Trump's performance in Europe deepens wariness about the US Merkel says days of relying on allies are "over" “America First” is what Donald Trump promised, and it’s what he’s delivering, with his expected withdrawal from the Paris climate accord and his upbraiding of fellow NATO leaders in Europe last week. A possible rejection of the global consensus on fighting climate change and Trump’s view of NATO and transatlantic trade as transactional agreements that add up to a bad deal for US taxpayers, rather than guarantees of US power and global influence, will win the President kudos from his political supporters. But the headlines in Europe following his trip – “Boor in Chief” among them – and first reactions to reports he may walk out of the Paris pact are the signs of a backlash against Trump’s global role that are likely to have longstanding consequences, not just for America’s image abroad, but for his own foreign policy aspirations. Most seriously, diplomats, experts and former officials say European allies may be potentially less willing or less able to fulfill their decades-long role of having Washington’s back in the world arena. While in Europe, Trump lectured allies, rebuked Germany, physically shoved another leader, failed to endorse core security commitments and played coy on the Paris climate agreement while his G-7 counterparts unanimously lined up to reaffirm it. Trump proclaimed it a victory. “Just returned from Europe. Trip was a great success for America. Hard work but big results!” he tweeted. Just returned from Europe. Trip was a great success for America. Hard work but big results! Seen from Europe, the performance deepened impressions formed during the presidential campaign that under Trump, the US is ceding its global leadership role in favor of an inward turn. The president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, offered a preview of the likely reaction from the other side of the Atlantic if Trump goes ahead and says he will leave the Paris pact during an appearance in the White House Rose Garden at 3 p.m. ET. “I am a trans-Atlanticist. But if the American President was to say in the coming hours that he wants to exit the Paris accord, then it is our duty to say: ‘You can’t do that,’” Juncker said in Berlin on Wednesday night, according to the commission’s office in the German capital. In the aftermath of Trump’s visit, German Chancellor Angela Merkel told her citizens on May 28 that “the times when we could completely rely on others are, to an extent, over.” Derek Chollet, a former assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs in the Obama administration, said a danger is that Europe won’t want to follow Trump if he needs them. “In his behavior, Trump is spending political capital that he might need to use if he wanted to pursue different policies or ask European leaders to make tough decisions on our behalf,” Chollet said. “Whether it’s a new approach to Iran, a new approach to ISIS, he’s giving them little incentive to cooperate. In fact, he’s giving the opposite incentive: not to cooperate.” Trump has made pressuring Iran a central goal, floating the idea of backing out of the nuclear deal reached with the European Union and other parties. The idea that the US might walk away from the deal has frustrated Europeans after the years it took to reach the agreement. Analysts say they’re not likely to go along with the US if Trump does back out, continuing instead to allow their companies to open up to business with Tehran. One European diplomat agreed, saying that leaders on the continent already face growing populist sentiment among citizens who are “already less inclined to back foreign interventions or move the focus from domestic issues. Trump is just going to make it harder” for those leaders to convince their publics to agree if the US asks for help, the diplomat said. “The way the political incentives in Europe are working right now, it’s better not to cooperate with the United States because Trump is so politically toxic,” Chollet said. There are limits to how much both the US and Europe could disengage from one another. As the world’s largest economy, the US is a huge market for European goods and the American military is crucial to European security. Trump had said that he wants other nations to step up and do more on global challenges, including North Korea’s aggressive pursuit of a nuclear weapon, which the administration wants to build an Iran-style coalition to counter. Related video Macron: Trump handshake was moment of truth The administration has also pushed other countries to do more on another of Trump’s foreign policy priority – eradicating ISIS. On both fronts, Europe will be a key player. The US also relies on European intelligence services and its military. While the the US carries the lion’s share of the military load around the world, Europe has been increasingly important. In West Africa, Europe has a far more active presence than the US military, with countries like France leading the fight against terrorist groups there. But Trump’s own belligerent persona and sharp demands of European leaders to spend more on their militaries could be counter-productive. Germany, for instance, has committed to reaching the 2% threshold by 2024. The decision came after an exhaustive policy review and a conclusion that the perceived threat from Russia had grown. But the move was deeply sensitive in a nation that is still intensely conscious of the consequences of its past militarism. Now the debate on spending will be infused by hostility towards Trump, who is highly unpopular in the country. Indeed, the animus for the President is so bad in Germany, that Der Spiegel, the country’s equivalent of Time magazine, summed up Trump’s visit with an op-ed that concluded: “It’s time to get rid of Donald Trump.” Trump had upbraided Germany for being “bad, very bad” about its trade surpluses and berated NATO leaders about defense spending without reaffirming the core principle of mutual defense – after telling the autocratic leader of Saudi Arabia on an earlier stop that he was not “here to lecture.” I spoke with @realDonaldTrump at length this morning and told him that I could not be more pleased with his first international trip. More: pic.twitter.com/sUiaR87qFr Back home, at least among Trump’s allies, reviews for his trip were better. The Republican chairman of the Senate foreign relations committee was among those who praised the performance. Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee tweeted that he’d told Trump “that I could not be more pleased with his first international trip,” adding that it “was executed to near-perfection.” Corker said he was “confident we can reassert US leadership, strengthen key alliances.” It was a stark contrast to Merkel’s assessment that Europe now “really must take our fate into our own hands.” Bill Kristol, the conservative editor and commentator, said that “Merkel’s comments today are a reminder that Trump’s failures are, while he’s president, also America’s failure, and damage America.” Merkel's comments today are a reminder that Trump's failures are, while he's president, also America's failure, and damage America. Still, for Trump’s supporters, a US withdrawal from the Paris climate accord and his earlier rejection of the Trans Pacific Partnership are a sign that the President is prepared to challenge a global establishment that they believe has hurt their economic interests to benefit elites, a form of leadership in itself. Trump’s top advisers reject the notion that his attitude is a symptom of an abrogation of US global leadership. In fact, they contend that Trump is providing direction following an era of US disengagement. Twice in the first four months of the administration, Washington will have turned its back on major international agreements, which involved its partners and rival governments also making painful political concessions to reach a deal. That experience is likely to make it less likely in future, whoever is president, that foreign states will trust the US to live up to its commitments. It will also further undermine the liberal international order and the dominant role of Western-style democracy, and cede leadership positions to American rivals like China, Trump critics argue. Related video Markey: Moral imperative for U.S. to lead on climate “#ParisAgreement is not only about the climate: It is also about America remaining the global leader,” wrote former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney on Twitter on Wednesday. Juncker made a similar point, saying he had explained to Trump that “it would not be good for the world or the United States if America was to literally step off the world’s stage. Because the vacuum will be filled and the Chinese are in prime position to take on a leadership role.” Also Wednesday, Democratic Sens. Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Jack Reed of Rhode Island sent a letter to the White House saying that “leaving the Paris agreement would damage relationships with our allies and weaken American leadership on the global stage … empowering sometimes adversarial nations like China.”


A Europol report projects that ISIS will stage terrorist attacks on the continent in the "near future" Technology and social media have allowed ISIS to continue recruiting ISIS and other terrorist groups are evolving in ways that will force the US and Europe to adapt new counterterrorism strategies, according to US lawmakers, analysts and European security officials. A report issued Thursday by the European security agency Europol projects that as ISIS comes under increasing pressure in the Mideast, it will stage terrorist attacks on the continent in the “near future,” using techniques and tactics honed in Syria and Iraq, such as car bombs and kidnappings. That grim forecast came as US lawmakers examined ISIS’ dangerous adaptability Thursday and discussed how US counterterrorism approaches should change in response. Technology and social media have allowed ISIS to continue recruiting, training and executing sophisticated external attacks, even as it has lost more than 55% of its Mideast territory since 2014. RELATED: ISIS uses water as weapon in Mosul fight “ISIS and al Qaeda have proved to be resilient in the face of extreme pressures,” said Sen. Bob Corker, the Tennessee Republican chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, “reinventing themselves and taking advantage of conflicts around the globe to root into local populations.” Witnesses, who described the fight against jihadist groups as generational, suggested ways the US can adapt. Daniel Benjamin, former coordinator for counterterrorism at the State Department, said the US should reconsider its use of social media “messaging” to counter violent extremism and adopt – or push its Mideast allies to adopt – a more hands-on approach. Young people “especially aren’t going to be listening to the kinds of messaging we’re putting out,” he said. “We need to move away from counter-messaging and toward more direct intervention in communities: teachers, health care providers, religious leaders who can intervene when they see individuals are in danger of radicalization.” He also recommended building up partnerships with developing countries, emphasizing the rule of law and spending more money on development and diplomacy. “That has been woefully underfunded,” he said. Juan Zarate, the former deputy national security adviser on terrorism to President George W. Bush, said it will be imperative to have a “Marshall Plan-like structure to deal with inevitable vacuums that terrorists would fill” once ISIS is defeated in places like Mosul, Iraq. Like Benjamin, Zarate pushed for more effective partnerships in Europe and the Middle East, and a less virtual, more engaged approach to fighting extremism. Somehow, people came to believe that fight against jihadis could be won remotely, that “you can push a magic button and make them go away, Zarate said. “The laws of physics apply to counterterrorism. We have to physically disrupt the ability of groups to plot and organize.” RELATED: James Mattis selected as Trump’s secretary of defense And he said that words matter in this fight: “how we define the enemy; how we talk about our allies.” Benjamin, along with several Democrats, agreed. Anti-Muslim rhetoric during the presidential campaign not only undermines the US ability to cooperate with allies, they said, but plays into the hands of jihadi recruiters who look for alienated and angry young Muslims. Proposals floated by President-elect Donald Trump during the campaign, such as “threats to cut off all Muslim immigration, restore waterboarding and other forms of torture, create a national registry of Muslims and kill the families of terrorists have all contributed to a profound unsettling of American Muslim communities,” Benjamin said. “This will undermine our security in far-reaching ways, I fear,” if Trump continues to pursue them as president. The strongly integrated Muslim-American community has close ties to law enforcement, one reason there have been few attacks on US soil, said Benjamin, who added that the treatment of Muslim-Americans will be key to protecting against future attacks. “Thinking somehow that directly attacking the religion of over 1.6 billion people will make them more willing to help us is just fallacy,” said the ranking Democrat on the committee, Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland. “We need to recognize that there is a global effort to fight extremists. What we say, what we do, has a major impact on that.”


The move is a minor easing of a sanction put in place by Obama A top State Department official said the move was made as a technical fix The Treasury Department said Thursday it will allow for some companies to do limited business with Russia’s Federal Security Service, known as the FSB. The move is a minor easing of a sanction put in place at the end of the Obama administration that limits business to $5,000 for any calendar year. A top State Department official said the move was made as a technical fix to the sanctions that were put in place to avoid “unintended consequences” of US government business with Russia. President Donald Trump denied Thursday he’d eased sanctions on Russia. “I haven’t eased anything,” Trump said during a meeting with Harley-Davidson executives at the White House. White House press secretary Sean Spicer said the same during his daily press briefing. “From what I understand it’s a fairly common practice for the Treasury Department, after sanctions are in place, to go back and look at whether or not there needs to be specific carve-outs for different industries or products or services,” he said. He said the move didn’t reflect a shift in policy, but rather a “regular course of action.” The fix was in the works soon after the sanctions were put in place because FSB is also involved in customs and border checks on trade. The sanctions had the unintended consequence of preventing US businesses from being able to pay some necessary trade-related costs to the Russian government. US intelligence agencies accused the FSB of being involved in the election-related hacking last year. The Treasury Department did not immediately respond to a CNN request for comment.

US Treasury Department sanction policy on Russia's FSB


On Thursday, President Donald Trump escalated his ongoing one-sided war with the media. He did it, of course, via Twitter. “Why Isn’t the Senate Intel Committee looking into the Fake News Networks in OUR country to see why so much of our news is just made up - FAKE!” Trump tweeted. Why Isn't the Senate Intel Committee looking into the Fake News Networks in OUR country to see why so much of our news is just made up-FAKE! Let’s be clear about what Trump is suggesting here. He wants the Senate intelligence committee to open an investigation into the “Fake News Networks” to get to the bottom of why so much of the news is “just made up.” He offers no evidence of this claim. And yet, the President of the United States feels entirely comfortable urging the legislative branch to open an investigation into the Fourth Estate. The reason? Because Trump doesn’t like what the media writes about him. That’s what he means when he uses the word “fake” – and he uses it a lot. “Fake” for Trump is rightly translated as “not fawning.” (The committee, by the way, is already investigating real fake news targeted by Russians on the US as part of their larger examination of Russian meddling in the run-up to the 2016 US election.) The truth – as hundreds of fact checks have shown – is that the biggest purveyor of fake news in the country right now is Trump. According to The Washington Post’s Fact Checker blog, Trump has made 1,145 false or misleading claims in his first 232 days in office. That’s 4.9 false or misleading statements per day. Related article FBI chief on Russian hacking: We 'should have seen this coming' Trump’s casual relationship with the truth makes his calls for the legislative branch to investigate the allegedly “fake news” industry all the more outlandish. Yes, the media – including me – do occasionally get things wrong. But, in virtually every case, those mistakes are honest ones – slip-ups made in an honest pursuit of the truth. And, when an error is found, steps are made to publicly remedy the mistake to keep misinformation from seeping into the public’s consciousness. Can Trump say the same? The answer, of course, is no. He not only spreads falsehoods but does so long after it’s become clear that what he is saying is simply not true. Why does he do it? For the same reason he has made attacking the “fake news” media his primary daily duty. Because it works – or, at least, it works to motivate his political base, which believes whatever he says (facts be damned!) and is convinced the media is comprised primarily of liberals trying to push their agenda behind the guise of neutrality. It’s worth noting here that Trump is far from the first president to have his issues with the media. Virtually every president has an adversarial relationship with the press. The difference with Trump is that he seems not to believe in the fundamental role that a free press plays in a democracy and spends a good chunk of his time working to discredit and disenfranchise the media. Related article DOJ demands Facebook information from 'anti-administration activists' Here’s how President Barack Obama described his relationship with the media – and the media’s role in covering the White House – in his final news conference in January: “I have enjoyed working with all of you. That does not, of course, mean that I’ve enjoyed every story that you have filed, but that’s the point of this relationship. You’re not supposed to be sycophants, you’re supposed to be skeptics, you’re supposed to ask me tough questions. You’re not supposed to be complimentary, but you’re supposed to cast a critical eye on folks who hold enormous power and make sure that we are accountable to the people who sent us here, and you have done that.” And here’s former President George W. Bush on the press earlier this year: “I consider the media to be indispensable to democracy. We need an independent media to hold power to account. Power can be very addictive and it can be corrosive, and it’s important for the media to call to account people who abuse their power.” Contrast those two quotes to Trump’s tweet this morning. Bush and Obama affirm the core importance of a free and independent press to the American way of life. Trump calls on the Senate to investigate the media for writing stories he doesn’t like. Startling, right? Related article Ivanka Trump rebrands -- again The broader point here is that what Trump is doing is dangerous. (Yes, I know I have said other things Trump is doing are dangerous, too. That’s because they are.) He is trying to pressure an independent branch of the government to investigate the independent media because he doesn’t like what the media is reporting. It’s his latest ramping-up of an ongoing effort to destroy the credibility of the media in the eyes of a not-insignificant number of people in the country. Which is bad enough. What makes it worse is that Trump knows the media isn’t fake. He is an avid consumer of cable TV and major national newspapers. No president has been so aware of what the media is saying about him at any given minute as Trump. He is saying and doing these things not because he really believes it but because he knows it works for his base. That cynical ploy may well be a way for Trump to rally that base to him. But the medium- and long-term implications of trying to use the Senate to pressure the media to cover a president more favorably are scary.


38 people were killed in Tunisia, the health ministry reports ISIS identifies the attacker as a local engineering student Terrorist attacks also happened in France and Kuwait ISIS claimed responsibility for the attack on a seaside resort hotel in Tunisia on Friday that killed at least 38 people and wounded at least 36 others, many of them Western tourists. The Islamist group named the attacker as Abu Yahya al-Qirawani and said he managed to infiltrate the Hotel Riu Imperial Marhaba in the coastal city of Sousse. ISIS posted a photo of the alleged attacker, but people who were at the scene of the shooting told CNN they could not definitively say whether the gunman they saw is the same one featured in the ISIS photo. Some witnesses reported seeing more than one gunman, and the Tunisian Interior Ministry initially said there had been three, but a ministry spokesman later said they are aware of only one and that he was killed. The spokesman, Mohammed Ali Aroui, said the gunman was a student who was going to receive his master’s degree in engineering in the nearby town of Kairouan. Tunisian authorities did not name him. Two U.S. officials said they believe the Tunisia attack may have been inspired by ISIS, though not directed by the terrorist group. Tunisia hotel attack witness: It was sheer horror Tunisian Prime Minister Habib Essid said 38 people were killed, many of them as they enjoyed their holiday on the beach. Among the dead were at least five Britons, three Belgians, one German, and one woman from Ireland, according to the foreign ministries of Britain, Ireland and Tunisia. An unknown number of French nationals were also among the dead, Essid said Saturday, according to CNN affiliate BFMTV. A British man wounded in the arm described running into the sea to escape. “I heard someone firing a gun and then I looked at my wife, and she got up and ran,” the man, whose name wasn’t given, told Tunisia’s Watania 1 TV. “As I turned, the bullet just hit me in my arm. … My wife ran to the hotel and I just saw the gunman firing shots randomly at people laying on the sunbeds on the beach.” Another British tourist staying next door to the Imperial Marhaba said he had just left its lobby and was walking along the beach with his wife when the firing started. Ian Symes said that at first it sounded like fireworks, but “then you could hear the swoosh of the bullets as they were going on the beach, and that’s when panic set in and everybody rushed up to the hotels.” He said he also heard a couple of explosions amid the gunshots, which he believes might have been grenades. A woman from Wales told CNN’s Robyn Kriel that she saw bloodied bodies lying in the sand and people from neighboring hotels jumping over fences to get to her hotel, about a mile away from the main attack scene. The woman said she heard at least 30 seconds of sustained gunfire. Symes said staff from the hotel ran onto the beach while the firing was still going on so they could help the victims. “They were very brave,” he said. “They were going toward (the victims), certainly while the guns were still firing. Very commendable.” On its website, Hotel Riu Imperial Marhaba is described as an all-inclusive hotel with views of Port El Kantaoui on the Mediterranean Sea. It contains indoor and outdoor pools, including one for children, as well as buffet-style and theme restaurants. Opinion: What the Tunisia attack means Tunisia’s nightmare came on the same day as at least two fatal terrorist attacks in other countries. Related gallery France terror attack A man caused an explosion at a chemical plant near Lyon in southeastern France after having beheaded his boss and leaving the head hanging on a fence, French officials said. Authorities detained the suspect. And ISIS has claimed responsibility for an apparent bomb blast at the Shiite-affiliated Al-Sadiq mosque in Kuwait’s capital during Friday prayers, leaving at least 25 dead and more than 200 injured. Spain raised its terror alert – to 4 on a 1-to-5 scale, with the higher numbers indicating a bigger threat – in light of the three attacks, Spanish Interior Minister Jorge Ferandez said. Other leaders, like British Prime Minister David Cameron, reacted as well. “I am sickened by the attacks in Tunisia, France and Kuwait,” Cameron tweeted. “Our countries stand together in combating the horrors of terrorism.” I am sickened by the attacks in Tunisia, France and Kuwait. Our countries stand together in combatting the horrors of terrorism. Sajjan Gohel, the international security director for the Asia-Pacific Foundation think tank, said the confluence of events add up to “an unprecedented day for terrorism.” He noted that, while questions remain about who was responsible and the extent to which the attacks were coordinated, in each case you have individuals “buying into the … doctrine that groups like ISIS articulate.” While what happened Friday is rare, Gohel told CNN that people worldwide should brace themselves for more such violence. “Terrorism is something that, unfortunately, we’re going to have to accept as part of our daily lives,” said Gohel, who is also an Islamist ideology expert at the London School of Economics. “Terrorism is now diffuse: It’s not autonomous, it’s not necessarily being coordinated by one particular group, (and) it can often be very spontaneous. “… Gone are the days of the al Qaeda large-scale plots where the cell was big, the authorities could disrupt it, arrest (people) and prosecute. Now are are seeing an increase in the volume of terrorism because the plots sometimes actually are on a smaller scale (which makes them) harder to protect, harder to monitor.” Opinion: Terror on three continents Tunisia is the birthplace of the Arab Spring and perhaps its lone success story. But the North African nation is not without its issues, including an uneven economy marred by high unemployment and the distinction of having more citizens – up to 3,000 – thought to have gone to Iraq and Syria to fight as jihadists, according to the London-based International Centre for the Study of Radicalization. Terrorists within Tunisia have been targeted before, as part of apparent attempts to hurt Tunisia’s economy by scaring off some of the millions who come each year to the country for its culture and Mediterranean Sea beaches. Related gallery Terrorist attack in Tunisia The prime example, until Friday, had been the killing of 23 people – most of whom vacationing aboard two cruise ships – last March at  the landmark Bardo Museum in Tunis. At the time, that attack was the deadliest on tourists in the Arab world since the 1997 massacre in Luxor, Egypt. In a subsequent audio statement, ISIS identified two men – Abu Zakariya al-Tunisi and Abu Anas al-Tunisi – who it said used “automatic weapons and hand grenades” to kill and injure what it called “crusaders and apostates.” That message also warned that the Bardo Museum attack was “just the start.” Friday’s hotel attack will do nothing to calm fears about more violence, especially for tourists. Belgian carrier JetAir not only canceled all its flights to Tunisia in the wake of this new violence, but had one flight turn around mid-flight and return to Brussels. And TUI tour operators Jetair, Sunjets.be and VIP Selection have canceled all departures to Tunisia until further notice. Travel groups cancel flights after attack And Tunisians themselves looked inward once again, forced to face the scourge of terrorism and figure out what to do next. “Tunisia has undergone a remarkable democratic transition and is the success story of the Arab Spring. But our country is still fragile,” said the Ennahda Party, a moderate Islamic group that’s part of Tunisia’s coalition government. “There is a tiny but poisonous fringe of society across our region which has wrongly interpreted the Islamic faith and wishes to destroy Tunisia’s progress, at any cost. … Today’s attack will not weaken the commitment of Tunisians and people around the world to the values of democracy, equality and the fundamental importance of human life.” In Tunisia, terror attack undercuts Arab Spring’s best prospect CNN’s Sara Mazloumsaki, Salma Abdelaziz, Yousuf Basil and journalist Yasmin Ryan contributed to this report.


Julian Assange’s nearly six-year refuge at the Ecuadorian embassy in London is in danger, opening the WikiLeaks founder to arrest by British authorities and potential extradition to the US, multiple sources with knowledge tell CNN. While Assange has in the past claimed his position in the embassy was under threat, sources say his current situation is “unusually bad” and that he could leave the embassy “any day now,” either because he will be forced out or made to feel so restricted that he might choose to leave on his own. His position there is “in jeopardy,” one source familiar with the matter said. Assange’s exit from the embassy could open a new phase for US investigators eager to find out what he knows. Related article A GOP congressman's lonely quest defending Julian Assange CNN reported in April 2017 that the US has prepared charges to seek the arrest of Assange, who US intelligence agencies believe Russia used as an intermediary to distribute hacked emails from Hillary Clinton’s campaign during the 2016 presidential election. Assange and his lawyers say he has been detained without charge for 2,720 days – 53 of those “gagged” and isolated from visitors and outside communications – and that there is “not a shred of evidence that Assange has done anything but publish material just as the establishment media do every day,” according to a tweet by his lawyers on May 19. “The concern from day one until the present is that if Julian Assange walks out of the Embassy, he will be extradited to face what the executive director of the ACLU described as an ‘unprecedented and unconstitutional’ prosecution under the US Espionage Act,” his lawyer Melinda Taylor told CNN. Ecuador’s newly elected president, Lenín Moreno, is under increasing pressure from the US to expel Assange, sources say. Moreno described Assange as an “inherited problem” and “more than a nuisance” in a television interview in January. Related article Hot Pockets, mismatched chairs and a critical mission: Inside year one of the Mueller investigation Sources familiar also believe Spain exerted pressure on Ecuador after Assange tweeted support for the separatist movements in Catalonia, a northeast region of Spain seeking independence. Recently, the Ecuadorian government cut off Assange’s access to the internet, making it virtually impossible for him to manage WikiLeaks. He has also had his access to visitors severely restricted. Assange is now only allowed to see his lawyers, who say their mobile phones are jammed while they are inside the embassy. He is dealing with multiple lawsuits. While the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ecuador declined to comment on Assange’s case, it referred CNN to past statements made on the decision to cut his internet access. In statements, the ministry denied mistreatment and suggested Assange had not been abiding by his agreement with Ecuador by publicly discussing the internal affairs of other nations, presumably Spain and the US. The ministry “acts in the strictest adherence to the Constitution, laws and international law,” according to the March 2018 press release. British authorities have said that they would issue a warrant for Assange’s arrest if he were to leave the embassy. He faces charges in the UK for breach of bail for failing to surrender for extradition to Sweden, a charge a British judge upheld in February despite the fact that Sweden stopped investigating an allegation of rape against Assange in 2017. Swedish prosecutors maintain the right to resume the investigation if Assange leaves the embassy, however. In the US, Assange’s fate is even more uncertain. Assange’s lawyers claim that US officials have maintained a secret grand jury investigation into WikiLeaks for nearly eight years. Related article 2016 Presidential Campaign Hacking Fast Facts “For the last eight years, the UK has refused to either confirm or deny that they have received an extradition request from the US. At the same time, they have refused to provide assurances that Julian will not be extradited to the US if such a request were to be received, and maintained an ever-present vigil of the Embassy, notwithstanding a UN directive to take steps to ensure Julian’s immediate liberty,” Taylor told CNN. “Their silence speaks volumes, particularly in light of recent statements from US officials that Julian’s arrest and extradition are a priority.” Taylor was referring to comments in April 2017 by US Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who said that arresting Assange is a “priority.” “We’ve already begun to step up our efforts and whenever a case can be made, we will seek to put some people in jail,” Sessions said at a news conference in El Paso, Texas. Representatives from the US government, including the White House, the Department of Justice, the State Department and the intelligence community either did not respond to request for comment or declined to discuss Assange’s cases with CNN. “Mr. Assange’s presence in the Ecuadorian Embassy is a matter between the UK and Ecuador,” one State Department official told CNN. “As a matter of policy, the Department of State neither confirms nor denies the U.S. government’s intention to request extraditions.” Related article Roger Stone says he hasn't been contacted by special counsel CIA declined to provide additional comment about Assange and referred CNN to former Director Mike Pompeo’s past statements on WikiLeaks, describing the group as a “hostile non-state intelligence service” rather than a media outlet. Pompeo, though he formerly tweeted his appreciation of WikiLeaks and the role it played in publishing Democratic National Committee emails during the election, told an audience at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in 2017 that the US can no longer give Assange a platform to speak freely and openly using information he’s provided by leakers. “To give them the space to crush us with misappropriated secrets is a perversion of what our great Constitution stands for. It ends now,” Pompeo said. US authorities are also deeply interested in further investigating WikiLeaks’ publication of a trove of source codes and documents revealing details about CIA hacking tools in March 2017. The FBI’s prime suspect for the leak, revealed in recently unsealed court documents, is a CIA employee who developed some of those tools. The Department of Justice says that individual also managed an encrypted server that contained evidence of child pornography. Both the intelligence community and the Department of Justice continue to investigate the theft, one source familiar with the matter told CNN, though the two investigations are separate. Both would be interested in speaking with Assange about the disclosure if he were to leave the embassy. Assange has had difficulties with his hosts in the past. The most memorable incident came in 2013 when several embassy employees were punished, one of whom was demoted, in part because of Assange’s actions while there, according to two sources familiar with the matter, including one source at the Ecuadorian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. At the time, Assange was eager to get involved to help NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden find asylum in Ecuador, establishing WikiLeaks as the preeminent organization for whistleblower protection. He convinced a high-ranking embassy employee to help him. When top officials found out, several employees suffered the consequences, including at least one demotion. Assange has since said he encouraged Snowden to stay in Russia. The Guardian reported last week that the embassy for years had spent millions on protecting Assange using expensive surveillance tools from cameras to spy software – while Assange turned around and hacked into the embassy’s communication systems. Ecuador has cut off Assange’s internet access multiple times, the most recent instance in late March.


Editor’s Note: Kenneth Roth is executive director of Human Rights Watch. Follow him on Twitter: @KenRoth. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his. Kenneth Roth: Trump's one-day emotional response to horrors of a particular chemical attack in Syria is not enough He says the US needs a coherent policy to end the Syrian people's suffering How do we make sense of President Donald Trump’s military response to the April 4 sarin attack on the town of Khan Sheikhoun, which evidence shows was launched by Syrian government forces? Was Trump simply demonstrating that he is not President Barack Obama, responding militarily to the chemical weapon “red line” that Obama chose instead to enforce through the negotiated removal of what President Bashar al-Assad claimed were all of his chemical weapons? Or was Trump showing that even he has limits to the atrocities he will tolerate? Russia claims that the April 4 attack was a Syrian conventional bomb that happened to hit a “terrorist” chemical weapons cache on the ground. That cover story was quickly undercut by the fact that Khan Sheikhoun residents began suffering symptoms from a sarin attack five hours before Russia said the conventional attack took place. Then, last week, Human Rights Watch decimated the cover story. Dozens of local residents interviewed said that a crater in the middle of a paved road appeared to have been the epicenter of the chemical exposure and that there were no indications that other sites attacked that morning contained any stored chemicals. Related video US sanctions Syrian research center Two remnants found in a crater in the paved road have characteristics that are similar to a Soviet-produced, air-dropped chemical bomb designed to deliver sarin, suggesting that the weapon used was factory-produced. And it turns out, the April 4 attack was not the Syrian military’s only recent use of nerve agents. Witnesses described to Human Rights Watch how bombs containing nerve agents were also dropped on March 30 southwest of Khan Sheikhoun and on December 11 and 12 on two villages in territory controlled by the Islamic State, or ISIS. It would be laughable to suggest that at four different times in four different locations Syrian bombers just happened to hit hidden caches of nerve agents – all the more so since there is no firm evidence that anti-government fighters even possess them. The Syrian government has been responsible for a devastating range of atrocities. In addition to nerve agents, it has deployed chlorine as a chemical weapon against civilians so extensively that these attacks may amount to a crime against humanity. But beyond chemical weapons, the Assad government has been responsible for conventional attacks that have killed vastly more Syrian civilians than its use of chemicals. Related video The inconsistencies in Assad's interview While chemical deaths number in the hundreds, deaths from conventional weapons are in the hundreds of thousands. Supported on the ground by Iran and Hezbollah and from the air by Russia, the Syrian military has pummeled civilians and civilian institutions with conventional weapons, including heavy artillery, cluster munitions, incendiary weapons and the notorious helicopter-dropped “barrel bombs.” It has subjected hundreds of thousands of civilians to the severe deprivation of unlawful sieges.  And its prisons have imposed ruthless conditions, pervasive torture and widespread death on thousands more. Yet these atrocities have barely registered in the Trump administration’s rhetoric. Millions of Syrians have fled these atrocities, seeking safety and security abroad. But Trump has suggested that despite extensive vetting they are too dangerous to come to the United States and has sought to ban the lucky few who were selected for resettlement. Related video Trump: Syria attacks the work of a butcher Meanwhile, US foreign policy has flouted human rights norms. As Trump removed “human rights” from the name of the White House office that had promoted them, his secretary of state said he would relegate human rights to “values,” distinguishing them from the policies that will guide US relations and prioritize economic and security interests. In addition, Trump held official meetings with autocrats like Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and Chinese President Xi Jinping without any public criticism of their egregious rights records. It may well be that Trump was moved to respond to the Khan Sheikhoun attack after seeing images of the victims. But without a strategy to protect civilians in Syria his one-off response will do little to meet their urgent need. A serious Syria policy would center on the need to protect civilians from all forms of attack. It would rally other nations to talk regularly about the Syrian government’s extensive war crimes, press for accountability and impose intense pressure to end them on Russia, whose military support the Assad government needs to survive. Related video Haley: I think Russia knew about attack Trump has cooled his early infatuation with Vladimir Putin, but has put only limited public pressure on Putin to rein in Assad’s atrocities, other than a seemingly summary declaration that Assad must go. Shamefully, although the US under Obama voted to create a new accountability mechanism for Syria through the UN General Assembly, Trump has yet to contribute any funds, according to UN officials. Instead, US policy remains fixated on defeating ISIS – an important initiative, but far from the main cause of Syrian deaths or suffering.  The Trump administration has toyed with the idea of “safe” zones for Syrian civilians but has offered no concrete plan for who would actually keep them safe. For all practical purposes, Trump continues to leave the Syrian people in the lurch. No one pretends that solving Syria is easy. But, so far, Trump has offered no coherent policy, just a one-day emotional response to the horrors of a particular chemical attack. That barely makes a dent in the Syrian people’s suffering.


Readers have to answer three multiple-choice questions before they can post comments Many news platforms have disabled comment fields, turning to social media instead How often do you read a headline online and race to the comment section, desperate to vent? It may be natural to many, but it’s exactly the type of behavior that NRKbeta, the technology section on the news website of Norway’s public broadcasting network, is trying to stop. On some stories, potential commenters must answer three simple multiple-choice questions about an article before they can post responses to it. On a recent NRKbeta article about a new Facebook search tool, for example, readers have to answer these correctly questions before they can post a comment: Who developed Stalkscan? Should you be terrified of Stalkscan? When did Facebook Graph Search launch? Three options are given for each, and the answers can all be found in the story. Related article Study: Facebook can actually make us more narrow-minded The site has few problems with its regular community of readers, NRKbeta editor Marius Arnesen told CNN. “But when we share our articles on the home page, they attract a lot of readers not familiar with the topics,” he said. “They just read the headline, assume certain things and race to the comment field. “The aim is to make people take 30 seconds before they comment, to take the edge off.” The initiative was launched three weeks ago. Arnesen admits that its success will be difficult to measure: “Are fewer comments a sign of success? Better comments? How do you measure good/bad comments?” But he said the initial reaction from the site’s regular audience has been positive. Over the last few years, many news platforms, including CNN, have disabled the comment field entirely on some or all of their articles, choosing to encourage discussions on social media channels instead. Related article Brutal video brings online harassment to life Last year, tech site Engadget disabled its comment system for a week because “so many of the replies” to stories dealing with topics such as gender, race or harassment were “hateful, even threatening,” according to a statement posted on the website. The comment system was re-enabled soon afterward with a new series of safeguards, including in-line moderator tools and user profiles. Other sites are taking advantage of tools such as Civil Comments, which uses crowdsourced moderation, or Disqus, which uses ban lists and word filters to moderate reader comments. Like many other platforms, NRKbeta is committed to keeping comment fields open if at all possible. “We believe that you reading NRKbeta are at least as clever, and often smarter, than us who work here,” Arnesen wrote in a statement on the website in August. “We believe in the idea that comments help to make the articles better by deepening, enriching and questioning the themes.” But NRKbeta is one of very few sections on the NRK website to have any comment fields still open at all, according to Arnesen. “Most of the comment fields on the rest of the site have been turned off for years,” he told CNN. With this new tool, Arnesen said he hopes to reinvigorate reader engagement across the NRK platform. “This could lead to us turning on comment fields elsewhere on the site,” he said. Whether it can halt the slow death of comment fields on sites across the Web, however, remains to be seen.


Editor’s Note: Anushay Hossain is a writer and media personality based in Washington. For more, visit AnushaysPoint.com. The views expressed are her own. Ivanka Trump's company gets provisional OK for 3 trademarks in China hours before she dines with Chinese President By keeping an ownership interest in her businesses, Ivanka risks an appearance of conflict of interest, Anushay Hossain writes As the President got ready to sell his latest executive order  to the American public, an overhaul of the H-1B skilled worker visa program, under his “Buy American, Hire American” slogan, Ivanka Trump appeared to be busy protecting the real emerald of the Trump family’s vast business empire: China. On April 6, hours before she and her husband dined with the Chinese President and his family, Ivanka’s company secured provisional approval for three new trademarks to sell her brand’s jewelry, bags and spa services in the world’s second-largest economy. Though there is no direct evidence linking her trademark approval to the dinner or any other meeting with the Chinese government, the story does draw attention to the fine line the Trump White House is walking when it comes to maintaining its family businesses. All the Trump family knows is how to make and close business deals. However, now that they are in politics – representing America on the world’s stage – they cannot use the White House to make money for the Trump family brand. And they certainly should avoid any appearance of impropriety. Related article Ivanka's role raises red flags The trademarks are just the latest in a string of international trademarks the Trump family has secured since Donald Trump won the presidency. And despite all the boycotting efforts and attempts to curtail the sale of Ivanka’s brand, business is booming. The brand, which is still owned by Ivanka, who now also holds an official White House role, not only hit record sales this year, but saw its US imports, most of which came from China, increase 166%  in 2016. According to China’s Trademark Office, Ivanka Trump Marks LLC has 16 registered trademarks in China and 32 pending applications ranging from cosmetics to leather handbags to clothes to spa and beauty services. Although not all the applications were filed after Trump won the White House, some were, including five filed last December after Trump’s electoral victory and another four earlier this year after Trump’s inauguration. Ivanka’s company said she did not sign off on the new trademark applications, adding that the trademarks are not “not necessarily an indication that the brand is planning to launch a category or a store in a specific territory.” However, all this creates the appearance that Ivanka is still intent on maintaining her business portfolio and potentially even pursuing lucrative business deals under the shadow of her father’s White House. Related article 'SNL' is right: Ivanka is complicit We have to remember that despite divesting some of her assets and selling $36.7 million in assets to comply with ethics rules, Ivanka still owns her clothing and jewelry brand. And like her father, Ivanka retains her ownership role in her massive global business empire. Her lawyer, Jamie Gorelick noted that Ivanka resigned from running the business and put it in trust, adding, “Ivanka has had no involvement with trademark applications submitted by the business.” Unlike her father, Ivanka is subject to federal rules that prevent her from participating in matters in which she has a financial interest now that she works in the White House in an official capacity. Despite ethics experts raising red flags for months over conflicts of interest between the Trump presidency, his businesses and his family, the unprecedented and unfamiliar nature of Trump’s political landscape is proving to be too convenient for the Trumps, especially Ivanka. Now that she is serving in the White House in an unprecedented position, Ivanka is benefiting from loose or nonexistent accountability mechanisms. Sign up for CNN Opinion’s new newsletter.Join us on Twitter and Facebook After all, who wouldn’t want to do business with the President of the United States’ daughter, especially one who holds an office in the West Wing, and all the perks that come with that position? And her clothing line isn’t even the only asset of Ivanka’s that we need to worry about. There is also her father’s Trump International Hotel down the street from the White House, in which Ivanka is a multimillion dollar stakeholder, despite ethics experts urging her to stay away from the hotel while holding a government job. Will Ivanka Trump be an advocate for women’s rights, climate change or paid family leave? Or is she making it appear she is more interested in pursuing potential business opportunities? From what we’ve seen so far, it pays to be the President’s daughter.


Donald Trump emphasized his hopes for a warmer relationship with Russia The news conference capped a turbulently productive seven days in office for Trump President Donald Trump used his first White House news conference Friday to say he is open to a warmer relationship with Russia and believes torture works as an interrogation technique, in a performance less confrontational than other recent media appearances. Standing alongside British Prime Minister Theresa May in the White House East Room, Trump wouldn’t say whether he was planning to lift sanctions on Moscow ahead of a call with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday. Nor would he outwardly affirm his support for NATO. Compared to his pre-inauguration news conference in New York, Trump answered questions on his foreign policy prescriptions with uncharacteristic caution. During each answer, Trump stopped himself after only a few minutes, moved little beyond what he’s said previously, and displayed none of the brashness that became his hallmark on the campaign trail. Asked about the return of waterboarding for suspected terrorists, Trump declared the torture technique works. But he said he would allow his Defense Secretary James Mattis to “override” him on torture, an issue where the two men fundamentally disagree. “I happen to feel that it does work,” Trump said. “I’ve been open about that for a long period of time. But I am going with our leaders. And we’re going to win with or without, but I do disagree.” May, who was under pressure from rights groups in Britain to condemn torture during her visit to the White House, said only that on areas of disagreement, she would carry out a “open and frank discussion” with the US leader. And while both leaders went out of their way to create a friendly ambience, it was up to May to bring up the issues at the top of her wishlist: public backing of NATO or say he would work to swiftly work towards a free trade deal with Britain once it leaves the European Union. “Mr. President, I think you said, you confirmed that you’re 100% behind NATO. But we’re also discussing the importance of NATO continuing to ensure it is as equipped to fight terrorism and cyber warfare as it is to fight more conventional forms of war,” May said, seeking both to bolster the military bloc but but also to forge a way forward following the President’s complaints that it is obsolete. The 18-minute news conference in the White House East Room capped a turbulently productive seven days in office for Trump. He’s taken rapid-pace executive action, including ordering the federal government to begin construction on his promised wall between the United States and Mexico. That move put Trump in his first diplomatic flap. Mexico’s President Enrique Peña Nieto on Thursday abruptly canceled a planned visit to Washington. On Friday, Trump described a “very, very friendly” call with the Mexican leader, which took place in the morning before May arrived for talks. At the same time, Trump insisted he would maintain a tough stance on trade with the US neighbor. “Mexico with the United States has out-negotiated us and beat us to a pulp through our past leaders,” Trump said. “They have made us look foolish.” He said he would work to bolster a “soft and weak” border and prevent American jobs from moving across the border. “We’re no longer going to be the country that doesn’t know what it’s doing,” Trump said. And ahead of a Saturday phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump indicated a willingness to work with Moscow. “We’ll see what happens,” Trump said of the call. He said it was “too early” to discuss removing sanctions that were issued on Russia under his predecessor, President Barack Obama. “We’re looking to have a great relationship with all countries,” Trump said. “If we can have a great relationship with Russia and China and all countries I’m all for that.” Relations between the US and the UK, however, remain strong, Trump said, hailing the “special relationship” between the nations as “one of the great forces of history.” “Our relationship has never been stronger,” Trump said. May underscored the sentiment, saying Queen Elizabeth II invited Trump for a state visit later this year. Trump said both he and May were adamant that governments “be responsive to everyday working people” and show respect for their citizens. For Trump, the event was an opportunity to fully capitalize on his new office, trading the lobby of Trump Tower – the site of his last fiery news conference – for the iconic gold curtains and presidential podium in the East Room. Vastly different in persona, the bombastic Trump and the sober May appeared friendly despite their differences. May is the daughter of a vicar in the Cotswalds and has been known for her constrained public appearances. Trump’s brazenness upended US political norms in last year’s election. “I’m not as brash as you might think. And I can tell you that I think we’re going to get along very well,” Trump said Friday. “You know, it’s interesting because I am a people person. I think you are also, Theresa. And I can often tell how I get along with somebody very early, and I believe we’re going to have a fantastic relationship.” CNN’s Jeremy Diamond and Stephen Collinson contributed to this report.


A federal judge on Thursday cast doubt on a civil lawsuit brought against the Trump campaign and Roger Stone by three Democrats who claim that election-year WikiLeaks releases destroyed their reputations. The hearing put Trump campaign lawyers in the position of arguing in court that there was no collusion between President Donald Trump’s campaign and the Russians – a drama that played out on the one-year anniversary of special counsel Robert Mueller’s criminal investigation into exactly that matter. “We didn’t possess the emails, we didn’t disseminate the emails and we didn’t hack the emails,” said Trump campaign attorney Michael Carvin, referring to the Democratic National Committee email leak. Carvin argued that even if there had been discussion between Russia and the Trump campaign to change the party’s platform and influence voters to oppose Hillary Clinton, “that conspiracy is not about an unlawful act,” he said. “That’s all quite legal. It’s called democracy.” Carvin’s arguments also seem to preview points he could make in fighting a lawsuit brought by the Democratic National Committee against several Russian and campaign affiliates. Carvin argued Thursday that the Trump campaign shouldn’t be held liable for the acts of individuals on the campaign, after the Democrats’ lawyer in court pushed the possibility that George Papadopoulos’ and Paul Manafort’s contacts with Russian-connected individuals during the campaign, and Michael Flynn’s contact afterward, helped execute a conspiracy. Judge Ellen Huvelle was skeptical that her Washington court was the right venue for the case, noting the Trump campaign was based in New York and that the DNC recently filed its own hacking-related lawsuit in New York. Huvelle did not make a decision in the case Thursday. If it’s dismissed, the Democrats wouldn’t be able to engage in the fact-finding about Trump campaign discussion that they seek in this suit. Huvelle asked the Democrats’ side sharp questions about the complaint against longtime Trump ally Stone, who is also named in the suit. She pointed out that Stone left the Trump campaign a year before the hacked emails came out in July 2016 and that he does not live in Washington, where the suit was filed. “He could be completely disreputable and a prankster, but that doesn’t give me jurisdiction,” Huvelle said. Stone denies colluding with WikiLeaks or Russia. The basis of the claims against him largely comes from his own comments during the 2016 campaign, and after, where he claimed to have a back channel with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and appeared to predict some of the explosive leaks. Two of the Democrats who filed the lawsuit last year saw their Social Security numbers exposed in the leaks. The third plaintiff claims the emails outed him as gay. US intelligence agencies and Trump’s intelligence heads say the Russian government was responsible for the DNC hack. WikiLeaks published the nearly 20,000 messages in July 2016, and Trump regularly touted the materials at his rallies. CNN’s Katelyn Polantz contributed to this report.


Walling off southern border became an oft-repeated campaign promise and rallying cry Reality of building the wall could be more difficult than the rallying cries would suggest President Donald Trump is following through with one of the first pledges he made a year and a half ago when he announced his long-shot bid for the White House – directing federal resources toward building a wall along the southern border. But the reality of building the wall could be more difficult than the rallying cries would suggest. The length of the wall, when construction will begin, how much it will cost and who will pay for it remain fundamental questions. There is also ongoing debate about the feasibility of the structure and the need for it in the first place. Trump’s push for a wall dates back to the day in June 2015 when he announced his campaign and promised to “build a great, great wall on our southern border” and said Mexico would pay. “Mark my words,” he said for added effect. His effort to turn those words into reality is expected to be formally announced Wednesday and is among several immigration-related actions anticipated in a multi-day rollout from the new administration. Related video Trump pledges to build a wall Since he first made the pledge, walling off our neighbors to the south became an oft-repeated promise and rallying cry, both for the candidate and his supporters. Chants of “build that wall” thundered through arenas and convention halls. In at least one instance, Trump himself led the cheer. Building “an impenetrable physical wall on the southern border, on day one” is listed as item No. 1 on his “10 Point Plan to Put America First.” At the first press briefing of the new administration Monday, one of the first questions to White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer was about the wall. Spicer said the administration was working with agency heads and Congress to move forward on the project. He offered no further details. Donald Trump’s immigration policy: Then and now Not everyone is as enthusiastic as the President about building a wall, including the man whose job it was to secure the U.S. border for the past three years. “I don’t see any efficacy in building a wall across the border,” said Gil Kerlikowske, who until last week served as Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection under former President Barack Obama. “The border and migration issues are just unbelievably complex,” Kerlikowske said in an interview with CNN. “And a simple answer to a complex problem is most assuredly the wrong answer.” Trump has yet to appoint Kerlikowske’s replacement. Related gallery Donald Trump's Inauguration Day Kerlikowske said the rugged terrain in the Arizona desert and the shifting Rio Grande River in Texas, which routinely changes depth and even direction, both represent natural obstacles to building a border wall. Some of the land along the border in the Rio Grande Valley is privately owned, representing another challenge, he said. Kerlikowske also noted that the vast majority of people trying to enter the US are actually showing up at border entry points and seeking asylum or turning themselves in. Most are not trying to scale the fence in the dark of night, he said. Even if a wall was built, he said, it would require a significant hiring increase to have enough agents to monitor the wall. That would be no easy feat for an agency that is currently 1,200 employees below full strength. Kerlikowske said that, in addition to some 700 miles of fencing, the border is currently patrolled by agents on foot, bikes, motorcycles, ATVs and horseback. There’s also an air wing, unmanned predator drones, ground sensors, infrared video and tower-mounted video with a range of 25 miles. “It’s all preferable to a wall,” Kerlikowske said. “Unless you monitor that wall.” On the campaign trail, Trump told a crowd of supporters in Anaheim, California, in May that he’d reached out to leaders in the union representing Border Patrol agents and asked whether a wall was truly needed. “Mr. Trump, It’s absolutely vital,” came the reply, he told the crowd. “It’s an absolutely important tool. Maybe our most important tool to stop what’s going on.” Building Trump’s wall: For Texans, it’s complicated Hearing that, Trump told the crowd: “We’re going to build the wall. We have no choice.” At the point, the crowd began chanting, “build that wall.” Trump joined in from the podium. The National Border Patrol Council, the union representing Border Patrol agents, endorsed Trump for President – marking the first time the group had taken such an action. Brandon Judd, president of the council, said in a recent interview with CNN, that Trump was “by far the best on border security” when compared with other candidates. Judd said he didn’t reach that decision based on his pledge to build a wall. He said his group favored “barriers in strategic locations.” But, importantly, he didn’t say those barriers had to come in the form of a wall as Trump is suggesting. “It doesn’t have to be a wall,” Judd said. He called the double fencing along the border in the San Diego area “insanely effective.” Judd, who said he met with Trump and his transition team, argued such fencing allows agents to confront people on the US side of the border while they still have a fence in front of them to slow their progress. “He was very much willing to listen to our perspective,” Judd said. “It was, you know: ‘I didn’t realize that’. And ‘that’s good to know’.” Trump would then turn to an aide, Judd recounted, and say: “Hey, get on this. Get back with me. I need to know more about this.” Judd said he was confident his group’s views were being taken into consideration. “If you look at the areas they’re currently surveying – if you look at what the talk is, a lot of that is coming from us,” he said. “They absolutely 100% are in the process of implementing things we suggested.” Judd said he signed a non-disclosure agreement that prohibited him from going into detail about planned construction. Trump believes millions voted illegally, WH says – but provides no proof Shawn Moran, vice president of the Border Patrol union, said he thinks most people would be surprised to learn that it’s possible to drive for 30 minutes in some Border Patrol sectors and not encounter agents on patrol. “I think a lot of Americans think you’re going to see agents in towers every hundred yards,” Moran said. “That doesn’t exist.” He said one instance in which a wall may have made a difference was in the 2009 slaying of Border Patrol Agent Robert Rosas. Rosas was shot to death by assailants who crawled under fencing near the eastern San Diego County town of Campo. The US-Mexico border is approximately 2,000 miles long, running from San Diego to Brownsville, Texas. Trump initially said he wanted to wall off the entire border, but has since said that 1,000 miles may do. He has offered few details on the wall since being elected president. But speaking at a news conference earlier this month, he reiterated his pledge, referring to the border as “an open sieve.” He made construction sound imminent. “Mike Pence is leading an effort to get final approvals through various agencies and through Congress for the wall to begin,” he told reporters on Jan. 11. CNN reported earlier this month that Trump transition team officials had been in discussions with the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Interior Department to begin planning a wall, including how certain environmental laws could come into play. “It seems clear they were trying to size up the environmental laws that may be obstacles to building the wall,” said one U.S. official familiar with the inquiry. A review of Trump’s statements on the campaign trail offers a glimpse of what he envisions – or did at the time. President Donald Trump’s thin skin Trump said his wall would be solid, strong and “probably 35 to 40 feet up in the air.” “It will actually look good,” he added. “You know, as good as a wall is going to look.” The dimensions of the border barricade grew when former Mexican President Vicente Fox insisted his country would never pay for it. “It just got 10 feet taller,” Trump told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer last year. When then-Republican presidential contender Jeb Bush referred to the proposed wall as a fence in August of 2015, Trump took to Twitter to correct him: “It’s not a fence, Jeb, it’s a WALL,” Trump tweeted, “and there’s a BIG difference!” In an interview with MSNBC in February, then-candidate Trump said he’d priced out the project at about $8 billion. Later that month, he told Fox News’ Sean Hannity the cost would be $10 billion. “It’s going to be a very terrific wall,” Trump said. “$10 billion is not bad.” Hannity asked Trump, whose name is synonymous with his brand as a builder and hotelier whether the name Trump will be on the wall. “Only if its’ beautiful,” he replied.


Christiane Amanpour’s interview with Edgar Feuchtwanger airs at 2pm ET on CNN International. Edgar Feuchtwanger, then 8, first saw Adolf Hitler on a Munich street in 1932 The Jewish boy's family later escaped from Germany; he would become a professor in UK “I knew only too well, even when I was 8 years old – I knew it was a very bad business for us.” Edgar Feuchtwanger first saw Adolf Hitler on Munich’s Prinzregentenplatz in 1932, a year before Hitler would be named chancellor. “I was being taken for a walk by my nanny,” he recalled. “I passed his front door just as he came out. And he saw, and I saw him, and he looked at me quite benevolently.” “There were some people, of course, in the street who immediately shouted ‘Heil Hitler.’ “ “If he had known who I was, I wouldn’t be here to talk to you,” Feuchtwanger, now 91, told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour in an interview airing Thursday. He has written a memoir of his experience, “I Was Hitler’s Neighbor,” which was published last year in the UK. Not only was Feuchtwanger Jewish, but his uncle, Lion Feuchtwanger, was a prominent novelist who had become something of a “personal enemy” to Hitler, as he put it. One of Lion’s books, “Success,” included a Hitler-like character named Rupert Kutzner. “If they had ever found out that we were the closest relation to Lion, we wouldn’t be here, for sure.” Hitler moved into the neighborhood in 1929 “as he was on the up and up.” They would be neighbors for nine years as Germany was transformed into a dictatorship. There was, of course, no way to know what was to come, but it was clear something profound was happening, Feuchtwanger said. “It was very much the talk of everybody.” As a Jew, Feuchtwanger didn’t have to enroll in the Hitler Youth. But at school, Nazi ideology was inescapable. “I had this teacher who was 150% Nazi immediately.” “Of course, I was told you do what your teacher tells you.” So when sketching Nazi propaganda was the order of the day, young Edgar could not demur. Did he know what he was doing as a young boy? Amanpour asked. “I think so. I knew it was a bad business for us. But at the same time, I had to do what the teacher told me. And the teacher was quite a charismatic lady who pushed all that out, and who was over the moon about it all.” The changes that were brewing all came to a head in November 1938 – the Kristallnacht pogroms. Across the country, Jews were targeted, and their businesses destroyed. And Feuchtwanger’s father, a prominent publisher, was taken to Dachau, the Nazi’s first concentration camp. Authorities confiscated much of the family’s extensive book collection – for “safekeeping,” they were told. Related video Watch the full interview “We didn’t know would we ever see him again,” Feuchtwanger told Amanpour about his father. Remarkably, the elder Feuchtwanger was released after six weeks. “I think the whole enterprise was designed not to keep the people there but to frighten them into leaving” Germany. “After all, things like Auschwitz didn’t exist yet. That it would reach that sort of extreme, one didn’t really anticipate. But it was bad enough, let’s face it.” And leave they did – to England, where Edgar Feuchtwanger would go on to become a respected professor of history. He lives in England to this day. The “amazing thing,” he said, is that – as far as he knows – the authorities never figured out his family was related to the despised Lion Feuchtwanger. “If they had found that out, even while we were just living there, we would have been goners – there’s no doubt about it.”


On Thursday morning, a White House aide named Kelly Sadler joked about Sen. John McCain’s opposition to CIA nominee Gina Haspel by noting that “he’s dying anyway.” It was the latest in a series of increasingly nasty comments about McCain: Sen. Orrin Hatch, a Utah Republican, called it “ridiculous” that McCain wasn’t planning to invite President Donald Trump to his funeral while a retired general on Fox News on Thursday referred to a debunked conspiracy theory that McCain had informed on his comrades while a prisoner of war during Vietnam. There’s no disputing the fact that McCain has terminal brain cancer and that he is very unlikely to be around at this time next year. It’s also indisputable that McCain is a genuine American hero – who fought and suffered for his country in the theater of war and had decided the better part of the last four decades of his life to public service as a House member, a senator and a two-time presidential candidate. That even some part of his final days – or weeks or months – is consumed by this sort of garbage is maddening. And depressing. And made even more so by the fact that this is, in fact, the new normal. How did we get here? Where anyone who disagrees with us on anything is evil, other and an object for ridicule? Where the phrase “reasonable people can disagree” has lost all meaning? Where someone can feel comfortable making a death joke about a man battling brain cancer? Lots of people would like to lay the blame – all of it – at the feet of Trump. The reality is more complex. Our own self-sorting tendencies – we rarely live around anyone anymore who doesn’t see the world generally as we do – played a role. The expansion of ideological media where you can only watch, read and listen to people who validate you and your views played a role. The rise of outside political groups who made a business out of purifying the two parties of any so-called moderates played a role. The partisan redistricting processes around the country, which jammed us into congressional seats prioritized by political party played a role. That said, there is no question that Trump – the campaign he ran in 2016 and the way he has acted in the White House since winning – has been the prime catalyst for this degradation in our ability to simply treat people with whom we disagree with respect. There was already lots of gasoline on the ground. Trump lit the match and dropped it. Trump’s campaign was based on a simple idea: Politicians are too political. They’re afraid of their own shadows. They won’t say it like it is because they live in fear of the political correctness police coming to knock on their door. He cast himself as the antidote to all of that – someone who would say what everyone was thinking. He was a status quo shaker, the worst nightmare for the staid and ineffective political establishment. That idea, in and of itself, is powerful. The problem was – and is – that Trump conflated insults and bullying with shaking things up. So, questioning McCain’s war credentials – “He’s not a war hero. He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.” – as Trump did in July 2015, at the start of his presidential campaign, was somehow treated by Trump and those who supported him as speaking truth to power. Ditto his attacks on Carly Fiorina’s looks. His attempts to raise the heritage of Judge Gonzalo Curiel. His suggestion that Khizr Khan, the father of a solider fighting in Iraq, had been put up to his speech at the Democratic National Convention by partisans out to get him. His suggestion, as President, that “both sides” were to blame for the white nationalist violence in Charlottesville, Virginia. His repeated bullying of his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, and his comments about the alleged plastic surgery of “Morning Joe” anchor Mika Brzezinski. On and on the list goes. And it all adds up to one thing: Trump weaponized nastiness and bullying. He turned it into a political art form. He gave cover for all of those people with uninformed views – on race, ethnicity and everything else – to emerge from the shadows and speak out. And, if you didn’t laugh or “get the joke” – even though Trump was often not joking in these circumstances – you were part of the problem. Just another defender of a status quo that rewarded elites and left out the little guy. Just another person who didn’t get it. Related video Trump's I'm-joking-but-not-really strategy The issue with all of this is that it bastardized a very legitimate issue – the growing income (and everything else) gap between the rich and the poor – for Trump’s own political purposes. He drove the divide for political reasons and, in his language, made it totally OK to say whatever you wanted about people you disagreed with because they had been out to get you for years. This was just payback. And man did they deserve it. Nuance went out the window. Speaking hard truths that the country needed to hear – as McCain has done throughout his career – became indistinguishable from calling Sen. Ted Cruz’s wife ugly or suggesting that we need to ban Muslims from entering the country. Political incorrectness became a crutch to justify racist and xenophobic views. And in the middle of it all was Trump. When he wasn’t engaging in these behaviors, he was refusing to condemn them – an example of his abdication of the idea of the President as moral leader. Who am I to say who is right and who is wrong in the Charlottesville violence, Trump asked.  Who am I to judge who is telling the truth – Roy Moore or the multiple women who said he had pursued relationships with them when they were teenagers? That view has trickled down. When CNN’s Chris Cuomo asked State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert on Friday to comment on the “joke” about McCain’s death, Nauert responded: “I’m not familiar with what you’re familiar with.” Really? Nauert hadn’t heard about the story? I find that very, very hard to believe. That collective shrug from the President of the United States and his allies coupled with the extant factors of our internal divisions and the sort of campaign he ran in 2016 created the toxic stew from which comments like the one Thursday by Sadler grow. No one is standing up and saying “We can’t treat people like this.” And sadly, that vacuum in moral leadership means that the better angels of our nature are being drowned out by our demons.


Suspect's phone had 90 ISIS videos on it, FBI says in court document Five Argentinians and one Belgian were among the eight victims killed The suspect in New York’s deadliest terror attack since 9/11 has been charged with federal terrorism offenses in Tuesday’s attack that left eight people dead, authorities said. Sayfullo Habibullaevic Saipov, a 29-year-old Uzbekistan native who was living in New Jersey, is charged with providing material support to ISIS, violence and destruction of motor vehicles,  said Joon H. Kim, acting US attorney for the Southern District of New York . Saipov appeared in federal court in a wheelchair and didn’t enter a plea, a source at the US attorney’s Office told CNN. President Donald Trump said he should be executed. “NYC terrorist was happy as he asked to hang ISIS flag in his hospital room. He killed 8 people, badly injured 12. SHOULD GET DEATH PENALTY!’ the President tweeted late Wednesday night. Read the federal complaint against the suspect Saipov told investigators he was inspired by Islamic State videos, in particular one showing ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, a federal criminal complaint states. Related article How the New York City truck attack unfolded The suspect decided to conduct a truck attack “to inflict maximum damage against civilians” and that he specifically chose to strike on Halloween “because he believed there would be more civilians on the street for the holiday,” the complaint says. He began planning an attack a year ago and decided two months ago to use a truck, officials said. One of Saipov’s cellphones reviewed by law enforcement contained approximately 90 videos, “many of which appear to be … ISIS-related propaganda.” The phone also had almost 4,000 images, many of which were ISIS propaganda, the FBI said in the complaint. Authorities said Saipov came to the US legally in 2010. He allegedly drove a rented truck onto a well-trafficked bike path just blocks from the World Trade Center on Tuesday afternoon. Eight people were killed and more than a dozen injured as the truck carved a path of destruction through several blocks of Lower Manhattan. Saipov crashed the truck into a school bus, left the vehicle brandishing imitation firearms and was shot by police, officials said. In carrying out the attack, Saipov relied on the playbook laid out by ISIS in recent years, officials said. “He appears to have followed almost exactly to a ‘T’ the instructions that ISIS has put out in its social media channels before, with instructions to their followers on how to carry out such an attack,” John Miller, NYPD deputy commissioner for intelligence and counterterrorism, said at an earlier news conference. A handwritten “document” found near the scene had both Arabic and English text, and included the message that the Islamic State would endure, the complaint says. Saipov came to the US from the central Asian nation of Uzbekistan in 2010 on a diversity immigrant visa, according to the Department of Homeland Security. The Diversity Immigrant Visa Program awards up to 50,000 individuals per year a visa for a green card, which bestows permanent residency and is a path to citizenship. The visas are awarded randomly to those in select countries to promote immigration from places that don’t otherwise send many immigrants to the US. The bill establishing the program was signed into law in 1990. NYPD’s Miller said Saipov has never been the subject of an NYPD or FBI investigation, but investigators are looking into how he is connected to the subjects of other investigations. Saipov was “radicalized domestically” in the US, Gov. Andrew Cuomo said. “The evidence shows – and again, it’s only several hours, and the investigation is ongoing – but that after he came to the United States is when he started to become informed about ISIS and radical Islamic tactics,” Cuomo said. Saipov was not on any US government terror watch lists, according to two sources familiar with the investigation. Just over six months ago, Saipov began driving for Uber in New Jersey, the company told CNN. He passed a background check. The company said it has not yet identified any complaints about his safety. The company is cooperating with authorities in the investigation. Related article Who is New York attack suspect Sayfullo Saipov? Saipov once listed his occupation as a truck driver, his marriage license shows. He had multiple run-ins with law enforcement in several states, online records show. He had traffic citations issued in Maryland, Missouri and Pennsylvania and was arrested by the Missouri State Highway Patrol in October 2016 after failing to show up in court for a misdemeanor offense. He paid a $200 bond, which he forfeited when he didn’t show up in court for his next hearing in November. A guilty plea was entered on his behalf. Saipov’s wife has spoken with investigators, law enforcement officials said. Saipov, his wife and three children have a residence in Paterson, New Jersey. Carlos Batista, one of Saipov’s neighbors in Paterson, told CNN that Saipov had acted as a “peacemaker” about six months ago. Batista was riding a dirt bike at night, and Saipov’s friends asked him to stop. The incident became testy until Saipov stepped in and “calmed everything down,” Batista said. Saipov has been linked to social media accounts that contain ISIS-related material, a law enforcement official said Wednesday morning. The official also said Saipov has been somewhat cooperative with FBI and New York police investigators who questioned him in the hospital overnight. Among the eight people killed, five were from Argentina, two were Americans, and one was from Belgium, according to the New York Police Department. The Argentinians were part of a group celebrating their high school reunion in New York City, Argentina’s Foreign Affairs Ministry said. Related article Victims of the New York terror attack Hernán Diego Mendoza, Diego Enrique Angelini, Alejandro Damián Pagnucco, Ariel Erlij and Hernán Ferruchi died in the attack, the ministry said in a statement Tuesday. They had traveled to New York from Rosario, a town nearly 200 miles northwest of Buenos Aires, to mark the 30th anniversary of their high school graduation. A sixth Argentine national who was also part of the group was injured during the attack. Nicholas Cleves, 23, from New York, and Darren Drake, 32, from New Milford, New Jersey, were the two Americans killed. Ann-Laure Decadt, a 31-year-old Belgian woman, was also among those killed, according to a statement from her husband, Alexander Naessens. Decadt, a mother of two young sons, was on a trip to New York with her two sisters and her mother, Naessens said. Hours after the attack, President Trump tweeted that he’s ordered the Department of Homeland Security “to step up our already Extreme Vetting Program”, and he accused Sen. Chuck Schumer of not being tough enough on immigration. Related article Who is the NYPD officer who apprehended the suspect? Speaking to the media on Wednesday, Trump called the suspect an “animal” and said that he planned to start the process of terminating the diversity lottery program. “I am going to ask Congress to immediately initiate work to get rid of this program. Diversity lottery, diversity lottery. Sounds nice, it is not nice, it is not good. It hasn’t been good and we have been against it,” he said. Earlier, Gov. Cuomo criticized Trump’s tweets. “The President’s tweets were not helpful. I don’t think they were factual. I think they tend to point fingers and politicize the situation,” he said. “You play into the hands of the terrorist to the extent that you disrupt, divide and frighten people in the society. The tone now should be the opposite – on all levels.” New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said “the last thing we should do is start casting aspersions on whole races of people or whole religions or whole nations. That only makes the situation worse.” De Blasio also warned against stereotyping all Muslims as extremists. “Anyone who wants to come into this country should be very thoroughly vetted as an individual,” he said. “But the minute you start generalizing it, especially to a whole religion, then unfortunately we’re sending the exact negative message that a lot of our enemies want and the terrorist wants to affirm – that this nation is somehow anti-Muslim. We’ve got to do the exact opposite.” The tactic of turning an ordinary vehicle into a lethal weapon is becoming increasingly common. In 2014, an ISIS spokesman called for lone-wolf attacks using improvised weaponry. “If you are not able to find an IED or a bullet, then single out the disbelieving American, Frenchman or any of their allies. Smash his head with a rock or slaughter him with a knife or run him over with your car or throw him down from a high place or choke him or poison him.” Related article Vehicles as weapons: New York City crash is part of a deadly trend Since 2014, there have been 15 vehicular attacks in the West by jihadist terrorists, killing 142 people, according to a count by New America, a nonpartisan research institution. Those figures include Tuesday’s attack in Manhattan. CORRECTION: This story has been updated to reflect the note claiming that the attack was made in the name of ISIS was found near the truck. It has also been updated to correctly quote Mayor Bill de Blasio on comments he made cautioning against casting blame on different groups of people. And the story was updated with the correct spelling of Ann-Laure Decadt. CNN’s Shimon Prokupecz, Tal Kopan, Paul Murphy, Brynn Gingras, David Shortell, Topher Gauk-Roger, Curt Devine, Hilary McGann, Elizabeth Joseph, Athena Jones, Sarah Jorgensen, Nelli Black, Kristina Sgueglia and Patricia DiCarlo contributed to this report.


NEW: Turkish Prime Minister: One suspect has been identified, links under investigation Funerals begin after an attack that killed more than 30 people in the border town of Suruc Police in Istanbul fire tear gas as protesters rally in support of the blast victims in Suruc Funerals were held Tuesday for victims of a blast that ripped through a rally in the Turkish border town of Suruc a day earlier – an attack suspected to have been carried out by an ISIS suicide bomber. At least 31 people were killed in the explosion – one of the deadliest terrorist attacks to rock the country in years. At least 100 others were wounded, provincial Gov. Izzettin Kucuk told Turkish media. Crowds of mourners wept and chanted beside flag-draped coffins as the funerals got underway. Suruc lies about 6 miles from the Syrian border opposite Kobani, the Syrian city that was the scene of intense fighting last fall between ISIS and predominantly Kurdish forces, backed by coalition airstrikes. Related gallery Dozens dead after bomb attack in Turkey Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu told a news conference Tuesday that “one suspect has been identified” and that all that person’s “links domestically and internationally are being investigated.” “Right now links to ISIS and it being a suicide bomber have gained probability,” he said. “We expect the investigation to be completed as soon as possible.” Davutoglu on Monday described ISIS as “not just a threat to Syria but to Turkey as well.” He urged solidarity among the Turkish people, saying the attack was not against any one part of the country but “against all of us.” Davutoglu said the government would not hesitate in taking action in response to the bombing, which he suggested was in revenge for the role Turkey is playing in the war on terror. There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the blast, which struck a gathering of mostly Kurdish activists calling for more help to rebuild Kobani. Read: Explosions at Turkish political rally kill at least 2, injure 100 Late Monday, police fired tear gas and water cannons to disperse several hundred demonstrators gathered in Istanbul, Turkey’s largest city, to show support for the victims of the blast. The explosion occurred at midday at the Amara Cultural Park in Suruc, where an activist group had gathered. Related video Turkey blames ISIS for suicide bombing Photos and video from the scene show bodies strewn around a park and dazed people at the blast site while emergency teams rush to aid victims. “Kids were screaming, everyone was screaming and running,” eyewitness Erhan Subasi told CNN. “Everyone was in a panic but trying to help. “People’s faces were blown off, arms scattered. … You could smell burned bodies.” The mood in the town was somber as investigative and forensics teams worked into the night, blood still staining the ground. On Tuesday, toys appeared at the scene of the bombing, placed in a symbolic reference to the playthings that some of those targeted had been sending into devastated Kobani. people targeted in #suruc #turkey were sending toys into #kobani. Some now symbolically placed at scene of attack pic.twitter.com/AqGP7LoveW The Kurdish and Syrian rebel forces eventually succeeded in driving ISIS out of the strategic stronghold, but the Syrian town was left in ruins. It’s not the first time the violence in Syria has spilled over into Turkey. But the scale of this attack against Kurds on Turkish soil will doubtless raise fresh questions over how the government is handling the ISIS threat. A Turkish official speaking on condition of anonymity told CNN on Monday that the government thinks the attack is “retaliation to the Turkish government’s fight against terrorism.” Read: Offices of Kurdish party in Turkey rocked by explosion The official called for the international anti-ISIS coalition to “more actively pursue a solution to the crisis in Syria.” Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan condemned the attack. “Terror doesn’t have a nation, race or homeland,” he said. “That is why we have been consistent in underlining the need for a global effort to fight terror.” CNN’s Arwa Damon and Gul Tuysuz reported from Suruc, while Laura Smith-Spark wrote from London. CNN’s Nimet Kirac, Michael Pearson and Ivan Watson also contributed to this report.


A total of 38 alleged traffickers have been charged in the case Victims were forced to pay impossible bondage debts and undergo plastic surgery Another 21 alleged members of an international sex trafficking ring have been charged in the United States with forcing hundreds of Thai women to travel to the US to work as “modern sex slaves.” They join 17 members charged last October, three of whom have pleaded guilty. The indictment, unsealed Thursday in St. Paul, Minnesota, details a scheme dating back to 2009, which denied the women their freedom until payment of bondage debts that were often as high as $60,000. According to a statement made by US Attorney Gregory Brooker of the District of Minnesota, the defendants include 10 Thai nationals and 11 US citizens, arrested at various locations in Los Angeles, San Diego, Dallas, Austin, Houston, and Chicago. One defendant remains at large. “The complexities of this organization represent the lengths to which criminals will go to profit off of human beings. This is an important reminder that sex trafficking and the associated buying, are not victimless crimes – this organization preyed and profited on vulnerable women,” said Cook County Sheriff Thomas Dart, who took part in the dismantling of the criminal enterprise. Operating since January 2009 through May 2017, the criminal organization allegedly trafficked hundreds of women from Bangkok, Thailand, to various cities across the US, including Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Chicago, Atlanta, Phoenix, Washington, D.C., Las Vegas, Houston, Dallas, Seattle, and Austin. The women, often from impoverished backgrounds and speaking little to no English, were lured with promises of a better life and steady income in the US. The indictment says they were informed back in Thailand that they would engage in prostitution activities, but were often “painted a rosy picture of life in the United States,” with a quick payoff of the debt and a chance to send money back home. Once in the US, the women were forced to have sex with strangers – at times all day, every day, with up to 10 or more men – and were isolated, not allowed to leave the prostitution houses without an escort. In the event of an attempted escape, the woman and her family in Thailand would be threatened, compelling her to return to “work.” The indictment described them as “modern sex slaves.” “The victims are isolated,” the document states. “The victims are effectively ‘owned’ by the organization.” In addition to the significant bondage debt, the victims were forced to bear the cost of cosmetic surgery they were encouraged to undergo, to make them “more appealing to potential sex buyers in the United States,” according to the indictment. Typically, 60% of the profit was routed to a trafficker to pay down the bondage debt, while the rest of the money would be retained by the “house boss” who owned the prostitution facility. The eight-count indictment outlines bulk cash smuggling and money laundering offenses, detailing “funnel accounts” to route cash from cities across the US to money launderers in Los Angeles. The ring moved tens of millions of dollars from the US to Thailand and elsewhere using a “hawala-based system,” in which family members and trusted individuals would carry large volumes of cash on their person, including hiding cash in clothing and dolls. The women brought to the US for sex purposes were also forced to open bank accounts in their own names, which were controlled by members of the organization for coordinated deposits. “The special agents of IRS Criminal Investigation are committed to taking the profit away from these human traffickers,” stated Special Agent in Charge Shea Jones of the St. Paul Field Office IRS Criminal Investigation. “As all financial transactions leave a trail, IRS Criminal Investigation special agents used their accounting expertise to analyze the complex financial transactions made by these criminals.” Their positions ranged from traffickers, who held the bondage debt of a victim, to house bosses, who “owned” the houses of prostitution, to money launderers and facilitators, whose responsibilities included transportation of women to different houses of prostitution – travel costs which were added to the victims’ bondage debt. According to US Attorney Brooker, this investigation took years to complete and to finally “disrupt and dismantle this criminal organization from all angles.”