📅 Sep 25, 2015 REDACTED

Photo of the day

From: Unknown

To: jeevacation@gmail.com

Attachments: IMG 20150925 110739.jpg EFTA01170981

Attachments: IMG 20150925 110739.jpg

EFTA01170981

📅 May 11, 2014

Greg Brown's Weekend Reading and Other Things.... 05/11/2014

From: Gregory Brown

To: undisclosed-recipients

DEAR FRIEND..... The image shows a portrait of a man identified as Chris Matthews. He is smiling and wearing a suit, shirt, and tie. The background is split into red and blue sections, with radiating lines. WHY ISN'T ANYONE LISTENING As a liberal Democrat who is interested in politics as well as the welfare of my fellow men/women, I often find myself watching Moyers & Company, Frontline and Hardball with Chris Matthews and on the April 29th show Chris Matthews closed with the following: EFTA

DEAR FRIEND.....

The image shows a portrait of a man identified as Chris Matthews. He is smiling and wearing a suit, shirt, and tie. The background is split into red and blue sections, with radiating lines.

WHY ISN'T ANYONE LISTENING

As a liberal Democrat who is interested in politics as well as the welfare of my fellow men/women, I often find myself watching Moyers & Company, Frontline and Hardball with Chris Matthews and on the April 29th show Chris Matthews closed with the following:

EFTA01170983

MATTHEWS: Let me finish tonight with these war hawks who seize on every world conflict, whatever the sides, to root for American engagement. It seems there is no war that can't use military action or the threat of it. In their alarmist world view, this country must forever be aiming its guns at someone, somewhere, demanding they follow our orders. Well, the effect of this posture, as we've learned in tragedies, is to transform every regional difference into a loaded weapon. We set up a demand, an ultimatum, to use an old war, where term, when that's not met, we have no choice but to act. Load her up. Argue that Saddam Hussein's possession of WMD constitutes a cause for war. Then accuse him of having them and then it's on to Baghdad.

Do the same with Iran, in Libya, and Syria, and Russia and what God knows what other nation. Then, cock the hammer. If they don't do what we demand they do, we start the war drums. Well, this has been the Geronimo talk before and after the hell and stupidity of Iraq. Ever since Vietnam, the neoconservatives and the militarist hawks have pushed this line. If a country fails to act the way we'd like, we start war talk. We are always one thumb to nose away from battle. Well, this is the world of Dick Cheney, the American Enterprise Institute and those killers of the keyboard, those thicken hawks who send others to battle while they man the op-ed pages. Well, President Obama did a great job in calling them out for what they are -- warriors without swords, hawks without wings, patriots by the page, soldiers of the sound bite. That's HARDBALL for now. Thanks for being with us.

******

SARAH PALIN NRA

When Sarah Palin commented, at this last week's national National Rifle Association convention, "...waterboarding is how we baptize terrorists,"she did worse than offend, worse than degrade human beings, worse than stir up a group of weapon-advocates. She did so in the Name of God. The fact that the NRA would allow someone to promote fundamentalism at their convention is a violation of their civic responsibility and a threat to human rights on a national scale. Most faith traditions incorporate water's restorative power. The Muslim ritual ablution of Wudu, the Jewish Mikveh ritual bath, the Hindu ritual immersions in the River Ganges, and the Christian practice of baptism, each point to renewal, transformation, and life. How dare the NRA tolerate -- worse, amplify -- hatred garbed in religious symbolism. As CNN's David Perry wrote in the article PalM Goes Too Far, Again -- this was not a joke or an accident and is not new rhetoric -- it is just pure barbaric hatred.

Leave aside the fact, which Palin consistently ignores, that torture has been proven ineffective in acquiring actionable intelligence. Leave aside the illegality of torture, affirmed by the United States' signature on the UN Convention Against Torture, which stipulates, "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture." Leave aside the partisan semantics of what actually constitutes torture in the first place. That has all been settled beyond question, and is not the source of my outrage at the NRA. We have to wonder how God and guns merged especially when people are talking about torture -- and waterboarding is torture and was definitely thought so when the Japanese used in during WWII.

Faith traditions consider torture to be a desecration of the image of God, which is why groups like T'ruah: The Rabbinical Call for Human Rights and NRCAT (National Religious

EFTA01170984

Campaign Against Torture) have been marshalling religious leaders to address the moral question of torture. The National Rifle Association consistently grants fundamentalists a platform for spewing hatred and promoting the tools of war, using the Second Amendment to garner financial gain. They are using talking heads and patriotism to feed their greed, and the human cost is growing beyond 31,000 annual U.S. gun violence deaths. Fueled by demagogues like Sarah Palin, the NRA's social impact is immeasurable. Witnessing Sarah Palin's ignorance and venom paired with the NRA's profitability is both terrifying and offensive. And more terrifying is that someone like Sarah Palin was almost one heartbeat from being President of the United States.

******

A Few Fascinating Quotes

******

End The War On Drugs, Say Nobel Prize- Winning Economists

Read LSE's full report here:
REPORT-FINAL-WEB.pdf

EFTA01170985

WAR is failure. So after a decades-long global war on drugs a new report endorsed by five Nobel Prize-winning economists concludes that it has failed and ifs time to shift the focus from mass incarceration to public health and human rights. The report, titled "Ending the Drug Wars"and put together by the London School of Economics' IDEAS Center, looks at the high costs and unintended consequences of drug prohibitions on public health and safety, national security and law enforcement. "The pursuit of a militarized and enforcement-led global `war on drugs'strategy has produced enormous negative outcomes and collateral damage," says the 82-page report. "These include mass incarceration in the US, highly repressive policies in Asia, vast corruption and political destabilization in Afghanistan and West Africa, immense violence in Latin America, an HIVepidemic in Russia, an acute global shortage ofpain medication and the propagation ofsystematic human rights abuses around the world."

The report urges the world's governments to reframe their drug policies around treatment and harm reduction rather than prosecution and prison. It is also aimed at the United Nations General Assembly, which is preparing to convene a special session on drug policy in 2016. The hope is to push the U.N. to encourage countries to develop their own policies, because the report declares the current one-size-fits-all approach has not proved to be effective. "The UN must recognize its role is to assist states as they pursue best-practice policies based on scientific evidence, not undermine or counteract them," said Danny Quah, a professor of economics at LSE and a contributor to the report. "If this alignment occurs, a new and effective international regime can emerge that effectively tackles the global drug problem."

In addition to contributions from Quah and a dozen other foreign and drug policy experts, the report has been endorsed by five past winners of the Nobel Prize in Economics: Kenneth Arrow (1972), Sir Christopher Pissarides (2010), Thomas Schelling (2005), Vernon Smith (2002) and Oliver Williamson (2009). Also signing on to the report's foreword are a number of current and former international leaders, including George Shultz, secretary of state under President Ronald Reagan; Nick Clegg, British deputy prime minister; and Javier Solana, the former EU high representative for common foreign and security policy. Guatemalan President Otto Perez Molina, who has announced that his government may present a plan to legalize production of marijuana and opium poppies by the end of 2014, has also publicly backed the report. Molina plans to discuss the report at the U.N.

A recent Pew survey suggests that Americans may be ready to refocus the U.S. end of the drug war, with 67 percent favoring policies that would provide drug treatment. "The drug war'sfailure has been recognized by public health professionals, security experts, human rights authorities and now some of the world's most respected economists,"said John Collins, the International Drug Policy Project coordinator at LSE IDEAS. "Leaders need to recognize that toeing the line on current drug control strategies comes with extraordinary human andfinancial costs to their citizens and economies." Hopefully, governments will now listen to what many professionals have been saying for decades. The War Against Drugs only makes things worse as it doesn't address the underlying issues and the collateral damages that it creates worse unintended consequences.

******

EFTA01170986

This image is not a chart. It depicts two men standing at a podium in front of an American flag and White House backdrop. The man on the right, speaking and gesturing, is identified as John Podesta, Special Advisor to the White House. The man on the left, wearing glasses, stands beside him.

Special Advisor to the White House — John Podesta

Tuesday the White House released the National Climate Assessment (NCA) Report 2014 saying that -- Climate change is here and will only worsen. Get used to more flooding, wildfires and drought, depending on where you live. Cities and states across America already are spending lots of money to respond. Those are the take-home messages are part of President Barack Obama's second-term effort to prepare the nation for the impacts of a changing climate such as rising sea levels and increasingly erratic weather. The National Climate Assessment update said evidence of human-made climate change "continues to strengthen" and that "Americans are noticing changes all around them." "This is not some distant problem of the figure,"Obama told NBC, while John Holdren, who directs the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, said climate change "already is affecting every region of the country and key sectors of the economy."

The report, more than 800 pages long, detailed how consequences of climate change could play out on several fronts, including infrastructure, water supplies, and agriculture. Climate impacts are already apparent in the United States, they are likely to worsen, and communities should begin factoring climate change into all kinds of decisions. From Hawaii to Maine, from the fishing industry to manufacturing, the report's 3o chapters emphasize that "evidence of human-induced climate change continues to strengthen and that impacts are increasing across the country." Severe weather and other impacts of climate change also increase the risk of disease transmission, decrease air quality and can increase mental health problems, among other effects, the report said. That could mean that over time the demand for certain medications could rise, for example, along with more severe seasonal allergies. And a changing climate that thrusts U.S. corn production further northward could alter the transportation patterns needed to move agricultural products to market, boosting road and rail construction.

Thirteen government departments and agencies, from the Agriculture Department to NASA, were part of the committee that compiled the report, which also includes academics, businesses, non-profit organizations and others. By highlighting issues in each corner of the country, the administration hopes to garner support for federal and state actions, including measures already under way and some that are pending. "They get that climate change is happening, they get that it is caused by human activity and support the solutions to climate change but they don'tfeel that sense of urgency," John Podesta, an adviser to President Barack Obama, told reporters Tuesday.

EFTA01170987

Unlike a major United Nations report on climate released earlier this year, which looked at North America as a whole, the vast U.S. report outlines in detail the effects on different geographic regions and segments of the economy. For example, while residents of the coastal Northeast could face bigger storm surges and coastal areas around the country risk more flooding, the southwestern United States is likely to confront more wildfires and severe water shortages. "It will help put their own experiences in context, and we think that is important in generating interest and action on the issue," said Lyndsay Moseley, director of the American Lung Association's Healthy Air campaign.

Instead of climate change as a global problem or a future problem the report lays out climate change as a problem of today and how it is affecting us now. And these are the effects. Starting with the Northeast were 64 million people live and super storm Sandy and all of damage that are came from that and all of huge snowstorm that have slept through the Northeast in recent years, the report says that these weather events, extreme precipitation events will continue damaging our infrastructure (roadways, railways, bridges and the electric supplies). Moving down to the Southeast, climate change is causing seas to overwhelm the low lying coastal areas (these billion dollar weather events) causing billions of dollars in damages from the Carolinas to Texas.

Not all is bad as climate change may produce a longer growing season in the Midwest where it is all about agriculture but the downside is that the growing season will be less predictable thus driving up the cost of food. Moving to the Great Plains the growing problem will be water scarcity. And the Southwest (Southern California, Arizona, etc.) are already experiencing a growing number of gigantic wildfires as things dry out and become less favorable for growing conditions. The sort of the same thing happens in the Northwest as climate change is responsible for insect infestation killing vast swaths of forest. As a result, no matter where you live in this country there is something in this report that should concern you. Attached, please find CNN article - Chan es east to west: Breaking down the climate report by region and for the entire report -

******

A statue of Saddam Hussein is being toppled by a crane in front of a mosque with a dome and minaret. A crowd of people is gathered, and a person in the foreground is observing the scene.

EFTA01170988

I just read an interesting article in The Daily Beast by Jay Parini — GOP Hypocrisy: Outraged Over Benghazi, Silent on Iraq — This week the House of Representatives established a select committee to investigate the attack on Benghazi that left four Americans dead in 2012. I couldn't help but wonder what these same legislators might have done had Barack Obama been president in 2003, and had the audacity of George W. Bush to attack a sovereign country that had no relevant connection to the 9/11 attacks with the result that nearly 5,000 Americans and well over 100,000 Iraqi civilians (many of them women and children) perished. Had Obama's war in Iraq also cost American taxpayers $1.7 trillion, with another $490 in veteran expenses (thus far) — with a total cost of $6 trillion projected — I have no doubt that a select committee would long ago have sent him to the Hague for trial as a war criminal.

It's sad to think how in our fury over Benghazi we've almost forgotten a recent war that destroyed so many families, nearly bankrupted this country (and may yet), and led to a hugely destabilized Iraq that no longer serves as a buffer to Iran. Needless to say, this terrible war was pursued under false pretenses, with huge amounts of government corruption — Houston-based company KBR alone (a spinoff from Halliburton, where Dick Cheney was chairman and CEO before becoming vice president) racked up charges of nearly $4o billion during the war, making it (by far) the winner in the Iraq sweepstakes. In most banana republics, this would be cause for serious investigation; but not so much here, where our politicians (or their friends) are allowed to profit from armed invasions. Can it possibly be so that the U.S. Congress has ignored such obvious corruption while investigating over and over whether Susan Rice was given some edited "talking points" on Benghazi? Really?

Iraq now lies in ruins, and the U.S. has tens of thousands of enemies with a right to their anger. And the unintended consequence of this misadventure is the total destabilization of the Middle East, with the Iraqi government almost a client-state of its former enemy Iran, much like the relationship that Afghanistan has with its neighbor Pakistan. Meanwhile, Americans mourn the loss of so many brothers, fathers, uncles, sisters, and mothers. Many veterans lie in hospitals across the nation, dazed and confused. This war that somehow never found its way onto the books continues to drag on our economy. So why haven't we brought Bush and Cheney to Washington to answer some very hard questions under oath? We have serious problems in America and trying to find out why a one-time description on several Sunday morning news programs by one person in the Obama Administration is nowhere close to the top nor will it change anything other than muddy up Hillary Clinton should she run for President in 2016. Since Congress has time to investigate Benghazi, they should also create a House committee to study the unprovoked attack on Iraq which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people. This is blatant evidence of the hypocrisy in the GOP's latest attempt to damage Hillary Clinton, President Obama and their legacies and this is my rant of the week.

WEEK'S READINGS

Obama grins and roasts the press, himself, Republicans and Putin at 2014

EFTA01170989

White House Correspondence Dinner

The image shows Barack Obama at a podium, wearing a tuxedo and bow tie. He is smiling and appears to be speaking at an event. The text indicates this is at the Correspondents Association dinner, where the President enjoys making jokes. People are visible behind him.

President enjoys tradition of wise-cracks at the expense of his critics and himselfat Correspondents Association dinner

On the 100 anniversary of its founding President Obama made fun of himself at the White House Correspondents Association dinner on Saturday, the annual nerd-ball schmooze-fest where Washington's media stars get comfy with a mix of political bigwigs and Hollywood beautiful people to celebrate a year of journalism. Obama, known for his comic timing and delivery, didn't disappoint. President Obama poked fun at the press, his political rivals and his own healthcare policy a week ago Saturday night, as he spoke at the White House Correspondents' Association Dinner.

Web Link:

In the annual tradition of the president offering a sendup of the press, his rivals and often himself, President Obama noted that House Republicans have been as tough on Speaker John A. Boehner (Ohio) as they had previously been on him. And one of MY FAVORITES: "Which proves that orange really is the new black," he said, to roars from the audience of 2,600 or so members of the media, Congress, visiting celebrities and others at the Washington Hilton. He was, of course, poking fun at the preternaturally tan Boehner who is a frequent target of Washington punch lines. The technical problems with the government's health-care Web site provided the inspiration for one of the year's most popular movies, Obama said. Then the poster for the animated film "Frozen"appeared on the large television screens. Obama's routine at the dinner focused mostly on those likely to be vying for the 2016 presidential nominations. Fox News will miss him when he leaves office, he said, because ANOTHER FAVORITE: "it will be harder to convince the American people that Hillary was born in Kenya."

WHCA
White House Correspondents' Association

The White House Correspondents' Association (WHCA) is an organization of journalists who cover the White House and the President of the United States. The WHCA was founded on February 25, 1914, by journalists in response to an unfounded rumor that a Congressional committee would select which journalists could attend press conferences of President Woodrow Wilson. The WHCA operates

EFTA01170990

independently of the White House. Among the more notable issues handled by the WHCA are the credentialing process, access to the President and physical conditions in the White House press briefing rooms.

******

The States With the Worst Healthcare
Systems

Nearly a quarter of West Virginians have lost six or more teeth, and other findings from a new Commonwealth Fund report.

| Quartile | Number of States | States |
|---|---|---|
| Top quartile | 13 | CO, DC, HI, IL, IA, ME, MN, NH, NJ, NY, RI, VT, WA |
| Second quartile | 11 | CA, CT, DE, MA, MD, MT, NE, OR, PA, WI, WY |
| Third quartile | 14 | AL, AZ, GA, IN, KY, MI, NC, ND, OH, OK, SC, TN, UT, VA |
| Bottom quartile | 12 | AK, AR, FL, ID, KS, LA, MS, MO, NV, NM, TX, WV |

Minnesota has the nation's best-performing healthcare system, according to a Commonwealth Fund ranking released this week, and Massachusetts, Vermont, and New Hampshire are tied for second. Mississippi ranks last, just as it did on the previous ranking in 2009. Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Arkansas round out the bottom of the list.

For the ranking, the Commonwealth Fund relied on 42 different metrics that gauged everything from insurance coverage to avoidable hospital stays to vaccination rates, at the systemic level; and from obesity rates to how many adults have lost six or more teeth, at the individual level.

Here's the tooth map:

EFTA01170991

| State | Quartile |
|--------------|---------------|
| Arizona | Top Quartile |
| California | Top Quartile |
| Colorado | Top Quartile |
| Idaho | Top Quartile |
| Montana | Top Quartile |
| Nevada | Bottom Quartile|
| New Mexico | Third Quartile|
| Oregon | Top Quartile |
| Utah | Top Quartile |
| Washington | Top Quartile |
| Wyoming | Top Quartile |
| Alaska | Second Quartile|
| Hawaii | Second Quartile|
| Indiana | Third Quartile|
| Illinois | Third Quartile|
| Iowa | Third Quartile|
| Kansas | Second Quartile|
| Michigan | Third Quartile|
| Minnesota | Third Quartile|
| Missouri | Third Quartile|
| Nebraska | Second Quartile|
| North Dakota | Second Quartile|
| Ohio | Third Quartile|
| South Dakota | Second Quartile|
| Wisconsin | Third Quartile|
| Arkansas | Bottom Quartile|
| Delaware | Second Quartile|
| Florida | Bottom Quartile|
| Georgia | Bottom Quartile|
| Kentucky | Bottom Quartile|
| Louisiana | Bottom Quartile|
| Maryland | Second Quartile|
| Mississippi | Bottom Quartile|
| North Carolina| Bottom Quartile|
| Oklahoma | Bottom Quartile|
| South Carolina| Bottom Quartile|
| Tennessee | Bottom Quartile|
| Texas | No Data |
| Virginia | Third Quartile|
| West Virginia| Bottom Quartile|
| Alabama | Bottom Quartile|
| Connecticut | Top Quartile |
| Maine | Top Quartile |
| Massachusetts| Top Quartile |
| New Hampshire| Top Quartile |
| New Jersey | Second Quartile|
| New York | Third Quartile|
| Pennsylvania | Third Quartile|
| Rhode Island | Top Quartile |
| Vermont | Top Quartile |

Almost all states either stagnated or declined in performance since the survey was performed five years ago, and once again, Southern states scored especially poorly across all of the dimensions. What's more, there were wide mortality differences between black and white residents of several states in the Deep South. "Racial and ethnic minorities in Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Mississippi, and North Carolina faced some of widest disparities relative to the national average across all of the indicators assessed in our Equity dimension," the group wrote.

| State | Black Deaths per 100,000 | White Deaths per 100,000 |
| ---------------------- | ------------------------ | ------------------------ |
| Massachusetts | 99 | 64 |
| Washington | 107 | 63 |
| Colorado | 112 | 58 |
| New Mexico | 121 | 73 |
| Minnesota | 124 | 51 |
| Connecticut | 125 | 67 |
| Arizona | 128 | 74 |
| New York | 131 | 64 |
| New Jersey | 147 | 74 |
| Florida | 148 | 70 |
| Kansas | 149 | 72 |
| Nebraska | 150 | 72 |
| Delaware | 150 | 73 |
| Maryland | 151 | 76 |
| California | 152 | 73 |
| Virginia | 154 | 73 |
| West Virginia | 155 | 105 |
| Nevada | 156 | 83 |
| North Carolina | 161 | 84 |
| Georgia | 164 | 86 |
| South Carolina | 166 | 93 |
| Indiana | 167 | 79 |
| Ohio | 168 | 79 |
| District of Columbia | 171 | 49 |
| Texas | 173 | 85 |
| Missouri | 175 | 76 |
| Pennsylvania | 176 | 85 |
| Kentucky | 178 | 105 |
| Wisconsin | 179 | 89 |
| Alabama | 182 | 91 |
| Illinois | 185 | 83 |
| Tennessee | 186 | 97 |
| Michigan | 187 | 95 |
| Louisiana | 190 | 99 |
| Oklahoma | 193 | 101 |
| Arkansas | 195 | 97 |
| Mississippi | 203 | 102 |

Demographically, Mississippi is already at a disadvantage. A black man in Mississippi has a shorter life expectancy than the average American did in 1960. The state has an obesity rate of 35 percent, one of the highest poverty rates in the country, and just one abortion clinic. Healthcare in Mississippi and in other Southern states is unlikely to become more equitable anytime soon, however. As the study authors note, 16 of the states in the bottom half of the ranking have opted not to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act to adults making up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level.

In Mississippi, for example, "Medicaid eligibility for non-disabled adults is limited to parents with incomes below 29percent of poverty, or about $6,800 a year for a family of four, and adults without dependent children remain ineligible regardless of their income," as the Kaiser Family Foundation

EFTA01170992

points out. Those Mississippians making between too percent of the federal poverty level, or $23,850 for a family of four, and 400 percent, can qualify for subsidies to buy health insurance on the exchanges. But 30 percent of uninsured Mississippians fall into the "coverage gap" between the state's current income cutoff for Medicaid and the federal cutoff for health insurance subsidies. They don't qualify for any kind of financial help to buy health insurance and are likely to remain uninsured. Mississippi also had the largest percentage of adults who went without medical care because of cost issues, according to the Commonwealth Fund report.

In an editorial in the Journal of the American Medical Association last week, the Commonwealth Fund's Douglas McCarthy and David Radley highlighted Medicaid expansion as one way to bridge the North-South healthcare divide. "If all states participate in Medicaid expansions, the geographic divide documented by the scorecard might narrow," they wrote. "However, if many states do not, the divide could widen in the future."

******

This image is not a chart. It depicts a portrait of Ayman al-Zawahri, the former leader of al-Qaeda. The surrounding text indicates he admitted al-Qaeda's entry into Syria's civil war was a "political disaster" for Islamist militants, urging them to focus on Iraq instead. He attempted to mediate infighting between ISIL and the Nusra Front.

Overlook by almost everyone in the American press was that Al Qaeda Chief Ayman Al-Zawahri has publicly admitted that al Qaeda's entry into Syria's civil war caused "a political disaster" for Islamist militants there, the movement's global leader al-Zawahri said in a video message, urging the faction to redouble its efforts in Iraq instead. Zawahri has repeatedly tried to end infighting between the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and another al Qaeda-aligned group, the Nusra Front. He said on Friday in a message translated by SITE Monitoring that if ISIL had accepted his decision not to get involved in Syria and had instead worked to "busy itself with Iraq, which needs double its efforts" then it could have avoided the "waterfall of blood" caused by militant infighting. ISIL militants joined the conflict in Syria last year and unilaterally declared they were taking over the Nusra Front, which had won the admiration of many rebels fighting Syria's President Bashar al-Assad for its battlefield prowess.

Zawahri, who has run al Qaeda since Osama bin Laden was killed in April 2011, accused ISIL's leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, of "sedition" and said rebel disunity had been handed "on a plate of gold" to Assad, the ultimate target of all Sunni Islamist groups in Syria. Zawahri said Baghdadi should instead redouble his efforts against the Iraqi government, led by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki who is a Shi'ite - an Islamic sect regarded by al Qaeda as heretical. Shi'ism is the dominant sect in Iran. He said that toppling Assad would "cause the elimination of more than half of the Iranian power alliance that seeks to establish a Shi'ite state from Afghanistan to south Lebanon". On Wednesday the United

EFTA01170993

States said al Qaeda's core organization in Pakistan, led by Zawahri, had been severely degraded, but that the movement's affiliates in Africa and the Middle East were becoming more autonomous and aggressive. The leadership of Al Qaeda and AI-Zawahri are learning the lesson that cross border intervention can have unintended consequences as the locals whom you support may be crazier than you

******

Last week in the New York Times economist Paul Krugman wrote a scathing op-ed — Inventing a Failure - on how House Republicans released a deliberately misleading report on the status of health reform, crudely rigging the numbers to sustain the illusion of failure in the face of unexpected success.... Asking readers "are you shocked?"

Krugman: You aren't, but you should be. Mainstream politicians didn't always try to advance their agenda through lies, damned lies and — in this case — bogus statistics. And the fact that this has become standard operating procedure for a major party bodes ill for America's future.

About that report: The really big policy news of 2014, at least so far, is the spectacular recovery of the Affordable Care Act from its stumbling start, thanks to an extraordinary late surge that took enrollment beyond early projections. The age mix of enrollees has improved; insurance companies are broadly satisfied with the risk pool. Multiple independent surveys confirm that the percentage of Americans without health insurance has already declined substantially, and there's every reason to believe that over the next two years the act will meet its overall goals, except in states that refuse to expand Medicaid.

This is a problem for Republicans, who have bet the ranch on the proposition that health reform is an unfixable failure. "Nobody can make Obamacare work," declared Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, a couple of weeks ago (when it was already obvious that it was working pretty well). How can they respond to good news? Well, they could graciously admit that they were wrong, and offer constructive suggestions about how to make the law work even better. Oh, sorry —

I forgot that I wasn't writing jokes for the White House Correspondents' Dinner.

No, they have in fact continued to do what they've been doing ever since the news on Obamacare started turning positive: sling as much mud as possible at health reform, in the hope that some of it sticks. Premiums were soaring, they declared, when they have actually come in below projections. Millions of people were losing coverage, they insisted, when the great bulk of those whose policies were canceled simply replaced them with new policies. The Obama administration was cooking the books, they cried (projection, anyone?). And, of course, they keep peddling horror stories about people suffering terribly from Obamacare, not one of which has actually withstood scrutiny.

Now comes the latest claim — that many of the people who signed up for insurance aren't actually paying their premiums. Obviously this claim is part of a continuing pattern. It also, however, involves a change in tactics. Previous attacks on Obamacare were pretty much fact-free; this time the claim was backed by an actual survey purporting to show that a third of enrollees hadn't paid their first premium.

But the survey was rigged. (Are you surprised?) It asked insurers how many enrollees had paid their first premium; it ignored the fact that the first premium wasn't even due for the millions of people who

EFTA01170994

signed up for insurance after March 15.

And the fact that the survey was so transparently rigged is a smoking gun, proving that the attacks on Obamacare aren't just bogus; they're deliberately bogus. The staffers who set up that survey knew enough about the numbers to skew them, which meant that they have to have known that Obamacare is actually doing O.K.

First of all, it fires up the base. After this latest exercise in deception, we can be fairly sure that Republican leaders know perfectly well that Obamacare has failed to fail. But the party faithful don't. Like anyone who writes about these issues, I get vast amounts of mail from people who know, just know, that insurance premiums are skyrocketing, that far more people have lost insurance because of Obummercare than have gained it, that all the horror stories are real, and that anyone who says otherwise is just a liberal shill.

Beyond that, the constant harping on alleged failure works as innuendo even if each individual claim collapses in the face of evidence. A recent poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that a majority of Americans know that more than eight million people enrolled in health exchanges; but it also found a majority of respondents believing that this was below expectations, and that the law was working badly.

So Republicans are spreading disinformation about health reform because it works, and because they can — there is no sign that they pay any political price when their accusations are proved false. And that observation should scare you. What happens to the Congressional Budget Office if a party that has learned that lying about numbers works takes full control of Congress? What happens if it regains the White House, too? Nothing good, that's for sure.

******

The image depicts a group of men in camouflage uniforms and masks, some holding firearms. One man in the foreground is holding a handgun aloft and appears to be speaking. The background shows an indoor setting with a sofa and curtains. The overall impression is of a group asserting power or defiance.

EFTA01170995

One of the scariest phrases in military jargon has to be unintended consequences. An example of unintended consequences is the United States arming Mujahideen forces and Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan in the 198os only to face the same forces and weapons itself in 2001. And probably a better example is the Bush/Cheney administration's miscalculations of the benefits of regime change in Iraq. Because of instead of giving us access to cheap crude oil, stabilizing the Middle East and isolating al Qaeda and Iran, the exact opposite happened on all three, not to mention 9/11 as well as the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania by al Qaeda in 1998.

This week in The Daily Beast Bruce Riedel wrote an interesting article — Syria's Terror Blowback Threatens Europe and the United States - pointing out that the Afghan war of the 198os gave us al Qaeda and the Syrian war of today may spawn something worse as the flow of foreign fighters to Syria to join the war against Bashar Assad's dictatorship is becoming the largest in the history of the global jihad, and the Syrian battleground is on the way to outstripping the 1980s Afghan war against the Soviets as a training ground for Islamic militants. Security services around the world are becoming increasingly alarmed at the implications for the safety of their citizens.

American intelligence officials now put the number of foreign fighters who have gone to Syria since the war began in 2011 at between 8,000 and 10,000. Other sources put the total even higher, up to 12,000. The largest contingent is probably Saudis. Saudi sources put the number of their citizens who have gone to wage jihad in Syria at 1,200, of whom 300 are reported to have died on the battlefield. Jordanian sources report about a thousand Jordanians have gone to fight in their northern neighbor. Figures for other Arab countries are largely unavailable. There are no coherent governments counting the flow of fighters from broken states like Yemen, Libya or Iraq, but we know from previous experience they are likely sources of jihadists.

Virtually every country in Western Europe has reported that some of its Muslim citizens have gone to Syria. A small but significant number have died in the war and become martyrs back in the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, and other states with sizable Muslim minorities. Even tiny Luxembourg has had one jihadi martyr already. Americans are now fighting in Syria as well. In comparison, the war against the Soviet 40th Red Army in Afghanistan in the 198os attracted an estimated 20,000 foreign volunteers over a decade, according to the estimate of the American intelligence community when the Russians retreated from Afghanistan in 1989. So Afghanistan attracted more volunteers, but over a longer time period. If Syria continues to attract foreign fighters at the rate we have seen so far and the civil war goes on for a decade, the Syrian war is all but certain to be an even larger factory for extremism than Afghanistan.

Syria is worrisome in other ways as well. Many of the so-called Arab Afghans who came to Pakistan and Afghanistan in the 198os were labeled "tourist jihadis" at the time. Considerable numbers of the Arab and other Muslim volunteers in the '8os never actually crossed the border from Pakistan into Afghanistan to fight the Russians. They got their pictures taken with an AK47 assault rifle in the Afghan refugee camps and the training bases of the mujahedin in Pakistan, endured a few months hardship and then they went home to boast of their "experience" in jihad. Understand that foreign fighters are often the most fanatical on the battlefield and among jihadis they probably make up the majority of suicide bombers.

Even those who did fight against the Russians played only a marginal role in determining the outcome of the war. The best estimate available of the total number of Arab Afghans who died on the battlefield in the 1980s is no more than 500. Over a million Afghans died in the war. The vast bulk of the fighting

EFTA01170996

was done by thousands of Afghan mujahedin backed by several hundred Pakistani intelligence officers from the ISI and Pakistan Special Forces commandoes. With a few notable exceptions (Osama bin Laden being the most important) the Arab Afghans were not regarded by either the mujahedin or the ISI as serious contributors to the war effort. They were good for fundraising, medical services and public relations purposes, not combat.

That is not the case in Syria today. Foreign fighters are a mainstay of the rebellion against Assad. Especially in the extremist factions like al Qaeda's Al Nusra Front or the even more radical Islamic State of Iraq and al Shams group (expelled from al Qaeda this winter for its extremism), the foreign volunteers are a major source of manpower for the war. The foreign fighters are often the most fanatical on the battlefield. They probably make up the majority of suicide bombers. In Afghanistan in the 1980s there were no suicide bombers—the mujahedin then did not feel that was a heroic way to fight or die.

The blowback from the Afghan war was massive and enduring. As early as 1991 Algerian veterans of the Afghan war were a critical ingredient in starting the Algerian civil war that ultimately claimed an estimated 150,000 lives. Afghan veterans in Egypt played a role in the wave of terror that swept Cairo and other Egyptian cities in the 199os. The Who's Who of the Global Jihad is full of Afghan war veterans from bin Laden to his successor, the Egyptian Ayman Zawahiri, who was a doctor in the refugee camps during the war. Of course the most dangerous blowback of the war was the role it played in creating the ideology of global jihad.

The father of that ideology was an Afghan war veteran, Abdallah Azzam, a Palestinian who was bin Laden's first partner in attracting foreign fighters to come to Afghanistan. Few volunteers in the 198os came from the Muslim Diaspora in Europe and North America. Now there are dozens of fighters in Syria who have American and European passports and will come home if they survive the war. For the intelligence and security services of the Western allies the specter of dozens of battle-hardened, experienced fanatics returning to their homes full of anger and resentment is a very deeply troubling one.

******

The Six Principles of the New Populism (and the Establishment's Nightmare)

EFTA01170997

A group of people with bicycles are participating in a protest. One individual holds a sign that reads "WE MUST PUT OUR PLANET BEFORE PROFIT NOW". The background shows city buildings, some with large blue signs containing white letters.

Robert Reich -- Huffington Post -- 05/06/2014

More Americans than ever believe the economy is rigged in favor of Wall Street and big business and their enablers in Washington. We're five years into a so-called recovery that's been a bonanza for the rich but a bust for the middle class. 'The game is rigged and the American people know that. They get it right down to their toes,"says Senator Elizabeth Warren. Which is fueling a new populism on both the left and the right. While still far apart, neo-populists on both sides are bending toward one another and against the establishment. Who made the following comments? (Hint: Not Warren, and not Bernie Sanders.)

A. We "cannot be the party of fat cats, rich people, and Wall Street."

B. "The rich and powerful, those who walk the corridors of power, are getting fat and happy..."

C. "If you come to Washington and serve in Congress, there should be a lifetime ban on lobbying."

D. "Washington promoted moral hazard by protecting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which privatized profits and socialized losses."

E. "When you had the chance to stand up for Americans' privacy, did you?"

F. "The people who wake up at night thinking of which new country they want to bomb, which new country they want to be involved in, they don't like restraint. They don't like reluctance to go to war."

(Answers:A. Rand Paul, B. Ted Cruz, C. Ted Cruz, D. House Republican Joe Hensarling, E. House Republican Justin Amash, F. Rand Paul )

You might doubt the sincerity behind some of these statements, but they wouldn't have been uttered if the crowds didn't respond enthusiastically — and that's the point. Republican populism is growing, as is the Democratic version, because the public wants it. And it's not only the rhetoric that's converging. Populists on the right and left are also coming together around six principles:

1. Cut the biggest Wall Street banks down to a size where they're no longer too big to fail. Left populists have been advocating this since the Street's bailout now they're being joined by populists on the right. David Camp, House Ways and Means Committee chair, recently proposed an extra 3.5 percent quarterly tax on the assets of the biggest Wall Street banks (giving them an incentive to trim

EFTA01170998

down). Louisiana Republican Senator David Vitter wants to break up the big banks, as does conservative pundit George Will. "There is nothing conservative about bailing out Wall Street," says Rand Paul.

2. Resurrect the Glass-Steagall Act, separating investment from commercial banking and thereby preventing companies from gambling with their depositors' money. Elizabeth Warren has introduced such legislation, and John McCain co-sponsored it. Tea Partiers are strongly supportive, and critical of establishment Republicans for not getting behind it. "It is disappointing that progressive collectivists are leading the effort for a return to a law that served well for decades," writes the Tea Party Tribune. "Of course, the establishment political class would never admit that their financial donors and patrons must hinder their unbridled trading strategies."

3. End corporate welfare -- including subsidies to big oil, big agribusiness, big pharma, Wall Street, and the Ex-Im Bank. Populists on the left have long been urging this; right-wing populists are joining in. Republican David Camp's proposed tax reforms would kill dozens of targeted tax breaks. Says Ted Cruz: "We need to eliminate corporate welfare and crony capitalism."

4. Stop the National Security Agency from spying on Americans. Bernie Sanders and other populists on the left have led this charge but right-wing populists are close behind. House Republican Justin Amash's amendment, that would have defunded NSA programs engaging in bulk-data collection, garnered in Democrats and 94 Republicans last year, highlighting the new populist divide in both parties. Rand Paul could be channeling Sanders when he warns: "Your rights, especially your right to privacy, is under assault... if you own a cellphone, you're under surveillance."

5. Scale back American interventions overseas. Populists on the left have long been uncomfortable with American forays overseas. Rand Paul is leaning in the same direction. Paul also tends toward conspiratorial views about American interventionism. Shortly before he took office he was caught on video claiming that former vice president Dick Cheney pushed the Iraq War because of his ties to Halliburton.

6. Oppose trade agreements crafted by big corporations. Two decades ago Democrats and Republicans enacted the North American Free Trade Agreement. Since then populists in both parties have mounted increasing opposition to such agreements. The Trans-Pacific Partnership, drafted in secret by a handful of major corporations, is facing so strong a backlash from both Democrats and tea party Republicans that it's nearly dead. "The Tea Party movement does not support the Trans-Pacific Partnership," says Judson Philips, president of Tea Party Nation. "Special interest and big corporations are being given a seat at the table" while average Americans are excluded.

Left and right-wing populists remain deeply divided over the role of government. Even so, the major fault line in American politics seems to be shifting, from Democrat versus Republican, to populist versus establishment -- those who think the game is rigged versus those who do the rigging. In this month's Republican primaries, tea partiers continue their battle against establishment Republicans. But the major test will be 2016 when both parties pick their presidential candidates. Ted Cruz and Rand Paul are already vying to take on Republican establishment favorites Jeb Bush or Chris Christie. Elizabeth Warren says she won't run in the Democratic primaries, presumably against Hillary Clinton, but rumors abound. Bernie Sanders hints he might.

EFTA01170999

Wall Street and big business Republicans are already signaling they'd prefer a Democratic establishment candidate over a Republican populist. Dozens of major GOP donors, Wall Street Republicans, and corporate lobbyists have told Politico that if Jeb Bush decides against running and Chris Christie doesn't recover politically, they'll support Hillary Clinton. "The darkest secret in the big money world of the Republican coastal elite is that the most palatable alternative to a nominee such as Senator Ted Cruz of Texas or Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky would be Clinton," concludes Politico.

Says a top Republican-leaning Wall Street lawyer, "it's Rand Paul or Ted Cruz versus someone like Elizabeth Warren that would be everybody's worst nightmare." Everybody on Wall Street and in corporate suites, that is. An d the "nightmare" may not occur in 2016. But if current trends continue, some similar "nightmare" is likely within the decade. If the American establishment wants to remain the establishment it will need to respond to the anxiety that's fueling the new populism rather than fight it.

******

* **Image 1:** A man in a suit and tie, identified by the "FOX NEWS channel" and "O'Reilly Factor" chyron.
* **Image 2:** A building exterior with "shuttle era," "FOX NEWS," and "Making Wa" visible on a sign. Large letters spelling "AMERICA'S" are displayed on the windows.
* **Image 3:** A man, identified as George Will, wearing a suit and bow tie, standing on a red carpet with "FOX NEWS" logos in the background.

If you really want more evidence on what's wrong with media in America you only have to look at FOX News where last week two conservatives intellectuals, George F. Will and Charles Krauthammer appeared on a Fox News All-Star Panel discussing the U.S. National Climate Assessment that was just released by the White House, which they dismissed with various irritable mental gestures. Their evasions and misstatements, clothed in faux-erudition, offer a useful entrance point to study the current state of the right-wing mind.

There is no issue where educated ignorance is on more perfect display than watching the conservative movement confront scientific evidence of climate change. Educated ignorance is not the same thing as

EFTA01171000

the regular kind of ignorance. It takes real talent to master. George F. Will and Charles Krauthammer are two of the intellectual giants of the right, former winners of the Bradley Foundation's $250,000 annual prize, Washington Post columnists, and Fox News MI-Star panelists. They numbered among the select conservative intellectuals chosen to dine with newly elected president Barack Obama in 2009.

What follows is an annotated analysis of Will and Krauthammer's remarks, the intellectual quality of which starts off low, and grows increasingly and even frighteningly so as the program progresses. After a brief introduction of the climate report, we begin with Krauthammer:

What they tell you is that you should be scared about what's happening today. Of course, if it's very cold in the
winter, they blame it, here in the northeast, they blame it on global warming, and the report says that global
warming makes summers hotter and winters are generally shorter and warmer.

In one sentence, Krauthammer claims "they" blame every cold winter on climate change, but does not identify who "they" is. In the next sentence, he correctly says that the climate assessment links climate change with shorter, warmer winters in the United States, negating his previous point. Any scientific theory that explains everything explains nothing, and no matter what happens in climate is unpleasant, the word for that is weather, it's attributed to global warming. If we continue global warming up here in the northeast, we're going to freeze to death.

It is not clear what Krauthammer means when he says climate science "explains everything."Climate science is an attempt to model the complex impact of heat-trapping gasses in the atmosphere. It does not attempt to explain "everything" more than, say, the Theory of Gravity does. (In fact, it attempts to explain less, as it contains more room for unpredictability.) It is also impossible to understand exactly what Krauthammer's line about freezing to death even means. The report does in fact describe dangerous and costly impacts in the Northeast:

"Heat waves, coastal flooding, and river flooding will pose a growing challenge to the region's environmental, social, and economic systems. This will increase the vulnerability of the region's residents, especially its most disadvantaged populations. Infrastructure will be increasingly compromised by climate-related hazards, including sea level rise, coastal flooding, and intense precipitation events. Agriculture,fisheries, and ecosystems will be increasingly compromised over the next century by climate change impacts. Farmers can explore new crop options, but these adaptations are not cost- or risk-free. Moreover, inequities exist in adaptive capacity, which could be overwhelmed by changing climate."

Krauthammer goes on to endorse comments by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell:

But the most important element is what McConnell was talking about, the negligible gains. Assume they are right about global warming, assume that it is all caused by man. The United States has reduced carbon emissions since 2006 more than any other country on earth. We are right now at 1992 levels, according to the International

EFTA01171001

Energy Agency, and yet carbon emissions have gone up globally. Why? We don't control the emissions of the other 96 percent of humanity, especially China and India. As we dismantle the coal plants in our country, China and India together are adding one coal-fired plant every week. The net effect is to shift the U.S. coal energy generating industry from here to India and China. It will have zero effect. If we could have a pact with other countries in which everybody would reduce their emissions, I would sign on. In the absence of it, all that we're doing is committing economic suicide in the name of do-goodism that will not do an iota of good.

Krauthammer asserts, with an air of unassailable confidence, that reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions will have no significant impact on worldwide greenhouse gas emissions, because "we don't control the emissions of the other 96 percent of humanity." ICrauthammer's implication that 96 percent of the greenhouse gas problem lies beyond the direct control of the United States is untrue, since, while the United States may only account for 4 percent of the world's population, it emits 16 percent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions:

The strategy to limit climate change does not assume that limiting American emissions is a sufficient step to mitigate catastrophic climate change. It assumes it is a necessary step to mitigate catastrophic climate change. Countries like India and China have, in fact, taken steps to reduce their energy intensiveness. Given that those countries' per capita greenhouse gas emissions are a small fraction of ours, there is no plausible or defensible path to securing an international agreement without a commitment by the countries with the highest per-capita emissions, like the U.S., to participate.

After an interlude from others on the panel, George Will jumps in:

There is, however, no evidence for the increase in extreme weather.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found otherwise in 2011:

There is evidence that some extremes have changed as a result of anthropogenic influences, including increases in atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases. It is likely that anthropogenic influences have led to warming of extreme daily minimum and maximum temperatures at the global scale. There is medium confidence that anthropogenic influences have contributed to intensification of extreme precipitation at the global scale. It is likely that there has been an anthropogenic influence on increasing extreme coastal high water due to an increase in mean sea level. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration concluded, somewhat more conclusively, "Human influences are having an impact on some extreme weather and climate events."

Will continues:

I own a home on an island in South Carolina looking south in the direction of hurricanes, and after Katrina I was really interested when they said this is a harbinger of increased hurricane activity, which since then has plummeted.

The chance of a hurricane striking a given location is extremely variable. The lack of major hurricanes striking the United States since 2005 is attributable to luck. It does not contradict any major scientific conclusions about climate change.

EFTA01171002

Will continues:

Now, there is, as Charles says, the policy question is how much wealth do we want to spend directly or in lost production in order to have no discernible measurable effect on the climate? People say, well, what about this report? There is a sociology of science. Scientists are not saints in white laboratory smocks. They have got interests like everybody else. If you want a tenure-track position in academia, don't question the reigning orthodoxy on climate change. If you want money from the biggest source of direct research in this country, the federal government, don't question its orthodoxy. If you want to get along with your peers, conform to peer pressure. This is what's happening.

Will is arguing that climate scientists have been massively corrupted by federal funding and peer pressure. ("They have got interests like everybody else.") He does not consider the countervailing power of opposing financial interests that might lure scientists to question of the scientific consensus, such as the lucrative funding made available in the right-wing think-tank world. He likewise discounts the possibility that scientists would find the lure of being proven eventually correct to be a powerful reputational incentive, let alone that they would actually care enough about being right to disregard social and financial pressure. If Will has any specific sense of how these social pressures survived the rigors of the scientific method and peer review, he does not explicate them. Will is then asked about the 97 percent of climate scientists who share the consensus analysis, and replies:

Who measured it? Where did that figure come from? They pluck these things from the ether. I do not.

It comes from a peer-reviewed study which found that 97.1 percent of scientific papers taking a position on anthropogenic climate change "endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming."

To watch Will and Krauthammer grasp for rationales to cast doubt on an established scientific field merely because its findings pose a challenge to their ideological priors is a depressing, and even harrowing, study in the poisonous effects of dogma upon a once-healthy brain. They have amassed an impressive array of sound bites and factoids, and can render them with convincing gravitas, and yet their underlying reasoning is absolutely bonkers. The analogy Krauthammer suggests of the rain man — an authority figure possessed of commanding prestige despite lacking even rudimentary analytic powers — turns out to be apt; only he is describing himself. How can one explain Krauthammer and Will defend the stupid? There is nothing worse than smart people who allow partisan prejudice cloud their judgment.

THIS WEEK's QUOTES

Islamicphobic is a word created byfascist and used by cowards to manipulate morons.

Christopher Hitchens

EFTA01171003

BEST VIDEO OF THE WEEK

Bill Maher Argues For Privacy, Free Speech In Wake Of Donald Sterling Scandal

- **Key Entities:** Bill Maher, a woman, and an older man.
- **Contextual Text:** "Bill Maher Argues For Privacy, Free Speech In Wake Of Donald Sterling Scandal"
- **On-screen Text:** "TAPPY DAYS"

Web Link:

While most late night comedy shows have focused on Donald Sterling's overt racism in recent weeks, Bill Maher dug into a different aspect of the stow on Friday's "Real 'lime:" Privacy. "Last week when President Obama was asked about the Sterling episode, he said, 'When ignorant folks want to advertise their ignorance, just let them talk.'But Sterling didn't advertise," Maher explained, "He was bugged. And while he may not be worth defending, the 4th Amendment is." It's a difficult point to make, given the collective outrage that sprung up once Sterling's comments were broadcast. Maher's studio audience broke into fewer rounds of applause during the segment than is usual for one of his New Rules. But as the host laid out his argument that we need to maintain the ability to speak our minds in private, he seemed to win them over.

In response to a Washington Post op-ed by Kathleen Parker which suggested you, "Say what you will, but you'd best checkfor recording devices... for] check your thoughts," Maher chafed, "I'd rather be a Mormon." He went on to sum up Parker's sentiment: "So let me get this straight, we should concede that there's no such thing anymore as a private conversation, so therefore remember to 'lawyer' everything you say before you say it, and hey, speaking your mind was overrated anyway, so you won't miss it. Well, I'll miss it, I'll miss it a lot." Watch the segment above (the Sterling New Rule begins at 2:14) and let me know what you think.

EFTA01171004

This is not a chart.

* **Subject:** Queen Latifah (Dana Elaine Owens)
* **Date of Birth:** March 18, 1970
* **Profession:** Singer, songwriter, rapper, actress, model, television producer, record producer, comedienne, talk show hostess.
* **Significance:** Considered a pioneer feminist in hip-hop.
* **Awards/Nominations:** Golden Globe, two Screen Actors Guild Awards, two Image Awards, Grammy, six additional Grammy nominations, Emmy nomination, Academy Award nomination.
* **Notable Events:** Premiered "The Queen Latifah Show" (September 16, 2013); officiated 33 weddings at the 56th Annual Grammy Awards (January 26, 2014).

This week I would like the share the music of Queen Latifah. Dana Elaine Owens (born March 18, 1970), better known by her stage name Queen Latifah, is an American singer, songwriter, rapper, actress, model, television producer, record producer, comedienne, and talk show hostess. She has long been considered one of hip-hop's pioneer feminists. Her work in music, film, and television has earned her a Golden Globe award, two Screen Actors Guild Awards, two Image Awards, a Grammy Award, six additional Grammy nominations, an Emmy Award nomination and an Academy Award nomination. On September 16, 2013, Latifah premiered her own syndicated daytime television show titled The Queen Latifah Show. On January 26, 2014, Latifah officiated the weddings of 33 same-sex and opposite-sex couples during a performance of "Same Love" by Macklemore at the 56th Annual Grammy Awards. With this I invite you to enjoy the music of Ms. Queen Latifah.

| Artist(s) | Song Title |
|---|---|
| Queen Latifah | [Blacked out] |
| Queen Latifah | Just Another Day |
| Queen Latifah ft. Monie Love | Ladies First |
| Queen Latifah | I Know Where I've Been |
| Queen Latifah | California Dreamin |
| Queen Latifah | Goin' Out Of My Head |
| Queen Latifah | Hello Stranger |
| Queen Latifah | Mercy, Mercy, Mercy |
| Alicia Keys, Queen Latifah & Kathleen Battle | Superwoman |

QUEEN LATIFAH, YO YO, MC LYTE, SALT IN PEPA, TLC & ATRA - FREEDOM --

EFTA01171005

Queen Latifah - Dance For Me

Queen Latifah at the White House — I Can't Stand The Rain --

I hope that you have enjoyed this week's offerings and wish you and yours a great week.... Also — HAPPY MOTHER'S DAY

Sincerely,

Greg Brown

Gregory Brown
Chairman & CEO
GlobalCast Partners, LLC

US

EFTA01171006

📅 Nov 4, 2011

Fw:

From: Terje Rod-Larsen

To: mkevacation@gmail.comm, Jeevacation@gmail.com

Attachments: 4_November.doc From: Avi Gil < To: 'Avi Gil' < Sent: Fri Nov 04 04:11:24 2011 Subject: For the P. Avi Avi Gil e-mail: EFTA01171044

Attachments: 4_November.doc

From: Avi Gil <
To: 'Avi Gil' <
Sent: Fri Nov 04 04:11:24 2011
Subject:
For the P.
Avi

Avi Gil
e-mail:

EFTA01171044

📅 Nov 4, 2011

J.P. Morgan Eye on the Market, November 4, 2011

From: US GIO

To: Undisclosed recipients

Attachments: 11-04-11_-_EOTM_-_The_austerity_club.pdf Inline-Images: image005.jpg; image011.jpg; image013.png; image014.jpg; image015.jpg; image016.png Eye on the Market, November 4, 2011 (attached PDF easier to read) The intersection of politics and economics comes to a head in the US, Italy and Greece; Chart of the Year I can't remember a time when stock price movements were quite so heavily affected by macroeconomic developments. One of our models indicates that 75%-80% of stock price move

Attachments: 11-04-11_-_EOTM_-_The_austerity_club.pdf

Inline-Images: image005.jpg; image011.jpg; image013.png; image014.jpg; image015.jpg; image016.png

Eye on the Market, November 4, 2011 (attached PDF easier to read) The intersection of politics and economics comes to a head in the US, Italy and Greece; Chart of the Year

I can't remember a time when stock price movements were quite so heavily affected by macroeconomic developments. One of our models indicates that 75%-80% of stock price movements for the S&P 100 are now explained by macro forces, a new all-time high. With that in mind, here are the latest developments in countries facing the political realities of fiscal austerity. This is not a fun time to be a politician in the birthplace of Western Democracy (Italy, Greece), or its 18th century offshoot (the US).

The United States, and the Incredible Shrinking Expectations for the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction

The chorus of voices calling for compromise and "big bang" long-term deficit reduction includes a bipartisan group of 100 House Democrats and Republicans in a letter to the Deficit Reduction Committee (DRC). However, so far, most policy proposals we hear about are far less ambitious, while others are already back-tracking on the Budget Control Act:

** A November 3 letter to the DRC by 33 Republican Senators calling for tax reform that lowers rates with no net tax increase

** A plan to have the DRC agree to a few hundred million of revenue increases, but then assign the task of finding them to other congressional committees, whose decisions would not be binding

** Using lower forecasts of war funding assumptions (declines in "Overseas Contingency Operations") to get to the targeted deficit reduction, rather than tackling structural deficits

** If the DRC does not come to agreement on $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction, there are mandated, "sequestered" cuts that would impact Medicare payments, security/defense allocations and non-defense spending. The latest reports indicate that Republican senators are working on legislation to derail mandated cuts to on defense spending, which of course has led to calls from Democratic legislators to defuse mandatory domestic spending cuts if defense cuts are derailed

We wrote a piece on why financial markets are likely to pay close attention to the DRC (the paper, which was entered into Senate testimony on October 4th by Maya MacGuineas ofthe Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, can be found here: ). The accompanying chart is the starting point in the discussion. As shown, even if the DRC doesfind $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction over ten years as per the Budget Control Act, the debt trajectory of the United States is still not stabilized, and will continue to rise based on CBO (and our) projections for growth, spending and revenues. Celebrating the Committee's ability to get to $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction would be like having a national holiday commemorating the U.S. military victory over Grenada. Something like $3 trillion in 10- year deficit reduction would be needed to ensure that the United States controls its own economic destiny. The current imperative for the US is job growth, which cures a lot of ills, so why consider tax increases and spending cuts at all? One of the common denominators of countries whose private sector job growth is healthy is the backdrop of a public sector that is not at risk of a sudden, destabilizing withdrawal of foreign capital. What's happening in Italy and Greece are examples of what can take place when that is no longer the case.

EFTA01171081

| Year | CBO August Baseline | Budget Control Act: Joint Committee proposal | Budget Control Act: Automatic Cuts | CBO June Alternative case |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 | 37 |  |  |  |
| 2006 | 36 |  |  |  |
| 2008 | 40 |  |  |  |
| 2010 | 50 |  |  |  |
| 2012 | 60 | 70 |  |  |
| 2014 | 65 | 68 |  |  |
| 2016 | 68 | 65 |  | 98 |
| 2018 | 70 | 63 |  | 100 |
| 2020 | 72 | 60 | 80 | 102 |

Italy,Economics > Politics, and the Chart of the Year

To keep this note limited to 3 pages, we cannot spend too much time describing the workings of the Italian Parliament (there have been 14 Italian governments since the inception of the European Monetary Union). As reported by II Corriere, finance minister Tremonti warned Prime Minister Berlusconi that if he did not step down, there could be a "disaster in financial markets"; Berlusconi replied that the problems were more a function of Tremonti "speaking ill about me". All we can say is that a technocratic government may be getting closer if Berlusconi continues to lose support in the Popolo della Liberia, perhaps led by former EU Competition Commissioner Mario Monti (known in some circles for his decision to block the 2000 GE/Honeywell merger, and fines levied against Microsoft). Monti is a supporter of EU Federalization; although given the subsidies for countries like Italy that Federalization implies, I can't imagine why any Italian economist would ever oppose it.

While markets might welcome a technocratic government, keep in mind that the lesson of the last 2 years is that in the long run, economics trump politics. Here are 5 things to keep in mind about Italy's economy, with references to when we included the corresponding charts in the EoTM:

** Other than during its participation in WWI/WWII, Italy's debt is at the highest level since reunification in 1861 (Sep 21)

** Italy has not experienced the labor competitiveness adjustments seen in Ireland, has among the worst "production time per unit" in Europe, and relies more on foreign capital than at any time since 1975 (Sep 21)

** The decline in Italy's debt-to-GDP ratio during the late 1990's was heavily based on EMU convergence which resulted in Italian interest expenditures to GDP falling from 11% to 4% (Oct 5); this is a one-trick pony that is now going in reverse ** The primary budget surplus Italy ran in the 1990's was based mostly on higher taxes rather than reduced spending (Oct

5), providing less of a blueprint for the current period, when the primary surplus will also need to be around 4%-5%

** Loan loss provisions held by Italian banks on their performing loans are 15%-25% of comparable levels in the US (Nov I)

On top of these structural issues, the latest surveys show a sharp decline in output in Italy, suggesting that a recession is coming (see chart below). Our Chief Economist Michael Vaknin estimates that even with a primary surplus of 3%, if accompanied by a modest recession of 1.5% of GDP in 2012, 5% interest rates and 1% inflation, Italian debt would rise rather than fall over the next 3 years.

The ECB would like to see the Italian Parliament do the following: reform collective wage bargaining, allowing companies to tailor wages and working conditions to firm-specific needs; review rules regulating hiring and dismissal of employees; create a fund to help with worker reallocation; and tighten pension eligibility criteria. Whether this would unleash a productive surge in Italy is anyone's guess [a]. Italy's stubborn growth and productivity gap with Germany brings us to the Chart of the Year.

EFTA01171082

| Year | Germany | Italy |
|---|---|---|
| 1982 | 75 | 73 |
| 1986 | 85 | 80 |
| 1990 | 95 | 85 |
| 1994 | 100 | 88 |
| 1998 | 105 | 90 |
| 2002 | 115 | 95 |
| 2006 | 125 | 100 |
| 2010 | 135 | 85 |

Chart of the Year. This was a difficult choice, as we have shown 511 different charts in the Eye on the Market so far this year. To be eligible, the chart has to capture a trend that had a large impact on markets, and also has to be easy to understand (not the case for all our charts). The winner, shown above with its first place ribbon: the one showing the divergence between German and Italian industrial production, which began like clockwork when the Euro was adopted. Instead of explaining the reasons that this chart won, I will summarize as follows. If I told you that this economic outcome was the by-product of belated efforts by the Allied Powers of the 1940's to sow dissension and discord in the ranks of the Axis Powers, it would make more sense than to discover that this is the result of an economic model willfully adopted by the countries themselves. As a reminder, Italy has more debt outstanding than Germany, despite being a considerably smaller economy.

Greece and Chaos theory

At times like this, it's worth remembering that "chaos" is a word ofGreek origin (xftoc). Over the past 48 hours, Greece has been contemplating public referendums (the way Ancient Athens used to sort things out), early elections, national unity governments, etc. As with Italy, the Greek government needs an explicit vote of support, either from the opposition parties or the public at large, to continue with its failed, IMF-approved experiment of fiscal austerity within the confines of a fixed exchange rate. Markets might like the fact that there will be no referendum or early elections; I think that is a mistake. The political and social fabric of Greece is in shreds; the lack of a safety valve allowing public consent to continued austerity is potentially dangerous. A national unity government designed to simply re-approve austerity plans and secure the next EU disbursement may have no more political legitimacy than the current one.

Why isn't the recently proposed debt exchange calming things down? The proposed debt exchange is designed to include the "voluntary" participation ofEuropean banks, which own 85 billion out of Greece's 375 billion in debt. There's another 100 billion or so held by a variety of private sector entities that might participate, but the incentives at the current time are unclear [b]. The remainder is held by the IMF, ECB, EU and Greek Social Security Funds, which are reportedly not participating. As a result, as shown in the first chart, Greece's debt burden is still crushing, even assuming 50% debt forgiveness and 150 billion of participation. All the scenarios are bad, even the one crafted by the IMF; compare them to prior post-restructuring debt levels in Mexico and Argentina. The EU approach to Greece from the beginning has violated the principles the official sector learned a long time ago: you cannot impose austerity from outside without visible contributions by external creditors that make the country's finances sustainable (see box).

EFTA01171083

| Year | Greece Morgan central scenario | Greece IMF/ECB/EU baseline | Argentina 2001 post-restructuring debt to GDP | Mexico 1990 post-restructuring debt to GDP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| '09 | 127% | 127% | - | - |
| '10 | 159% | 155% | - | - |
| '11 | 164% | 148% | - | - |
| '12 | 161% | 143% | - | - |
| '13 | 164% | 137% | - | - |
| '14 | 168% | 134% | - | - |
| '15 | 172% | 130% | - | - |
| '16 | 176% | 127% | - | - |
| '17 | 180% | 124% | - | - |
| '18 | 184% | 121% | - | - |
| '19 | 186% | 118% | - | - |
| '20 | 188% | 115% | - | - |

**Notes:**
* The chart displays "Debt to GDP, percent" from '09 to '20.
* Argentina's post-restructuring debt to GDP is shown at 65%.
* Mexico's post-restructuring debt to GDP is shown at 50%.
* Sources include EU, J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, Banco de México, and Ministerio de Economía y Producción.

le,,on that EI polio makers forfml to read From the World Banks archives. in 1990: "Mexicans have made such enormous adjustments. accepted such a large reduction in living standards. that any package without an extensive and visible contribution by external creditors would not be acceptable domestically" "Mexico's External Debt Restructuring in 1989-90". June 1990. S. van Wijnbergen. World Bank Regional Working Paper 424.

For what it's worth, I do not subscribe to the economic orthodoxy that it is axiomatic that Greece would be worse off defaulting and exiting the Euro. This is speculation, and my opinion doesn't matter anyway. But I find it interesting that some people who have misjudged the severity of the EMU crisis from the beginning are the voices most convinced that an exit from the EU would result in a greater disaster for Greece worse than the one that is already upon them.

Let's start with this table. These are estimates of Greece's "primary balance", the budget deficit they must close by increasing taxes or cutting spending, before considering interest expense. The bottom line: by 2012, Greece will be much closer to being in balance before interest, raising the incentive to default on its external debt. A default and exit from the Euro would most likely knock Greek GDP for a loop (again), which could reintroduce a primary deficit. But there's no question that Greece is closer now than it was a year ago to being able to consider a default/exit option that does not automatically entail another massive fiscal contraction.

<table><tr><th colspan="5">Greece primary balance, % of GDP</th></tr><tr><td>Source</td><td>2010</td><td>2011</td><td>2012</td><td>As of</td></tr><tr><td>JPMS LLC</td><td>-4.90</td><td>-2.30</td><td>0.80</td><td>10/28/2011</td></tr><tr><td>IMF/ECB/EU</td><td>-4.90</td><td>-2.30</td><td>1.40</td><td>10/28/2011</td></tr><tr><td>IMF</td><td>-4.95</td><td>-1.29</td><td>0.79</td><td>Sep-11</td></tr><tr><td>OECD</td><td>-5.08</td><td>-1.93</td><td>-0.94</td><td>7/1/2011</td></tr><tr><td>Eurostat</td><td>-4.90</td><td>-2.80</td><td>-1.80</td><td>Spring 2011</td></tr><tr><td>BofA/ML Research</td><td>-4.90</td><td>-1.30</td><td>0.80</td><td>9/26/2011</td></tr></table>

The unshakable conclusion that Greece would be worse off if it left the European Monetary Union is also inconveniently challenged by the recent recovery in Iceland (see Appendix), the recovery of the United Kingdom in 1992 after leaving the ERM (Exchange Rate Mechanism), and the last 40 years of history regarding fiscal adjustments, growth and currency devaluation. There is very little precedent for what the Europeans are trying to do: large fiscal adjustments at a time of low growth and without currency devaluation (see orange circles on chart below). These efforts are in stark contrast to the last 40 years of history in Europe and Latin America regarding how such crises are typically resolved (yellow circles).

EFTA01171084

## Fiscal Adjustments, Then and Now

| Group | GDP Growth (%) | Currency Devaluation (%) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 EMU fiscal adjustments | ~1.0% - ~2.0% | ~0% - ~10% | Represented by orange circles. Larger circles indicate higher GDP growth. |
| Prior European and Latin adjustments, 1975-2000 | ~1.0% - ~4.0% | ~0% - ~90% | Represented by yellow circles. Size of circles appears to vary, not clearly correlated with an axis. |

## Iceland, Greece, and Italy Sovereign Credit Default Swap Spread (Basis Points)

| Country | Jun-07 | Feb-08 | Oct-08 | Jun-09 | Feb-10 | Oct-10 | Jun-11 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Iceland | ~100 | ~200 | ~1100 | ~500 | ~300 | ~300 | ~200 |
| Greece | ~100 | ~200 | ~400 | ~600 | ~700 | ~5700 | ~5700 |
| Italy | ~50 | ~100 | ~150 | ~200 | ~200 | ~250 | ~300 |

There is no question that there would be severe costs to Greece if it defaulted and exited the Euro. If Greece had to

rely on its central bank to finance budget deficits, they would risk a substantial rise in inflation (which could erode the devaluation benefit), and in turn, further damage the credibility of the Bank of Greece. There could also be disruptions to trade finance (which could be ameliorated by the IMF in ways that more constructive for Greece than what they are doing now). The question is whether exiting offers the chance of something better for Greece than the certainty of failure associated with staying in the Euro. That is what Greece is in the process of debating; a temporary government is unlikely to be the last word on this.

Michael Cembalest

Chief Investment Officer

The Sun Also Rises: Iceland's post-devaluation recovery

Unlike the rest of Southern Europe, Iceland pursued the traditional formula: fiscal austerity, a large currency devaluation (which led to a rapid improvement in its current account deficit), an IMF loan and most importantly, the refusal to take on the obligations of Icelandic banks. Iceland's debt/gdp ratio is now around 100% (having risen from 40% a few years ago), so why are Iceland's credit spreads so much tighter than in Ireland and Portugal and tighter than Italy? Iceland suffered a huge spike in inflation and unemployment in 2009, and a terrible collapse in GDP and private consumption as well. But by 2010, the standard adjustment started to play out, in which GDP, trade, private consumption and capital spending are now rebounding. Inflation, which hit 18% in 2009, is back at 2%. The budget deficit is 4.5% of GDP, requiring less austerity going forward than Southern Europe. Iceland is expected to grow at around 3.5% to 4.0%, which helps solve a lot of problems, and puts the government debt ratio on a trajectory to decline rather than rise. Iceland's unemployment has risen to 9%, but is stable and now half the rate in Southern Europe. A fiercely independent country, it also controls its own destiny.

Notes

[a] Unfortunately for Italy, of all reforms, labor market reforms are the ones with the largest short-term negative impact on

growth. See "Fostering structural reforms in industrial countries", IMF, 2004, Chapter 3, Exhibit 3.9. [b] A lot depends on whether participants in the first exchange (if it happens) could be defaulted upon a second time in the future. In other words, if any new bonds are cross-defaulted with existing Greek debt, and in 2012 Greece defaults on those who did not participate the first time, there's no reason to participate today, since you will be defaulted upon twice. To avoid this outcome, the bonds offered in the current exchange would have to either be subject to UK law (as opposed to Greek law), or collateralized in some reliable way.

The material contained herein is intended as a general market commentary. Opinions expressed herein are those of Michael Cembalest and may differ from those of other J.P. Morgan employees and affiliates. This information in no way constitutes J.P. Morgan research and should not be treated as such. Further, the views expressed herein may differ from that contained in J.P. Morgan research reports. The above summary/prices/quotes/statistics have been obtained from sources deemed to be reliable, but we do not guarantee their accuracy or completeness, any yield referenced is indicative and subject to change. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results. References to the performance or character of our portfolios generally refer to our Balanced Model Portfolios constructed by J.P. Morgan. It is a proxy for client performance and may not represent actual transactions or investments in client accounts. The model portfolio can be implemented across brokerage or managed accounts depending on the unique objectives of each client and is serviced through distinct legal entities licensed for specific activities. Bank, trust and investment management services are provided by J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A, and its affiliates. Securities are offered through J.P. Morgan Securities LLC (JPMS), Member NYSE, FINRA and SIPC and Chase Investment Services s Corp., (CISC) member FINRA and SIPC. Securities products purchased or sold through JPMS or CISC are not not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC"); are not deposits or other obligations of its bank or thrift affiliates and are not guaranteed by its bank or thrift affiliates; and are subject to investment risks, including possible loss of the principal invested. Not all investment ideas referenced are suitable for all investors. Speak with your J.P. Morgan Representative concerning your personal situation. This material is not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument. Private Investments may engage in leveraging and other speculative practices that may increase the risk of investment loss, can be highly illiquid, are not required to provide periodic pricing or valuations to investors and may involve complex tax structures and delays in distributing important tax information. Typically such investment ideas can only be offered to suitable investors through a confidential offering memorandum which fully describes all terms, conditions, and risks. IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: JPMorgan Chase & Co. and its affiliates do not provide tax advice. Accordingly, any discussion of U.S. tax matters contained herein (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, in connection with the promotion, marketing or recommendation by anyone

EFTA01171085

unaffiliated with JPMorgan Chase & Co. of any of the matters addressed herein or for the purpose of avoiding U.S. tax-related penalties. Note that| Morgan is not a licensed insurance provider. ©2011 JPMorgan Chase & Co; All rights reserved

This email is confidential and subject to important disclaimers and conditions including on offers for the purchase or sale of securities, accuracy and come leteness of information viruses confidentiality, legal privilege, and legal entity disclaimers, available at

EFTA01171086

📅 Nov 4, 2011 REDACTED

SRF ISLS Memo and website with ISLS/ Dr. Munther featured

From: CA-Chairman's Assistant - From the Office of Dr. Jarecki

Please see attached. Kind regards, Rachel McCullough-Sanden From the office of Dr. Henry Jarecki The Falconwood Corporation 67 Irving Place, 12th Floor New York, NY 10003 T: F: The information contained in this message, and any attachment, is intended only for the intended recipient(s). It may contain confidential, privileged or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to review, copy or distribute this message. If you receive this message in er

Please see attached.

Kind regards,

Rachel McCullough-Sanden

From the office of Dr. Henry Jarecki
The Falconwood Corporation
67 Irving Place, 12th Floor
New York, NY 10003

T:
F:

The information contained in this message, and any attachment, is intended only for the intended recipient(s). It may contain confidential, privileged or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to review, copy or distribute this message. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.

EFTA01171087

📅 Oct 31, 2011

Emailing: FrogBearWarren, DSC02559ed

From: Warren Eisenstein

To: Undisclosed-Recipient

Almost 50 years apart. Your message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments: FrogBearWarren DSC02559ed Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled.

Almost 50 years apart.

Your message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments: FrogBearWarren DSC02559ed

Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled.

📅 Oct 31, 2011

Fwd: Fwd:

From: drsra

To: jeevacation@gmail.com

Got this letter this morning. Mike & his wife got a Summary Judgment against them. I was told by the Bank they would release me for $60,000.00 at the short sale and now I find out Mike & Julie walk without paying anything. Why should I have to pay when he gets the pass. I consider it evidence of collusion between Mike and the Bank. -- On Mon, 10/31/11, Trent Steele < > wrote: From: Trent Steele < Subject: Fwd: Fwd: To: " " < >, "Leanne Seibert" < Date: Monday, October 31, 2011, 9:43 AM Sent f

Got this letter this morning. Mike & his wife got a Summary Judgment against them. I was told by the Bank they would release me for $60,000.00 at the short sale and now I find out Mike & Julie walk without paying anything. Why should I have to pay when he gets the pass. I consider it evidence of collusion between Mike and the Bank.

-- On Mon, 10/31/11, Trent Steele < > wrote:

From: Trent Steele <
Subject: Fwd: Fwd:
To: " " < >, "Leanne Seibert" <
Date: Monday, October 31, 2011, 9:43 AM

Sent from my mobile phone

Begin forwarded message:

From: "John Reichard" <
To: "Trent Steele" <
Subject: Fwd:

------ Forwarded message ------
From: <
Date: Oct 31, 2011 9:14 AM
Subject:
To: "John" <

This E-mail was sent from "RNPA9D899" (Aficio 3045).

Scan Date: 10.31.2011 08:11:02 (-0500)
Queries to:

EFTA01171092

📅 Oct 31, 2011

Re: Fw: Settlement

From: Jeffrey Epstein

To: drsra

yes, you can call me On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 6:09 PM, drsra < wrote: Your thoughts? Mike has supposedly found a buyer, but he has told lies constantly & I don't trust him. Is the wiser course to just pay the $60,000.00 and be done with it? - - On Mon, 10/31/11, Leanne Seibert > wrote: * **Sender:** Leanne Seibert * **Subject:** Settlement * **Recipient:** "drsra" * **Cc:** "Trent Steele" * **Date:** Monday, October 31, 2011, 5:38 PM Trent asked me to send you this information on the settleme

yes, you can call me

On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 6:09 PM, drsra < wrote: Your thoughts? Mike has supposedly found a buyer, but he has told lies constantly & I don't trust him. Is the wiser course to just pay the $60,000.00 and be done with it?

- - On Mon, 10/31/11, Leanne Seibert > wrote:

* **Sender:** Leanne Seibert
* **Subject:** Settlement
* **Recipient:** "drsra"
* **Cc:** "Trent Steele"
* **Date:** Monday, October 31, 2011, 5:38 PM

Trent asked me to send you this information on the settlement.

Kranz originally said $100,000 plus closing costs to be paid 12/ by Hardman and 12/ by you contingent on the

short sale closing. We agreed to pay $60,000 now, but only if they released you whether or not the short sale closed. Then the bank agreed to release you upon payment of the $60,000 now, without it being contingent on closing and they said they were not going to release Hardman's guarantee. Now we get the letter that says they are not requiring a payment from Hardman and will release his guarantee contingent on closing within 45 days. Otherwise the letter provides that if the short sale falls through, the bank will proceed with the foreclosure sale and no release of Hardman. The $60,000 from you is for a full release now regardless of whether or not the short sale closes.

The letter indicates that the foreclosure sale will go through if the property does not close before January 12, 2012. In that case the buyer could bid their offer at the foreclosure sale or negotiate with the bank after the foreclosure sale and the bank could still prosecute their case on the guarantees against you and Hardman.

You indicated you wanted the matter resolved now and be done with it. If you want to pay nothing now we can go back to Kranz and make that demand, but then you would only be released if the short sale closes. Not too long ago they turned down your offer to settle for $100,000 to release your guarantee only. The question at this point is whether it is worth the payment of $60,000 to get your release guaranteed now or not.

Please advise how you want us to proceed.

EFTA01171098

**Law Offices of W. Trent Steele**

**Services:**
* Bankruptcy
* Foreclosure Defense
* Real Estate
* Wills, Trusts, & Estates
* Business Law

**Contact:**
* Leanne Seibert, FRP (Paralegal/Office Manager)
* Address: 8902 SE Bridge Rd.
* Offices in Palm Beach Gardens, Hobe Sound, & Port St. Lucie

**Confidentiality Notice:** This transmission is attorney/client privileged and confidential. Dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited.

********

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of Jeffrey Epstein

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com, and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

EFTA01171099

📅 Nov 7, 2011 REDACTED

Paris-20111107-01003jpg

From: Unknown

To: Jeffrey Epstein <jeevacation@gmail.com>

EFTA01171101

EFTA01171101

📅 Nov 7, 2011

Photographs - November 7, 2011

From: Daphne Wallace

To: Jeffrey Epstein (jeevacation@gmail.com)

Greetings Mr. Epstein, November 7 photographs for your review and comments: Blue beach Main compound Big hill grading Courtyard tree lights scaffolding Library wall Palms hurricane tie down anchors Palms off master - preliminary grading Flagpole Parking area Landscaping - grass, relocated bottle palm, transplanted "Ginger Thomas" Landscaping The palm off of the outdoor tub area was removed - the surrounding concrete/stonework did not provide ample room for that palm's root system, so the

Greetings Mr. Epstein,

November 7 photographs for your review and comments:

Blue beach

Main compound
Big hill grading
Courtyard tree lights scaffolding
Library wall
Palms hurricane tie down anchors
Palms off master - preliminary grading

Flagpole 
Parking area
Landscaping - grass, relocated bottle palm, transplanted "Ginger Thomas"

Landscaping

The palm off of the outdoor tub area was removed - the surrounding concrete/stonework did not provide ample room for that palm's root system, so the palm died - Igala would like to replace it with a Christmas palm - JE please advise

Dock house

Respectfully submitted,

Daphne

EFTA01171103

EFTA01171104

📅 Nov 8, 2011 REDACTED

Joe's Photo shoot

From: Warren Eisenstein

Milne-Images: photo.JPG This is legit.... The series is "Mob Wives" starts Dec.-Jan. Keep on Pushin' A man is standing in front of a framed black and white photograph. He is wearing a black tuxedo with a white ruffled shirt and a black bow tie. He has a patterned scarf draped around his neck. The photograph behind him shows a bustling scene at what appears to be a pier, with a sign reading "STEEL PIER". Warren EFTA01171145

Milne-Images: photo.JPG

This is legit.... The series is "Mob Wives" starts Dec.-Jan.

Keep on Pushin'

A man is standing in front of a framed black and white photograph. He is wearing a black tuxedo with a white ruffled shirt and a black bow tie. He has a patterned scarf draped around his neck. The photograph behind him shows a bustling scene at what appears to be a pier, with a sign reading "STEEL PIER".

Warren

EFTA01171145

📅 Nov 1, 2011

J.P. Morgan Eye on the Market, November 1, 2011: The Jackrabbit Solution

From: US GIO

To: Undisclosed recipients

Attachments: 11-01-11_-_EOTM_-_The_Jackrabbit_Solution.pdf Inline-Images: image002.png; image004.png; image009.png; image011.png; image013.png; image017.jpg Eye on the Market, November 1, 2011 (attached PDF much easier to read, and has a picture of a rabbit) Topics: US economic/profits watch; the latest idea to save Europe (repo markets); Brazil; the Gospel according to Paul Equity markets have just been through something that has only occurred a handful of times over the last 80 years: a 1

Attachments: 11-01-11_-_EOTM_-_The_Jackrabbit_Solution.pdf

Inline-Images: image002.png; image004.png; image009.png; image011.png; image013.png; image017.jpg

Eye on the Market, November 1, 2011 (attached PDF much easier to read, and has a picture of a rabbit)

Topics: US economic/profits watch; the latest idea to save Europe (repo markets); Brazil; the Gospel according to Paul

Equity markets have just been through something that has only occurred a handful of times over the last 80 years: a

15% selloff and recovery in the span of 3 months 11930-1933, 1938, 2001, 2002, 2009 and now 20111. As we noted a few weeks ago, technical factors indicated that there was extreme pessimism regarding US and Chinese growth, and the European debt crisis. All it took were modest improvements in the US and China economic outlook and ambiguous plans out of Europe to drive markets higher. Where do we go from here? Sideways, most likely, with more volatility to come. The first chart below is a proxy for the environment we think we are in. In the wake of the 1970's recession, US and German equity markets collapsed, then rallied back sharply by the end of 1976. Afterwards, during a period of extreme monetary and fiscal policy uncertainty, markets went sideways for years until the smoke cleared, setting the stage for the next bull market. Lessons learned during the prior period: don't sell when valuations are very low and pessimism is extremely high; look for opportunities to add yield through high-dividend stocks, and credit; and be prepared to shift to a more aggressive portfolio only when macroeconomics fade in importance relative to the profit cycle. On the latter point, we think we are not there yet; 2012 looks like another year in which macro will trump micro, as it has for the last 3 years.

| Year | S&P 500 Level (Blue) | Germany DAX Level (Brown) | Consumption (QoQ, annualized, sa) | Disposable Income (QoQ, annualized, sa) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1972 | ~100 | ~600 | N/A | N/A |
| 1973 | ~100 | ~800 | N/A | N/A |
| 1974 | ~70 | ~400 | N/A | N/A |
| 1975 | ~60 | ~300 | N/A | N/A |
| 1976 | ~100 | ~600 | N/A | N/A |
| 1977 | ~100 | ~700 | N/A | N/A |
| 1978 | ~90 | ~750 | N/A | N/A |
| 1979 | ~90 | ~700 | N/A | N/A |
| 1980 | ~110 | ~650 | N/A | N/A |
| 1981 | ~120 | ~550 | N/A | N/A |
| 1982 | ~140 | ~450 | N/A | N/A |
| 1983 | ~160 | ~750 | N/A | N/A |
| 1990 | N/A | N/A | ~2% | ~1% |
| 1991 | N/A | N/A | ~0% | ~-2% |
| 1992 | N/A | N/A | ~2% | ~0% |
| 1993 | N/A | N/A | ~4% | ~2% |
| 1994 | N/A | N/A | ~2% | ~2% |
| 1995 | N/A | N/A | ~4% | ~0% |
| 1996 | N/A | N/A | ~4% | ~2% |
| 1997 | N/A | N/A | ~5% | ~4% |
| 1998 | N/A | N/A | ~6% | ~2% |
| 1999 | N/A | N/A | ~4% | ~-2% |
| 2000 | N/A | N/A | ~6% | ~2% |
| 2001 | N/A | N/A | ~0% | ~-4% |
| 2002 | N/A | N/A | ~2% | ~-6% |
| 2003 | N/A | N/A | ~6% | ~2% |
| 2004 | N/A | N/A | ~8% | ~4% |
| 2005 | N/A | N/A | ~6% | ~2% |
| 2006 | N/A | N/A | ~4% | ~4% |
| 2007 | N/A | N/A | ~2% | ~0% |
| 2008 | N/A | N/A | ~0% | ~-8% |
| 2009 | N/A | N/A | ~4% | ~6% |
| 2010 | N/A | N/A | ~4% | ~2% |
| 2011 | N/A | N/A | ~2% | ~-2% |

**Key Entities:**

*   **S&P 500 Level:** Represents US equity market performance.
*   **Germany DAX Level:** Represents German equity market performance.
*   **Consumption:** Quarterly change in real consumption, annualized.
*   **Disposable Income:** Quarterly change in real disposable income, annualized.
*   **Bloomberg:** Source of equity market data.
*   **Bureau of Economic Analysis:** Source of consumer spending data.

**Key Information from Left Chart:**

*   The period from 1973 to 1976 is highlighted as a "Period of extreme monetary and fiscal uncertainty" where both S&P 500 and Germany DAX levels declined significantly before a sharp rally.
*   A "Bull market begins" is indicated around 1982.

**Key Information from Right Chart:**

*   Shows consumers spending by drawing down savings.
*   Consumption generally tracks disposable income but with greater volatility.
*   Periods of significant negative QoQ changes in disposable income are visible, particularly around 2001-2002 and 2008.
*   Consumption fluctuates more dramatically, sometimes exceeding disposable income growth and at other times falling below it.

US economic growth and profits outlook: better than very low expectations as2011 comes to a close

** Consumer spending has held up better than expected. However, this is due more to a decline in the savings rate than to improvements in disposable income (see second chart). This can go on for a quarter or two, but there's a limit to which the savings ratio can serve as a buffer against stagnation in household income.

** Commercial construction, capital goods shipments, light truck vehicle sales and other capital spending have generally been exceeding expectations. Regional business surveys have also been improving this month.

** As things stand now, the papal infallibility of the Economic Cycle Research Institute may be at risk, given their prediction of an unavoidable recession: "You haven't seen anything yet. It's going to get a lot worse." Our expectations have been for roughly 2% US growth: lower than the 3% consensus view that prevailed during Spring 2011 (in part due to the housing drag), but better than the recession which was priced in during September and early October.

** The big question revolves around the Committee on Deficit Reduction. The Fed's recommended solution is more fiscal stimulus now in exchange for substantial tax and entitlement changes in the future. Either way, the private sector will have to overcome fiscal tightening in 2012. The only question is whether the austerity burden will be moderate (e.g., if payroll tax cuts are extended), or very large (see chart).

EFTA01171149

| Year | Fiscal Deficit (% of GDP) | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Jun-63 | Approximately 0% | |
| Jun-70 | Approximately -0.5% | |
| Jun-77 | Approximately -1.5% | |
| Jun-84 | Approximately 1% | |
| Jun-91 | Approximately 0% | |
| Jun-98 | Approximately -1% | |
| Jun-05 | Approximately -1.5% | |
| Jun-12 | Approximately 1.5% | Assuming payroll tax cuts & unemployment insurance benefits are extended (indicated by red dot) |

** Profits update: another quarter of profits growth, this time to an all-time high. After the recent rally, the S&P is priced at 11.5x-12x 2012 earnings. The Achilles Heel remains the reliance of profits on a 50-year low in labor compensation to revenues, which is why profits should not command the same multiples they did in the past.

** China does not appear to be tilting into recession: growth in industrial value-added picked up in September vs August, as did cement production and steel demand. Consumption remains solid: spending measured by the urban household survey picked up in Q3 vs Q2. The October manufacturing business survey that we follow moved above 50 after spending 3 months below 50; new orders improved as well. Monetary policy is unlikely to change soon, but with money supply growth running below target and core inflation decelerating, chances are that if the Central Bank does move it will be in the direction of easing.

The Jackrabbit solution: usingnpo markets to save southern Europt

The European Union has been working on ideas to leverage its 440 billion Euro backstop (EFSF) into something bigger. Why? First, roughly 150 billion has already been spent/committed, or is needed for bank recapitalization. Second, funding needs for Spain and Italy over the next couple of years are 2x-3x what's left. I will not go into the intestinal details of the so-called "Monoline Solution" or the "Special Purpose Vehicle Solution" other than to say that they probably require the following:

" That France does not get downgraded below AAA, which could short-circuit the entire mechanism

" That Europe finds sufficient appetite for unorthodox long-term sovereign bonds with first-loss protection

" That a special purpose vehicle will be able to issue subordinated debt rated no higher than Italy itself

While these conditions might be achievable, they are far from certain. As a result, behind the scenes, our understanding is that Europe is looking for another way to draw in private capital. The idea of repo is interesting, since it tries to make good use of the rise in precautionary savings by companies, households and central banks that the European mess itself has prompted.

To make this simple, if you need to borrow a lot of money, you would first figure out who has a lot of it. In today's world, there are massive pools of cash struggling to find credit-worthy entities to lend to. A proxy for this is the quartet of charts below: the accumulation of reserves by EM and Japanese central banks; the surplus of deposits over loans in the US commercial banking system; the money that European banks leave on deposit at the ECB; and the pool of savings in US money market funds. There are others, but these tell the story: there's a lot of cash looking for a home as the money multiplier collapses.

| Category                        | Emerging Markets | Japan | US Commercial Banks (Deposits) | US Commercial Banks (Loans) | ECB Deposit Facility | US Institutional Money Market Fund Assets |
|---------------------------------|------------------|-------|--------------------------------|-----------------------------|----------------------|-----------------------------------------|
| **Data Type**                   | Trillions, USD   | Trillions, USD | Trillions, USD                 | Trillions, USD              | Billions, EUR        | Trillions, USD                          |
| **Approximate Data Range (2011)** | ~7.8             | ~1.1  | ~8.5                           | ~4.5                        | ~30                  | ~1.7                                    |
| **Trend**                       | Rapid Increase   | Gradual Increase | Steady Increase                | Gradual Decrease            | Volatile, then Decreasing | Peaked around 2009, then Decreasing     |
| **Time Period Covered**         | '70-'11          | '70-'11 | '00-'11                        | '00-'11                     | '08-'11              | '01-'11                                 |

The good news, in theory. These pools of capital participate in "repo markets", which are short-term collateralized lending facilities [a]. The size of this market in Europe is at least 6 trillion Euros, more than enough in principle to provide leverage

EFTA01171150

to the EFSF so that it could buy Italian and Spanish government bonds, pledge them, and then buy more. The EFSF would not need to borrow at the current 5%-7% repo haircuts applied to Italian debt (up to 15% for longer maturities). Even if the EFSF had to borrow at haircuts of say, 30%, it could still on paper create a trillion Euro backstop facility. Cash providers would presumably take the risk of lending against Italian government bonds given these larger haircuts, and given the ability to exit if they don't like the way things are going. Repo investors could earn more than the 0.75% they get paid by the ECB, and more than the 0.90% they earn in the unsecured overnight interbank lending market. Debt crisis solved?

The obvious problem: repo market lenders are like Jackrabbits, in that they flee at the first sign of trouble. That's what they should do, since they are looking for a marketplace with very little return (generally below Libor) in exchange for taking very little risk. We have no way of knowing if larger-than-normal lending haircuts would reduce their jackrabbit nature. What we do know is that in the fall of 2008 [b], and more recently in Europe, the rapid flight of repo lenders played a role in accelerating a debt crisis. High-velocity repo lenders might need upfront reassurance that the ECB would step into their shoes if there were a sudden and collective repo financing meltdown.

The less obvious problem: if the EU succeeds in creating a large-haircut lending product, what impact will that have on the rest of the repo markets? In other words, why would people keep financing French debt with a 5% haircut when you could lend against Italian debt with a 30% haircut? There could be unintended distortions in the rest of the repo markets which worsen financing conditions at a time when European banks are already shrinking their balance sheets.

An even less obvious problem: at some point, markets may refocus on the sand-bagging of bank capital adequacy stress tests, and insist that the EU explain more about its intended backstop for bank debt. Comparison of the week: the chart below shows the level of provisions on performing credit loans by US and European banks. If a recession takes place in Europe (the latest business surveys out of Germany were very weak), worsening conditions for banks could complicate the repo solution by increasing the amount of money sovereigns might need to fix them.

Bottom line: we find the repo idea interesting, as it appears to sidestep some problems inherent in the other approaches. Any subordinated capital from the IMF or China would help as well, since it too could be leveraged. However, using a liquidity-focused, hyper-skittish investor base to solve a problem that longer term debt markets do not want to solve is complicated, if not counter-intuitive. This is particularly true for pools of capital outside European banks (state and local U.S. governments, mutual funds, custodial managers, etc) which typically only lend against the highest quality collateral in the tri-party repo system. We will need a lot more detail from repo market participants before considering this a viable solution. Meanwhile, Greece continues to disintegrate both economically and politically, the Irish miracle is fading with a first half relapse in GNP, and the EU region is heading for recession and credit contraction. The EMU is still an emu (see last week's EoTM).

| Bank | Loan Loss Provisions (%) |
|---|---|
| Citi | 5.1 |
| BofA | 3.3 |
| JPM | 2.7 |
| WFC | 2.6 |
| US Bancorp | 2.3 |
| BB&T | 2.2 |
| PNC | 2.1 |
| Sun Trust | 2.0 |
| Erste | 0.4 |
| Dexia | 0.3 |
| KBC | 0.3 |
| Deutsche | 0.2 |
| Commerz | 0.2 |
| Landes | 0.2 |
| DZ Bank | 0.2 |
| Bayer Ln | 0.3 |
| Nord Deut | 0.3 |
| West LB | 0.3 |
| Danske | 0.3 |
| Santander | 0.7 |
| Bilbao | 0.3 |
| Paribas | 0.3 |
| Agricole | 0.3 |
| BPCE | 0.3 |
| Soc Gen | 0.3 |
| RBS | 0.3 |
| HSBC | 0.4 |
| Barclays | 0.3 |
| Lloyds | 0.3 |
| Bk of Ireland | 0.4 |
| Intesa | 0.4 |
| Unicredit | 0.4 |
| Paschi | 0.4 |
| ING | 0.3 |
| Rabo | 0.3 |
| ABN | 0.3 |
| DnB | 0.3 |
| Nordea | 0.3 |

| Year | Bovespa (LHS) | Non-consumption GDP (RHS) | Consumption (RHS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1995 | ~4,000 | ~100 | ~100 |
| 1997 | ~8,000 | ~110 | ~110 |
| 1999 | ~12,000 | ~120 | ~115 |
| 2001 | ~10,000 | ~130 | ~120 |
| 2003 | ~15,000 | ~140 | ~130 |
| 2005 | ~20,000 | ~150 | ~140 |
| 2007 | ~35,000 | ~160 | ~150 |
| 2009 | ~50,000 | ~155 | ~145 |
| 2011 | ~65,000 | ~160 | ~160 |

Stay focused on the steady pace of rising consumption in emerging economies like Brazil

As described above, we believe markets are in for an extended period of volatility given the global macro-economic landscape. There are not a lot of places to hide regarding interim valuations. But in the long run, we expect investments in companies with improving earnings fundamentals to pay off. One example: consider the steady advance of Brazilian consumption (see chart, above), compared to the rest of the Brazilian economy, and the Bovespa itself, both of which have been much more volatile.

One of our managers is dedicated to this strategy, having made acquisitions in car rentals, men's apparel targeting the middle class, food processing and distribution, etc. These companies were acquired at 6x-8x cash flow, and have generated earnings growth at twice the level of the Bovespa over the last year. The manager's pipeline is heavily focused on consumer goods, retailing and education. Investments in private companies entail a substantial sacrifice of liquidity; reserving illiquid portfolio

EFTA01171151

capacity for developing country consumer plays seems like a good place to deploy it. With the run rate ofBrazilian IPO's at around one third of their 2007-2010 pace, private equity investors are able to command better terms and conditions given a bit more capital scarcity.

One more thing: the Fed's zero interest rate policy plays a role here as well. The Brazilian Realhas been on a wild ride over the last few years, rising from 40 cents to 65 cents twice (2005-2008 and 2009-2011). With Brazilian interest rates still among the highest in the world, and easy Fed policy until 2047, we expect the Real to remain at the upper end of this range, putting further pressure on exports, and adding fuel to consumer incomes. Unemployment has fallen in half since 2004; according to the Brazilian Ministry ofFinance, Brazil's middle class rose from 65 million people in 2003 to 95 million people in 2009.

The Gospel according to Paul: the impact of high-risk, government sponsored lending

Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker remains a powerful and influential voice as it relates to the U.S. financial system. His views on the activities of banks and broker-dealers are well-known. However, I wonder if people are equally familiar with his views on the impact of high-risk government sponsored lending, as reported recently in the NY Times [c]:

"We simply should not countenance a residential mortgage market, the largest part of our capital market, dominated by so-called government-sponsored enterprises," Mr. Volcker said in his speech. "The financial breakdown was in fact triggered by extremely lax, government-tolerated underwriting standards, an important ingredient in the housing bubble." While he acknowledges that we cannot eliminate Fannie and Freddie anytime soon, "it is important that planning proceed now on the assumption that government-sponsored enterprises will no longer be a part of the structure of the market," he said

"This is an opportunity to get rid of institutions that shouldn't exist. You ought to be either public or private; don't mix up private profit-making opportunities with an institution that is going to be protected by the government but not controlled by it."

"If the government wants to guarantee mortgages for certain low-income people, O.K., but I wouldn't do much of it," Mr. Volcker
said. "A public agency intervening in the mortgage market in a limited way doesn't bother me. But if you want to subsidize the
mortgage market, do it more directly than hiding it in a quasi-private institution."

I find this chart useful in the context of Volcker's comments. It looks at one of the origins of the housing crisis: the growth of

high LTV loans, a source of eventual distress to taxpayers and homeowners. In the early 1990's, to maintain its charter and not be privatized, the US Agencies partnered with Congress and the Department of Housing and Urban Development and agreed to Affordable Housing targets. (FHEFSSA, ironically enough, stands for Federal HousingEnterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act). From that point going forward, Fannie Mae and FHA competed to see how many affordable loans they could underwrite. In 2002, Fannie Mae's CEO proclaimed that it was running "neck and neck" with the Federal Housing Administration as the chiefsource ofpublic funding for housing. Other illustrative quotes: "The government is our only competitor", and "Our company is overwhelmingly an affordable housing company" [d].

A look back at the origins of the housing crisis

Percent of annual loan volume

| Year | % of FHA/Fannie Mae home purchase volumes with LTV or CLTV >= 97% (LHS) | HUD affordable lending targets (RHS) | FHEFSSA |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1980 | 0% | 30% |  |
| 1983 | 0% | 30% |  |
| 1986 | 0% | 30% |  |
| 1989 | 1% | 30% |  |
| 1992 | 1% | 31% | 35% |
| 1995 | 4% | 34% | 36% |
| 1998 | 11% | 35% | 38% |
| 2001 | 17% | 37% | 41% |
| 2004 | 24% | 43% | 46% |
| 2007 | 34% | 55% | 59% |

The affordable housing targets started at 30%, but their "free lunch" nature was irresistible: Congress raised them 3 more times to please constituents. A year or two after each increase, GSE-guaranteed high LTV loans (loan to values >= 97%) rose sharply, and the rest, as they say, is history. Decades ofunderwriting discipline by both GSEs and banks went out the window. In an effort to promote affordable housing, its adherents arguably ended up exhausting several generations of housing subsidies in a few short years. As the debate about what went wrong and what to do continues, it's worth keeping this history in mind: good underwriting is the best foundation for a viable housing market, and the unintended consequences of seemingly benign public policy can never be under-analyzed.

EFTA01171152

Michael Cembalest

Chief Investment Officer

| EFSF   | European Financial Stability Facility   |
|-|-|
| ECB    | European Central Bank                   |
| LTV    | Loan to value                           |
| LCH    | London Clearing House                   |
| EMU    | European Monetary Union                 |
| IMF    | International Monetary Fund             |
| HUD    | Housing and Urban Development           |
| FHA    | Federal Housing Authority               |
| IPO    | Initial Public Offering                 |
| GSE    | Government sponsored enterprise         |

Notes

[a] There is a ton of detail on which entities would serve as repo collateral agent (LCH, Eurex, etc); how FX risk would be hedged by non-Euro participants; bilateral repo vs tri-party repo; etc. Most of this is not germane right now as to whether the idea would work or not

[b] Example: from June 2007 to the end of 2008, haircuts on AA and AAA asset backed securities rose from 1.8% to 18%. Haircuts on Irish debt were as high as 80% in the summer of 2011, compared to pre-crisis levels of 2%-4% for EU AAA sovereign paper.

[c] "How Mr. Volcker Would Fix It", New York Times, October 22, 2011

[d] As reported by Realty Times, March 2002, and National Mortgage News, April 2002.

The material contained herein is intended as a general market commentary. Opinions expressed herein are those of Michael Cembalest and may differ from those of other J.P. Morgan employees and affiliates. This information in no way constitutes J.P. Morgan research and should not be treated as such. Further, the views expressed herein may differ from that contained in J.P. Morgan research reports. The above summary/prices/quotes/statistics have been obtained from sources deemed to be reliable, but we do not guarantee their accuracy or completeness, any yield referenced is indicative and subject to change. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results. References to the performance or character of our portfolios generally refer to our Balanced Model Portfolios constructed by J.P. Morgan. It is a proxy for client performance and may not represent actual transactions or investments in client accounts. The model portfolio can be implemented across brokerage or managed accounts depending on the unique Morgan Chase Bank, NA, and its objectives of each client serviced through distinct legal entities licensed (CISC) member FINRA Securities are offered through J.P. Morgan Securities LLC (JPMS), Member NYSE. FINRA and SIPC are provided by J.P its affiliates. Securities specific activities. trust and trust and investment management services and Chase Investment Services Corp.): and SIPC. Securities products p purchased or sold through JPMS or C JPMS or CISC are not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance risks, including possible loss of the principal in obligations of its bank or thrift aftes and are not guaranteed by its bank or thrift affiliates; and are subject to investment or other with your Morgan Representative concerning y g your personal situation. This material is not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument. Private Investments may engage in leveraging and other speculative practices that may increase the risk of investment loss, can be highly illiquid, are not required to provide periodic pricing or suitable investors through a confidential offering memorandum which fully describes all termo tax information. Typically such investment ideas can only be offered to valuations to investors and may involve complex tax structures and delays in distributing terms, conditions, and risks. IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: JPMorgan Chase & Co. and its affiliates do not provide tax advice. Accordingly, any discussion of U.S. tax matters contained herein (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, in connection with the promotion, marketing or recommendation by anyone unaffiliated with JPMorgan Chase & Co. of any of the matters addressed herein or for the purpose of avoiding U.S. tax-related penalties. Note that J.P. Morgan is not a licensed insurance provider. ©2011 JPMorgan Chase & Co; All rights reserved

This email is confidential and subject to important disclaimers and conditions including on offers for the purchase or sale of securities, accuracy and core leteness of information, viruses, confidentiality, legal privilege, and legal entity disclaimers, available at h

EFTA01171153

📅 Nov 1, 2011 REDACTED

Re: Jeffrey Epstein

From: Brock Pierce

I'm back in the states. Sent from my Samsung smartphone on AT&T > wrote: Hello Brock! Jeffrey was trying to reach you last week...to no avail. Are you still in Asia...? What is the best number to try and reach you on? Let me know Thank you, Assistant to Jeffrey Epstein

I'm back in the states.

Sent from my Samsung smartphone on AT&T

> wrote:

Hello Brock! Jeffrey was trying to reach you last week...to no avail. Are you still in Asia...? What is the best number to try and reach you on?

Let me know

Thank you,

Assistant to Jeffrey Epstein

📅 Nov 1, 2011 REDACTED

Brock Pierce update

From: Unknown

To: jeevacation@gmail.com

See Below! I have emailed him asking if this is still a good number for him but have not heard back as of yet. Begin forwarded message: From: Brock Pierce sc Date: November 1, 2011 12:02:56 PM EDT To: Subject: Re: Jeffrey Epstein I'm back in the states. Sent from my Samsung smartphone on AT&T > wrote: Hello Brock! Jeffrey was trying to reach you last week...to no avail. Are you still in Asia...? What is the best number to try and reach you on? Let me know Thank you, Assistant to Jeffre

See Below! I have emailed him asking if this is still a good number for him but have not heard back as of yet.

Begin forwarded message:

From: Brock Pierce sc
Date: November 1, 2011 12:02:56 PM EDT
To: 
Subject: Re: Jeffrey Epstein

I'm back in the states.

Sent from my Samsung smartphone on AT&T

> wrote:

Hello Brock! Jeffrey was trying to reach you last week...to no avail. Are you still in Asia...? What is the best number to try and reach you on?

Let me know

Thank you,

Assistant to Jeffrey Epstein

📅 Nov 2, 2011 REDACTED

Fwd: Oiled up at the Riv.

From: Warren Eisenstein

Oh shit! Look what LaLa sent me: Keep on Pushin' Warren Begin forwarded message: From: Larry Streitman Date: November I, 2011 6:44:49 PM CDT To: Warren Eisenstein Subject: Oiled up at the Riv. EFTA01171161 This image is a photograph, not a chart. It shows four people at what appears to be a pool or beach resort. In the foreground, two shirtless men are relaxing in lounge chairs. Behind them, a man and a woman are standing, smiling at the camera. In the background, there are buildings, palm

Oh shit! Look what LaLa sent me:

Keep on Pushin'

Warren

Begin forwarded message:

From: Larry Streitman
Date: November I, 2011 6:44:49 PM CDT
To: Warren Eisenstein
Subject: Oiled up at the Riv.

EFTA01171161

This image is a photograph, not a chart. It shows four people at what appears to be a pool or beach resort. In the foreground, two shirtless men are relaxing in lounge chairs. Behind them, a man and a woman are standing, smiling at the camera. In the background, there are buildings, palm trees, lounge chairs, and umbrellas.

Scnt from my iPad

EFTA01171162

📅 Sep 17, 2015

(no subject)

From: jeffrey E.

To: Richard Kahn

did you check with hosssain re amount of investment covered please note The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of EFTA01171165 JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immed

did you check with hosssain re amount of investment covered

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of

EFTA01171165

JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

EFTA01171166

📅 Sep 17, 2015

Jawbone

From: Richard Kahn

To: Jeffrey Epstein <jeevacation@gmail.com>

i spoke with Andrew Linsey, Anna and Will from Code Advisors as Hosain was unavailable last week only 5,000,000 of investment would be covered as this can only apply to preferred shares our investment in Series S was as follows: Preferred 695,301 x 7.19113 = 5,000,000 Common 1,260,233 x 3.96792 = 5,000,000 I was told on call that valuation of company at time of Series S was 1,650,000 post Series 6, 7, 8 and Blackrock note have further diluted our investment and although they would not give me

i spoke with Andrew Linsey, Anna and Will from Code Advisors as Hosain was unavailable last week only 5,000,000 of investment would be covered as this can only apply to preferred shares

our investment in Series S was as follows:

Preferred 695,301 x 7.19113 = 5,000,000 Common 1,260,233 x 3.96792 = 5,000,000

I was told on call that valuation of company at time of Series S was 1,650,000 post Series 6, 7, 8 and Blackrock note have further diluted our investment and although they would not give me an exact figure our new breakeven without Series 8 participation appears to be 3,250,000

With Series 8 investment of 833,000 i believe believe we would receive the following on a sale of company post April 28 2016

1,000,000 7,500,000 from preferred and 0 from common (0 received without Series 8) 2,000,000 7,500,000 from preferred and 0 from common (0 received without Series 8) 3,000,000 7,500,000 from preferred and 0 from common (0 received without Series 8) 3,250,000 7,500,000 from preferred and 5,000,000 from common (10,000,000 received without Series 8)

it appears Series 8 protection provides protection from 1,000,000 to 3,250,000 on liquidation

April 28 2016 is key date as it is 1 year anniversary of Blackrock investment and if company sold before that date they have a 3x liquidation preference

As of last friday they have raised 33,000,000 of the 35,000,000 needed for Blackrock to release final 50,000,000 If that is achieved they would have raised since April 28 2015:

220,000,000 Blackrock original note
40,000,000 Series 8 JPM (34) and Sequia (6)
50,000,000 Blackrock additional
35,000,000 Series 8 (33mm raised to date)
50,000,000 Blackrock final
395,000,000 Total raised

As of Sep 11, 2015 there cash flow was as follows:

30,000,000 in cash
85,000,000 (Series 8 and final Blackrock)
115,000,000 potential cash

Once 85,000,000 is secured they will finalize deal for an ABL credit line in the amount of 50,000,000 that will be collateralized by AR and Inventory

EFTA01171164

They mentioned that Q4 would be cash flow positive however they did not elaborate on what their loss for 2015 or 2016 would be..

When i pressed them and said i thought they would would be out of money by mid 2016 and we again may be further diluted with a Series 9 or 10 they responded that they had new management that would not allow this

They said Jason Child, new CFO, has already run analysis to ensure that they remain cash flow positive in 2016 Not sure that is so realistic as they also mentioned that Fitbit already has market share and that they will not chase market share via lower pricing or marketing

In addition they will not build large inventories with vendors if they need to conserve cash Andrew stated that Hosain made poor non financially focused decisions and new CFO will not allow that moving forward Jawbone believes it will be the leader in the next phase which will evolve from basic wellness to health and medical (blood pressure, respiration and oxidation)

Analogy was used that basic wellness market is similar to Smartphones in the early 2000's and Symbian who was leader disappeared

My concerns are as follows:

a) Jawbone is always one step behind and they keep jumping to the next Hot idea..

b) There will inevitably be a Series 9 / 10 round as i believe they will again run out of cash middle of next year causing further dilution to Series 8 they are asking us to participate in

Andrew also sent email with codes for free UP 2 or UP 3 product

I will order and have for you on your next visit (do you have a color preference - black, silver, indigo and red?)

1&keywords=up3

Please advise how you want to proceed with Series 8 proposed investment of 833,000 Thank you

Richard Kahn
HBRK Associates Inc.
575 Lexington Avenue 4th Floor
New York, NY 10022

tel
fax
cell

📅 Sep 18, 2015

Series 8 Investment to Cover Common Investment

From: Andrew Lindsay

To: Richard Kahn

Hi Rich, It was great chatting with you this morning. As I noted, Mort can make an investment in Series 8 to have enough liquidation preference to cover both its common and preferred investments. With an investment of just $1.25M in Series 8 will result in Mort having a resulting total liquidation preference of $11.25M, to cover the previous $5M of common, $5M of preferred and new $1.25M investments. In addition to the increased liquidation preference, for the $1.25M, Mort will also receive an

Hi Rich,

It was great chatting with you this morning. As I noted, Mort can make an investment in Series 8 to have enough liquidation preference to cover both its common and preferred investments. With an investment of just $1.25M in Series 8 will result in Mort having a resulting total liquidation preference of $11.25M, to cover the previous $5M of common, $5M of preferred and new $1.25M investments.

In addition to the increased liquidation preference, for the $1.25M, Mort will also receive an incremental 677,244 shares with all the upside of Jawbone equity. That equates to $1.85 per share.

Detail of the structure is included in the attached document.

I've also included a summary of the successful launch of our recent UP2 and UP3 products. It's been very well received with reviews like this.

EFTA01171163

Thanks, 
Andrew

📅 Sep 18, 2015

Fwd: Series 8 Investment to Cover Common Investment

From: Richard Kahn

To: Jeffrey Epstein <jeevacation@gmail.com>

Andrew called this afternoon and asked if we were going to participate in series 8. I expressed our displeasure that our entire investment could not be protected. He then said that is not true. I said this is now the third time they are changing fact pattern. He prepared attached summary for your review. He said they have 33.5 of 35mm to force black rock to invest final 50mm. Please advise if you have any interest in investing. Thank you. Richard Kahn HBRK Associates Inc. 575 Lexington Avenue,

Andrew called this afternoon and asked if we were going to participate in series 8. I expressed our displeasure that our entire investment could not be protected. He then said that is not true. I said this is now the third time they are changing fact pattern. He prepared attached summary for your review. He said they have 33.5 of 35mm to force black rock to invest final 50mm. Please advise if you have any interest in investing. Thank you.

Richard Kahn
HBRK Associates Inc.
575 Lexington Avenue, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10022

Tel
Fax
Cell

📅 Sep 26, 2015

FW: Series 8 Investment to Cover Common Investment

From: Richard Kahn

To: Jeffrey Epstein <jeevacation@gmail.com>

Please advise From: Richard Kahn < Date: Friday, September 18, 2015 at 9:51PM To: Jeffrey Epstein <jeevacation@gmail.com> Subject: Fwd: Series 8 Investment to Cover Common Investment Andrew called this afternoon and asked if we were going to participate in series 8. I expressed our displeasure that our entire investment could not be protected. He then said that is not true. I said this is now the third time they are changing fact pattern. He prepared attached summary for your review. He sai

Please advise

From: Richard Kahn <

Date: Friday, September 18, 2015 at 9:51PM

To: Jeffrey Epstein <jeevacation@gmail.com>

Subject: Fwd: Series 8 Investment to Cover Common Investment

Andrew called this afternoon and asked if we were going to participate in series 8. I expressed our displeasure that our entire investment could not be protected. He then said that is not true. I said this is now the third time they are changing fact pattern. He prepared attached summary for your review. He said they have 33.5 of 35mm to force black rock to invest final 50mm. Please advise if you have any interest in investing. Thank you.

Richard Kahn
HBRK Associates Inc.
575 Lexington Avenue, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10022

Tel
Fax
Cell

Begin forwarded message:

From: Andrew Lindsay Date: September 18, 2015 at 9:27:27 PM EDT To: Richard Kahn < Cc: Anna Podkovyrova Subject: Series 8 Investment to Cover Common Investment

Hi Rich,

It was great chatting with you this morning. As I noted, Mort can make an investment in Series 8 to have enough liquidation preference to cover both its common and preferred investments. With an investment of just $1.25M in Series 8 will result in Mort having a resulting total liquidation preference of $11.25M, to cover the previous $5M of common, $5M of preferred and new $1.25M investments.

In addition to the increased liquidation preference, for the $1.25M, Mort will also receive an incremental 677,244 shares with all the upside of Jawbone equity. That equates to $1.85 per share.

Detail of the structure is included in the attached document.

I've also included a summary of the successful launch of our recent UP2 and UP3 products. It's been very well received with reviews like this.

EFTA01171163

Thanks, 
Andrew

From: Richard Kahn
Date: Thursday, September 17, 2015 at 4:33 PM
To: Jeffrey Epstein <jeevacation@gmail.com>
Subject: Jawbone

i spoke with Andrew Linsey, Anna and Will from Code Advisors as Hosain was unavailable last week only 5,000,000 of investment would be covered as this can only apply to preferred shares

our investment in Series S was as follows:

Preferred 695,301 x 7.19113 = 5,000,000 Common 1,260,233 x 3.96792 = 5,000,000

I was told on call that valuation of company at time of Series S was 1,650,000 post Series 6, 7, 8 and Blackrock note have further diluted our investment and although they would not give me an exact figure our new breakeven without Series 8 participation appears to be 3,250,000

With Series 8 investment of 833,000 i believe believe we would receive the following on a sale of company post April 28 2016

1,000,000 7,500,000 from preferred and 0 from common (0 received without Series 8) 2,000,000 7,500,000 from preferred and 0 from common (0 received without Series 8) 3,000,000 7,500,000 from preferred and 0 from common (0 received without Series 8) 3,250,000 7,500,000 from preferred and 5,000,000 from common (10,000,000 received without Series 8)

it appears Series 8 protection provides protection from 1,000,000 to 3,250,000 on liquidation

April 28 2016 is key date as it is 1 year anniversary of Blackrock investment and if company sold before that date they have a 3x liquidation preference

As of last friday they have raised 33,000,000 of the 35,000,000 needed for Blackrock to release final 50,000,000 If that is achieved they would have raised since April 28 2015:

220,000,000 Blackrock original note
40,000,000 Series 8 JPM (34) and Sequia (6)
50,000,000 Blackrock additional
35,000,000 Series 8 (33mm raised to date)
50,000,000 Blackrock final
395,000,000 Total raised

As of Sep 11, 2015 there cash flow was as follows:

30,000,000 in cash
85,000,000 (Series 8 and final Blackrock)
115,000,000 potential cash

Once 85,000,000 is secured they will finalize deal for an ABL credit line in the amount of 50,000,000 that will be collateralized by AR and Inventory

EFTA01171164

They mentioned that Q4 would be cash flow positive however they did not elaborate on what their loss for 2015 or 2016 would be..

When i pressed them and said i thought they would would be out of money by mid 2016 and we again may be further diluted with a Series 9 or 10 they responded that they had new management that would not allow this

They said Jason Child, new CFO, has already run analysis to ensure that they remain cash flow positive in 2016 Not sure that is so realistic as they also mentioned that Fitbit already has market share and that they will not chase market share via lower pricing or marketing

In addition they will not build large inventories with vendors if they need to conserve cash Andrew stated that Hosain made poor non financially focused decisions and new CFO will not allow that moving forward Jawbone believes it will be the leader in the next phase which will evolve from basic wellness to health and medical (blood pressure, respiration and oxidation)

Analogy was used that basic wellness market is similar to Smartphones in the early 2000's and Symbian who was leader disappeared

My concerns are as follows:

a) Jawbone is always one step behind and they keep jumping to the next Hot idea..

b) There will inevitably be a Series 9 / 10 round as i believe they will again run out of cash middle of next year causing further dilution to Series 8 they are asking us to participate in

Andrew also sent email with codes for free UP 2 or UP 3 product

I will order and have for you on your next visit (do you have a color preference - black, silver, indigo and red?)

1&keywords=up3

Please advise how you want to proceed with Series 8 proposed investment of 833,000 Thank you

Richard Kahn
HBRK Associates Inc.
575 Lexington Avenue 4th Floor
New York, NY 10022

tel
fax
cell

On Sep 17, 2015, at 2:38 PM, jeffrey E. <jeevacation@gmail.com> wrote:

did you check with hosssain re amount of investment covered

please note

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of

EFTA01171165

JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to jeevacation@gmail.com and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved

EFTA01171166