U.S. support for Kurdish forces fighting Islamic State in Syria is expected to dominate the first official meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Turkey is fiercely opposed to that alliance, saying Kurds in Syria are linked to the Kurdish terrorist group PKK in Turkey, which is fighting for an independent Kurdish state. VOA’a Zlatica Hoke has more.
…

A group that included a well-known white nationalist carried torches and chanted “you will not replace us” at a weekend protest in Virginia over plans to remove a monument of a Confederate general.

The protesters on Saturday evening called on officials to halt the removal of a Gen. Robert E. Lee statue in Charlottesville and were swiftly condemned by the city’s mayor, who said the event appeared to hearken “back to the days of the KKK,” the Daily Progress newspaper reported. 

Among those at the protest were Richard Spencer, a while nationalist who popularized the phrase “alt-right” and is a leading figure in a fringe movement that has been described as a mix of racism, white nationalism and populism.

“We will not be replaced from this park,” Spencer told the crowd at a different rally held hours earlier in Charlottesville on Saturday. “We will not be replaced from this world. Whites have a future. We have a future of power, of beauty, of expression,” he said.

Spencer, an outspoken supporter of President Donald Trump, hosted a postelection conference in the nation’s capital last November that ended with audience members mimicking Nazi salutes after Spencer shouted, “Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!” Spencer also has advocated for an “ethno-state” that would be a “safe space” for white people

Charlottesville Mayor Mike Signer said in a statement that Saturday’s protest was either “profoundly ignorant” or meant to instill fear in minorities “in a way that hearkens back to the days of the KKK.”

“I want everyone to know this: We reject this intimidation,” Signer said in a statement. “We are a welcoming city, but such intolerance is not welcome here.”

Erich Reimer, chairman of the Charlottesville Republican Party, said in a statement that the “intolerance and hatred” that the protesters are seeking to promote is “utterly disgusting and disturbing beyond words,” The Daily Progress reported.

The debate over Confederate symbols has swept through cities across the South since the 2015 massacre of nine black parishioners at a South Carolina church. The gunman was a self-avowed white supremacist.

In Virginia, Republican Corey Stewart’s vocal support for the Lee statue also has pushed the issue into the state’s high-profile race for governor. Stewart has pledged that no Confederate monuments would be removed if he is elected. 

In New Orleans, workers on Thursday removed a statue of Confederate President Jefferson Davis, the second of four monuments to Confederate era figures the city has voted to remove. Late last month, the city removed a 35-foot tall granite obelisk tribute to whites who battled a biracial Reconstruction government installed in New Orleans after the Civil War.

The Charlottesville City Council voted last month to sell the Lee statue, but a judge has agreed to a temporary injunction that blocks Charlottesville from moving the statue for six months, The Daily Progress reported. The city also plans to rename Lee Park and another park named after another famed Confederate, Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson.
…

Supreme Court decisions in a half-dozen cases dealing with immigration over the next two months could reveal how the justices might evaluate Trump administration actions on immigration, especially stepped up deportations.

Some of those cases could be decided as early as Monday, when the court is meeting to issue opinions in cases that were argued over the past six months.

The outcomes could indicate whether the justices are retreating from long-standing decisions that give the president and Congress great discretion in dealing with immigration, and what role administration policies, including the proposed ban on visits to the United States by residents of six majority Muslim countries, may play.

President Donald Trump has pledged to increase deportations, particularly of people who have been convicted of crimes. But Supreme Court rulings in favor of the immigrants in the pending cases “could make his plans more difficult to realize,” said Christopher Hajec, director of litigation for the Immigration Reform Litigation Institute. The group generally supports the new administration’s immigration actions, including the travel ban.

For about a century, the court has held that, when dealing with immigration, the White House and Congress “can get away with things they ordinarily couldn’t,” said Temple University law professor Peter Spiro, an immigration law expert. “The court has explicitly said the Constitution applies differently in immigration than in other contexts.”

Cases before court

Two of the immigration cases at the court offer the justices the possibility of cutting into the deference that courts have given the other branches of government in this area. One case is a class-action lawsuit brought by immigrants who’ve spent long periods in custody, including many who are legal residents of the United States or are seeking asylum. The court is weighing whether the detainees have a right to court hearings.

In the other case, the court has taken on a challenge to an unusual federal law that makes it easier for children born outside the United States to become citizens if their mother is an American and harder for them if their father is the U.S. citizen. Even after legislation in 1986, children of American fathers face higher hurdles claiming citizenship for themselves.

Both cases were argued before Trump became president in January, and the Obama administration opposed the detainees’ claims and the citizenship challenge.

Even if the positions haven’t changed, the context has, Spiro said.

“The court has got to be conscious of how these rulings are going to apply to Trump administration activity,” Spiro said.

The decisions may directly affect people who are targeted by immigration authorities for quick deportation, or expedited removal, and immigrants who were brought to the United States as children and offered protection from deportation by the Obama administration, said Steven Vladeck, a University of Texas law professor.

“An open question in immigration law concerns how much authority the government has and how strong the Constitution is as a constraint,” Vladeck said. For Trump, he said a major question is how much discretion the president has. “It’s at the heart of a lot of what the Trump administration wants to do,” Vladeck said.

Other cases involve discrete sections of the immigration law in which the decisions either will free or constrain immigration authorities from deporting people convicted of certain crimes.

In one case, a Mexican immigrant is facing deportation after he was convicted in California of having sex with someone under 18 and more than three years younger than he was. The charge covered a period before and after his 21st birthday when the woman, his girlfriend, was 16. That’s a crime in California, but not in most of the rest of the country and the immigrant says it should not count as sexual abuse of a minor, which under immigration law would subject him to deportation.

In another case, an immigrant convicted of burglary is challenging a provision of immigration law that counts the crime as serious enough to warrant automatic deportation. Several federal appeals courts have sided with immigrants who have contended the provision is too vague.

Another issue before the court also involves sending people back to their native countries, in a case in which an immigrant received bad legal advice that led to a guilty plea and certain deportation.

Immigration almost certainly will continue to be a very active part of the Supreme Court’s docket. The travel ban itself could be at the court in the coming months. On Monday, the federal appeals court in San Francisco is hearing the administration’s appeal of an order striking down the ban. Appellate judges in Richmond, Virginia, heard a similar case last week.
…

Tech staffs around the world worked around the clock this weekend to protect computers and patch networks to block the computer hack whose name sounds like a pop song — “WannaCry” — as analysts warned the global ransomware attack could be just the first of a new wave of strikes by computer criminals.

The United States suffered relatively few effects from the ransomware that appeared on tens of thousands of computer systems across Europe and into Asia, beginning Friday. Security experts remained cautious, however, and stressed there was a continuing threat.

In contrast to reports from several European security firms, a researcher at the Tripwire company on the U.S. West Coast said late Saturday that the attack could be diminishing.

“It looks like it’s tailing off,” said Travis Smith of Tripwire.

“I hope that’s the case,” Smith added. The Oregon firm protects large enterprises and governments from computer security threats.

Ransomware attack

The code for the ransomware unleashed Friday remains freely available on the internet, experts said, so those behind the WannaCry attack — also known as WanaCryptor 2.0 and a variety of other names — could launch new strikes in coming days or weeks. Copycat attacks by other high-tech criminals also are possible.

“We are not out of the woods yet,” said Gary Davis, chief consumer security evangelist at McAfee, the global computer security software company in Santa Clara, California. “We think it’s going to be the footprint for other kinds of attacks in the future.”

The attack hit scores of countries — more than 100, by some experts’ count — and infected tens of thousands of computer networks.

Industry reports indicate Russia, Taiwan, Ukraine and Britain were among the countries hit hardest, and more hacking reports can be expected when offices reopen for the new workweek Monday or, in some parts of the world, Sunday.

One of the weapons used in the current attack is a software tool reportedly stolen from the U.S. National Security Agency and published on the internet by hackers last month.

The tool affords hackers undetected entry into many Microsoft computer operating systems, which is what they need to plant their ransomware. However, Microsoft issued patches to fix that vulnerability in its software weeks ago that could greatly reduce the chances of intrusion.

Outdated operating systems

The crippling effects of WannaCry highlight a problem that experts have long known about, and one that appears to have hit developing countries harder.

Some organizations are more vulnerable to intrusion because they use older or outdated operating systems, usually due to the cost of upgrading software or buying modern hardware needed to install better-protected operating systems. Companies like Microsoft eventually stop updating or supporting older versions of their software, so customers using those programs do not receive software patches or security upgrades.

Much of the ransomware’s spread around the world occurred without any human involvement. The WannaCry malware self-propagates, copying itself to all computers on a network automatically.

When a demand for ransom payments appears on a user’s screen — $300 at first, doubling to $600 in a few days — it’s usually too late: All files on that computer have been encrypted and are unreadable by their owners.

The hackers said they would reverse the effect of their software once they received the payments they demanded.

Microsoft patched the “hole” in the newest versions of its operating software — Windows 10 for most home users — in March, three weeks before the stolen NSA exploit software was published on the internet. Since Friday, the company dropped its refusal to update old versions of its programs and issued patches specifically written for use in Windows XP and several other systems.

Microsoft declined a request for an interview, but a statement on the company’s blog said: “Seeing businesses and individuals affected by cyberattacks, such as the ones reported today, was painful. We are taking the highly unusual step of providing a security update for all customers to protect Windows platforms that are in custom support only, including Windows XP, Windows 8, and Windows Server 2003.”

“A lot of people in the security community were impressed with Microsoft’s speed, but it highlights an ongoing challenge we have,” said Stephen Cobb, a senior security researcher with ESET, a global security software company. “If a malicious code outbreak breaks out tomorrow, and targets unsupported operating systems, Microsoft may have to go there again.”
…

A cyberattack against tens of thousands of data networks in scores of countries, all infected by malware that locks computer files unless a ransom is paid, spread further in its second day Saturday, with no progress reported in efforts to determine who launched the plot.

Computer security experts assured individual computer users who have kept their PC operating systems updated that they are relatively safe.

They advised those whose networks have been effectively shut down by the ransomware attack not to make the payment demanded — the equivalent of $300, paid in the digital currency bitcoin, delivered to a likely untraceable destination that consists merely of a lengthy string of letters and numbers.

However, the authors of the “WannaCry” ransomware attack told their victims the amount they must pay would double if they did not comply within three days of the original infection — by Monday, in most cases. And the hackers warned that they would delete all files on infected systems if no payment was received within seven days.

Avast, an international security software firm that claims it has 400 million users worldwide, said the ransomware attacks rose rapidly Saturday to a peak of 57,000 detected intrusions. Avast, which was founded in 1988 by two Czech researchers, said the largest number of attacks appeared to be aimed at Russia, Ukraine and Taiwan, but that major institutions in many other countries were affected.

‘Kill switch’ found

Computer security experts said the current attack could have been much worse but for the quick action of a young researcher in Britain who discovered a vulnerability in the ransomware itself, known as WanaCryptor 2.0.

The researcher, identified only as “MalwareTech,” found a “kill switch” within the ransomware as he studied its structure.

The “kill” function halted WanaCryptor’s ability to copy itself rapidly to all terminals in an infected system — hastening its crippling effect on a large network — once it was in contact with a secret internet address, or URL, consisting of a lengthy alphanumeric string.

The “kill” function had not been activated by whoever unleashed the ransomware, and the researcher found that the secret URL had not been registered to anyone by international internet administrators. He immediately claimed the URL for himself, spending about $11 to secure his access, and that greatly slowed the pace of infections in Britain.

Expects cautioned, however, that the criminals who pushed the ransomware to the world might be able to disable the “kill” switch in future versions of their malware.

Hackers’ key tool

WanaCryptor 2.0 is only part of the problem. It spread to so many computers so rapidly by using an exploit — software capable of burrowing unseen into Windows computer operating systems.

The exploit, known as “EternalBlue” or “MS17-010,” took advantage of a vulnerability in the Microsoft software that reportedly had been discovered and developed by the U.S. National Security Agency, which used it for surveillance activities.

NSA does not discuss its capabilities, and some computer experts say the MS17-010 exploit was developed by unknown parties using the name Equation Group (which may also be linked to NSA). Whatever its source, it was published on the internet last month by a hacker group called ShadowBrokers.

Microsoft distributed a “fix” for the software vulnerability two months ago, but not all computer users and networks worldwide had yet made that update and thus were highly vulnerable. And many computer networks, particularly those in less developed parts of the world, still use an older version of Microsoft software, Windows XP, that the company no longer updates.

The Finnish computer security firm F-Secure called the problem spreading around the world “the biggest ransomware outbreak in history.” The firm said it had warned about the exponential growth of ransomware, or crimeware, as well as the dangers of sophisticated surveillance tools used by governments.

Lesson: Update programs

With WanaCryptor and MS17-010 both “unleashed into the wild,” F-Secure said the current problem seems to have combined and magnified the worst of the dangers those programs represent.

The security firm Kaspersky Lab, based in Russia, noted that Microsoft had repaired the software problem that allows backdoor entry into its operating systems weeks before hackers published the exploit linked to the NSA, but also said: “Unfortunately it appears that many users have not yet installed the patch.”

Britain’s National Health Services first sounded the ransomware alarm Friday.

The government held an emergency meeting Saturday of its crisis response committee, known as COBRA, to assess the damage. Late in the day, Home Secretary Amber Rudd said the NHS was again “working as normal,” with 97 percent of the system’s components now fully restored.

Spanish firm Telefonica, French automaker Renault, the U.S.-based delivery service FedEx and the German railway Deutsche Bahn were among those affected.

None of the firms targeted indicated whether they had paid or would pay the hackers ransom.
…

A Russian-owned group of companies will pay the U.S. government $6 million to settle a wide-reaching money-laundering case that had quietly rippled through U.S.-Russian relations for years.

Federal prosecutors in New York announced the settlement with Russian businessman Denis Katsyv, the owner of Prevezon Holdings, on May 12, just three days before jury selection was set to begin in the case.

Under the settlement, none of Prevezon Holdings’ companies admitted wrongdoing.

The settlement brings to a close more than three years of court battles by U.S. prosecutors seeking to seize more than $20 million in real estate and bank accounts from Prevezon.

The assets, prosecutors alleged, were obtained through a series of Byzantine bank transfers that ultimately trace back to the largest tax-fraud case in Russian history. That tax-fraud case, totaling about $230 million, targeted the Hermitage Capital investment firm and was uncovered by a whistle-blowing Russian auditor hired by Hermitage, Sergei Magnitsky.

Magnitsky was himself arrested on charges of collusion to commit tax fraud, and he died in a Moscow pretrial detention center in November 2009, just eight days before he would have either had to be put on trial or released.

His supporters say he was tortured, and a Russian government commission was critical of his treatment while in custody. Russian prosecutors later charged him posthumously with the very crime he helped uncover. 

Magnitsky Act

Three years later, the United States passed a law bearing Magnitsky’s name that targeted Russian government officials allegedly involved in the original tax crime, as well as those complicit in Magnitsky’s death and other alleged human rights abuses.

As of May, there were 44 Russian officials on the Magnitsky sanctions list, including the former head of Russia’s Investigative Committee, Aleksandr Bastrykin, and several Interior Ministry officers and tax officials are also on the list. State Duma Deputy Andrei Lugovoi is on the list for his alleged involvement in the 2006 radiation-poisoning death in London of former Federal Security Service officer Aleksandr Litvinenko.

Prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York launched the Prevezon case nearly four years ago, but instead of filing criminal charges they opted for a “civil asset forfeiture” proceeding, where the rules of evidence aren’t as strict.

U.S. authorities “will not allow the U.S. financial system to be used to launder the proceeds of crimes committed anywhere — here in the U.S., in Russia, or anywhere else,” Joon H. Kim, the acting Manhattan U.S. attorney, said in a statement late Friday.

The Saturday settlement helps U.S. prosecutors avoid having to establish the underlying circumstances of the original $230 million tax fraud. As it had for years of pretrial wrangling, Prevezon’s defense team intended to challenge the facts of the fraud, asserting that the government’s case was entirely built on flimsy evidence gathered by Hermitage founder William Browder.

‘Modest’ settlement

Prevezon portrayed the settlement as a defeat for the U.S. government and said the arrangement did not constitute a seizure or forfeiture on the part of Prevezon.

“The modest size of this settlement simply underscores the fact that this action should never have been bought in the first place,” a company spokesman told RFE/RL in an email.

Hermitage founder Browder, however, described the settlement as “a huge victory.”

“This sends a clear message to the people who received that money that it’s not safe in the West and will be seized,” Browder’s statement said. “I believe that this case will give the green light to other countries to follow suit.”

U.S. officials had repeatedly sought assistance from Russian prosecutors in gathering material for their case. But in Moscow, the Prosecutor-General’s Office not only refused to help, but instead asked their U.S. counterparts for help in building a criminal case against Browder. 

Russian prosecutors ultimately charged Browder with tax evasion. He was convicted in 2013 after a trial that was largely seen as politically motivated.

​The Washington law firm initially hired to represent Prevezon, Baker Hostetler, sought repeatedly to undermine the prosecution’s case, arguing that it was built largely on Browder’s material.

Just days before trial’s original start date in January 2016, the judge ordered a delay, after Hermitage argued one of the Baker Hostetler lawyers had provided counsel to Hermitage years prior in the tax fraud case, and therefore had a conflict of interest.

An appeals court later agreed and kicked Baker Hostetler off the case.

Last-minute motion

Last week, federal prosecutors won a small pretrial victory when U.S. District Judge William Pauley allowed the introduction of crucial banking files compiled by Nikolai Gorokhov, another Russian lawyer who has represented Magnitsky’s widow, as part of the docket record.

A day later, Pauley rejected a last-minute motion by Prevezon’s new lawyers, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart and Sullivan, to have the entire case thrown out.

Russia has made no secret of its contempt for the Magnitsky Act and the entire narrative that paints a picture of institutionalized high-level Russian corruption.

Several months after then-President Barack Obama signed the legislation into law, the Kremlin retaliated by banning all adoptions of Russian children by U.S. parents. That ban remains in place.

The case rippled quietly through Washington, D.C., more recently.Last year, a Russian-American man named Rinat Akhmetshin, who had worked alongside Baker Hostetler, helped spearhead a quiet lobbying effort to undermine Magnitsky’s findings and influence Congress as it sought to pass a broader human rights law modeled on the original Magnitsky law.

Akhmetshin’s name then resurfaced last month when a leading Republican senator called for the Justice Department to investigate him and a Washington lobbying firm named Fusion GPS, with which he worked. 

Fusion GPS has been linked to the explosive dossier compiled by a former British intelligence officer on President Donald Trump that leaked out during last year’s election campaign. Senator Chuck Grassley suggested that some of the anti-Magnitsky lobbying may have been done in violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

Adding further to the intrigue, in March, Gorokhov, the Russian lawyer who had also represented Magnitsky’s widow, fell from a window of his Moscow apartment building, one day before he was scheduled to appear in a Russian court in a case related to Magnitsky’s death.

He remains hospitalized.
…