Iraq Bans 8 Local Banks From US Dollar Transactions

CensorBiz Бізнес, Новини, Статті, Суспільство 0 Comment

Baghdad, Iraq — Iraq has banned eight local commercial banks from engaging in U.S. dollar transactions, taking action to reduce fraud, money laundering and other illegal uses of U.S. currency days after a visit by a top U.S. Treasury official.

The banks are banned from accessing the Iraqi central bank’s daily dollar auction, a main source of hard currency in the import-dependent country that has become a focal point of a U.S. crackdown on currency smuggling to neighboring Iran.

A rare ally of both the United States and Iran with more than $100 billion in reserves held in the U.S., Iraq relies heavily on Washington’s goodwill to ensure that its access to oil revenues and finances are not blocked.

A central bank document verified by an official at the bank listed the banned banks.

They are: Ahsur International Bank for Investment; Investment Bank of Iraq; Union Bank of Iraq; Kurdistan International Islamic Bank for Investment and Development; Al Huda Bank; Al Janoob Islamic Bank for Investment and Finance; Arabia Islamic Bank and Hammurabi Commercial Bank.

The head of Iraq’s private bank association, which represents the banks involved, and Ashur and Hammurabi did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Reuters is contacting the other banks.

A Treasury spokesperson said: “We commend the continued steps taken by the Central Bank of Iraq to protect the Iraqi financial system from abuse, which has led to legitimate Iraqi banks achieving international connectivity through correspondent banking relationships.”

In July 2023, Iraq banned 14 banks from conducting dollar transactions as part of a wider crackdown on dollar smuggling to Iran via the Iraqi banking system. The decision came after a request from Washington, according to Iraqi and U.S. officials.

Banks banned from dollar transactions can continue operating and can engage in transactions in other currencies, the central bank says.

The U.S. Treasury Department’s top sanctions official, Brian Nelson, last week met top Iraqi officials in Baghdad, discussing how to protect the Iraqi and international financial systems from criminal, corrupt and terrorist actors.

Treasury announced action against Al-Huda Bank during the visit, saying it was involved in diverting billions of U.S. dollars to Iranian-backed groups.

A senior Treasury official told Reuters that Washington expected Iraq to do more to help counter Iran-backed armed groups operating out of Iraq after the killing of three U.S. soldiers that has been blamed on hard-line Iraqi factions.

The current Iraqi government came to power with the support of powerful, Iran-backed parties and armed groups with interests in Iraq’s highly informal economy, including the financial sector long seen as a money-laundering hotspot.

Still, Western officials have lauded cooperation with Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani toward carrying out economic and financial reforms meant to curb the ability of Iran and its allies to access U.S. dollars, and to bring the Iraqi economy into line with international standards.
…

Republicans Governors, National Guard and the Texas Border: What to Know

PolitCens Новини, Політика, Суспільство 0 Comment

AUSTIN, Texas — As Republicans cheer on Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s escalating feud with the Biden administration over immigration enforcement, some governors are considering deploying National Guard members to the border — again.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Thursday was among the first to commit more personnel to Texas, announcing he would send hundreds of additional guard members as tensions grow between state authorities and the U.S. government over who has the power to enforce immigration policies, where and how.

Republicans say tougher actions along the border are needed in response to record levels of illegal crossings, but sending guard members to the border is not new.

DeSantis is one of more than a dozen Republican governors who have sent state National Guard units to the southern border since 2021. His latest deployment comes as Texas continues to deny U.S. Border Patrol agents entry to a popular crossing spot for migrants in the border city of Eagle Pass.

Here’s what to know about National Guard on the border to date:

What is happening at the Texas border?

At the center of the clash between Texas officials and the federal government is Shelby Park in Eagle Pass, which has become one of the busiest locations for people attempting to cross into the U.S. illegally from Mexico. Earlier this month, troops from the Texas National Guard seized the park and began turning away federal immigration authorities despite pleas from U.S. government officials.

Immigration enforcement is typically a federal responsibility.

Abbott has said he will continue implementing new immigration measures, calling it a “constitutional right to self-defense.” Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal agents were allowed to remove razor wire placed by Texas officers along the border with Mexico, including in Shelby Park.

Texas has since installed more razor wire in Eagle Pass, which was not prohibited under the Supreme Court’s order. The Biden administration has argued that the wiring makes it difficult and dangerous for federal agents to perform their duties.

Other measures taken by Abbott as part of his border security initiative include a floating barrier installed in the Rio Grande near Eagle Pass, which has also been challenged by federal officials.

Who is sending guard members?

Florida has already sent more than 1,000 guard members, troopers and other officers to the Texas border since last May, according to the Florida Division of Emergency Management.

At least a dozen governors have sent deployments ranging in size from a few dozen guard members to more than 100, including those of Arkansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Virginia and West Virginia.

South Dakota GOP Gov. Kristi Noem was the first to send 50 guard members to Texas in 2021, which were paid for by a private Republican donor who offered $1 million to make the mission possible. Two years later, she deployed at least 50 more.

Some governors have also looked beyond the National Guard, including Idaho Gov. Brad Little, who said last week he would send additional members of the state police to Texas.

What do they do?

The most recent guard deployments have been in support of Abbott’s border mission known as Operation Lone Star, which began shortly after President Joe Biden took office.

Many have been used for surveillance, such as spotting illegal crossings. Migrants are then turned over to federal immigration authorities, although Abbott has also empowered Texas National Guard members to arrest migrants on misdemeanor trespassing charges in some areas. National Guard members have also installed barricades and razor wire.

After Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds sent more than 100 Guard members and more than 30 state police to Texas last year, she credited the deployments with being directly involved in dozens of human smuggling cases and arrests.

But South Dakota records show that some days troops had little to do. During a rushed deployment of Texas National Guard members at the start of the mission, some also complained of low morale and uneventful patrols.

Trespassing arrests have been a key part of Abbott’s nearly $10 billion border mission, but may soon be phased out under a new state law, set to take effect in March, which allows police anywhere in Texas to arrest migrants who are suspected of entering the U.S. illegally.

How else is the National Guard used?

Not all National Guard members are helping Texas.

In Massachusetts, Democratic Gov. Maura Healey activated hundreds of guard members last August to aid with an influx of migrants. The members helped coordinate food, transportation, medical care and other basic needs at shelters and hotels.

National Guard members from across the country are also in Texas helping with the border security operations under the command of federal authorities, including from states that have not deployed soldiers to help with Operation Lone Star.
…

Biden Wins South Carolina’s Democratic Primary

PolitCens Новини, Політика, Суспільство 0 Comment

COLUMBIA, South carolina — U.S. President Joe Biden easily won South Carolina’s Democratic primary on Saturday, clinching a state he pushed to lead off his party’s nominating process after it revived his then-struggling White House bid four years ago. 

Biden defeated the other long-shot Democrats on South Carolina’s ballot, including Minnesota Representative Dean Phillips and author Marianne Williamson. With 74% of the votes counted, Biden had 108,123 votes, or 96.4% of the votes. 

His reelection campaign invested heavily in driving up turnout in what it saw as a test drive of its efforts to mobilize Black voters, a key Democratic bloc central to Biden’s chances in a likely November rematch against former President Donald Trump. 

“In 2020, it was the voters of South Carolina who proved the pundits wrong, breathed new life into our campaign, and set us on the path to winning the presidency,” Biden said in a statement. “Now in 2024, the people of South Carolina have spoken again and I have no doubt that you have set us on the path to winning the Presidency again — and making Donald Trump a loser — again.” 

The Associated Press declared Biden the winner at 7:23 p.m. based on an analysis of initial vote results showing him with a decisive lead in key locations throughout the state. He won all 55 of the state’s Democratic delegates. 

The president was behind a Democratic National Committee effort to have South Carolina be the party’s first primary, citing the state’s more racially diverse population compared to the traditional first-in-the-nation states of Iowa and New Hampshire, which are overwhelmingly white. 

South Carolina is reliably Republican, but 26% of its residents are Black. In the 2020 general election, Black voters made up 11% of the national electorate, and 9 in 10 of them supported Biden, according to AP VoteCast, an expansive survey of that election’s voters. 

Biden pushed for a revamped primary calendar that will see Nevada go second, holding its primary on Tuesday. The new order also moves the Democratic primary in Michigan, a large and diverse swing state, to February 27, before a large field of states vote on March 5, known as Super Tuesday. 

New Hampshire rejected the DNC’s plan and held a leadoff primary last month anyway. Biden didn’t campaign and his name wasn’t on the ballot, but still won by a sizable margin after supporters mounted a write-in campaign on his behalf. 

South Carolina, where Biden has long held deep relationships with supporters and donors, also played a pivotal role in his 2020 campaign, where a big win revived a flagging effort in other early-voting states and propelled him to the nomination. 

Biden was aided by longtime South Carolina Representative Jim Clyburn whose 2020 endorsement served as a long-awaited signal to the state’s Black voters that Biden would be the right candidate to advocate for their interests. Clyburn remains a close Biden ally and said on Saturday night that he believed New Hampshire’s delegates should be seated at the party’s convention this summer and that Democrats should avoid any further infighting. 

Both Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, the first Black woman and Asian American to serve in the role, have consistently thanked South Carolina’s Democrats for their support.  

Biden was traveling this weekend in California and Nevada but called into a series of Black radio stations across South Carolina and told WWDM in Sumter, “The only reason I’m talking to you today as president of the United States of America is because of South Carolina. That is not hyperbole. That’s a fact.” 

Campaigning in the state last week, the president said South Carolina was “the reason Donald Trump is a loser. And you’re the reason we’re going to win and beat him again,” framing the likely general election matchup with the GOP’s current front-runner. 

Black voters interviewed during the recent early voting period listed a range of reasons for supporting Biden, from his administration’s defense of abortion rights to appointing Black jurists and other minorities to the federal courts. Some echoed Biden’s warnings that Trump would threaten democracy as he continues to push lies that the 2020 vote was stolen. 

“We can’t live with a leader that will make this into a dictatorship. We can’t live in a place that is not a democracy. That will be a fall for America,” said LaJoia Broughton, a 42-year-old small business owner in Columbia. “So my vote is with Biden. It has been with Biden and will continue to be with Biden.” 

Some voters said they were concerned about the 81-year-old Biden’s age, as many Americans have said they are in public polling. Trump is 77. Both men have had a series of public flubs that have fueled skepticism about their readiness. 

“They’re as old as I am and to have these two guys be the only choices, that’s kind of difficult,” said Charles Trower, a 77-year-old from Blythewood, South Carolina. “But I would much rather have President Biden than even consider the other guy.” 
…

Court to Rule If ‘Insurrection Provision’ Voids Trump’s Eligibility

PolitCens Новини, Політика, Суспільство 0 Comment

washington — A case with the potential to disrupt former U.S. President Donald Trump’s drive to return to the White House is putting the U.S. Supreme Court uncomfortably at the center of the 2024 presidential campaign. 

In arguments Thursday, the justices will, for the first time, wrestle with a constitutional provision that was adopted after the Civil War to prevent former officeholders who “engaged in insurrection” from reclaiming power. 

The case is the court’s most direct involvement in a presidential election since Bush v. Gore, a decision delivered a quarter-century ago that effectively delivered the 2000 election to Republican George W. Bush. It comes to a court that has been buffeted by criticism over ethics, which led the justices to adopt their first code of conduct in November, and at a time when public approval of the court is diminished, at near-record lows in surveys. 

The dispute stems from the push by Republican and independent voters in Colorado to kick Trump off the state’s Republican primary ballot because of his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden, culminating in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. 

Colorado’s highest court determined that Trump incited the riot in the nation’s capital and is ineligible to be president again as a result and should not be on the ballot for the state’s primary on March 5. 

A victory for the Colorado voters would amount to a declaration from the justices, who include three appointed by Trump when he was president, that he did engage in insurrection and is barred by the 14th Amendment from holding office again. That would allow states to keep him off the ballot and imperil his campaign. 

A definitive ruling for Trump would largely end efforts in Colorado, Maine and elsewhere to prevent his name from appearing on the ballot. 

The justices could opt for a less conclusive outcome, but with the knowledge that the issue could return to them, perhaps after the general election in November and during a full-blown constitutional crisis. 

The court has signaled it will try to act quickly, dramatically shortening the period in which it receives a written briefing and holds arguments in the courtroom. 

Trump is separately appealing to state court a ruling by Maine’s Democratic secretary of state, Shenna Bellows, that he was ineligible to appear on that state’s ballot over his role in the Capitol attack. Both the Colorado Supreme Court and the Maine secretary of state’s rulings are on hold until the appeals play out. 

In 2000, in Bush v. Gore, the court and the parties were divided over whether the justices should intervene at all. 

The conservative-driven 5-4 decision has been heavily criticized ever since, especially given that the court cautioned against using the case as precedent when the unsigned majority opinion declared that “our consideration is limited to the present circumstances.” 

In the current case, both parties want the matter settled, and quickly. 

Trump’s campaign declined to make anyone available for this story, but his lawyers urged the justices not to delay. 

Justice Clarence Thomas is the only sitting member of the court who was on the bench for Bush v. Gore. He was part of that majority. 

But three other justices joined the legal fight on Bush’s side: Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. Bush eventually put Roberts on a federal appeals court and then appointed him chief justice. Bush hired Kavanaugh to important White House jobs before making him an appellate judge, too. 

Kavanaugh and Barrett were elevated to the Supreme Court by Trump, who also appointed Justice Neil Gorsuch. 

Thomas has ignored calls by some Democratic lawmakers and ethics professors to step aside from the current case. They note that his wife, Ginni Thomas, supported Trump’s effort to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Ginni Thomas repeatedly texted White House chief of staff Mark Meadows in the weeks after that election, once referring to it as a “heist,” and she attended the rally that preceded the storming of the Capitol by Trump supporters. Nearly two years later, she told the congressional committee investigating the attack that she regretted sending the texts. 

Trump lost 60 different court challenges to his false claims that there was massive voter fraud that would have changed the results of that election. 

The Supreme Court ruled repeatedly against Trump and his allies in 2020 election-related lawsuits, as well as his efforts to keep documents related to Jan. 6 and his tax returns from being turned over to congressional committees. 

But the conservative majority Trump’s appointees cemented has produced decisions that overturned the 5-decade-old constitutional right to abortion, expanded gun rights, and struck down affirmative action in college admissions. 

The issue of whether Trump can be on the ballot is just one among several matters related to the former president or Jan. 6 that have reached the high court. The justices declined a request from special counsel Jack Smith to rule swiftly on Trump’s claims that he is immune from prosecution, though the issue could be back before the court soon depending on the ruling of a Washington-based appeals court. 

In April, the court will hear an appeal that could upend hundreds of charges stemming from the Capitol riot, including against Trump. 
…

У Запоріжжі пройшла акція на підтримку українських військовополонених-оборонців Маріуполя

SocNet Новини, Політика, Суспільство 0 Comment

Частина учасників акції розповідають, що не мають жодного зв’язку та інформації про стан і місце перебування своїх близьких майже два роки
…