Category Archives: News

Worldwide news. News is information about current events. This may be provided through many different media: word of mouth, printing, postal systems, broadcasting, electronic communication, or through the testimony of observers and witnesses to events. News is sometimes called “hard news” to differentiate it from soft media

US to Add Citizenship Question to 2020 Census

U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross has announced the next count of every resident in the country will include a question about citizenship status.

The U.S. Census Bureau conducts the survey every 10 years, with the next set to come in 2020. The deadline for finalizing the questions is Saturday.

Ross said in a memo late Monday that he chose to add the citizenship question after a request from the Department of Justice, which said the move was necessary to get data to better enforce a law that protects minority voting rights.

The decision brought criticism from those who say the citizenship question will cause people to not participate in the census because of concerns about how the government could use the information, resulting in an undercount of the population.

The census figures determine the number of seats each state is allocated in the U.S. House of Representatives as well as how the federal government distributes hundreds of billions of dollars in funding for various programs.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra announced the state would file a lawsuit challenging what he called an “illegal” move.

“Innocuous at first blush, its effect would be truly insidious,” he wrote in a joint op-ed in the San Francisco Chronicle with the California Secretary of State Alex Padilla.

Former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who now serves as chairman of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, said his organization will also challenge the decision in court, calling it “motivated purely by politics.”

“This question will lower the response rate and undermine the accuracy of the count, leading to devastating, decade-long impacts on voting rights and the distribution of billions of dollars in federal funding,” Holder said. “By asking this question, states will not have accurate representation and individuals in impacted communities will lose out on state and federal funding for health care, education, and infrastructure.”

He also said that in his experience leading the Department of Justice, asking the citizenship question on the census “is not critical to enforcing the Voting Rights Act.”

The census has included a citizenship question in the past. Ross said in his memo the last time it was included was in 1950, but that other surveys by the Census Bureau do currently ask the question.

Ross noted the concerns about lower response rates, including from the Census Bureau itself, but said his department’s own review “found that limited empirical evidence exists about whether adding a citizenship question would decrease response rates materially.”

The Census Bureau plans to allow people to respond to the survey on a paper form, through the internet or by telephone. When people do not respond, teams attempt to follow-up with those households.

Ross said the higher cost of having to do more follow-ups in the case of a lower response rate was a factor he considered, but that “the need for accurate citizenship data” outweighs concerns about the potential for fewer responses.

Affordable Chip Pinpoints Methane Leaks

One of today’s most affordable sources of fossil-based energy is natural gas, which consists primarily of methane. Found in remote, deep underground reservoirs, the gas must be transported through long pipelines with thousands of connections, valves and pumping stations, which are inevitably prone to leaks. Scientists at IBM are testing a small, affordable gas detector that could be placed literally anywhere. VOA’s George Putic reports.

White House Denies Porn Star’s Claim of Trump Affair

The Trump White House was on the defensive Monday, the day after adult film star Stormy Daniels spoke about her alleged affair with President Donald Trump back in 2006. Daniels detailed her involvement with Trump in an interview with the CBS program, “60 Minutes.” VOA National correspondent Jim Malone has more from Washington.

White House Denies Porn Star’s Claim of Trump Affair

The Trump White House was on the defensive Monday, the day after adult film star Stormy Daniels spoke about her alleged affair with President Donald Trump back in 2006. Daniels detailed her involvement with Trump in an interview with the CBS program, “60 Minutes.” VOA National correspondent Jim Malone has more from Washington.

Uber Sells Southeast Asia Business to Grab After Costly Battle

Uber Technologies has agreed to sell its Southeast Asian business to bigger regional rival Grab, the ride-hailing firms said on Monday, marking the U.S. company’s second retreat from an Asian market.

The industry’s first big consolidation in Southeast Asia, home to about 640 million people, puts pressure on Indonesia’s Go-Jek, which is backed by Alphabet’s Google and China’s Tencent Holdings Ltd.

A shake-up in Asia’s fiercely competitive ride-hailing industry became likely earlier this year when Japan-based SoftBank Group Corp’s Vision Fund made a multibillion-dollar investment in Uber. SoftBank owns stakes in most major global ride services companies, and executives have indicated they favored consolidation.

SoftBank already had investments in Grab and India’s Ola, and Vision Fund Chief Executive Rajeev Misra had urged Uber to focus less on Asia and more on profitable markets such as Latin America, a person familiar with the matter said.

Grab President Ming Maa told Reuters that SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son was “highly supportive” of the deal, which he called “a very independent decision by both” Grab and Uber.

Uber will take a 27.5 percent stake in Singapore-based Grab and Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi will join Grab’s board. Grab was last valued at $6 billion after a financing round in July.

“It will help us double down on our plans for growth as we invest heavily in our products and technology,” Khosrowshahi said in a statement.

The Competition Commission of Singapore (CCS) said it has the mandate to review whether any mergers will result in a “substantial lessening of competition” and take any action to intervene in the deal, but it has yet to receive notice from the companies.

The deal will help bolster Grab’s meal-delivery service, which will merge with Uber Eats, compete with Go-Jek. Go-Jek has become a dominant player and powerful rival in Indonesia, the region’s biggest economy, and it has rapidly expanded beyond ride hailing to digital payments, food delivery and on-demand cleaning and massage.

Ride-hailing companies throughout Asia have relied heavily on discounts and promotions, driving down profit margins and increasing pressure for consolidation.

Uber, which is preparing for a potential initial public offering in 2019, lost $4.5 billion last year and is facing fierce competition at home in the United States and across Asia, as well as a regulatory crackdown in Europe.

Uber invested $700 million in its Southeast Asia business.

Uber previously sold operations in China and Russia to local rivals under former CEO Travis Kalanick. The deal with Grab is the first operations sale by Khosrowshahi, who started in September.

More consolidation

But Uber’s CEO does not want to make these mergers a pattern, and said he has no plans to do another sale in which it consolidates its operations in exchange for a minority stake in a rival.

“It is fair to ask whether consolidation is now the strategy of the day, given this is the third deal of its kind…The answer is no,” Khosrowshahi said in a note to employees that was shared with Reuters. “One of the potential dangers of our global strategy is that we take on too many battles across too many fronts and with too many competitors.”

SoftBank is also an investor in India’s Ola, another competitive and costly market where rivals have heavily subsidized rides in an effort to gain market share. But a source familiar with Uber’s strategy said the company was going to step up its battle with Ola in India, where Uber has close to 60 percent of the market, by some estimates, but is losing money.

SoftBank’s Misra sees opportunities for mergers and joint ventures between SoftBank-backed ride-hailing companies, particularly for collaborating on research and development, but the investor would never get actively involved with management decisions, the person familiar with the matter said.

Uber includes the United States, Australia, New Zealand and Latin America among its core markets — regions where it has more than 50 percent market share and is profitable or sees a path to profitability.

Uber Sells Southeast Asia Business to Grab After Costly Battle

Uber Technologies has agreed to sell its Southeast Asian business to bigger regional rival Grab, the ride-hailing firms said on Monday, marking the U.S. company’s second retreat from an Asian market.

The industry’s first big consolidation in Southeast Asia, home to about 640 million people, puts pressure on Indonesia’s Go-Jek, which is backed by Alphabet’s Google and China’s Tencent Holdings Ltd.

A shake-up in Asia’s fiercely competitive ride-hailing industry became likely earlier this year when Japan-based SoftBank Group Corp’s Vision Fund made a multibillion-dollar investment in Uber. SoftBank owns stakes in most major global ride services companies, and executives have indicated they favored consolidation.

SoftBank already had investments in Grab and India’s Ola, and Vision Fund Chief Executive Rajeev Misra had urged Uber to focus less on Asia and more on profitable markets such as Latin America, a person familiar with the matter said.

Grab President Ming Maa told Reuters that SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son was “highly supportive” of the deal, which he called “a very independent decision by both” Grab and Uber.

Uber will take a 27.5 percent stake in Singapore-based Grab and Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi will join Grab’s board. Grab was last valued at $6 billion after a financing round in July.

“It will help us double down on our plans for growth as we invest heavily in our products and technology,” Khosrowshahi said in a statement.

The Competition Commission of Singapore (CCS) said it has the mandate to review whether any mergers will result in a “substantial lessening of competition” and take any action to intervene in the deal, but it has yet to receive notice from the companies.

The deal will help bolster Grab’s meal-delivery service, which will merge with Uber Eats, compete with Go-Jek. Go-Jek has become a dominant player and powerful rival in Indonesia, the region’s biggest economy, and it has rapidly expanded beyond ride hailing to digital payments, food delivery and on-demand cleaning and massage.

Ride-hailing companies throughout Asia have relied heavily on discounts and promotions, driving down profit margins and increasing pressure for consolidation.

Uber, which is preparing for a potential initial public offering in 2019, lost $4.5 billion last year and is facing fierce competition at home in the United States and across Asia, as well as a regulatory crackdown in Europe.

Uber invested $700 million in its Southeast Asia business.

Uber previously sold operations in China and Russia to local rivals under former CEO Travis Kalanick. The deal with Grab is the first operations sale by Khosrowshahi, who started in September.

More consolidation

But Uber’s CEO does not want to make these mergers a pattern, and said he has no plans to do another sale in which it consolidates its operations in exchange for a minority stake in a rival.

“It is fair to ask whether consolidation is now the strategy of the day, given this is the third deal of its kind…The answer is no,” Khosrowshahi said in a note to employees that was shared with Reuters. “One of the potential dangers of our global strategy is that we take on too many battles across too many fronts and with too many competitors.”

SoftBank is also an investor in India’s Ola, another competitive and costly market where rivals have heavily subsidized rides in an effort to gain market share. But a source familiar with Uber’s strategy said the company was going to step up its battle with Ola in India, where Uber has close to 60 percent of the market, by some estimates, but is losing money.

SoftBank’s Misra sees opportunities for mergers and joint ventures between SoftBank-backed ride-hailing companies, particularly for collaborating on research and development, but the investor would never get actively involved with management decisions, the person familiar with the matter said.

Uber includes the United States, Australia, New Zealand and Latin America among its core markets — regions where it has more than 50 percent market share and is profitable or sees a path to profitability.

White House Probing Huge Loans to Kushner’s Family Firm

White House officials are looking into whether $500 million in loans that went to Trump administration senior adviser Jared Kushner’s family real estate company may have spurred ethics or criminal law violations, according to the head of the federal government’s ethics agency.

David J. Apol, acting director of the Office of Government Ethics, said in a letter sent late last week to Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi that the White House Counsel’s office told him that officials were probing the loans to Kushner Cos. and whether “additional procedures are necessary to avoid violations in the future.”

Krishnamoorthi, an Illinois Democrat, had asked Apol on March 1 about a New York Times report in February that Kushner Cos. accepted $184 million in loans from Apollo Global Management and $325 million from Citigroup last year over a span of several months after Kushner met with officials from the two firms. As President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and key adviser, Kushner plays an influential role in domestic and foreign policy decisions.

Both companies have insisted their officials did nothing wrong in meeting with Kushner. Both firms had financial interests overseen by the federal government at the time and both firms – either independently or through industry groups – backed elements of the tax reform legislation that passed Congress last year with support from Trump.

In one case cited by the Times, Citigroup lent $325 million to Kushner Cos. in spring 2017 shortly after Kushner met with Citi’s chief executive, Michael Corbat. Last week, Citigroup’s general counsel told several Democratic lawmakers in a letter that the loan was “completely appropriate.”

In a second case, Kushner met several times with Apollo co-founder Joshua Harris and discussed a possible White House job – followed by Apollo’s loan of $184 million to the Kushner family firm. An Apollo spokesman previously told The Associated Press that Harris “never discussed with Jared Kushner a loan, investment, or any other business arrangement or regulatory matter involving Apollo.”

In the letter to Krishnamoorthi, Apol responded to several of her questions about Kushner’s conduct during the period when his family’s real estate firm received the two loans. Apol was careful not to offer legal opinions on Kushner’s behavior, instead noting that “the White House is in a position to ascertain the relevant facts related to possible violations and is responsible for monitoring compliance with ethics requirements.”

Apol said he raised those questions with White House officials “to ensure that they have begun the process of ascertaining to determine whether any law or regulation has been violated.” During the conversations, “the White House informed me that they had already begun this process,” he said.

A spokeswoman for Kushner Cos. said Monday night that the firm had not received any correspondence or other notifications from the White House or OGE.

A spokesman for Jared Kushner at the White House was not immediately available to comment on Apol’s confirmation of the probe.

White House Probing Huge Loans to Kushner’s Family Firm

White House officials are looking into whether $500 million in loans that went to Trump administration senior adviser Jared Kushner’s family real estate company may have spurred ethics or criminal law violations, according to the head of the federal government’s ethics agency.

David J. Apol, acting director of the Office of Government Ethics, said in a letter sent late last week to Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi that the White House Counsel’s office told him that officials were probing the loans to Kushner Cos. and whether “additional procedures are necessary to avoid violations in the future.”

Krishnamoorthi, an Illinois Democrat, had asked Apol on March 1 about a New York Times report in February that Kushner Cos. accepted $184 million in loans from Apollo Global Management and $325 million from Citigroup last year over a span of several months after Kushner met with officials from the two firms. As President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and key adviser, Kushner plays an influential role in domestic and foreign policy decisions.

Both companies have insisted their officials did nothing wrong in meeting with Kushner. Both firms had financial interests overseen by the federal government at the time and both firms – either independently or through industry groups – backed elements of the tax reform legislation that passed Congress last year with support from Trump.

In one case cited by the Times, Citigroup lent $325 million to Kushner Cos. in spring 2017 shortly after Kushner met with Citi’s chief executive, Michael Corbat. Last week, Citigroup’s general counsel told several Democratic lawmakers in a letter that the loan was “completely appropriate.”

In a second case, Kushner met several times with Apollo co-founder Joshua Harris and discussed a possible White House job – followed by Apollo’s loan of $184 million to the Kushner family firm. An Apollo spokesman previously told The Associated Press that Harris “never discussed with Jared Kushner a loan, investment, or any other business arrangement or regulatory matter involving Apollo.”

In the letter to Krishnamoorthi, Apol responded to several of her questions about Kushner’s conduct during the period when his family’s real estate firm received the two loans. Apol was careful not to offer legal opinions on Kushner’s behavior, instead noting that “the White House is in a position to ascertain the relevant facts related to possible violations and is responsible for monitoring compliance with ethics requirements.”

Apol said he raised those questions with White House officials “to ensure that they have begun the process of ascertaining to determine whether any law or regulation has been violated.” During the conversations, “the White House informed me that they had already begun this process,” he said.

A spokeswoman for Kushner Cos. said Monday night that the firm had not received any correspondence or other notifications from the White House or OGE.

A spokesman for Jared Kushner at the White House was not immediately available to comment on Apol’s confirmation of the probe.

What Facebook’s Privacy Policy Allows May Surprise You

To get an idea of the data Facebook collects about you, just ask for it. You’ll get a file with every photo and comment you’ve posted, all the ads you’ve clicked on, stuff you’ve liked and searched for and everyone you’ve friended — and unfriended — over the years.

 

Now, the company is under fire for collecting data on people’s phone calls and text messages if they used Android devices. While Facebook insists users had to specifically agree, or opt in, to have such data collected, at least some users appeared surprised.

 

Facebook’s trove of data is used to decide which ads to show you. It also makes using Facebook more seamless and enjoyable — say, by determining which posts to emphasize in your feed, or reminding you of friends’ birthdays.

 

Facebook claims to protect all this information, and it lays out its terms in a privacy policy that’s relatively clear and concise. But few users bother to read it. You might be surprised at what Facebook’s privacy policy allows — and what’s left unsaid.

 

Facebook’s privacy practices have come under fire after a Trump-affiliated political consulting firm, Cambridge Analytica, got data inappropriately from millions of Facebook users. While past privacy debacles have centered on what marketers gather on users, the stakes are higher this time because the firm is alleged to have created psychological profiles to influence how people vote or even think about politics and society.

 

Facebook defends its data collection and sharing activities by noting that it’s adhering to a privacy policy it shares with users. Thanks largely to years of privacy scandals and pressure from users and regulators, Facebook also offers a complex set of controls that let users limit how their information is used — to a point.

 

You can turn off ad targeting and see generic ads instead, the way you would on television or in a newspaper. In the ad settings, you’d need to uncheck all your interests, interactions with companies and websites and other personal information you don’t want to use in targeting. Of course, if you click on a new interest after this, you’ll have to go back and uncheck it in your ad preferences to prevent targeting. It’s a tedious task.

 

As Facebook explains, it puts you in target categories based on your activity. So, if you are 35, live in Seattle and have liked an outdoor adventure page, Facebook may show you an ad for a mountain bike shop in your area.

 

But activity isn’t limited to pages or posts you like, comments you make and your use of outside apps and websites.

 

“If you start typing something and change your mind and delete it, Facebook keeps those and analyzes them too,” Zeynep Tufekci, a prominent techno-sociologist, said in a 2017 TED talk.

 

And, increasingly, Facebook tries to match what it knows about you with your offline data, purchased from data brokers or gathered in other ways. The more information it has, the fuller the picture of you it can offer to advertisers. It can infer things about you that you had no intention of sharing — anything from your ethnicity to personality traits, happiness and use of addictive substances, Tufekci said.

 

These types of data collection aren’t necessarily explicit in privacy policies or settings.

 

What Facebook does say is that advertisers don’t get the raw data. They just tell Facebook what kind of people they want their ads to reach, then Facebook makes the matches and shows the ads.

 

Apps can also collect a lot of data about you, as revealed in the Cambridge Analytica scandal. The firm got the data from a researcher who paid 270,000 Facebook users to complete a psychological profile quiz back in 2014. But the quiz gathered information on their friends as well, bringing the total number of people affected to about 50 million.

 

Facebook says Cambridge Analytica got the data inappropriately — but only because the app said it collected data for research rather than political profiling. Gathering data on friends was permitted at the time, even if they had never installed the app or given explicit consent.

 

Ian Bogost, a Georgia Tech communications professor who built a tongue-in-cheek game called “Cow Clicker” in 2010, wrote in The Atlantic recently that abusing the Facebook platform for “deliberately nefarious ends” was easy to do then. What’s worse, he said, it was hard to avoid extracting private data.

 

If “you played Cow Clicker, even just once, I got enough of your personal data that, for years, I could have assembled a reasonably sophisticated profile of your interests and behavior,” he wrote. “I might still be able to; all the data is still there, stored on my private server, where Cow Clicker is still running, allowing players to keep clicking where a cow once stood.”

 

Facebook has since restricted the amount of types of data apps can access. But other types of data collection are still permitted. For this reason, it’s a good idea to check all the apps you’ve given permissions to over the years. You can also do this in your settings.

What Facebook’s Privacy Policy Allows May Surprise You

To get an idea of the data Facebook collects about you, just ask for it. You’ll get a file with every photo and comment you’ve posted, all the ads you’ve clicked on, stuff you’ve liked and searched for and everyone you’ve friended — and unfriended — over the years.

 

Now, the company is under fire for collecting data on people’s phone calls and text messages if they used Android devices. While Facebook insists users had to specifically agree, or opt in, to have such data collected, at least some users appeared surprised.

 

Facebook’s trove of data is used to decide which ads to show you. It also makes using Facebook more seamless and enjoyable — say, by determining which posts to emphasize in your feed, or reminding you of friends’ birthdays.

 

Facebook claims to protect all this information, and it lays out its terms in a privacy policy that’s relatively clear and concise. But few users bother to read it. You might be surprised at what Facebook’s privacy policy allows — and what’s left unsaid.

 

Facebook’s privacy practices have come under fire after a Trump-affiliated political consulting firm, Cambridge Analytica, got data inappropriately from millions of Facebook users. While past privacy debacles have centered on what marketers gather on users, the stakes are higher this time because the firm is alleged to have created psychological profiles to influence how people vote or even think about politics and society.

 

Facebook defends its data collection and sharing activities by noting that it’s adhering to a privacy policy it shares with users. Thanks largely to years of privacy scandals and pressure from users and regulators, Facebook also offers a complex set of controls that let users limit how their information is used — to a point.

 

You can turn off ad targeting and see generic ads instead, the way you would on television or in a newspaper. In the ad settings, you’d need to uncheck all your interests, interactions with companies and websites and other personal information you don’t want to use in targeting. Of course, if you click on a new interest after this, you’ll have to go back and uncheck it in your ad preferences to prevent targeting. It’s a tedious task.

 

As Facebook explains, it puts you in target categories based on your activity. So, if you are 35, live in Seattle and have liked an outdoor adventure page, Facebook may show you an ad for a mountain bike shop in your area.

 

But activity isn’t limited to pages or posts you like, comments you make and your use of outside apps and websites.

 

“If you start typing something and change your mind and delete it, Facebook keeps those and analyzes them too,” Zeynep Tufekci, a prominent techno-sociologist, said in a 2017 TED talk.

 

And, increasingly, Facebook tries to match what it knows about you with your offline data, purchased from data brokers or gathered in other ways. The more information it has, the fuller the picture of you it can offer to advertisers. It can infer things about you that you had no intention of sharing — anything from your ethnicity to personality traits, happiness and use of addictive substances, Tufekci said.

 

These types of data collection aren’t necessarily explicit in privacy policies or settings.

 

What Facebook does say is that advertisers don’t get the raw data. They just tell Facebook what kind of people they want their ads to reach, then Facebook makes the matches and shows the ads.

 

Apps can also collect a lot of data about you, as revealed in the Cambridge Analytica scandal. The firm got the data from a researcher who paid 270,000 Facebook users to complete a psychological profile quiz back in 2014. But the quiz gathered information on their friends as well, bringing the total number of people affected to about 50 million.

 

Facebook says Cambridge Analytica got the data inappropriately — but only because the app said it collected data for research rather than political profiling. Gathering data on friends was permitted at the time, even if they had never installed the app or given explicit consent.

 

Ian Bogost, a Georgia Tech communications professor who built a tongue-in-cheek game called “Cow Clicker” in 2010, wrote in The Atlantic recently that abusing the Facebook platform for “deliberately nefarious ends” was easy to do then. What’s worse, he said, it was hard to avoid extracting private data.

 

If “you played Cow Clicker, even just once, I got enough of your personal data that, for years, I could have assembled a reasonably sophisticated profile of your interests and behavior,” he wrote. “I might still be able to; all the data is still there, stored on my private server, where Cow Clicker is still running, allowing players to keep clicking where a cow once stood.”

 

Facebook has since restricted the amount of types of data apps can access. But other types of data collection are still permitted. For this reason, it’s a good idea to check all the apps you’ve given permissions to over the years. You can also do this in your settings.

Cisco Systems Gives $50M to Combat California Homelessness

Internet gear maker Cisco Systems Inc. announced Monday that it will donate $50 million over five years to address the growing problem of homelessness in California’s Santa Clara County and is encouraging other Silicon Valley companies to make similar efforts.

 

In a blog post, Chief Executive Chuck Robbins said people in the San Francisco Bay Area know homelessness has reached a crisis level, costing the county where many tech companies are based $520 million per year.

 

“Though homelessness seems intractable, I believe that it is a solvable issue,” Robbins wrote. “I also feel very strongly that we have an opportunity — and a responsibility — to do something about it.”

Northern California’s booming economy has been fueled by the tech sector. But the influx of workers coupled with decades of under-building has led to a historic shortage of affordable housing throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. Homelessness is now pervasive throughout Silicon Valley.

 

The median rent in the San Jose metro area is $3,500 a month, but the median wage is $12 an hour in food service and $19 an hour in health care support, an amount that won’t even cover housing costs. The minimum annual salary needed to live comfortably in San Jose is $87,000, according to a study by personal finance website GoBankingRates.

 

Cisco’s donation will go to Destination: Home, a public-private partnership that focuses on getting housing for the homeless as the first step in addressing other problems related to health, addiction, family estrangement and joblessness. In addition to financing housing, the funding will also help improve data collection about homelessness services so money is spent more efficiently.

 

Ray Bramson, chief impact officer for Destination: Home, said the leadership shown by Cisco and its CEO is what the community needs to see from the major technology companies that call Silicon Valley home.

“We’ve always known that tech could be a good partner,” Bramson said. “We’re hoping that by Cisco really stepping up and giving us this support we’re going to see other great organizations in our valley step up. … No one agency, no one organization can really do it alone.”

 

Cisco’s donation is believed to be among the largest of its kind in the region.

 

The tech company last year pledged $10 million to Housing Trust Silicon Valley’s TECH fund, on the condition that it would be matched by others. LinkedIn matched $10 million.

Cisco Systems Gives $50M to Combat California Homelessness

Internet gear maker Cisco Systems Inc. announced Monday that it will donate $50 million over five years to address the growing problem of homelessness in California’s Santa Clara County and is encouraging other Silicon Valley companies to make similar efforts.

 

In a blog post, Chief Executive Chuck Robbins said people in the San Francisco Bay Area know homelessness has reached a crisis level, costing the county where many tech companies are based $520 million per year.

 

“Though homelessness seems intractable, I believe that it is a solvable issue,” Robbins wrote. “I also feel very strongly that we have an opportunity — and a responsibility — to do something about it.”

Northern California’s booming economy has been fueled by the tech sector. But the influx of workers coupled with decades of under-building has led to a historic shortage of affordable housing throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. Homelessness is now pervasive throughout Silicon Valley.

 

The median rent in the San Jose metro area is $3,500 a month, but the median wage is $12 an hour in food service and $19 an hour in health care support, an amount that won’t even cover housing costs. The minimum annual salary needed to live comfortably in San Jose is $87,000, according to a study by personal finance website GoBankingRates.

 

Cisco’s donation will go to Destination: Home, a public-private partnership that focuses on getting housing for the homeless as the first step in addressing other problems related to health, addiction, family estrangement and joblessness. In addition to financing housing, the funding will also help improve data collection about homelessness services so money is spent more efficiently.

 

Ray Bramson, chief impact officer for Destination: Home, said the leadership shown by Cisco and its CEO is what the community needs to see from the major technology companies that call Silicon Valley home.

“We’ve always known that tech could be a good partner,” Bramson said. “We’re hoping that by Cisco really stepping up and giving us this support we’re going to see other great organizations in our valley step up. … No one agency, no one organization can really do it alone.”

 

Cisco’s donation is believed to be among the largest of its kind in the region.

 

The tech company last year pledged $10 million to Housing Trust Silicon Valley’s TECH fund, on the condition that it would be matched by others. LinkedIn matched $10 million.

Federal Trade Commission Confirms Facebook Probe

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission said Monday it is investigating the privacy controls of social media giant Facebook in the aftermath of reports that the personal data of tens of millions of Facebook users was compromised by the British voter profiling firm Cambridge Analytica.

The consumer agency’s announcement sent Facebook’s stock price down another 2 percent, after a 14 percent plunge last week cut the company’s market value by $90 billion.

The FTC normally does not announce its investigations, but confirmed the probe after numerous news accounts last week said it had been opened.

Acting consumer protection chief Tom Pahl said the FTC “is firmly and fully committed to using all of its tools to protect the privacy of consumers. Foremost among these tools is enforcement action against companies that fail to honor their privacy promises,” including adherence to a joint U.S.-European privacy accord, “or that engage in unfair acts that cause substantial injury to consumers in violation” of U.S. consumer protections.

Facebook’s privacy practices are being questioned on both sides of the Atlantic after revelations that Cambridge Analytica got the cache of information about Facebook users from British researcher Alexsandr Kogan, who had been authorized by Facebook to collect the data as part of an academic study.

Kogan developed an app on which 270,000 Facebook users supplied information about themselves. In all, because of extensive links of friends and associates to the 270,000 Facebook users, 50 million Facebook users may have had their personal data compromised.

Britain has opened an investigation of Cambridge Analytica and seized data from its London headquarters.

German Justice Minister Katarina Barley met Monday with Facebook officials, later calling for stricter regulation and tougher penalties for companies like Facebook.

“Facebook admitted abuses and excesses in the past and gave assurances that measures since taken mean they can’t happen again,” she said. “But promises aren’t enough. In the future we will have to regulate companies like Facebook much more strictly.”

Facebook said Monday it remains “strongly committed” to protecting people’s information and would answer the FTC’s questions.

Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg on Sunday apologized to Facebook users in full-page ads in nine British and U.S. for the massive “breach of trust” by the company.

Zuckerberg did not mention Cambridge Analytica, which was paid $6 million by U.S. President Donald Trump’s successful 2016 presidential campaign for the White House to develop voter profiles.

Zuckerberg said in the ads, “This was a breach of trust, and I’m sorry we didn’t do more at the time” when Kogan passed on the Facebook data to Cambridge Analytica.”We’re now taking steps to make sure this doesn’t happen again.”

“We have a responsibility to protect your information,” Zuckerberg said. “If we can’t, we don’t deserve it.”

Federal Trade Commission Confirms Facebook Probe

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission said Monday it is investigating the privacy controls of social media giant Facebook in the aftermath of reports that the personal data of tens of millions of Facebook users was compromised by the British voter profiling firm Cambridge Analytica.

The consumer agency’s announcement sent Facebook’s stock price down another 2 percent, after a 14 percent plunge last week cut the company’s market value by $90 billion.

The FTC normally does not announce its investigations, but confirmed the probe after numerous news accounts last week said it had been opened.

Acting consumer protection chief Tom Pahl said the FTC “is firmly and fully committed to using all of its tools to protect the privacy of consumers. Foremost among these tools is enforcement action against companies that fail to honor their privacy promises,” including adherence to a joint U.S.-European privacy accord, “or that engage in unfair acts that cause substantial injury to consumers in violation” of U.S. consumer protections.

Facebook’s privacy practices are being questioned on both sides of the Atlantic after revelations that Cambridge Analytica got the cache of information about Facebook users from British researcher Alexsandr Kogan, who had been authorized by Facebook to collect the data as part of an academic study.

Kogan developed an app on which 270,000 Facebook users supplied information about themselves. In all, because of extensive links of friends and associates to the 270,000 Facebook users, 50 million Facebook users may have had their personal data compromised.

Britain has opened an investigation of Cambridge Analytica and seized data from its London headquarters.

German Justice Minister Katarina Barley met Monday with Facebook officials, later calling for stricter regulation and tougher penalties for companies like Facebook.

“Facebook admitted abuses and excesses in the past and gave assurances that measures since taken mean they can’t happen again,” she said. “But promises aren’t enough. In the future we will have to regulate companies like Facebook much more strictly.”

Facebook said Monday it remains “strongly committed” to protecting people’s information and would answer the FTC’s questions.

Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg on Sunday apologized to Facebook users in full-page ads in nine British and U.S. for the massive “breach of trust” by the company.

Zuckerberg did not mention Cambridge Analytica, which was paid $6 million by U.S. President Donald Trump’s successful 2016 presidential campaign for the White House to develop voter profiles.

Zuckerberg said in the ads, “This was a breach of trust, and I’m sorry we didn’t do more at the time” when Kogan passed on the Facebook data to Cambridge Analytica.”We’re now taking steps to make sure this doesn’t happen again.”

“We have a responsibility to protect your information,” Zuckerberg said. “If we can’t, we don’t deserve it.”

Fishing Crackdown Nets Benefits for Indonesia

Indonesia’s strict crackdown on illegal foreign fishing boats is paying off, according to new research.

Kicking out interlopers has relieved pressure on the country’s overtaxed fisheries at no cost to its domestic industry, the study says, and may point the way for other countries to make their fisheries more sustainable.

About a third of the world’s commercial fish populations are overfished, according to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization. 

One study estimated that restoring depleted fisheries would ultimately generate $53 billion in additional annual profits. 

But reducing overfishing usually means putting unpopular restrictions on local fishers to allow populations to recover.

“Telling fishers to stop fishing for a few months or years would be something that’s not that realistic,” said study lead author Ren Cabral at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

Violators will be sunk

But in Indonesia, as in many developing countries, locals are only part of the equation. Many foreign vessels fished the country’s waters, often illegally.

The study notes that the country lost an estimated $4 billion per year to illegal fishing before 2014, when the government banned foreign fishing vessels in its waters.

Since then, more than 300 ships found violating the ban were evacuated and sunk.

Cabral and colleagues wanted to see what the impact had been.

Using government registries, vessel tracking data and satellite imagery, they saw a drop of more than 90 percent in the time foreign vessels spent in Indonesian waters. That meant at least a quarter less fishing activity overall.

“That’s huge,” Cabral said.

The study is published in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution. 

“You have a large benefit, but the cost to local people is zero,” said marine biologist Boris Worm at Dalhousie University, who was not involved with this research.

Do this first

“This paper argues, I think convincingly, that this is the first thing you should do: if you want to fix fisheries in your country, first, kick out the fishers that don’t need to be there,” he added.

Worm notes that the study could only account for large vessels that are required to carry tracking equipment. It could not assess what smaller vessels are doing.

“You’re really only seeing the tip of the iceberg,” he said. “The tip of the iceberg is getting smaller, which is good in this case. But there are a whole lot of problems below.”

With foreign fishing boats out of the way, local fishers are filling in the gap. If not managed properly, they could undo the benefits of fighting illegal fishing, Cabral said.

If Indonesia continues to ban illegal fishing and also manages local fishing sustainably, the study estimates profits would be 12 percent higher in 2035 compared to today.

On the other hand, if local fishing remains unchanged, 2035 profits would drop by half as fish populations declined.

 

“The next step would be Indonesia managing their local fishing effort,” Cabral added. “If they do that, they can definitely get the benefit from their policies.”

 

Fishing Crackdown Nets Benefits for Indonesia

Indonesia’s strict crackdown on illegal foreign fishing boats is paying off, according to new research.

Kicking out interlopers has relieved pressure on the country’s overtaxed fisheries at no cost to its domestic industry, the study says, and may point the way for other countries to make their fisheries more sustainable.

About a third of the world’s commercial fish populations are overfished, according to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization. 

One study estimated that restoring depleted fisheries would ultimately generate $53 billion in additional annual profits. 

But reducing overfishing usually means putting unpopular restrictions on local fishers to allow populations to recover.

“Telling fishers to stop fishing for a few months or years would be something that’s not that realistic,” said study lead author Ren Cabral at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

Violators will be sunk

But in Indonesia, as in many developing countries, locals are only part of the equation. Many foreign vessels fished the country’s waters, often illegally.

The study notes that the country lost an estimated $4 billion per year to illegal fishing before 2014, when the government banned foreign fishing vessels in its waters.

Since then, more than 300 ships found violating the ban were evacuated and sunk.

Cabral and colleagues wanted to see what the impact had been.

Using government registries, vessel tracking data and satellite imagery, they saw a drop of more than 90 percent in the time foreign vessels spent in Indonesian waters. That meant at least a quarter less fishing activity overall.

“That’s huge,” Cabral said.

The study is published in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution. 

“You have a large benefit, but the cost to local people is zero,” said marine biologist Boris Worm at Dalhousie University, who was not involved with this research.

Do this first

“This paper argues, I think convincingly, that this is the first thing you should do: if you want to fix fisheries in your country, first, kick out the fishers that don’t need to be there,” he added.

Worm notes that the study could only account for large vessels that are required to carry tracking equipment. It could not assess what smaller vessels are doing.

“You’re really only seeing the tip of the iceberg,” he said. “The tip of the iceberg is getting smaller, which is good in this case. But there are a whole lot of problems below.”

With foreign fishing boats out of the way, local fishers are filling in the gap. If not managed properly, they could undo the benefits of fighting illegal fishing, Cabral said.

If Indonesia continues to ban illegal fishing and also manages local fishing sustainably, the study estimates profits would be 12 percent higher in 2035 compared to today.

On the other hand, if local fishing remains unchanged, 2035 profits would drop by half as fish populations declined.

 

“The next step would be Indonesia managing their local fishing effort,” Cabral added. “If they do that, they can definitely get the benefit from their policies.”

 

Witness in Mueller Probe Aided United Arab Emirates Agenda in Congress

A top fundraiser for President Donald Trump received millions of dollars from a political adviser to the United Arab Emirates last April, just weeks before he began handing out a series of large political donations to U.S. lawmakers considering legislation targeting Qatar, the UAE’s chief rival in the Persian Gulf, an Associated Press investigation has found.

George Nader, an adviser to the UAE who is now a witness in the U.S. special counsel investigation into foreign meddling in American politics, wired $2.5 million to the Trump fundraiser, Elliott Broidy, through a company in Canada, according to two people who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. They said Nader paid the money to Broidy to bankroll an effort to persuade the U.S. to take a hard line against Qatar, a long-time American ally but now a bitter adversary of the UAE.

A month after he received the money, Broidy sponsored a conference on Qatar’s alleged ties to Islamic extremism. During the event, Republican Congressman Ed Royce of California, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, announced he was introducing legislation that would brand Qatar as a terrorist-supporting state.

In July 2017, two months after Royce introduced the bill, Broidy gave the California congressman $5,400 in campaign gifts — the maximum allowed by law. The donations were part of just under $600,000 that Broidy has given to GOP members of Congress and Republican political committees since he began the push for the legislation fingering Qatar, according to an AP analysis of campaign finance disclosure records.

Broidy said in a statement to AP that he has been outspoken for years about militant groups, including Hamas.

“I’ve both raised money for, and contributed my own money to, efforts by think tanks to bring the facts into the open, since Qatar is spreading millions of dollars around Washington to whitewash its image as a terror-sponsoring state,” he said. “I’ve also spoken to like-minded members of Congress, like Royce, about how to make sure Qatar’s lobbying money does not blind lawmakers to the facts about its record in supporting terrorist groups.”

While Washington is awash with political donations from all manner of interest groups and individuals, there are strict restrictions on foreign donations for political activity. Agents of foreign governments are also required to register before lobbying so that there is a public record of foreign influence.

Cory Fritz, a spokesman for Royce, said that his boss had long criticized the “destabilizing role of extremist elements in Qatar.” He pointed to comments to that effect going back to 2014. “Any attempts to influence these longstanding views would have been unsuccessful,” he said.

In October, Broidy also raised the issue of Qatar at the White House in meetings with Trump and senior aides.

The details of Broidy’s advocacy on U.S. legislation have not been previously reported. The AP found no evidence that Broidy used Nader’s funds for the campaign donations or broke any laws. At the time of the advocacy work, his company, Circinus, did not have business with the UAE, but was awarded a more than $200 million contract in January.

The sanctions bill was approved by Royce’s committee in late 2017. It remains alive in the House of Representatives, awaiting a review by the House Financial Services Committee.

Meetings probed

The backstory of the legislative push is emerging amid continuing concerns about efforts by foreign governments or their proxies to influence American politics. While reports about possible Russian links to Trump’s campaign and his presidential administration have been making headlines since 2016, questions are now arising about efforts during the Trump era to influence U.S. policy in the Middle East.

The U.S. has long been friendly with Saudi Arabia and the UAE as well as Qatar, which is home to a massive American air base that the U.S. has used in its fight against the Islamic State. But as political rifts in the Gulf have widened, the Saudis and Emiratis have sought to undercut American ties with Qatar.

Qatar and UAE have also exchanged allegations of politically motivated hacks. Scores of Broidy’s emails and documents have leaked to news organizations, drawing attention to his relationship with Nader. Broidy has alleged that the hack was done by Qatari agents and has reported the breach to the FBI.

“It’s no surprise that Qatar would see me as an obstacle and come after me in the way it has,” he said in a statement.

A spokesman for the Qatari embassy, Jassim Mansour Jabr Al Thani, denied the charges, calling them “diversionary tactics.” Representatives of the UAE did not respond to requests for comment.

The timeline of the influx of cash wired by Nader, an adviser to Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed al-Nahyan, the de facto leader of the UAE, may provide grist for U.S. special counsel Robert Mueller’s legal team as it probes the activities of Trump and his associates during the 2016 campaign and beyond. However, it is not clear that Mueller has expanded his investigation in that direction.

Mueller’s investigators are looking into two meetings close to Trump’s inauguration attended by Nader and bin Zayed. The pair joined a meeting at New York’s Trump Tower in December 2016 that included presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner and Steve Bannon, who was Trump’s chief strategist at the time. A month later, Nader and bin Zayed were a world away on the Seychelles island chain in the Indian Ocean, meeting with Erik Prince, the founder of the security company Blackwater, and the Kremlin-connected head of a large Russian sovereign wealth fund, Kirill Dmitriev.

Nader, a Lebanese-American businessman, agreed to cooperate with Mueller’s team after investigators stopped him at Dulles International Airport, according to a person familiar with his case.

That person and others who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity said they could not be identified because of the sensitivity of the issues surrounding the Mueller investigation.

A lawyer for Nader declined to comment for this story.

Policy push

Broidy and Nader first met at Trump’s presidential inauguration on Jan. 20, 2017, according to a person with knowledge of the matter.

Both men have checkered legal histories. Nader was convicted in a Czech Republic court in 2003 of multiple counts of sexually abusing minors. Broidy, a businessmen and prolific Republican fundraiser, was sidelined for a few years after he pleaded guilty to bribery in a case stemming from an investment scheme involving New York state’s employee pension fund.

Broidy later re-emerged as a player in GOP politics. During the 2016 Republican presidential primary, he raised money for U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, Sen. Marco Rubio and Sen. Ted Cruz. After Cruz bowed out of the race, Broidy signed on to help Trump during the 2016 election and beyond, co-hosting fundraisers across the country.

The meeting between Broidy and Nader at the dawn of Trump’s presidency soon led the two to work together in an effort to shift U.S. policies on the Middle East.

On April 2, 2017, Nader asked Broidy to invoice his Dubai-based company for $2.5 million, according to someone familiar with the transaction who spoke on condition of anonymity.

On the same day, Broidy attached an invoice for that amount from Xiemen Investments Limited, a Canadian company directed by a friend. The money was forwarded to his own account in Los Angeles from the Canadian account, the person said. It was marked for consulting, marketing and advisory services, but was actually intended to fund Broidy’s Washington advocacy regarding Qatar, two people familiar with the transaction said. The financial transaction and the White House meetings were first reported by The New York Times.

It was on May 23, 2017, when Royce, a 13-term Congressman, appeared at a conference on Qatar’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and announced that he was introducing the sanctions bill that would name Qatar a state sponsor of terrorism.

The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a think tank that hosted the conference, said Broidy had approached it about organizing the event. Broidy bankrolled that conference and contributed to the financing of a second conference hosted on a similar theme in October by another think tank, the Hudson Institute.

Both organizations said Broidy said that no money from foreign governments was involved. FDD says it does not accept money from foreign governments and Hudson only accepts money from Democratic countries allied with the U.S.

“As is our funding policy, we asked if his funding was connected to any foreign governments or if he had business contracts in the Gulf. He assured us that he did not,” FDD said in a statement.

Broidy donated millions of his own money to efforts to fight Qatar, in addition to the $2.5 million from Nader, according to someone close to him, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss Broidy’s private finances.

Broidy’s behind-the-scenes efforts unfolded as animosity was growing between the UAE and Qatar. These tensions came to a head when the UAE and Saudi Arabia launched an embargo with travel and trade restrictions against Qatar less than two weeks after Royce introduced the sanctions legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Weeks later, Trump himself waded into the fracas, accusing Qatar of funding extremism in tweets on June 6.

Royce and a staff member met with Broidy at Washington’s Capitol Hill Club to discuss the bill, according to someone who was at the meeting. An associate, who Broidy paid for some of the work, also had frequent contact with congressional staff.

Strong language

Broidy’s effort to cultivate allies in Congress extended beyond Royce.

Broidy has personally given hundreds of thousands of dollars to Republicans over the past decade or more. But he gave nothing during the 2012 and 2014 election cycles and just $13,500 during the 2016 cycle. Things changed after Trump’s election as Broidy ramped up his advocacy on Middle East policy. Broidy has given nearly $600,000 to GOP candidates and causes since the beginning of last year when he began his advocacy push— more than in the previous 14 years combined.

Campaign finance records going back two decades show Broidy had not given any money to Royce — until he gave the lawmaker a pair of $2,700 donations on July 31, 2017.

By then, the sanctions bill was on a fast track.

The original draft considered by the Foreign Affairs Committee contained language singling out Qatar as a supporter of Hamas, a Palestinian organization that has been designated as a terrorist group by the U.S. State Department.

“Hamas has received significant financial and military support from Qatar,” the draft bill states.

Soon Qatar was lobbying hard to have that language excised. Nikki Haley, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, declared in a statement to the committee that Qatar does not fund Hamas.

According to two people familiar with the committee deliberations, both Republican and Democratic staff members reached a consensus that because of the tensions in the Gulf, the language would look like the lawmakers were taking sides. They agreed to take it out of the bill.

Qatari officials and lobbyists thought the matter had been settled, according to one lobbyist and a committee staffer. But just before the bill was to be put up for debate ahead of the committee’s vote, Royce ordered the language on Qatar not only reinstated, but strengthened, they say. The bill was approved by the committee in November with the stronger language on Qatar intact.

A Royce aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment, denied that Royce had ever considered removing the Qatar language.

In January, Royce announced that he would not seek re-election, saying that he wanted to focus on his committee in the last year of his chairmanship rather than a political campaign.

In the same month, Broidy’s company signed the hefty contract with the UAE government for gathering intelligence, according to someone familiar with the work.

 

Witness in Mueller Probe Aided United Arab Emirates Agenda in Congress

A top fundraiser for President Donald Trump received millions of dollars from a political adviser to the United Arab Emirates last April, just weeks before he began handing out a series of large political donations to U.S. lawmakers considering legislation targeting Qatar, the UAE’s chief rival in the Persian Gulf, an Associated Press investigation has found.

George Nader, an adviser to the UAE who is now a witness in the U.S. special counsel investigation into foreign meddling in American politics, wired $2.5 million to the Trump fundraiser, Elliott Broidy, through a company in Canada, according to two people who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. They said Nader paid the money to Broidy to bankroll an effort to persuade the U.S. to take a hard line against Qatar, a long-time American ally but now a bitter adversary of the UAE.

A month after he received the money, Broidy sponsored a conference on Qatar’s alleged ties to Islamic extremism. During the event, Republican Congressman Ed Royce of California, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, announced he was introducing legislation that would brand Qatar as a terrorist-supporting state.

In July 2017, two months after Royce introduced the bill, Broidy gave the California congressman $5,400 in campaign gifts — the maximum allowed by law. The donations were part of just under $600,000 that Broidy has given to GOP members of Congress and Republican political committees since he began the push for the legislation fingering Qatar, according to an AP analysis of campaign finance disclosure records.

Broidy said in a statement to AP that he has been outspoken for years about militant groups, including Hamas.

“I’ve both raised money for, and contributed my own money to, efforts by think tanks to bring the facts into the open, since Qatar is spreading millions of dollars around Washington to whitewash its image as a terror-sponsoring state,” he said. “I’ve also spoken to like-minded members of Congress, like Royce, about how to make sure Qatar’s lobbying money does not blind lawmakers to the facts about its record in supporting terrorist groups.”

While Washington is awash with political donations from all manner of interest groups and individuals, there are strict restrictions on foreign donations for political activity. Agents of foreign governments are also required to register before lobbying so that there is a public record of foreign influence.

Cory Fritz, a spokesman for Royce, said that his boss had long criticized the “destabilizing role of extremist elements in Qatar.” He pointed to comments to that effect going back to 2014. “Any attempts to influence these longstanding views would have been unsuccessful,” he said.

In October, Broidy also raised the issue of Qatar at the White House in meetings with Trump and senior aides.

The details of Broidy’s advocacy on U.S. legislation have not been previously reported. The AP found no evidence that Broidy used Nader’s funds for the campaign donations or broke any laws. At the time of the advocacy work, his company, Circinus, did not have business with the UAE, but was awarded a more than $200 million contract in January.

The sanctions bill was approved by Royce’s committee in late 2017. It remains alive in the House of Representatives, awaiting a review by the House Financial Services Committee.

Meetings probed

The backstory of the legislative push is emerging amid continuing concerns about efforts by foreign governments or their proxies to influence American politics. While reports about possible Russian links to Trump’s campaign and his presidential administration have been making headlines since 2016, questions are now arising about efforts during the Trump era to influence U.S. policy in the Middle East.

The U.S. has long been friendly with Saudi Arabia and the UAE as well as Qatar, which is home to a massive American air base that the U.S. has used in its fight against the Islamic State. But as political rifts in the Gulf have widened, the Saudis and Emiratis have sought to undercut American ties with Qatar.

Qatar and UAE have also exchanged allegations of politically motivated hacks. Scores of Broidy’s emails and documents have leaked to news organizations, drawing attention to his relationship with Nader. Broidy has alleged that the hack was done by Qatari agents and has reported the breach to the FBI.

“It’s no surprise that Qatar would see me as an obstacle and come after me in the way it has,” he said in a statement.

A spokesman for the Qatari embassy, Jassim Mansour Jabr Al Thani, denied the charges, calling them “diversionary tactics.” Representatives of the UAE did not respond to requests for comment.

The timeline of the influx of cash wired by Nader, an adviser to Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed al-Nahyan, the de facto leader of the UAE, may provide grist for U.S. special counsel Robert Mueller’s legal team as it probes the activities of Trump and his associates during the 2016 campaign and beyond. However, it is not clear that Mueller has expanded his investigation in that direction.

Mueller’s investigators are looking into two meetings close to Trump’s inauguration attended by Nader and bin Zayed. The pair joined a meeting at New York’s Trump Tower in December 2016 that included presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner and Steve Bannon, who was Trump’s chief strategist at the time. A month later, Nader and bin Zayed were a world away on the Seychelles island chain in the Indian Ocean, meeting with Erik Prince, the founder of the security company Blackwater, and the Kremlin-connected head of a large Russian sovereign wealth fund, Kirill Dmitriev.

Nader, a Lebanese-American businessman, agreed to cooperate with Mueller’s team after investigators stopped him at Dulles International Airport, according to a person familiar with his case.

That person and others who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity said they could not be identified because of the sensitivity of the issues surrounding the Mueller investigation.

A lawyer for Nader declined to comment for this story.

Policy push

Broidy and Nader first met at Trump’s presidential inauguration on Jan. 20, 2017, according to a person with knowledge of the matter.

Both men have checkered legal histories. Nader was convicted in a Czech Republic court in 2003 of multiple counts of sexually abusing minors. Broidy, a businessmen and prolific Republican fundraiser, was sidelined for a few years after he pleaded guilty to bribery in a case stemming from an investment scheme involving New York state’s employee pension fund.

Broidy later re-emerged as a player in GOP politics. During the 2016 Republican presidential primary, he raised money for U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, Sen. Marco Rubio and Sen. Ted Cruz. After Cruz bowed out of the race, Broidy signed on to help Trump during the 2016 election and beyond, co-hosting fundraisers across the country.

The meeting between Broidy and Nader at the dawn of Trump’s presidency soon led the two to work together in an effort to shift U.S. policies on the Middle East.

On April 2, 2017, Nader asked Broidy to invoice his Dubai-based company for $2.5 million, according to someone familiar with the transaction who spoke on condition of anonymity.

On the same day, Broidy attached an invoice for that amount from Xiemen Investments Limited, a Canadian company directed by a friend. The money was forwarded to his own account in Los Angeles from the Canadian account, the person said. It was marked for consulting, marketing and advisory services, but was actually intended to fund Broidy’s Washington advocacy regarding Qatar, two people familiar with the transaction said. The financial transaction and the White House meetings were first reported by The New York Times.

It was on May 23, 2017, when Royce, a 13-term Congressman, appeared at a conference on Qatar’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and announced that he was introducing the sanctions bill that would name Qatar a state sponsor of terrorism.

The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a think tank that hosted the conference, said Broidy had approached it about organizing the event. Broidy bankrolled that conference and contributed to the financing of a second conference hosted on a similar theme in October by another think tank, the Hudson Institute.

Both organizations said Broidy said that no money from foreign governments was involved. FDD says it does not accept money from foreign governments and Hudson only accepts money from Democratic countries allied with the U.S.

“As is our funding policy, we asked if his funding was connected to any foreign governments or if he had business contracts in the Gulf. He assured us that he did not,” FDD said in a statement.

Broidy donated millions of his own money to efforts to fight Qatar, in addition to the $2.5 million from Nader, according to someone close to him, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss Broidy’s private finances.

Broidy’s behind-the-scenes efforts unfolded as animosity was growing between the UAE and Qatar. These tensions came to a head when the UAE and Saudi Arabia launched an embargo with travel and trade restrictions against Qatar less than two weeks after Royce introduced the sanctions legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Weeks later, Trump himself waded into the fracas, accusing Qatar of funding extremism in tweets on June 6.

Royce and a staff member met with Broidy at Washington’s Capitol Hill Club to discuss the bill, according to someone who was at the meeting. An associate, who Broidy paid for some of the work, also had frequent contact with congressional staff.

Strong language

Broidy’s effort to cultivate allies in Congress extended beyond Royce.

Broidy has personally given hundreds of thousands of dollars to Republicans over the past decade or more. But he gave nothing during the 2012 and 2014 election cycles and just $13,500 during the 2016 cycle. Things changed after Trump’s election as Broidy ramped up his advocacy on Middle East policy. Broidy has given nearly $600,000 to GOP candidates and causes since the beginning of last year when he began his advocacy push— more than in the previous 14 years combined.

Campaign finance records going back two decades show Broidy had not given any money to Royce — until he gave the lawmaker a pair of $2,700 donations on July 31, 2017.

By then, the sanctions bill was on a fast track.

The original draft considered by the Foreign Affairs Committee contained language singling out Qatar as a supporter of Hamas, a Palestinian organization that has been designated as a terrorist group by the U.S. State Department.

“Hamas has received significant financial and military support from Qatar,” the draft bill states.

Soon Qatar was lobbying hard to have that language excised. Nikki Haley, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, declared in a statement to the committee that Qatar does not fund Hamas.

According to two people familiar with the committee deliberations, both Republican and Democratic staff members reached a consensus that because of the tensions in the Gulf, the language would look like the lawmakers were taking sides. They agreed to take it out of the bill.

Qatari officials and lobbyists thought the matter had been settled, according to one lobbyist and a committee staffer. But just before the bill was to be put up for debate ahead of the committee’s vote, Royce ordered the language on Qatar not only reinstated, but strengthened, they say. The bill was approved by the committee in November with the stronger language on Qatar intact.

A Royce aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment, denied that Royce had ever considered removing the Qatar language.

In January, Royce announced that he would not seek re-election, saying that he wanted to focus on his committee in the last year of his chairmanship rather than a political campaign.

In the same month, Broidy’s company signed the hefty contract with the UAE government for gathering intelligence, according to someone familiar with the work.

 

New Push Sought for Myanmar-India Economic Links

A delegation of Indian CEOs visiting Myanmar and the launch of a new India-Myanmar business chamber in Yangon have sought to inject life into stagnant economic ties between the two neighboring countries.

Since 2011, when the military junta launched political and economic reforms, Myanmar’s future prosperity has been predicated on its strategic location between India and China, two giant economies and population centers.

Yet, while China has poured billions into mega infrastructure and energy projects and continues to dominate trade with Myanmar, flagship Indian infrastructure projects in western Myanmar have run behind schedule and over budget.

Bilateral trade — topped by beans and pulses from Myanmar and sugar and medicines from India — has hovered around the $2 billion mark since 2011, less than a fifth of the trade volume with China and falling well below targets set by a Joint Trade Committee. Though Myanmar’s fourth largest trade partner, India is only its eleventh largest investor.

At an India-Myanmar Business Conclave on March 22 in Yangon, Myanmar’s commercial capital, Indian company directors mingled with Myanmar business leaders while senior government officials mixed frank acknowledgements of underperformance with affirmations of Myanmar’s potential.

India’s Minister of Commerce and Industry C.R. Chaudhary said, “Myanmar is our gateway to Southeast Asia,” recalling two pillars of India’s foreign policy, Act East and Neighborhood First, and stressed the need to “remove trade barriers.”

Next at the podium, Myanmar’s Deputy Minister for Commerce Aung Htoo, talked of boosting India-Myanmar trade to 5 billion over the next three years, as part of a Myanmar government plan made in 2016 to triple all exports by 2020.

Taking time

Speaking to VOA on the sidelines, Gaurav Manghnani, the Myanmar country head of Credera, a trading and investment company with roots in Myanmar’s Indian diaspora, said he didn’t share in the growing pessimism of other foreign investors over the slow pace of economic reform in Myanmar.

“If they’re taking time to get the reforms underway and making sure these reforms are here to stay and forward looking, they won’t make the mistakes other countries have,” he said, citing the lengthy delay in the implementation of the new Companies Act, a law that allows for larger foreign stakes in local companies, as “the best thing that could happen.”

He acknowledged that India-Myanmar trade “has been stagnant at this level for a while now. To push it beyond the current volume of 2 billion requires something different to be done.”

Yet, beyond the formal launching of the new India-Myanmar Chamber of Commerce — aimed at speeding up interaction between Indian and Myanmar businessmen and advising on tie-ups — the March 22 conclave did not feature announcements of new investments or major breakthroughs in deepening ties.

Indian Ambassador to Myanmar Vikram Misri said that work was nearing the “final stage” in two separate infrastructure projects being built on Indian government grants.

These are a section of the Trilateral Highway, running from northeast India across Myanmar to Thailand, and the Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project, linking India’s eastern seaport of Kolkata to its landlocked northeastern states via ports, inland water terminals and roads in Myanmar’s Rakhine and Chin states.

Speaking separately to VOA, the ambassador said he expected both projects, conceived respectively in 2002 and 2008, to be finished in 2021. Meanwhile, agreements on the legal movement of people and vehicles across the land border are still under negotiation.

Protectionism

One obstacle to closer ties is the measures taken by India to prop up its own market. In August last year, when monsoon rains produced a bumper harvest in India, causing local prices to plummet, the government imposed quotas on Myanmar beans and pulses, which account for more than 75 percent of Myanmar’s exports to India.

Myanmar’s Deputy Commerce Minister said at the conclave, “Due to recent restrictions by quota from India, Myanmar farmers have suffered a lot this year. I’d like to ask the Government of India to increase the quotas for Myanmar pulses and beans.”

Ambassador Misri defended the move to VOA, saying, “It’s not protectionism for the sake of being protectionist. It is something that is in fact foreseen under the WTO mechanisms in terms of protecting against surges and adverse market conditions.”

“It would have been a calamitous situation for imports to have continued and for the market price to fall even further,” he said, adding, “The longer term answer to this is a diversification of the trade basket that Myanmar has with regard to India.”

Vikram Nehru, a professor​ at the John Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, told VOA he was skeptical Indian investment in Myanmar would take off.

“India is an inward looking economy. It’s one of the most protected markets in the world. India​ is not part of the global or regional value chain, unlike China or Japan​,” he said.

Most Indian investments abroad, he explained, “are designed to tap into their host ​markets,” and the Myanmar market remains comparatively small and risky.

“Why would Indian firms be interested? They’d much rather set up in the Indian market of 1.3 billion people, with a per capita income that is higher than Myanmar’s,” he said.

New Push Sought for Myanmar-India Economic Links

A delegation of Indian CEOs visiting Myanmar and the launch of a new India-Myanmar business chamber in Yangon have sought to inject life into stagnant economic ties between the two neighboring countries.

Since 2011, when the military junta launched political and economic reforms, Myanmar’s future prosperity has been predicated on its strategic location between India and China, two giant economies and population centers.

Yet, while China has poured billions into mega infrastructure and energy projects and continues to dominate trade with Myanmar, flagship Indian infrastructure projects in western Myanmar have run behind schedule and over budget.

Bilateral trade — topped by beans and pulses from Myanmar and sugar and medicines from India — has hovered around the $2 billion mark since 2011, less than a fifth of the trade volume with China and falling well below targets set by a Joint Trade Committee. Though Myanmar’s fourth largest trade partner, India is only its eleventh largest investor.

At an India-Myanmar Business Conclave on March 22 in Yangon, Myanmar’s commercial capital, Indian company directors mingled with Myanmar business leaders while senior government officials mixed frank acknowledgements of underperformance with affirmations of Myanmar’s potential.

India’s Minister of Commerce and Industry C.R. Chaudhary said, “Myanmar is our gateway to Southeast Asia,” recalling two pillars of India’s foreign policy, Act East and Neighborhood First, and stressed the need to “remove trade barriers.”

Next at the podium, Myanmar’s Deputy Minister for Commerce Aung Htoo, talked of boosting India-Myanmar trade to 5 billion over the next three years, as part of a Myanmar government plan made in 2016 to triple all exports by 2020.

Taking time

Speaking to VOA on the sidelines, Gaurav Manghnani, the Myanmar country head of Credera, a trading and investment company with roots in Myanmar’s Indian diaspora, said he didn’t share in the growing pessimism of other foreign investors over the slow pace of economic reform in Myanmar.

“If they’re taking time to get the reforms underway and making sure these reforms are here to stay and forward looking, they won’t make the mistakes other countries have,” he said, citing the lengthy delay in the implementation of the new Companies Act, a law that allows for larger foreign stakes in local companies, as “the best thing that could happen.”

He acknowledged that India-Myanmar trade “has been stagnant at this level for a while now. To push it beyond the current volume of 2 billion requires something different to be done.”

Yet, beyond the formal launching of the new India-Myanmar Chamber of Commerce — aimed at speeding up interaction between Indian and Myanmar businessmen and advising on tie-ups — the March 22 conclave did not feature announcements of new investments or major breakthroughs in deepening ties.

Indian Ambassador to Myanmar Vikram Misri said that work was nearing the “final stage” in two separate infrastructure projects being built on Indian government grants.

These are a section of the Trilateral Highway, running from northeast India across Myanmar to Thailand, and the Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project, linking India’s eastern seaport of Kolkata to its landlocked northeastern states via ports, inland water terminals and roads in Myanmar’s Rakhine and Chin states.

Speaking separately to VOA, the ambassador said he expected both projects, conceived respectively in 2002 and 2008, to be finished in 2021. Meanwhile, agreements on the legal movement of people and vehicles across the land border are still under negotiation.

Protectionism

One obstacle to closer ties is the measures taken by India to prop up its own market. In August last year, when monsoon rains produced a bumper harvest in India, causing local prices to plummet, the government imposed quotas on Myanmar beans and pulses, which account for more than 75 percent of Myanmar’s exports to India.

Myanmar’s Deputy Commerce Minister said at the conclave, “Due to recent restrictions by quota from India, Myanmar farmers have suffered a lot this year. I’d like to ask the Government of India to increase the quotas for Myanmar pulses and beans.”

Ambassador Misri defended the move to VOA, saying, “It’s not protectionism for the sake of being protectionist. It is something that is in fact foreseen under the WTO mechanisms in terms of protecting against surges and adverse market conditions.”

“It would have been a calamitous situation for imports to have continued and for the market price to fall even further,” he said, adding, “The longer term answer to this is a diversification of the trade basket that Myanmar has with regard to India.”

Vikram Nehru, a professor​ at the John Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, told VOA he was skeptical Indian investment in Myanmar would take off.

“India is an inward looking economy. It’s one of the most protected markets in the world. India​ is not part of the global or regional value chain, unlike China or Japan​,” he said.

Most Indian investments abroad, he explained, “are designed to tap into their host ​markets,” and the Myanmar market remains comparatively small and risky.

“Why would Indian firms be interested? They’d much rather set up in the Indian market of 1.3 billion people, with a per capita income that is higher than Myanmar’s,” he said.

Row Over Data Mining Firm Cambridge Analytica Reverberates in India

The controversy over the British-based data mining company, Cambridge Analytica, which faces allegations of using the personal data of millions of Facebook followers to influence the U.S. election, is reverberating in India, which is due to hold national elections next year.

The website of the Indian affiliate of Cambridge Analytica, Ovleno Business Intelligence (OBI), has been taken down amid a dispute between the country’s two major political parties over using its services.

Both the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the main opposition Congress Party have denied doing so. However Ovleno’s site had listed the BJP, the Congress and a regional party known as the Janata Dal (United) among its clients.

India’s Information Technology Minister, Ravi Shankar Prasad, last week warned of tough action against social media giants if the data of Indians was misused.

He said India supports freedom of speech, expression and exchange of ideas on social media, “but any attempt, covert or overt, by the social media, including Facebook, of trying to influence India’s electoral process through undesirable means will neither be appreciated nor be tolerated.”

He said that in the wake of recent data theft from Facebook, the stern warning should be heard “across the Atlantic, far away in California.”

Minister Prasad asked Congress Party leader Rahul Gandhi, to “explain” the role of Cambridge Analytica in his social media outreach and whether the party had engaged in data trade with the firm.

Congress Party spokesman Randeep Sujrewala called the accusation a “fake agenda and a white lie.” He said it was the BJP that had used the company’s services.

Gandhi is expected to be the main opponent to Prime Minister Narendra Modi in 2019. Although Modi’s BJP won a sweeping victory in 2014, many analysts expect next year’s elections to be a much tighter race.

Domestic media reports have said that Cambridge Analytica and its India partner have been in talks with both the Congress and the BJP for a possible collaboration for their 2019 Lok Sabha election campaigns.

On its website, the Indian affiliate of Cambridge Analytica had said it offered services such as “political campaign management,” which includes social media strategy, election campaign management and mobile media management.

Internet experts say India is extremely vulnerable to the misuse of personal data during elections.  

“It’s become a source of micro-targeting. At scale when you can dissect this data and customize messages to individual people to prey on their fears, that kind of campaign is always possible,” said Nikhil Pahwa, a digital rights activist and founder of digital news portal MediaNama.

“The problem is not with one entity [such as Cambridge Analytica] but a system which allows it,” Pahwa said, pointing out that there is too much data floating around.

In an interview with CNN, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has said Facebook was committed to stopping interference in the U.S. midterm election in November and elections in India and Brazil.

Row Over Data Mining Firm Cambridge Analytica Reverberates in India

The controversy over the British-based data mining company, Cambridge Analytica, which faces allegations of using the personal data of millions of Facebook followers to influence the U.S. election, is reverberating in India, which is due to hold national elections next year.

The website of the Indian affiliate of Cambridge Analytica, Ovleno Business Intelligence (OBI), has been taken down amid a dispute between the country’s two major political parties over using its services.

Both the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the main opposition Congress Party have denied doing so. However Ovleno’s site had listed the BJP, the Congress and a regional party known as the Janata Dal (United) among its clients.

India’s Information Technology Minister, Ravi Shankar Prasad, last week warned of tough action against social media giants if the data of Indians was misused.

He said India supports freedom of speech, expression and exchange of ideas on social media, “but any attempt, covert or overt, by the social media, including Facebook, of trying to influence India’s electoral process through undesirable means will neither be appreciated nor be tolerated.”

He said that in the wake of recent data theft from Facebook, the stern warning should be heard “across the Atlantic, far away in California.”

Minister Prasad asked Congress Party leader Rahul Gandhi, to “explain” the role of Cambridge Analytica in his social media outreach and whether the party had engaged in data trade with the firm.

Congress Party spokesman Randeep Sujrewala called the accusation a “fake agenda and a white lie.” He said it was the BJP that had used the company’s services.

Gandhi is expected to be the main opponent to Prime Minister Narendra Modi in 2019. Although Modi’s BJP won a sweeping victory in 2014, many analysts expect next year’s elections to be a much tighter race.

Domestic media reports have said that Cambridge Analytica and its India partner have been in talks with both the Congress and the BJP for a possible collaboration for their 2019 Lok Sabha election campaigns.

On its website, the Indian affiliate of Cambridge Analytica had said it offered services such as “political campaign management,” which includes social media strategy, election campaign management and mobile media management.

Internet experts say India is extremely vulnerable to the misuse of personal data during elections.  

“It’s become a source of micro-targeting. At scale when you can dissect this data and customize messages to individual people to prey on their fears, that kind of campaign is always possible,” said Nikhil Pahwa, a digital rights activist and founder of digital news portal MediaNama.

“The problem is not with one entity [such as Cambridge Analytica] but a system which allows it,” Pahwa said, pointing out that there is too much data floating around.

In an interview with CNN, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has said Facebook was committed to stopping interference in the U.S. midterm election in November and elections in India and Brazil.

US Stocks Surge as Fears Ease over Trade War with China

U.S. stocks surged Monday as fears eased about the possibility of an all-out trade war with China over competing tariff increases.

The closely watched Dow Jones Industrial Average of 30 key stocks jumped by more than 1.5 percentage point in New York in early-day trading and other indexes were also advancing sharply. Earlier, Asian stocks were mixed, while European indexes edged down for the day.

Global markets plummeted last week after U.S. President Donald Trump announced tariffs on $60 billion worth of Chinese imports in an effort to trim $100 billion off the $375 billion trade deficit the U.S. recorded last year with China. Beijing immediately vowed to retaliate with higher import duties on U.S. goods.

But there were signs Monday of easing of tensions between the world’s two biggest economies.

White House trade adviser Peter Navarro told CNBC that U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer are talking with Chinese officials about trade issues between the two countries. Mnuchin told Fox News he was “cautiously hopeful” that the U.S. would reach a deal to keep China from imposing tariffs on $50 billion worth of U.S. exports.

The Trump administration is asking China to lower tariffs on U.S. car exports and open its markets to U.S. financial service companies. Bloomberg News reported that Mnuchin called China’s Liu He to congratulate him on his appointment as China’s vice premier for economic policy and that the two officials discussed ways the two countries could mutually agree to close the wide trading gap between the two countries.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said China would be willing to meet with U.S. officials to work out the two countries’ trade issues, while China’s foreign ministry urged the U.S. to “stop economic intimidation” over tariffs.

While avoiding mention of the tariff dispute and last week’s sharp drop in stock prices, Trump boasted about the performance of the U.S. economy.

“The economy is looking really good,” he said in a Twitter comment. “It has been many years that we have seen these kind of numbers. The underlying strength of companies has perhaps never been better.”

US Stocks Surge as Fears Ease over Trade War with China

U.S. stocks surged Monday as fears eased about the possibility of an all-out trade war with China over competing tariff increases.

The closely watched Dow Jones Industrial Average of 30 key stocks jumped by more than 1.5 percentage point in New York in early-day trading and other indexes were also advancing sharply. Earlier, Asian stocks were mixed, while European indexes edged down for the day.

Global markets plummeted last week after U.S. President Donald Trump announced tariffs on $60 billion worth of Chinese imports in an effort to trim $100 billion off the $375 billion trade deficit the U.S. recorded last year with China. Beijing immediately vowed to retaliate with higher import duties on U.S. goods.

But there were signs Monday of easing of tensions between the world’s two biggest economies.

White House trade adviser Peter Navarro told CNBC that U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer are talking with Chinese officials about trade issues between the two countries. Mnuchin told Fox News he was “cautiously hopeful” that the U.S. would reach a deal to keep China from imposing tariffs on $50 billion worth of U.S. exports.

The Trump administration is asking China to lower tariffs on U.S. car exports and open its markets to U.S. financial service companies. Bloomberg News reported that Mnuchin called China’s Liu He to congratulate him on his appointment as China’s vice premier for economic policy and that the two officials discussed ways the two countries could mutually agree to close the wide trading gap between the two countries.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said China would be willing to meet with U.S. officials to work out the two countries’ trade issues, while China’s foreign ministry urged the U.S. to “stop economic intimidation” over tariffs.

While avoiding mention of the tariff dispute and last week’s sharp drop in stock prices, Trump boasted about the performance of the U.S. economy.

“The economy is looking really good,” he said in a Twitter comment. “It has been many years that we have seen these kind of numbers. The underlying strength of companies has perhaps never been better.”