrian President Bashar Assad.

According to the Debka report, Panetta and Al-Maliki have agreed to maintain US control of four major military bases, in Halabja, Talil, Balad, and another east of Halabja, that will be used as outposts to protect oilfields in addition to defending against Iranian incursions. The fact that US bases will firmly remain staffed is unsurprising given that President Obama renamed such facilities “enduring presence posts” just last year.

Debka notes that “two of the four American air bases, Halabja and Talil, will therefore face Iran,” adding that thousands of extra US troops will be needed to service these bases in addition to the 15,000 that will already remain in Iraq. Like the 15,000, most of whom will be labeled “diplomats,” these extra forces will also be given a “cover-designation” to hide the fact that they are part of a massive remaining US presence.

Barack Obama swept to power on the promise that he would “immediately” withdraw troops from Iraq.

In reality, even before the August 2010 “withdrawal” of U.S. troops, the New York Times reported that, “Mr. Obama plans to leave behind a “residual force” of tens of thousands of troops to continue training Iraqi security forces, hunt down foreign terrorist cells and guard American institutions.”

When the supposed August 2010 “withdrawal” was announced, a senior military officer spelled it out more plainly to the Los Angeles Times, “‘When President Obama said we were going to get out within 16 months, some people heard, ‘get out,’ and everyone’s gone. But that is not going to happen,’ the officer said.”

Rapper Ja Rule:28 months in prison for failing to file tax returns

18 July 2011

SADDLE RIVER — A federal judge this morning sentenced the rapper and movie actor “Ja Rule,” a Saddle River resident, to 28 months in prison on three misdemeanor charges of failure to file his taxes. The sentence also required the rapper to pay back more than $1.1 million to the Internal Revenue Service.

“Ja Rule,” whose real name is Jeffrey Atkins, had pleaded guilty in March to three counts of failure to file federal tax returns. Authorities said Atkins, 35, had earned more than $4 million from 2004 to 2008, but rather than file the tax returns, he asked for extensions. Authorities added that Atkins never paid the taxes even after the extensions — which he requested in four of the five years — had expired.

In court today, an emotional Atkins stood and told U.S. Magistrate Judge Patty Shwartz that he was “choked up” — and at one point he had to pause before continuing to express his contrition to the judge.

“I want to say I’m sorry,” he told Judge Shwartz, as a Newark courtroom packed with summer legal interns and others watched in silence. “I in no way attempted to deceive the government.”

He added, “I was a young man who made a lot of money.” And, he said, “I didn’t actually know how to deal with these finances … [and] I didn’t have the best people guide me.”

But federal prosecutor Joseph G. Mack argued that Atkins’ own accountant had warned him that failing to pay his taxes would be a crime. And Judge Shwartz noted the accountants’ advice to Atkins, just moments before she handed down her sentence. She also said is was difficult to view Atkins as “unsophisticated.”

“He’s a creative person who embarked on a very successful business,” she said.

In early June, the Grammy-nominated rapper began serving a 24-month sentence in New York state prison for the attempted possession of a weapon. He appeared in court today in a bright-yellow prison-issued jump suit. His wrists were shackled, and he had a heavy chain wrapped around his waist.

A major issue at the sentencing was whether the federal punishment would run concurrently or consecutively with Atkins’ New York state prison sentence. New Jersey federal prosecutors argued today that Atkins should get a 36-month prison sentence, with 24 months of it concurrent and 12 months running consecutively. But Judge Shwartz issued a 28-month sentence, while mandating that all of it run concurrent to the New York sentence, except for the final four months.

Atkins will therefore serve at least 4 months of additional time in prison under today’s federal sentence. However, the additional federal time may be longer, lawyers said, because Atkins could win early release in New York based on good behavior.

Both Atkins and his lawyer, Stacey Richman, also told Judge Shwartz that Atkins’ business had been experiencing financial problems. Richman argued Atkins “does not have the financial savvy to have maintained a set aside so that his taxes would be paid.”

Atkins said: “I didn’t have the actual finances to pay off [the taxes], otherwise I would have.” Still, he added, “I made mistakes,” and he also said, “Things kind of spun out of control.”

According to Richman, Atkins’ wife, other family members and his manager were in the courtroom. At various times during the hearing, both a man and woman who appeared to be family members or business associates of Atkins ‘ prayed. One woman dabbed tears from her eyes with a tissue.

Atkins was subdued and often looked down at the defense table. Richman said that for the last two weeks, as he awaited today’s sentencing hearing, Atkins was held in a solitary-confinement situation for 23 hours a day at the Essex County jail. Jail officials, she said, believed such confinement was needed to protect the rapper. She repeatedly called the conditions “draconian” in court.

On the day of his guilty plea in March, Atkins had tweeted to his fans: “S/o to the Feds very cooperative it’s not tax evasion it’s failure to file and I’m taking care of it case closed. WINNING lol…” and “When u get caught wit ya hand in the cookie jar just replace the cookies lol…”

Federal authorities said in March that Atkins was the sole shareholder of ASJA Inc. and Rule Tours Inc. Authorities also said that from 2004 to 2008, Atkins received music royalty income from ASJA Inc., and music tour and live performance-related income from Rule Tours Inc.

Poison Perfume Al-Qaeda’s Newest Weapon

According to reports out of Saudi Arabia, al-Qaeda terrorist operatives plotted to kill various government and media officials by sending them gifts of poisoned perfumes.

Al Jazeera reports that Saudi Arabia has detained nearly 150 al-Qaeda-linked suspects in recent months, many accused of financing and recruiting terrorist efforts inside the kingdom.

The group “planned to rob banks and companies to finance their operations”, the official, who declined to be named, said on Saturday.

“Using poisoned perfume … is one of the ways the arrested people planned to carry out their assassinations,” he said.

The new plans for poison perfume represent an effort among terrorist extremists to shift terror operations from traditional explosives to chemical warfare and come after security officials foiled plans to detonate explosives on cargo jetliners.

Some of these efforts have come close to being successful.  Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula recently tried to assassinate government officials and religious clerics with agarwood-scented and poison-dosed perfume sent to their homes and offices, Wired reports.

A spokesman for Saudi Arabian Interior Ministry says the recently arrested suspects will be put on trial and may soon be enrolled in the government’s rehabilitation program if they demonstrate repentance.

News of the World phone hacking whistleblower found dead

Death of Sean Hoare – who was first named journalist to allege Andy Coulson knew of hacking – not being treated as suspicious

18 July 2011

Sean Hoare, the former News of the World showbiz reporter who was the first named journalist to allege Andy Coulson was aware of phone hacking by his staff, has been found dead, the Guardian has learned.

Hoare, who worked on the Sun and the News of the World with Coulson before being dismissed for drink and drugs problems, is said to have been found dead at his Watford home.

Hertfordshire police would not confirm his identity, but the force said in a statement: “At 10.40am today [Monday 18 July] police were called to Langley Road, Watford, following the concerns for welfare of a man who lives at an address on the street. Upon police and ambulance arrival at a property, the body of a man was found. The man was pronounced dead at the scene shortly after.

“The death is currently being treated as unexplained, but not thought to be suspicious. Police investigations into this incident are ongoing.”

Hoare first made his claims in a New York Times investigation into the phone-hacking allegations at the News of the World.

He told that newspaper that not only did Coulson know of the phone-hacking, but that he actively encouraged his staff to intercept the phone calls of celebrities in the pursuit of exclusives.

In a subsequent interview with the BBC he alleged that he was personally asked by his then-editor, Coulson, to tap into phones. In an interview with the PM programme he said Coulson’s insistence that he didn’t know about the practice was “a lie, it is simply a lie”.

At the time a Downing Street spokeswoman said Coulson totally and utterly denied the allegations and said he had “never condoned the use of phone-hacking and nor do I have any recollection of incidences where phone-hacking took place”.

Sean Hoare, a one-time close friend of Coulson’s, told the New York Times the two men first worked together at the Sun, where, Hoare said, he played tape recordings of hacked messages for Coulson. At the News of the World, Hoare said he continued to inform Coulson of his activities. Coulson “actively encouraged me to do it,” Hoare said.

In September last year he was interviewed under caution by police over his claims that the former Tory communications chief asked him to hack into phones when he was editor of the paper, but declined to make any comment.

Hoare emerged back into the spotlight last week, after he told the New York Times that reporters at the News of the World were able to use police technology to locate people using their mobile phone signals in exchange for payments to police officers.

He said journalists were able to use a technique called ‘pinging’ which measured the distance between mobile handsets and a number of phone masts to pinpoint its location.

Hoare gave further details about the use of ‘pinging’ to the Guardian last week. He described how reporters would ask a news desk executive to obtain the location of a target: “Within 15 to 30 minutes someone on the news desk would come back and say ‘right that’s where they are.'”

He said: “You’d just go to the news desk and they’d just come back to you. You don’t ask any questions. You’d consider it a job done. The chain of command is one of absolute discipline and what’s why I never bought into, like with Andy saying he wasn’t aware of it and all that. That’s bollocks.”

He said he would stand by everything he had told the New York Times about ‘pinging’. “I don’t know how often it happened. That would be wrong of me. But if I had access as a humble reporter … .”

He admitted he had had problems with drink and drugs and had been in rehab. “But that’s irrelevant,” he said. “There’s more to come. This is not going to go away.”

Hoare named a private investigator who he said had links with the News of the World, adding: “He may want to talk now because I think what you’ll find now is a lot of people are going to want to cover their arse.”

Speaking to another Guardian journalist st last week, Hoare repeatedly expressed the hope that the hacking scandal would lead to journalism in general being cleaned up and said he had decided to blow the whistle on the activities of some of his former News of the World colleagues with that aim in mind.

He also said he has been injured at a party the previous weekend while taking down a marquee erected for a children’s party. He said he had broken his nose and badly injured his foot when a relative accidentally struck him with a heavy pole from the marquee.

Hoare also emphasised that he was not making any money from telling his story. Hoare, who has been treated for drug and alcohol problems, reminisced about partying with former pop stars and said he missed the days when he was able to go out on the town.

TSA Charges Congressman With Violating Federal Law For Exposing Security Breaches

 

Hypocrites: At same time appeals court confirms TSA itself broke federal law

Steve Watson
Infowars.com
July 18, 2011

Officials at the Department of Homeland Security, the parent agency of the TSA, have claimed that a Congressman violated federal law by disclosing to the press details of 25,000 security breaches over the past ten years, despite the fact that the documents from which he gleaned the information were non-classified.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) received a letter last week outlining the charge from Homeland Security Deputy Counsel Joseph B. Maher, following a Congressional oversight hearing on the TSA last Wednesday.

During the hearing Chaffetz disclosed information about the security breaches, which made headlines in USA Today and several other newspapers.

“This document was marked as [Sensitive Security Information],” Maher wrote in the letter which was seen by The Washington Post, “and provided clear notice that unauthorized disclosures of the document violated federal law.”

Maher referred to the information Chaffetz discussed at the hearing as “a topic of particular interest to our adversaries,” intimating that the Congressman had endangered air travelers by revealing some details to the public.

In response to the TSA/DHS reaction, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) returned correspondence directly to DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano.

Issa, who chairs the House Oversight Committee, described Maher’s threats toward Chaffetz as “meritless”and pointed out that it was his committee’s job to address “TSA deficiencies.”

Issa reiterated the fact that the information contained within the documents was not classified and declared it a “threat to the entire legislative branch that this administration will seek retribution when non-classified information is shared with the public.”

“The fact that the information in question was transmitted to the committee via an open e-mail over an open and non-secured network only underscores that this was not national security sensitive information,” Issa wrote, adding that he will open an investigation into “how and why” the DHS responded in such an aggressive manner.

The charge comes at the same time that a federal appeals court ruled that the TSA itself violated federal law by introducing radiation firing body scanners without debate.

A unanimous three-judge panel ruled Friday that the TSA’s failure to provide notice and allow sufficient time for public comment before adopting the technology as a primary passenger-screening tool violated the Administrative Procedure Act.

However, the court did not accept that the scanners violated the Fourth Amendment and several other privacy laws, noting “we are not persuaded by any of the statutory or constitutional arguments.” As a result the TSA will be allowed to continue using the machines, despite widespread warnings from scientists that they could cause cancers and pose other health risks to both the public and employees of the agency.

Rep. Chaffetz has consistently railed against the TSA takeover throughout the nation’s airports.

Last year he oversaw the passage in the House of an amendment to ban “strip-search” imaging at airports altogether.

“You don’t have to look at my wife and 8-year-old daughter naked to secure an airplane,” Chaffetz said at the time.

“You can actually see the sweat on somebody’s back. You can tell the difference between a dime and a nickel. If they can do that, they can see things that quite frankly I don’t think they should be looking at in order to secure a plane,” Chaffetz told the House.

The Congressman also labeled the TSA’s delay in releasing safety reports on body scanning technology as “inexcusable”.

Earlier this year, the Congressman introduced legislation to the House that would completely outlaw any form of pat-down on a child by security personnel without the express consent and presence of a parent.

“I am personally outraged and disgusted by yet another example of mistreatment of an innocent American at the hands of TSA.” Chaffetz said at the time, following the emergence of a video of a TSA agent conducting an enhanced pat down on a six year old girl.

“The agency must get serious about the manner in which it seeks to balance national security with personal privacy,” Chaffetz wrote to TSA head John Pistole. “At the very least, it cannot continue to operate under the belief that little girls and handicapped children pose such a serious threat that [agents] must abandon all manner of decency when interacting with them.”

The Congressman’s efforts applied pressure on the TSA, forcing the agency to once again announce a “change” in policy to stop pat downs on children under 10 years of age where ever possible.

Investors Break Their Bonds to Ratings Agencies

Monday, 18 Jul 2011

Some of the world’s largest asset managers are cutting ties to credit rating agencies, potentially signaling the beginning of the end of their grip on global financial markets.

Managers responsible for billions of euros of fixed income investments are reviewing relationships with the likes of Fitch Ratings, Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s Investors Service [MCO  35.28    -1.17  (-3.21%)   ] , whose calls on Portugal, Ireland and the United States have roiled central banks desperate to avert a collapse of the Euro zone.

Fund firms contacted by Reuters said rating agency research tended to be backward-looking and superficial, and often encouraged the kind of speculation that has recently dragged down Italy, one of the world’s largest government bond issuers.

“We have cancelled our subscriptions to two of them and they haven’t left us alone since. It has been very irritating,” the head of sovereign debt investment at one large European bond investor told Reuters on condition of anonymity.

“It would be naive to blame the agencies for everything that went wrong during the financial crisis but anyone who relies on a third party to form their investment opinions is headed for trouble … clients pay us to make those decisions, it would be completely wrong of us to abdicate that responsibility.”

Investors say they have steadily reduced reliance on external research providers ever since rating agencies slapped high ratings on complex structured financial investment products such as collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) which later turned out to be far riskier than initially assessed.

READ MORE:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/43795020

No Drought Relief in Texas, New Mexico

18 July 2011

“Aside from an isolated thunderstorm, no rainfall is expected…”

Drought conditions remain extreme and exceptional, the highest levels of drought intensity, across portions of eastern New Mexico and Texas.

Many locations across this region have received less than 1 inch of rain since the beginning of April. Widespread rainfall amounts of less than 20 percent of normal have occurred as a result of the rainfall deficit.

El Paso, Texas, recorded its first measurable rainfall since Feb. 2 on Thursday as a brief thunderstorm brought 0.05 of an inch to the area.

Aside from an isolated thunderstorm, no rainfall is expected across this region through at least the middle of next week.

Heat has also been building across these same drought-stricken areas. Although temperatures will climb into the 90s and even near 100 in several locations through the middle of next week, it could be worse as illustrated by the graphic below.

Berlusconi will be tried by Milan court in underage sex case

COLONEL SIXX: BERLUSCONI DECIDED TO DROP OUT OF THE NATO CRIMES BEING COMMITTED AGAINST LIBYA.

http://news.ph.msn.com/top-stories/article.aspx?cp-documentid=4960106

Italy breaks ranks over NATO’s Libya mission

NOW, LIKE DOMINIQUE STRAUSS-KHAN, HE IS HAVING CRIMINAL SEXUAL ACTS HUNG AROUND HIS NECK. IT APPEARS THAT THE LITTLE GAME FAILED WITH MR. STRAUSS-KHAN AND HE IS EVEN MORE FAVORED TO RUN AGAINST THE FRENCH POODLE PIMP.

THE ALLEGATION OF THESE CRIMES IS EXPECTED TO HAVE HIM THROWN IN JAIL BUT HE WILL MAKE A PLEA DEAL THAT WILL SIMPLY ALLOW HIM TO STEP DOWN AS PRIME MINISTER.

THIS IS ALL SYSTEMATIC.  YOU CAN FOLLOW THE STORY AS IT UNFOLDS.

http://colonel6.com/2011/07/09/colonel-sixxyou-shall-be-utterly-slain-and-blood-will-flow-and-rise-as-high-as-the-horses%E2%80%99-bridles/

http://colonel6.com/2011/07/15/gaddafi-how-bush-blair-and-berlusconi-the-colonel-a-makeover/

Taiwan Sun
Monday 18th July, 2011  

The Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berliusconi suffered a setback when a Milan court decided it was competent to hear his sex trial.

The decision ended plans by the prime minister to have the case heard by special tribunal of ministers in Rome.

The billionaire Italian prime minister is accused of sleeping with an underage prostitute and abusing his power by ordering a police station to release her following her arrest in a separate incident.

Berlusconi denies both charges and claims the Milan court, which had already opened the case, was biased against him, moving the hearing to Rome would have meant starting from scratch.

The trial is known as the Ruby case due to the stage name of the alleged prostitute with which he is accused of sleeping. She would have been 17 at the time the tryst occurred with the prime minister, who is in his seventies.

Berlusconi is currently facing four trials; the other three involve corruption allegations.

Both the alleged prostitute and Berlusconi deny they ever had sex.

•  Berlusconi is accused of sex with an underage prostitute
  •  The Italian Prime Minister had wanted the case moved to Rome
  •  He has accused court in Milan of being biased against him

The Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berliusconi suffered a setback when a Milan court decided it was competent to hear his sex trial.The decision ended plans by the prime minister to have the case heard by special tribunal of ministers in Rome.The billionaire Italian prime minister is accused of sleeping with an underage prostitute and abusing his power by ordering a police station to release her following her arrest in a separate incident.

Berlusconi denies both charges and claims the Milan court, which had already opened the case, was biased against him, moving the hearing to Rome would have meant starting from scratch.

The trial is known as the Ruby case due to the stage name of the alleged prostitute with which he is accused of sleeping. She would have been 17 at the time the tryst occurred with the prime minister, who is in his seventies.

Berlusconi is currently facing four trials; the other three involve corruption allegations.

Both the alleged prostitute and Berlusconi deny they ever had sex.

The Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berliusconi suffered a setback when a Milan court decided it was competent to hear his sex trial.The decision ended plans by the prime minister to have the case heard by special tribunal of ministers in Rome.The billionaire Italian prime minister is accused of sleeping with an underage prostitute and abusing his power by ordering a police station to release her following her arrest in a separate incident.Berlusconi denies both charges and claims the Milan court, which had already opened the case, was biased against him, moving the hearing to Rome would have meant starting from scratch.

The trial is known as the Ruby case due to the stage name of the alleged prostitute with which he is accused of sleeping. She would have been 17 at the time the tryst occurred with the prime minister, who is in his seventies.

Berlusconi is currently facing four trials; the other three involve corruption allegations.

Both the alleged prostitute and Berlusconi deny they ever had sex.

September Israel-Iran War Predicts CIA Veteran

Tyler Durden
Zero Hedge
July 18, 2011

One look at the most recent naval update maps shows that in addition to global insolvency (courtesy of the broke European dominoes and a potentially technically broke US), a UK on the verge of a parliamentary scandal courtesy of a media baron whose empire is crumbling, and not to mention yet another downward inflection point in the global economic slowdown courtesy of the end of QE2 and no replacement yet, market watchers may have to start factoring in geopolitical risk yet again.

While the fact that Syria, Yemen, Egypt, Tunisia, and now Turkey, are ever more increasingly on edge is apparently something Mr. Market has managed to internalize, when it comes to geopolitics everyone stops to listen when renewed Iran-Israel rumblings reappear. Which may just be the case.

As the most recently updated naval map from Stratfor demonstrates, the CVN 77 G.H.W. Bush has just entered the Persian Gulf, the first time a US aircraft carrier has passed through the Straits of Hormuz in months. What is also notable is that the LHD 5 Bataan amphibious warfare ship has just weighed anchor right next to Libya: this is odd since the coast of Tripoli had been left unattended for many weeks by US attack ships. And topping it all off is that a third aircraft carrier, the CVN 73, is sailing west from the South China seas, potentially with a target next to CVN 76 Ronald Reagan which is the second carrier in the Straits of Hormuz area.

Three carriers in proximity to Iran would be extremely troubling, yet fit perfectly with the story of CIA veteran Robert Baer, the man played by George Clooney in Syriana, who as Al Jazeera reports, appeared on KPFK Los Angeles, warning that Israeli PM Netanyahu is “likely to ignite a war with Iran in the very near future.”

It gets worse: “Masters asked Baer why the US military is not mobilising to stop this war from happening. Baer responded that the military is opposed, as is former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who used his influence to thwart an Israeli attack during the Bush and Obama administrations.

But he’s gone now and “there is a warning order inside the Pentagon” to prepare for war.” The punchline: “There is almost “near certainty” that Netanyahu is “planning an attack [on Iran] … and it will probably be in September before the vote on a Palestinian state. And he’s also hoping to draw the United States into the conflict“, Baer explained.” For the betting public out there, an September CL call may not be the dumbest trade possible…

First, the naval update per Stratfor:

And, courtesy of Al Jazeera and Haaretz, the full take from Robert Baer:

Earlier this week, Robert Baer appeared on the provocative KPFK Los Angeles show Background Briefing, hosted by Ian Masters. It was there that he predicted that Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is likely to ignite a war with Iran in the very near future.

Robert Baer has had a storied career, including a stint in Iraq in the 1990s where he organised opposition to Saddam Hussein. (He was recalled after being accused of trying to organise Saddam’s assassination.) Upon his retirement, he received a top decoration for meritorious service.

Baer is no ordinary CIA operative. George Clooney won an Oscar for playing a character based on Baer in the film Syriana (Baer also wrote the book).

He obviously won’t name many of his sources in Israel, the United States, and elsewhere, but the few he has named are all Israeli security figures who have publically warned that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are hell-bent on war.

Most former Mossad chiefs wary of Netanyahu

Baer was especially impressed by the unprecedented warning about Netanyahu’s plans by former Mossad chief Meir Dagan. Dagan left the Israeli intelligence agency in September 2010. Two months ago, he predicted that Israel would attack and said that doing so would be “the stupidest thing” he could imagine. According to Haaretz:

When asked about what would happen in the aftermath of an Israeli attack Dagan said that: “It will be followed by a war with Iran. It is the kind of thing where we know how it starts, but not how it will end.”

The Iranians have the capability to fire rockets at Israel for a period of months, and Hizbollah could fire tens of thousands of grad rockets and hundreds of long-range missiles, he said.

According to Ben Caspit of the Israeli daily Maariv, Dagan’s blasts at Israel’s political leadership are significant not only because Mossad chiefs, in office or retired, traditionally have kept their lips sealed, but also because Dagan is very conservative on security matters.

Caspit writes that Dagan is “one of the most rightwing militant people ever born here. … When this man says that the leadership has no vision and is irresponsible, we should stop sleeping soundly at night”.

Dagan describes the current Israeli government as “dangerous and irresponsible” and views speaking out against Netanyahu as his patriotic duty.

And his abhorrence of Netanyahu is not uncommon in the Israeli security establishment. Accordingto Think Progress, citing the Forward newspaper, 12 of the 18 living ex-chiefs of Israel’s two security agencies (Mossad and Shin Bet), are “either actively opposing Netanyahu’s stances or have spoken out against them”. Of the remaining six, two are current ministers in Netanyahu government, leaving a grand total of four out of 18 who independently support the prime minister.

In short, while Congress dutifully gives Netanyahu 29 standing ovations, the Israelis who know the most about both Netanyahu and Israel’s strategic situation think he is a dangerous disaster.

But according to Baer, we ain’t seen nothing yet.

There is almost “near certainty” that Netanyahu is “planning an attack [on Iran] … and it will probably be in September before the vote on a Palestinian state. And he’s also hoping to draw the United States into the conflict”, Baer explained.

The Israeli air force would attack “Natanz and other nuclear facilities to degrade their capabilities. The Iranians will strike back where they can: Basra, Baghdad”, he said, and even Afghanistan. Then the United States would jump into the fight with attacks on Iranian targets. “Our special forces are already looking at Iranian targets in Iraq and across the border [in Iran] which we would strike. What we’re facing here is an escalation, rather than a planned out-and-out war. It’s a nightmare scenario. We don’t have enough troops in the Middle East to fight a war like that.” Baer added, “I think we are looking into the abyss”.

Another US war?

Masters asked Baer why the US military is not mobilising to stop this war from happening. Baer responded that the military is opposed, as is former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who used his influence to thwart an Israeli attack during the Bush and Obama administrations. But he’s gone now and “there is a warning order inside the Pentagon” to prepare for war.

It should be noted that the Iranian regime is quite capable of triggering a war with the United States through some combination of colossal stupidity and sheer hatred. In fact, as Baer explained, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard would welcome a war. They are “paranoid”. They are “worried about … what’s happening to their country economically, in terms of the oil embargo and other sanctions”. And they are worried about a population that increasingly despises the regime.

They need an external enemy. Because we are leaving Iraq, it’s Israel. But in order to make this threat believable, they would love an attack on their nuclear facilities, love to go to war in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia and Iraq and hit us where they could. Their defense is asymmetrical. We can take out all of their armored units. It’s of little difference to them, same with their surface-to-air missile sites. It would make little difference because they would use terrorism. They would do serious damage to our fleet in the Gulf.

Given all that, is it possible that the United States would allow Israel to attack when the president knows we would be forced to join the war on Israel’s side?

“The president is up for re-election next year,” Blair pointed out, and Israel is “truly out of control”.

What happens when you see 100 F-16′s approaching Iraq and there is a call to the White House [from Netanyahu] that says “We’re going in, we’re at war with Iran”? What does the President of the United States do? He has little influence over Bibi Netanyahu. … We can’t stop him. And he knows it.

It’s a pretty frightening scenario, made infinitely more so by the fact that top Israelis (who have heard Netanyahu’s thinking from Netanyahu himself) also see the future the same way. Those Israelis deserve a world of credit for sounding the warning bell loudly enough that we would hear it and do something about it – although it’s impossible to know if the people who matter are paying attention.

Actually, only one person matters: the US president. If Israel bombed Iran tomorrow, Congress would forget all about their partisan differences and run, not walk, to the House and Senate floors to endorse the attack and call for unstinting support for Israel. That is what Congress always does, and will always do so long as the lobby (and the donors it directs) are the key players in making our Middle East policies.

And who knows what Obama would do? So far, he has not exactly distinguished himself when it comes to standing up to Netanyahu.

But an Israeli attack on Iran would be different. It would endanger countless Americans (in the region and here at home, too). It would kill off any economic recovery by causing oil prices to skyrocket. It would engulf us in another Middle East war. And it would threaten the existence of the state of Israel.

This is something the president needs to focus on instead of being forced to nickel and dime with the likes of Representative Eric Cantor and Senator Mitch McConnell. How incredible that these two, and their right-wing allies, have our government tied in knots in their incessant effort to elevate themselves by destroying the President of the United States. It is sickening.