Select Page ::

Kay Bailey Hutchison vows toughness on Russia as NATO … – Texas Tribune

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

WASHINGTON Former U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison testified on Thursday that she would take a tough stance on Russia if she is confirmed as the new ambassador to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

"We are beefing up defenses for an aggressive Russia," she told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, adding that she supports lawmakers considering new sanctions on Russian in response to its cyberattacks at home and abroad. "I think that Congress is doing the right thing."

Hutchison's comments were striking given that the man who nominated her to the NATO post President Donald Trump continues to cultivate an oddly close relationship with RussianPresident Vladimir Putin.Several senators, including Democrats, said Thursdaythey found Hutchison's positions reassuring, and they were anything but adversarial in their questioning of her.

"Kay Bailey, I'm so excited you're the nominee," said U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat and 2016 Democratic nominee for vice president."Your nomination sends a signal the NATO relationship is an important one."

The Texas Tribune thanks its sponsors. Become one.

The Senate haspassed Russian sanctionsin a near-unanimous vote, but the legislation is stalled in the House amid procedural and partisan infighting. Most members of Congress believe Trump is against new sanctions, setting the stage for a potential veto or veto override in the coming months.

In her testimony,Hutchison calledit likely that Russia interfered in the 2016 American elections, a conclusion Trump and many Republicans have yet to fully accept despite a consensus among the country's intelligence agencies.

Hutchison was one of several ambassador nominees who participated in Thursday'spanel.Texas' two senators, John Cornyn and Ted Cruz, introduced Hutchison to the committee with high praise.

She was relentless; she would not stop until she achieved her objective," Cornyn said of his time serving with her in the Senate.And most importantly, she always did what she thought was the right thing for Texas. Whether it was working with Republicans or Democrats, that was always her guiding star.

As I think about the type of individual best-suited to represent the U.S. on the world stage, I can think of no one better than Kay," he added.

Cruz, who succeeded Hutchison in the Senate, joked to his colleagues that they preferred her to him.

The Texas Tribune thanks its sponsors. Become one.

"You know I agree with the presidents effort to extract more from our allies in support of NATO. I think thats a positive direction for our country," he said. "But I think it is also very good to have a U.S. ambassador who has a strong will and a gracious smile to represent America."

Hutchison is expected to coast to confirmation.

Disclosure: The author of this article briefly worked for Kay Bailey Hutchison more than a decade ago.

Read related Tribune coverage:

Former U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison,under consideration for the NATO ambassadorship, played a key role in shepherding U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson through hisSenate confirmation. [link]

President Trump has nominated former U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison to be the nation's new NATO ambassador. [link]

Go here to read the rest:

Kay Bailey Hutchison vows toughness on Russia as NATO ... - Texas Tribune

NATO, Russian Troops Rattle Swords Along Hundreds of Miles of Borderland – Foreign Policy (blog)

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

Tens of thousands of troops are on the move from the Baltic to the Black Sea, as NATO and Russia open up a series of massive military exercises the size of which the continent hasnt seen since the Cold War.

Both sides claim the drills, which involve aircraft, warships, tanks and artillery, are purely defensive in nature. But it is clear the exercises are also meant to show off new capabilities and technologies, and display not only the strength of alliances, but how swiftly troops and heavy equipment can move to squash a threat at the frontier.

The most ambitious undertaking on the NATO side is Saber Guardian 17, a series of over a dozen distinct battle drills being carried out by 25,000 troops from 20 countries moving across Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria.

The scenario presented to ground commanders is that a technologically advanced land force has pushed into NATO territory and is threatening the alliance as a whole. The drills include air defense tests, live fire tank engagements, long advances by armored columns, fighter planes and helicopters supporting ground movements, electronic warfare, and airdrops.

Deterrence is about capability, its about making sure that any potential adversary knows that we are prepared to do whatever is necessary, U.S. Army Europe commander Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges told reporters during the exercise. What escalates tensions is when we look weak, not connected, not prepared, that is what invites aggression.

But increasing military capability doesnt have to mean war, he added. The Russians only respect strength, so if we demonstrate cohesion, if we demonstrate that we are together, that we are prepared, then I think we dont have to worry.

The generals blunt comments underscore the planning for Saber Guardian, which doesnt name Russia as the adversary, but clearly has the Kremlin in mind.

The scenario revolves around an incursion into NATO territory by a militarily advanced enemy intent on seizing the economic assets of Black Sea countries. A battle featuring 5,000 NATO troops at the Cincu training range in Romania saw U.S. Apache and Romanian helicopters coordinate with artillery on the ground, U.S. Abrams tanks, and 650 vehicles in support of a large infantry movement to halt the advance.

The U.S. is planning to spend about $23 million on the sprawling Romanian base in order to conduct even larger, more complex battle drills there in the future.

On the other side of the deterrent fence stands Russia, which is preparing to surge as many as 100,000 troops into the field in a series of drills dubbed Zapad, or West in the coming weeks.

The Kremlin claims about 12,700 troops will be active in Belarus and Russia for Zapad. But experts and NATO officials say Moscow is more likely to conduct a series of engagements that will swell those ranks by tens of thousands. Under the Vienna Document agreement of 2011, foreign observers must be present for any exercise that exceeds 13,000 troops.

By coming in under that number while conducting several other large drills at the same time, Moscow can avoid the presence of observers and control the narrative of how its troops performed.

But NATO is wary.

Given that Russia used a massive military exercise in 2014 to obscure its incursion into Crimea, and invaded South Ossetia in Georgia in 2008 during another exercise that covered troop movements, the alliance is keeping a close eye on Zapad.

From previous experiences related to previous exercises, we have every reason to believe there may be substantially more troops participating than the official quoted numbers, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said recently when asked about Zapad.

We dont consider this years Zapad exercise in itself to be a direct threat to [NATO] or a cover for an attack, added Kristjan Prikk, undersecretary for defense policy at Estonias Ministry of Defense during a conference in Washington on July 11. But we have to keep in mind that the Russians have the nasty habit of hiding their actual military endeavors behind exercises.

The last Zapad, in 2014, focused on displaying how quickly Russia could move forces from one part of the country to another, and illustrated how the Kremlin underplays the number of troops involved in its intertwined military drills.

Moscow claimed about 22,000 troops took part in 2014, but outside observers later concluded that up to 70,000 were involved, once all of the smaller but related exercises were added up.

Whatever number of troops ultimately take part, Moscow is going to very actively signal what they can and cannot do militarily, said Olga Oliker of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. And the fact that Russia often conducts nuclear exercises in conjunction with conventional movements adds an extra element of uncertainty for NATO and the West.

This year, Im looking to see what Kaliningrads role is in the exercise, and what supporting and concurrent exercises are being held in Belarus and Kaliningrad, the Russian exclave on the Baltic Sea, Oliker said.

Three Chinese warships are slated to arrive in Kaliningrad in July 21 to take part in a series of drills with the Russian navy and air force.

The upcoming weeks worth of activities will include anti-submarine and anti-ship operations, and practice between the two nations communicating and coordinating while fighting. The main aims of the exercise are to increase the efficiency in cooperation of the two fleets to counter threats to security at sea, [and] train compatibility of the crews of Russian and Chinese combat ships, the Russian Defense Ministry said.

The naval activity in the Baltic comes months after NATO established new brigades in Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia, beefed up by prepositioned American tanks and heavy armored vehicles.

In June, the U.S. Air Force also sent B-1 and B-52 bombers to Europe to participate in the massive BALTOPs exercise with Baltic allies, which included 50 allied ships running through a series of defensive maneuvers to protect NATOs northern flanks.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Army deployed a Patriot anti-aircraft missile system in Lithuania for use in yet another NATO wargame, marking the first time the system has been brought to the Baltic region where Russia enjoys a robust air and missile defense capability. The deployment is temporary, U.S. officials cautioned, but officials in Lithuania are looking at purchasing the system. Romania recently committed to a $3.9 billion deal for seven Patriot missile defense systems in July.

Closer to Russias borders and Crimea is another NATO exercise related to Saber Guardian, dubbed Sea Breeze 2017. The 12-day naval exercise currently underway in the Black Sea is co-hosted by the U.S. and Ukraine, and features the U.S. Navy cruiser USS Hue City and the destroyer USS Carney, which join 16 other countries in the Odessa-based undertaking. American surveillance plans and a team of Navy SEALs are also participating.

The naval exercises will be closely watched by Russian forces, who are active in the Black Sea, and have vastly improved their surveillance capabilities in Crimea. Over the past year, Russian aircraft have repeatedly buzzed American warships and aircraft in international waters in the Black Sea, drawing protests from Washington.

In February, an armed Russian aircraft buzzed the USS Porter, and in May armed Russian jets came within feet of U.S. surveillance planes operating over the waterway.

Photo Credit: DIMITAR DILKOFF/AFP/Getty Images

Twitter Facebook Google + Reddit

Originally posted here:

NATO, Russian Troops Rattle Swords Along Hundreds of Miles of Borderland - Foreign Policy (blog)

USA Pride: Local 14U team to compete in NSA North World Series – Huron Daily Tribune

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

By Seth Stapleton Tribune Sports Writer

USA Pride vs. Millington

USA Pride: Local 14U team to compete in NSA North World Series

SEBEWAING It was a simple doubleheader between two area softball teams, but it served a much bigger purpose.

Tuesday's games between 14U squads USA Pride and Millington were both a tuneup and a fundraiser for a USA team that is on its way to the National Softball Association North World Series.

"It should never surprise me, in the communities of Unionville and Sebewaing, that we would have a good turnout," said USA Pride coach Tom Williamson of the event. "And it was a better turnout than I expected."

Williamson said the initial goal of the friendly matchup Tuesday was to just find a good team to play a doubleheader against. With the help of the community though, it turned into a fundraiser and an opportunity to promote the entire travel program.

Williamson, who has been part of USA's summer travel softball program for many years, said it's the first time a USA team will compete in the NSA World Series.

"Our goal as a program is not to go win tournaments, we want to go compete," Williamson said. "If we win, great, but we just want to play the best competition we can to get better as a program."

In the past, USA travel teams have always played in three or four tournaments throughout the summer. This year, the 14U team decided to try to qualify for the NSA tournament. They played in a qualifier in Midland over Memorial Day weekend and placed second, qualifying them for the big event.

It will take place in Crown Point, Indiana, beginning Tuesday. USA Pride will open the tournament at 9:45 a.m. Tuesday, then play again at 4:45 p.m. that day. From there, the team will be seeded into a double elimination bracket. At minimum, they will play a total of four games.

"They are so excited they can't stand it," Williamson said of the team. "I'm really happy in the fact that we are representing USA travel softball as a whole. We're representing USA and really proud of it."

At the NSA tournament, USA Pride will be competing against around 40 teams from the likes of Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Kentucky. While the task may seem daunting, Williamson feels his team is playing its best ball of the summer at this point in time, fresh off a title at the Grand Blanc tournament a weekend ago.

"They're hitting the ball really well and we've got three pitchers, which is important to get through a long tournament," Williamson said. "I'm really pleased with the way that we're playing right now. We've gotten better all year long, so we'll see what happens when we go into next week."

Added Williamson: "This team, it is truly like family. Every single one of these kids get along so well. And more importantly, the parents are unbelievable. The amount of help we've received is amazing. As a coach, you can't ask for anything more than that."

Go here to see the original:

USA Pride: Local 14U team to compete in NSA North World Series - Huron Daily Tribune

Elite softball teams welcome challenge at NSA world series – The … – Virginia Gazette

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

An hour before the 9 a.m. first pitch for his team's 16-and-under game Friday at Kiwanis Park, Line Drive Express Softball Club coach Doug Hill glanced across the field at his team's opponent, the Illiana Dream Seams, on day five of the National Softball Association Class A Eastern World Series.

Hill's Gold squad hails from Midland in Central Michigan and the Dream Seams from Martinsville in Eastern Illinois. All Hill knew about the Dream Seams is what he could see through the fence: a team beginning its warmups wearing an ensemble with splashes of black, red and yellow similar to the University of Maryland's often bold getups. The night before, he was not even sure which state they were from. Hill said it is his superstition to not get wrapped up in scouting reports during massive tournaments like these, with 20 teams in their age group and more than 85 overall from 10 different states.

That is part of the fun. That is part of the reason why many of the teams including Hill's group, donning Central Michigan University's burgundy and gold colors, visited the tournament that held games Monday-Friday at Kiwanis, and Quarterpath parks as well as Stoney Run Athletic Complex in Newport News.

After running into the same teams in regular weekend tournaments, a change of scenery and exposure to different philosophies and coaching styles makes events like these attractive for some teams, even to the ones that drove more than 12 hours like Hill's.

"It's really immaterial what they're doing," Hill said. "I always tell them to do our work and don't worry about theirs."

If that sounds at all ruthless, it is because Line Drive Express is used to winning. Hill, who owns the club, is a NSA hall of famer having coached the sport the last 27 years. Prior to that, he played football at Northwood University in Midland and semi-professional softball.

Line Drive Express had 13 state championships and three NSA world series titles to its name entering Friday's competition, when it needed to win five games to take another title back to Michigan. The club had only needed to finish first or second in at least one qualifier to secure a spot in the world series field; but it won four separate qualifying tournaments for good measure.

All but two of Hill's players are committed to play in college including his daughter, Bailey, who said staying pumped up is vital in tourneys like these that are made even more grueling by the extreme heat that accompanied this one.

The dugouts of the Line Drive Express and Dream Seams were blaring music Friday morning before most folks in Williamsburg had ventured out to work.

"When I go out there, I always know I have to give it my all even if I'm dead," said Line Drive Express pitcher Faith Barden, a Western Michigan University recruit. "And I always have the defense behind me to be able to back me up."

Line Drive Express was fortunate to make it to Friday after a tough win Thursday night over Chesapeake's Elite Fastpitch, which had to survive four games on Thursday, one more than Line Drive Express.

The Chesapeake team's exit left the Blue Ridge Sudden Impact the only team from Virginia still standing in the bracket.

Lynch Station, south of Lynchburg, is home for Sudden Impact, which took on the Central Illinois Cyclones in game one on Friday.

New York teams from Long Island and West Seneca rounded out the 16-and-under teams that made it to Friday.

Sudden Impact has traveled as far away as Las Vegas for NSA world series tournaments but set its sights on the Williamsburg tournament because they wanted to play in their home state.

Sudden Impact might have been the defacto home team by Friday but Virginia license plates were outnumbered by ones from Michigan and Illinois in the Kiwanis parking lot.

The Cyclones came from Peoria, having qualified in two previous tournaments including the Illinois NSA event.

"The NSA folks here at Williamsburg have been excellent," said Cyclones manager Aaron Barrington. "They treated us well. We got to go to Busch Gardens and do some things we don't get to do in Illinois."

As Barrington and tournament site director Scott Hinders each noted, the Eastern World Series is the big and final tournament of the season for most of the teams. A few of the Cyclones will go on to play for colleges, Barrington said, while others will choose their post-secondary schools of choice solely for educational reasons, meaning competitive softball at this level ended for them in Williamsburg.

Line Drive Express started its season in November before moving indoors for the winter. While not quite a vacation, the Eastern World Series provided the club a chance to enjoy the conclusion of long travel campaign.

"These guys are here because they earned it," Hill said. "That's what I enjoy about this sport. This is their payback for all the hard work."

Holtzman can be reached by phone at 757-298-5830.

See original here:

Elite softball teams welcome challenge at NSA world series - The ... - Virginia Gazette

Fifth Amendment Concerns Result in Overturned Convictions in First … – Lexology (registration)

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

The Second Circuit yesterday became the first court of appeals to address a criminal appeal regarding the governments investigation into the manipulation of the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR). Its decision in United States v. Allen reversed the convictions of two former Rabobank employees accused of using their roles in the banks LIBOR submission process to rig the global interest benchmark, and not only reversed the convictions but dismissed the operative grand jury indictment. The court concluded that the government had improperly used the defendants compelled testimony against them, holding that the Fifth Amendments prohibition on the use of compelled testimony applies even when the testimony was compelled by a foreign sovereign. The decision may well have a significant impact on the increasing number of extra-territorial investigations conducted by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), in which it partners with foreign agencies to investigate and prosecute cross-border activity.

The pair Anthony Allen and Anthony Conti were initially investigated by the United Kingdoms Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). During the investigation Allen, Conti, and other Rabobank employees were interviewed by the FCA; Allens and Contis interviews were compelled by threat of imprisonment, though they were granted direct use immunity. The FCA later brought an enforcement action against one of their co-workers, Paul Robson, disclosing relevant evidence against him, including Allens and Contis compelled testimony. During this exchange, Robson reviewed the materials over the course of two or three successive or nearly successive days, admitting to having underlined, annotated, and circled certain passages of both Allens and Contis testimony. But, in short order, the FCA then dropped the case and the DOJ stepped in.

A grand jury returned indictments against Allen and Conti in 2014, charging both with one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud, and several counts of wire fraud. Robson was the sole source of certain material information for the indictment, including the source of testimony provided by FBI agent to the grand jury that Allen and Conti had participated in rigging LIBOR.

Before trial, the defendants moved under Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441 (1972), to dismiss the indictment or suppress Robsons testimony. The Supreme Courts decision in Kastigar held that the government may compel testimony from witnesses, in spite of their invoking the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, where it confers immunity from use of that testimony and evidence derived therefrom in a subsequent criminal case. The upshot is that the government must show in cases where such testimony is at issue that its proof rests on evidence other than the compelled statements and the fruits thereof. The district court in this case resolved that it would instead address any Kastigar concerns i.e., issues regarding the use of compelled testimony under Fifth Amendments Self-Incrimination Clause at trial.

The pair were convicted. After a post-trial Kastigar hearing, the district court held that Robsons reading, marking up, and annotating the compelled testimony, and the fact that material parts of the FBI agents grand jury hearsay testimony had been derived solely from Robson, were not enough to taint the evidence Robson provided because the government had shown an independent source for such evidence, to wit, [Robsons] personal experience.

The Second Circuit disagreed. It held first that the Fifth Amendments prohibition on government use of compelled testimony in American criminal proceedings applies, even when a foreign sovereign is the actor that compelled the testimony, noting that Amendment protects against the use and derivative use of compelled testimony against an accused in such a proceeding.

Second, it held that when the government attempts to use a witness like Robson, who has been substantially exposed to a defendants compelled testimony, it is the governments burden under Kastigar to show, at a minimum, that the witnesss review of the compelled testimony did not shape, alter, or affect the evidence used by the government.

It third held that a witnesss bare, generalized incantations that reviewing those materials did not taint his or her testimony (as was the case here via leading questions of Robson at the Kastigar hearing, which produced nothing more than bare, self-serving denials from Robson) are insufficient to meet this burden of proof.

And it lastly it had no trouble concluding that introducing testimony provided by Robson a key cooperator and prominent witness before the trial and grand jury (via a hearsay presentation) was not harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt. Robsons had been the only testimony refuting Allens and Contis central argument that they had not actually engaged in rigging the LIBOR benchmark. This finding as to testimony both at trial and before the grand jury resulted in the dismissal of the indictments against Allen and Conti.

The Court rejected the governments counterarguments, including that prohibiting the use in United States Courts of testimony compelled by a foreign authority could seriously hamper the prosecution of criminal conduct that crosses international borders, by among other things, inadvertently or negligently obstructing federal prosecutions. The court noted that this risk already exists within our own constitutional structure, and that the practical outcome of our holding today is that the risk of error in coordination falls on the U.S. Government (should it seek to prosecute foreign individuals), rather than on the subjects and targets of cross-border investigations.

Fifth Amendment Concerns Result in Overturned Convictions in First ... - Lexology (registration)

Are There Limits To Trump’s Pardon Power? – HuffPost

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

Originally published on Just Security.

Over the weekend, one of President Donald Trumps personal lawyers, Jay Sekulow, refused to rule out the possibility that the president would pardon his associates, or even himself, in the Russia investigation. SekulowtoldABCsThis Week: He can pardon individuals, of course. Thats because the founders of our country put that in the United States Constitution: the power to pardon. But I have not had those conversations, so I couldnt speculate on that.

The issue of whether Trump could use his pardon power returns us to thedebateover whether a sitting president may be indicted or whether the Constitution requires impeachment and removal prior to indictment. Assomehave noted, that is almost a purely academic question because it is highly unlikely that Special Counsel Robert Mueller would indict Trump while still in office. In any event, there is the potential for post-presidency criminal exposure. In addition, Trumps family members and close associates could also be under investigation. This means Trump could be tempted to insulate them by granting pardons before theyre convicted of anything.

Presidents tend to save their most controversial grants of clemency for the end of their term in order to avoid the ensuing political firestorm while in office. But a Russia-related pardon would be particularly incendiary politically. That may not mean much to Trump given that a defining element of his rise has been his willingness to disregard longstanding norms and upend convention. He has mocked the disabled, attacked a Gold Star family, joked about sexual assault, savaged the free press, and fired the FBI director investigating Russian interference.

Aside from the political dynamics, granting a pardon in the context of the Russia investigation also raises fundamental questions of constitutional law.

Presidential pardon power derives from a specific grant in theConstitution. Article II, Section 2 vests the president with the Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment. The Presidents pardon power is limited to federal offenses, which include federal prosecutions in U.S. territories like the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Clemency requests, which include both requests for a pardon and requests that a sentence be commuted, typically flow through the Office of the Pardon Attorney at the Department of Justice (see the Justice DepartmentsFAQs). The Justice Department evaluates clemency requests pursuant tostandardsset forth in the U.S. Attorneys Manual. However, the president may bypass that process given that it is a power expressly reserved for the president.

A president can prospectively pardon individuals for crimes that have occurred but have not been charged. In the most famous example, President Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon even though he was not under indictment. President Fordsproclamationincluded a full, free and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during his presidency. Similarly, President George H.W. Bush issued full pardons to six people implicated in the Iran-Contra Affair,some of whom still faced trial.

The Nixon pardon was a political disaster that ended Fords presidential honeymoon, but it also sparked a debate among legal commentators about whether it was constitutional. Mark Rozell gives a brief and interestingtreatmentof the debate. Some argued it was beyond the power of the president to relieve a person of criminal liability for hypothetical offenses (see Edwin Brown Firmage and R. Collin Magnumhere). However most sources suggest a prospective pardon is within the presidents constitutional authority. InEx Parte Garland, 71 U.S. 333, 380 (1867), the Supreme Court described the power in broad temporal terms:

The [pardon] power extends to every offense known to the law, andmay be exercised at any time after its commission, eitherbefore legal proceedings are taken, or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment. (emphasis added).

A 1995 Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinionnotesthat presidents throughout U.S. history have asserted the power to issue pardons prior to conviction, and the consistent view of the Attorneys General has been that such pardons have as full an effect as pardons issued after conviction. It cites an Attorney General opinion from the 1850s, which defends the presidents preemptive power on the grounds that the act of clemency and grace is applied to the crime itself, not to the mere formal proof of the crime. Members of Congress have occasionally contemplated a constitutional amendment to preclude a future pardon like Nixon received, which itself suggests Congress acquiesces to the Executive Branchs view. Most legal authorities indicate President Trump has the power to grant prospective pardons for criminal acts not subject to formal charge.

Three days before Nixon resigned, OLC issued anopinionthat [u]nder the fundamental rule that no one may be a judge in his own case, the President cannot pardon himself. Most legal experts supported that view, although the arguments as to why vary from natural law (first principles such as no man can be a judge in his own case) to constitutional structure (a self-pardon would defeat the purposes of Article I, Section 4, which expressly allows officeholders removed by impeachment to be subject to criminal prosecution). A handful of Republican members of Congress cited the possibility of self-pardon as a justification for their votes to impeach President Bill Clinton, which is discussed in the introduction to this Oklahoma Law Reviewarticle. While some doubt remains about whether the president has the authority to pardon himself, a self-pardon is most likely legally ineffective from shielding a president from future federal prosecution.

In its Watergate opinion, OLC also suggested that the president could invoke Section 3 of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment to allow the vice president, in his role as acting president, to pardon the president. If the President declared that he was temporarily unable to perform the duties of his office, the Vice President would become Acting President and as such he could pardon the President. Thereafter the President could either resign or resume the duties of his office, the opinion stated. However, if the president and vice president conspired to launder away the presidents criminal liability, it would trigger a seismic political event. It would also tarnish the vice presidents standing as a politically viable successor in the event of impeachment. However, I have not yet seen a legal obstacle to that kind of scheme.

As for the special counsel, a prospective pardon would have a narrowing effect on his authority, as it would end any criminal jeopardy arising from his investigation. However, provided there are still active leads and targets, the special counsel mandate would continue. It would raise interesting legal questions. For example, a pardoned individual could still potentially serve as an unindicted coconspirator, which triggers benefits to a prosecution such as a hearsayexceptionfor co-conspirator statements.

Congressional investigations serve legislative policy and oversight goals rather than criminal enforcement goals, so a pardon does not end an Article I inquiry. But there could be other counterintuitive effects of a pardon on the ongoing congressional investigations into Russias interference in the 2016 election and whether there was any coordination with the Trump campaign. For example, it could potentially remove federal legal jeopardy in a manner that may defeat an assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Were Trump to pardon his former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, tomorrow, Congress might be able to get a court order requiring Flynn to testify before the committees because he no longer faces federal criminal prosecution. That court order or resulting congressional contempt finding, in turn, could theoretically be enforced by coercive contempt (i.e., jailing until such time as the witness provides ordered testimony). Because coercion serves process integrity goals rather than criminal goals, that enforcement power probably could not be defeated by another presidential pardon.

The criminal and congressional Russian investigations should proceed with integrity and without interference. With Trump at the helm and his family under scrutiny, pardon power hangs over the investigations like a sword of Damocles. The pardon sword is largely held overhead by a thread made of political, rather than legal, fiber.

See more here:

Are There Limits To Trump's Pardon Power? - HuffPost

Testimony of co-defendant contentious in upcoming Fort Collins murder trial – Loveland Reporter-Herald

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

By Sam Lounsberry

Reporter-Herald Staff Writer

Corzo-Avendano

A 13-day trial is set to start Monday for Tolentino Corzo-Avendano, who has been charged with first-degree murder in the February 2016 stabbing attack in a Fort Collins home that left a woman blind in one eye and her grandmother dead.

Attorneys met to discuss the course of the upcoming trial at a hearing Wednesday, and the planned testimony of a former co-defendant in the murder case became a point of contention between prosecution and defense teams.

Corzo-Avendano, 27, was arrested after the reported stabbing of 26-year-old Sara Mondragon and her 61-year-old grandmother Cathy Mondragon, who died shortly after the attack.

Sara Mondragon is now reportedly blind in her left eye and can no longer walk.

A co-defendant of Corzo-Avendano, 42-year-old Tomas Vigil, was also originally charged with first-degree murder in the incident, but has since accepted a plea agreement for admitting to armed burglary with a crime of violence sentence enhancer.

Vigil is still being held in the Larimer County Jail, though, and because the District Attorney's Office plans to call him as a witness in its case against Corzo-Avendano during trial, Vigil's pending testimony was discussed between prosecuting and defense attorneys Wednesday.

Deputy District Attorney Nick Cummings said Vigil should not be allowed to be cross-examined by Corzo-Avendano's defense counsel due to Vigil's likely choice to remain silent and plead the Fifth Amendment.

However, defense attorney Kathryn Hay argued a witness's right to the Fifth Amendment is outstripped by a defendant's right to a full legal defense as outlined by the Sixth Amendment, and called Vigil's upcoming testimony "ripe for cross-examination."

8th District Judge Julie Kunce Field, who will preside over the trial, ordered the District Attorney's Office to file a written motion on the matter, and will rule on the course of Vigil's testimony after Hay and defense attorney Matthew Landers file a written response.

Previous motions filed by Landers included one to suppress from evidence given to the jury statements Corzo-Avendano made during his arrest and while in custody of Fort Collins police, and another to suppress phone conversations between Corzo-Avendano and Sara Mondragon while the former was in custody at the Larimer County Jail prior to the alleged stabbing assault.

Defense counsel has argued that police elicited responses from Corzo-Avendano illegally, prior to reading him his Miranda rights and after he evoked his right to have counsel present.

Prosecutors have not offered Corzo-Avendano a plea deal throughout the proceedings.

Sam Lounsberry: 970-635-3630, slounsberry@prairiemountainmedia.com and twitter.com/samlounz.

Read the rest here:

Testimony of co-defendant contentious in upcoming Fort Collins murder trial - Loveland Reporter-Herald

Nebraska Med Mal Cap Survives 7th, 5th & 14th Amendment Attacks – JD Supra (press release)

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

The US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has upheld Nebraskas statutory medical malpractice limit, rejecting attacks that were based on the Seventh, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the US Constitution.

After a federal court jury awarded $17 million to a child born with severe brain damage, the court applied Nebraskas statutory limit of $1.75, for a reduction of almost 90%. The plaintiff appealed on several grounds, including four based on the US Constitution.

The court rejected the Seventh Amendment argument that the cap amounted to a denial of right to trial by jury, ruling that it is the jurys role to determine the extent of a plaintiffs injuries but not to determine the legal consequences of its findings.

The court also rejected the argument that the cap amounted to a taking without just compensation under the Fifth Amendment, ruling that the plaintiff never had a vested property right in uncapped damages.

Similarly, the court rejected two Fourteenth Amendments arguments. First, the court held that the cap doesnt deny equal protection to those with damages above the cap, as compared to those with damages below the cap (an argument that persuaded the Florida Supreme Court to strike down that states cap on June 8 in N. Broward Hosp. Dist. v. Kalitan, No. SC15-1858).

The court noted that the legislature enacted the cap for the express purpose of curbing meritless med mal claims and efficiently resolving meritorious claims. When enacted, the cap bore a rational relationship to that purpose. That is the only applicable standard, and the cap passes it. An argument that the cap is unnecessary or imprudent or has outlived its usefulness is irrelevant.

Last, the court rejected the argument that the cap denies a right of substantive due process by failing to provide a just substitute remedy for uncapped damages.

The case is Schmidt v. Ramsey, Nos. 16-1022, 16-1024 (8th Cir., June 22, 2017).

View post:

Nebraska Med Mal Cap Survives 7th, 5th & 14th Amendment Attacks - JD Supra (press release)

Attorney General Sessions ignores 4th Amendment – Allentown Morning Call

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

On July 17, 229 years after ratification of the Constitution, Jeff Sessions, the honorable attorney general of the USA, issued his recommendation that asset forfeiture be increased.

Meanwhile in middle town USA, a collective shrug of the shoulders was the response. Who cares if a few drug dealers have their ill-gotten gains taken from them? Yet, it is a shame if innocent Americans happen have their property and cash taken from them without due process of law. There must be a good reason for this gross violation of the Fourth Amendment.

As a matter of fact, thanks to Sessions, we now know the Founding Fathers had it all wrong. We are not innocent until proven guilty, and we owe Sessions our gratitude for correcting a 200-year-old mistake in our justice system.

Since he has determined we are all inherently guilty, it is futile to try to prove our innocence. Therefore, the only patriotic thing to do is to voluntarily forfeit our assets so he won't waste our tax dollars seizing them.

Donald Harris

Whitehall Township

Read the original here:

Attorney General Sessions ignores 4th Amendment - Allentown Morning Call

Refusing Interior Inspection: Right to Challenge Property Assessment Not Lost – WisBar

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

Refusing Interior Inspection: Right to Challenge Property Assessment Not Lost
WisBar
Kelly concluded that the Milewskis had a constitutional right to refuse the tax assessor's entry, because government entry to obtain information would be a search under the Fourth Amendment, which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Refusing Interior Inspection: Right to Challenge Property Assessment Not Lost - WisBar

NRA-ILA | Supreme Court Asked to Review Maryland’s Gun Ban – NRA ILA

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

Fairfax, Va. A group of Maryland citizens, with the support of the National Rifle Association, filed a petition to the United States Supreme Court on Friday seeking to reverse aCourt of Appealsrulingthat stripped some of Americas most popular rifles of Second Amendment protection.The 4thCircuit ruling in the case Kolbe v. Hogan is a direct contradiction of the Supreme Courts 2008 decision, District of Columbia v. Heller, which re-affirmed American citizens right to self-defense.

Lower courts have been making up their own rules when it comes to the Second Amendment for too long, andtheKolbe decisioncrossed yet another line, said Chris W. Cox, executive director, National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action. The Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense. The popular rifles and standard magazines banned in Maryland are some of the best tools for self-defense. We are hopeful that the Supreme Court will reverse this egregious decision.

InFebruary, the4thCircuit Court of Appeals ruled the Second Amendment does not protect the most popular rifles in the country including AR-15s as well as all standard capacity detachable magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.

The petition asks the Supreme Court to confirm that its ruling inDistrict of Columbia v. Hellerprotects the most popular semiautomatic rifles and magazines.

By holding that the Second Amendment does not apply to common firearms and magazines, the4thCircuit has gone further than any other courtinattackingSecond Amendment freedoms.

Marylands ban on commonly owned rifles and magazines is unconstitutional.The National Rifle Association will continue to fight for all Americans Second Amendment rights.

Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America's oldest civil rights and sportsmen's group. More than five million members strong, NRA continues to uphold the Second Amendment and advocates enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation's leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the armed services. Be sure to follow the NRA on Facebook at NRA on Facebook and Twitter @NRA.

Visit link:

NRA-ILA | Supreme Court Asked to Review Maryland's Gun Ban - NRA ILA

First Amendment suit halts anti-‘Pokmon Go’ law – Engadget

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

But Candy Lab, maker of the AR game Texas Rope 'Em, sued the county and claimed that the ordinance was a First Amendment violation. They also asked the courts for an injunction of the rule before the lawsuit goes to trial next April, which a district judge granted on Thursday. In the ruling, the judge said, "Greater injury will be inflicted upon [Candy Labs] by the denial of injunctive relief than will be inflicted upon [Milwaukee County] by the granting of such relief."

Milwaukee County has argued that this isn't a First Amendment violation because the game and its makers don't have First Amendment rights. "Texas Rope 'Em is not entitled to First Amendment protection because it does not convey any messages or ideas. Unlike books, movies, music, plays and video games mediums of expression that typically enjoy First Amendment protection Texas Rope 'Em has no plot, no storylines, no characters and no dialogue," said Milwaukee County in its motion to dismiss the case. It also claims that the game isn't protected by the amendment because it constitutes illegal gambling.

The permit Milwaukee County began demanding treats AR gaming like a special event, requiring start and end times, expected numbers of participants, portable restroom supply and fees for things like garbage collection. All of which seem rather ridiculous to ask of a game developer.

In response to the judge's injunction approval, Candy Lab's attorney told Ars Technica, "I think it's a huge win for the medium of augmented reality as a whole. It's a strong affirmation that AR is a medium for creative expression."

Excerpt from:

First Amendment suit halts anti-'Pokmon Go' law - Engadget

David Ball: Questions Neal’s belief in First Amendment – GazetteNET

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

Questions Neals belief in First Amendment

I was shocked to learn that Richard Neal and many other congressmen think we should take away the First Amendment rights of people who express their support of a boycott of Israel.

I am Jewish, and committed to Israels long-term survival. I think the thuggish actions and racist comments of Benjamin Netanyahus far-right Israeli government represent a long-term threat to that survival. Along with the constant theft of Palestinian land (land the whole world, including Israel, recognizes as Palestinian), these actions arouse deep-seated hatred which can only lead to destructive war. At the end, it will likely lead to the destruction of Israel.

So I think anyone in this country who backs the extremist Netanyahu is really backing the long-term destruction of the Jewish state, and certainly the destruction of Israeli democracy.

But if anyone came up with a law to deprive Netanyahu-backers of the right to express their views, I would oppose it to my last breath. Does Congressman Neal believe in the First Amendment, which guarantees free speech? He should be ashamed of himself.

David Ball

Northampton

View original post here:

David Ball: Questions Neal's belief in First Amendment - GazetteNET

‘Nobody Speak’: How Billionaires Are Silencing the First Amendment (Audio) – Truthdig

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

Brian Knappenberger in 2012. (Logan Boyd / CC 2.0)

When documentary filmmaker Brian Knappenberger set out to make a film about Hulk Hogans lawsuit against Gawker Media, he didnt fully realize the impact of the trial on the future of journalism. It wasnt until the revelation that Peter Thiel was behind thisaka bankrolling Hogans lawsuitthat he realized suddenly this was a very different story, this was about how very wealthy individuals could silence their critics.

Knappenbergers past films, podcast host and Truthdig Editor in Chief Robert Scheer notes, talk about the possibilities for good and evil in the internet, and his latest, Nobody Speak: Hulk Hogan, Gawker, and the Trial of a Free Press, is no exception. In this weeks episode of KCRWs Scheer Intelligence, Knappenberger sits down with Scheer for a discussion of freedom of the press in the age of Donald Trump, and the future of online journalism.

I found the Hulk Hogan/Gawker case to be really compelling just by itself. It was the first time a sex tape case like this had ever gone to trial, and there was this kind of veneer of tabloid sensationalism to it. You could tell that there were some bigger-picture things going on, Knappenberger says. There were some, I think, really important First Amendment versus privacy issues happening here, and so I thought that was just really, really interesting.

Square, Site wide, Desktop

Square, Site wide, Mobile

Knappenberger goes on to explain how Trump has drastically impacted freedom of the press, and notes that Thiel also financially supported Trumps presidential campaign. I think theyre kindred spirits, certainly, in their hatred of the media, he says.

So how does Knappenberger feel about the future of the free press, especially considering the media consolidation happening under companies like Sinclair Broadcast Group?

Theres a lot of examples, and troubling examples, of big money in news and in media. Theres no question about that, he says. I think what were seeing here in the last year, and what Im responding to in the film, is the beginning of this stuff really ratcheting up, and the stakes getting higher and higher.

Listen to the full interview in the player above. Find past editions of Scheer Intelligence here.

Posted by Emma Niles

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

View post:

'Nobody Speak': How Billionaires Are Silencing the First Amendment (Audio) - Truthdig

Tor Project to launch public bug bounty project | CIO Dive – CIO Dive

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

Dive Brief:

The nonprofit Tor Project announced it plans to launch its first public bug bounty project, working with HackerOne, according to VentureBeat. The Tor browser is the controversial program that allows people to troll the internet without being tracked.

The Tor Project wants to find vulnerabilities that could compromise the anti-surveillance network.

Tor launched a private bug bounty program last year. The new program is public, which means anyone can participate. Tor Project said a legitimate bug report could land a researcher up to $4,000.

Bug bounties are growing in popularity among companies looking to keep on top of vulnerabilities. For one thing, such programs are often much cheaper than the cost of recovering from an attack. The average cost of recovery from a single security incident is estimated to be $86,500 for small and medium businesses and $861,000 for enterprises,according to a recent report from Kaspersky Lab.

The number of enterprise bug bounty programs grew more than 300% over the last year, according to the 2017 State of Bug Bounty Reportreleased by BugCrowd earlier this month.

HackerOne is well known for helping big-name companies improve their security posture, and its efforts appear to be paying off. In April, HackerOne announcedit received $40 million in series C funding led by Dragoneer Investment Group and the company said its hacker community tripled to nearly 100,000 last year.

Large companies like Google, General Electric, Microsoft, United Airlines, Western Union, Tesla Motors and Fiat Chryslerhave all participated in bug bounty programs over the last few years.

See the original post here:

Tor Project to launch public bug bounty project | CIO Dive - CIO Dive

Launch Dates for These New Cryptocurrency ITOs Have Been Announced – Investopedia

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

Investopedia

Launch Dates for These New Cryptocurrency ITOs Have Been Announced
Investopedia
OpenLedger has released the dates for the Initial Token Offerings (ITO) of four different projectsOCASH, eDev.one, GetGame and Apptradebeing built on its platform. In June, Denmark based Open Ledger Aps received a seed funding of $1.6 million ...

Launch Dates for These New Cryptocurrency ITOs Have Been Announced - Investopedia

Bitcoin is booming because a split in the cryptocurrency has been narrowly averted – Quartz

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

Bitcoin has risen as much as 28% over the past 24 hours, driven by news that an imminent split in the cryptocurrency has been narrowly averted. The price of bitcoin nearly hit $3,000 late on July 20, within spitting distance of its all-time high, set last month.

The remarkable rally took place as bitcoins miners coalesced around one of several competing proposals that would increase the number of transactions that can be processed on the network. The issue has gained urgency in recent months, because one of the measures, known as Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 148 (BIP 148), would lead to a split in the cryptocurrency on Aug. 1 if implemented.

The price rallied as bitcoins miners began broadcasting their support for a less radical proposal, BIP 91, in increasing numbers yesterday. This proposal avoids the so-called hard fork by stopping short of altering the hard-coded limit on transaction capacities that is the bone of contention within the bitcoin world, while offering slightly enlarged transaction capacity.

The threshold for activating BIP 91 is 80% of all the processing power on the bitcoin network. That was achieved in the early hours of July 21. Currently 97% of the processing power on the network, which is largely controlled by miners, is voting in favor of BIP 91.

But its not settled yet. Although enough miners have signaled support for their preferred proposala process akin to broadcasting a preference over the networkenough of them must now run the software that implements this proposal within the next two and a half days. Failure to maintain a simple majority of the processing power, also called the hash rate, would mean BIP 91 does not activate. This would put the bitcoin world back at square one, with just a week to go before the potentially destabilizing hard fork on Aug. 1.

There are also still signs that the fundamental disagreement that led to this showdowna civil war, as some call itis far from resolved. The fight is between bitcoins miners and the influential programmers who contribute to bitcoins open-source code, known as the core developers. The core devs say bitcoin is at risk of being controlled by a cartel of miners who, by virtue of their huge investments in processing power, are able to dictate what changes are made to the codeanathema to bitcoins decentralized founding ethos. But the miners, and other heavy users, like payment processors, point out that the bitcoin network could be abandoned if it doesnt enlarge its limited capacity soon.

The architect of BIP 91, James Hilliard, a miner himself, told industry publication CoinDesk: This is where mining centralization makes things easier, because I can just message everybody on WeChat and help them if needed. That may be so, but it wont comfort the parts of the bitcoin world concerned with centralization of the cryptocurrency, even if the current fix to bitcoins problems goes according to plan.

Read next: Bitcoins civil war threatens to blow up the cryptocurrency itself

Originally posted here:

Bitcoin is booming because a split in the cryptocurrency has been narrowly averted - Quartz

New Virtual Reality Cryptocurrency Gets $2.1 in Funding – Investopedia

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

Investopedia

New Virtual Reality Cryptocurrency Gets $2.1 in Funding
Investopedia
As the cryptocurrency world expands, it's difficult to say exactly how many other industries it will impact. Nonetheless, one industry that has already been affected by the expanding digital currency realm is gaming. As mining operations have ...

See the original post here:

New Virtual Reality Cryptocurrency Gets $2.1 in Funding - Investopedia

ECB President: Cryptocurrency Price Boom Having Limited Effect on Economy – CoinDesk

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

The president of the European Central Bank (ECB) has issued remarks addressing the rising interest in cryptocurrencies as an asset class.

In a letter to members of the European parliament this week, Mario Draghi built on statements made during a May hearing, in which he first discussed financial innovation, including the "rapid pace of development" in digital ledger(DLT) and related technologies. At the time, he cautioned that care must be taken so that fintech, including blockchain and DLT, does not disrupt the financial system.

Published this week, the new letter builds on this commentary, addressing more directly the rise in cryptocurrency prices so far in 2017. Driven by big gains in bitcoin and ether, the value of the total supply of all cryptocurrencies is now $93bn, down slightly from an all-time high of $115bn earlier this year.

Still, in the face of this increase, Draghi used the opportunity to restate his belief that cryptocurrencies still havea limited impact on the financial system.

Draghi wrote:

"Although the market capitalisation of [virtual currency schemes] has increased since the publication of these reports, there is no evidence to suggest that the connection of VCS to the real economy has strengthened significantly."

Citing past research from the ECB, Draghi indicated he still believes there could be a "build-up of risks" due to the use of cryptocurrencies, which may necessitate an international regulatory response.

Still, for now, he said the ECB would likely take steps to continue to monitor the ecosystem, tracking the "number, structure and scope" of public blockchain tokens.

"An increase in the usage of [virtual currency schemes] is conceivable. It is thus important to monitor the take-up of VCS from a financial stability perspective," he said.

For more on how the ECB is approaching blockchain and cryptocurrencies, read our most recent interview.

ECB DLT Lead: Central Banks Won't Compete on Blockchain Tech

Mario Draghi image via Shutterstock

The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is an independent media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. Have breaking news or a story tip to send to our journalists? Contact us at [emailprotected].

Continue reading here:

ECB President: Cryptocurrency Price Boom Having Limited Effect on Economy - CoinDesk

Cryptocurrency Gets Its Biggest Test Yet – Fortune

Posted on July 22, 2017 by Danzig

In the coming months a startup based in Waterloo, Ontario, is set to kick off a grand monetary experiment, one that will put to the test a new model for business that could prove to be either the webs next great economic engine, or a multibillion-dollar bubble thats as combustible as the Hindenburg.

The concept at stake is cryptocurrency , a form of digital money that exists independent of traditional banks or governments. Over the past few months, the market for cryptocurrencies has rocketed to more than $100 billion (and fallen back to $60 billion) amid extreme enthusiasm and volatility. So-called token sales, or initial coin offerings , also known as ICOs , have raised hundreds of millions of dollars, creating substantial fortunes out of little more than ones, zeros, and pitches. The movements critics compare it to the tulip-bulb manias of centuries past and say it will end the same way.

Advocates, however, believe cryptocurrencies could represent an important way for tech companies to raise cash. Instead of users trading their time, attention, and energy for free services, while a few supermassive landlord corporations reap all the profits (hello, Facebook ( fb ) ), cryptocurrencies could enable participants to be remunerated for their contributions on the platforms, with yet-to-be-invented moneys. Imagine users getting paid by the like.

So far, while their nominal value has soared, cryptocurrencies have mostly been a vehicle for speculators . But in the coming months, for the first time, a mainstream company with an established user base will try its hand at launching a crypto token to its 15 million monthly active users, potentially multiplying by a factor of five overnight the number of people using digital currency, according to estimates by the Cambridge Center for Alternative Finance . The company is Kik, the maker of a chat app favored by American teens , which intends to mint tokens enabling users to transact through its network.

Kik will join more than a hundred early-stage projectswith names like Brave , Civic, and Tezosin hosting token sales in order to fund themselves . But Kik hopes to be among the first to get people to use the tokens for something other than trading, flipping, or speculating.

Ted Livingston, founder and CEO of Kik, had the idea for a cryptocurrency in the back of his mind in 2014 when he launched Kik Points, a video-game-like in-app virtual money. The company shuttered the pilot program last year, but Livingston was pleased with it: The points traded hands an average of 300,000 times per day, more than three times the average number of transactions per month on Bitcoins network during that time. Kiks customers mostly used the points to buy stickers and smileys, but the company intends its new Kin tokens, the batch of to-be-released computer coins, to enable users to do everything from tipping peers, to ordering pizza, to paying for premium content.

Kik plans to mint a total of 10 trillion Kin tokens, selling a trillion to the public, holding on to 3 trillion for itself, and setting aside 6 trillion for a nonprofit that will manage a rewards program for loyal users. Its a new way to compete, its a new way to monetize, and its potentially a new way to exit as well, Livingston says.

If past ICOs are any indication, Kiks will bring in a substantial sum no matter what. What industry watchers will be eyeing, however, is whether Kin will actually catch on, fueling a mini-economy within and outside the app. If it works, the experiment could signal to the world the viability of the much-hyped and, until now, mostly theoretical token-based business model.

Success will pave the way for other traditional companies to do it, says Jake Brukhman, cofounder of CoinFund, which advises companies, including Kik, on blockchain tech. Indeed, crypto enthusiasts have proposed companies such as Twitter ( twtr ) , Snap ( snap ) , and Reddit as leading candidates for eventual token sales.

Either that, or the movementwhich depends on widespread adoption to justify multibillion-dollar valuationscould implode and leave many aspiring entrepreneurs and investors in the dust. For the Internets next big thing, that would be a little more than Kin, and less than kind.

A version of this article appears in the Aug. 1, 2017 issue of Fortune.

Original post:

Cryptocurrency Gets Its Biggest Test Yet - Fortune

Select Page ::