John Branca John McClain are Michael Jackson Estate Executors

Today, a judge upheld Michael Jackson's written will, and granted co-executor rights to John Branca and John McClain, an attorney and a music industry executive.

Michael Jackson Estate - Neverland Ranch

In 2002, Jackson signed the will that specified John Branca and John McClain as the Jackson Estate executors. The judge ruled that Branca and McClain keep Michael's mother, Katherine Jackson "apprised of their dealings." Branca and McClain said that they would "would carry out Jackson's wishes and maximize his estate's value."

At the time of the will, Jackson's estate was estimated to be worth $500 million, but today his debt is estimated at $400 million.

Jackson owned one-half of Sony-ATV, which controls a music catalogue which includes songs from The Beatles and other artists and has been valued as high as $1 billion. Jackson also owned a company that controlled the rights to music he recorded during his solo career, and its value is expected to rise over time.

Rumors are that Michael's money, is there is any left, will be divided among his children, his mother and his charities. This reports say that a "no-contest clause in the will prevents any beneficiary from contesting the distribution of the estate. If any beneficiary does protest the will, that beneficiary will be stricken from the will.

Katherine Jackson attempted to secure executorship from Branca and McClain. That request was denied. Mrs. Jackson's attorney made it clear to the judge that she was not contesting the will:

Katherine's lawyer raised concerns about Branca's relations with Michael. After working together for 20 years, Branca and Michael drifted apart in 2006. However just three weeks before his death, Michael re-inducted Branca into his team.

Branca's lawyer showed the court a letter from Michael dated June 17, 2009, just eight days before his death, in which Michael reiterated that he wants Branca in control of his affairs.

Katherine's attorneys also suggested that McClain should be excluded because of an alleged "infirmity," though his lawyer said McClain was in "fine mental capacity."

While the judge ruled in favor of Branca and McClain administering the estate as wished by Michael, he directed them to seek court approval for decisions involving marshaling the assets, attorney's fees, and settling claims and actions.

The court also asked the administrators to execute a $1 million bond to protect the estate from any misappropriation of the estate.

The will is said to have been in the possession of John Branca, so it's convenient that Jackson rehired him just days before his death. Twenty percent is said to be going to "unspecified" children's charities, 40% to his mother and 40% divided between his children.

Some gossip from January 2009: Reports in the U.K. were rampant that Jackson was dying of a genetic lung disease and planned to will-back his ownership portion of the Beatles' music catalog. In 1985, Michael Jackson out-bid Paul Cartney to take ownership of the Beatles' music catalog.

U.K. newspaper the Daily Mirror quotes a Jackson insider as saying, "Michael told his lawyers he was sad he no longer talks to Sir Paul and said he wanted to make things right.

Jackson and McCartney ended their friendship over the the transaction, but the bottom line is Jackson valued the catalog more than did McCartney. McCartney could have had it his way and placed the highest bid. He didn't.

Jackson's unofficial Brit biographer, Ian Halperin, has spawned rumors of a lung disease and even predicted that Jackson would be dead within 6 months. Jackson died 6 months and 1 day after Halperin's comment. Now come rumors that Jackson knew he was dying, and so the talk of McCartney getting his music catalog back.

View blog reactions

Michelle, Malia, Sasha, Grandma in Moscow: Ritz-Carleton Official Business

Michelle, Malia, Sasha and Grandma are arriving in Moscow and will do their official business at the Ritz-Carleton in a five bedroom suite. Lynn Sweet, writing for Politics Daily says it is official business, so I suppose it must be, but not all official business is equal.

Ritz-Carleton, Moscow

I don't have a problem with the First Lady accompanying President Obama to Moscow. I agree this is official business, but then we learn that the children and Mrs. Robinson, Michelle's mother, will be hanging with Prez on this trip...or not. Of course not. They will have tour guides and official minders and...

View on Red Square

The President, his wife and children and mother-in-law will spend two nights in the Presidential Suite with bullet-proof windows looking out onto the Kremlin, Red Square, Saint Basil's Cathedral and the Cathedral of Christ the Savior. The suite has five rooms, including a music room with a piano, an office, a dining room, a wardrobe room and a "panic room" with it's own generator.


From looking at the floor plan, I see one bedroom, so maybe they are bringing in roll-aways? Or maybe additional and separate rooms are needed for the children and Mrs. Robinson, or maybe this isn't the room at all - maybe there is an unadvertised suite for someone more regal than a president...an emperor or king? The rate for the Presidential Suite is said be about $13,754.00 a night plus tax.

Maybe...maybe the Obama's are paying for the girl's and the babysitter expenses out of their own pockets?

Some of this information is taken from the 100% Unofficial Blog of the Russian President, which says that Obama will be driving a Lada while in the country (test driving???). Here's som pics of Ladas:


Here's some of the views out the Presidential Suite window:

Saint Basil's Cathedral, Red Square, Moscow

Kremlin, Red Square

From Left to Right: The domed Senate building behind the high walls of the Kremlin, with the Senate tower built into the wall directly behind the tomb of Lenin. The next structure to the right is the St. Nicholas Tower. The State History Museum is to the far-right. See a larger photo here.

View blog reactions

Marion Barry Stalking Arrest: When is Enough Enough?

Washington, D.C. Councilman Marion Barry has been arrested for stalking a woman in Anacostia Park.

Marion Barry

The woman flagged down a police officer, pointed out Barry's car, and she said he was stalking her. Barry and the woman knew each other. She has not been named.

The stalking charge is a misdemeanor. Here's the way things work for the powerful in Washington, D.C.:

The officer is a not a D.C. and was unaware who Barry was prior to making the arrest, said Park Police spokesperson Sgt. David Schlosser, according to the Washington City Paper.

Barry failed to file or pay income taxes for years. He is on probation for that offense through 2011. In the last year as Mayor of Washington, D.C., in 1990 an FBI sting caught him on tape smoking crack cocaine. Barry service six months in prison and returned to the Mayor's office for a fourth term in 1994.

How do these people get re-elected? Do the voters in D.C. see this man as a leader for them and their cause, or do they see him as a enabler?

View blog reactions

Boehner and Hoyer on Fox News Sunday: Boehner: Defending the Simulus (Video)

Listen to Boehner tell Hoyer that Republicans were not opposed to a stimulus, they were opposed to the Democrat's stimulus. Saying that jobs should have been created by small businesses as Republicans proposed, Obama and Hoyer bray about th teachers and firefighters who have not lost their jobs.

The fact is, few jobs have been created, basically no sustainable jobs have been created, but...well one job created by stimulus funds is...innovative??? The show opens with this video within the video, of how a town used their stimulus windfall.

Rep. John Boehner key quote: "Trust small business and the American people to invest their own money."

In response to Rep. Steny Hoyer's whine that the Democrats inherited this terrible economy, my hubby points out that the Democrats had been in power for two years before Barack Obama came to the Oval Office, and sat in the Senate those two years.

Boehner and Hoyer on Fox News Sunday

View blog reactions

U.S. Syria Relations Cozy: Neutralizing Israel

Syrian president Bashar Assad has invited President Obama to visit Damascus, in the wake of a U.S.-Saudi press for Syria to "demarcate" its border with Lebanon. By marking the Syrian border and giving up its claims to Shaba Farms, also known as Mount Dov, and placing Mount Dov inside Lebanon's borders, the reasoning is that Israel will have no rationale to claim the militarily strategic Mount Dov, and so Hizbullah will also have no reason to attack Israel. The move is on to neutralize Israel.

U.S. Syria Relations Cozy: Bashar Assad with U.S. Speaker Nancy Pelosi

It's a fantasy - it's not going to happen.

For those who have forgotten, Israel liberated Mount Dov from Syria during the 1967 Six-Day War. Lebanon claims that Mount Dov belongs to it, and Hezbullah uses Israel's 'occupation' of Mount Dov as proof that Israel is 'occupying' 'Lebanese territory' thereby justifying its existence in Lebanon. The US claims that if Syria demarcates its border with Lebanon, and puts Mount Dov on the Lebanese side of the border, it will take away Hezbullah's raison d'etre (see map below).

It's a bit shocking to know that in 2009, there are countries without official borders.

Israel took over the area in 1967 and sees it as part of the Golan Heights. The UN accepted this position following the IDF's pullout from Lebanon in May 2000 but Hezbollah and Lebanon claim that this is Lebanese territory still under Israeli occupation.

From Israel's long-time point-of-view, Shaba Farms (Mount Dov) has been off the table for discussion.

What are the issues?

In the 1923 Anglo-French Demarcation Agreement, which set the borders between the British and French mandates in Palestine, Syria and Lebanon, the area was included in Syria. The maps of the 1949 Israeli-Syrian Armistice Agreements similarly designated the area as Syrian.

In the 1967 Six Day War, the farms were occupied by the IDF as part of its conquest of the Golan Heights. Lebanon was not involved in that war, and Israel did not engage in any fighting against it.

At that time, no one - neither Syria nor Lebanon - claimed that the area was Lebanese.

IN THE negotiations leading to the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, Lebanon for the first time raised its claim to the farms, but based on all previous historical documents and maps, the UN sided with the Israeli version, i.e. that this was Syrian territory and subject to future Israeli-Syrian negotiations. The Lebanese claim was used by Hizbullah to continue its resistance to "Israeli occupation of Lebanese territory.

At the time of the 2000 Israeli withdrawal the UN asked Syria about its position on the issue. Damascus was in a quandary: On the one hand, this was obviously Syrian territory; on the other, if Syria conceded that the farms belong to Lebanon, there might be a chance of getting one more sliver of Arab territory out of Israeli hands.

Syria thus responded that whatever its former claims to the Shaba Farms, it now agreed to cede them to Lebanon.

But when the UN asked Damascus for a formal document stating that the area had indeed been legally transferred to Lebanon, Syria balked - and it has still not supplied such a document.

The short story is that Syria has refused to recognize Lebanon as a sovereign state. Not until this year did Syria appoint it's first ever ambassador to Beirut. At the same time, Lebanon sent its first ambassador to Syria.

Damascus still has powerful allies in Lebanon, including Hezbollah, an Iranian-backed Shi'ite party with a powerful guerrilla army.

The U.S. has pressured Israel to withdraw from Mount Dov for years.

The area is a 100 square mile parcel of land located at the foot of Mount Hermon where the Syrian, Lebanese and Israeli borders meet. Israel took control of the area after the Six Day War in 1967, and since then has built up a number of military outposts on the strategic hills.

Israel's indefensible borders on all sides have led to the necessary land-grabs gained in the 1967 war. How can you defend your people when your enemies refuse to respect your border towns? This 2006 report describes the importance of not letting your enemy bite at your heels:

The drive up to the top of Mt. Dov on Wednesday is done along a narrow and winding road, accessible only in armored vehicles, a memory of Hizbullah's incessant shelling of IDF outposts there not so long ago.

The Gladiola outpost is situated just over the Lebanese village of Shuba with a clear view of Ghajar, as well. Soldiers man heavily-fortified positions along the ridge, keeping an eye on the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) patrols below.

Strangely enough, during the war this summer, the Mt. Dov area was quiet, and saw nearly no fighting. According to the officer, the explanation is simple - Hizbullah does not attack military bases, since they know that in such a situation they will lose.

The importance of the area to Israel is clear:

Since the war in Lebanon, the IDF has invested millions of shekels in fixing the infrastructure along the mountain - from repaving the winding road to installing new antennas and surveillance equipment.

The officer said the soldiers stationed in the series of outposts along the mountain play a key role in assisting the IDF to form accurate assessments of Hizbullah's plans.

The purpose of the powerful Hizbullah in Lebanon is to protest the Mount Dov possession by Israel, claiming that the land belongs to Lebanon.

Hizbullah's attempt to claim sovereignty of Mt. Dov is because the group needs an excuse for its existence," he said. "Otherwise, they are worthless."

Israel Matzav questions any notion of Syria's abandonment of Hizbullah and says this:

Engagement' is one thing and giving up real assets (even if the asset is only a claim) is something else. Mount Dov is a very strategic point that is used for military purposes by Israel.

Why would the Syrians want to let Lebanon have it?

What is Lebanon giving them in return?

...even if Israel were to hand Mount Dov over to Lebanon tomorrow, Hezbullah would continue to exist and would continue to charge Israel with 'occupying Lebanese territory.'

So what is the U.S. doing? Should Syria mark their border and place Mount Dov in Lebanon's hands, and Israel acknowledge that border and abandon the area, how can Israel be rightly convinced that the position would not once again be used against the people of Israel? Could a treaty between Israel and Syria be achieved? Would such a treaty mean safety for Israel? There is no way for Israel to be rightly convinced. This has been a U.S. endeavor through the Bush years. The U.S. should not ask Israel to enter into such an agreement. Afterall, had Israel's neighbors respected their sovereignty, the 1967 War would not have happened.

I believe that if the U.S. and the free world would wholeheartedly and very publicly back Israel, Hamas and Hizbullah would be defeated by the very notion that the west would assist Israel's defense of its own borders. It's very simple. Actively support the right of the Israeli people to exist...but rather than follow such a justifiable position, we quake at the wrath of the Muslim world. The thing we seem to ignore is that living inside that Muslim world is a sovereign non-Muslim nation. Where is the justification for the Muslim rejection of these people?

View blog reactions