Who got $$ from Brunei's Islamic law government? The Clinton Foundation

As Hollywood hotshots protest the iconic Beverly Hills Hotel over its ownership by Brunei's sultan -- and his recent full-fledged embrace of Islamic law -- it turns out the Brunei government has financial connections to another American institution: The Clinton Foundation. 
The nonprofit foundation lists Brunei alongside Kuwait, Oman and Qatar as donors that gave between $1 million and $5 million through last year. The foundation confirmed the donation from Brunei was made in 2002, in connection with the construction of the Clinton Presidential Library in Arkansas. 
"The Clinton Foundation's impact would not be possible without the generous support of our donors," the foundation's website reads. "Their contributions have made a difference in the lives of tens of millions across the world."
The contribution could prove an uncomfortable detail in the foundation's financial records, particularly as Hillary Clinton weighs a possible presidential run. Though The Clinton Foundation has thus far avoided any major controversy over the matter, a Brunei connection has caused headaches for the Beverly Hills Hotel on the other side of the country.
Brunei’s Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah has come under heavy criticism since the ultra-wealthy leader, who has been in power for decades, embraced a harsh Islamic penal code for his southeast Asian nation of roughly 408,000 residents. The change would make adultery, abortion and same-sex relationships offenses punishable by ancient methods -- flogging, or even stoning. 
The development led Beverly Hills’ city council to unanimously pass a resolution calling for Brunei to change its laws or divest its ownership of the iconic hotel property, which opened in 1912 and has since been designated a historic landmark. Affectionately known as the “Pink Palace,” the hotel boasts 208 rooms over 12 acres, including a presidential suite for $20,000 nightly and a seven-day minimum stay. 
A growing number of Hollywood groups and luminaries have since relocated events typically held at the hotel in protest, including the International Women’s Media Foundation and the Barbara Davis Carousel of Hope. Celebrities including Jay Leno and Ellen DeGeneres have also called for boycotts of the hotel.
“This is 2014, not 1814,” Leno, the former “Tonight Show” host, told dozens of protesters earlier this month.
Leno told The Los Angeles Times that local residents had been too absorbed by the controversy surrounding Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling and his remarks on race to properly pay attention to the Brunei developments. 
“I mean, we get so upset when a team owner says something inappropriate,” Leno told the newspaper. “Here are people being killed, stoned to death. ... It's just a matter of priorities, that's what it is.”
It's unclear whether the Clinton Foundation would consider returning its own Brunei donation, but a statement from the foundation said it does not anticipate any more. 
"The Foundation received a one-time donation from the government of Brunei in 2002. We have not received any additional donations from them since, and we do not expect any in the future," the statement said. 
In total, the Clinton Foundation has received at least $492 million since its inception in 1997 through 2007. Other notable names or entities within the high-donation bracket include filmmaker Steven Spielberg, the Boeing Company and The Walmart Foundation.
Meanwhile, the Beverly Hills Hotel reportedly tapped a former Clinton aide to perform damage control in the growing saga. Mark Fabiani, known for his aggressive style during the Clinton administration, was hired last week to oversee crisis management, Politico reported.
In 2008, the Clinton Foundation disclosed the names of its 205,000 donors, ending a decade of resistance to identifying the sources of its money. Some 12,000 donors gave $10 or less, while at least $46 million was received from Saudi Arabia (which also imposes strict Islamic law), Norway and other foreign governments. 
The New York Times reported recently on alleged financial issues at the foundation, and said Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton were readying for a $250 million fundraising push.

Student Loans

Amid Protests, FCC Advances Net Neutrality' Regulations

The Federal Communications Commission on Thursday moved forward with new regulations regarding so-called net neutrality, voting to advance rules that could have far-reaching implications on how Internet content is delivered and how much consumers pay to have it delivered.
The new regulations, if approved after a four-month period of comment and review, could allow big Internet service providers such as Comcast (NASDAQ: CMCSA) and Verizon (NYSE: VZ) to charge more for faster and more efficient delivery of content.
The vote was along party lines, with Democratic appointees Tom Wheeler, the chairman, Mignon Clyburn and Jessica Rosenworcel approving the effort to develop new rules they argue will keep the Internet “open.” The FCC vote comes in the wake of two recent court rulings that struck down past FCC efforts to impose regulations on the Internet.
Republican appointees Ajit Pai and Michael O'Reilly voted against moving forward with the new regulations, saying the proposal reaches beyond the scope of the FCC’s responsibilities. Pai said if new regulations are needed, Congress should legislate them.
The vote  kicks off a 120-day rulemaking process, with public comments due July 15.
Responding to vocal public opposition to his proposal, Wheeler defended the new regulations, saying they are intended to preserve an “open” Internet and would prevent discrimination of content.
“There is one Internet. It must be fast, it must be robust, it must be open,” Wheeler said in comments prior to the vote. “The prospect of a gatekeeper choosing winners and losers is unacceptable. I will not allow the national asset of an open Internet to be compromised.”
Critics of the proposal, which include consumer activist groups and a large swath of web content and service providers, say approval of the plan would create a two-tiered Internet, where deep-pocketed companies could pay for better service and start-ups would be left behind.
The critics say the FCC’s proposal would create a “fast lane” and a “slow lane” on the Internet.
“Giving ISPs the green light to implement pay-for-priority schemes will be a disaster for startups, nonprofits and everyday Internet users who cannot afford these unnecessary tolls. These users will all be pushed onto the Internet dirt road, while deep-pocketed Internet companies enjoy the benefits of the newly created fast lanes,” Craig Aaron, president of activist group Free Press said in a recent statement.
Wheeler released a draft of his plan last month, but then revised it after a number of tech companies including Google (GOOG) and Netflix (NFLX) as well as two FCC commissioners criticized the plan for dividing the Internet into slow and fast lanes.
The plan, according to the critics, would eliminate net neutrality -- the principle that all traffic on the Internet should be treated equally.
The revised draft doesn’t allow companies to prioritize content delivery and includes language that ensures providers don't unfairly put nonpaying companies' content at a disadvantage.
The decision is likely to face legal challenges.
The FCC’s meeting in Washington drew hundreds of protesters, rare for a vote by the federal regulatory agency and an indication of the broad ramifications and strong emotions surrounding the issue.
The opponents of the FCC proposal support converting ISPs into utilities like telephone companies that would be subject to even greater government regulation.
Most Republicans in Congress say further regulations on the web would curb investment and stifle innovation.
George Foote, a Washington-based attorney who has represented telecommunications companies in regulatory cases, said the revisions proposed by Wheeler would protect and ultimately benefit Internet users.
“The whole debate about net neutrality has been hijacked by self-interest and sidetracked by a poor metaphor,” he said. “If service is to be upgraded in the future, who pays for the improvement? If the new policy strengthens the FCC’s hand to prevent discrimination in favor of affiliated companies, who is to complain?”
Last week 100 Internet companies, including powerhouses Google, Facebook (FB), Microsoft (MSFT) and Yahoo (YHOO), signed a letter voicing opposition to the proposal.
The companies advocated for a “free and open Internet,” suggesting the proposed rules could create an Internet where larger, wealthier companies would have a distinct advantage over smaller companies.

Reports of workers paid to do nothing spurs calls for probe of ObamaCare contractor

Several lawmakers are calling for an investigation into reports that employees at a center processing applications for health insurance under ObamaCare were paid to do nothing.
Missouri television station KMOV-TV reported Monday that data entry workers at a Serco Inc. office in Wentzville spent days staring at their computer. The company was awarded up to $1.25 billion to process applications for health insurance through the health care law.
Republican Sens. Roy Blunt of Missouri and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee sent a letter Wednesday to Marilyn Tavenner, administrator for the federal government's Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, in response to the report. 
"We are concerned Serco may have much less work than was expected when CMS awarded the contract, and may not be successfully completing the applications it has received," the senators wrote in the letter. 
Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer, R-Mo., whose district includes Wentzville, wrote to Tavenner separately along with several other congressional lawmakers looking into whether there should be an investigation.
"It is imperative that we fully understand the role of CMS and any potential role played by the Department of Health and Human Services in this matter," read the letter also signed by Missouri GOP Reps. Sam Graves, Vicky Hartzler, Billy Long, Ann Wagner and Jason Smith.
Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, a supporter of the Affordable Care Act, has also asked for an investigation. 
KMOV-TV first reported the story, citing a whistleblower who said employees were told to "sit at their computers and hit the refresh button every 10 minutes" as they waited for applications to process. The company is reportedly continuing to hire new employees at its facilities.
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch on Thursday quoted former Serco worker Lavonne Takatz as saying workers had so little to do that she played board games. Others slept, she said. It wasn't immediately clear if Takatz was the same employee who spoke with KMOV.   
"I feel guilty for working there as long as I did," Takatz, 42, told the newspaper. "It was like I was stealing money from people."
She did not respond to messages seeking comment from The Associated Press.
Based in Great Britain, Serco employs 100,000 people worldwide, including 9,000 in the U.S.
The Wentzville facility has 660 employees and is one of three contracted to process paper applications; the others are in Arkansas and Kentucky.
The Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, a division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said in a statement that it is committed to working with Serco and other contractors "to ensure that federal funds are spent appropriately and performance expectations are clear and monitored closely.
"We closely monitor the work Serco is doing relative to the number of employees they have, and we are confident that the balance is appropriate," it said.
In a statement Thursday, Serco did not address the Wentzville facility specifically but said that after securing the processing contract, it "set up operation centers and hired the necessary workforce to process paper applications and exemption requests, verify information, resolve conflicts of information, and obtain missing information."
"From October 1 through the end of April, our workforce has processed more than 1 million documents and made 1.4 million outbound phone calls to applicants. As in any business or major program there are peaks and valleys as the various tasks stop and start," the company said. "The number of staff Serco has working on the Marketplace is reviewed on a regular basis by CMS and any adjustments are made to ensure tasks are successfully completed in the most efficient manner."
The senators expressed concern that Serco "may have much less work than was expected" when it was awarded the contract, and that the company may not be successfully completing applications it receives. They asked Tavenner to respond by May 30.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Fox News Poll: Trust in government down 44 percent among GOP in last decade

When it comes to Washington controversies, most American voters think Benghazi, the IRS and the government’s electronic surveillance program are serious matters. A Fox News poll also finds that less than four in 10 voters trust the federal government.
The new poll, released Thursday, finds 37 percent of voters answer “yes” when asked: “would you say you generally trust the federal government?” Six in 10 say they don’t trust the government, down a touch from a high of 62 percent (June 2013 and July 2011).
CLICK HERE TO READ THE POLL RESULTS
One thing that is sure to erode trust is a scandal, and 78 percent of voters consider the Obama administration’s handling of the attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi a serious matter, including 52 percent who say “very serious.” Just over half (53 percent) see government surveillance of everyday Americans as “very serious” and 44 percent feel that way about the IRS targeting conservative groups.
Partisanship also shapes views on trustworthiness. In 2002, the first time this question was asked on a Fox News poll, 47 percent of Democrats said yes, they trust the government. That increased to 53 percent in February 2009, about a month after President Obama was inaugurated, and it stands at 55 percent in the new poll. The trend is reversed and more dramatic among Republicans: 63 percent trusted the government in 2002, while 32 percent felt that way in 2009 and just 19 percent trust Uncle Sam today.
For independents, trust was 53 percent in 2002, 35 percent in 2009 and 31 percent now.
In all, that’s an increase in trust of eight percentage points among Democrats from the days of the George W. Bush administration, and a decrease of 44 points among Republicans and 22 points among independents.
Only about a quarter of voters think the Obama administration has lived up to the promise of being the most transparent White House in history.
About a third of voters think the Obama administration has been less open and transparent than previous administrations (34 percent). That’s up nine points since early in Obama’s presidency when 25 percent felt that way (August 2010).
The poll finds 27 percent of voters agree with the president that this White House is more open than others, down from a high of 32 percent (2010 and 2012). Comparing sentiment today to that early in the Obama administration, the decline in those saying this White House is more open than others comes mostly from Democrats (-10 points) and independents (-11 points).
Overall, the largest number of voters -- 38 percent -- believes the transparency of the Obama White House is about the same as previous administrations. And 40 percent felt that way in 2010.
The Fox News poll is based on landline and cell phone interviews with 1,025 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide and was conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) from May 10, 12-13, 2014. The full poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

'DANGED IF I KNOW' Rice seems to scoff at Benghazi probe question

National Security Adviser Susan Rice, at a foreign policy lunch on Wednesday, seemed to scoff at a question on whether a select committee investigation on Benghazi would reveal new evidence.
"Danged if I know," Rice said, to audience laughter. "I mean honestly, the administration has produced, I think, 25,000 pages of documents. ... It's hard to imagine what further will come of yet another committee. What I think about and focus on as the national security adviser is what we must do with Congress to increase our security of our embassies and facilities around the world."
She was addressing the decision last week by the House to establish a select committee investigation. Rice on Wednesday steered away from the issue of her national TV appearances in 2012 in which she wrongly linked an anti-Islam video to the terrorist attack.
"What is lost in all of this discussion about Sunday shows and talking points is that we lost four brave Americans on that day, " Rice said.
Without referring directly to the Benghazi attack, and the recent appointment of the congressional select committee, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also discussed foreign policy on Wednesday before the American Jewish Committee, a Jewish advocacy group. She said making policy is a balancing act.
"There are always choices that we later regret, consequences we do not foresee, alternative paths we wish we had taken but hopefully we get it more right than wrong," she said.  
At a separate event, Bill Clinton offered a strong defense of his wife: "In my opinion, Hillary did what she should have done."
But the former president didn't mention that the State Department Benghazi investigation -- led by retired Adm. Mike Mullen and former U.S. diplomat Thomas Pickering -- never interviewed Mrs. Clinton.
"They looked into what was wrong," Bill Clinton explained. "They gave 29 recommendations. She took 'em and started implementing them. "
Despite the growing threat in Benghazi, well-documented by the U.S. intelligence community, the former president suggested little could have been done to prevent the attack. "No one had advance notice that this would happen as nearly as I can tell, so I just think we should let the report speak for itself."
In an interview with the Fusion cable network, current CIA director John Brennan seemed to choose his words carefully.
"Finally on Benghazi, did you know, director, from the beginning that it was a terrorist attack?" anchor Jorge Ramos asked.
"You know, in the heat of an event such as Benghazi, there are a lot of different bits and pieces of information that you try to piece together. I think clearly, early on it was seen as an assault, and it was seen as a very dangerous one that was putting the lives of our diplomats at risk,"  Brennan said. 
"So whether or not you call it a terrorist attack or an assault or a violent confrontation that unfortunately led to the death of four Americans, it is something that we need to make sure that we are able to get to the bottom of and as you say, bring the people responsible for that to justice. it."
Catherine Herridge is an award-winning Chief Intelligence correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC) based in Washington, D.C. She covers intelligence, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Herridge joined FNC in 1996 as a London-based correspondent.

Shinseki faces bipartisan criticism during Hill hearing on vet health care scandal

Lawmakers accused Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki of failing to act on repeated warnings about problems with the veterans health care system, as the embattled secretary vowed to take "all actions necessary" to fix the problems during a contentious hearing on Capitol Hill. 
"Any allegation, any adverse incident like this makes me mad as hell," Shinseki said Thursday. 
He addressed lawmakers in his first testimony on Capitol Hill since allegations that delayed health care led to patient deaths were made public. Early in the hearing, he faced heated bipartisan criticism that his department is falling down on its vital obligation to care for America's veterans. 
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. -- who represents the state where the scandal broke -- said the problems have created a "crisis of confidence." 
"We should all be ashamed," said McCain, a Vietnam veteran. 
Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., who has called for the secretary's resignation, accused Shinseki of being in "damage control" and not taking the action that is necessary to correct the system. 
The scandal at the Phoenix division involved an off-the-books list allegedly kept to conceal long wait times as up to 40 veterans died waiting to get an appointment. Officials were accused of cooking the books to hide the fact that veterans were waiting more than 14 days, the target window. 
VA facilities in South Carolina, Florida, Pennsylvania, Georgia and Washington state have also been linked to delays in patient care or poor oversight. An internal probe of a Colorado clinic found that staff had been instructed to falsify records to cover up delayed care at a Fort Collins facility. 
Shinseki has urged officials to wait until an inspector general report is completed, as he orders a separate review, but lawmakers voiced concern that this would only lead to further delays. 
Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., called the allegations "deeply disturbing." "We need more than good intentions," she said, calling for "decisive action." 
A top Republican also questioned when senior leaders at the Department of Veterans Affairs learned that lower-level workers were "manipulating wait times" for veterans' health care. Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., ranking Republican on the panel, said that the allegations have been surfacing for a while, and information on the problems was available to the secretary a year and a half ago. 
"Why were the national audits and statements of concern from the VA only made this month?" he asked, adding that the delayed health care has resulted in "patient harm and patient death." 
Shinseki's testimony is the first since the burgeoning scandal broke on allegedly deadly health care delays in the VA system. He is facing calls for his resignation as well as demands that the VA immediately improve the way it treats America's vets. 
Shinseki said the controversy "saddens" him. In his written statement, he said the department "must do better." 
Under questioning from senators, Shinseki still defended the overall management of the VA, calling it a "good system" and claiming that cases where workers were manipulating wait times "isolated." 
Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., in his opening statement, urged Shinseki's critics to wait until more details are known, acknowledging the VA health care system has "serious problems" but questioning whether it even has enough resources. 
"There has been a little bit of a rush to judgment," he said. 
Meanwhile, the chief watchdog for the VA will testify Thursday that it must immediately focus on delivering quality health care in order to save lives.
In prepared remarks obtained by Fox News from a congressional source, VA’s acting Inspector General Richard J. Griffin said: “The unexpected deaths that the OIG continues to report on at VA facilities could be avoided if VA would focus first on its core mission to deliver quality health care.” 
The two officials, along with representatives from a host of veteran advocacy groups -- including The American Legion, which has called for Shinseki's resignation -- were testifying before the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs. The scandal started with allegations of patient deaths due to long wait times at a Phoenix VA medical center, but new reports are emerging almost daily of problems elsewhere. 
Shinseki stresses that he has already placed three employees at the Phoenix VA center on leave over the allegations that as many as 40 veterans may have died because of delayed treatment at that hospital. Further, he ordered an inspector general investigation into the matter and a nationwide review into scheduling policy.
Griffin is expected to cite deep flaws in the organizational structure of the VA that need to be fixed. In his prepared remarks, Griffin cites seven recent reports that demonstrate problems hindering the VA’s ability to provide quality health care coverage.
Examples include a September 2013 report on a VA hospital in Columbia, S.C., which found thousands of patients had their appointments for colon cancer screenings delayed. He says it found that more than 50 patients had a delayed diagnosis of colon cancer, and some later died. Another report from October 2013 discusses a facility in Memphis, Tenn., where three patients died due to improper emergency room care.
Griffin will say a review of these and other examples concluded that the VA needs to improve its system for implementing standards nationwide, saying the VA has become a network of hospitals that differ greatly from each other while attempting to accomplish the same goal.
“It is difficult to implement national directives when there are no standard position descriptions or areas of responsibility across the system,” Griffin plans to say.
Griffin says it is time for the VA to conduct a review of its systems to determine if there are changes that can be made to improve.
In discussing the current state of VA health care, Shinseki cites numerous examples of ways he says the VA has improved care over the past five years, including improving and expanding care access, working to end veteran homelessness and improving access to mental health services. He says the VA is actively working to improve patient wait times. 
The White House has stood behind Shinseki amid calls for him to resign. President Obama announced Wednesday he is assigning his close adviser Rob Nabors to the VA to work on a review focused on policies for patient safety rules and the scheduling of patient appointments.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.