Trump: I’ll Give Peace ‘a Shot’ Before Moving US Embassy to Jerusalem

October 7, 2017

(The Hill) - President Trump said he would like to attempt to establish peace between the Israel and Palestine before moving the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

“I want to give that a shot before I even think about moving the embassy to Jerusalem,” Trump told former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) on the Trinity Broadcasting Network's "Huckabee" in an interview that aired on Saturday.

“If we can make peace between the Palestinians and Israel, I think it’ll lead to ultimately peace in the Middle East, which has to happen,” he continued.

Trump renewed a waiver last August to keep the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv temporarily, despite promising on the 2016 campaign trail that he would move it to Jerusalem.

The location of the embassy has always been a point of contention between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

Israelis see Jerusalem as its capital, however Palestinian want East Jerusalem to be the capital of what they hope will be a future, independent state.

The U.S. does not see Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and former presidents have said the city's final status should be decided in peace negotiations.

Sheldon Adelson: Trump Will Be 'The Best President Ever' for Israel

Adelson's remarks were made during a dinner party attended by top donors of the Republican Jewish Coalition, CNN reports.

February 24, 2017

(Haaretz) - Billionaire Sheldon Adelson said at a private gathering of top Republican donors on Thursday night that based on the Trump administration’s first month in the White House, he believes Donald Trump will be "the best president ever" for Israel.

Adelson, who owns the pro-Netanyahu daily newspaper Israel Hayom, will host the annual leadership conference of the Republican Jewish Coalition this weekend, bringing together hundreds of influential supporters of Israel within the Republican Party at his Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas. CNN reported that Adelson's remarks about Trump and Israel were made during a dinner event at his home, attended by many of the organization's top donors.

On Friday, the main speaker before the conference will be U.S. Vice President Mike Pence, who will also hold a private meeting with Adelson before addressing the entire audience. Pence has been a staunch supporter of Israel for years, and has close ties to right-wing pro-Israeli groups, both Jewish and Christian. Pence will also be a keynote speaker this year at the annual AIPAC conference in Washington, D.C.

Adelson's meeting with Pence will mark the second time in two weeks that he speaks privately with a senior figure in the Trump White House. Two weeks ago, on the eve of Trump's first meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Adelson met the president in Washington for a joint dinner that was also attended by a small number of aides and advisers. Adelson lobbied Trump during the meeting to adopt hard-line positions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, despite the president's public statements about his will to create a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.

On Thursday evening, Trump discussed the Israeli-Palestinian issue in an interview with Reuters, and said: "I like the two-state solution. Ultimately, I like whatever makes both parties happy."

It will be interesting to see if Pence will touch upon this issue at his speech in Las Vegas, which will take place before a crowd that mostly opposes Palestinian statehood and Israeli territorial concessions.

Casino Mogul Adelson Met with Trump Hours after Las Vegas Shooting

Pre-arranged meeting was to review policy, but also looked at ways to help victims of massacre

October 4, 2017

(Times of Israel) - Casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson met Monday with US President Donald Trump in the White House, where they discussed how to help victims of a deadly shooting hours earlier at a Las Vegas country music festival that killed 59 people and injured hundreds.

The afternoon meeting had been scheduled before the shooting attack and was aimed at discussing policy, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported on Tuesday, citing a representative from the Sheldon’s Las Vegas Sands casino and resort company.

Adelson, who owns the Review-Journal, was one of Trump’s biggest financial backers during his successful 2016 presidential election campaign, donating millions to the Republican candidate’s cause. The two men both own casinos in Las Vegas.

Adelson is also a major backer of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and owns the widely circulated Israel Hayom free daily.

According to Sands representative Andy Abboud, Trump and Adelson discussed the shooting in Las Vegas the night before and how they might help victims, among other topics, the Review-Journal reported.

Las Vegas on Tuesday was still coping with the aftermath of the Sunday shooting attack on a country music festival. Gunman Stephen Paddock opened fire from his hotel room on the 32nd floor of a casino across the street from the concert, killing 59 people and wounding over 500.

It’s not clear what motivated the shooting, although the actions of Paddock, 64, suggest that he had planned the attacks for at least a period of days.

Adelson, who owns several properties in Las Vegas, has not made any official statement on the shooting and its not known if he has donated any money to recovery efforts or victims funds. His daughter Shelley Adelson donated $10,000 to a GoFundMe page set up to aid victims.

Trump on Tuesday called the gunman “demented” and a “very, very sick individual.” Asked about gun laws, the president said, “We’ll be talking about gun laws as time goes by.”

The president is slated to visit Las Vegas on Wednesday. He was in Puerto Rico on Tuesday to review hurricane recovery efforts.

In the Monday meeting, Adelson was accompanied by his wife Miriam. Trump’s son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner was also present at the meeting and the Adelsons had sought to meet new White House Chief of Staff John Kelly.

It was not immediately known what type of policy Trump and Adelson were set to discuss, but the casino mogul has been critical of the president over some of his stances toward Israel and reluctance to move the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Adelson has also reportedly been critical of National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster due to his positions on Israel.

The Pro-Israeli Lobby, AIPAC, Runs the U.S. Government and Owns Almost All the Politicians

Meet the 1% of the 1%. Who are the 31,385 individuals who contributed 28.1 percent of the traceable money in the 2012 election? A few of them are well-known. Sheldon Adelson and his wife Miriam contributed a combined $97 million. Many of the other names atop the list will be familiar to readers of our “Stealthy Wealthy” series. [Source]

On December 3, 2015, Trump was among 14 presidential candidates speaking at a forum hosted by the Republican Jewish Coalition, an influential group and aggressive supporter of Israel. The group and its biggest benefactor — casino magnate Sheldon Adelson — have little tolerance for anything that might be perceived as a criticism of the Jewish state. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie was forced to apologize to Adelson personally last year after using the term "occupied territories" while describing a trip to Israel. The Israeli government and by extension most of Israel's supporters in the U.S. don't consider the West Bank and East Jerusalem to be occupied territory. [Source]

While speaking before the Republican Jewish Coalition on December 3, 2015, Trump reiterated that he doesn't know "if Israel has the commitment" to reach a peace deal. He was loudly booed when he refused to say whether he supports Israel's position that Jerusalem is its undivided capital. One of Trump's rivals for the GOP nomination, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, said at the same forum that those calling for more sacrifices from Israel "are dead wrong, and they don't understand the enduring bond between Israel and America." [Source]

Billionaires Sheldon Adelson and Joe Ricketts Plan Donations to Back Donald Trump After Leading the 2015 Movement to Stop Trump from Winning the Republican Nomination

Las Vegas casino mogul Sheldon Adelson came off the sidelines in the presidential contest. In the last six weeks of the campaign, he pledged at least $25 million to a pro-Trump dark money group, 45Committee, and an associated super PAC, Future45, according to Politico. The groups are run by Todd Ricketts, whose family owns the Chicago Cubs and has a history of big Republican donations; he’s urging other Republicans to fall in line. According to CNN, a Ricketts family insider said the family now has $35 million in the bank, thanks to Adelson, and is planning on boosting the number up to $70 million exclusively for the presidential bid. Ironically, earlier in the year, the Ricketts family helped lead the #NeverTrump movement, giving millions to Our Principles PAC in an effort to stop the combative billionaire from winning the Republican nomination. And they weren’t alone in not supporting Trump — which makes this cycle far different from 2012, when the biggest conservative spenders almost unanimously funneled the majority of their dollars to super PACs of similar purpose, American Crossroads and Restore Our Future, to attack President Obama and support Romney. [Source]

September 19, 2016 

Wall Street Journal - Two billionaires are planning to open their pocketbooks for Republican nominee Donald Trump in the final six weeks of the election, as the businessman continues to lag behind Democrat Hillary Clinton in fundraising.

Billionaire casino owner Sheldon Adelson and his wife, Miriam, are planning to spend $45 million to boost Republicans in the next two months, including at least $5 million to help Mr. Trump, according to a person familiar with the plans.

And Joe Ricketts, the founder of TD Ameritrade who donated millions of dollars to Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s presidential campaign before pouring $6 million together with his wife into an anti-Trump super PAC, in a stunning reversal now plans to give at least $1 million to a group backing Mr. Trump.

Mr. Adelson will likely direct his $5 million to a Ricketts-affiliated group, though Mr. Ricketts hasn't yet determined precisely which super PAC he will support, according to the person with knowledge of Mr. Adelson’s plans.

Mr. Adelson’s planned donations—first reported by CNN—would make him easily the largest donor of the election cycle. Yet they fall far short of the $100 million the casino owner had earlier this year pledged to spend on Mr. Trump’s behalf. While Mr. Adelson endorsed Mr. Trump shortly after the primary concluded, he didn’t donate any money to Mr. Trump’s campaign or to pro-Trump super PACs through July, according to the latest Federal Election Commission disclosures.

Republican donor Adelson and Trump may be aligning on Israel

December 19, 2015

Reuters - Top Republican Party donor Sheldon Adelson said on Friday he met presidential candidate Donald Trump earlier this week and that the two American billionaires broached the issue at the heart of Adelson's political agenda: support for Israel.

ISIS Wants the United States and Its Allies to be Dragged into a Ground War in Syria; George W. Bush Bashes Obama for Not Sending Ground Forces to Syria

ISIS leaders are trying feverishly to draw the U.S. and the Western powers (“the forces of Rome”) into a bloody ground war in Syria. Why? In order to fulfill Islamic prophecies about an apocalyptic End Times battle in an obscure Syrian town called Dabiq and establish a global Islamic kingdom or caliphate.

ISIS did not just emerge out of nowhere, but has been festering for over a decade, taking root in the chaos that Iraq found itself in after the U.S. invasion in 2003. So why is it working for ISIS this time, starting around 2010-2011? Despite facing multiple challenges and disappointments, ISIS was able to use the continued lack of a cohesive state in Iraq to survive. The breakdown of central authority left a power vacuum filled by a variety of self-appointed Sunni militia groups, but these proved to be little more than armed thugs imposing protection taxes but providing no protection (nor trash collection, water and power supply, medical care or food). Next to them, ISIS was seen as a relief.

The second big break ISIS got was the civil war in Syria, a war that left the (largely Sunni) Syrian hinterland ungoverned. The disparate, disorganized and fractious rebel groups in that region were unable or unwilling to fight sustained battles against the central government forces under Bashar Al-Assad, which made it excruciatingly difficult for the West in general and the U.S. in particular to find reliable recipients of U.S. military aid. The only group that really pushed the battle forward was the Nusra Front, and they were allies of Al Qaeda. For his part, Al-Assad was (and is) only too happy to let ISIS do his Sunni-on-Sunni dirty work. Truly a foreign policy problem from hell from the U.S. standpoint.

The third big break ISIS got was the Arab Spring, a movement of popular revolutions that unhinged government after government but which led not to a birth of a new Arab freedom but chaos and further economic dislocation. Disaffected youth (and not just youth) hear a resonance in these End Time prophesies as their world has turned upside down. Utopianism has a strong appeal to the marginalized and disaffected, whether it’s the weird cult of a Jim Jones or a restoration of a more pure and primitive society as preached by Pol Pot. When the Utopians are heavily armed, the myth plays out exactly one way—the dubious peace of mass slaughter and unburied death. [Robert J. Hard]

U.S. Seeks to Avoid Ground War Welcomed by Islamic State

December 7, 2015

New York Times - As the debate on how best to contain the Islamic State continues to rage in Western capitals, the militants themselves have made one point patently clear: They want the United States and its allies to be dragged into a ground war.

In fact, when the United States first invaded Iraq, one of the most enthusiastic proponents of the move was the man who founded the terrorist cell that would one day become the Islamic State, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. He excitedly called the Americans’ 2003 intervention “the Blessed Invasion.”

His reaction — ignored by some, and dismissed as rhetoric by others — points to one of the core beliefs motivating the terrorist group now holding large stretches of Iraq and Syria: The group bases its ideology on prophetic texts stating that Islam will be victorious after an apocalyptic battle to be set off once Western armies come to the region.

Donald Trump Doubts Israel's Commitment to a Peace Deal with Palestine, and Rightfully So, Because Israel's Position is That Jerusalem is Its Undivided Capital (Palestine Wants East Jerusalem as Its Capital)

AP Conversation: Trump says Mideast peace rests with Israel

December 3, 2015

AP - Donald Trump says that if he's elected president, he'll know within six months whether he can achieve an elusive peace accord between Israelis and Palestinians, one of the world's most vexing challenges. But the Republican presidential candidate says he has doubts about each side's commitment to the peace process.

"I have a real question as to whether or not both sides want to make it," Trump said in an interview with The Associated Press on Wednesday.

The Republican front-runner said his concerns are greater regarding "one side in particular." While Trump wouldn't say whether he was referring to the Israelis or the Palestinians, he said the chances for a lasting peace rest with Israel.

"A lot will have to do with Israel and whether or not Israel wants to make the deal — whether or not Israel's willing to sacrifice certain things," Trump said. "They may not be, and I understand that, and I'm OK with that. But then you're just not going to have a deal."

"If I win, I'll let you know six months from the time I take office," he added.

Trump stuck by his comments Thursday while speaking in Washington before the Republican Jewish Coalition, reiterating that he doesn't know "if Israel has the commitment" to reach a peace deal. He was loudly booed when he refused to say whether he supports Israel's position that Jerusalem is its undivided capital.

One of Trump's rivals for the GOP nomination, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, said at the same forum that those calling for more sacrifices from Israel "are dead wrong, and they don't understand the enduring bond between Israel and America."

U.S. Deploys Military Boots on the Ground in Syria

According to Russian news agencies, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that Moscow considers the use of U.S. forces without coordination with Syrian President Bashar Assad's government unacceptable. [Source] Lavrov said a U.S. decision to deploy special forces in Syria would make cooperation between the armed forces of the two countries more important. Earlier, U.S. officials disclosed plans to station dozens of special forces troops as advisers in Syria to help in the fight against Islamic State militants. "I am sure that neither the United States nor Russia want (the conflict) to become a so-called proxy war," Lavrov told reporters after multi-lateral talks on the Syrian crisis in Vienna. "But it is obvious for me that the situation makes the task of cooperation between the militaries more relevant." He also said discussions on securing a ceasefire in Syria's four-year civil war would continue, but said the fight against what he called terrorist groups would also not cease. [Reuters]

The United States' decision to send troops into Syria is an act of aggression because it does not have the government's agreement, a Syrian member of parliament said Saturday. "When America sends ground forces into Syrian territories without an agreement with the Syrian government it becomes an intervention and aggression," Shehadeh said by telephone. "Will America allow Russian ground forces to go into America without an agreement? I think the answer is no." [Associated Press]

US escalates involvement in Syria amid talks on Assad future

October 30, 2015

AP - The United States escalated its fight against the Islamic State in Syria on Friday, pledging the first open deployment of military boots on the ground, even as U.S., Russian and other diplomats pressed a new peace effort that America hopes will hasten the departure of Bashar Assad.

Up to 50 special operations troops will be sent to assist Kurdish and Arab forces in northern Syria, American officials said. The move marks a significant departure for President Barack Obama, who for years has resisted putting ground forces in Syria even as he has gradually intensified the U.S. military response to what counterterrorism officials worry is a growing Islamic State threat in Syria and Iraq.

The troop announcement came as diplomats in Vienna representing 17 countries and the European Union agreed to launch a broad new peace attempt to gradually end Syria's long civil war — a declaration that avoided any determination on when President Assad might leave. It is not clear how many rebel groups would agree to a plan that doesn't result in Assad's immediate departure.

Any cease-fire agreement that may come as a result of the peace effort would not include the Islamic State, which controls large parts of northern Syria and has its capital there.

But the participation by Russia and Iran in the attempt could mark a new and promising phase in the diplomacy since those countries have staunchly backed Assad.

The White House has long said that Assad's ouster is essential to its ultimate goal of defeating the Islamic State because the Syrian president's brutal tactics against Sunni rebels have drawn Sunni radicals from all over the world into the militant group's ranks.

Despite killing as many as 12,000 militants, the U.S. bombing campaign has not significantly weakened the Islamic State's capacity to hold territory, and the group's ranks have been replenished by foreign fighters and others.

Military experts say ground troops are essential for the fight. A U.S. program to train Syrians was abandoned as a failure, and the new deployment essentially would replace that program.

Speaking to reporters flying with him on an overseas trip, Defense Secretary Ash Carter said this would probably not be the last significant adjustment to the anti-IS military campaign in Syria and Iraq.

"We are going to continue to innovate, to build up what works," he said.

Friday's developments came as missiles slammed into a crowded suburb of the Syrian capital. The attack killed at least 40 people, activists said. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and the Local Coordination Committees group said government forces fired more than 11 missiles at a market in the suburb of Douma.

In Washington, officials said the new U.S. forces will work from headquarters locations and won't move to the front lines or be used to call in airstrikes. However, the U.S. has conducted special operations raids into Syria before now and will continue to do more unilateral raids. It helped Iraqi forces rescue hostages last week, and Master Sgt. Joshua Wheeler was killed, the first U.S. combat death in that country since 2011.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest said the new troops will not be on a "combat mission."

"There's no denying the serious risk they will be facing," Earnest said, but their mission will "not be to lead the charge to take the hill."

Russia and Syria are conducting airstrikes in the country, but Earnest said it was unlikely the U.S. troops would be at risk because Russia has not bombed in the area where they will be.

On Capitol Hill, some lawmakers greeted the troop announcement with dismay.

It "marks a major shift in U.S. policy — a shift that is occurring without congressional debate (and) is unlikely to succeed in achieving our objective of defeating IS," said Sen. Brian Schatz.

U.S. Billionaires Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban, Split on U.S. Politics, Have United to Fight Global Trend to Boycott, Divest and Sanction Israel Over Its Policy Toward Palestinians

U.S. Billionaire Political Foes Unite to Fight Israel Boycotts

June 7, 2015

Bloomberg - One donated more than $100 million to the Republicans, the other has been the Clintons’ biggest backer. Now billionaires Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban, split on U.S. politics, have united to fight boycott threats against Israel.

Adelson and Saban hosted a conference of pro-Israel business executives and activists over the weekend in Las Vegas, to begin an initiative aimed at countering the growing threat of international sanctions against Israel.

“That he’s a Democrat and I’m a Republican has really very little to do with it,” said Las Vegas Sands Corp. founder Adelson, who holds the 25th slot on Bloomberg’s Billionaires Index, in a joint interview with Saban on Israel’s Channel 2 on Saturday.

While you can “rest assured” the two men will not be supporting the same person in the 2016 presidential election, Saban said, “when it comes to Israel, we are absolutely on the same page.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has identified the global trend to boycott, divest and sanction Israel over its policy toward the Palestinians, known as the BDS movement, as a major threat.

The boycott issue gained new prominence after Stephane Richard, chief executive officer of Orange SA, said on Wednesday that the Paris-based telecom company would end its licensing deal with Israel’s Partner Communications Co. “tomorrow” if he wasn’t concerned about legal repercussions. Richard later apologized for his comments, made in response to a question over a threatened boycott of Orange’s Egyptian subsidy, Mobinil, and said they weren’t motivated by political concerns.

‘Blatant Lie’

The Israel-born Saban, who owns a controlling stake in Partner, called Richard’s clarification “a blatant lie.”

“Any company that chooses to boycott business in Israel, they’re going to look at this case, and once we’re done, they’re going to think twice about whether they want to take on Israel or not,” he said.

BDS supporters say their tactics are the only effective means of getting Israeli to stop building West Bank settlements that most of the world views as illegal under international law, and an impediment toward peace with the Palestinians.

Sheldon Adelson, Benjamin Netanyahu and America’s Dark Money Conspiracy

Netanyahu Speaks, Money Talks: “We are hostage to his fortune”

The gambling tycoon is funneling loads of cash into GOP PACs. He's also controlling Israel's propaganda machine

March 7, 2015

BillMoyers.com - Everything you need to know about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to Congress Tuesday was the presence in the visitor’s gallery of one man – Sheldon Adelson.

The gambling tycoon is the Godfather of the Republican Right. The party’s presidential hopefuls line up to kiss his assets, scraping and bowing for his blessing, which when granted is bestowed with his signed checks. Data from both the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics and the Center for Public Integrity show that in the 2012 election cycle, Adelson and his wife Miriam (whose purse achieved metaphoric glory Tuesday when it fell from the gallery and hit a Democratic congressman) contributed $150 million to the GOP and its friends, including $93 million to such plutocracy-friendly super PACs as Karl Rove’s American Crossroads, the Congressional Leadership Fund, the Republican Jewish Coalition Victory Fund, Winning Our Future (the pro-Newt Gingrich super PAC) and Restore Our Future (the pro-Mitt Romney super PAC).

Yet there’s no knowing for sure about all of the “dark money” contributed by the Adelsons – so called because it doesn’t have to be reported. Like those high-rise, multi-million dollar apartments in New York City purchased by oligarchs whose identity is hidden within perfectly legal shell organizations, dark money lets our politicians conveniently erase fingerprints left by their ink-stained (from signing all those checks) billionaire benefactors.

But Sheldon Adelson was not only sitting in the House gallery on Tuesday because of the strings he pulls here in the United States. He is also the Daddy Warbucks of Israel, and Benjamin Netanyahu is yet another of his beneficiaries – not to mention an ideological soulmate. Although campaign finance reform laws are much more strict in Israel than here in the United States, Adelson’s wealth has bought him what the historian and journalist Gershom Gorenberg calls “uniquely pernicious” influence.

31,385 People Gave 28 Percent of All Individual Contributions to the 2012 U.S. Election: This Elite Group of Donors are the Collective Gatekeepers of Public Office

International Corporations and Bankers Run the World - They Own the Politicians, Big Media, Judges, State Houses, City Halls (Excerpt)

The U.S. now has a campaign finance system where a tiny slice of individuals – 31,385 people, not even enough to fill half of a professional football stadium – collectively account for more than a quarter of all individual contributions (that we can trace), even though they represent just one in ten thousand Americans. Every single member of Congress elected in 2012 received a contribution from this group of individuals, and the vast majority of those elected (84 percent) received more money from the "1% of the 1%" than they did from all small donations (under $200).

A tiny sliver of Americans who can afford to give tens of thousands of dollars in a single election cycle have become the gatekeepers of public office in America. Through the growing congressional dependence on their contributions, they increasingly set the boundaries and limits of American political discourse – who can run for office, what their priorities should be and even what can be said in public. And in an era of unlimited campaign contributions, the power of the 1% of the 1% only stands to grow with each passing year.

Meet the 1% of the 1%

Who are the 31,385 individuals who contributed 28.1 percent of the traceable money in the 2012 election?

A few of them are well-known. Sheldon Adelson and his wife Miriam contributed a combined $97 million. Harold Simmons, who built a business empire around buying Superfund sites, contributed $25 million. Bob Perry, the late Texas real estate mogul, contributed $23.5 million. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is the seventh largest donor, at $10.6 million. Many of the other names atop the list will be familiar to readers of our “Stealthy Wealthy” series.

But our analysis is not focused on specific individuals, many of whose campaign largesse and motivations already have been well-scrutinized. Rather, our interest is in examining the role of this elite group of donors as the collective gatekeepers of public office.

Mostly, these donors tend to come from top corporate positions, most commonly in the worlds of finance and law. They most frequently hail from New York and Washington. Of donors for whom we know the gender, 71.8 percent are male.

For a list of all 31,385 donors in the 2012 one percent of the one percent, click here.

Top Professions

While the most common occupation listed among these donors is “Retired” (13.1%), the plurality with identifiable professions hail from top corporate jobs: 8.8 percent identify themselves as “president,” 8.7 percent as “attorney” or “lawyer” and 8.5 percent as “CEO.” While there is some overlap among the corporate jobs (for example, various individuals list themselves as “CEO and Chairman,” or “President/CEO,” etc.), a total of 5,639 top donors (17.0 percent) list themselves as at least one of the following: “CEO," "President," "Chairman,” “Executive” or “Owner."

Looking purely at the monetary contributions, CEOs and chairmen (frequently the same person) account for the largest raw percentage of donations, which tells us that they contribute, on average, a bit more than the average member of the 1% of the 1%. By contrast, retirees give a little less on average, accounting for only 10.8 percent of the contributions as compared to 13.2 percent of donors.

It’s also worth highlighting that 7.7 percent of the 1% of the 1% list their occupation as “homemaker.” Since homemakers are rarely compensated for their work, we are left to assume that their ability to contribute tens of thousands of dollars is due to spousal or inherited wealth. “Homemaker” is the listed occupation for 27.4 percent of the female 1% of the 1% donors, while “Retired” is the listed occupation of 17.5 percent of the female 1% of the 1% donors. (As a basis of comparison, 11.5 percent of the male 1% of the 1% donors list their occupation as “retired.”)

Most common professions among the 1 percent of the 1 percent, 2012

Occupation	Donors	Share of 1% of the 1% donors	Total donations	Share of 1% of the 1% donations
Retired	4131	13.2%	$181,663,338	10.8%
President	2764	8.8%	$137,886,277	8.2%
Attorney	2738	8.7%	$104,658,811	6.2%
CEO	2671	8.5%	$230,678,958	13.7%
Homemaker	2432	7.7%	$117,901,507	7.0%
Chairman	2428	7.7%	$223,832,610	13.3%
Executive	1886	6.0%	$101,835,685	6.1%
Investor	1638	5.2%	$106,385,270	6.3%
Owner	1015	3.2%	$42,177,945	2.5%

Top Employers

While thousands of different employers are represented among the 1% of the 1%, certain names pop up more frequently than others. At the top of the list (by far), is Goldman Sachs, with 85 employees contributing $4.67 million between them. Blackstone, the private equity firm, is next with 49 employees, and the major law firm, Kirkland & Ellis, is third on the list with 40 employees. Financial and legal/lobbying firms dominate the top 20.

Besides Goldman and Blackstone, financial firms Morgan Stanley (38 donors), Elliot Management (24), Citigroup (23), Credit Suisse (23), Fidelity (23) and Bain Capital (21) also make the top 20 list. That adds up to 248 major donors from top financial firms. Elliot donors contributed on average $184,830, the highest of any of the top employers. Bain Capital came in second, at $131,634.

The top legal and lobbying firms, after Kirkland and Ellis, are Akin Gump (36), Podesta Group (30), Skadden Arps (29), DLA Piper (21) and Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck (20). That adds up to 176 major donors from top law and lobbying firms.

Rounding out the list of organizations with the most employees in the 1% of the 1%: Harvard University at 33, Google at 33, Microsoft at 31 and Comcast at 26. One name that may not be familiar to Washington insiders is the Rothman Institute, a Philadelphia-area orthopedic group with 23 employees in 1% of the 1%. It is the only healthcare organization on this list. Its 1% of the 1% donors also gave the least on average: $25,668.

Most common employers among the 1% of the 1% percent, 2012

Employer	1% of the 1% Donors	Total donations	Average donations
Goldman Sachs	85	$4,670,207	$54,944
Blackstone	49	$2,236,050	$45,634
Kirkland and Ellis	40	$1,526,949	$38,174
Morgan Stanley	38	$1,241,241	$32,664
Comcast	37	$1,222,705	$33,046
Akin Gump	36	$1,643,941	$45,665
Google	33	$1,352,312	$40,979
Harvard	33	$1,236,391	$37,466
Microsoft	31	$1,049,667	$33,860
Podesta Group	30	$1,052,179	$35,073
Skadden Arps	29	$1,239,387	$42,737
Patton Boggs	26	$925,528	$35,597
Elliot Management	24	$4,435,923	$184,830
Credit Suisse	23	$705,788	$30,686
Rothman Institute	23	$590,366	$25,668
Citigroup	23	$746,650	$32,463
Fidelity	23	$726,414	$31,583
DLA Piper	21	$864,496	$41,166
Bain Capital	21	$2,764,306	$131,634
Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck	20	$627,016	$31,351

Congressional dependence

Every single member of Congress elected in 2012 received at least some money from the 1% of the 1%. Only Reps. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., ($4,750 from eight 1% of the 1% donors) and Jose Serrano, D-N.Y., ($7,000 from six 1% of the 1% donors) received less than $10,000 total. Both represent safe seats in poor, urban districts, and both get roughly 75 percent of their campaign money from PACs.



Of the 435 House members elected in last year, 372 (86 percent) received more from the 1% of the 1% than they did from every single small donor combined. And almost half (202, or 46.4 percent) received more than three times as much money from these large donors than they did from all small donors combined.

The 33 senators elected in 2012 were only slightly less dependent on the 1% of the 1%. The majority (20, 61 percent) got more money from the top donors than from all small donors combined. And one third (11) got three times as much money.

Members of Congress with the highest share of donations from the 1% of the 1%, 2012

Candidate	State	Chamber	Share from the 1% of the 1%	Share from small donors	Total raised
Nancy Pelosi (D)	CA	H	40.4%	4.8%	$2,298,844
Roger Williams (R)	TX	H	38.7%	1.5%	$2,736,485
Sheldon Whitehouse (D)	RI	S	36.5%	6.4%	$3,280,685
Nita M. Lowey (D)	NY	H	34.2%	3.9%	$2,125,851
Eric Cantor (R)	VA	H	34.2%	4.9%	$7,619,202
Jeff Flake (R)	AZ	S	33.3%	13.9%	$8,967,955
Joe Kennedy III (D)	MA	H	32.6%	0.0%	$4,193,094
Bill Foster (D)	IL	H	32.3%	11.8%	$2,956,287
John Sarbanes (D)	MD	H	31.8%	5.4%	$1,010,367
John Boehner (R)	OH	H	31.0%	26.7%	$21,981,789
Jon Tester (D)	MT	S	29.7%	13.1%	$11,881,646
Ron DeSantis (R)	FL	H	29.1%	6.1%	$1,145,859
Ted Cruz (R)	TX	S	28.8%	17.2%	$13,627,317
Jerrold Nadler (D)	NY	H	28.4%	2.4%	$1,114,468
Orrin G. Hatch (R)	UT	S	28.3%	0.6%	$8,829,902
John A. Barrasso (R)	WY	S	28.3%	4.5%	$4,007,574
Tim Kaine (D)	VA	S	28.2%	17.0%	$18,008,380
Ted Deutch (D)	FL	H	27.9%	2.6%	$1,263,534
Kirsten Gillibrand (D)	NY	S	27.6%	8.5%	$15,577,940
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D)	FL	H	27.6%	21.0%	$3,610,339

For complete data on all members elected in 2012, click here.

Related: 

• 'Think Tanks' of the Elite Guiding U.S. Policy 
• A Tiny Elite Owns 80% of the World's Wealth

Republican Jewish Coalition Undertaking Concerted Efforts to Undermine Rand Paul's Political Ambitions

Rand Paul has a plan to win over the country

But he needs to convince his own party first
 

April 14, 2014

Yahoo News - There’s an obnoxious game that politicians play around the halfway point between presidential elections. They dangle the possibility of making their own White House run with a wink and a nudge — not to mention a steady diet of airplane pretzels — as they zip between early primary states like Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. Then they brush aside political reporters who ask them if they’re considering a presidential bid, quizzing them as to why they’re always so obsessed with politics.

“What I’m doing is very simply thanking and encouraging grassroots activists,” Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz said innocently in Manchester Saturday when asked if he was testing the presidential waters during a weekend swing through New Hampshire. 

While there, he met with state party officials and spoke at a conference of conservative activists.

Cruz may very well choose not run for president in 2016, but let’s get real. The guy’s not test-driving New Hampshire for a joy ride. Those Live Free or Die tires are feeling the swift kick of a pair of black Texas-made ostrich-skin boots.

Not to pick on Cruz. His finely tuned answer is the descendent of a long line of genially vague quotes from aspiring presidents who’ve said the same sort of thing over the years. But Cruz's answer contrasts sharply with the way Rand Paul, the junior Republican senator from Kentucky and son of failed three-time presidential contender Ron Paul, is approaching his own possible run. 

“I’m seriously considering it,” Paul regularly tells anyone who asks. 

Aides who work for him are equally up front about his goal in private. His travel schedule, which regularly includes stops in Des Moines and Manchester, suggest that he’s working toward a White House run.

In New Hampshire right now, it is a period of calm before the storm. Party activists here from both major political parties are focused intently on winning the midterm elections this November, although they don’t mind a little titillating presidential foreplay in the duller moments. Potential presidential candidates aren’t yet intensively locking down field reps, although they are window shopping with the intent to buy when the time is right. Two aides to New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Matt Mowers and Colin Reed, recently started working in New Hampshire politics — Mowers as the executive director of the state party and Reed as an aide to Republican U.S. Senate candidate Scott Brown. In Iowa, Paul recently picked up the state's Republican Party chairman, A.J. Spiker, to work for his PAC. It was a coming home of sorts for Spiker, who co-chaired former congressman Ron Paul's presidential campaign in Iowa in 2012.

For now, Sen. Paul’s focus is on expanding the appeal of his party, which has had branding problems of late, particularly among single women, minorities and young voters. He has taken a cue from his father, an unimposing little man in his 70s with a baffling knack for attracting university arenas full of students, by speaking at colleges across the country. In the wake of revelations of the federal government’s domestic spying program, he sees a unique opportunity for Republicans to reach young people who don’t want the feds snooping on their iPhones.

“It’s an area where we can connect with people who haven’t been connecting. Obama won the youth vote 3 to 1, but he’s losing them now,” Paul told a gathering of New Hampshire Republicans in Dover on Friday. 

“Hillary Clinton’s as bad or worse on all of these issues. It’s a way we can transform and make the party bigger and win again. But we have to be as proud of the Fourth Amendment as much as we are the Second Amendment.”

Other Republicans seem to be taking notice. On Saturday in Manchester at the New Hampshire Freedom Summit, a conference for conservative activists hosted by Citizens United and Americans for Prosperity where Paul, Cruz, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and several other well-known Republicans spoke, most speakers devoted sections of their remarks to the National Security Agency’s spying program.

While Paul strives to reach young voters, his travels have taken him to historically black colleges, where he has spoken out against the ongoing federal drug war and imprisoning of millions of young black men for nonviolent crimes. It is through this message, Paul says, that Republicans can find an opening with a constituency that has largely voted as a bloc for Democrats since the civil rights era. Some of this push is also reactive: Paul has previously come under fire for making controversial comments about the Civil Rights Act, and Democrats think he is extremely vulnerable on racial issues. But that doesn't mean Paul's views are insincere or will have no impact on GOP thinking longer-term.

“I truly do care about the injustice and what it’s done to voting,” Paul told me when we met Friday at a pizza place in downtown Manchester. “Everyone’s talking about voter ID. Voter ID is one-one thousandths of the problem compared to felony disenfranchisement. I think there’s 150,000 people in Kentucky who can’t vote because of a felony conviction. Probably half or more are black.”

A number of high-profile Republicans have begun to explore Paul’s ideas about prison reform, albeit cautiously. In the Senate, Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn and Utah Sen. Mike Lee have teamed up with Illinois Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin on a bill to reduce minimum sentencing requirements. In the states, Republican governors around the country, particularly outgoing Texas Gov. Rick Perry and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, are re-examining their own state laws on how the government handles drug cases.

Changing or reforming these laws, of course, won’t transform the GOP into a less white and less old party overnight, but it does give Republicans something to talk about with new constituencies.

And Paul isn’t just interested in growing the party by wooing people of color. He wants the party to move beyond calls for ideological purity, even if it means giving party blessings to members who stray from the official platform.

When asked by a reporter on Friday in Dover about Republicans who support same-sex marriage, Paul replied: 

“I think the party’s a big party and can include people with a variety of opinions. I think that in some ways we need to agree to disagree on some of these issues, in the sense that the party needs to be bigger, we need to understand that people have somewhat of regional attitudes towards the issues. … I think there’s an arrogance to having an absolute litmus test.”

Paul's call for openness reflects a growing understanding that the party will need to present itself differently if it hopes to win at the national level again. Huckabee, a Southern Baptist conservative who opposes allowing same-sex couples to marry and who recently questioned President Barack Obama’s commitment to faith because the president changed his views on the matter, also called for more ideological room within the party when asked similar question in Manchester on Saturday.

“There’s room in the party for people to have different viewpoints, there always has. I don’t know why we would suddenly have this moment where we would start acting as if there’s only a few viewpoints that are valid,” Huckabee said. “As far as in the general election, I think it’s nonsense that people would vote against someone because of an issue that a president would probably not have a lot of input on anyway.”

So what does all of this have to do with Paul’s presidential ambitions? Plenty. Paul is steadily working to carve an important niche among Republicans as a voice in the ongoing effort to remake the party at the national level. To win a general election, presidential candidates need to appeal to broad swaths of voters — not just hardcore conservatives — and Paul, who on many issues is a hardcore conservative, is crafting a plan that he thinks will do just that.

And yet Paul’s most skeptical audience may well be inside the Republican Party itself. Much of what he emphasizes is new territory for members of a party who have long embraced the mantle of being “tough on crime.” The party has also celebrated surveillance measures enacted under President George W. Bush that some members now decry as overreach when carried out under Obama.

Conservatives who embrace the party’s traditionally robust foreign policy stance have severe reservations about Paul's quest for executive power and views that the U.S. should play a more limited role abroad. Republican donors who gathered last month at the Republican Jewish Coalition in Las Vegas, Nev., expressed concern over Paul’s rise, telling Time magazine that they may have to undertake concerted efforts to undermine his political ambitions over such positions as cutting off all U.S. aid to Israel and other countries. Republican mega donor and casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, Time reported, is considering spending massive sums to keep Paul from becoming the GOP nominee.

In response, Paul insists that those concerned about his foreign policy views just need more time to hear him out. Paul plans to discuss these issues with Adelson himself in the future, he said.

“When he gets to know me, he’ll like me too,” Paul told me.

I asked Paul about the time Christie called his foreign policy “dangerous” and when former U.S. ambassador to the U.N John Bolton described Republicans like Paul as “unfit to serve.” (Both men, particularly Christie, harbor presidential ambitions of their own.)

“The people who are saying that are the dangerous people,” Paul said. “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. They really wouldn’t like Ronald Reagan if they read anything he wrote or were introduced to it.”

So it goes, and so it will go with greater intensity the closer these aspiring politicians get to presidential primary season. In these intervening years, party members will snipe and engage in acts of friendly fire as they skirmish over the soul of the Republican Party. All that will come to an end once Democrats choose their own nominee, at which time Republicans will, for a brief period of months in 2016, suddenly agree on everything until the second week of November.

Gift and Estate Tax Shelters Have Saved $100 Billion in Federal Taxes for the Wealthy Since 2000

Accidental Tax Break Saves Wealthiest Americans $100 Billion

December 17, 2013

Bloomberg - Sheldon Adelson makes no secret of his disdain for the estate tax.

"How many times do you have to pay taxes on money?" the casino magnate asks, leaning on a blue cane on the cobblestones of Wall Street on a crisp October morning.

A gravel-voiced man whose accent recalls his blue-collar Boston roots, Adelson, 80, has just rung the bell at the New York Stock Exchange. Shares of his Las Vegas Sands Corp. are at a five-year high, making him one of the world's richest men, worth more than $30 billion.

Federal law requires billionaires such as Adelson who want to leave fortunes to their children to pay estate or gift taxes of 40 percent on those assets. Adelson has blunted that bite by exploiting a loophole that Congress unintentionally created and that the Internal Revenue Service unsuccessfully challenged.

By shuffling his company stock in and out of more than 30 trusts, he's given at least $7.9 billion to his heirs while legally avoiding about $2.8 billion in U.S. gift taxes since 2010, according to calculations based on data in Adelson's U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filings.

Hundreds of executives have used the technique, SEC filings show. These tax shelters may have cost the federal government more than $100 billion since 2000, says Richard Covey, the lawyer who pioneered the maneuver. That's equivalent to about one-third of all estate and gift taxes the U.S. has collected since then.

Easy Bypass

The popularity of the shelter, known as the Walton grantor retained annuity trust, or GRAT, shows how easy it is for the wealthy to bypass estate and gift taxes. Even Covey says the practice, which involves rapidly churning assets into and out of trusts, makes a mockery of the tax code.

"You can certainly say we can't let this keep going if we're going to have a sound system," he says with a shrug.

Covey's technique is one of a handful of common devices that together make the estate tax system essentially voluntary, rendering it ineffective as a brake on soaring economic inequality, says Edward McCaffery, a professor at the University of Southern California's Gould School of Law.

Since 2009, President Barack Obama and some Democratic lawmakers have made fruitless proposals to narrow the GRAT loophole. Any discussion of tax shelters has been drowned out by the debate over whether to have an estate tax at all, McCaffery says.

‘Campaign Donors'

"From the Republican side of the aisle, you're committed to killing the thing," he says, adding that Democrats don't want to tackle an issue affecting a handful of people. "And that handful are all in the class of campaign donors."

Facebook Inc. Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg and Lloyd Blankfein, the CEO of Goldman Sachs Group Inc., are among the business leaders who have set up GRATs, SEC filings show.

JPMorgan Chase & Co. helps so many clients use the trusts that the bank has a special unit dedicated to processing GRAT paperwork, says Joanne E. Johnson, a JPMorgan private-wealth banker.

"I have a client who's done 89 GRATs," she says.

Goldman Sachs disclosed in a 2004 filing that 84 of the firm's current and former partners used GRATs. Blankfein has transferred more than $50 million to family members with little or no gift tax due, according to calculations based on data in his SEC filings.

Charles Ergen, chairman of Dish Network Corp., and fashion designer Ralph Lauren passed more than $300 million each, calculations from SEC filings show.

Blankfein, Ergen, Lauren and Zuckerberg declined to comment.

Devising Strategies

Congress enacted the estate tax in 1916 to apply to large fortunes at death. Eight years later, it added the related gift tax to cover transfers made before death. Both rates are currently 40 percent, and the first $5.25 million of an individual's wealth is exempt; the amount is $10.50 million for couples.

For as long as such levies have been on the books, lawyers have been devising strategies to get around them.

Congress created the GRAT while trying to stop another tax-avoidance scheme that Covey developed. In 1984, Covey, a lawyer at Carter Ledyard & Milburn LLP in New York, publicized an estate-tax shelter he'd invented called a grantor retained income trust, or GRIT.

Covey figured out how to make a large gift appear to be small. He would have a father, for example, put investments into a trust for his children, with instructions that the trust should pay any income back to the father. The value of that potential income would be subtracted from the father's gift-tax bill.

Growth Stocks

Then, the trust could invest in growth stocks that paid low dividends so that most of the returns still ended up going to his kids. 

Six years after Covey started promoting this technique, Congress termed it abusive and passed a law to stop it. The 1990 legislation replaced the GRIT with the GRAT, a government-blessed alternative that allowed people to keep stakes in gifts to their children while forbidding the abuse Covey had devised.

Covey studied the law and found an even bigger loophole.

"The change that was made to stop what they thought was the abuse, made the matter worse," he says.

Fredric Grundeman, who helped draft the bill while he was an attorney at the U.S. Treasury Department and is now retired, says the framers didn't recognize the new law's potential for abuse.

Flawed Thinking

"How do I say it?" Grundeman says. "When Congress enacts a law, it isn't always well thought out."

Covey, 84, a Missouri native and former U.S. Marine Corps basketball player who earned a law degree from Columbia Law School in 1955, uses the words "romantic" and "beautiful" to describe the most elegant tax maneuvers.

Covey recognized that a client could use the 1990 legislation to avoid gift taxes if he did something that would otherwise make no sense: put money in a trust with instructions to return the entire amount to himself within two years. Because he doesn't have to pay tax on a gift to himself, the trust incurs no gift tax. Covey calls the trust "zeroed out."

Because the client isn't paying any tax upfront, the transaction amounts to a can't-lose bet with the IRS. If the trust's investments make large enough gains, the excess goes to heirs tax-free. If not, the only costs are lawyer's fees, typically $5,000 to $10,000, Covey says.

Zeroed-Out

Three years after the new law took effect, Covey created a pair of $100 million zeroed-out GRATs for Audrey Walton, the former wife of the brother of Wal-Mart Stores Inc. founder Sam Walton. The IRS, which had banned such GRATs through regulation, demanded taxes and took her to court.

In 2000, the U.S. Tax Court found in Walton's favor, determining the 1990 law didn't prohibit a "zeroed-out" GRAT. Covey had won a rare prize: an official seal of approval for a tax shelter.

Two years after Covey's court victory, Adelson set up a GRAT called the "Sheldon G. Adelson 2002 Two Year LVSI Annuity Trust," Adelson's SEC filings show. By 2009, he was juggling chunks of his fortune in as many as 10 GRATs at a time, filings show.

Adelson once discussed his approach to inheritance taxes in a legal deposition.

"Listen, the law says you can avoid taxes but you can't escape taxes," Adelson testified as part of a 1997 lawsuit over an unrelated business dispute. "We just want to do what is right, but it is prudent and it's wise to prepare your estate to save taxes."

Political Donations

The son of a cabdriver from Lithuania, Adelson started his first business at the age of 12, selling newspapers with the help of a $200 loan. He got rich in the 1980s as the owner of a company that organized computer trade shows. Later, he bought the Sands Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas.

A globe-spanning casino and resort empire followed. He drew national attention in 2012 by donating more than $90 million to groups that supported Republican candidates, including Mitt Romney, the presidential nominee and an estate-tax opponent.

In November 2010, Adelson sat for an interview with a Bloomberg News reporter in Las Vegas Sands' corporate boardroom, tucked inside the palatial Venetian resort. He spoke of the perks of being gambling's richest man: His weekend home in Malibu, California; the homes in Israel and the south of France; the six jets that ferry his family between them.

‘Extremely Gratifying'

Adelson had recently rescued Las Vegas Sands from the brink of bankruptcy. His company's stock, which lost more than 90 percent in 2008, had recovered almost half of its value. That was good news for his place on the list of the world's richest people, a ranking that he follows closely.

"I don't need to pat myself on the back to say, look at all the good things I did," he said. "But the success and the comeback that I've enjoyed, and the company's enjoyed, have been extremely gratifying."

The share gains were also good for Adelson's tax shelters. That's because after Sands stock plunged in 2008, Adelson plowed even more of his fortune into new GRATs, the SEC filings show. When the stock rebounded, those GRATs swelled in value.

A few days after the interview, he would pour $725 million from one of his GRATs into trusts for the benefit of his family. If he'd given the same amount to family members without using a GRAT, it would have resulted in a gift-tax bill of more than $250 million.

25 GRATs

In all, Adelson and his wife, Miriam, have created at least 25 GRATs. At least 14 of the 25 trusts were zeroed out, according to the calculations based on SEC filings. Those trusts transferred at least $7.9 billion to family members, an amount that would otherwise have incurred gift taxes of $2.8 billion.

Adelson has six living children, including two teenage sons. By early 2012, more than a third of Adelson's stake in the Sands -- worth more than $10 billion today -- had already passed through GRATs to trusts overseen by his wife for the benefit of his family.

The titles of some of those trusts start with the first letters of his children's names. Later, more GRATs added another $3 billion to the heirs' trusts.

Outside the stock exchange in October, Adelson declined to comment on GRATs. Later, he passed a message along through Ron Reese, his publicist.

"Mr. Adelson did tell me to tell you that he has no intention of ever dying," Reese says. ‘So the estate-planning conversation is moot.''

Lawyers Tweak

Since Covey's triumph in the Walton case, lawyers have tweaked his technique to generate even more tax savings. One idea, used by former Aetna Inc. CEO John W. Rowe, puts corporate stock options into a GRAT.

Another, championed by Goldman Sachs banker Stacy Eastland in presentations at estate-planning conferences, envisions a husband funding a GRAT with the proceeds of an options bet with his wife.

"It's very common," Rowe says, referring to the use of GRATs. "It's become standard practice in estate planning."

Charles Dolan, whose family controls the New York Knicks basketball team and who is chairman of Cablevision Systems Corp., has repeatedly swapped Cablevision shares out of his GRATs and replaced them with IOUs, his SEC filings show.

The technique multiplies the potential tax savings, according to a 2008 report by analysts at AllianceBernstein Holding LP. Through a spokeswoman, Dolan declined to comment.

Not Pressing

The GRAT loophole is unlikely to be plugged anytime soon. President Obama has included a proposal to limit the GRAT technique in each of his annual budget plans but hasn't pressed Congress to act on it, says Kenneth Kies, a Republican tax lobbyist.

Committees in the House and Senate are working on what they call comprehensive tax overhaul bills. Neither plans to address estate or gift taxes.

Covey suggests one reason for the lack of action: Wealthy donors to politicians, both Democratic and Republican, want to keep the loophole in place.

"I've done a lot for Democratic contributors," he says with a smile.

No one knows for sure how much all of these GRATs cost the U.S. government. The IRS estimates the number of gift-tax returns filed in connection with new GRATs each year; there were about 1,946 in 2009, according to the most recent publicly available data.

Taxpayers don't have to report how much each GRAT ultimately passes to heirs.

It's as if Covey built an invisible highway bypass that carries some of the biggest fortunes past the tax man's tollbooth. He marvels at the billions that flow along this route.

"It boggles the mind," he says.

Mitt Romney Says He Could Wage War on Iran Without Congress' Approval

Mitt Romney talks with Bob Schieffer on CBS's "Face the Nation", June 17, 2012 (Full Interview)

In Israel, Romney Declares Jerusalem to be Capital

July 29, 2012

AP - Standing on Israeli soil, U.S. presidential candidate Mitt Romney on Sunday declared Jerusalem to be the capital of the Jewish state and said the United States has "a solemn duty and a moral imperative" to block Iran from achieving nuclear weapons capability.

"Make no mistake, the ayatollahs in Iran are testing our moral defenses. They want to know who will object and who will look the other way," he said. "We will not look away nor will our country ever look away from our passion and commitment to Israel."

The presidential election hovered over the speech. The Old City formed a made-for-television backdrop behind Romney, while some of his campaign donors listened in the audience.

Romney's declaration that Jerusalem is Israel's capital was matter-of-fact and in keeping with claims made by Israeli governments for decades, even though the United States, like other nations, maintains its embassy in Tel Aviv.

He did not say if he would order the embassy moved if he wins the White House, but strongly suggested so in a CNN interview.

"My understanding is the policy of our nation has been a desire to move our embassy ultimately to the capital (Jerusalem)," he said, adding, "I would only want to do so and to select the timing in accordance with the government of Israel."

His remarks on the subject during his speech drew a standing ovation from his audience, which included Sheldon Adelson, the American businessman who has said he will donate millions to help elect Romney to the White House.

Romney's embrace of Israel was on display throughout the day when he met with Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu and other leaders. He also visited the Western Wall, Judaism's holiest site, where he was mobbed by worshippers. In addition, Romney met with Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad.

In his remarks, Romney steered clear of overt criticism of President Barack Obama, even though he said the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran "has only become worse" in the past five years.

In an unspoken rebuttal to Obama and other critics, Romney said, "It is sometimes said that those who are the most committed to stopping the Iranian regime from security nuclear weapons are reckless and provocative and inviting war.

"The opposite is true. We are the true peacemakers," he said.

The former Massachusetts governor also stepped back from a comment a senior aide made a short while before the speech.

"We recognize Israel's right to defend itself," he told the audience. Earlier, the aide, Dan Senor, previewed the speech for reporters, saying that "if Israel has to take action on its own, in order to stop Iran from developing the capability, the governor would respect that decision."

Israel is the second of three stops on an international trip for Romney in the weeks before he claims the Republican nomination at his party's national convention in Tampa, Fla.

He flew to the Middle East from Britain, where he caused a stir by questioning whether officials there were fully prepared for the Olympic Games. A stop in Poland will complete his trip.

Four years ago, then-U.S. Sen. Barack Obama also visited Israel as a candidate, part of a five-nation trip meant to establish his own foreign policy credentials.

In his speech, Romney said Syrian President Bashar Assad "desperately clings to power" in Damascus in the face of an attempted overthrow, but he did not call for his removal.

He noted that Egypt is now headed by an "Islamist president, chosen in a Democratic election. ... The international community must use its considerable influence to insure that the new government honors the peace agreement with Israel that was signed by the government of Anwar Sadat" more than three decades ago, he said.

A goal of Romney's overseas trip is to demonstrate his confidence on the world stage, but his stop in Israel also was designed to appeal to evangelical voters at home and to cut into Obama's support among Jewish voters and donors. A Gallup survey of Jewish voters released Friday showed Obama with a 68-25 edge over Romney.

Romney and other Republicans have said Obama is insufficiently supportive of Israel, noting statements the president has made about settlements and his handling of evident Iranian attempt to develop nuclear weapons.

Tehran is closer to developing nuclear weapons capability than before, Romney said. "Preventing that outcome must be our highest national security priority."

In a March speech before a pro-Israel lobby in Washington, Obama warned of "loose talk of war" that serves only to drive up oil prices. "Now is not the time to bluster," he said then. "Now is the time to let our increased pressure sink in and sustain the broad international coalition we have built."

It was unlikely that the day's events would settle the issue.

Obama's former press secretary, Robert Gibbs, told ABC's "This Week" that the administration has delayed Iran's nuclear program. The president has imposed U.S. penalties against Iran and worked to tougher strictures applied by other nations. There have been numerous published reports of a coordinated U.S.-Israeli cyberattack that caused damage to Iranian equipment vital to creating weapons-grade nuclear material.

Even so, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said before the speech that "all the sanctions and diplomacy so far have not set back the Iranian program by one iota."

Whatever the reality, the administration has taken steps in recent days to reassure Israel of its support.

Most notably, Obama approved an increase in assistance to strengthen a missile defense system that is designed to protect Israel from rocket attacks launched from the Gaza.

Senor's comments caused a stir in the hours leading to Romney's speech, a reminder of the controversy that Romney had created a few days earlier in London.

He later clarified his comments in a written statement, saying that the candidate "believes we should employ any and all measures to dissuade the Iranian regime from its nuclear course and it is his fervent hope that diplomatic and economic measures will do so. In the final analysis, of course, no option should be excluded."

Pentagon officials have spoken publicly about the difficulty of such a strike and American officials have expressed concern about the destabilizing effect such military action could have in the region, even if carried out successfully.

In Israel, Romney Talks Iran, Angers Palestinians

July 29, 2012

AFP - White House hopeful Mitt Romney held top-level talks in Israel over Iran's nuclear ambitions but quickly drew fire from the Palestinians for endorsing Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish state.

"We must lead the effort to prevent Iran from building and possessing nuclear weapons capability," the Republican challenger said in a speech given on a rooftop overlooking Jerusalem's Old City in which he laid out key foreign policy issues facing Israel.

"We should employ any and all measures to dissuade the Iranian regime from its nuclear course," he said, expressing hope that diplomatic and economic measures would help achieve this aim, but adding that "in final analysis, of course, no option should be excluded."

"We recognise Israel's right to defend itself, and that it is right for America to stand with you," said Romney, the Republican challenger who will face off against President Barack Obama in November's US election.

Israel, which is widely believed to have the Middle East's only, albeit undeclared, nuclear arsenal, has warned that a military option cannot be ruled out to prevent Iran from developing atomic weapons capability. Tehran insists its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes only.

According to Israeli public radio, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Romney it was important to have "a strong and credible military threat" because sanctions and diplomacy "so far have not set back the Iranian programme by one iota."

The White House hopeful, who arrived in Israel from Britain late Saturday on a one-day visit, stepped into the quagmire of Middle Eastern politics when during his policy speech he hailed Jerusalem as Israel's capital.

"It is a deeply moving experience to be in Jerusalem, the capital of Israel," he said, in an apparent endorsement of a position held by the Jewish state but never accepted by the international community.

Netanyahu thanked him for his remarks, later telling him: "I want to thank you for those very strong words of support and friendship for Israel and for Jerusalem that we heard today."

But the Palestinians were infuriated, saying his remarks were "harmful to American interests in our region."

"They they harm peace, security and stability," Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat told AFP.
"Even if this statement is within the US election campaign, it is unacceptable and we completely reject it. The US election campaign should never be at the expense of the Palestinians," he said.
"Romney is rewarding occupation, settlement and extremism in the region with such declarations."

Israel, which occupied the largely Arab eastern sector during the 1967 Six-Day War and later annexed it, claims both halves of the city to be its "eternal and undivided capital."

But the Palestinians want the eastern sector as capital of their promised state and fiercely oppose any Israeli attempt to extend sovereignty there.

Most of the international community, including the United States, does not formally recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital due to the ongoing conflict, insisting the issue can only be resolved through final status negotiations.

Romney has consistently attacked what he says is Obama's weak and misguided Middle East policy, saying in January that the president "threw Israel under the bus," by defining the 1967 borders as a starting point for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.

On Egypt, Romney said he would work to ensure Cairo's new Islamist President Mohamed Morsi would protect the 1979 peace treaty with Israel.

"With the Islamist president elected in Egypt we hope to use the considerable weight of the world's influence to ensure a continued commitment to the agreements of peace... with Israel."

In a show of support for Israel ahead of Romney's tour, Obama on Friday signed a law reinforcing US security and military cooperation with Israel as representatives of the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC stood beside him in the Oval Office.

Read More...

Zionist Billionaire is Behind Newt Gingrich's Rise in Polls

Behind Gingrich's Rise, Billionaire Pal Sheldon Adelson

January 25, 2012

ABC News - Before Newt Gingrich dominated the South Carolina primary, a so-called super PAC supporting him spent millions of dollars savaging Mitt Romney in negative ads and fliers.

A driving force behind that super PAC is Sheldon Adelson, a Las Vegas casino tycoon who has translated his deep friendship with Gingrich into a financial bonanza to buoy his candidacy. Adelson gave the PAC, Winning Our Future, $5 million just before the South Carolina primary, and this week, his wife gave the group another $5 million.

The Adelsons make Mitt Romney look like Tom Joad. Adelson, the eighth-richest American, is worth more than $20 billion. He built the iconic Venetian hotel (and another in Macao to match) and has given to a host of Jewish causes — in addition to funding a nonprofit group that led to Gingrich's presidential run.

Adelson met Gingrich when he was the speaker of the House, and they bonded over their dedication to support Israel as Congress debated passing a bill that would encourage the American Embassy in Tel Aviv to be moved to Jerusalem, the capital. Since then they've been friends, with obvious benefits.

"He admires and likes Newt for his intellect and his creativity, and those are two traits that are very strong with Sheldon himself," said Robert List, a former governor of Nevada who was Adelson's legal counsel when he acquired the historic Sands Hotel. "It's no surprise that he's liked Newt from the beginning."

In October, Adelson attended a fundraiser for Gingrich at a Las Vegas restaurant owned by George Harris, a former political consultant who worked for the casino baron for years and ate lunch with him every day. They raised $60,000 for Gingrich.

Next week, Gingrich is due back at the restaurant, and so is Adelson, Harris said. Nevada's Republican caucus is Feb. 4.

"Sheldon Adelson — if he said he's going to do something, he does it," Harris said. "He's a humongous supporter of Newt. They're friends. They're buddies. It's a true relationship."

The money that the Adelsons have given to Winning Our Future is double what the super PAC has already spent to support Gingrich, which is just over $5 million as of Wednesday. It's unclear how much money the group has ready to spend, because super PACs aren't required to report how much they've raised until the end of January — after the four first primary contests.

Lifted by the donation from Adelson's wife, Winning Our Future is placing a big bet on the Florida primary, spending $6 million to run a TV ad that demonizes the health care plan that Romney led in Massachusetts.

The plan is awfully similar to what happened in South Carolina, where Romney's lead over the other candidates shrank by the day as the pro-Gingrich super PAC crowded the airwaves with anti-Romney commercials. Now the PAC is spending much more in Florida, though the Adelsons are said to have asked that the ads be positive.

"He wants to advance Newt's cause," List said. "He'll do what he can to help."

Gingrich was seen as a serious candidate only recently, months after Adelson first attended that Las Vegas fundraiser for him in October. The headlines were about Romney, and Gingrich was being called a long-shot. In some ways, Adelson's friends saw a parallel to a meeting with his senior staff when he was describing his vision to build a "new Las Vegas strip" in Macao.

"At that time, it was just a dream, and huge, involving billions and billions and billions of dollars," List said. "People were sitting around the table saying, 'Do you really think this could happen?' You know? And it did."

In an alternate universe, if Gingrich had never befriended Adelson years ago, the super PAC supporting the former speaker would probably have a significantly diminished effect. Perhaps South Carolina would have gone Romney's way, all but crowning him the nominee before January is over. Or maybe Gingrich's victory would have just been smaller.

Either way, Adelson reportedly doesn't expect anything in return from Gingrich.

"Sheldon doesn't need anything from anybody," Harris said.

And those who know Adelson well say that despite his loyalty to Gingrich, he'll be quick to reopen his checkbook for Romney if the ex-governor wins the Republican nomination.

"I don't think there's any doubt that he would support Romney, absolutely not one doubt in the entire world," said Fred Zeidman, a Romney fundraiser who speaks often with Adelson and who was the chairman of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council (the Adelsons have donated profusely to the museum). "This is all about beating Barack Obama."

• A Zionist Plot To Stop Ron Paul
• Gingrich's Major Backer Arch-Zionist Sheldon Adelson
• Zionist Billionaire Sheldon Adelson owns Newt Gingrich
• Gingrich’s Major Backer Arch-Zionist Sheldon Adelson

Read More...