Search This Blog

Sunday, January 12, 2025

Another terrible Biden legacy — releasing more Gitmo prisoners who will terrorize the world

 Twenty-three years after the 9/11 attacks on NYC, new US intelligence documents reveal 234 “rehabbed” former Gitmo detainees have returned to terrorism and killing Americans — an alarming 32% recidivism rate. Most of them have not been recaptured and are still at large. 

Nonetheless, lame-duck President Biden is quietly freeing more of these high-risk terrorist suspects from the Guantanamo Bay prison, all to fulfill his old boss Barack Obama’s pledge to permanently close the facility in Cuba.

Shortly after taking office, Biden reversed President Trump’s executive order to keep Gitmo open and is lining up more inmates to transfer out of the prison with the goal of emptying it and shuttering it — even though the remaining prisoners have long been classified by military intelligence as the worst of the worst and too dangerous to release.

Earlier this month, the outgoing president freed 11 Yemeni prisoners — all of them al-Qaeda terrorists, including two of Osama bin Laden’s bodyguards — leaving the number of remaining detainees at 15. He sent them to Oman, where we are told they’ll be monitored, rehabilitated and go on to live peaceful lives.

However, some of Oman’s counterterrorism programs “were postponed or canceled” after the COVID-19 pandemic, and “Oman’s iniatives to counter violent extremism remained opaque in 2023,” according to the State Department’s latest country report. It also stated that Oman has “limited resources” and needs to “improve its CT (counterterrorism) capabilities.”

The control tower is seen through the razor wire inside the Camp VI detention facility in Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba.AP

What’s more, Oman’s remote, uncontrolled borders with Saudi Arabia and Yemen present additional “obstacles for counterterrorism,” the report warned.

One of the bin Laden bodyguards released by Biden — Sana Ali Yislam al-Kazimi — was a “facilitator for the Yemen-based al-Qaida branch,” according to a declassified military dossier, and could slip back into his old role across the border.

Just six months ago, Oman abandoned 28 other Gitmo terrorists it promised to reform under an agreement with Obama. Oman stripped them of citizenship and shipped them across the border to Yemen, a known terrorist redoubt.

Gouled Hassan Dourad, a Somali prisoner, planned attacks in Djibouti and Ethiopia.
Ismael Ali Faraj Ali Bakush, aka Ismael Ali Bakush, was a fighter for the Taliban and al Qaeda.DoD
Zayn al-Ibidin, a senior Osama bin Laden lieutenant involved in the planning of 9/11, was captured in Pakistan in 2002.

Perhaps it needed to make room for Biden’s 11 new parolees, who include unrepentant al-Qaida operative Hani Saleh Rashid Abdullah, who’s tied to 9/11 planners and lusted for watching footage of the attacks while incarcerated and required “robust security assurances” from Oman.

Or more likely, officials in Muscat viewed them as an internal terror threat and wanted to get rid of them rather than “reintegrate” them into their society.

“Anyone who thinks they’ll be rehabbed simply doesn’t want to look at past incidents of detainees returning to the fight,” said ret. Army Lt. Col. Brian F. Sullivan, a former FAA special agent who specialized in counterterrorism.

Once al Qaeda’s third in command, Mustafa Faraj Muhammad Masud al-Jadid al-Uzaybi aka al-Libbi, plotted plane hijackings and the assassination of Pakistan’s president.
Guantanamo Bay detainee Muhammad Rahim al Afghani, one of Osama bin Laden’s top aides and translators.via CAGE International
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the architect of the 9/11 attacks. He has agreed to a controversial plea deal that gives him life in prison but not the death penalty.AP

But Biden isn’t finished. Three other Gitmo fiends have been cleared for release — including an “explosives expert who trained al-Qaeda members and provided operational support to key al-Qaida figures” and “a key member of the al-Qaeda network in Somalia,” according to Gitmo parole board documents reviewed by The Post.

And three more are eligible for review by the parole board, including Abu Zubaydah, “one of Osama Bin Laden’s most trusted facilitators,” according to his Gitmo dossier. Congress would have to be notified 30 days in advance of Zubaydah’s release, giving Republicans time to raise objections.

Even the prisoners not being released are dodging justice, with 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed avoiding the death penalty as part of a sweetheart plea deal, and will instead serve life in prison.

Encep Nurjaman, an Indonesian head of al Qaeda in Southeast Asia, where he plotted the Bali nightclub bombing of 2002.
Walid Bin Attash worked as bodyguard for Osama bin Laden and helped with USS Cole attack.

These “forever” detainees have been charged in the military court system. Biden wants to move them out, as well, but a law blocks their transfer to US prisons. Trump has vowed to keep Gitmo open.

Biden is hellbent on clearing out the cells despite being fully briefed by his intelligence agencies that one in three released detainees have gone back to fighting against America — and some have actually managed to kill more Americans.

“Based on trends identified during the past 20 years, we assess that some detainees currently at GTMO will seek to reengage in terrorist or insurgent activities after they are transferred,” a recent US intelligence report warned.

Mustafa-al-Hawsawi, a Saudi Arabian who provided financial and travel support to the 9/11 hijackers.via International Red Cross
Ramzi-bin-al-Shibh was supposed to be one of the 9/11 hijackers, but was rejected for a visa to the US. He helped facilitate the attacks.

According to the June 2024 declassified report by the Office of National Intelligence, a total of 234 of the 733 detainees released from Gitmo have reengaged in terrorist activities, including conducting and planning attacks and recruiting and funding terrorists. That’s a re-offense rate of 31.9%. (The share would be even higher if US intelligence included engagement in anti-US statements or propaganda in its definition of “terrorist activities.”)

Detainees have appealed to the Biden administration through their bleeding-heart pro-bono defense lawyers to ensure their release. They argue their bloodthirsty clients have reformed their violent ways thanks to “yoga classes” and other touchy-feely prison activities and just want to return home to help their sick moms or run their family shops.

Several terrorists have told the exact same sob story to the review board, as The Post has previously reported. But since those stories were exposed, the Pentagon has removed the detainees’ written submissions and hearing transcripts from the review board website. It claims they aren’t posted “at the request of the detainee,” but those materials have now been removed from all detainee files.

Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, a Saudi Arabian who plotted the bombing of the USS Cole.
Ammar al-Baluchi, nephew of the Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, he helped hide and transferred the money needed for 9/11.via International Red Cross

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin assured that each of the released detainees “underwent a thorough review,” yet the public is now blind to that process.

Even more stunning: The administration admits that resettling terrorists in Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan hasn’t stopped them from returning to their violent ways. According to the 2024 ODNI report, “Former GTMO detainees routinely communicate with members of terrorist organizations.”

“Some detainees determined to reengage have and will do so regardless of any transfer conditions,” the report adds.

Ali Hamza al-Bahlul was convicted in 2008 of performing media relations for Osama bin Laden and providing material support for terrorism. Was sentenced to life in prison.
Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi commanded Al-Qaeda’s army, and served as the terror group’s accountant. As part of a plea deal, he will be held in prison until 2032.

Gitmo inmates previously repatriated in Afghanistan are now under the care of the Taliban, who reclaimed control of Kabul in late 2021 (thanks to Biden’s disastrous troop withdrawal) and are once again sheltering al-Qaeda leaders, who no doubt have reunited with those Gitmo alumni and are plotting a 9/11 encore.

“The men Joe is sending to Oman will be no different,” said ret. Army Capt. Sam Faddis, a former CIA operations officer who served in the Middle East. “We will see them again soon on the battlefield.”

He added: “Given the open-border policies of the Biden administration and the extent of our penetration by terrorist networks, that battlefield may be right here at home.”

Paul Sperry is a senior reporter for RealClearInvestigations and author of the bestseller “Infiltration.” Follow him on X: @paulsperry_

https://nypost.com/2025/01/12/opinion/another-terrible-biden-legacy-releasing-more-gitmo-prisoners-who-will-terrorize-world/

CVS successfully converts commercial pharmacy contracts to “cost plus” model

 

  • CVS has overhauled how its pharmacies are paid by commercial payers, after successfully converting contracts with pharmacy benefit managers over to a novel reimbursement model for 2025.
  • Now, all commercial prescriptions dispensed at CVS pharmacies will be reimbursed the cost of the drug, plus a set markup and additional pharmacist fee for handling and dispensing the medication, the healthcare conglomerate announced this week.
  • The “cost plus” model, called CostVantage, should result in more reliable revenue for CVS’ 9,000 retail pharmacies, according to the Rhode Island-based company. CVS is already eyeing an expansion of CostVantage to Medicare and Medicaid managed prescriptions.
CVS announced CostVantage in late 2023 as its pharmacies struggled with flatlining payment for dispensing drugs.

The company blamed an antiquated reimbursement model that led pharmacies to use higher rates on some medicines to subsidize losses on others, a strategy that’s been less than effective in recent years as the cost of branded drugs rises and reimbursement from payers falls.

Without the pricing change, CVS’ retail pharmacy division expected a 5% drop in adjusted operating income this year. CostVantage should help hike the business’ margins to flat, CVS executive Prem Shah said during the 2023 investor day unveiling CostVantage. Shah, now executive vice president and group president of CVS, was the company’s chief pharmacy officer at the time.

The transition to CostVantage marks a significant shift in how many people in the U.S. get their medications, as the majority of Americans are covered by employer-sponsored plans. CVS’ contracts with commercial payers account for some 750 million prescriptions annually, according to the company.

Though the company says the model will not increase the cost of drugs, some experts have said that how CVS calculates the acquisition cost of drugs, and how it negotiates mark-ups with payers, could allow the company to manipulate the model.

In comparison, Cost Plus Drug Company, the transparent online pharmacy created by billionaire Mark Cuban, charges a flat 15% markup in addition to the cost of drugs, plus pharmacy fees.

CVS started rolling out the model in 2024, with hopes of launching for all commercial prescriptions in 2025. However, by late last year CVS had yet to get all its clients on board. Some market watchers questioned whether PBMs, middlemen that pay pharmacies for dispensing medication on behalf of insurers, would accept the arrangement, as it could be less profitable for them.

By November, the company had signed about half of its clients to the new model, Shah said during a third-quarter earnings call with investors.

The major holdouts were the two largest PBMs besides CVS Caremark: UnitedHealth-owned Optum Rx and Cigna-owned Express Scripts, according to CVS CFO Tom Cowhey.

However, it’s normal for contracting discussions to stretch late into the year, Cowhey said during a November healthcare conference hosted by investment research firm Wolfe.

“I wouldn’t read into the fact that we don’t have a signed contract on some of those,” Cowhey said, later adding: “We’re losing money on some of the generics we file, and we’re losing money on pretty much every branded prescription that we fill. And so, part of that advantage of CostVantage is that we will level the playing field.”

PBMs may have been more willing to accept CostVantage as a way to offset future political and regulatory scrutiny, TD Cowen analyst Charles Rhyee wrote in a note on Monday.

PBMs had a financially rich but politically bruising 2024, emerging as public enemy No. 1 in the fight over who to blame for skyrocketing drug costs. Executives for Caremark, Express Scripts and Optum Rx — the “Big Three” PBMs, jointly accounting for 80% of all U.S. prescriptions — were summoned before Congress to testify about how their business practices could be raising the price of medications while putting independent pharmacies out of business.

PBMs also got a healthy dose of criticism from states and antitrust regulators — including a scathing report from the Federal Trade Commission. This all culminated in a September lawsuit from the FTC against Caremark, Express Scripts and Optum Rx over how their negotiations with drugmakers may have artificially inflated the cost of insulin.

And in December, a bipartisan group of lawmakers unveiled legislation that would break up PBMs by forcing them to divest pharmacy assets, a proposal that would be devastating for CVS (though it’s unlikely to pass).

Amid the turmoil, PBMs have launched a number of new products they bill as transparent and cost-effective.

Along with CVS’ CostVantage, the company in 2023 also announced a new PBM model that’s based on the net cost of drugs, with clear administrative fees. Express Scripts and Optum Rx have rolled out their own transparent PBM models, as data shows employer and payer clients, fed up with the black box of pharmacy contracts, are increasingly interested in the offerings.

CVS is also not the only major pharmacy chain looking to stabilize reimbursement. Beleaguered Walgreens is also aggressively pushing for higher compensation for pharmacy services, according to Rhyee’s note.

PBMs’ willingness to convert their contracts to a cost-plus model “may indicate that [Walgreens] may see improved pharmacy reimbursement pressure in 2025,” Rhyee said.

https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/cvs-costvantage-cost-plus-pharmacy-launch/736659/

Healthcare venture capital investment amplified by AI in 2024: report

 

  • Venture capital investment in healthcare increased in 2024, spurred by enthusiasm for artificial intelligence startups, according to a report by Silicon Valley Bank. 
  • Funding for U.S. healthcare companies reached $23 billion last year, compared with $20 billion in 2023. Nearly 30% of the 2024 investment went to startups leveraging AI, according to SVB.
  • This year could bring a “steady yet modest” increase in deal value and volume across healthcare, Jackie Spencer, head of relationship management for life science and healthcare banking at SVB, said in a statement. Still, the market for initial public offerings will likely remain muted until conditions improve and newly public companies demonstrate success. 

Total investment in the healthcare sectors — including biopharma, healthcare technology, diagnostics and tools, and medical devices — remains down from the pandemic-era funding boom, according to SVB’s report.

But last year outpaced 2021 in the number of VC deals. Plus, healthcare investment overall has grown 44% since the beginning of 2020. 

Meanwhile, AI has become a significant driver of healthcare investment, particularly for biopharma startups utilizing the technology for tasks like discovering new drugs, screening potential candidates and informing clinical trial design, according to SVB. 

The sector saw $5.6 billion invested in AI-backed companies in 2024, growing nearly three times year over year. Overall, biopharma startups raised $24.2 billion across 568 deals last year, compared with $10.1 billion across 645 investments in 2023.

But on the health tech side, funding lagged. Startups raised $10.6 billion across 706 deals, falling from $15.4 billion in funding over nearly 1,200 deals. 

Still, investment for early-stage health tech startups increased slightly in 2024. Meanwhile, investors focused their later-stage funding towards entrenched companies, according to SVB’s report.

“The flight to quality in healthtech is in full force, with investors disclosing that reduced risk is taking a priority in their late-stage spending,” the report’s authors wrote. “The overall view is that while AI disruption in healthtech is inevitable, there’s no clear view of what that disruption will look like, or the next phase of healthtech will look like. In the face of that uncertainty, many are taking a wait-and-see approach, holding off on big spends for now.”

Disclosed health tech deals fall in 2024

Private M&A and IPOs among private health tech companies, 2018-2024

The exit landscape for health tech companies is still subdued compared with recent years, according to the report. Only two companies went public via an IPO, while merger and acquisition activity was dominated by undisclosed deals. 

However, the tides could begin to turn in 2025. Digital musculoskeletal company Hinge Health and chronic condition management firm Omada — which have both raised hundreds of millions of dollars — could complete an IPO this year, according to reporting by Business Insider. 

“If they’re successful, they’ll be a major counterpoint to the lingering disappointment that’s been dragging the space down,” the report’s authors wrote. “[...] If VCs can see an exit for companies in this space again, other late-stage incumbents are likely to follow suit, and earlier-stage startups can expect to see the benefits.”

https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/healthcare-venture-captial-funding-ai-boost-2024-silicon-valley-bank/736870/

Supreme Court Rules 200 Patent Judges' Appointment Unconstitutional

 The Supreme Court has ruled that over 200 Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) judges were unconstitutionally appointed, however the problem may be 'cured' if the board's director exercises greater supervision over them.

A general view of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on June 1, 2021. Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion in the split decision in the case of U.S. v. Arthrex Inc, a consolidation of three cases. The patent adjudication system is administered by the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO), which sits within the Department of Commerce. The PTO has a single director who is subject to Senate confirmation.

The PTAB was established by the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act of 2011, and sits in panels of at least three members who are drawn from the Director, the Deputy Director, the Commissioners for Patents and Trademarks, and over 200 Administrative Patent Judges (APJs). Members of the PTAB and APJs are selected by the Secretary of Commerce.

As the Epoch Times notes further, Roberts explained that Arthrex Inc. develops medical devices and procedures for orthopedic surgery. In 2015, it received a patent on a surgical device it invented that reattaches soft tissue to bone without tying a knot. Arthrex soon claimed that two rival companies had infringed the patent. Three APJs on the PTAB panel concluded that a prior patent application “anticipated” the invention claimed by the patent, making Arthrex’s patent invalid.

On appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Arthrex raised for the first time an argument based on the Appointments Clause of the Constitution, which provides that the president may appoint officers to assist him in carrying out his responsibilities. Principal officers must be appointed by the president and be confirmed by the Senate, while inferior officers may be appointed by the president alone, the head of an executive department, or a court.

Roberts noted that Arthrex argued that the APJs were principal officers and that meant their appointment by the Secretary of Commerce was unconstitutional. The Federal Circuit sided with Arthrex and invalidated the tenure protections for APJs.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court held 5-4 that the authority the APJs possess runs afoul of the Appointments Clause because they are not nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. The APJs’ “unreviewable authority” in patent proceedings is not consistent with their appointment by the secretary. Only principal officers who are constitutionally appointed may wield that level of authority, Roberts wrote. Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett concurred.

But the court also ruled 7-2 on what should be done, finding that the constitutional infirmity could be cured by letting the director of the PTO have the ability to review and modify decisions made by the APJs. Four justices partially concurred and partially dissented in various parts of the court’s opinion.

Roberts quoted Alexander Hamilton who wrote in Federalist 77 that assigning the nomination power to the president guarantees accountability for the appointees’ actions because the “blame of a bad nomination would fall upon the president singly and absolutely.” The “sole and undivided responsibility of one man will naturally beget a livelier sense of duty and a more exact regard to reputation,” the founding father wrote.

Roberts cited a 1997 precedent, writing that the Appointments Clause “adds a degree of accountability in the Senate, which shares in the public blame ‘for both the making of a bad appointment and the rejection of a good one.’”

Justice Clarence Thomas penned a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan.

For the very first time, this Court holds that Congress violated the Constitution by vesting the appointment of a federal officer in the head of a department,” Thomas wrote.

“Just who are these ‘principal’ officers that Congress unsuccessfully sought to smuggle into the Executive Branch without Senate confirmation? About 250 administrative patent judges who sit at the bottom of an organizational chart, nestled under at least two levels of authority. Neither our precedent nor the original understanding of the Appointments Clause requires Senate confirmation of officers inferior to not one, but two officers below the President.” (Italics in original.)

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/supreme-court-rules-200-patent-judges-appointment-unconstitutional

TikToker captures careless idiots releasing lantern balloons on SoCal beach as LA burns

 A Southern California TikToker caught a group of careless idiots launching lantern balloons with lit candles into the sky near a nature preserve — even as wildfires incinerated Los Angeles.


The woman — who spoke to The Post anonymously after she took down the video — said she made a trip to a beach near Santa Barbara to decompress after working with fire victims in Los Angeles.

What she saw next left her dumbstruck: A group of partiers launching “sky lanterns” a stone’s throw from a campground, nature preserves and a residential neighborhood in a county with a “high” fire risk designation.

A video showed beach partiers launching fire lanterns in a high wildfire risk zone.
A video showed beach partiers launching fire lanterns in a high wildfire risk zone.Obtained by the NY Post


“I was watching them just light these lanterns and putting them into the air. They just kept launching more and more,” she told The Post.

Sky lanterns can reach altitudes of 1,500 feet and have been known to crash-land on forests and rooftops, starting blazes .

The group insisted they had a "permit" for the lanterns, which are illegal in California.
The group insisted they had a “permit” for the lanterns, which are illegal in California.Obtained by the NY Post

As a result, they are illegal in dozens of states — including California.

When the TikToker saw one of the airborne fireballs drift in the direction of the nearby mountains, she decided enough was enough.

She and another concerned bystander whipped out their phone cameras and confronted the party, who insisted that the lanterns were safe because “it’s not windy” and claimed to have a “permit” for the illegal lanterns, a video shows.

“Have you even gone down to LA? Do you even know what’s happening?” the enraged TikToker fired back.

In the video, she can be heard explaining to the firebugs that she has been working with victims of the wildfires that have destroyed thousands of homes and forced more than 100,000 people to evacuate.

“The man who was confronting them with me, I didn’t get his name, but he told me he and his family were displaced from LA. He said, ‘We’re sheltering up here. And now we see this?'” she recalled.

00:01
03:42

Eventually, someone in the group claimed the lanterns were part of a memorial service.

“I was like, ‘I’m so sorry, but I’ve been going down to LA, I’ve been seeing the devastation, and I don’t want to start a fire here,'” said the woman, who lives in Santa Barbara.

When the party grew more belligerent, the TikToker backed off and called 911. Eventually, local authorities arrived and shut the lantern-launching down.

But the experience left her rattled.

“Just seeing this, and knowing what’s happening in LA, physically going down there, it absolutely devastated me to see a lot of it burning it to the ground,” she said. “I thought I would be safe up here, but now I don’t feel safe at all.”

https://nypost.com/2025/01/12/us-news/tiktoker-captures-idiots-releasing-lantern-balloons-as-la-burns-video/