Trump Praises Africa for Making “So Many Friends” Rich – Vanity Fair
The Trump Organization has claimed that while Donald Trump is president, for however long that may be, it will not engage in any new foreign deals. Assuming the company is actually sticking to that claim—and it’s possible that it’s not!—the president is presumably seething with impotent rage about not being able to get in on all the sweet, sweet business opportunities his buddies are exploiting in Africa.
Following his maniacal speech on Tuesday at the United Nations, in which he vowed to wipe North Korea off the map if necessary, Trump told African leaders gathered for a lunch at the U.N. that he stands in awe of all the continent’s “tremendous business potential.” Naturally, his praise quickly took on a vaguely colonialist tone.
“I have so many friends going to your countries to get rich,” he actually said to them, adding that “six of the world‘s 10 fastest growing economies are in Africa.” Perhaps getting himself a little too worked up about all the ways in which Africa poses an opportunity for his close personal friends to further enrich themselves, the president referred to a country called “Nambia,” which has the unique distinction of not existing.
In fairness to Trump, we should probably award him partial credit for refraining from telling the group “I love Africa. Great colonialism. Excellent mineral extraction opportunities,” which we can only assume was how the first draft of his speech began.
If you would like to receive the Levin Report in your inbox daily, click here to subscribe.
Who among us hasn’t offered to provide foreign billionaires with “private briefings” on U.S. presidential elections?
Surely there’s nothing to see here:
Less than two weeks before Donald Trump accepted the Republican presidential nomination, his campaign chairman offered to provide briefings on the race to a Russian billionaire closely aligned with the Kremlin, according to people familiar with the discussions. Paul Manafort made the offer in an e-mail to an overseas intermediary, asking that a message be sent to Oleg Deripaska, an aluminum magnate with whom Manafort had done business in the past, these people said. “If he needs private briefings we can accommodate,” Manafort wrote in the July 7, 2016, e-mail, portions of which were read to The Washington Post along with other Manafort correspondence from that time. The e-mails are among tens of thousands of documents that have been turned over to congressional investigators and special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s team as they probe whether Trump associates coordinated with Russia as part of Moscow’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 U.S. election.
A spokeswoman for Deripaska told The Washington Post that the e-mails were only evidence of scheming by “consultants in the notorious ‘beltway bandit’ industry.” Jason Maloni, a spokesman for Manafort, said in a statement that the e-mails were an “innocuous” attempt to collect money that was owed to him. “It’s no secret Mr. Manafort was owed money by past clients,” Maloni said.
Equifax could pay just $1 per customer in hacking scandal
Earlier this month, credit-reporting company Equifax disclosed that more than a month prior, its systems had been breached in a cyber attack that may have compromised almost half of America’s personal information, including social security, credit card, and driver’s license numbers, birth dates, names, and addresses. The pilfered data could be used for illegal means for years, including by individuals seeking to commit identity and credit theft. In addition, according to attorney Andrew Friedman, the risks associated with the theft include a “possible national security threat, as personal information of governmental employees useful for cyberwarfare will be available on the Dark Web for years to come.” For those reasons, it’s unsurprising that within hours of Equifax disclosing the hack, two customers had filed a complaint in federal court and now, less than two weeks later, the company has been hit with more than 100 consumer lawsuits.
For the scope of its incompetence, you might think that the company would be facing a legal penalty that starts with a “b.” But you would think wrong! According to legal experts, despite the fact that “its exposure theoretically could amount to $143 billion under a federal law that carries damages of as much as $1,000 per violation, plus punitive damages,” it’s unlikely to pay anywhere near that. Instead, cyber-security lawyer Nathan Taylor tells Bloomberg, a global settlement of $200 million is possible; after attorneys take their cut, Equifax could end up paying, on average, less than $1 per person of the 143 million whose information may have been affected.
For consumers—or more precisely, their attorneys—a modest settlement would avoid the risk of winning nothing if no actual harm from the hack can be definitively traced back to the company. With frequent high-profile hacks in recent years, it’s virtually impossible to connect a specific instance of identity theft to a particular breach, according to Taylor of Morrison Foerster. . .