Should Wealthy People Pay For Embassies?

US weighs Sheldon Adelson offer to fund Jerusalem embassy

JOSH LEDERMAN

,

Associated Press•February 23, 2018

0:11

1:13

AP sources: Adelson offers to help pay for Jerusalem embassy

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is considering an offer from Republican mega-donor Sheldon Adelson to pay for at least part of a new U.S. embassy in Jerusalem, four U.S. officials told The Associated Press.

Lawyers at the State Department are looking into the legality of accepting private donations to cover some or all of the embassy costs, the officials said. The discussions are occurring as the administration plans a ribbon-cutting for a scaled-down, temporary embassy that will open in May — more than a year ahead of schedule.

In one possible scenario, the administration would solicit contributions not only from Adelson but potentially from other donors in the evangelical Christian and American Jewish communities, too. One official said Adelson, a Las Vegas casino magnate and staunch Israel supporter, had offered to pay the difference between the total cost — expected to run into the hundreds of millions of dollars — and what the administration is able to raise.

Under any circumstance, letting private citizens cover the costs of an official government building would mark a significant departure from historical practice. In the Jerusalem case, it would add yet another layer of controversy to Trump's politically charged decision to move the embassy, given Adelson's longstanding affiliation with right-wing Israeli politics.

The move of the embassy from Tel Aviv to the disputed holy city cleared a final bureaucratic hurdle this week when Secretary of State Rex Tillerson signed off on the security plan. In a letter sent to Congress, the State Department said the interim facility's inauguration will coincide with the 70th anniversary of Israel's independence on May 14.

"It's the right thing to do," Trump said Friday of the embassy relocation.

Adelson's unconventional offer, made around the time Trump announced in December that the embassy would move, would address the president's stated distaste for shelling out eye-popping sums for overseas diplomatic facilities. Although Trump has promoted the Jerusalem move as fulfilling a key campaign promise, he also was outspoken last month in blasting the $1 billion price tag for a new embassy in London.

How quickly to move the embassy has been a source of intense debate within Trump's administration, said the officials, who weren't authorized to discuss the issue publicly and demanded anonymity.

Tillerson, who opposed moving the embassy in the first place, advocated a go-slow approach and said it could take years. But Ambassador David Friedman, who lobbied Trump to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital, has pushed to move it sooner.

To enable a May opening, the administration settled on a phased approach to building out the embassy at an existing U.S. facility in Jerusalem's Arnona neighborhood that currently handles consular affairs like passports and visas.

Initially, the U.S. will merely retrofit a small suite of offices there to accommodate Friedman and one or two top aides. The rest of the staff will remain at first in America's current facility in Tel Aviv.

The Arnona facility will be expanded accommodate a regular contingent of embassy personnel by the end of 2019, and ultimately is likely to spill into an adjacent U.S.-controlled property that currently houses a home for senior citizens, officials said. The State Department said a separate search was starting "in parallel" to eventually plan and build a permanent embassy.

Israel's government hailed the impending move, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu saying on Twitter that it would turn Israel's anniversary "into an even greater national celebration." But Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat said the move showed Trump was determined to destroy prospects for a two-state solution and "provoke the feelings of the Palestinian people."

Retrofitting just a few offices can be accomplished at minimal cost. But expanding to allow the bulk of America's diplomatic staff in Israel to work out of Jerusalem would easily cost more than $500 million dollars, officials familiar with the process said. Particularly pricey are the strict security requirements for embassies that are written into U.S. law.

It's unclear how much of the cost Adelson might be willing to cover.

The White House declined to comment. An Adelson spokesman didn't respond to multiple requests for comment.

The State Department said it had "nothing to announce" and "no confirmation or details about this hypothetical proposal." Undersecretary of State Steve Goldstein added that there had been no "formal talks" with private citizens about funding.

It's not clear if there is any precedent, nor whether government lawyers would give the green light to accept Adelson's or anyone else's donations.

Kathy Bethany, the former cost management director for the State Department's Bureau of Overseas Building Operations, said she couldn't recall the U.S. government ever accepting donations to build embassies during her tenure, which ended in 2014.

"I don't know how well that would work," Bethany said. "Would we be beholden to putting their name on the building? I've never heard of that."

There are several ways, in theory, that it could work. Citizens could cut a general check to the U.S. Treasury and unofficially "earmark" their dollars as being intended to offset the embassy's cost. The State Department's Foreign Affairs Manual also lays out a formal process for accepting gifts, including real estate, requiring a rigorous review to ensure the gift "would not give the appearance of a conflict of interest."

Adelson, who donated $5 million to Trump's inaugural committee, is one of the Republican Party's biggest donors and a major Netanyahu supporter. Adelson also finances Israel Hayom, a pro-Netanyahu newspaper that is distributed free throughout Israel.

Allowing donations from Adelson or others would come with significant political risk for Trump. The president already faces major criticism from Palestinians and others who say his decision to move the embassy to Jerusalem — also claimed by the Palestinians for the capital of their future state — tipped the scales unfairly in Israel's favor.

Mort Klein, president of the pro-Israel group Zionist Organization of America and a close associate of Adelson, said accepting donations would be ill-advised. Klein said he knew Adelson was "deeply interested" in seeing the embassy relocate to Jerusalem but didn't know whether the casino mogul had offered to help pay for it himself.

"This is a government project. It's a government-run embassy," Klein said. "I don't want people to be able to say it was Jewish money."

___

Associated Press writers Ian Deitch in Jerusalem and Darlene Superville in Washington contributed to this report.

Adelson Makes His Impact

NY Times: Trump's 'Regret' Speech Came After Sheldon Adelson Meeting

 Sheldon Adelson (Getty Images)

By Todd Beamon   |   Saturday, 27 Aug 2016 09:27 PM

Short URL|

Email Article|

Comment|

Contact|

Print|

    A   A

• 0
  inShare

Donald Trump expressed "regret" about some of his fiery rhetoric last week after casino magnate Sheldon Adelson urged him "to demonstrate a measure of humility" in a private meeting the day before speaking in North Carolina, according to news reports.

The session with Adelson, 83, head of the Las Vegas Sands Corp. and one of the GOP's largest donors, was held at the St. Regis Hotel in New York City on Aug. 17, The New York Times reports.

Adelson, head of the Republican Jewish Coalition, has pledged $100 million to Trump's effort. He told the developer that he remained "committed to his campaign," according to the Times.

The following night, Trump told a rally in Charlotte: "Sometimes, in the heat of debate, and speaking on a multitude of issues, you don't choose the right words or you say the wrong thing.

Latest News Update

Get Newsmax TV At Home »

"And, believe it or not, I regret it.

"I do regret it, particularly where it may have caused personal pain," he said. "Too much is at stake for us to be consumed with these issues."

However, "it was unclear if it would be enough for him to fulfill his pledge to Mr. Trump," the Times reports, sourcing its article on "five Republicans briefed on the conversation who were not authorized to discuss it publicly."

Adelson "was uneasy with Mr. Trump’s behavior in the weeks after the Republican convention last month," according to the Times.

The period included the nominee's attacks on a Gold Star family whose son was a U.S. Army captain who had been killed in Iraq.

Neither Adelson nor his wife, Miriam, have yet contributed to Trump's campaign, the Republican National Committee or "the groups backing him" since pledging the $100 million in May, the Times reports.

Miriam Adelson also attended last week's meeting.

The Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment from the Times.

Related Stories:

• Trump Talks Tough on Immigration: Deporting Criminal Illegals 'On Day One'
• Trump Ignites Firestorm Tweeting Link on Votes, Death of NBA Star's Cousin

© 2016 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Breaking News at Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Trump-regret-speech-Adelson/2016/08/27/id/745485/#ixzz4IfwaxshM

Jewish Groups Must Get Out Of The Democratic "Group Think" And Start Representing Their Members.

he American Government vs. Pro-Israel Supporters

Posted by: Ronn Torossian June 5, 2014 , 12:48 pm

93 3

0 2Email 107Share

This week, the Executive Director of a major Jewish, Pro-Israel non-profit organization confidentially told me their organization remains under IRS scrutiny and has had tremendous legal issues over the last few years. The organization had functioned without any issues for many years prior to this – and at the insistence of their board has not publicized the issue. (One imagines large individual donors don’t wish to be audited as well).

Similarly, media reports this week reveal that a federal judge refused to dismiss a suit brought by Z Street, a pro-Israel group, against the IRS. The ruling had Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson order the IRS to stop “attempting to thwart this action’s advancement,” and to respond to the complaint within thirty days.

The IRS noted that the organization’s application for tax-exempt status had been sent to a “special unit… to determine whether the organization’s activities contradict the Administration’s public policies.”

The richest Jew in the world, Sheldon Adelson, who is proud to be very pro-Israel (and of course very intelligent) wisely noted prior to Obama’s re-election that a second Obama term would bring government “vilification of people that were against him.” And, how right he was.

In the aftermath of IRS admissions that they had been intentionally targeting conservative groups since at least 2011, making intrusive and unconstitutional inquiries, is there not clear writing on the wall about pro-Israel organizations? Jay Sekulow of the ACLJ noted, alluding to the conservative organizations being targeted, that it was a revival of “McCarthyism” – and a deliberate targeting and harassment of conservative organizations.

Where are the voices of the many liberal Jewish organizations condemning this Administration for turning the full power of the IRS on American citizens? This is a harsh attack upon freedom and liberty, which is liberal practice at its finest – liberal except when it comes to political opponents.

If indeed pro-Israel organizations’ claims are true and they were targeted because they worked to educate about Zionism, Israel and the need for Israel to stand strong against terrorists, there will be legal repercussions. The American government’s harassment of political opponents – which may include pro-Israel organizations – is sinister and despicable.

Read more at http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/16138/american-government-vs-pro-israel-supporters/#KUi4HE50aTUfRPU3.99

Israel Headed To The Moon. Adelson Helps Them On The Way.

GOP Bankroller Adelson Gives $16M to Send Israel to Moon

Casino magnate Sheldon Adelson and his wife have pledged $16.4 million to fund SpaceIL, the Israeli mission to the moon.

The donation by the Jewish couple's Dr. Miriam and Sheldon G. Adelson Family Foundation was reported by the Israeli news site hayadan.org.il.

"Sheldon and I are thrilled to be supporting the SpaceIL association in its effort to land the first Israeli spacecraft on the moon," Miriam said. "As a physician and an Israel-born scientist, I am particularly proud of the positive effect this will have on a generation of young Israelis and non-Israelis."

The SpaceIL project has 20 full-time staffers and 250 volunteers, and aims to land a spacecraft on the moon at a cost of about $37 million, Forward.com reported.

SpaceIL is the only team running its project through philanthropic contributions rather than corporate sponsorships, according to the London Jewish Chronicle.

Yariv Bash, a co-founder of SpaceIL, said that once the Israeli spacecraft lands on the lunar surface, he hopes it will carry out a number of experiments including the first attempt to grow plants outside the earth.

Adelson was a major donor to Republican campaigns during the 2012 election cycle. He and his wife spent more than $92 million helping mostly losing candidates, and in the next cycle they plan to support a GOP presidential candidate they believe will have broad electoral appeal.

But New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is not likely to be Adelson's choice. An Adelson confidant has said that he cannot support Christie in 2016 because the governor used the term "occupied territories" in discussing the West Bank at a meeting of the Republican Jewish Coalition.

Words Have Meaning And Chris Christie Does Not Understand The Lesson. He Should Not Get Support From Israel Supporting Republicans.

Chris Christie and the “Occupied Territories” Incident

Posted by: Daniel Pipes April 9, 2014 , 10:12 am

77 6

2 6Email 102Share

A small but significant event took place on March 29 at the Republican Jewish Coalition in Las Vegas. Hosted by Sheldon Adelson, the mega-donor to Republican presidential campaigns, the event drew four leading potential candidates for president in 2016, including New Jersey governor Chris Christie.

In the Q&A session, Christie recounted a trip he took with the RJC to Israel in 2012. In the course of a choppy sentence in which he expressed his admiration for the country, he used the term occupied territories to refer to the West Bank: “I took a helicopter ride from the occupied territories across, … and just felt, personally, how extraordinary that was, to understand the military risk that Israel faces every day.”

That term caused a stir in the audience. As Christie left the venue, Morton Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America, confronted him in a hallway. “Governor Christie, you used an inaccurate and erroneous term.” Klein tells me that he explained to Christie that the Kingdom of Jordan lacked recognized control of the territory and that Jews have greater rights to it than Arabs. He concluded by requesting that Christie not use “occupied territories” in the future but rather “Judea and Samaria,” “West Bank,” or “disputed territories.”

Christie replied, “Yeah, I saw you shaking your head when I used that term.” Klein acknowledged that he had, indeed, shaken his head and again asked if Christie would use a different formulation. Christie rebuffed him a second time saying, “Yeah, I saw you shaking your head,” and walked off.

Soon after, Christie met privately with Adelson. We have two published accounts of that conversation. Kevin Bohn of CNN writes:

Christie said “I misspoke,” according to Andy Abboud, senior vice president of Adelson’s Las Vegas Sands Corp. Abboud, who also attended the session, told CNN that Christie said “I don’t believe that,” referring to the view that the West Bank is occupied by Israel. … “They had a nice meeting,” Abboud told CNN.

Politico‘s Kenneth Vogel has a similar account:

Christie “clarified in the strongest terms possible that his remarks today were not meant to be a statement of policy.” Instead, … Christie made clear “that he misspoke when he referred to the ‘occupied territories.’ And he conveyed that he is an unwavering friend and committed supporter of Israel, and was sorry for any confusion that came across as a result of the misstatement.” Adelson accepted Christie’s explanation.

To confirm these accounts, I asked Andy Abboud specifically whether Christie apologized: “Gov. Christie did not apologize,” Abboud replied. “He said he misspoke and regretted that he misspoke. It was very matter-of-fact. He did not come crawling in but noted that a lot of people use that term. Then they moved on. It was not a big deal.”

In other words, Christie acknowledged that he “misspoke” and distanced himself from the offending phrase, saying it was not “a statement of policy.” But he did not retract his use of the term occupied territories or promise not to use it again. Much less did he apologize for using it in the first place. In other words, Christie withdrew tactically but still sees the West Bank as occupied territory.

I draw two conclusions from this little incident.

First, beware journalistic spin. Politico inaccurately headlined its report “Chris Christie apologizes for ‘occupied territories’ remark” and many other media – such as the Daily Mail, New Republic, Huffington Post, and Daily Show with Jon Stewart – based their coverage on this summary. Reporting that Christie abjectly apologized to Adelson, they then drew grand but unfounded conclusions about the commanding role of money in American politics.

In other words, the media provide accurate facts but present them as it suits their agenda. The savvy consumer reads between the lines, as though he were consuming Pravda, and draws his own conclusions.

Second, Christie’s scornful non-response to Klein contrasts dramatically with his retreat before Adelson and provides important insights. His inconsistency points to the governor’s true views (which do not bode well for Israel) and to the content of his character.

With someone he encountered in the hallway, he showed disdain; with the largest political donor in American history, he mouthed what was minimally required from him. This is the politician reputed to “tell it like it is“? No, Christie bullies those less powerful and sucks up to those he needs.

He must not become the Republican nominee for president.