text
stringlengths 1
134k
| label
int64 0
1
|
|---|---|
Is that what this article said? | 0 |
(Want to get this briefing by email? Here’s the .) Good evening. Here’s the latest. 1. The House speaker, Paul Ryan, reiterated his support for Donald Trump, even though Mr. Trump has refused to endorse him. Protesters handed out copies of the U. S. Constitution at Mr. Trump’s town hall meeting in Maine, while military veterans, like those at Capitol Hill, above, have expressed dismay over his comments about the armed services. Mr. Trump’s running mate, Mike Pence, faced down an at a rally in North Carolina who asked why he was “kind of softening up on Mr. Trump’s policies and words. ” “I just wanted to make sure he was totally loyal to Mr. Trump and the Republican Party,” the boy said later. Watch the video. _____ 2. New polls show Hillary Clinton with a lead in Florida, a major swing state crucial to Mr. Trump’s chances of winning the presidency, and even further ahead in New Hampshire. Mrs. Clinton, who has been building support among Republicans and billionaires of all stripes, visited an electric company in Las Vegas, above. _____ 3. President Obama met with his National Security Council to discuss progress against the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, including the new campaign of airstrikes against the group’s strongholds in Libya. At a news conference afterward, Mr. Obama denied that a $400 million pallet of cash delivered to Iran in January, was ransom for four American citizens Iran released the same day. “Some of you may recall, we announced these payments in January,” he said. “Many months ago. It was no secret. ” _____ 4. The Malaysian government acknowledged for the first time that the pilot of the Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, which vanished with 239 people aboard more than two years ago, had recorded a route on his personal flight simulator for the southern Indian Ocean. That is the area where a few pieces of debris from the aircraft were found. While not conclusive, the finding deepened suspicion that the pilot, Capt. Zaharie Ahmad Shah, deliberately flew off course en route to Beijing. Above, his sister, in February, with her last photo of him. _____ 5. A day before the opening ceremony for the Olympics in Rio, Olympic officials said that 271 Russian athletes would be allowed to compete in the Rio Games — 118 fewer than the country hoped to enter. Above, some of the Russians arriving in Rio. And a side note: And if you want some appropriate background music, here’s a playlist of essential Brazilian songs. _____ 6. The London police said a knife attack that left an American woman dead and five other people injured on Wednesday night appeared to have been “triggered by mental health issues,” not terrorism. The suspect, a Norwegian of Somali descent, was taken into custody at the scene of the attack, in the upscale neighborhood of Bloomsbury. _____ 7. The Bank of England is cutting its main interest rate to the lowest point ever, aiming to steady Britain’s newly strained economy. Signs of financial trouble — like a plunging pound and sagging consumer confidence — have multiplied in the weeks since the country voted to leave the European Union. “There is a clear case for stimulus, and stimulus now, in order to be there when the economy really needs it,” the bank’s governor said. _____ 8. “Everybody, let’s help each other, protect each other, save a life before this punk takes another life. ” That’s one of the people sharing information and suggesting lines of investigation on the Phoenix Police Department’s social media accounts as the authorities try to find a serial shooter who has killed seven people and injured two since March. The reward for any information leading to an arrest rose this week to $50, 000 from $30, 000. _____ 9. One of our most read stories today tells of the life and death of Julian Washington, 30, who was killed in a stabbing in one of New York City’s deadliest precincts. He had been at a party in a public housing when a brawl broke out, and someone began slashing away with kitchen knives. Mr. Washington staggered into the building’s hallway, bleeding from the neck, as partygoers fled past him. The Times is documenting every murder recorded this year in the 40th precinct of the South Bronx. Mr. Washington was the sixth. _____ 10. The prototype of an bus made its debut in China this week. The Transit Elevated Bus, 72 feet long and 26 feet wide, straddles the roadway while cars drive underneath. With the ability to carry 1, 200 passengers, the colossal bus is intended to help ease the country’s traffic congestion, but several questions — like what happens to trucks too large to fit below it — remain. _____ 11. Finally, this is Harry, the seventh of 21 puppies that have appeared in the Broadway play “The Curious Incident of the Dog in the . ” All found homes with people connected to the theater industry after they aged out of the play. One last puppy is having his moment of fame: Simon, a golden retriever, will fill the role until the play ends its run on Sept. 4. _____ Your Evening Briefing is posted at 6 p. m. Eastern. And don’t miss Your Morning Briefing, posted weekdays at 6 a. m. Eastern, and Your Weekend Briefing, posted at 6 a. m. Sundays. Want to look back? Here’s last night’s briefing. What did you like? What do you want to see here? Let us know at briefing@nytimes. com. Karen Workman contributed reporting. | 1 |
by having it be about climate and not about the general planetary destruction of nature, land, and lifestyle we are doomed to fail
ecosystem destroying solar plants in pristine desert valleys and buying Teslas are not the answer | 0 |
MEXICO CITY — For half a century, as Fidel Castro transformed Cuba into a Communist state and sparred with the United States, his brother Raúl worked in his shadow, the authoritarian leader’s disciplined, junior partner. But by the time the elder Mr. Castro died on Friday night, Raúl Castro, who assumed presidential powers in 2006 before getting the official title in 2008, had transformed Cuba into a country that was unrecognizable in many ways — and yet remarkably the same. Raúl discarded some of the precepts that Fidel had considered sacred, chipping away at the Communist scaffold his brother had built. And in a stunning embrace that caught the world off guard, he negotiated an end to the diplomatic standoff with the United States that Fidel had fiercely maintained. It is now solidly Raúl’s Cuba, an island where millennials talk to their cousins on Skype, where restaurant owners hustle for zucchini at privately run farms and where Americans clog the streets of Old Havana. Over all this, he has a firm hold on power, secured by trusted military leaders in vital positions and a new economic course of his making in which private enterprise plays an essential — but unthreatening — role. Still, Fidel died at a time of great uncertainty. Cuba’s regional benefactor, Venezuela, is collapsing economically. And many Cubans are trying to reach the United States while special immigration privileges are still in place. And now, after multiple rounds of changes by President Obama to knit the two countries closer together, a wild card has emerged: the election of Donald J. Trump, who has threatened to undermine the détente between the two nations unless he can extract more concessions from the Castro government. Cuban officials say they have weathered financial and political swings before, whether they were the American embargo, the collapse of the Soviet Union or the economic troubles in Venezuela. With Fidel gone, a lingering question may now be answered: Did the weight of his legacy hold Raúl back, preventing him from substantially dismantling the cherished system his brother had constructed, or were the slow, halting steps toward change a reflection of Raúl’s own desire to insert new life into the ailing Cuban economy — without weakening the structures of state power? Roberto Veiga, the director of Cuba Posible, an organization in Havana that promotes political dialogue, said that Fidel’s passing would “deeply affect people” on the island, but that it would not change the course of the country. “It will have an emotional impact,” Mr. Veiga said. “It will have a political impact. But it won’t have any impact on how the country is governed. ” “It’s a long time since Fidel was in the presidency,” he added. “Raul Castro has been leading the country for years. He has a team. There’s stability. ” Enrique López Oliva, a retired church historian in Cuba, expects change. While he did not rejoice in Mr. Castro’s death, he said, he found himself excited about the possibilities that it could bring for Cuba’s future. “It’s the end of one era and the beginning of another,” he said. “The death itself, we were waiting for that to happen at any moment. But now it feels like a new phase is about to begin. ” Some experts contend that Raúl held back true economic reforms because his brother opposed them. Fidel, some believe, prevented the Communist Party from announcing major new endeavors at the party congress this year, Mr. López said. “Now Raúl will feel more free,” he said. “The process of change will undoubtedly accelerate. ” Mr. López added that Cubans were eager for more economic changes because the increase in tourism seemed to have had the adverse effect of diverting food and other necessities to the tourism sector. Shortages are common, and frustrations are running high. Mr. López, who lives on a $12 monthly pension, said he recently had to sell two luxury antique lamps in order to buy food. “When I was in Miami, people asked me why I didn’t stay in Miami, and I said I wanted to see the end of the movie,” Mr. López, 80, said. “Now I am watching it. We are living a historic moment. I was happy to have lived through the revolution and happy to live through this. ” Raúl has shown a willingness to change course. Brian Latell, a former C. I. A. analyst who has followed the Cuban leadership closely for decades, said the Castro brothers’ relationship was once like a show. Fidel played the mercurial, genius director spewing bold visions, while Raúl was the producer backstage, making sure that the microphone worked, that the actors were paid and that everyone followed the script. But as Fidel withdrew, he said, Raúl was increasingly free to steer the production in a different direction, while retaining its spirit. Raúl has long framed his vision as a continuation of the revolution, vowing to build “a prosperous and sustainable socialism. ” It was Raúl who grumbled about the bloated state bureaucracy and corruption, saying the public work force had to be cut. “We have to erase forever the notion that Cuba is the only country in the world where one can live without working,” he told the National Assembly in 2010. He replaced many of Fidel’s senior leaders with his own trusted allies in the military. He opened limited space for small private enterprise, introduced salary increases and reduced state subsidies, publicly rejecting “three principles of Fidelismo: paternalism, idealism and egalitarianism,” Mr. Latell said. Fidel began his protracted retreat from public life in August 2006, when a grave intestinal illness forced him to step aside. He ceded power to Raúl, first provisionally, then permanently in 2008. Fidel’s silence after the United States and Cuba announced they would restore diplomatic relations in 2014 was interpreted by Cubans and by foreign experts as a sign that the former leader was extremely sick. Some Cuba watchers wonder if the breakthrough with the United States could have been achieved if Fidel had still been in power or in better health. But others believe that the changes must have carried Fidel’s endorsement, or at least that Raúl acted in a belief that he was following his brother’s grand design. In the televised speech to announce the rapprochement with the United States, Raúl said his openness to talks was “a position that was expressed to the United States government, both in public and in private, by our Comrade Fidel at different moments of our long struggle. ” While Raúl is firmly in control, and seemingly in good health, many people inside and outside Cuban wonder what kind of Cuba comes after him. Raúl, 85, has pledged to step down in 2018. His vice president and former minister for higher education, Miguel Mario Bermúdez, 56, is expected to fill the presidency. But in the opaque, tightly guarded circles of Cuban politics, it is impossible to know for sure. | 1 |
Figures Long-gone Russian Empire: Small towns in colorful archive photos Sergey Prokudin-Gorsky was a Russian photographer best known for his pioneering work in color photography. In the early 20th century he traveled across the Russian Empire capturing small-town life. Scroll down to see more SERGEY PROKUDIN-GORSKY Sergey Prokudin-Gorsky was a Russian chemist and photographer. He is best known for his pioneering work in color photography. In 1890 Prokudin-Gorsky joined Russia's photography section of the Imperial Russian Technical Society. / Avraamiev Monastery in the city of Smolensk. SERGEY PROKUDIN-GORSKY In 1901, Prokudin-Gorsky established a photography studio and laboratory in Saint Petersburg. Throughout the years, Prokudin-Gorsky's photographic work, publications and slide shows to other scientists and photographers in Russia, Germany and France earned him praise. / View of Volga river and Zytsov city. SERGEY PROKUDIN-GORSKY The Tsar Nicholas II enjoyed the color photos, and, with his blessing, Prokudin-Gorsky got the permission and funding to document Russia in color. / Dormition Cathedral, Smolensk. SERGEY PROKUDIN-GORSKY In long journeys around the country, carried out from 1905-1909, Prokudin-Gorsky captured on film the patriarchal Russian life. / Nikolskye gates in the city of Smolensk. Sergey Prokudin-Gorsky In the course of ten years, Sergey Prokudin-Gorsky was to make a collection of 10,000 photos. / Trinity Cathedral in Torzhok. SERGEY PROKUDIN-GORSKY Thanks to him, we have unique colour portraits of Tolstoy, Chekhov and Shalyapin, his pictures of young Russian peasants, the Emir of Bukhara, sailors from the steamship “Sheksna”, factory workers are widely known. / Nilov Monastery situated on a Stolobny Island in the Tver Oblast of Russia. SERGEY PROKUDIN-GORSKY As a result of unique technology, the images have survived in modern standards of quality and original, wonderfully saturated colours. / Bogomaterinskaya church. SERGEY PROKUDIN-GORSKY His ultimate goal was to educate the schoolchildren of Russia with his "optical color projections" of the vast history, culture, and modernization of the Empire. / View of city of Staritsa. SERGEY PROKUDIN-GORSKY After the October Revolution, Prokudin-Gorsky was appointed to a new professorship under the new regime, but he left Soviet Russia in August 1918. / View of Tver and Volga river. SERGEY PROKUDIN-GORSKY Upon leaving the country, about half of his photos were confiscated by Russian authorities for containing material that seemed to be strategically sensitive for war-time Russia. / Torzhok city. Sergei Prokedin-Gorsky Sergey Prokudin-Gorsky finally settled in Paris in 1922. He died in died on September 27, 1944 at the age of 81. / View on Borisoglebsky Monastery, Torzhok. Facebook | 0 |
Preguntar por el sueldo será motivo de despido ATOSIGAR AL JEFE PIDIÉNDOLE UN CONTRATO O DÍAS DE VACACIONES SE CONSIDERARÁ ACOSO LABORAL trabajo
Embrutecer la relación laboral mostrando interés por asuntos meramente económicos será motivo suficiente para echar a un empleado, según una nueva normativa laboral anunciada por el Gobierno esta mañana. “Insistir en temas económicos da a entender que el trabajador podría no estar interesado en el trabajo sino sólo en el dinero”, explicaba esta mañana Fátima Báñez, ministra de Empleo y Seguridad Social.
Según la normativa, la cantidad monetaria que todos los trabajadores perciben a fin de mes a cambio del trabajo realizado debería ser un tema “que al menos se finja secundario” para poder mantener “la ilusión” de que se trabaja en vistas a mejorar la productividad de la empresda y de España “y no por intereses personales y exclusivamente pecuniarios”.
“Preguntar por nóminas atrasadas deja en evidencia que existía un interés oculto cuando se aceptó el trabajo”, explica la ministra.
Los empresarios, a través de la patronal, no han tardado en aplaudir una medida que llevaban años solicitando. “Cuando estás haciendo una entrevista, preguntas por los sueños y las aspiraciones de una persona, por cosas importantes, y al final siempre rompen ese clima de confidencia preguntando cuánto van a cobrar y es una pena”, explica Carmen Sartoña, directora de Recursos Humanos de la multinacional Jenkins&Co. “El trabajo bien hecho debería ser su propia recompensa, nos gusta que el sueldo sea una sorpresa inesperada, un plus”, insiste.
“Que mis subordinados trabajen por una motivación ajena al trabajo me parece feo y en esas condiciones prefiero poder despedirlos”, ha declarado otro empresario de Madrid, aplaudiendo la medida. Confía en que la nueva normativa favorezca la dedicación apasionada y desinteresada por el trabajo.
Asimismo, los trabajadores que atosiguen al jefe pidiéndole un contrato o días de vacaciones podrán ser acusados de acoso laboral. | 0 |
DETROIT — Fiat Chrysler said on Friday that it was recalling 1. 1 million vehicles that can roll away unexpectedly and cause injuries when the transmission is not used properly, adding to a spate of recent safety actions by carmakers. Safety recalls in the United States have continued to mount this year as automakers react to tougher enforcement efforts by regulators. This year’s total is unlikely to match the record of more than 60 million vehicles set in 2014 after General Motors recalled millions of small cars with faulty ignitions that were ultimately linked to 124 deaths. But over all, the pace of recalls so far in 2016 exceeds the number in a typical year before the G. M. crisis. G. M. and other automakers, including Fiat Chrysler, have been subject to heavy fines by regulators for failing to promptly fix defective vehicles. In addition, automakers are being scrutinized by other government agencies, including the Justice Department, for their conduct related to recalls and safety defects. In recent weeks, G. M. announced a major recall to fix seatbelts in its trucks, and other companies have announced safety actions to repair faulty airbags. The recall blitz has even included the electric carmaker Tesla Motors, which said last week that it would recall its new Model X sport utility vehicle to prevent seats from folding forward in a collision. On Friday, Fiat Chrysler said it would recall 811, 586 cars and S. U. V.s in the United States after reports of 41 injuries linked to transmission problems. The automaker also will recall more than 300, 000 vehicles for similar problems in various international markets, including Canada and Mexico. The vehicles affected include Jeep Grand Cherokee S. U. V. and Dodge Charger and Chrysler 300 sedans. An investigation by the carmaker and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration found that drivers were leaving their vehicles without shifting the transmission into the “park” position when the engine was running. According to Fiat Chrysler, the drivers were unaware of how to properly use electronically controlled shift levers. Unlike conventional transmissions, the levers do not change position when shifted. Instead, the levers return to the same position after shifting, and gear selection is indicated by lights. “Unless due care is taken, drivers may draw erroneous conclusions about the status of their vehicles,” Fiat Chrysler said. According to documents from the auto safety regulator, more than 300 incidents were reported in which vehicles rolled away after improper shifting, resulting in more than 100 accidents. Among the injuries were a fractured pelvis, broken ribs, cuts, sprains and severe bruising. Regulators also found that shifters in the affected vehicles were unreasonably difficult to operate. “The shifter is not intuitive and provides poor tactile and visual feedback to the driver, increasing the potential for unintended gear selection,” regulators said. Fiat Chrysler said it would enhance the warning systems and otherwise modify the transmission systems in the recalled models. The company said it had already updated the shifters in newer versions of the vehicles. | 1 |
Over the past several months, Donald J. Trump has crisscrossed the country making dozens of campaign stops in places like Sioux City, Iowa, and Jackson, Miss. often in his sleek Cessna jet. There is just one hitch: The plane’s registration is expired. Records kept with the Federal Aviation Administration show the aircraft’s registration lapsed on Jan. 31. Laura J. Brown, a spokeswoman for the Federal Aviation Administration, confirmed that the plane’s registration was not in good standing and said the owner had not renewed it. With few exceptions, aircraft must be registered in order to fly. Mr. Trump’s plane could be grounded for days, or even months, while the issue is sorted out. In the event of an accident, the company that insures the jet could cite the lapsed registration to decline any claims. The F. A. A. could also fine or assess other penalties against the owner, the operator or both Mr. Trump owns the plane through a limited liability company. Though it is unlikely that the agency would seek the maximum penalty, flying with no registration could result in a civil penalty of up to $27, 500, a criminal fine of up to $250, 000 and imprisonment for up to three years, it said. Hope Hicks, a spokeswoman for the Trump campaign, declined to answer several questions about the plane’s registration or use, saying only that the renewal process “is just about complete. ” As of late Tuesday, the F. A. A. had not received a registration renewal application for the Cessna, according to Ms. Brown, the agency spokeswoman. She declined to comment on any action the F. A. A. might take. Although Mr. Trump has a sizable delegate lead in the Republican presidential primary race, his campaign has often had organizational issues, at times losing ground against better organized opponents, chiefly Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, as Mr. Trump has struggled to master the complicated rules governing the selection of delegates. Mr. Trump can still fly most candidates typically charter a private plane. He also has four other registered aircraft: a Boeing 757 and three Sikorsky helicopters, a fleet that has become a critical part of the billionaire’s image he has sought to project on the campaign trail. The Boeing, which has Mr. Trump’s surname emblazoned in big letters on the outside and fixtures inside, has been used as a backdrop at a number of his rallies. But the aircraft weighs more than 100, 000 pounds, and that creates limitations: It cannot land at many smaller airports. As a result, Mr. Trump often presses the 1997 Cessna 750 Citation X, which was designed to seat eight people, into action. It has made hundreds of flights since he announced his plan to seek the Republican nomination in June 2015, according to F. A. A. records reviewed by The New York Times. Dozens of those flights were made after Jan. 31, when the registration expired. The plane flew as recently as Monday, when it was used to transport Team Trump between La Guardia Airport and Buffalo for a campaign event on the eve of the New York primary. On Friday, it flew to Plattsburgh, N. Y. and to Hartford for rallies in those cities, according to radio transmissions broadcast by the plane that were archived on a flight data website and reviewed by The Times. The F. A. A. warned Mr. Trump that the Cessna’s registration was set to expire, records show. On Dec. 1, DJT Operations CX L. L. C. the limited liability company owned by Mr. Trump that operates the Cessna, received a “final notice” from the F. A. A. according to records reviewed by The Times. Then, on March 1, DJT Operations CX was notified that the registration had expired. “The aircraft’s registration and airworthiness certificates no longer support the aircraft’s operation,” the agency wrote. These notices, records show, were sent to National Registered Agents it is not a company Mr. Trump owns. It is the Delaware firm that was listed as the “registered agent” when DJT Operations CX was incorporated in 2012, the year Mr. Trump bought the jet. In an F. A. A. filing in 2012, titled “Aircraft Registration Application,” National Registered Agents, its address and its phone number were listed as the contact information for DJT Operations CX. The filing is one page, largely filled out by hand, and is signed by Mr. Trump. His title, initially listed as “president,” was crossed out and replaced with “sole member. ” The registration for Mr. Trump’s four other aircraft are current, records show. Flying privately is not cheap. The Trump campaign has paid a company that Mr. Trump owns more than $3 million for travel since he announced his candidacy. Registering an aircraft, however, is cheap: It costs only $5, and the registration is valid for three years. | 1 |
Al Jarreau, a versatile vocalist who sold millions of records and won a string of Grammys for his work in pop and RB as well as his first love, jazz, died on Sunday in Los Angeles. He was 76. His death was announced by his manager, Joe Gordon, who said that Mr. Jarreau had been hospitalized for exhaustion two weeks ago. On the advice of his doctors, he had canceled his tour dates and retired from touring. Mr. Jarreau did not begin a musical career until he was nearly 30, but within a few years he had begun attracting notice for a vocal style that was both instantly appealing and highly unusual. Critics were particularly taken by his improvisational dexterity, in particular his virtuosic ability to produce an array of vocalizations ranging from delicious nonsense to clicks and growls to sounds. Although he made his initial mark in the jazz world, Mr. Jarreau’s style, and his audience, crossed stylistic barriers. His music incorporated elements of pop, soul, gospel, Latin and other genres. It was a mark of his eclecticism that he won six Grammys across three different categories: jazz, pop and RB. He was also among the performers on a children’s album, “In Harmony: A Sesame Street Record. ” If Mr. Jarreau’s highly accessible, intensely personal style defied easy classification, that very accessibility — and, perhaps, the mere fact of his considerable commercial success — left some jazz purists skeptical. Reviewing a concert by Mr. Jarreau at the Savoy in New York in 1981, Stephen Holden of The New York Times encapsulated what many saw as both the pros and the cons of Mr. Jarreau’s singular style: “Al Jarreau may be the most technically gifted singer working in today,” Mr. Holden wrote. Of the evening’s performance, however, he continued: “Mr. Jarreau’s concert lacked the emotional range of great jazz. He is such a prodigious talent that the absence of even the slightest blues inflections kept his music from cutting deeply. ” But critics’ reservations never deterred Mr. Jarreau, who prided himself, as he told The Los Angeles Times in 1986, on his “jazz attitude,” which he defined as “the idea of being open to each and every moment as a chance to create something different. ” “I try to be receptive,” he added, “and to be listening, and to not be afraid to try something new. ” Alwin Lopez Jarreau was born in Milwaukee on March 12, 1940, into a musical family. His father, a minister, was a fine singer his mother played the piano in church. Young Al began singing at 4, harmonizing with his siblings. As a youth he sang in church, as well as with harmony groups and local jazz bands. Mr. Jarreau earned a bachelor’s degree in psychology from Ripon College in Wisconsin in 1962, and a master’s in vocational rehabilitation from the University of Iowa in 1964. Afterward he moved to San Francisco, where he worked as a rehabilitation counselor for people with disabilities. But Mr. Jarreau found he could not resist the pull of jazz and before long was singing in local nightclubs. By the late ’60s, he had quit his day job and embarked on a nightclub career, first on the West Coast and eventually in New York. He reached a national audience with the album “We Got By,” released by Warner Bros. in 1975 to critical praise and commercial success. Though advertised as his debut, it was actually his second album. A decade earlier, Mr. Jarreau had quietly recorded an album, later released on the Bainbridge label under the title “1965. ” Though Mr. Jarreau took legal action, without success, to block its belated release in 1982, it is esteemed by jazz connoisseurs today. Appearances on “Saturday Night Live” and other television shows raised his profile, as did extensive touring. In 1981 he had his biggest hit with the song “We’re in This Love Together,” which reached No. 15 on the Billboard pop singles chart. He won his first Grammy in 1978, for best jazz vocal performance, for his album “Look to the Rainbow. ” He won his last in 2007, for best traditional RB vocal performance the award was shared by Mr. Jarreau, George Benson and Jill Scott for their collaborative performance “God Bless the Child. ” In between, in 1982, Mr. Jarreau earned a Grammy for best pop vocal performance by a male artist for the title track of his album “Breakin’ Away. ” That year, he also received the Grammy for best jazz vocal performance by a male artist, for his version of Dave Brubeck’s “Blue Rondo à la Turk,” from the same album. His other Grammys came in 1979 for the album “All Fly Home” (in the jazz category) and in 1993 for the album “Heaven and Earth” (in RB). A seventh Grammy came in 1981 for “In Harmony: A Sesame Street Record,” a compilation children’s album that featured a range of artists. Among Mr. Jarreau’s recordings was the theme song for the television series “Moonlighting,” for which he wrote the lyrics to Lee Holdridge’s music. He appeared on Broadway as a replacement in the role of the Teen Angel in the 1994 revival of “Grease. ” Mr. Jarreau’s first marriage, to Phyllis Hall, ended in divorce. He is survived by his wife, the former Susan Player a son, Ryan two brothers, Marshall and Appie and a sister, Rose Marie Freeman. Mr. Jarreau canceled a number of concert dates in 2010 after experiencing heart and breathing problems during a European tour. He was hospitalized for 11 days but resumed his touring schedule after his release, and had continued to perform until recently. Shortly after his 2010 hospitalization, he said in an interview that his health problems had not been as serious as reports suggested, but joked that he appreciated the attention they received in the media because it proved that he was a celebrity. “I figured,” he said, “ ‘Yeah, maybe I have arrived.’ ” | 1 |
Two days before the snowstorm that was supposed to be a blizzard (but wasn’t quite) I decided to get serious. I went to the supermarket to stock up on paper towels and cookies and the concoction that is the only coffee drink I can stomach. I went to the butcher and bought a thick sirloin that I would go on to woefully torture on the stove top. And I went to Sleepy Jones, to pick out pajamas. Let’s start with this: I abhor pajamas. I abhor most forms of casual attire, even in the most casual of settings. I didn’t buy sweatpants until about two years ago, not because demathleisureboyz. net told me to, but because I thought I might one day see the inside of a gym and hoped to pass for a native. (I have I don’t.) I wear them around the house, too, but I don’t want to be seen in them. If I wear them to the trash chute, I walk quickly. As for pajamas, I’ve had a few. Two, actually, in my adult life. One, a pair I bought in London when it seemed culturally appropriate and chic the other, by Burberry, a gift. I had spells of wearing both, but they passed quickly. Working from home — writing from home — is close enough to subsidized indolence that you don’t need a sartorial reminder of just how little you’re accomplishing. Besides, being home is a prize all of its own. You get to keep the worst of the world, and most of the rest of it, at bay. But the house no longer feels like such a safe space. There are CNN and all the other news channels on my TV, alerts from The New York Times and The Washington Post on my phone screen. Anxiety is persistent. Even “Fixer Upper” barely helps. Pajamas, I recently reasoned, might be the only hope for sanity. In the store, the two clerks wore full sets, top and bottom, with some accessories atop them so no one got too cozy. They seemed to promise that, yes, you could wear pajamas and get things done — maybe not everything, but some things, and certainly that would be enough. I didn’t come to Sleepy Jones to be sensible, though. That seemed besides the point. I think I was hoping for neon stripes, a rich paisley, a garish gingham — something that would connote relaxation even from space. Allowing yourself space to relax is a herculean task. Pajamas, I was positing, would make it an irresistible one, too. The choices here were basic, though. Friendly and nonjudgmental. Ice blue and white, or a nongarish gingham, or one particularly dizzying plaid. (Pants ranged from $128 to $158 tops from $138 to $178.) Sleepy Jones is part of the Andy Spade ecosystem, which is why, in these pajamas, you don’t look like Julian Schnabel so much as a fastidious finance executive who packs thoroughly for a pond jumper trip to Brussels. In the spirit of the place, and also of possible soothing, I tried on several sets. They were fine. It turns out it is hard to exult about pajamas — simple ones, at least — especially in a store where the staff is enthusiastically curious about how your pajamas look. (Buddy, I’m buying pajamas because I don’t want to be seen, not because they unleash my inner conversationalist.) Pajamas also have limitations, which Sleepy Jones, a jovial place, addresses by offering items that are related in tone: underwear, some pencils, fragrant soaps ($14) that had the names of other clothing items (loafer, navy blazer) in generic fonts ($48) zines filled with strange things said by the son of a friend of the brand ($10). I decided to buy a pair of simple gingham pants. It was both an experiment and a symbol of naïve hope. Sweatpants, I’d come to realize, never felt formal. Pajama pants might allow a dash of seriousness to temper my relaxation. It wasn’t to be. When I got home and pulled the pants out of the bag, the white tissue paper they were wrapped in was sealed with a small circular sticker that read, “Finish nothing today. ” I’m certain whoever came up with that felt it would reinforce my decision to tap out, but the longer I looked at it, the more it began to feel nihilistic. Finish nothing? I had, like, five deadlines. I bought pajamas because I wanted everything around me to telegraph calm so that my brain and fingers could be free to roam. I’m not lazy, I’m overstimulated. Still, I held out hope that a life could also be a productive one. A day or so later, when the snow came, I gamely put the pants on. An hour later, it was back to the sweatpants. An hour after that, jeans. | 1 |
Comments
In this hilarious clip, late night talk-show host Seth Meyers discusses the difficulty that many Americans seem to be feeling about choosing between the two candidates on election night 2016 – Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, or Republican nominee Donald Trump.
Meyers does a detailed breakdown that presents the pros and cons of each candidate and details exactly what they have to offer the American people – and it’s spot on.
I think we can all agree there’s only one choice this Tuesday.
Watch it here: | 0 |
Waking Times
The months long Dakota Access Keystone XL pipleine protest at the Standing Rock Indian Reservation by Native Americans and those sympathetic to protection of our water supply has been met with heavy-handed and brutal clamp down by police and national guard. Militarized goons in battle dress have stormed protector camps with LRAD sonic weapons, attack dogs , tear gas, tazers , and even live ammunition ( killing horses ), while politicians and mainstream media do their best to ignore this growing atrocity, hoping to wait it out until the protestors give up.
But, as the saying goes, Water Is Life , and the issue of life and death is at the root of this protection movement, therefore, for people concerned with life, giving up on this is simply unthinkable. The root issue justifying state oppression of the protest is capitalism, and the perception that money is more important than life itself. When the police and national guard attack U.S. citizens on private property to protect corporate interests, who are they really working for?
The corporate dream of the Keystone XL pipeline is to create a profit stream for a small number of people at the expense of the natural world and anyone in the way. At the top of this pyramid of profit is Texas billionaire Kelcy Warren, CEO of Energy Transfer Partners, the company responsible for the project.
So who is Kelcy Warren?
A native of East Texas and graduate of the University of Texas at Arlington with a degree in civil engineering, Warren worked in the natural gas industry and became co-chair of Energy Transfer Equity in 2007. With business partner Ray Davis, co-owner of the Texas Rangers baseball team, Warren built Energy Transfer Equity into one of the nation’s largest pipeline companies, which now owns about 71,000 miles of pipelines carrying natural gas, natural gas liquids, refined products and crude oil. The company’s holdings include Sunoco, Southern Union and Regency Energy Partners.
Forbes estimates the 60-year-old Warren’s personal wealth at $4 billion. Bloomberg described him as “among America’s new shale tycoons” — but rather than building a fortune by drilling he “takes the stuff others pull from underground and moves it from one place to another, chilling, boiling, pressurizing, and processing it until it’s worth more than when it burst from the wellhead.” [ Source ]
Shockingly, in 2015 the governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, appointed Warren to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission which is an insult to environmentalists working to protect Big Bend National Park and surrounding sacred tribal lands from another $770 million pipeline project .
“According to the governor’s office, the state parks and wildlife commission “manages and conserves the natural and cultural resources of Texas,” along with ensuring the future of hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation opportunities for Texans.” [ Source ]
This glaring conflict of interest has inspired Environmental Science major at UTSA and former Texas State Park Ambassador Andrew Lucas to begin a drive to have Warren removed from this environmental post. His petition is described here :
Most people may know Kelcy Warren as the man behind the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline. The Dallas-based billionaire and CEO of Energy Transfer Partners has been making headlines for fast-tracking a 1100 mile crude oil pipeline across the Midwest and under the Missouri River, just north of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. No environmental impact assessment, no respect for cultural sites, and no regard for the local and widespread communities living along the river. A similar story is unfolding out in West Texas, where Warren’s company has split through the pristine Big Bend region with the 200 mile Comanche Trail Pipeline and nearly-complete 143 mile Trans Pecos Pipeline. These Pipelines mark the way for massive natural gas and oil developments in the Trans Pecos region.
With untold damages unfolding for cultural and environmental resources at the hands of Energy Transfer Partners, it would surprise most to know that nearly a year ago, Texas Governor Greg Abbott appointed Kelcy Warren for a 6 year term as 1 of the 10 commissioners who preside over Texas Parks And Wildlife… Why? Probably the $550,000 in campaign contributions Abbott received from Warren.
Footage of militarized police using the Long Range Acoustic Device ( LRAD ) crowd control weapon against protectors at standing rock on October 27th, 2016: Final Thoughts
Warren is listed as number 150 on Forbes list of wealthiest Americans with an estimated net worth of $4.2 billion in September of 2016. He is the head of the Dakota Access Pipeline snake.
If you are scratching your head wondering why militarized police and private security contractors are beating, gassing and attacking peaceful resistors, including women, children and the elderly, the answer is, they are doing it to protect the interests of Kelcy Warren and others invested in this pipeline project. Read more articles by Isaac Davis . About the Author
Isaac Davis is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com and OffgridOutpost.com Survival Tips blog. He is an outspoken advocate of liberty and of a voluntary society. He is an avid reader of history and passionate about becoming self-sufficient to break free of the control matrix. Follow him on Facebook, here . This article ( This is the Man Militarized Police at Standing Rock are Working For and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Isaac Davis and WakingTimes.com . It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement. | 0 |
Image: Bin im Garten, Creative Commons
This article was written by Tyler Durden and originally published at Zero Hedge .
Editor’s Comment: The entire campaign season was composed of stories about how Trump couldn’t win, about the derogatory comments he has made, and the terror he would bring. But their lopsided attacks against Trump, and their continuing praise of nothing-but-Hillary was completely wrong in every way… the epitome of “fake news.”
And President-elect Trump reportedly let the media hear his mind… interesting account of this off-the-record meeting.
Trump “Exploded” At Media Execs During Off-The-Record Meeting: “It Was A F–king Firing Squad”
by Tyler Durden
Earlier today we reported that in a “summit” organized by Trump’s campaign manager Kellyanne Conway, executives and anchors from the major US media outlets, including CNN president Jeff Zucker, ABC News president James Goldston, Fox News co-presidents Bill Shine and Jack Abernethy, and NBC News president Deborah Turness, visited Donald Trump at his Trump Tower penthouse for an off the record meeting.
Courtesy of the Post, we have a complete list of the participants at the Trump media meeting: the hour-long powwow included top execs from network and cable news channels. Among the attendees were NBC’s Deborah Turness, Lester Holt and Chuck Todd, ABC’s James Goldston, George Stephanopoulos, David Muir and Martha Raddatz, CBS’ Norah O’Donnell John Dickerson, Charlie Rose, Christopher Isham and Gayle King, Fox News’ Bill Shine, Jack Abernethy, Jay Wallace, Suzanne Scott, MSNBC’s Phil Griffin and CNN’s Jeff Zucker and Erin Burnett.
The contents of what was discussed were initially unclear.
Now, according to the Post and Politico , we learn that the President-elect “ exploded at media bigs in an off-the-record Trump Tower powow on Monday .”
“ It was like a f—ing firing squad ,” one source told the Post.
According to the Post’s recound of the conversation, “ Trump started with Jeff Zucker and said I hate your network, everyone at CNN is a liar and you should be ashamed ….”
Jeff Zucker (left)
“The meeting was a total disaster . The TV execs and anchors went in there thinking they would be discussing the access they would get to the Trump administration, but instead they got a Trump-style dressing down,” the source added. A second source confirmed the encounter.
The Post adds that “the meeting took place in a big board room and there were about 30 or 40 people, including the big news anchors from all the networks…”
“Trump kept saying, ‘ We’re in a room of liars, the deceitful dishonest media who got it all wrong. He addressed everyone in the room calling the media dishonest, deceitful liars. He called out Jeff Zucker by name and said everyone at CNN was a liar, and CNN was network of liars .
“Trump didn’t say Katy Tur by name, but talked about an NBC female correspondent who got it wrong, then he referred to a horrible network correspondent who cried when Hillary lost who hosted a debate – which was Martha Raddatz who was also in the room.
“Gayle did not stand up, but asked some question, ‘How do you propose we the media work with you?’ Chuck Todd asked some pretty pointed questions. David Muir asked how are you going to cope living in DC while your family is in NYC? It was a horrible meeting.”
Politico adds further details, according to which “Trump complained about photos of himself that NBC used that he found unflattering, the source said. Trump turned to NBC News President Deborah Turness at one point, the source said, and told her the network won’t run a nice picture of him, instead choosing “this picture of me,” as he made a face with a double chin. Turness replied that they had a “very nice” picture of him on their website at the moment.”
Amusingly, since the meeting was off the record, meaning the participants agreed not to talk about the substance of the conversations, it means they will most likely be unable to confirm or deny the Post’s report.
Politco’s recollection of events was slightly less dramatic:
The New York Post on Monday afternoon portrayed a much more heated meeting, including a quote from one source who said the encounter was “like a f–ing firing squad.” The Post also said Trump called CNN journalists “liars” and that they should be “ashamed.” The source who spoke with POLITICO characterized the meeting as less intense, and said the discussion included Trump expressing the possibility of a “reset” of the tumultuous relationship between the president-elect and the media and that all he wants is “fairness.”
Asked how he defines fairness by a network executive, Trump said simply, “The truth.” But aside from the few moments of contention in the beginning, the source said the meeting was largely substantive.
Politico also adds that Trump, flanked by chief of staff Reince Priebus and campaign manager Kellyanne Conway at the table, also expressed annoyance at the protective press pool and the complaints over him ditching the press when he went out to dinner last week with his family after reporters were advised he was in for the night. But Priebus assured the attendees that the protective press pool will be taken care of and it would all work out.
Other attendees at the meeting from Trump’s team included chief strategist Stephen Bannon, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, spokesman Jason Miller, and Republican National Committee chief strategist and communications director Sean Spicer.
Asked for comment, Miller referred POLITICO to Conway’s comments to reporters after the meeting, in which she echoed the sentiments made in the meeting about turning over a new leaf with the media.
“There was no need to mend fences,” Conway said. “It was very cordial, very genial. But it was very candid and very honest. From my own perspective, it’s great to hit the reset button.”
Conway later on Monday hit back at the New York Post report. “He did not explode in anger,” she said.
While one can have a subjective interpretuation of the nuances at the meeting, one thing was clear: Trump’s attempt at a ‘reset’ will be frowned at by the media which is not used to this kind of treatment, even if the “kindler, gentler” version of events as reported by Politico is accurate.
It also means that what has already been a conventional war between the various US media organizations and Trump, is likely about to go nuclear.
This article was written by Tyler Durden and originally published at Zero Hedge . | 0 |
PITTSBURGH — Federal intervention to curb police abuse did not begin after chants of “I can’t breathe,” viral cellphone videos or the Black Lives Matter movement. It began 21 years ago here in Pittsburgh, where the police were laden with complaints that black residents were routinely singled out for false arrest and abuse. In a City Hall conference room, Chief Robert McNeilly faced a team of lawyers from the Justice Department — young, smartly dressed and newly empowered to rein in the department. Sizing up the investigators, Chief McNeilly — dressed, as usual, in uniform — had one thought he could not get out of his mind: “There was nobody with any police experience. ” Still, the negotiators groped their way to the first federal “consent decree,” an agreement in 1997 that turned Pittsburgh into a widely emulated model department — for a time, at least. Since then, there have been consent decrees in 19 other cities, from little Steubenville, Ohio, and Ferguson, Mo. to Los Angeles, Seattle and, as of Friday, Baltimore. Though widely regarded as a net positive, consent decrees, based on a 1994 statute that gave the federal attorney general the authority to combat systemic constitutional violations, have had varying degrees of success and have fallen in and out of favor, buffeted by political winds. They were pioneered by President Bill Clinton’s Justice Department, largely rejected by President George W. Bush and vigorously revived by the Obama administration. Now, under President Trump, their future is in doubt. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has ordered a review of all federal interventions in law enforcement agencies and tried to delay Baltimore’s new decree. To revisit the very first police consent decree is to examine a microcosm of the agreements’ potential, and their limitations. Many of the issues, including poor training, racial bias, union opposition and the high cost to carry out the decree, could have been plucked from last week’s headlines. Under its decree, Pittsburgh curtailed strip searches, began documenting traffic stops, gave officers “cultural diversity” training and tracked civilian complaints. But from the outset, the police union balked, warning of “more shootings, more drugs” and a spike in crime. Four years after the consent decree ended in 2002, a new mayor, elected with union backing, took office and promptly dismissed Chief McNeilly. (The former chief says he retired voluntarily.) Over time, various aspects of the consent decree fell out of use. One of Chief McNeilly’s successors went to prison during a corruption scandal. “The only realistic way to look at this is that it did not stick,” said David Harris, a University of Pittsburgh law professor who has written extensively about police reform and who studied the Pittsburgh experience. In 1991, long before cellphone videos, there was Rodney King, an unarmed black man whose beating by four Los Angeles police officers was captured in grainy television footage. The episode led to widespread public outrage and congressional hearings on how to address police misconduct. A tiny provision, known as Section 14141, was inserted into a crime bill signed into law by Mr. Clinton in 1994. The attorney general was authorized to investigate and sue to eliminate any “pattern or practice” of unconstitutional conduct by law enforcement officers. In the Justice Department, civil rights lawyers wrestled with how, and where, to exercise their new authority. In Pittsburgh, lawyers had been collecting civilian complaints and learned that over 20 years, only one police officer had been disciplined — one who had an altercation with a black man who happened to be the deputy city solicitor. In 1995, Pittsburgh had its own Rodney King — Jonny Gammage, a black businessman and cousin of a lineman for the Pittsburgh Steelers, who died of asphyxiation during a struggle with white police officers in the suburbs. Though his death did not involve the Pittsburgh police, it galvanized blacks and whites here to work together, said Tim Stevens, the president of the local chapter of the N. A. A. C. P. at the time. In March 1996, Witold Walczak, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, learned about Section 14141 while preparing a suit against the Pittsburgh police. He called the Justice Department and offered up his documents, which led to the federal investigation. The city was offered the chance to avoid a federal lawsuit if it agreed to make certain changes — a consent decree. Though Section 14141 was envisioned as a way to force change, Chief McNeilly, who was new to the job and had been brought on for that very purpose, did not resist. “When the D. O. J. came in, I pulled out my list and said, ‘These are the things I would do — ethics training, diversity training, communications training for every officer,’” Chief McNeilly said. Also on his list: computers, which the Justice Department ultimately required the city to buy. “Pittsburgh could very well have been stuck in the ’60s with no computers if it hadn’t had a consent decree,” he said. The Justice Department had a list of demands — for instance, that every passenger’s race and sex be recorded during traffic stops. Chief McNeilly protested, questioning the practicality and legality of such a requirement. In the end, only the driver’s information was tracked. The Justice Department also required an “early warning system,” opposed by the union, that would flag officers prone to using force. “Bob McNeilly was like a test pilot in the Mercury flight program,” said Chuck Wexler, the president of the Police Executive Research Forum, a group of law enforcement professionals. “No one knew what an ‘early warning system’ was, how to build it or what to measure. ” By 2002, when the Pittsburgh decree expired, the department was considered a model of progressive policing. By then, Mr. Bush was in the White House, having campaigned on a promise not to meddle with the local police. His attorney general, John Ashcroft, told law enforcement executives that “he did not want the federal government managing local police departments. ” Years later, Mr. Trump and Mr. Sessions would strike the same chords. “These lawsuits undermine the respect for police officers,” Mr. Sessions said at his confirmation hearing. Mr. Bush preferred voluntary arrangements, known as memorandums of agreement. Cleveland, Miami and New Orleans were all investigated by the Justice Department, but none were required to enter into consent decrees. All three were reinvestigated by the Obama administration. President Barack Obama’s first civil rights division chief, Thomas Perez, came in determined to build on the work of the Clinton administration and consent decrees like that in Los Angeles, which had been hailed as a success in a Harvard study. But Mr. Perez’s style drew the ire of union leaders, including James O. Pasco Jr. the national president of the Fraternal Order of Police. In an interview, Mr. Pasco accused Mr. Perez of waging “a virtual jihad against police officers. ” Christy Lopez, a former Justice Department lawyer who worked on police abuse investigations during the Clinton and Obama administrations, said of Mr. Perez: “He represented a shift, and it was very hard for police officers. He was telling them things that no one really had the nerve to tell them before. ” Mr. Perez’s successor, Vanita Gupta, sought to mend fences, but by then, many union leaders say, the relationship had been poisoned. The Fraternal Order of Police, which was founded in 1915 by two Pittsburgh police officers and now has a membership of well over 300, 000 nationwide, has backed presidential candidates of both major political parties over the years but declined to choose between Mr. Obama and his Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, in 2012. In 2016, the organization backed Mr. Trump. investigative reports were filled with vivid anecdotes and statistics: a homeless man shot with a stun gun for refusing to leave a bus stop a victim who was told that it was “probably just a drunken night and a mistake” a city where blacks were more than twice as likely as whites to be accused of “milling” or “loitering. ” The consent decrees grew longer and more detailed, and included metrics and public reports. Instead of simply reviewing documents, Justice Department investigators included the views of officers, union leaders and community advocates in an attempt to make changes last. “In the end, a city completes a consent decree, then the judge goes away, the monitor goes away,” said Samuel Walker, an expert on police accountability. “All cities are on their own, and then it’s dependent on the local community and local politics. ” In 2010, Jordan Miles, 18, an honor student here, was badly beaten by police officers. Suddenly, Pittsburgh was thrown back into its past. Local news media outlets later reported that between 2010 and 2015, the city had used $4. 9 million in tax money to settle more than 28 civil lawsuits against the police. Despite the backsliding, Mr. Stevens, the civil rights leader, said the consent decree had had lasting “ripple effects” in Pittsburgh. The city’s recently retired police chief, who left after just two years, pushed hard to improve relations with black residents, and the new chief is also talking about police reform. But Mr. Stevens is worried that what he is hearing from Washington will cause the ripples to subside. So are officials in Chicago and Baltimore, who, in a sign of how some cities have come to embrace federal intervention, have objected to a retreat from police overhauls. The Baltimore police commissioner, Kevin Davis, called the Justice Department’s effort to delay the agreement “a punch in the gut. ” Chief McNeilly and his wife, a former police commander, now consult with departments seeking to improve and see the federal government as a powerful ally. “To suggest that there aren’t police departments out there that need massive help is naïve,” he said. “You’ve got some of the smartest, best, most experienced attorneys in D. C. and it’s all going to be for naught. ” | 1 |
Stupid Stuff, Late-2016 Edition by Sprott Money - Oct 26, 2016 11:03 AM
Debts implode, stocks plunge, economies contract, financial assets fall out of favor, and real things start attracting capital. And the people who caused the mess go quiet for a while. by williambanzai7 - Oct 26, 2016 10:39 AM
War is Peace... Bullion Banks "pass the parcel" on El Salvador’s Gold Reserves by BullionStar - Oct 26, 2016 12:30 AM
Gold lending by central banks to bullion banks is one of the most opaque areas of the gold market. Bank of England Asks UK Banks To Detail Their Exposure To Deutsche And Italian Banks Oct 26, 2016 2:13 PM 0 SHARES
In what may or may not be a coincidence, just hours after Bloomberg reported that DB launched a probe into whether it "misstated" derivatives, moments ago the FT reported that the Bank of England is seeking details from large British banks on their current exposure to Deutsche Bank and some of the biggest Italian banks, including Monte dei Paschi , "amid mounting market jitters over the health of Europe’s financial sector."
The FT notes that the request was made in recent weeks by the BoE’s Prudential Regulation Authority as investors sold off Deutsche and Monte dei Paschi, both of which have been the subject of scrutiny over their capital levels. Supervisors worldwide have attempted to curtail the links between large institutions since the 2008 banking crisis, when the collapse of Lehman Brothers and other big groups threatened to drag down the entire global financial system.
While the PRA regularly speaks to banks about their exposures, particularly to any lender that might be facing difficulty, the BoE’s recent intervention is a sign of continued nervousness among regulators that the interconnectedness of Europe’s largest banks could harm otherwise healthy groups if one of the weakest links were to fall into crisis.
Som more details:
Normally, exposures to other financial institutions are not disclosed to regulators unless they are particularly large or as part of annual stress tests. That forced the BoE to ask for the latest snapshot of the big UK banks’ exposures to their German and Italian rivals as those groups came under market attack. Banks can be exposed to one another directly through lending or derivatives but indirect exposures — such as lending to a counterparty of a bank in trouble — also need to be considered.
Global rules cap the amount that one bank can hold in another to 25 per cent of the first bank’s capital, while anything above 10 per cent must be disclosed to regulators. Smaller holdings are therefore harder for supervisors to spot.
Paul Sharma, a former PRA official now a consultant at Alvarez & Marsal, said large UK banks were now able to monitor their direct exposure to troubled banks on a “near real-time” basis but that market turmoil could complicate the picture.
The FT also writes that British regulators are particularly anxious about the impact of litigation costs on Deutsche’s already weak profitability and that large piles of non-performing loans could have a similarly corrosive impact on Italian banks .
As we pointed out earlier, Germany’s biggest bank still faces serious doubts on whether it will need to raise billions of euros of extra capital and slash costs drastically to strengthen its balance sheet and boost profits. Among the entities rumored to provide backstop capital are various middle-eastern funds as well as rumored Chinese investors.
Normally, similar reports of heightened regulatory scrutiny would lead to a brike selling in any named bank; however perhaps because Deutsche Bank has already been through hell and back over the past few months, this latest news will hardly come as a shock to investors.
Meanwhile, Deutsche Bank is set to announce earnings tomorrow, in which it is expected to announce a lower net loss of around €610 million, versus a massive €6 billion loss one year ago, much of which stemmed from write-downs on investment-banking and other assets. At this time last year, Deutsche Bank was kicking off its new, multi-year overhaul under Chief Executive John Cryan. This quarter's loss is expected to be largely due to another large major litigation provision ahead of a potential settlement with the DoJ. Analysts are split on precisely how much the bank will set aside, but their forecasts range from €250m to €1.5bn according to a consensus report compiled by the bank. Analysts also expect third-quarter revenues to be €7.1 billion, according to a consensus of 17 analysts' estimates compiled by the bank. That compares with €7.3 billion a year ago.
Prolonged uncertainty around Deutsche Bank's capital position-exacerbated by the litigation questions--have fueled persistent questions about whether the lender might be forced to sell shares, shed businesses it has planned to keep, or accelerate cost-cutting plans.
Keys to Deutsche Bank's plans for building its capital cushion include divesting its German retail-banking division called Postbank. That plan has proved more difficult than expected, and investors want to know the latest-especially if executives have changed their minds. Investors will also want to know when the bank is going to see the cash it is expecting from selling its roughly 20% stake in Chinese bank Hua Xia. The roughly $4 billion deal was announced in December 2015, but the proceeds have taken longer to arrive than executives expected.
Meanwhile, in an attempt to cut costs, DB has undergone on a major layoff spree and, as reported yesterday, is considering paying banker bonuses in compensation other than cash. | 0 |
By: The Voice of Reason | In recent weeks, a common theme that has run through the vast majority of the stories I’ve covered, has been for people to make sure they are preparing for the possibility of a major emergency. Why? First and foremost, because it was only back in May when President Obama took time out of his extremely busy schedule to deliver an address at the FEMA National Response Coordination Center in Washington where he made a point to stress that Americans who are not preparing for disaster, or who do not have emergency evacuation plans for any given scenario, could find themselves in big trouble in the near future. The following excerpt from Obama’s speech comes directly from the official White House website … “One of the things that we have learned over the course of the last seven and a half years is that government plays a vital role, but it is every citizen’s responsibility to be prepared for a disaster. And that means taking proactive steps, like having an evacuation plan, having a fully stocked disaster supply kit. If your local authorities ask you to evacuate, you have to do it. Don’t wait.” That’s the biggest reason why. Second, all one has to do is look around at our surroundings to see that right now the “perfect storm” of pure chaos is brewing all around us. As our allies in Berlin who have nuclear missiles pointed in their direction by the Russians can attest to, Geopolitical tensions are sky right now. German leaders, along with leaders in the Czeck Republic have issued warnings to their people to begin stockpiling food and emergency supplies in case of what could be an “existence threatening event.” Not helping matters geopolitically is the fact that the entire financial banking system of the West which includes the U.S. Dollar as the World Reserve Currency was built as a debt-based monetary system, and now that the debt saturation process has run its full course, the global economy is on the verge of what is being called a “global reset,” which could occur at any moment. Lastly, here domestically the 2016 presidential election has gotten so divisive, that supporters from both political parties have vowed not to accept the winner if it’s not their candidate, and some groups have even promised the largest civil uprising in our nation’s history if the election doesn’t go their way. If that was all that was in the news, it would be enough to put anyone on edge. What I talk about in the video below, is a recent article from earlier this week from The Daily Caller . In that article, among other things, it reports that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford has had to issue a reminder/warning to the troops to stay committed to their oaths, as well as the chain of command in the coming weeks. In light of everything I’ve been warning people of, this recent report is most troubling… The Daily Caller Reports: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford wrote a Medium blog post Monday to remain committed to its military oath amid the 2016 election. “What we must collectively guard against is allowing our institution to become politicized, or even perceived as being politicized, by how we conduct ourselves during engagements with the media, the public, or in open or social forums,” Dunford reminded troops. Dunford further urged service members that the military must remain committed to the chain of command structure until the next administration comes in, and that the military should not undermine its credibility in the interim with the next president. “I have a duty to protect the integrity and political neutrality of our military profession,” he continued. Dunford’s comments also come amid increased concern that the U.S. military is becoming too politicized. He is reportedly furious with Retired Marine Gen. John Allen and Retired Army Gen. Michael Flynn for actively campaigning on behalf of the Democratic and Republican presidential nominees. Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey openly rebuked Allen and Flynn for injecting themselves into the political process. “The American people should not wonder where their military leaders draw the line between military advice and political preference,” he lamented in a letter to The Washington Post. He continued “our nation’s soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines should not wonder about the political leanings and motivations of their leaders.” The letter is also likely addressing recent political statements by active duty service members on social media. A female sailor posted a video of herself sitting through morning colors in protest of supposed racism in the national anthem in August. The protest video was inspired by 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick. THE VOICE OF REASON is the pen name of Michael DePinto, a graduate of Capital University Law School, and an attorney in Florida. Having worked in the World Trade Center, along with other family and friends, Michael was baptized by fire into the world of politics on September 11, 2001. Michael’s political journey began with tuning in religiously to whatever the talking heads on television had to say, then Michael became a “Tea-Bagging” activist as his liberal friends on the Left would say, volunteering within the Jacksonville local Tea Party, and most recently Michael was sworn in as an attorney. Today, Michael is a major contributor to www.BeforeItsNews.com , he owns and operates www.thelastgreatstand.com , where Michael provides what is often very ‘colorful’ political commentary, ripe with sarcasm, no doubt the result of Michael’s frustration as he feels we are witnessing the end of the American Empire. The topics Michael most often weighs in on are: Martial Law, FEMA Camps, Jade Helm, Economic Issues, Government Corruption, and Government Conspiracy. Submit your review | 0 |
Print
Although members of Congress are now absolutely outraged the Pentagon is trying to recoup bonuses given out to thousands of troops, it turns out, Congress actually knew about this problem for at least two years.
Andreas Mueller, chief of federal policy for the California National Guard, wrote an email to the California congressional delegation, stating the Guard told members of Congress about the bonus reclamation issue two years ago, The Los Angeles Times reports.
In fact, Mueller noted that the Guard had even offered a solution, but Congress took zero action.
In effect, the scandal stems back to about a decade when the National Guard was called upon to supply more troops. Guard officials were only supposed to give out bonuses to high-value positions like intelligence or civil affairs, to incentivize more soldiers to head to Iraq and Afghanistan during a marked troop shortage. But that rule was ignored and thousands of soldiers received bonuses they weren’t actually supposed to, unbeknownst to them.
Now, the Pentagon wants those bonuses back and with interest.
Since the story first broke Saturday, members of Congress have declared how abhorrent it is for veterans to be targeted with tax liens and wage garnishment for refusing to pay back these bonuses. GOP Rep. Duncan Hunter, a Marine Corps reservist, wrote a letter to Secretary of Defense Ash Carter on Sunday, asking for him to get involved as to find a solution to this “boneheaded” decision .
On the other side of the aisle, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi sent House Speaker Paul Ryan a letter Monday arguing that as soon as Congress gets back in session, members should immediately pass legislation to halt the Pentagon’s collection efforts.
Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer also wrote a letter to Carter, insisting that he had the power to simply forgive the debts without any action from Congress.
“Thousands of our service members are paying the price for mistakes made by California National Guard managers, some of whom are now serving jail time or paying restitution for their crimes,” Feinstein and Boxer said . “It is outrageous to hold these service members and their families responsible for the illegal behavior of others.”
But in the meantime, the California Guard certainly does not have the legal power to forgive debts, however much it might want to do so.
Article reposted with permission from The Daily Caller shares | 0 |
Popcorn munching. Soup slurping. Nose sniffling. Or, simply, breathing. Ever wonder why some ordinary sounds drive you crazy? It’s called misophonia, a mysterious affliction in which seemingly harmless sounds unleash anger, anxiety and, in some cases, panic attacks in some people. If you’re one of them, neuroscientists at Newcastle University in Britain say they may have found an explanation for what ails you. In a report on the latest study published Thursday in the journal Current Biology, the neuroscientists say that brain scans of misophonia sufferers show that particular sounds, like eating and drinking, cause the part of their brain that processes emotions, the anterior insular cortex, to go into overdrive. That region in sufferers was also connected differently, compared to normal brains, to the amygdala and the hippocampus, areas that are involved in recalling past experiences, said Dr. Sukhbinder Kumar, the lead researcher from the Institute of Neuroscience at Newcastle University. “We think that misophonia may be heavily connected to recalling past memories, because people with misophonia have had very bad experiences,” he said in a phone interview Friday. The research opens up the possibilities of future therapy for those afflicted with misophonia, a term coined by the American scientists Pawel and Margaret Jastreboff in 2001. A survey of nearly 200 misophonia sufferers showed that the average age at which they first became aware of the condition was 12, Dr. Kumar said. “When they hear these sounds, it’s like their attention is completely absorbed by the sounds, and they can’t do anything else,” he said. “They’re triggering a recall. ” For the study, the team used an M. R. I. to measure the brain activities of 42 people with and without misophonia while they were listening to a range of noises. The sounds were categorized into neutral ones like rain unpleasant sounds like a crying baby and trigger sounds that were mostly linked to eating, chewing, drinking and breathing. When exposed to the noises, those with misophonia showed brain activities different from those without the condition. “The most dominant reaction is anger and anxiety, not disgust,” Dr. Kumar said. But why those sounds, and not others, trigger such averse reactions remains a mystery, he said. The exact number of misophonia sufferers in the world is unknown, he said, because it was only recently diagnosed as a condition. The affliction can be so acute in some people that they can’t stand living with their own families. Olana 29, of Kent, England, was just 8 when family meals became a real chore. “The noise of my family eating forced me to retreat to my own bedroom for meals,” she told the team at Newcastle University. “I can only describe it as a feeling of wanting to punch people in the face when I heard the noise of them eating. ” Dr. Kumar said in a news release,“My hope is to identify the brain signature of the trigger sounds — those signatures can be used for treatment such as for for example, where people can their reactions by looking at what kind of brain activity is being produced. ” But the study’s findings will come as some relief to misophonia sufferers and reassure some who question the condition’s validity, he added. “This study demonstrates the critical brain changes as further evidence to convince a skeptical medical community that this is a genuine disorder. ” | 1 |
Two days after Madonna shared her wish to blow up the White House, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D. .) has not come out with a statement condemning the outrageous desire that the pop singer expressed in her address to Saturday’s Women’s March on Washington’s National Mall. [“Yes, I am outraged. Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House,” Madonna said to the cheers of tens of thousands of feminists and other opponents of President Donald J. Trump. Breitbart News sought comment from Warren with an office visit, in addition to emails and a phone message. After being given a window before posting, the senator’s office did not respond. A survey of Warren’s social media accounts and her official senate office website turned up no condemnation of Madonna’s threat of terrorism against the Executive Mansion. According to Gateway Pundit, the response of the Secret Service was different: A spokesman for the Secret Service told The Gateway Pundit the agency is aware of the comment by aging pop star Madonna made at a large liberal women’s protest against President Donald Trump held in Washington, D. C. Saturday, that she has “thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House. ” The spokesman said an investigation would be opened but that the decision to prosecute rests with the U. S. Attorney’s office. Sunday, the “Material Girl” songstress walked back her wish to blow up the White House in an exhaustive Instagram post: Yesterday’s Rally. was an amazing and beautiful experience. I came and performed Express Yourself and thats exactly what i did. However I want to clarify some very important things. I am not a violent person, I do not promote violence and it’s important people hear and understand my speech in it’s entirety rather than one phrase taken wildly out of context. My speech began with ” I want to start a revolution of love. ” ♥️ I then go on to take this opportunity to encourage women and all marginalized people to not fall into despair but rather to come together and use it as a starting point for unity and to create positive change in the world. Madonna said her plan to blow up the White House was a metaphor and she does not want to speak or act out of anger: “It was truly an honor to be part of an audience chanting “we choose love”. ♥️♥️♥️♥️ #revoltutionoflove♥️#revolutionoflove♥️***” | 1 |
Wednesday on MSNBC, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani defended Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and Breitbart News against network host Stephanie Ruhle’s charges of racism. Partial transcript as follows: RUHLE: I’ve also never seen the hate and the racism out of so many people who are saying we’re going to— GIULIANI: There’s no racism. RUHLE: You don’t think Breitbart News — GIULIANI: Breitbart News is not running for office. RUHLE: But Steven Bannon is the architect of Donald Trump’s campaign. What do you believe Breitbart represents? GIULIANI: Nobody runs Donald Trump’s campaign but Donald Trump. For all the stuff you’re throwing around, racist, the last thing in the world Donald Trump is a racist. I’ve known him for 28 years. The man likes white people, he likes black people, he likes Hispanic people, he plays golf with them. He opened up the first club in Palm Beach that allowed Jewish people, Italian people like me who couldn’t get into those clubs. RUHLE: Can you say that Steven Bannon doesn’t run his campaign? GIULIANI: Donald Trump runs Donald Trump’s campaign. RUHLE: What is he doing paying Steven Bannon? GIULIANI: There are a lot of people who do different things. | 0 |
When hearing of an establishment called the Black and Blue Steakhouse, one could reasonably surmise that some, or at the very least one, extremely tough person could be found somewhere in there. Well, the three terrorists who attacked London Bridge over the weekend found the Black and Blue Steakhouse, and they found the toughest man in the house. [Or, maybe more to the point, he found them. Roy Larner, 47, is a huge fan of the South East London soccer team Millwall F. C. The team is known as the Lions, and when terrorists entered the Black and Blue to kill innocent people, Larner let them know who is the true king of the jungle. After the terrorists entered, with obvious bad intentions, Larner sprang into action: “Like an idiot I shouted back at them. I thought, ‘I need to take the p*** out of these b*****s.’ “I took a few steps towards them and said, ‘F*** you, I’m Millwall.’ So they started attacking me. “I stood in front of them trying to fight them off. Everyone else ran to the back. I was on my own against all three of them, that’s why I got hurt so much. It was just me, trying to grab them with my bare hands and hold on. I was swinging. “I got stabbed and sliced eight times. They got me in my head, chest and both hands. There was blood everywhere. “They were saying, ‘Islam, Islam!’ I said again, ‘F*** you, I’m Millwall!’ “It was the worst thing I could have done as they carried on attacking me. “Luckily, none of the blows were straight at me or I’d be dead. ” A petition has begun, with the aim of awarding Larner with the George Cross for bravery. The award is the second highest commendation granted by Great Britain. Looking at his scars, it’s really hard to imagine that he won’t get it. If Millwall is looking for a new slogan, they may have found it. “F*** you, I’m Millwall!” has a nice ring to it. Follow Dylan Gwinn on Twitter: @themightygwinn | 1 |
الجيش اليمني يهاجم قوات الحوثيين في محافظة مأرب
تاريخ النشر: 26.10.2016 | 17:52 GMT | قوات موالية للرئيس هادي يهاجمون مواقع للحوثيين في محافظة مأرب - أرشيف A+ الحكومة اليمنية تتحفظ على مبادرة ولد الشيخ أحمد
وذكرت رويترز أن القتال في المحافظة اندلع غداة تسليم مبعوث الأمم المتحدة اقتراحا لإحلال السلام إلى الجماعات المسلحة التي تسيطر على العاصمة اليمنية.
وانهار هذا الأسبوع اتفاق لوقف إطلاق النار مدته 3 أيام يهدف إلى تمهيد الطريق أمام تسوية سياسية لأزمة اليمن تزامنا مع تجدد القتال، ما يهدد جهود الأمم المتحدة لإنهاء حرب مستمرة منذ 19 شهرا أدت إلى وصول الملايين في البلد الأفقر في شبه الجزيرة العربية إلى حافة المجاعة.
وذكرت وكالة الأنباء السعودية الرسمية أن القوات اليمنية قصفت بالمدفعية مواقع الحوثيين وطردتهم من بلدات في محافظة مأرب شرقي صنعاء يوم الأربعاء. Reuters Mohamed Al-Sayaghi مسلحون حوثيون في صنعاء
وقال الحوثيون الذين يسيطرون على معظم العاصمة صنعاء منذ انقلابهم على حكومة عبد ربه هادي عام 2015 إن الطائرات السعودية ضربت مصنعا للثلج على مقربة من مدينة المخاء اليمنية المطلة على البحر الأحمر فضلا عن منازل ومزارع في منطقة صرواح في محافظة مأرب ليل الثلاثاء.
ولم يتسن الحصول على تعليق من المتحدث باسم التحالف العربي بقيادة السعودية.
وتنقسم ولاءات سكان محافظة مأرب وهم في معظمهم من القبائل الجيدة التسليح والذين باتوا حلفاء لدول الخليج وبين أصدقاء للحوثيين وموالين للرئيس السابق علي عبدالله صالح.
وأعلنت الأمم المتحدة، الثلاثاء، أن إسماعيل ولد الشيخ المبعوث الخاص للأمم المتحدة إلى اليمن زار صنعاء وسلم الحوثيين وحلفاءهم من مؤيدي صالح خارطة طريق تتطرق إلى "الأمن والخطوات السياسية" ودعا طرفي النزاع إلى تمديد الهدنة والسماح بدخول المساعدات الإغاثية إلى البلاد. وقال الحوثيون إنهم سيدرسون الاقتراحات. Reuters Khaled Abdullah Ali Al Mahdi المبعوث الدولي إلى اليمن إسماعيل ولد الشيخ
وأشار راجح بادي، المتحدث باسم حكومة هادي، في حديث لرويترز، إلى أن أي اقتراح للسلام يجب أن يتوافق مع الخطط السابقة لتأمين مستقبل اليمن أي المبادرة الخليجية التي تخلى بموجبها صالح عن الحكم ومقررات مؤتمر الحوار العام بين الأحزاب السياسية عام 2014 وقرار مجلس الأمن الدولي عام 2015 الذي يدعو الحوثيين إلى تسليم سلاحهم والانسحاب من المدن الكبرى.
وقال بادي إن أي "رؤية" يجب أن تتطابق مع المراجع الثلاث مشيرا إلى أن الحكومة لم تتلق بعد أي خطة من مبعوث الأمم المتحدة أو من المنظمة نفسها بعد.
المصدر: رويترز تعليمات استخدام خدمة التعليقات على صفحات موقع قناة "RT Arabic" (اضغط هنا) العناوين | 0 |
Seventeen passengers aboard a ferry on the Hudson River were injured after it struck a dock in Jersey City on Saturday night, a city spokeswoman said. Three people were removed on stretchers and the rest were able to walk off the ferry, the Peter R. Weiss operated by New York Waterway, said the spokeswoman, Jennifer Morrill. All of the injuries were minor, she said. A spokesman for the Coast Guard, Petty Officer Third Class Steve Strohmaier, said the ferry hit the Paulus Hook dock at a “fast rate of speed” around 7:20 p. m. The ferry, with 57 people on board, was arriving from the World Financial Center in Manhattan when it struck the dock, said Pat Smith, a spokesman for New York Waterway. He described it as a “hard landing” and equated it to a jolt passengers get while the riding the subway. Accounts of the number of injured varied. Ms. Morrill, citing figures from the Jersey City Fire Department, said five passengers were taken to Christ Hospital and 12 to Jersey City Medical Center. Mr. Smith said crew members reported six people injured with bumps and bruises, and Petty Officer Strohmaier said 15 people were injured, with four of them seeking medical attention. Mr. Smith said the ferry, which has a capacity for 150 passengers, was not damaged. Petty Officer Strohmaier said the Coast Guard was investigating. | 1 |
WASHINGTON — It is an iconic photograph of American patriotism, depicting the heroism of service members raising the flag over Iwo Jima during World War II, which inspired the book and movie “Flags of Our Fathers. ” But while the image has become a symbol of the sacrifices of American troops, the Marine Corps has also had to defend it for 70 years against accusations that it was staged and that some of the men were misidentified. Now, the man who wrote the book, which chronicled how his father and five Marines came together to lift the flag in the famous photograph, has raised new doubts about the image, saying that he now believes his father is not actually in it. The author, James Bradley, revealed his conclusion in an interview on Tuesday, just days after the Marine Corps said that it had opened an inquiry into whether the identifications in the photograph were correct. He said that his father, John, a Navy corpsman, had participated in raising a flag on Iwo Jima on Feb. 23, 1945, but had not taken part in another the same day, which became the famous photograph. His father, he said, probably thought that the first was the one that was captured in the famous picture taken by Joe Rosenthal, a photographer for The Associated Press. Mr. Bradley’s doubts tell a story about the fog of war, the efforts of a son to memorialize his father and the apparent willingness of the Marines to at first brush aside questions about one of their most historic moments. Mr. Bradley said he had become convinced that his father was not in the photograph after studying evidence that was published in a 2014 article in The Omaha which described doubts raised by amateur historians who compared that photograph to images of the first . They found that the pants, headgear and cartridge belt on the Navy corpsman identified as John Bradley were different from the gear he wore that day. Mr. Bradley said he had waited a year to examine the evidence in the newspaper article because he was working on a new book in Vietnam, and then became ill. He did not come forward with his belief that his father was not in the photograph, he said, because there was little interest from the news media and the Marines. “It wasn’t top of mind,” Mr. Bradley said in the interview. “It wasn’t a priority. I was overseas, and this past fall I was recovering from a disease I got in New Guinea that almost killed me. Now there’s interest in this, and I’m talking about it. I didn’t have the energy to carry the water all by myself. ” The photograph, taken during one of the bloodiest battles of the war, was splashed across the front pages of newspapers throughout the country less than 48 hours after it was taken, exceptionally fast for the time. It was an immediate source of patriotism and controversy. President Harry S. Truman used it to sell bonds to fund the war, and Mr. Rosenthal brushed back accusations that it had been staged. And two years after the image was taken, one of the men identified as being in it hitchhiked to Texas from Arizona to tell the family of a man who died on Iwo Jima that the man had been incorrectly named as one of those depicted. That spurred a congressional investigation that led the military to acknowledge that it had misidentified one of the men. “Flags of Our Fathers,” first published in 2000, was on lists for nearly a year. It was later made into a movie directed by Clint Eastwood. The photograph was also the inspiration for the Marine Corps War Memorial in Arlington, Va. a statue in which six figures are depicted in the positions captured by Mr. Rosenthal. Mr. Bradley said that his father had met with the sculptor of the memorial, who based some of the figures on his body. All of the men identified in the photograph are dead. Three of the men died fighting the Japanese on Iwo Jima. John Bradley died in 1994. The 2014 article in the Omaha newspaper detailed how Stephen Foley, a man in Ireland who worked at a building supply company, and Eric Krelle, an historian, had concluded that Mr. Bradley was misidentified after poring over the images and studying uniforms worn on the island. At the time, however, the Marines and James Bradley discounted the research. “Listen, I wrote the book based on facts told to me by guys who had actually been there,” Mr. Bradley was quoted saying in the article. “That’s my research. That’s what I trust. ” He added: “At the end of the day, the truth is the truth. Everything is possible. But really?” The Marines said at the time that they “firmly” stood by the established accounts of who was in the photograph. Last year, Dustin Spence, a historian from California who made a documentary about the and Mr. Foley approached the Marines with findings that they said showed problems with the identifications, Mr. Spence said in a telephone interview. The Marines, Mr. Spence said, did not seriously look into their claims. “I believe it’s something difficult for some in the Marine Corps to swallow,” Mr. Spence said. The Smithsonian Channel said it had gone to the Marines after “months of thorough, scientific analysis” and had since been working closely with the service. It added that it would broadcast the findings this year. The Marine Corps acknowledged the inquiry in a statement, but provided few details. ”Our history is important to us, and even today, this iconic image still represents the fighting spirit of Marines and is a symbol of the tremendous accomplishments of our corps,” the Marines said. “As such, with the information and research provided by the Smithsonian Channel, who used advanced digital technology to examine battle footage, the Marine Corps decided to review their photo enhancements, film analysis and findings. ” It added, “Joe Rosenthal’s photo captured a single moment in the battle during which more than 6, 500 U. S. servicemen made the ultimate sacrifice, and it is representative of the more than 70, 000 U. S. Marines, sailors, soldiers and Coast Guardsmen that contributed to the battle. ” A summary on the paperback edition of “Flags of Our Fathers” reads: “Here is the true story behind the six flag raisers and the immortal photograph that came to symbolize the power and courage of America during World War II. In ‘Flags of Our Fathers,’ the son of one of the flag raisers captures the glory, the heartbreak, and the legacy of the six ordinary boys who came together at a crucial moment in one of history’s bloodiest battles — and lifted the heart and spirit of a nation at war. ” | 1 |
Thousands of Wild Bison Appear At Standing Rock Out Of Nowhere! A Sign From The Earth? Nov 6, 2016 5 0
Recently, tensions between law enforcement workers and peaceful protestors with the Standing Rock Sioux tribe have escalated. A series of standoffs have resulted in protesters being maced, shot with rubber bullets, tased, and even attacked with concussion cannons.
After months of struggles to protect sacred burial grounds and the Missouri River, opposition of the DAPL were blessed when a herd of buffalo appeared out of nowhere. Buffalo were seen on the hill during the current front line standoff at Standing Rock.
— Kat Maguire (@katworldmusic) October 27, 2016
I’m in tears over the buffalo appearing at #StandingRock ! The ppl have been praying & the ancestors responded. https://t.co/qouCvCCgtZ
A cry of joy was heard over the crowd because The Standing Rock Sioux had reportedly been praying for help in the midst of the standoff.
“The ancestors are with us,” said Myron Dewey, who uploaded video footage of the stampede to Facebook.
Buffalo are revered as symbols of sacrifice in Native American culture. Indigenous people believe the animals, known as “Tatanka Oyate” or “Buffalo Nation,” sacrifice themselves in order to supply their meat and hides for people.
According to RT:
At least 117 demonstrators have been arrested in North Dakota as protesters continue to protest against the construction of the controversial pipeline, which will cut through Native American land. Protesters say its construction will destroy sacred sites and have a negative impact on the region’s water supplies.
In a statement from the tribe’s chairman, David Archambault II, the leader condemned what he called the recent “militarized law enforcement” against protesters.
“Militarized law enforcement agencies moved in on water protectors with tanks and riot gear today,” he said. “We continue to pray for peace. We call on the state of North Dakota to oversee the actions of local law enforcement to, first and foremost, ensure everyone’s safety.” | 0 |
On his last day in office, the chief federal prosecutor in Chicago made an impassioned plea for big changes to combat the city’s soaring violence, departing from the Justice Department’s usual tone to criticize the local political culture, federal budget cuts and reformers. In a statement issued as he resigned on Monday, Zachary Fardon, the United States attorney for Northern Illinois, outlined a plan for taking on crime and the ills of the Chicago Police Department, including a pattern of excessive force that was documented by the Justice Department in January. Most of all, he said, the Chicago police need a major increase in resources and a consent decree, with a monitor, to make sure change occurs. “For decades, C. P. D. has been run on the cheap,” Mr. Fardon wrote. “Officers don’t have the training, the supervision, the equipment or the culture they need and deserve. “If you leave correcting those deficiencies to the vagaries of city politics, then you likely lose the fight. ” Chicago police officials outlined a plan for improvement on Tuesday that they pledged to follow even if the Justice Department does not pursue a consent decree. Superintendent Eddie Johnson said that the police training program would be overhauled, that supervision would be improved by having fewer officers assigned to each sergeant, and that a new policy would soon be finalized. “We’re not just saying we’re going to reform — we’re showing you that we’re reforming,” Mr. Johnson said. “If you go out there right now, C. P. D. is different than it was this time last year. So we don’t need a piece of paper to ensure that we do it. We’re doing it. ” Mr. Fardon was one of 46 United States attorneys whom the Trump administration told on Friday to resign immediately. The suddenness was unusual new presidents routinely remove the prosecutors but often keep them on while searching for their replacements. Preet Bharara, the United States attorney in Manhattan, refused to step down and was fired. His counterpart in Montana, Michael W. Cotter, resigned but called the administration’s handling of the matter “very unprofessional. ” A few others called it abrupt and unnecessary. Mr. Fardon’s parting message was different, raising no objection to his ouster. Instead, it was a call to address a surge of violence in Chicago that has defied the efforts of police officers who “in their quiet moments struggled with their own sense of frustration and despair. ” Mr. Johnson called Mr. Fardon “a great partner” to the Police Department and said he agreed with Mr. Fardon’s call for more prosecutions on federal gun laws. He also addressed Mr. Fardon’s claim that police officers had become hamstrung and too passive on patrol. “Listen, there are things within C. P. D. that we did need to fundamentally change, and we’re changing them,” Mr. Johnson said, adding that officers were focusing on arresting gun offenders and other serious criminals. “I think that the understand that we have a job to do,” he said. “You know, we swore an oath to protect the citizens of the city, and that’s what we’re going to do. ” Donovan Price, an activist who agreed with parts of Mr. Fardon’s statement, said, “I believe he shed some tears when he wrote this. ” Consent decrees and federal oversight, favorite tools of the Obama administration and police critics, are opposed by many conservatives, including Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Mr. Fardon criticized budget cuts that have thinned the ranks of federal prosecutors. He called for a significant increase and better cooperation among federal law enforcement agencies. But he also said that criticism of the police, and efforts to restrain them, had undermined morale and contributed to the rise in crime — a claim often made by conservatives but rejected by liberal advocates of police reform. Mr. Fardon took particular aim at a 2015 agreement between the police and the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois that sharply curtailed the number of people — primarily black men — the police could stop on Chicago’s streets. He wrote that the settlement had told officers, “If you go talk to those kids on the corner, you’re going to have to take 40 minutes to fill out a form. ” He said that change, along with the firing of a police superintendent and the release of a video showing an officer shooting a Laquan McDonald, 16 times, had created a morale crisis. As officers made fewer stops, he said, “kids started shooting more. ” Karen Sheley, director of police practices for the A. C. L. U. of Illinois, said Mr. Fardon had overstated the burden of the 2015 agreement, adding, “Trying to blame reform for a rise in crime is a mistake. ” Many cities had increases in violent crime last year, but Chicago stood out as homicides jumped more than 50 percent, to 762, more than New York and Los Angeles combined. Mr. Fardon wrote that communities needed a far bigger police presence and more programs to divert young people from gangs. And he called for an aggressive crackdown on social media, where people air grievances that escalate to gunfire. These prescriptions require money, so their prospects are unsure, at best, in a city and state with serious financial challenges and under an administration in Washington that has promised to cut spending. Jim Bueermann, president of the Police Foundation, a law enforcement research group, praised some of the ideas and was hesitant about others. But he said it was important that Mr. Fardon had aired them. “There are a lot of people that work in the criminal justice system that feel deeply and personally about these issues, but the public doesn’t hear that very often,” Mr. Bueermann said. “I think more prosecutors and police chiefs should do what he did. ” | 1 |
Entitled Customer Slams Restaurant On Yelp, What Happens Next Is Sheer Badassery By Tiffany Willis on October 11, 2014 Subscribe
A customer ( Yelp name Sonal B) was visiting Kansas City for a conference when she decided to try to get take-out food from Voltaire , “an upscale restaurant across the street from her conference building. The only problem with that is that Voltaire doesn’t offer take-out and they never have, by policy.” The customer pitched a fit, threatened to get her “lawyer” husband involved (and did), and threatened the manager with a bad Yelp review, which she did minutes after leaving the restaurant.
But Voltaire’s owner responded. And it was fabulous.
The Yelp review: Most unfriendly and arrogant restaurant in KC. Just called Voltaire to try to order some food because we’re in a late business meeting across the street. First, they refused to answer our question about what type of broth is used in the risotto. Then they said they won’t pack food to go. My husband spoke to the manager and explained that we’re in a conference room across the street, and asked if they can pack our dinner (which we would pick up). The hostess flat-out refused to answer our question about the food or to try and work with us so we could get food in our meeting. My husband asked to speak with the manager. The manager, Jamie, said, “our food is plated beautifully, and we can’t put it in a ‘to go’ container.” So thanks, Jamie, we’ll just starve. (What the manager said is just not true by the way we’ve eaten there before, and they did pack our food to go.) When my husband said that he was going to post a Yelp review about the way the restaurant was treating us, the manager questioned, “Are you a grown man and an adult?” Yes, Jamie, we are grown adults, and we do not do business with people who behave like you do. We regularly travel to NYC and eat at a variety of restaurants, which are more than happy to accommodate people by packing food to go. This restaurant thinks they’re too good for their customers. They will soon learn that if you ignore your customers, they’re going to start ignoring you. I would not even give this place one star after this experience, and I’m dismayed by their unprofessional and arrogant behavior.
The owner’s response: I sincerely apologize that we don’t offer ‘take-out’ food at our restaurant. Being a Yelp user, I’m sure you were aware that on our Yelp business page, on the right side of the screen, it lists details about our establishment. There is an item listed ‘Take-Out : No.’ We have never offered take-out food as we believe the food we prepare should be presented as we see fit, (usually) on a plate inside the dining room. As for the risotto, its made with a vegetable stock – this dish is vegetarian, and I’m certain that who you were speaking with wanted to make extra certain the information provided to you was accurate. On your previous visits, you say you have witnessed dishes being boxed up as proof that we provide ‘take-out’ food. Although we do allow our guests to take their uneaten food with them in to-go boxes after they have dined with us, we have never offered ‘take-out’ food. If you were actually starving, as in a life threatening condition requiring nutritional sustenance, we would be happy to assist you..we do make exceptions for emergency situations. Our general manager did question the age/maturity of your husband after he became combative and threatened us with a negative Yelp review if we did not alter our operational practice and provide him with ‘take-out’ food. 15 minutes later you indeed came through with this threat. I can assure you that we don’t offer ‘take-out’ food because we feel we are ‘too good’ for our customers; we just prefer to have our guests dine with us, allowing for the proper presentation (and temperature) of their fare that has been skillfully prepared by our kitchen. I am very pleased that you frequent New York. We travel often as well. And I can assure you that there are many restaurants in NYC that do not offer ‘take-out’ food. Although there are many other options that do – in Kansas City as well (Go Royals!). It was made REPEATEDLY clear in the conversation with your husband that he is a lawyer. Let me provide the following analogy/role reversal-it may assist in clarifying your request. YOU: I want to hire you to handle my divorce. ME: But, I’m a tax lawyer. YOU: I don’t care I want you to handle my divorce. ME: Sorry, but I don’t practice that form of law. YOU: Just handle my divorce, I’ll pay you-it will be fine. ME: I don’t feel comfortable providing my services as a divorce lawyer, as I am a tax lawyer. You won’t receive the service you are wanting or that I am willing to provide. YOU: Well, I travel to NYC often, and in NYC, Tax lawyers handle my divorce litigation all the time. I don’t know what the problem is. I’ve told you I’m a chef, right? ME: Well, that’s nice sir, but I really can’t help you. It goes against my business practice. YOU: If you don’t represent me in my divorce, I’m going to post it all over the [most frequented social media review of lawyers] that you refused to provide me with the service I requested, and make baseless allegations about how you are very pretentious, arrogant and unprofessional. I will also try to prevent you from getting any additional business by damning you on said social media platform. Now will you represent me? ME: I don’t take kindly to threats. Thanks for your feedback. We will let you know if we decide in the future to practice divorce law, I mean, provide ‘take-out’ food.
Let us know your thoughts at the Liberal America Facebook page . Sign up for our free daily newsletter to receive more great stories like this one.
h/t NextShark About Tiffany Willis
Tiffany Willis is a fifth-generation Texan, a proponent of voluntary simplicity, a single mom, and the founder and editor-in-chief of Liberal America. An unapologetic member of the Christian Left, she has spent most of her career actively working with “the least of these" -- disadvantaged and oppressed populations, the elderly, people living in poverty, at-risk youth, and unemployed people. She is a Certified Workforce Expert with the National Workforce Institute , a NAWDP Certified Workforce Development Professional, and a certified instructor for Franklin Covey's 7 Habits of Highly Effective Teens . Follow her on Twitter , Facebook , or LinkedIn . She also has a grossly neglected personal blog , a Time Travel blog , a site dedicated to encouraging people to read classic literature 15 minutes a day , and a literary quotes blog that is a labor of love . Find her somewhere and join the discussion. Click here to buy Tiff a mojito. Connect | 0 |
posted by Eddie Each one of us has been told about our ticking biological clock, but those in their 30’s or 40’s who are hoping to have kids, probably think having a baby, is just not possible anymore. Well, it is, but with a few risks. But, after hearing the story about a 70-year-old who gave birth, you now have the perfect comeback to whoever says your lady parts are slowly reaching its best-before date. A 70-year-old woman named, Daljinder Kaur, in India has become the world’s first-mom to give birth to a son, using in-vitro fertilization (IVF). Despite, two failed pregnancies before, the third time was the charm, giving her a boy she named, Arman. What’s more is, it’s been years since Daljinder had her menopause (the end of a woman’s menstrual cycle in life), so theory has it that Daljinder used an egg from a younger donor, although this has not been confirmed. Studies by the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) say that although medicine has endless phenomenon, a woman’s chances of fertility does reduce as they age. This usually occurs by the early-30’s, and plummets faster by their late-30’s. The reason for this is because a woman is born with just one to two million eggs and they are lost gradually with each menstrual cycle, till it finally ends. By the early 50’s, when menopause begins on average, there may be just around a thousand eggs left. But IVF and other assisted reproductive procedures, is usually taken up as a solution to this, especially women who are suffering from infertility and want to improve their chances of getting pregnant. So here’s how IVF works. An egg is taken from a woman and fertilized using a man’s sperm, outside of the body. The embryo is then placed back inside the woman’s womb with the hope that she will get pregnant. The age-limit for allowing IVF and such procedures, in the US is those in their mid-40’s or 50’s. In addition, women in their 40’s are usually impregnated with donor eggs from women in their 20’s and 30’s, to increase their fertility chances. Statistics suggest that women for all ages recorded, who used donor eggs, had a 50% success rate and gave birth. However, a 70-year-old is stretching it a bit, making Daljinder one of the oldest women on the planet to give birth. This is despite the fact that, aged women have a lower blood flow to their uterus, making it close to impossible to conceive and sustain a baby’s life through the pregnancy. It could also take a huge toll on an older woman’s body and put their heart at risk, as it would be unable to handle the blood flow for their own body, let alone a baby. Old-age also comes with its classic creaks from high blood pressure to diabetes and weak bone structures. So, could Daljinder’s case change the face of fertility possibilities as we know it? As a fellow myth-buster, maybe. But the older-mom trend is on a rise, such as, 50-year-old Janet Jackson, who is now pregnant with her first baby as well as Halle Berry who gave birth when she was 47. And hearing from the woman who made history herself, Daljinder’s says she is doing well and feels blessed to hold her own baby. Whoever said motherhood is timeless, has probably found a whole new dimension of meaning to it now. Source: | 0 |
BELLEVILLE, Wis. — Drive past the dairy farms, cornfields and horse pastures here and you will eventually arrive at Cate Machine Welding, a business run by Gene and Lori Cate and their sons. For 46 years, the Cates have welded many things — fertilizer tanks, parts, cheese molds, even a farmer’s broken glasses. And like many small businesses, they have a dusty old computer humming away in the back office. On this one, however, an unusual battle is playing out: The machine has been taken over by Chinese hackers. The hackers use it to plan and stage attacks. But unbeknown to them, a Silicon Valley is tracking them here, in real time, watching their every move and, in some cases, blocking their efforts. “When they first told us, we said, ‘No way,’” Mr. Cate said one afternoon recently over pizza and cheese curds, recalling when he first learned the computer server his family used to manage its welding business had been secretly repurposed. “We were totally freaked out,” Ms. Cate said. “We had no idea we could be used as an infiltration unit for Chinese attacks. ” On a recent Thursday, the hackers’ targets appeared to be a Silicon Valley food delivery a major Manhattan law firm, one of the world’s biggest airlines, a prominent Southern university and a smattering of targets across Thailand and Malaysia. The New York Times viewed the action on the Cates’ computer on the condition that it not name the targets. The activity had the hallmarks of Chinese hackers known as the C0d0s0 group, a collection of hackers for hire that the security industry has been tracking for years. Over the years, the group has breached banks, law firms and tech companies, and once hijacked the Forbes website to try to infect visitors’ computers with malware. There is a murky and much hyped emerging industry in selling intelligence about attack groups like the C0d0s0 group. Until recently, companies typically adopted a defensive strategy of trying to make their networks as impermeable as possible in hopes of repelling attacks. Today, threat intelligence providers sell services that promise to go on the offensive. They track hackers, and for annual fees that can climb into the seven figures, they try to spot and thwart attacks before they happen. These companies have a mixed record of success. Still, after years of highly publicized incidents, Gartner, a market research company, expects the market for threat intelligence to reach $1 billion next year, up from $255 million in 2013. Remarkably, many attacks rely on a tangled maze of compromised computers including those shops like Cate Machine Welding. The hackers aren’t after the Cates’ data. Rather, they have converted their server, and others like it, into launchpads for their attacks. These servers offer the perfect cover. They aren’t terribly well protected, and rarely, if ever, do the owners discover that their computers have become conduits for spies and digital thieves. And who would suspect the Cate family? Two years ago, the Cates received a visit from men informing them that their server had become a conduit for Chinese spies. The Cates asked: “Are you from the N. S. A. ?” One of the men had, in fact, worked at the National Security Agency years before joining a company, Area 1, that focuses on tracking digital attacks against businesses. “It’s like being a priest,” said Blake Darché, Area 1’s chief security officer, of his N. S. A. background. “In other people’s minds, you never quite leave the profession. ” Mr. Darché wanted to add the Cates’ server to Area 1’s network of 50 others that had been by hackers. Area 1 monitors the activity flowing into and out of these computers to glean insights into attackers’ methods, tools and websites so that it can block them from hitting its clients’ networks, or give them a days, weeks or even months before they hit. The Cates called a family meeting. “People work really hard to make products, and they’re getting stolen,” Ms. Cate said. “It seemed like the least we could do. ” Area 1 paid for the installation cost, about $150. Shortly after installing a sensor on the machine, Mr. Darché said his hunch was confirmed: The sensor lit up with attacks. Area 1 began to make out the patterns of a familiar adversary: the C0d0s0 group. Area 1 was founded by three former N. S. A. analysts, Mr. Darché, Oren Falkowitz and Phil Syme. The three sat side by side at Fort Meade, tracking and, in some cases, penetrating adversaries’ weapons systems for intelligence. A little over two years ago, they decided to start their own company and raised $25. 5 million in funding from major venture capitalists and security entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley, including Kleiner Perkins Caulfield Byers and Cowboy Ventures, and security veterans like Ray Rothrock, the chief executive of RedSeal, and Derek Smith, the chief executive of Shape Security. Area 1 is a new player in threat intelligence, a nascent subsector of the security business that includes companies like iSight Partners and Recorded Future that track attackers in underground web forums and on social media, gleaning intelligence about them. Threat intelligence is still more art than science. The jury is still out on whether companies are equipped to use that intelligence to thwart hackers. Area 1 claims that it can head off attacks through the compromised servers it is tracking. It can also use its vantage point to see where attackers are setting up shop on the web and how they plan to target their intended victims. A handful of Area 1 customers confirmed that its technology had helped head off attackers. One client, a chief information security officer at a large health care provider, said the health care sector had been slammed by digital criminals and governments in recent years. He asked that the company not be named, to avoid becoming a more visible target. He credited Area 1’s sensors with blocking several attacks on his network, helping his company avoid the fates of the health insurer Anthem, which was breached by Chinese hackers last year, and a growing number of hospitals hit by attacks that have forced them to pay a ransom to get important information back. Mr. Smith, the chief executive of Shape Security, said Area 1 gave his company warning of three attacks before they happened, providing time to block them. Mr. Smith said he was impressed enough that he made a small investment in Area 1. “Many of these shops are ambivalent because the attacks don’t directly impact their business and revenue,” he said. “Meanwhile, they unwittingly operate this attack infrastructure. ” But Area 1’s business model can pose ethical dilemmas. What does the company do when it sees attacks against prominent companies and government agencies who are not Area 1 customers? “We think of ourselves as a bodyguard, not a police force that runs around telling everyone they’re a victim,” said Mr. Falkowitz, Area 1’s chief executive. “We’re in the business of . ” They do warn some victims, he said. For instance, they tipped off a law firm, a manufacturer, a financial services firm and electronics company that were attacked via the Cates’ server after they saw the C0d0s0 hackers make off with their intellectual property. Some of those victims, including the law firm, later signed up for Area 1 services. Not all companies heed the warning. A security consultant for one victim, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of nondisclosure agreements, said that his client chose not to act on a tip from Area 1 last year out of concern that a scandal over a successful online attack against the company would jeopardize its recent acquisition. It figured its acquirer would not have been thrilled to learn that the ’s proprietary technology was now in Chinese hacker’s hands. Posted on the wall of Area 1’s headquarters in a historic house in Redwood City, Calif. is a list titled “45 Things That Are Harder Than Cybersecurity. ” It includes flight, solar power, the flu vaccine, brain surgery, the internet, heart transplants, skyscrapers, the Thermos and the . Mr. Falkowitz disagrees with a growing concern that it is too difficult or impossible to stop online attacks. As attackers have grown more sophisticated, many security companies have stopped believing they can block attacks with traditional defenses like antivirus software. Instead, many focus on trying to detect an intrusion “in real time,” to catch hackers before they steal too much. Eighty percent of the time, victims learn they have been breached only when law enforcement or someone else shows up with their stolen data, according to Verizon, which tracks breach data. At the N. S. A. Mr. Falkowitz had worked with teams that detected North Korean missile launches. Much of that early work was done with satellites that would look for sudden heat blasts. Eventually, Mr. Falkowitz’s team tried a more proactive approach. If they could hack the computers that controlled the missile launch systems, they could glean launch schedules. Area 1 is now taking a similar approach to digital attacks, tapping into the attackers’ launchpads, as it were, rather than waiting for them to attack. Hackers don’t just press a big red “attack” button one day. They do reconnaissance, scout out employees on LinkedIn, draft carefully worded emails to trick unsuspecting employees to open them and click on links or email attachments that will try to launch malicious attacks. Once they persuade a target to click — and 91 percent of attacks start this way, according to Trend Micro, the security firm — it takes time to crawl through a victim’s network to find something worth taking. Then they have to pull that data off the network. The process can take weeks, months, even years and leaves a digital trail. Area 1 watches for this kind of activity and then teams up with firms like Blue Coat, a web security company, to build what it has learned into security software that can try to block attacks when they come. The owners of Cate Machine Welding say that living with Chinese attackers in your office can be a strange feeling. Recently, Area 1 executives visited the shop and showed them some of what they had learned from watching their computer. The C0d0s0 group had used their server to pilfer a law firm’s due diligence on an impending acquisition, a financial services firm’s confidential trading plans, a mobile payment ’s proprietary source code, some blueprints and loan applications at a mortgage company. Hearing that, Mr. Cate expressed pride — and maybe even a hint of schadenfreude. For years, the welding business that is his family’s bread and butter has been migrating to China. Now his family is helping American businesses fight back. “We want to do the right thing for these businesses,” Mr. Cate said, “For our country. ” | 1 |
IT’S one of the things we are most afraid might happen to us. We go to great lengths to avoid it. And yet we do it all the same: We marry the wrong person. Partly, it’s because we have a bewildering array of problems that emerge when we try to get close to others. We seem normal only to those who don’t know us very well. In a wiser, more society than our own, a standard question on any early dinner date would be: “And how are you crazy?” Perhaps we have a latent tendency to get furious when someone disagrees with us or can relax only when we are working perhaps we’re tricky about intimacy after sex or clam up in response to humiliation. Nobody’s perfect. The problem is that before marriage, we rarely delve into our complexities. Whenever casual relationships threaten to reveal our flaws, we blame our partners and call it a day. As for our friends, they don’t care enough to do the hard work of enlightening us. One of the privileges of being on our own is therefore the sincere impression that we are really quite easy to live with. Our partners are no more . Naturally, we make a stab at trying to understand them. We visit their families. We look at their photos, we meet their college friends. All this contributes to a sense that we’ve done our homework. We haven’t. Marriage ends up as a hopeful, generous, infinitely kind gamble taken by two people who don’t know yet who they are or who the other might be, binding themselves to a future they cannot conceive of and have carefully avoided investigating. For most of recorded history, people married for logical sorts of reasons: because her parcel of land adjoined yours, his family had a flourishing business, her father was the magistrate in town, there was a castle to keep up, or both sets of parents subscribed to the same interpretation of a holy text. And from such reasonable marriages, there flowed loneliness, infidelity, abuse, hardness of heart and screams heard through the nursery doors. The marriage of reason was not, in hindsight, reasonable at all it was often expedient, snobbish and exploitative. That is why what has replaced it — the marriage of feeling — has largely been spared the need to account for itself. What matters in the marriage of feeling is that two people are drawn to each other by an overwhelming instinct and know in their hearts that it is right. Indeed, the more imprudent a marriage appears (perhaps it’s been only six months since they met one of them has no job or both are barely out of their teens) the safer it can feel. Recklessness is taken as a counterweight to all the errors of reason, that catalyst of misery, that accountant’s demand. The prestige of instinct is the traumatized reaction against too many centuries of unreasonable reason. But though we believe ourselves to be seeking happiness in marriage, it isn’t that simple. What we really seek is familiarity — which may well complicate any plans we might have had for happiness. We are looking to recreate, within our adult relationships, the feelings we knew so well in childhood. The love most of us will have tasted early on was often confused with other, more destructive dynamics: feelings of wanting to help an adult who was out of control, of being deprived of a parent’s warmth or scared of his anger, of not feeling secure enough to communicate our wishes. How logical, then, that we should as find ourselves rejecting certain candidates for marriage not because they are wrong but because they are too right — too balanced, mature, understanding and reliable — given that in our hearts, such rightness feels foreign. We marry the wrong people because we don’t associate being loved with feeling happy. We make mistakes, too, because we are so lonely. No one can be in an optimal frame of mind to choose a partner when remaining single feels unbearable. We have to be wholly at peace with the prospect of many years of solitude in order to be appropriately picky otherwise, we risk loving no longer being single rather more than we love the partner who spared us that fate. Finally, we marry to make a nice feeling permanent. We imagine that marriage will help us to bottle the joy we felt when the thought of proposing first came to us: Perhaps we were in Venice, on the lagoon, in a motorboat, with the evening sun throwing glitter across the sea, chatting about aspects of our souls no one ever seemed to have grasped before, with the prospect of dinner in a risotto place a little later. We married to make such sensations permanent but failed to see that there was no solid connection between these feelings and the institution of marriage. Indeed, marriage tends decisively to move us onto another, very different and more administrative plane, which perhaps unfolds in a suburban house, with a long commute and maddening children who kill the passion from which they emerged. The only ingredient in common is the partner. And that might have been the wrong ingredient to bottle. The good news is that it doesn’t matter if we find we have married the wrong person. We mustn’t abandon him or her, only the founding Romantic idea upon which the Western understanding of marriage has been based the last 250 years: that a perfect being exists who can meet all our needs and satisfy our every yearning. We need to swap the Romantic view for a tragic (and at points comedic) awareness that every human will frustrate, anger, annoy, madden and disappoint us — and we will (without any malice) do the same to them. There can be no end to our sense of emptiness and incompleteness. But none of this is unusual or grounds for divorce. Choosing whom to commit ourselves to is merely a case of identifying which particular variety of suffering we would most like to sacrifice ourselves for. This philosophy of pessimism offers a solution to a lot of distress and agitation around marriage. It might sound odd, but pessimism relieves the excessive imaginative pressure that our romantic culture places upon marriage. The failure of one particular partner to save us from our grief and melancholy is not an argument against that person and no sign that a union deserves to fail or be upgraded. The person who is best suited to us is not the person who shares our every taste (he or she doesn’t exist) but the person who can negotiate differences in taste intelligently — the person who is good at disagreement. Rather than some notional idea of perfect complementarity, it is the capacity to tolerate differences with generosity that is the true marker of the “not overly wrong” person. Compatibility is an achievement of love it must not be its precondition. Romanticism has been unhelpful to us it is a harsh philosophy. It has made a lot of what we go through in marriage seem exceptional and appalling. We end up lonely and convinced that our union, with its imperfections, is not “normal. ” We should learn to accommodate ourselves to “wrongness,” striving always to adopt a more forgiving, humorous and kindly perspective on its multiple examples in ourselves and in our partners. | 1 |
House Speaker Paul Ryan promised to move forward on his plan to replace Obamacare after a meeting with House Republicans and White House officials, but he didn’t say whether he had the votes to pass the legislation. [“We have been promising the American people that we will repeal and replace this broken law and tomorrow we’re proceeding,” Ryan told reporters after the meeting on Capitol Hill. As reporters shouted questions about whether he had enough Republicans votes, Ryan walked away from the microphone. Senior White House aides Reince Priebus, Steve Bannon, Kellyanne Conway, and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney delivered an ultimatum from President Donald Trump: Vote for the House bill on Friday or Obamacare remains. Trump is ready to move on. | 1 |
You can't even prove your god exists. Why would I believe anything this god says? Fortunately, we have a congress who is supposed to vote on the law of equality and not on some stupid, outdated, book with fictional people and accounts. | 0 |
SAN DIEGO — The dressed in yellow and brown on Monday, making the field at Petco Park look, from above, like a grill full of cheeseburgers. The homage to the host San Diego Padres, who once wore similar uniforms, helped distinguish Home Run Derby day from every other day of this curious baseball season. Home runs are up. Way, way up. Baseball arrived at the break with hitters on pace for more than 5, 600 home runs, a level exceeded only once in history: in 2000, at the height of the steroid era. “I’d like to say that guys aren’t cheating,” said Stephen Vogt, the Oakland Athletics’ catcher. “Everybody’s going to speculate — right? — when the home run numbers go up. But we are cleaning up the game, and I hope that’s not the reason behind it. ” Before 2003, when baseball began testing for drugs, we searched for reasons to explain the surge in home runs. Expansion, smaller ballparks and better nutrition all played a part — but history, rightly, gave steroids most of the blame. So what now? Besides Dee Gordon — last year’s National League leader in batting average and steals — the players caught in this season’s drug net have mostly been marginal. Perhaps some sluggers are beating the system, but a widespread cheating epidemic seems unlikely. But something is happening. Two years ago, there were 4, 186 home runs, or 0. 86 per team per game. That was the lowest figure in any of the last 20 full seasons, dating to 1996. This season, there are 1. 16 homers per team per game, up from 1. 01 in 2015. Put another way, at the current pace, home runs will rise by more than 700 over the previous season for the second year in a row. That’s a lot more balls soaring over fences, and one pitcher is keeping his theories private. “I’m not going to be the one who throws that stone,” said Washington Nationals starter Max Scherzer, who leads the National League in homers allowed. “I’m not going to sit here and say anything and make accusations. That’s not the way you do things. But if they are up significantly, it would be interesting to see what M. L. B. actually thinks about it. ” Mike Teevan, a spokesman for Major League Baseball, said the league does “extensive reviews of the performance of the baseball, and there have been no differences” to explain the increase in homers. Strikeouts, said starter Jon Lester of the Chicago Cubs, are also rising, and hitters are taking a different approach. “I know our hitting coach wants you to hit the ball in the air,” Lester said. “There’s no slug on the ground. Guys are willing to take their to hit the ball in the air, and swing hard in case they hit it. ” That theory would seem to make sense, especially as hitters react to the increasing use of extreme infield shifts. Yet the overall percentage of fly balls has not risen. According to Fangraphs, it is 34. 2 percent now only two of the past 15 seasons have been lower. What has changed is that a greater percentage of fly balls are turning into home runs. At 12. 9 percent, that figure is the highest it has been since Fangraphs started tracking the statistic in 2002. At least in one sense, perhaps, throwing harder may be working against pitchers. “Secondary stuff isn’t as big of a thing as it used to be, I feel like,” Baltimore Orioles catcher Matt Wieters said. “It’s now, ‘Can you throw 98, 99?’ And a lot of breaking balls that are hanging end up getting hit out. “That’s my theory: The types of arms that are getting moved through the system are guys that can really throw hard, and command sometimes comes later for them. But they get to the big league level while they’re throwing hard, and then they learn command. Home runs, more times than not, are mistakes — they’re not the wrong pitch, they’re just mistakes in the middle of the plate. ” Vogt, the Oakland catcher, said he had been calling more fastballs up in the zone lately, because umpires seem more willing to call them strikes. Missing with a high fastball can lead to home runs, of course, and so can a poorly placed cutter. If a cutter does not dart sharply at the last moment, it is just a slower fastball that stays in a hitter’s bat path. “The cutter has become such a big pitch, and more guys are trying to throw it,” Vogt said. “But a cutter that doesn’t cut is a really good pitch to hit out. ” Vogt and other catchers, like San Francisco’s Buster Posey and Milwaukee’s Jonathan Lucroy, said they had noticed nothing different about the actual baseballs — which, of course, they handle just as often as pitchers, though not with the same intent. “We throw those things so much, we’d be able to tell if there’s something different about them,” Lucroy said. Lucroy pointed to recent changes at ballparks — like Petco Park, Citi Field and Marlins Park, where fences have all come in — as having an impact. But some pitchers, like Texas’ Cole Hamels, have thrived at smaller venues because they have multiple weapons to keep hitters guessing. Younger pitchers are rarely as skilled. “It’s not only having that second pitch, but having that third pitch,” Hamels said. “It’s easier for hitters to have success when it’s — a lot better than a 25 percent chance. So when guys don’t have four pitches they can essentially throw for strikes, that makes it a lot tougher. Guys are just homing in on certain counts and what guys have done statistically in the past, and they’re getting it. ” Daniel Murphy of the Nationals best embodies the trend around him. Murphy made the team with the Mets in 2014, when he played a full season and hit nine homers. Now he has 17 to go with a . 348 average. Murphy emphasizes damage over contact, with startling results — and fastballs do not bother him. “Guys throw so hard now, you either become accustomed to it or you have to find another line of work,” Murphy said. “The more velocity you see, you’re able to slow it down a little more. ” That last sentence might only make sense in the peculiar orbit of baseball, where fast can mean slow and a trend can quickly reverse itself. | 1 |
When Donald J. Trump takes the oath of office on Friday, he will do so with his hand on two Bibles: his own, and one used by Abraham Lincoln in 1861. Only one other president has used that Bible for the oath: Mr. Trump’s predecessor. Thomas Barrack Jr. the chairman of Mr. Trump’s inaugural committee, said in a statement earlier this week that the “is humbled to place his hand on Bibles that hold special meaning both to his family and to our country. ” Mr. Trump’s personal Bible was given to him by his mother in 1955, two days before his ninth birthday, according to a statement from the inaugural committee. He had just completed the Sunday Church Primary School at the First Presbyterian Church in Queens, where he grew up. To use the Lincoln Bible, the inaugural committee has to borrow it from its permanent home at the Library of Congress. Lincoln swore the oath on it at his first inaugural in 1861, as the United States stood on the cusp of the Civil War. It was not used again at an inauguration until the election of Barack Obama, who was sworn in on it in 2009 and again in 2013. Conservationists at the Library of Congress said the book was ready for another big day, though they have wary eyes turned toward a weather forecast that hints at the possibility of rain. “We always have it in the back of our mind that this might be happening,” said Elmer Eusman, who is the head of conservation. “So we’re prepared. ” “We already had made a protective box for it for Obama’s inauguration,” he said, adding that the library is creating a Mylar wraparound for the cover to protect it from rain. Mr. Eusman said the library would also have someone on standby who will be notified immediately if the Bible has been damaged and will whisk it back to a conservation lab for immediate repair. The steps are mostly precautionary. The Lincoln Bible is in good shape, and “it can certainly sustain this kind of activity,” said Mark Dimunation, the head of rare books and special collections. The Bible was given to the library by Mary Lincoln, the widow of Robert Todd Lincoln, the president’s son, Mr. Dimunation said. The collection also included the contents of President Lincoln’s pocket from the night he was killed. “We’ve used it from time to time in exhibitions, and when we talk about Lincoln, it gives us the opportunity to bring out the Bible and talk about the content of the first inaugural address,” Mr. Dimunation said. “It does have a certain kind of electricity about it because of the nature of that inaugural event. ” Because his election had been so divisive — between the election and the inauguration, seven states had seceded from the Union — there was real concern that Lincoln would be attacked and so he was smuggled into Washington. His household effects, including his family Bible, were still being shipped from Springfield, Ill. Mr. Dimunation said. A clerk for the Supreme Court, William Thomas Carroll, was sent out to buy what became the Lincoln Bible. The book is an 1853 Oxford University Press printing of the King James Bible, Mr. Eusman said, and it is bound in burgundy velvet with metal trim. It is approximately six by four inches and about an inch and a quarter thick. “It’s not very big,” he said. The back holds a large blue paper seal on yellow paper, where Mr. Carroll recorded the events of the day. “It has an accretion of ceremonial use that really gives this object an emotional and historical weight at this point,” Mr. Dimunation said. While the Constitution requires presidents to take an oath of office, there is no rule requiring them to do so with their hands on a religious book, or any book at all. Most have used a family Bible. The Bible used by George Washington at the first inauguration has been popular with his successors. Warren G. Harding, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Jimmy Carter and George H. W. Bush all used it, and in 2001, George W. Bush had made preparations to be the sixth president to do so. Members of the New York Masonic temple that cares for the bible carried it to the Capitol, but rain intervened. Mr. Bush used his father’s family Bible instead. In 1825, John Quincy Adams was sworn in on a law book, according to the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies. Adams was also, according to the committee, the first president to wear long trousers at his inauguration, breaking with the five presidents before him, who all had worn knee breeches. Lyndon B. Johnson, a Protestant, was sworn in aboard Air Force One using a Roman Catholic missal, after the assassination of John F. Kennedy. The prayer book had been found at Kennedy’s bedside table on the plane. And in 1901, Theodore Roosevelt was hiking in the Adirondack Mountains when he received word that William McKinley was not likely to survive being shot in Buffalo. By the time Roosevelt got there, McKinley had died. “When he arrived there was a fair amount of confusion,” said Mark Lozo, the director of education and interpretation at the Theodore Roosevelt Inaugural Site in Buffalo. “They were still making arrangements for administering the oath of office. ” No Bible could be found for the ceremony at the home of Roosevelt’s friend Ansley Wilcox, now the site of the museum. “With the ceremony already underway, they decided to proceed without one,” Mr. Lozo said. | 1 |
Thomas DiLorenzo https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/isnt-strange/
There have been many reports in Maryland and Texas, among other places, of people going in to vote (“early voting”) and voting for Trump to learn that their vote was flipped to Clinton. Quite a few Trump voters in Maryland have checked their votes and discovered this, with the election officials explaining that it was an electronic/mechanical error.
Isn’t it strange that 100% of the “mechanical errors” switch votes from Trump to Clinton and never the other way around? 11:53 am on October 28, 2016 | 0 |
Whales, elephants of the deep with fins the size of sheds and flukes prepared to consecrate nearby trollers.
Queen of clubs, thin, black hair razored at edges slinking hats and vests, Fells Point.
A hat, Napoleonic or Yellowbeard typhoon, skink darting palmettos, hummingbird at Roth’s feeder hanging above the lake house deck just before, just before its earth curved beak injects ink into twilight, just before the tightly wound shatters the silence, just before wings crackle and refuel themselves, of Italian cabinet members misbehaving with washer women, just before a tumor threatened civilization as we know it, just before the curtain was made of iron, just before we found the bomb and the bomb found the money, or was it the other way around?
with new technology: tape recorders, answering machines and Pentagon Papers; governments took things for granted, until things got out of hand Most are regrouping, reincorporating, in hopes of positive returns on their investments.
You didn’t think they were complete idiots, now, did you? | 0 |
Good morning. Please note: California Today is taking a break on Thursday and Friday for the holiday. We’ll be back on Monday. (Want to get California Today by email? Sign up.) For Thanksgiving this year, many Americans are anticipating turkey, mashed potatoes, pumpkin pie — and postelection combat with relatives. Every election provokes some level of stress among voters, but mental health professionals say that the polarization of this year’s presidential race appeared to have amplified the tension. “It was a very significant stressor for people this year,” said Dr. Vaile Wright, director of research and special projects at the American Psychological Association. On Tuesday, we asked readers to tell us whether they expected their Thanksgiving gatherings to provide a stage for potential blowups as relatives congregate for the first time since Election Day. Several people wrote to say they planned to adhere to a rule. Others said they were taking a more extreme approach — avoiding Thanksgiving altogether. For those disappointed by the presidential outcome, much of the anxiety stemmed from concerns that relatives who supported Donald J. Trump might gloat about his victory. Vince Garcia, 48, said he heard rumblings that two relatives were planning to wear Trump gear at their Thanksgiving gathering. “Quite honestly I’m not looking forward to it at all,” he wrote in an email. Martin Johnson, a retired engineer in San Clemente, said he and his wife worried that sparks could fly during their gathering of 18 family members. About half are loyal Democrats, he said, and half dedicated Trump supporters. If things get out of hand, Mr. Johnson, 66, said he planned to tell his guests: “Just put all that stuff in a shoe box and put it on a shelf. Let’s just not get into that topic. ” Dr. Wright said avoiding politics was sometimes the right approach. If the election outcome is weighing heavily on your mind, Thanksgiving can be a time to talk about it, she said. But if reconnecting with family is what’s most important, it could be wise to just postpone the political talk for another time. Kathy Winter, 61, a reader in San Diego, wrote in with a reminder that Thanksgiving is intended to be a moment to count blessings and connect with family. But, she added, “If we are all mature adults, we should be able to talk politics. ” • The Salinas Valley, known as the salad bowl of the nation, is struggling with a crisis of poverty and malnutrition among its farmworkers. [The New York Times] • California’s largest state workers union said it would strike in December over a contract dispute. [Sacramento Bee] • Michelle Rhee, Sacramento’s first lady and the former head of the Washington, D. C. schools, appeared to take herself out of the running to become education secretary in the Trump administration. [Sacramento Bee] • Two weeks after Election Day, Proposition 66 was finally called. The measure, intended to speed up death row appeals, passed. [Los Angeles Times] • Also called was Proposition 53, which would have given voters more say over megaprojects. It failed. [The Associated Press] • Disney has big plans for its Hong Kong resort: a $1. 4 billion upgrade. [The New York Times] • Facebook is said to have created a censorship tool in an effort to get back into China. [The New York Times] • A memorial service for a slain sheriff’s deputy in Stanislaus County was filled with laughter and tears. [Modesto Bee] • Defying expectations, the Oakland Raiders are now after beating the Texans in Mexico City. [The New York Times] • Most people know Jack London as a prolific writer. Few know him as a photographer. [The New York Times] • Our nation is diverse. How does that play out in what we eat at Thanksgiving? [The New York Times] Still in need of a quick Thanksgiving recipe? We asked Cortney Burns, a chef at Bar Tartine in San Francisco, to suggest a dish that takes advantage of the fall season. She offered this one from a book she wrote with Nicolaus Balla, “Bar Tartine: Techniques Recipes,” winner of a 2015 James Beard award: Potato and Green Bean Soup This is a soup to make in late summer, or autumn when the days get shorter and the green beans grow big and tough. It is ideal for those beans, which are much better cooked well past the bright green and crisp stage that culinary professionals prize. In this soup, the beans are cooked until they are quite tender and develop a deep, earthy flavor. The butter that floats on the surface of this soup is essential to the soup’s texture and flavor. We recommend you use cultured butter, which has a subtle tang. You can make it yourself or buy it. Serves 4 to 6 1 tbsp. filtered grapeseed oil or good cooking oil 1 sweet white onion, cut into 1⁄ dice 4 garlic cloves, minced 3 ML vegetable or poultry broth 12 g russet potatoes, peeled and cut into 1⁄ dice 1 g green beans, trimmed and cut into 3⁄ pieces 3 ML buttermilk 1 tbsp. plus 2 tsp. kosher salt Freshly ground black pepper 1 ML sour cream 3 tbsp. apple cider vinegar 2 tbsp. butter, melted Chopped fresh parsley for garnish Chopped fresh dill for garnish Chopped fresh chives for garnish Heat a medium saucepan over medium heat until a drop of water flicked on the surface sizzles gently on contact. Add the grapeseed oil, then immediately add the onion and garlic and cook, stirring occasionally, until the vegetables are slightly softened but not browned, about 10 minutes. Add the broth, potatoes and green beans and simmer until the potatoes are tender enough to be easily pierced with a skewer, about 25 minutes. Remove from the heat. In a blender, combine 2 ML of the broth and vegetables and the buttermilk and purée until smooth. Add the purée back to the saucepan, add the salt and 1⁄2 tsp. pepper, and place over medium heat. Bring to a simmer and cook gently until heated through, about five minutes. Remove from the heat and stir in 3⁄4 ML of the sour cream and the vinegar. Ladle the soup into individual bowls and garnish with melted butter, the remaining 1⁄4 ML sour cream, the parsley, dill, chives, and plenty of pepper. Leftover soup will keep in an airtight container in the refrigerator for up to four days. California Today goes live at 6 a. m. Pacific time weekdays. Tell us what you want to see: CAtoday@nytimes. com. The California Today columnist, Mike McPhate, is a Californian — born outside Sacramento and raised in San Juan Capistrano. He lives in Davis. Follow him on Twitter. California Today is edited by Julie Bloom, who grew up in Los Angeles and attended U. C. Berkeley. | 1 |
In Sunday’s season premiere of HBO’s “Veep,” Selina Meyer (Julia ) is locked in a cliffhanger tie, girding for a recount in Nevada and facing the possibility that Congress may give the presidency to her running mate and frenemy, Tom James (Hugh Laurie). But her more immediate problem is appearing in public with an enormous “stress pimple” on her face. Richard Nixon had a cancer on the presidency. “Veep” has a zit on the president. Over four seasons, “Veep,” created by Armando Iannucci (the BBC’s “The Thick of It”) has been American politics’ most obscenely funny satire, developing a feel for the war of appearances and the exquisite humiliations of Washington. By focusing on the vice presidency, the spare tire of democracy, it rendered the government small enough to drown in an acid bathtub. Its fifth season is in fine, familiar form. But something funny has happened to its context. Amid the threats, apocalypticism and ugly passions of the 2016 election, its bloodless cynicism and petty stakes are almost reassuring, like President Bartlet’s idealism was after the Clinton impeachment. This is what we’ve come to, America. “Veep” is now our “West Wing. ” As expressed through Ms. ’s electric hunger, “Veep” is about the Sisyphean tease of being this close to power and never quite grasping it. Even when Selina became president last season, after a surprise resignation, she was already empowered but not elected, sworn in but not ratified. In the premiere, Selina addresses the public — “It falls to the people to choose their president, and that is what you attempted to do last night” — and assembles a team to litigate the recount. ( she snaps, “I forgot to thank the voters for making our country look like a high school Spanish club. ”) The tie puts the new season in the zone of uncertainty where “Veep” thrives, a Schrödinger’s Oval Office in which Selina is simultaneously president and not president. Her toadies and allies of convenience are unsure where the power lies now, who best to suck up to. Mr. Iannucci left the show after Season 4, but while his caustic language is indispensable, it is fortunately not inimitable. The new episodes are just as amorally hilarious. When Selina needs to keep a conversation from going public, she tells her aide Amy (Anna Chlumsky) “This meeting cannot make it past the schoolbook depository. ” Amy answers, “I’m loading my gun, I’m going to the sixth floor. ” Right, Amy’s back. You remember her quitting in exasperation last year? On “Veep,” fits of principle are seasonal, like allergies. If a character wants something — a job, a bill, a policy — you can bet that thing will soon become undesirable and the character will switch positions on a dime. At the Nevada recount, Meyer staffers organize a protest when they realize that the decision they’re arguing for would go against them, they change the chant midrally. That’s democracy, but “Veep” is only nominally about politics. It’s about careerists, workaholics who marry their jobs and sleep with their phones. The closest thing to love here is the creepy filial devotion of Selina’s body man, Gary (Tony Hale). The more likely a character is to have actual feeling — say, Selina’s daughter, Catherine (Sarah Sutherland) — the more ridiculous she is. Everyone else is just a résumé with a pulse. We’ve seen joyless ambition on another show about a “House of Cards. ” (“Veep” even has a similar story line about using a family medical crisis for a political bump.) But “Veep” makes the point more universal by making it less histrionic. Few of us can be monsters like the Underwoods, but we all have it in us to be as pathetic as the Meyer staff. It’s tempting to say that life has caught up to “Veep. ” It’s true this election shares the series’s linguistic fixation, though “Veep” doesn’t bother with “small hands” euphemisms. A subplot in which Selina hires a grizzled recount expert (Martin Mull) echoes today’s candidates enlisting who remember the arcane game of contested conventions. But there’s a piece missing: the fury, resentment and zealotry driving the real election. They may exist in “Veep,” but they’re somewhere offscreen, out in . That none of the Beltway lifers in “Veep” believe in anything is not exactly unrealistic, but it’s also oddly comforting. They may be the worst, but at least they lack all conviction. For the dangers of passionate intensity, watch “Game of Thrones,” which returns for its sixth season an hour and a half earlier on Sunday. Beyond its derrières and dragons, “Thrones” has been an astute study of power politics and flexible alliances. (Give Littlefinger 30 minutes on the convention floor in Cleveland and he’d be picking out the White House drapes.) A story line from last season feels especially prescient today. (HBO has kept the new episodes locked in its own Iron Bank.) After years of war, a religious movement has emerged in Westeros, led by the High Sparrow (Jonathan Pryce). The Queen Mother Cersei Lannister (Lena Headey) in need of allies, raises him to High Septon of the Faith of the Seven, restoring the church’s private military in hope that he will use it against her enemies. He does — but then his puritans turn on the corrupt ruling class, including Cersei. Not unlike certain party establishments, Cersei believed the High Sparrow’s base could be useful as long as she harnessed its rage for her purposes. She ended the season its prisoner, paraded nude before a jeering, misogynist crowd by a holy woman chanting “Shame!” Her final hope for vengeance lies in the brawny form of a mysterious, unspeaking knight whose face is hidden by armor. (Paul Ryan? Is that you?) All analogies break down, of course. Donald J. Trump may be a populist insurgent, yet he shares the establishment Lannisters’ taste for gold. But between these two series, you can assemble something like a full sense of our political moment. Come to “Game of Thrones” for the shame. Stay through “Veep” for the shamelessness. | 1 |
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump nominated Judge Neil Gorsuch on Tuesday evening to fill the seat on the U. S. Supreme Court left open by the sudden death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016. [President George W. Bush appointed Gorsuch to the federal bench in 2006, after he worked in the Bush administration for two years as a deputy associate attorney general at the U. S. Department of Justice. Gorsuch currently serves as a judge on the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, which has jurisdiction over Wyoming, Kansas, Oklahoma, Utah, New Mexico, and his native Colorado. Gorsuch is considered one of the most intellectual jurists on the federal bench, evinced by his gilded pedigree. He received his undergraduate degree from Columbia University in 1988 and graduated from Harvard Law School in 1991. Later in his career, he earned a Ph. D. from Oxford University in 2004. He would be the first Supreme Court justice in decades to hold a doctoral degree. He’s had a legal career. He served as a law clerk for Judge David Sentelle on the U. S. Court of Appeals for the D. C. Circuit, then clerked for both Justice Byron White and later Justice Anthony Kennedy on the U. S. Supreme Court. He went on to a very successful career in the private sector before joining the Bush Justice Department in 2005. Gorsuch has embraced a textualist view of constitutional interpretation, including language that suggests he might share Justice Scalia’s view that judges should further construe the text only in a manner consistent with its original meaning. In Cordova v. City of Albuquerque (2016) he wrote: Ours is the job of interpreting the Constitution. And that document isn’t some inkblot on which litigants may project their hopes and dreams . . . but a carefully drafted text judges are charged with applying according to its original public meaning. If a party wishes to claim a constitutional right, it is incumbent on him to tell us where it lies, not to assume or stipulate with the other side that it must be in there someplace. That same year, Gorsuch authored a scholarly publication about judicial philosophy, in which he explained his view that, an assiduous focus on text, structure, and history is essential to the proper exercise of the judicial function. That, yes, judges should be in the business of declaring what the law is using the traditional tools of interpretation, rather than pronouncing the law as they might wish it to be in light of their own political views, always with an eye on the outcome … He concluded: “Though the critics are loud and the temptations to join them may be many, mark me down too as a believer that the traditional account of the judicial role Justice Scalia defended will endure. ” Gorsuch is known for a number of constitutional rulings that conservatives have applauded. He has consistently ruled in favor of religious liberty. In American Atheists v. Duncan (2010) he took the position that the Constitution’s Establishment Clause permits roadside memorials honoring fallen state troopers on public land. Regarding the free exercise of religion and federal statutes, he took the position that Obamacare’s contraceptive mandate violated Hobby Lobby’s rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a case that eventually became a landmark Supreme Court case. He has not been as outspoken on some other issues, such as the Second Amendment, but has nonetheless been generally supportive of gun rights when the matter has come before him. Judge Gorsuch was born in 1967 in Denver, Colorado. At age 49, he would be one of the youngest justices in decades, nearing Justice Elena Kagan’s age (50) when she was confirmed in 2010. Gorsuch has been married to his wife Marie for 20 years. They have two teenage daughters together. Ken Klukowski is senior legal editor for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter @kenklukowski. | 1 |
Tried to remove comments on this site years ago. We wrote a ludicrous satire about a self biography how a fictional character would relate to Mr. Gibson. This site does not allow option to remove comments. Sorry to Mr. Gibson, it was meant to be a joke to point out how ridiculous and annoying press is, not to be taken seriously. Please remove comments from “Captain Community”. Thanks! | 0 |
Политика
Победив на президентских выборах, Дональд Трамп стал самой яркой звездой на мировом небосклоне. Общественность вмиг позабыла о нефти, долларе, беременной Собчак, отобранном у Украины Крыме, политических трениях и сирийском конфликте. Николаю Баскову перестали дарить цветы (ведь все розы ушли на празднование победы Трампа), а Филип Киркоров, даже роди он десять детей и одну обезьяну, не смог бы попасть на страницы известных таблоидов. Ибо все внимание приковано к Дональду – ещё вчера к 70-летнему старику с манией величия, а сегодня – к перспективному политику и владыке Северной Америки (точнее, её половины).
С именем Дональда Трампа сегодня связано всё. Политолог Сэм Ванг, ранее предрёкший поражение лидера республиканцев и сделав ставку на Хиллари, проиграл спор и съел живого сверчка в прямом эфире. Пока все наблюдали публичную казнь насекомого, в сети появились кадры якобы НЛО, кружившего возле вертолёта нового президента. Наверное, инопланетяне хотели селфи замутить с новым лидером.
На этом фоне известие, что Трамп принадлежит к роду киевских князей Рюриковичей, легко и органично вплелось в поток безумных новостей, связанных с миллиардером. Трамп оказался никем иным, как потомком варяга Рюрика – основателя княжеской династии на Руси. В этом уверен историк и эксперт в генеалогии Александр Нилогов. Ну, вот теперь всё встало на свои места, господа! Раскрыта тайна потрясающей харизмы и тонкого ума американского лидера. Наш он, наш! Матушка будущего президента Мэри Энн Трамп приходится потомком Рюрику сразу по трём линиям, в 36-м, 37-м и 38-м колене (чтобы уж наверняка). Родство идёт от дочери Ярослава Мудрого – Анны Ярославны, которая приходилась женой французскому королю Генриху I. Вторая линия связана с династией Стюартов и происходит от дочери Великого князя Мстислава Владимировича. Ну, и последняя линия — от Изяслава Ярославича.
Своё исследование историк провёл на основании открытых документов и в доказательство продемонстрировал рисунок генеалогического древа. Что же получается? Семь десятков лет ходил человек по земле под именем Дональд. Может, пришло время открыть всем глаза? Какой там Дональд?.. Добрыня! Добрыня и есть! Как сам трижды потомок Рюрика отреагировал на новость, пока неизвестно.
Автор открытия не считает новость сенсацией. Дескать, многие президенты США являются потомками европейских аристократических родов. А те, в свою очередь, в родстве с потомками Рюрика, в основном по женской линии. К слову, Барак Обама несмотря на цвет кожи и мелодичное второе имя «Хусейн» через свою матушку тоже является родичем Рюрика по женской линии. Но его президентские дни сочтены, и эта информация уже малоинтересна. | 0 |
Pingyang County’s verdant hills still hint at a China. Rice paddies and villages surround its bustling towns, and in the fields, farmers wade into the mud to plant seedlings as they have for thousands of years. It is an odd place to find the people behind a Chinese corporate powerhouse that is turning heads on Wall Street with a global takeover binge. Yet the area is home to a tiny group of just such people — merchants and villagers who happen to control stakes in the Anbang Insurance Group, which owns the Waldorf Astoria in New York and a portfolio of global names and properties. American regulators are now asking who these shareholders are — and whether they are holding their stakes on behalf of others. The questions add to the mystery surrounding a company that seemed to come out of nowhere, surprising deal makers with offers to pay more than $30 billion for assets around the world. Anbang’s shopping spree is part of an outflow of money from China that has reshaped global markets but has often been shrouded in secrecy, sometimes by prominent Chinese looking to shift their wealth abroad without attracting attention at home. That poses a problem for international regulators trying to identify the buyers behind major acquisitions and to assess the riskiness of these deals. The Anbang shareholders in the Pingyang County area hold their stakes through a byzantine collection of holding companies. But according to dozens of interviews and a review of thousands of pages of Anbang filings by The New York Times, many of them have something in common: They are family members and acquaintances of Wu Xiaohui, Anbang’s chairman, a native of the county who married into the family of Deng Xiaoping, China’s paramount leader in the 1980s and ’90s. In many ways, Anbang and Mr. Wu appear to be archetypal products of China’s mix of freewheeling capitalism and Communist Party dominance, a formula that has fueled nearly four decades of untrammeled growth. Anbang got its start as an auto insurance company in 2004 in the eastern Chinese city of Ningbo. For years it was only a minor player. But it took off as it became more aggressive with its finances, buying stakes in Chinese banks and bringing in money by selling investment funds to ordinary Chinese. Mr. Wu, 49, a former car salesman and antismuggling official, led Anbang through this transformation and is now known as one of China’s most successful businessmen. He wears tailored suits and polished loafers, hobnobs with the likes of Stephen A. Schwarzman of Blackstone, and sometimes holds court at Harvard. But he does not appear in Anbang’s filings as an owner. It is common in China for the wealthy to have their shares in companies held in others’ names. Known in Chinese as baishoutao, or white gloves, these people are often trusted relatives or acquaintances. Many defend the practice as a way to protect their privacy in a nation where riches can be a political liability. But others say white gloves can be used to hide gains and thwart corruption investigators. Anbang did not respond when asked if Mr. Wu was a shareholder and declined to answer questions about its owners. The company, a spokesman said, “has multiple shareholders who have made all required disclosures under Chinese law. They are a mix of individual and institutional shareholders who made a commercial decision to invest in the company. Anbang has now grown to be a global company thanks to the support of these shareholders. ” For investors and regulators, white gloves can make it difficult to evaluate the financial health of a Chinese buyer. Ownership may be concentrated in the hands of a few people, posing hidden risks, and companies with government connections could be vulnerable to political shifts or become magnets for corruption. “It is very important for businesses to know who they are ultimately doing business with, and for investors, what they are investing in,” said Keith Williamson, a managing director in Hong Kong at Alvarez Marsal, a firm that carries out corporate fraud investigations. It is not clear whether the shareholders in the Pingyang County region are holding large stakes on behalf of anyone else. But on May 27, Anbang withdrew its application with New York State to buy an Iowa insurer, Fidelity Guaranty Life, for $1. 6 billion. Regulators had asked about ties between several shareholders with the same family names, said one person briefed on the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity. A $6. 5 billion deal for a portfolio of hotels that includes the Essex House in New York and several Four Seasons locations is awaiting results from a security review by the American government. In March, Anbang withdrew a $14 billion bid for Starwood, the operator of Sheraton and Westin hotels, in a move that surprised Wall Street. The company could come under greater scrutiny as it prepares to sell shares in its life insurance business on the Hong Kong stock exchange next year. Already, at least one major New investment bank has raised concerns about Anbang’s ownership after studying its shareholding structure to evaluate whether to help with its overseas deals, according to two people involved in the matter who asked not to be identified because the process was private. The bank did not participate in Anbang’s deals. Separately, the Chinese magazine Caixin reported in May that Chinese regulators were examining Anbang’s riskier financial products. It is unclear where that inquiry stands or whether Anbang’s ownership structure is being investigated. President Xi Jinping has waged a campaign against graft since taking office, and the use of white gloves has recently come under scrutiny. “White gloves are accompanied by power’s black hands,” the Communist Party’s disciplinary watchdog wrote in a report last year. Questions about Anbang’s owners come as Chinese companies make deals around the world — sometimes representing efforts by China’s powerful to move money out of the country, as the economy slows and the party tightens its grip on everyday life. China has encouraged some capital outflow to improve the performance of its investments and expand its influence. But the subject of the elite moving money overseas is politically sensitive, raising questions about the source of their wealth and their confidence in the Chinese economy. Luo Yu, the son of a former chief of staff of China’s military, said China’s most politically powerful families had been transferring money out of the country for some time. “They don’t believe they will hold on to power long enough — sooner or later they would collapse,” said Mr. Luo, a former colonel in the Chinese Army whose younger brother was a business partner with one of Anbang’s founders. “So they transfer their money. ” At its founding in 2004, Anbang had an impressive list of politically connected directors. Records show early Anbang directors included Levin Zhu, son of a former prime minister, and Chen Xiaolu, the son of an army marshal who helped bring Communist rule to China. Then there was Mr. Wu, who was born Wu Guanghui but was known as Wu Xiaohui from a young age. Relatives said he grew up in a Catholic family a crucifix sat on his aunt’s dining room table, and she wears a necklace with a portrait of the Virgin Mary. Mr. Wu married Zhuo Ran, a granddaughter of Deng, the Chinese leader who brought China out of the chaos of the Mao era. Together, Mr. Wu, Ms. Zhuo, Mr. Chen and their relatives owned or ran the companies that controlled Anbang, according to company filings. Anbang leapt onto the global stage with last year’s purchase of the Waldorf Astoria and its aborted bid for the Starwood chain. By this year, Anbang’s assets had swelled to $295 billion. It is not clear what prompted Anbang’s sudden interest in overseas assets. But the shift came after a reshuffling of its ownership structure that also led to the injection of more than $7. 5 billion into the company. Company documents filed with Chinese agencies show that the number of firms holding Anbang’s shares jumped to 39, from eight, over six months in 2014. Most of those firms received large injections of funds. At the same time, Anbang’s capital more than quintupled. Ms. Zhuo disappeared from the ownership records by the end of that year. Many of Mr. Wu’s relatives did as well. Mr. Wu and Mr. Chen had disappeared earlier from the records. Mr. Zhu, who does not appear to have owned shares, disappeared in paper filings from Anbang’s roster of directors by 2009, though he was listed as a director on online government filings as late as 2014. Mr. Wu, Mr. Chen and Mr. Zhu did not respond to requests for comment, and Ms. Zhuo could not be reached. In March, Mr. Zhu told Chinese reporters that he was not an Anbang director. Anbang’s current shareholding firms are not names in China, and some appear to have been set up just to hold Anbang shares. One lists its address as the empty 27th floor of a dusty Beijing office building. Two more list an address at a mail drop above a Beijing post office. Using corporate filings, The Times compiled a list of nearly 100 people who own shares in the firms and traced about a dozen to Pingyang County or nearby. Reporters visited the area, in China’s eastern Zhejiang Province, and interviewed dozens of residents, including several whose names appeared on the list. They also interviewed an uncle, an aunt and a nephew of Mr. Wu. The latter two, as well as others in the area, said one name matched that of his sister, Wu Xiaoxia. The family members said several other names matched those of Mr. Wu’s extended kin, including two cousins and others on his mother’s side of the family. Through their various stakes in Anbang shareholding companies, these people control a stake representing more than $17 billion in assets. Other names matched local acquaintances of Mr. Wu, including Huang Maosheng, a local businessman who confirmed in a brief phone interview that he had a business relationship with Mr. Wu but declined to elaborate. One village leader and neighbors identified the names of four of Mr. Huang’s relatives — including some whom they described as common workers — from among those on the list. Their Anbang holdings represent about $12 billion in assets. Another resident, Mei Xiaojing, said two names on the list matched those of her relatives. Asked if she knew Mr. Wu, she said, “Well, yes,” then ended the phone conversation and did not respond to subsequent calls. Through multiple holding companies, those three people have a stake representing about $19 billion in Anbang assets. As Anbang rose, so did Mr. Wu’s profile. In 2013 Mr. Wu secured a yearlong position as a visiting fellow at the Asia Center of Harvard, joining a growing list of politically connected Chinese billionaires with ties to Harvard. Ezra F. Vogel, a professor emeritus at Harvard who wrote a biography of Deng, said he met Mr. Wu on several occasions. “He had this staff of sharp people who were working for him,” Mr. Vogel said. “It seems that they were doing the detail work, and he was the friendly man supplying the connections. ” | 1 |
Hillary Clinton Waiting In Wings Of Stage Since 6 A.M. For DNC Speech PHILADELPHIA—Saying she arrived hours before any of the members of the production crew, sources confirmed Thursday that presidential nominee Hillary Clinton has been waiting in the wings of the Wells Fargo Center stage since six o’clock this morning to deliver her speech at the Democratic National Convention. Depressed, Butter-Covered Tom Vilsack Enters Sixth Day Of Corn Bender After Losing VP Spot WASHINGTON—Saying she has grown increasingly concerned about her husband’s mental and physical well-being since last Friday, Christie Vilsack, the wife of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, told reporters Thursday that the despondent, butter-covered cabinet member has entered the sixth day of a destructive corn bender after being passed over for the Democratic vice presidential spot. DNC Speech: ‘I Am Proud To Say I Walked In On Bill And Hillary Having Sex’ A friend of the Clinton family describes a Hillary who America never gets to see: the one he saw having sex. Trump Sick And Tired Of Mainstream Media Always Trying To Put His Words Into Some Sort Of Context NEW YORK—Emphasizing that the practice was just more evidence of journalists’ bias against him, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump stated Thursday that he was sick and tired of the mainstream media always attempting to place his words into some kind of context. Who’s Speaking At The DNC: Day 4 Here is a guide to the major speakers who will be addressing attendees on the final night of the 2016 Democratic National Convention Bound, Gagged Joaquin Castro Horrified By What His Identical Twin Brother Might Be Doing Out On DNC Floor PHILADELPHIA—Struggling to free himself from the tightly wound lengths of rope binding his wrists and ankles together, bruised and gagged Texas congressman Joaquin Castro was reportedly horrified by what his identical twin brother, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julian Castro, might be out doing on the floor of the DNC Thursday. Obama: ‘Hillary Will Fight To Protect My Legacy, Even The Truly Detestable Parts’ PHILADELPHIA—Emphasizing the former secretary of state’s competence and tenacity during his Democratic National Convention address Wednesday night, President Barack Obama praised Hillary Clinton as someone who would work tirelessly to defend and advance the legacy he had built, even the “truly repugnant parts.” Tim Kaine Clearly Tuning Out In Middle Of Boring Vice Presidential Acceptance Speech PHILADELPHIA—Describing the look of total disinterest on his face and noting how he kept peering down at his watch as the speech progressed, sources at the Democratic National Convention said that Virginia senator Tim Kaine clearly began tuning out partway through the boring vice presidential acceptance address Wednesday night. Cannon Overshoots Tim Kaine Across Wells Fargo Center PHILADELPHIA—Noting that the vice presidential nominee had been launched nearly 100 feet into the air during his entrance into the Democratic National Convention Wednesday night, sources reported that the cannon at the back of the Wells Fargo Center had accidentally overshot Tim Kaine across the arena, sending him crashing to the stage several dozen feet beyond the erected safety net. Biden Regales DNC With Story Of ’80s Girl Band Vixen Breaking Hard Rock’s Glass Ceiling PHILADELPHIA—Devoting a large portion of his speech to the “pioneering, stiffy-inducing” all-female quartet, Vice President Joe Biden regaled the Democratic National Convention Wednesday night with the rousing story of the metal band Vixen breaking hard rock’s glass ceiling in the late 1980s. | 0 |
SAN FRANCISCO — As Yahoo prepares to accept bids for its core Internet business on Monday, potential buyers have found themselves facing one big problem: How do you value a company with a declining business when the company appears reluctant to share vital financial details? In meetings and phone calls with potential bidders, Yahoo executives have offered gloomy financial projections for the current year, but have refused to discuss the outlook for 2017 or answer questions about crucial aspects of the business. Some of the three dozen or so potential suitors have even questioned what is truly for sale. But several big companies are expected to place bids for Yahoo anyway, according to people briefed on the matter. Verizon Communications, which has publicly expressed interest in buying Yahoo’s core Internet business and merging it with its AOL division, plans to press forward with a bid, some of these people said. The Daily Mail, a British tabloid newspaper and website, said publicly that it had considered joining with potential investors, including one or more private equity firm, for a bid. And the private equity firm TPG plans to make a bid in the first round on its own, according to a person briefed on the matter. Yet other huge companies plan to sit out the bidding. Google, which competes with Yahoo on search and display advertising and has a search partnership with the company, considered making an offer, but is unlikely to proceed because it fears any deal would draw stiff antitrust scrutiny, according to people briefed on the company’s thinking. Other notable businesses, including ATT, CBS and the investment firms Silver Lake, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and General Atlantic, are unlikely to bid, according to others briefed on their plans. And SoftBank, the Japanese telecommunications giant that controls Yahoo Japan, does not plan to bid despite press reports to the contrary. A presentation shown to potential Yahoo bidders is dense with figures, but even people familiar with the company’s operations have struggled to make sense of them. At the same time, Yahoo devoted just a couple of slides to important strategies, like its costly Hail Mary project to create an entirely new mobile search experience to leapfrog competitors like Google, Apple and Amazon. Representatives of Verizon, Google, ATT and CBS declined to comment. A Yahoo spokeswoman also declined to comment on the sales process. Marissa Mayer, Yahoo’s chief executive, is expected to face questions about the bidding on Tuesday, when the company reports its latest quarterly earnings. The report should offer a window into how Yahoo is weathering the upheaval caused by the layoff of 15 percent of its work force announced in February. The total value of Yahoo shares is now about $35 billion. The company may also disclose sales of patents and real estate, which it began shopping a couple of months ago in the hope of raising $1 billion to $3 billion. One reason for Yahoo’s reluctance to share information may be that the business is worse than the company has publicly disclosed. That has added to confusion regarding the intentions of a board of directors that, just a few months ago, publicly said it had no intention of selling. Ms. Mayer has often said she wants to make Yahoo services a “daily habit” for Internet users. But after nearly four years of effort, only about 10 percent of the one billion monthly visitors to Yahoo sites return every day, suggesting little attachment to the brand, according to people who have seen confidential internal data. At Facebook, by comparison, 65 percent of users visit daily. Yahoo is in a difficult position. Ms. Mayer’s turnaround effort has failed to deliver significant improvements at a company that has been in decline for a decade. Ms. Mayer argues that she is turning the tide with new investments in areas like video and native advertising. Activist investors, led by the Starboard Value hedge fund, have run out of patience and are pressing the board to sell the core business, separating it from the company’s far more valuable investment stakes in Alibaba, China’s leading company, and Yahoo Japan, a separate, publicly traded company. Yahoo’s board, which spent more than a year working on other plans to separate the investment stakes, reluctantly agreed to explore a sale of all or parts of the company and hired three investment banking firms to run the process. Starboard has formally threatened a proxy fight to replace the entire board at the next shareholder meeting if the directors do not follow through on a sale. Ms. Mayer has publicly laid out a path for an independent Yahoo and made the case to potential bidders that they should retain her as chief to carry out the plan. Abandoning previous forays into video and digital magazines, Ms. Mayer, who formerly headed search at Google, is now focused on returning Yahoo to its glory days as a search engine. Although comScore says that Yahoo is currently the No. 3 player in desktop searches, behind Google and Microsoft, Ms. Mayer argues that Yahoo can leap ahead through a “complete reimagination of mobile search. ” Ms. Mayer has assigned about 1, 000 people to search products, or about 10 percent of the company’s staff, according to people briefed on the business. The mobile effort, Project Index, has officially been underway for two years and aims to create a search tool similar to Google Now on Android phones, Apple’s Siri, Microsoft’s Cortana and Amazon’s Alexa. But the team has little to show for its work, and many at Yahoo wonder whether it is a hopeless quest. Industry experts as well as Yahoo insiders say that without the location and personal data that Apple and Google have, Yahoo will have a difficult time predicting what people want with enough accuracy to get them to switch from other services. “There is a massive opportunity for mobile search,” said Keith Rabois, a partner at Khosla Ventures, who invests in search . “But I don’t think Yahoo has the core assets or skills you would need to succeed or thrive right now. ” A Yahoo spokesman said that the company was exploring many search ideas, including the use of software bots that would fetch information on behalf of users. Ms. Mayer’s vague plans for reversing Yahoo’s decline, along with the lack of disclosure about the company’s finances, have made prospective bidders nervous. Though several private equity firms have been looking at the company, people involved in the bidding process said that they were unlikely to prevail against a determined corporate buyer. Verizon is viewed by analysts as the leading bidder for Yahoo, but its likely offer comes despite trepidation among its executives, according to the people briefed on the bidding. Verizon is still struggling to digest its $4. 4 billion acquisition last year of AOL, and some executives worry that buying Yahoo would simply be doubling down on integration troubles. Verizon could certainly combine the content properties and ad products and networks run by Yahoo and AOL. The company, with more than 112 million cellphone customers on top of its landline Internet subscribers, would have the ability to preinstall Yahoo services and distribute them widely. However, the contracts governing Apple iPhones and phones running Google’s Android operating system generally restrict what phone carriers can do to promote alternatives for major services like search and email. So Yahoo would still need to build products good enough to persuade people to switch. Wall Street is hoping for a quick sale, to anybody, at any reasonable price. “We continue to believe that one of the greatest risks in the stock is the core being a ‘melting ice cube,’ as a prolonged sale process draws on, creating questions for employees, advertisers and partners,” wrote Robert Peck, an analyst with SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, on Wednesday. | 1 |
The latest Muslim terrorist attack ripped apart little girls at a concert in Manchester, England, on Monday, killing 22. The death and count is still rising. [This is not a game. When young British girls are the targets of a suicide bombing, can we take a short break from the posturing, political correctness and Russia conspiracy theorizing? Won’t the hatred of Trump keep for a few weeks? on Monday night was like watching broadcasts from different countries. While Fox News and CNN covered the terrorist attack, MSNBC concentrated on the real news of the night — TRUMP’S COLLUSION WITH RUSSIA — as children screamed in the background in footage from Manchester. It was a big enough step for MSNBC to stop claiming that the “explosion” was just popping balloons. The hosts reasoned, We know that Islam is a religion of peace, so what else could it be? CBS and NBC News finally produced the name of the suicide bomber — the next day. (After any terrorist attack, the media like to keep us in suspense for as long as possible about whether it was a Muslim or a Christian.) Even then, the answer was difficult to find on either network’s Twitter feeds, which were bristling with updates on former CIA Director John Brennan’s congressional testimony about Russia and Trump: Yes, collusion was investigated. No, Brennan is not aware of any evidence to support the theory. BREAKING NEWS! The media didn’t gaudily broadcast the bomber’s name, religion or ethnicity in their headlines, but at least they finally coughed up the information. He was Salman Abedi, son of Libyan “refugees. ” Apparently, the media think you can’t be trusted with that information. You might notice that the West is deliberately importing people who enjoy killing kids. According to ABC News, the bomber’s father, Ramadan Abedi (not to be confused with Huma Abedin) was a member of an Islamic group in Libya. For this, he was accepted as a “refugee” by the British government. Liberals’ main reaction to the attack was not to demand the toppling of the British government, but to worry about an upsurge in Islamophobia. They say there’s nothing we can do about terrorism and we probably shouldn’t do anything anyway, because we deserve it. These were teen and preteen girls! Is there any fuel left in the gas tank of humanity, or are we just running on fumes now? While liberals are impatient to get back to their murderous immigration policies, conservatives are pining for war. And really, who wouldn’t want to send ground troops to Syria after our tremendous successes in Iraq and Afghanistan? Why do we need to fight ISIS in Syria again? I forget. How about we NOT send U. S. troops to some godforsaken nation of primitives? My reasoning is: It will cost us trillions of dollars we will sacrifice the lives of an untold number of our best young men in combat (and little girls — thanks, liberals!) and we will accomplish absolutely nothing, apart from creating a new stream of “refugees” and making the primitives even angrier with us, if that’s possible. Historically, starting wars in the Third World has not proved salutary. Trump was elected for one reason: Because he promised to put Americans’ interests first. If only he’d stuck to his campaign promises, he’d be a hero right now. The one promise Trump has kept is the “Muslim ban” — and he’s looking prophetic on that. The Ninth Circuit was probably just about to release its opinion affirming a Hawaii judge’s revocation of Trump’s travel ban, but after Manchester, they’ll have to sit on it for a few weeks. Wouldn’t you rather be defending Trump for imposing a travel ban, building a wall and deporting “Dreamers,” than for idiotic leaks about nothing? If Trump started removing undesirable foreigners, liberals would rush back to the airports, en masse, and forget all about Russia. The most humane response to terrorist attacks in the West is to kill a bunch of them for revenge, and then concentrate on our own problems. Instead of sending ground troops to Syria, we should be sending them to San Diego. Our policy following every Islamic terrorist attack anyplace in the West should be the following: 1) We drop a nuke on some city involved in terrorism. 2) We add six months to the immigration moratorium (which Trump promised us in his Aug. 16, 2015, immigration policy paper, the greatest political document since the Magna Carta). 3) We deport one Ninth Circuit judge. Since Trump, politics has become a game to liberals. The media is a game. Hollywood is a game. Islamic terrorists are killing little girls in England. This isn’t a game. | 1 |
Home / Health / Former DEA Prescription Head Drops a BombShell — Congress Protects Big Pharma & Fuels Opioid Crisis Former DEA Prescription Head Drops a BombShell — Congress Protects Big Pharma & Fuels Opioid Crisis Claire Bernish October 31, 2016 8 Comments
Congress would rather protect the profits of pharmaceutical companies than the health of those addicted to dangerous opioid drugs, says a former head of the DEA responsible for preventing abuse of medications.
Joseph Rannazzisi, former Deputy Assistant Administrator at the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, asserts Big Pharma and its lobbyists have a “stranglehold” on legislators in Congress and have engineered the protection of a $9 billion per year industry over the health of American citizens, according to a report from the Guardian .
“Congress would rather listen to people who had a profit motive rather than a public health and safety motive,” he said, according to the outlet. “As long as the industry has this stranglehold through lobbyists, nothing’s going to change.”
Rannazzisi explained lobbyists have spent millions thwarting legislative and policy efforts to provide guidelines for reducing the prescribing of opioid medications closely related to heroin — and helped limit the DEA’s powers to discipline those who dispense unusually high dosages of the same.
A pharmacist himself, Rannazzisi severely criticized lawmakers he claims hold a double standard — publicly vowing to combat the opioid epidemic, while essentially working on behalf of pharmaceutical companies to ensure the industry’s profits.
“These congressmen and senators who are using this because they are up for re-election, it’s a sham,” he told the Guardian . “The congressmen and senators who are championing this fight, the ones who really believe in what they’re doing, their voices are drowned out because the industry has too much influence.”
With the unique insight of having been an insider, Rannazzisi excoriated the duplicity evidenced between legislators’ public lamentation of addiction and deaths from the opioid crisis during election years, and private efforts to protect drugmakers from liability.
And he would know. According to Rannazzisi’s LinkedIn profile, as Chief of Diversion, he had been tasked with “oversight and control of all regulatory compliance inspections and civil and criminal investigations of approximately 1.6 million DEA registrants” — but if the standards are lowered by Congress to allow greater leeway in prescribing opioids, the threshold of criminality is raised.
As the Guardian points out, legislation to fight the opioid epidemic, Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act , did, in fact, pass in July — but partisan controversy erupted when Republicans failed to provide funding to give the law sharp teeth. Democrats then issued a report titled “ Dying Waiting for Treatment ” in response, which “likened the Republican response to the opioid crisis to ‘using a piece of chewing gum to patch a cracked dam.’”
Indeed the report sharply criticized the bill, equating its policies to ‘empty promises’ for the lack of financial follow-through.
As the Washington Post detailed in a report earlier this month, the DEA launched an aggressive campaign to rein in distribution of opioids by pharmaceutical manufacturers to illegal ‘pill mills’ and corrupt pharmacies, who cared little whether the drugs wound up on the streets.
Headed by Rannazzisi, the Office of Diversion Control sent investigators into the field, and began issuing hefty fines and filing lawsuits against the distributors responsible for the proliferation of opioids on the streets.
But the disproportionately powerful pharmaceutical industry — fearing a potential significant loss in profits — fought back. Hard.
According to the Post , the deputy attorney general summoned Rannazzisi to a meeting in 2012, concerning the cases of two unnamed major drug companies.
“That meeting was to chastise me for going after industry, and that’s all that meeting was about,” the now-retired DEA official told the Post .
Then, in 2014, came what constituted a hand out to the pharmaceutical industry by the Department of Justice and congressional legislators: the Ensuring Patient Access and Effective Drug Enforcement Act — legislation initiated by the Healthcare Distribution Management Association — the industry group representing distributors at the heart of the controversy.
An analysis of lobbying records by the Post found “the Healthcare Distribution Alliance, spent $13 million lobbying House and Senate members and their staffs on the legislation and other issues between 2014 and 2016.”
Rannazzisi argued his case to congressional staffers in a phone conference in July 2014, and recalled telling them, “This bill passes the way it’s written we won’t be able to get immediate suspension orders, we won’t be able to stop the hemorrhaging of these drugs out of these bad pharmacies and these bad corporations.”
Stunned at the massive — and ultimately successful — effort to take the bite out of DEA attempts to hold distributors and drugmakers responsible for their role in an epidemic estimated to take 19,000 lives every year, Rannazzisi likened the legislation to a “free pass” for legal drug pushers.
“This doesn’t ensure patient access and it doesn’t help drug enforcement at all,” he told the Guardian. “What this bill does has nothing to do with the medical process. What this bill does is take away DEA’s ability to go after a pharmacist, a wholesaler, manufacturer or distributor.”
“This was a gift. A gift to the industry,” he added.
After heading the diversion office for a decade, Rannazzisi retired in 2015 — likely disgusted over legislators’ dedication to the legal drug industry, rather than the people whose interests they’re ostensibly obligated to protect.
“The bill passed because ‘Big Pharma’ wanted it to pass,” he told the Guardian in no uncertain terms. “The DEA is both an enforcement agency and a regulatory agency. When I was in charge what I tried to do was explain to my investigators and my agents that our job was to regulate the industry and they’re not going to like being regulated.”
Big Pharma relies overwhelmingly on lobbyists filling the coffers of politicians to ensure they ignore the crisis gripping the nation. As the Center for Public Integrity found , the Guardian noted, Purdue Pharma — at the heart of the epidemic for its highly-addictive drug introduced in the late 1990s, OxyContin — spent a breathtaking $740 million in the last ten years on congressional lobbying efforts.
However, Big Pharma’s power to influence policy and legislation extends far beyond simple but effective lobbying — the government-run Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee (IPRCC) has been accused by Sen. Ron Wyden of being a tool to “weaken” CDC guidelines for limiting overprescribing of opioids.
Wyden wrote to Secretary of Health and Human Services Sylvia Burwell of his concerns the IPRCC had been staffed with ‘experts’ with conflicts of interest for their close ties to Big Pharma, including a scientist with a $1.5 million endowment from Purdue, reported the Guardian .
“You’ve got a panel that’s certainly got a fair number of people that have a vested interest in this problem of overprescribing. That’s something you’ve got to root out,” Wyden asserted . “The role of the pharmaceutical companies on these advisory panels troubles me greatly. Science is getting short shrift compared to the political clout of these influential interests.”
Families of countless addicts and victims of the opioid industry would undoubtedly find the direct influence of Big Pharma’s pro-opioid cash appalling — yet it continues to this day. Policies and legislation have not yet been given the appropriate funding needed to effectively combat the problem, which swirls out of control while politicians and drugmakers reap blood-tainted profits.
“Corporations have no conscience,” Rannazzisi flatly told the Guardian . “Unfortunately, with my job, I was the guy who had to go out and talk to families that lost kids. If one of those CEOs went out there and talked to anybody, or if one of those CEOs happened to lose a kid to this horrible, horrible domestic tragedy we have, I’d bet you they’d change their mind.
“When you sit with a parent who can’t understand why there’s so many pharmaceuticals out in the illicit marketplace, and why isn’t the government doing anything, well the DEA was doing something. Unfortunately what we’re trying to do is thwarted by people who are writing laws.” Share Google + skyp0ckets
You know, even if a pharma head talked to the family of someone who lost a loved one to opiod addiction, or had a family member suffer that fate, I don’t think it would change them in the least. These people who are hard-wired to accumulate massive amounts of wealth are usually somewhere between sociopathic and psychopathic. This is why it is very difficult for people to trust medicine, and in many cases, the doctors who dispense it. Have you ever been sitting in a waiting room and watched the number of salespeople revolve in and out, many with carry-out food? Disgusting. Bwin51
Ever notice how the sales reps are all well dressed attractive women? rav1 TZM_TVP_RBE
The entire system is inherently corrupt.
Imagine you are the CEO of one of these Big Pharma corporations and you decided to cut the price of your drugs across the board, making them accessible to everyone that needed them. You would be out the door so fast your head would spin!
The board and the shareholders would be furious and demand a CEO that only cares about share prices.
And so you have it, inherent corruption.
The solution:
http://www.thevenusproject.com/the-venus-project/ Bwin51
If there was ever a conspiracy, it’s this one where government and business agree that those who wish to abuse drugs to their eventual demise are given the freedom to destroy themselves, reproduce freely thereby creating a new generation of consumers, generating profits for a few and tax dollars for the country. It’s not the cost of pharmaceuticals as much as the enablement of opioid addiction in the name of profits that is disturbing. Purdue pharma had an opportunity to change their formulation of OxyContin long ago to make their drug nonaddicting, but they chose not to according to Chasing the Scream. If that’s true, and so far no one has denied the assertion, then what do we have here.
This is a “bombshell”? I thought it was common knowledge. rav1
We’ve known this for some time now – maybe it’s a bombshell to those who believe and defend the corrupt system – but… it’s been known for a long time.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c1fa9675331c053172286e53581c0496949f8edca27ba323bad684cf6b5fc19d.png
And think of what lobbyists dole out to Congressmen to force us to BUY AMERICAN rather than CANADIAN for exactly the same BRAND NAME DRUGS!
Lets See if Clinton can make this the major effort in 2018 when Congressmen need to be reelected at OUR EXPENSE!!!
Here’s a US-CANADA comparison of common drug prices US and CANADA.
Read the comments too! | 0 |
Haaretz reports: According to Syrian reports on Sunday, a Syrian man was killed when the vehicle he was driving was fired on by an Israeli drone in the Quneitra area in the Golan Heights. According to reports on social media, the fatality was a Hezbollah member named Yasser Assayed. [مصادر محلية: طائرة إسرائيلية مسيرة عن بعد قصفت سيارة مدنية ما أدى لمقتل شخص من آل السيد بمحافظة #القنيطرة pic. twitter. — الاتحاد برس (@alEtihad_Press) March 19, 2017, There have been several reports as to Assayed’s role. According to reports on Syrian opposition websites, the man was a senior officer in the regime’s air defense system. At the same time, an official affiliated with the Syrian regime told Haaretz that Assayed is a member of the Golan Battalion, a mostly Druze militia that supports Syrian President Bashar Assad. The Israel Defense Forces refused to comment on the reports. Read the full story here. | 1 |
Why BPA Hasn’t Been Banned? VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
If the synthetic estrogen BPA is linked to billions of dollars’ worth of medical problems a year, why is it still allowed in the food supply? Why BPA Hasn’t Been Banned?
“The number of new chemicals is increasing exponentially”—we’re talking 12,000 new substances a day. Yet, data aren’t available on the hazards of even some of the high volume chemicals. BPA is one of the highest volume chemicals, with billions of pounds produced each year. And, studies have “raised concerns about its possible implication in the [cause] of some chronic diseases, such as diabetes, obesity, reproductive disorders, cardiovascular diseases, birth defects, chronic respiratory and kidney diseases and breast cancer.”
A new study on the health implications of BPA comes out nearly every week. BPA was first developed over a hundred years ago as a synthetic estrogen. But it wasn’t until the 1950s that industry realized it could be used to make polycarbonate plastic, and it rapidly became one of the most used chemicals worldwide, even though it was recognized to have hormonal effects. About a billion pounds are also used to line food and beverage cans—especially, it seems, in tuna and condensed soups.
And now, we basically all have BPA in our bodies, and our children’s bodies. But, not to worry; the government says up to 50 a day is safe; 50 micrograms per kilogram. And, even those working in Chinese BPA factories don’t get exposed to more than like 70 times lower than that safety limit. Okay, then, why did exposure seem to affect the male workers’ sperm counts?
In the U.S., the general population only gets less than like a thousand times lower than the safety limit. Yet, still, we seem to be seeing “adverse effects on thyroid function, weight control, blood sugar control, cardiovascular disease, liver function, and immune function”—even at those incredibly low doses. So, “[t]he fact that there are significant adverse effects in populations exposed to BPA at concentrations [thousands of] times lower than the [official tolerable daily limit] indicates that the safe exposure to BPA may be much lower than previously thought in humans.” Yet, the limit hasn’t been changed. It’s been banned from baby bottles and sippy cups, but nearly unlimited doses are still apparently okay for everyone else. What’s the disconnect here?
It has to do with the fascinating world of low-dose effects of hormone-disrupting chemicals. “For decades, [these chemicals] “have challenged traditional concepts in toxicology”—particularly the old adage that it’s “the dose makes the poison,” the concept “that lower exposures to a hazardous compound will, therefore, always generate lower risks.” That’s “the core assumption underlying [our] system of chemical-safety testing.” They start dosing lab animals with super high amounts, and then keep lowering the dose until whatever adverse effects disappear; then, add a safety buffer, and assume everything below that dose should be okay, assuming the curve looks like this. You know, the higher the dose, the higher the effect. But, hormone-disrupting chemicals can have all sorts of “curious curves.” Basically, how could something have more of an effect at a lower dose?
Think about a hormone, and its receptors in the body. At low levels of the hormone, like going from 0 to 1, the receptors can fill up quickly. But, once they’re almost all filled up, going from 4 to 5, adding really high doses may not change things much. Let’s use an actual BPA example. This was a study to see if BPA suppressed an obesity-protective hormone in fat samples taken from breast reduction and tummy tuck patients. As you can see, at a hundred nanomoles of BPA (I feel like a weatherman here!), but at a hundred nanomoles of BPA, you can see hormone levels are no lower than they are at 0 BPA. And, since most people have levels like between 1 and 20, then BPA must be safe. But, here’s the actual graph. So, no suppression at 0; no suppression at 100. But, right where levels are in people’s bodies, BPA appears to cut hormone release nearly in half.
As the world’s oldest, largest, and most active organization devoted to research on hormones concluded, “even infinitesimally low levels of exposure—indeed, any level of exposure at all—may cause [problems],” nearly three billion dollars’ worth of problems every year, just counting the estimated effects of BPA on childhood obesity and heart disease alone.
Now, there are alternatives that the industry could use; the problem, though, is that they may cost two cents more. | 0 |
With the Social Security gun ban repealed and the lead ammunition ban revoked, the House is now eyeing a repeal of the gun ban for U. S. military veterans. [The gun ban for military veterans works in the same way the Social Security gun ban was designed to work, and was actually a precursor to the Social Security ban. In the Social Security ban, the Social Security Administration (SSA) could investigate beneficiaries who were under mental duress and needed help managing their finances. Following the investigation, the beneficiaries could be turned over to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) and prohibited from making firearm purchases. In the gun ban for military veterans, the Veterans Administration does the investigation of military personnel receiving disability benefits. If the VA declares said recipients “incompetent,” those recipients are turned over NICS and barred from buying firearms. In the gun ban for military veterans, the Veterans Administration does the investigation of military personnel receiving disability benefits. If the VA declares said recipients “incompetent,” those recipients are turned over to NICS and barred from buying firearms. As seen with the Social Security gun ban, the gun ban for military veterans operates by using the broad language of mental health to deny natural rights to those who served our country in uniform. The reports that military veterans turned over to NICS are “subject to a lifetime ban on the acquisition and possession of firearms, unless he or she successfully petitions for ‘relief from disabilities. ’” The legislation that will end the gun ban for military veterans is House Committee on Veteran Affairs chairman Phil Roe’s ( ) Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act. Roe’s Act has already passed in committee and will be taken up by the full house as early as this week. On December 5, 2012, Breitbart News reported that Senator Chuck Schumer ( ) was supporting an amendment to strip gun rights from military veterans via the language of mental health. Schumer defended the action, saying, “If you are mentally ill, whether you’re a veteran or not, just like if you’re a felon, if you’re a veteran or not, and you have been judged mentally infirm, you should not have a gun. ” AWR Hawkins is the Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and host of Bullets with AWR Hawkins, a Breitbart News podcast. He is also the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart. com. | 1 |
Last week, our first Friday mailbag was mostly election themed, with Donald Trump’s surprise victory occupying most readers’ minds. This week has been no different: The number of letters only increased over the weekend and during the first half of the week, coming in — at their highest rate — at around 500 per day. Many readers were still questioning The Times’s election coverage — more on that in Sunday’s public editor column. Another related topic was the paper’s plans to cover the Trump presidency over the next four years. Some offered suggestions. Several other writers proposed methods for responding to a president whose falsehoods, thus far, have been difficult to keep up with. Others offered words of encouragement in response to the ’s barrage of angry tweets about The Times. One reader wrote: When The Times reported on Trump’s first White House appointees, many readers believed that the paper was already normalizing Trump’s presidency by inaccurately describing them. On The Times’s description of Trump’s pick to reshape the Environmental Protection Agency, Myron Ebell, as a climate “contrarian”: (A memo that went out to Times editors last year advised that the paper “should not use the shorthand ‘climate skeptics’ except when referring to the (relatively few) trained scientists who see only moderate consequences in global warming. Other doubters — political, religious, whatever — need a more deliberate description, like ‘people who reject established climate science’ or, subsequently, ‘climate denialists’ or ‘climate contrarians.’ ”) On The Times’s description of Trump’s pick for a top White House post, Stephen Bannon, as “a media provocateur” and “a nationalist media mogul”: Some readers were mystified by The Times’s postelection analysis. Several were concerned with a story that featured a map describing two separate Americas: one Hillary Clinton’s, one Trump’s. A story on the Trump camp’s refusal to close the door on putting Hillary Clinton in jail raised readers’ eyebrows when it compared Trump’s possible investigation to President Obama’s decision over whether to investigate the George W. Bush administration for torture. The sentence has since been updated, though readers were not notified. The earlier sentence read: “The decision [Trump] faces echoes one confronted by Mr. Obama and his first attorney general, Eric H. Holder Jr. over whether to investigate Bush administration officials for extreme interrogation tactics against terrorism suspects that the Obama administration later deemed to be torture. ” It was changed to: “When Mr. Obama took office, he and his first attorney general, Eric H. Holder Jr. also faced a decision over whether to investigate the previous administration. ” One reader wrote: The public editor’s take: The editors were wise to rethink their comparison. Equating Clinton’s email travails to the actions of C. I. A. water boarders just doesn’t hold up. After a Times live briefing included the term “death tax,” a slew of readers wrote in to point out the misstep. One reader wrote: We raised the concern with the editor of the briefing he told us that the term had slipped by, and that he’d discuss it with the author. (The term still remains in the briefing at time of publication.) Notwithstanding the various complaints — and Trump’s claim otherwise — The Times this week reported a drastic uptick in paid subscriptions since the election — 41, 000, to be exact. Many of the new subscribers wrote in to our office to explain their decisions. One reader even asked how he could go a step further: Another reader said she would will be relying on The Times not just for its reporting but also for inspiration. Although we can’t speak for the newsroom, we can promise Beth that the public editor’s office will do its best to help the newsroom answer the call. | 1 |
Last year, after some players used the sport to protest against the country, the U. S. Women’s National soccer team added a rule requiring all players to stand for the playing of the national anthem. But, one of the players whose actions forced the rule by refusing to stand, Megan Rapinoe, is insisting that she won’t stop speaking out about social issues no matter what rules the team implements. [Rapinoe, 31, took flack last season for joining former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick in his protests by taking a knee instead of standing during the anthem. But, after several players indulged the protests, the national team added rules requiring all players representing the U. S. to stand during the anthem. The player, who has been on national teams since 2003, says she will obey the new rule but it won’t stop her from speaking about about the “inequality” she claims to see in the U. S. A. “What has surprised me the most, especially is that people are still sort of arguing against it. It’s really obvious that we have very serious inequality in this country across many different spectrums,” Rapinoe told the U. K. Guardian. “Yes, we can talk about the form of protest, or the way it’s done, or this or that. But it’s still not really the conversation that I think we desperately need to have more of in this country. ” Rapinoe insisted that the anthem protest is not the only way to speak out against the United States. “I don’t think there’s any perfect way to protest. I think if there was something else being done, something else would have been said about it,” Rapinoe exclaimed. “I can’t look back and say that I would have done this different, this different or this different. ” But the player also said that she was not sorry for her protests. “I can sleep at night knowing that I genuinely tried to have a really important conversation, or at least tried to open it up,” she said. “I think I came to it with an open mind, an open heart and tried to get as many people to talk about it as I could. ” “God forbid you be a gay woman and a person of color in this country because you’d be really fu**ed,” she added. Rapinoe also said she is widening her protests after “learning” more about the “inequalities” in the U. S. “As I got more into gay rights, I got more into equal pay and you just see that it’s all connected. You can’t really speak out on one thing and not another without it not being the full picture,” she insisted. “We need to talk about a larger conversation in this country about equality in general and respect — especially with the recent election and subsequent narrative that’s coming from the White House right now. ” “I hope to continue to have the conversation,” Rapinoe concluded. “Hopefully people who disagree with me continue to have the conversation and we can kind of open each other up even more than we already have. ” Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail. com. | 1 |
WASHINGTON — F. B. I. officials questioned Hillary Clinton extensively about her judgment in using her private email system to discuss classified drone strikes and in allowing aides to destroy large numbers of emails, before ultimately deciding she should not face criminal charges, according to investigative documents released Friday. The documents provided a number of new details about Mrs. Clinton’s private server, including what appeared to be a frantic effort by a computer specialist to delete an archive of her emails even after a congressional committee had requested they be preserved. In a interview with the Justice Department’s top counterintelligence officials on July 2, Mrs. Clinton defended her handling of the private email system by repeatedly saying she had deferred to the judgment of her aides, an F. B. I. summary of the interview showed. Mrs. Clinton’s use of the private server has shadowed her presidential campaign for a year and a half. And the newly disclosed records, while largely reinforcing what had already been known about the F. B. I. investigation, provided Republicans more ammunition to attack the Democratic nominee’s judgment and honesty as she heads into the final, Day phase of the campaign. Among the other key findings in the F. B. I. documents: ■ Mrs. Clinton regarded emails containing classified discussions about planned drone strikes as “routine. ” ■ She said she was either unaware of or misunderstood some classification procedures. ■ Colin L. Powell, a former secretary of state, had advised her to “be very careful” in how she used email. The F. B. I. documents show that an unnamed computer specialist deleted the archive of Mrs. Clinton’s emails weeks after the existence of the private server became public in March 2015. Days after The New York Times first reported that Mrs. Clinton had used a private email system exclusively as secretary of state, the House committee investigating the 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya, asked that her emails be preserved and subpoenaed those that were related to the attacks. About three weeks later, however, the unnamed specialist “had an ‘oh shit’ moment” and realized that he had not destroyed an archive of emails that was supposed to have been deleted a year earlier, according to the F. B. I. report. The specialist then used a program known as BleachBit to delete an unknown number of emails, according to the report. Mrs. Clinton told investigators that she was unaware that the aide had deleted the emails. Dozens of times during her interview, Mrs. Clinton said she did not remember details about the server or guidance she had received on how to handle classified information. In its summary of the investigation, the F. B. I. said that Mrs. Clinton had emailed Colin Powell, a former secretary of state, a day after she was sworn in to office about Mr. Powell’s use of a personal email account when he was the country’s top diplomat. Mr. Powell warned Mrs. Clinton that if she used her BlackBerry for official business, those emails could become “official record[s] and subject to the law. ” Mr. Powell, apparently implying that he was cautious in his use of a personal email account, added: “Be very careful. I got around it all by not saying much and not using systems that captured the data. ” According to the summary of her interview, Mrs. Clinton said that she did not know exactly what Mr. Powell was saying in that email and that his message “did not factor into her decision to use a personal email account. ” F. B. I. officials appear to have questioned Mrs. Clinton most aggressively about her judgment in using her private, unsecured system to get emails about how or where the Obama administration was planning to launch drone strikes against terrorism suspects, the documents indicated. The F. B. I. showed her one email after another containing information about possible drone strikes that was considered classified. But Mrs. Clinton appeared almost blasé in explaining her use of her private system to gather information on drone strikes. After being shown one email that was redacted from the public release of her emails, Mrs. Clinton “stated deliberation over a future drone strike did not give her cause for concern regarding classification,” according to the F. B. I. summary of the interview. “Clinton understood this type of conversation as part of the routine deliberation process,” the summary said. “Moreover, she recalled many conversations about future strikes that never occurred. ” Mrs. Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall, declined to comment. In a statement, her campaign said it was pleased that the F. B. I. had made the documents public. “While her use of a single email account was clearly a mistake and she has taken responsibility for it, these materials make clear why the Justice Department believed there was no basis to move forward with this case,” the campaign said. But Representative Jason Chaffetz, Republican of Utah and the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said that the deletion of the emails violated an order his committee issued to Mrs. Clinton in 2012 and a subpoena issued by the Benghazi committee in 2015. He said he planned to seek answers from Mrs. Clinton about the deletions. “These were not Hillary Clinton’s emails — they were government records, and this was potentially one of the largest security breaches at the State Department because they had all these years of security records that just went out the door,” Mr. Chaffetz said. “It’s a very order. There’s no wiggle room. ” Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, called the F. B. I. documents “a devastating indictment of her judgment, honesty and basic competency. ” The F. B. I. released only small portions of its thick files on the Clinton investigation, and Senator Charles E. Grassley, the Iowa Republican who leads the Senate Judiciary Committee, accused the F. B. I. of withholding key documents — including many unclassified ones — from public view. The selective release, he said, produced “an incomplete and possibly misleading picture of the facts without the other unclassified information that is still locked away from the public and even most congressional staff. ” Mrs. Clinton told F. B. I. investigators that she had used a personal email server “out of convenience” and did not remember anyone raising legal concerns about the practice. She also said that she “did not recall receiving any emails she thought should not be on an unclassified system,” the F. B. I. documents say. “She relied on State officials to use their judgment when emailing her and could not recall anyone raising concerns with her regarding the sensitivity of the information she received at her email address,” they say. The document summarizing Mrs. Clinton’s interview, known in the F. B. I. as a 302 report, runs only a dozen pages. The memorandum on the investigation is lengthier, and goes into greater detail about aspects of the case. The materials were presumably provided to James B. Comey, the F. B. I. director, who later decided to not recommend charges in the case. A senior law enforcement official said the interview at F. B. I. headquarters had been intended “to fill the gaps” of what the F. B. I. did not know about why Mrs. Clinton used a private email server. Both documents were partly redacted, which slowed their release as the bureau sought to protect some information while satisfying the public’s right to know. The documents offer the most detailed account of Mrs. Clinton’s role from the bureau’s yearlong investigation into whether she or her aides broke the law by using a private system — clintonemail. com — to send tens of thousands of emails about government business, including classified matters. | 1 |
You could almost hear the gasps from both sides of the ideological divide when President Trump unveiled the outline of his first budget late last month, proposing to slice $54 billion from the discretionary civilian budget next year to pay for a defense. That part of the budget pays for pretty much everything the government does other than the military, pensions and health insurance for older people. And it has been slashed repeatedly already. It adds up to only some $500 billion, hardly the best place to balance a $4 trillion federal budget. After Mr. Trump’s proposed cuts it would be 25 percent smaller than it was in 2010, adjusted for inflation. Even Republicans in Congress, no friends of government spending, argued that the math made little sense. While they share Mr. Trump’s twin goals of balancing the budget and slashing taxes, they would prefer to square the circle by cutting the entitlements of Social Security and Medicare. And yet Mr. Trump’s approach possesses a powerful political logic: The frazzled, anxious men and women who voted for him like Social Security, Medicare and defense. Other government spending, not so much. Notably, there is little political cost for Mr. Trump — in fact, potential benefit — in going after programs for the poor. These programs appeal to two constituencies that voters show little affinity for: the poor and urban liberal elites who can express enormous sympathy for the disenfranchised while ignoring the struggle of the white working class. While Mr. Trump is not the first Republican to propose cutting programs to pay for tax cuts, his bluntness breaks, at least rhetorically, with a Republican establishment that insists it cares about poverty. His political calculation could, paradoxically, protect Social Security and Medicare, entitlements that the Republican Party has tried so hard to rein in. But in areas as diverse as food stamps and housing assistance, education for the disadvantaged and Head Start, it could further fray the rest of America’s threadbare social safety net. In “White Working Class: Overcoming Class Cluelessness in America,” due out in May from Harvard Business Review Press, Joan C. Williams argues that white workers’ resentment of the safety net should not be surprising: They get next to no benefit from it. Ms. Williams, a professor at the University of California Hastings College of the Law, writes that these struggling workers resent not only the poor beneficiaries of the government’s largess but also the liberal policy makers who seem to believe that only the poor are deserving of help. And they bristle at the perceived condescension of a liberal elite that seems to blame them for their failure to acquire the necessary skills to rise to the professional class. By contrast, they see themselves as citizens who struggle to make ends meet, only to be left out of many of the government programs their taxes pay for. Over all, 61 percent of poor Americans draw from one benefit program or another, according to an analysis by the Census Bureau. But among families with incomes above the poverty line — many of which are barely better off, making just over $24, 000 for a family of four — only 13 percent do. Struggling families may not understand that welfare programs are so meager that the poor hardly get any help. But they can directly understand that they missed out on the tax credit because their family income hit $50, 000. It is not surprising that harried working mothers resent that 30 percent of families using child care receive some form of subsidy while families get next to nothing. “All they see is their daily lives, and they resent subsidies and sympathy available to the poor,” Professor Williams wrote. President Barack Obama’s signature legislation, the Affordable Care Act — the most significant expansion of the safety net since the War on Poverty in the 1960s — has unsurprisingly bred class resentment, too. Many disgruntled workers see it as another program for poor people that just pushed up their own premiums, offering little of benefit. The whites who turned out so enthusiastically for Mr. Trump include people like Lee Sherman, 82, from Louisiana, living precariously on Social Security after a life of hard and dangerous work fitting pipes, and exposed to all manner of toxic chemicals, at a petrochemical plant. Aversion to the safety net is built into his moral view of the world. “He knew liberal Democrats wanted him to care more about welfare recipients,” wrote the sociologist Arlie Russell Hochschild, who portrayed Mr. Sherman in her book “Strangers in Their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right” (The New Press). “But he didn’t want their P. C. rules telling him who to feel sorry for. ” To people like Mr. Sherman, government benefits tied to work, like Social Security and unemployment insurance, are legitimate rewards for one’s effort. Welfare recipients, by contrast, just “lazed around days and partied at nights,” he told Professor Hochschild. Racial mistrust is never far from the surface: Only 13 percent of whites draw benefits from programs, according to the Census Bureau analysis, compared with 42 percent of and 36 percent of Hispanics. So while most beneficiaries of welfare programs are white, many whites perceive them as schemes to hand their tax dollars to minorities. Mr. Trump’s agenda serves both race and class resentment: Whites are twice as likely as blacks to prefer a smaller government, according to a Pew Research Center survey. Among Americans, 56 percent would like the government to be smaller and offer fewer services, while among the poor, only 38 percent would like the government to shrink. It is the whites whom Mr. Trump has promised to serve. These resentments are hard to swallow on the left of the political spectrum. Since the 1960s, at least, liberal activists have held to the belief that a grand progressive alliance was possible: working men and women, the poor, immigrants, racial and other minorities coming together in a coalition to counter conservatives and their corporate allies. November’s election — when whites without a college degree voted for Mr. Trump over Hillary Clinton by 39 percentage points — pretty much drove a stake into those hopes. But could they be revived? As the president takes an ax to much of the government, the pressing question for liberals is whether a coalition can be built to protect the meager social safety net that remains. Could they draw back in the white voters who rejected them so soundly in November? These voters care less about gender rights and minorities. They may not share liberal views on abortion rights. They are unlikely to support a safety net that allows a poor woman to stay at home while offering nothing to a couple day and night shifts to care for their children. But, Professor Williams notes, the liberal goal can’t be saved without them: “If America’s policy makers better understood white anger against the social safety net, they might have a shot at creating programs that don’t get gutted in this way. ” | 1 |
Pakistani troops are seen in a village near the Line of Control (LoC) in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, October 1, 2016. (Photo by AFP)
Pakistan’s army says Indian troops have killed two civilians in the disputed region of Kashmir.
A military statement said on Wednesday that “unprovoked” firing by the Indian forces took place along the “working boundary,” which separates Pakistan’s Punjab province from Indian-controlled Kashmir.
The two were killed in the village of Chaprar, the statement said, adding that "eight civilians were also injured by the Indian fire."
Separately, a Pakistani civilian who was injured due to an earlier cross-border shelling succumbed to injuries on Wednesday.
The Pakistani military said, "Another civilian... who was injured by the Indian firing at Line of Control (LoC) Monday (October 24), succumbed to injuries today."
Tensions have been running high along the Line of Control, which divides the two neighbors in Kashmir. Pakistani villagers show the wall of a house damaged by heavy mortar shells fired by Indian troops in the border village of Chaprar on October 24, 2016. (Photo by AFP)
The Pakistani Foreign Ministry summoned a senior Indian diplomat to lodge a protest "over the unprovoked firing by India on the LoC and the working boundary on October 25 and 26."
The ministry called on India to "instruct its troops to respect the ceasefire" and "refrain from intentionally targeting the villages and maintain peace."
Relations between the two countries have plummeted in recent months, with India blaming Pakistan for a raid on an army base in Indian-controlled Kashmir in September that killed 19 soldiers. New Delhi responded with what it called "surgical strikes," infuriating Islamabad.
Kashmir has been divided between India and Pakistan but claimed in full by both since the two countries gained independence from Britain in 1947.
India and Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire in Kashmir on November 26, 2003, and launched a peace process the following year. Since then, there have been sporadic clashes, with the two sides trading accusations of violating the ceasefire along their de facto border. Loading ... | 0 |
Speaker Ryan’s plan to repeal and replace Obamacare elicits calls of “ ” in some quarters. [Here are some of the larger reforms in the Ryan’s American Health Care Act: Individual Mandate, Under Obamacare, individuals are required to purchase health insurance or pay a penalty. The Ryan plan replaces the individual mandate penalty with a penalty payable to the health insurance companies. Individuals who forgo health insurance for longer than 63 days face a 30 percent surcharge on their health insurance premiums. Since premiums are based on age, older Americans face a more expensive penalty for forgoing health insurance. The Ryan mandate’s penalty is based on age, not on income, so Americans could be subject to a disproportionately higher penalty than wealthier Americans. Employer Mandate, Obamacare required that employers with 50 or more employees must provide health insurance to their employees and their dependents. The American Health Care Act repeals the employer mandate. Taxes on ‘Cadillac’ Health Plans, The Affordable Care Act taxed expensive health care plans provided by employers at 40 percent. Rather than repealing the Cadillac tax, Speaker Ryan’s plan delays the Cadillac tax until 2025. Repeal of Various Taxes, Paul Ryan’s plan would repeal taxes on: Refundable Tax Credits The American Health Care Act creates refundable tax credits for individuals to purchase health insurance. The tax credits are adjusted by age: These credits are available for those making $75, 000 or those who file jointly at $150, 000, and the credit phases out by $100 for every $1, 000 higher in income in these age brackets. Raises Limits on Contributions to Health Savings Accounts, Health Savings Accounts allow individuals and families to pay for out of pocket costs medical costs. The American Health Care Act raises the annual contribution limit to $6, 550 or $13, 100 for family coverage. Essential Health Benefits, Paul Ryan’s Obamacare replacement retains Obamacare’s essential health benefits. The essential health benefits provisions requires that insurers maintain a minimum level of coverage, including emergency services, prescription drugs, laboratory services, vision, and dental. State Innovation Funds, The Ryan plan creates a $100 billion “Patient and State Stability Fund” that creates subsidies for states to provide care to individuals, stabilize private insurance premiums, promote aces to preventive services, and provide cost sharing subsidies. Medicaid Expansion Reform, Medicaid expansion will be capped per capita in 2020. Not in the Ryan Plan, For a Conservative alternative to Speaker Ryan’s plan, see Senator Rand Paul’s plan here: | 1 |
The Choice Is Trump or the Oligarchy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vST61W4bGm8
The post The Choice Is Trump or the Oligarchy appeared first on PaulCraigRoberts.org . | 0 |
Um destruidor de democracias e pilhador de nações 27.10.2016 A midiotização pelo mundo afora, leva o povo a acreditar que governos não simpáticos aos EUA, são governos ditatoriais, mesmo que tenham sido eleitos pelo voto dos seus concidadãos, como o caso de Assad na Síria e Maduro na Venezuela. Valter Xéu* Na época do George Bush, a mídia e os serviços de inteligências do ocidente propagaram para o mundo de que países como o Irã, Iraque e Coreia do Norte formavam o Eixo do Mal que colocava o mundo em perigo e a propaganda dizia: 'Ou você está conosco, outra contra nós'. Todos os países que não são simpáticos ou que contrarie os interesses dos Estados Unidos, a forte propaganda de manipulação trata de disseminar pelo mundo de que aquele governante é um ditador. E assim é feito com a Síria, onde apesar de Assad ter vencido duas ou três eleições presidenciais, recebeu o carimbo de ditador pelo simples fato de contrariar os interesses dos Estados Unidos e ter sido eleito, a propaganda dissemina pelo mundo de que foi uma eleição fraudulenta e isso o ocidental não aceita como aceitou o resultado da eleição em que Bush venceu Al Gore. Enviar para um amigo Os Estados Unidos destruíram o Iraque com a propaganda de que o país possuía armas de destruição em massa o que não era verdadeiro e isso foi atestado pelas próprias forças de ocupação. Como a mentira já não colava nos quatro cantos do mundo e inventaram de que estavam levando a democracia a um pais governado pelo ditador Saddam Hussein e que até então, tinha sido aliado dos americanos. Hoje os iraquianos vivem em situação muito pior, com conflitos de toda natureza onde os grupos diversos recebem armas do ocidente para guerrearem entre si enquanto as Halliburton da vida segue tranquila roubando o seu petróleo. Halliburton foi administrada pelo ex-vice-presidente americano Dick Cheney: Tutti cosa nostra... A mesma coisa aconteceu com a Líbia que depois de Israel era o segundo IDH do Oriente Médio segundo a ONU. Mesmo assim, precisaram formar uma coalizão internacional de 46 países para derrubar e assassinar Khadaffi. E usando o pretexto de que estavam derrubando um ditador, destruíram o pais, onde grupos rivais armados pelo ocidente se matam e as Halliburton Depois do Afeganistão, Iraque e Líbia chegou à vez da Síria onde os norte americanos acreditavam que seria muito mais fácil e ai houve o engano, pois Assad resistiu e de imediato trataram de disseminar pelo mundo de que ali era mais um ditador e como midiotizado é uma praga que existe em todo o planeta, Assad passou a ser demonizado pelo simples fato de ter enfrentado as forças criadas pelos Estados Unidos, Reino Unido, França, Alemanha, Arábia Saudita, Qatar, Turquia (que parece esta mudando de lado depois do tal golpe em que acusam os norte americanos) e a cumplicidade de Israel que oferece ajuda médica e vez por outra derruba aviões da força aérea da Síria que ousa bombardear as forças do Estado Islâmico nas imediações das Colinas de Golan. Com a chegada dos russos as coisas mudaram de um Assad quase derrotado para um presidente mais forte no poder. Os russos lá estão com a anuência do presidente sírio enquanto as forças ocidentais que não tiveram autorização são meras invasoras. E isso fere a carta da ONU e a soberania Síria, mas a ONU não vale nada para as potências do ocidente, onde na sua maioria participam da força agressora que é a OTAN = Organização Terrorista do Atlântico Norte e que no final dos anos 80 bombardeou Belgrado capital da Iugoslávia em pleno coração da Europa, mas como diz um amigo Croata, "naquela época não existia o Putin". Na questão de Aleppo, vários grupos terroristas estão no domínio da cidade perpetrando toda desgraça sobre a população, usando armas químicas, mas o culpado é Assad que ousou enfrentá-los. Na Venezuela, apesar de Chávez e Maduro terem sido eleitos pelo voto da maioria da população, a mídia e o atual governo golpista do Brasil, Argentina e Paraguai trata os governantes venezuelanos como ditadores o que parece até piada. O de lá eleito pelo voto direto é ditador. O golpista do Brasil, o que é? Na Venezuela depois do fracassado golpe com armas em que Chávez foi preso e voltou nos braços do povo, à direita e seus apoiadores internacionais mudaram de tática e usaram a mesma que destronou o governo ucraniano, defenestrado com denuncias de corrupção e hoje uma quadrilha de corruptos estão no poder com a ajuda do "campeão da democracia". Usaram desse expediente aqui e estão usando o mesmo na Venezuela onde de repente desapareceram dos supermercados os gêneros alimentícios sabotados pela burguesia empresarial. O governo criou uma espécie de Cesta do Povo o que se mostrou ineficaz contra o desabastecimento e assim os grandes grupos econômicos com ajuda externa que despejam bilhões de dólares para acumpliciar mídia e uma parte dos parlamentares. Com o judiciário a coisa é bem diferente do que é o daqui. Maduro que não tem um perfil Dilma Rousseff e nem na sua equipe republicanos covardes, reage às provocações e recebe o carimbo de ditador pela sua ousadia em resistir. O pior de tudo isso, é que a midiotização geral leva a "boiada" a acreditar que realmente ele é um ditador, enquanto o nosso aqui é um democrata e que aquele pais destruidor de países, é nada mais, nada menos que o verdadeiro campeão da democracia no mundo e a "boiada" acredita. Ô, raça! Em tempo Lula precisa fazer o mesmo que Maduro faz na Venezuela, Rafael Correa no Equador, Evo Morales na Bolívia e o que diz o escritor Moniz Bandeira, que é o envolvimento dos Estados Unidos em toda essa trama em que participa a mídia, o congresso e o judiciário e denunciar isso para o mundo, pois existe um interessado maior no enfraquecimento do país e esse interessado, o mundo sabe quem é. Isso é o que tem de ser feito. *Valter Xéu é diretor e editor dos portais Pátria Latina e Irã News. analista politico do Palestina Liberation, Pravda e diversas publicações no Brasil e exterior. | 0 |
The Next Big Shoe to Drop Posted on The Next Big Shoe to Drop
This is yet another source of highly flammable fuel that will result in more gasoline when the Fed is called in…
From Dr. Jeffrey Lewis :
More than 40 million young Americans carry federal and private student loan debt – amounting to over $1 trillion. Defaults are on the rise and the issue has grown to become a nasty wealth transfer mechanism, as well as sad example of the failure of finance in general.
This week, President Obama announced a new initiative framed as a way of addressing the issue. Sadly, it is far from the mark, and just one more indication that monetary masters are the real puppeteers.
Many have pointed out that the student loan debt bubble could be the next subprime crisis.
Perhaps so, but it is potentially much worse, acting as an anvil when considered in the context of other consumer debt like car loans and credit cards.
The student debt debacle has the potential of corrupting not only education, but a generation as well.
It risks becoming the blight on a generation of would-be productive and innovative work force.
Furthermore, the workforce declines, and falls behind, as more students return home to live with parents. And the extra burden on multi-generational households adds yet another deflationary force to the natural trend.
From the perspective of bankers, policy makers, and the propaganda machine, college loan programs have been a tremendous success, providing access for students who would otherwise not be able to afford the privilege.
It is about threading a narrow political path.
Defaults are on the rise and the notional value of student loans went north of $1 trillion.
Servicers must be getting nervous; the lobbyists are circling the wagons.
There is no clear indication of who will pay for it – or how.
Defaults on the rise; one in seven currently default.
The news of doing something comes around to yet another intervention with all the familiar signs that it is meant to save the financiers and has very little to do with helping students.
The problem is that this is too little too late.
Student loan debt is a trillion dollar reality in the context of a major, ongoing depression.
We are a Nanny state – with almost 50 million on food stamps and more on some sort of assistance. Labor force participation is at 40 year lows.
There is already a major dis-incentive to work. If you take a horrible minimum wage job, you lose valuable benefits, entitlements.
Which, incidentally, also explains why while it took the U.S. economy 6 years to recover all the job losses since Lehman. This took place at the expense of 13 million Americans leaving the labor force for good even as the U.S. population rose by 15 million.
It also means that using a historical average participation rate, U.S. unemployment is over 11%, while underemployment is currently well in the 20% range – a far more realistic assessment of where the U.S. economy really is.
People on assistance programs are literally paid to stay home – think of the cultural implications.
It’s almost a conspiracy. You have a massive class of under the table people with no voice. Give them bread and circuses.
The student loan debacle is another story.
For the parents, the typical situation is framed by skyrocketing tuition; and little help from scholarships become fractions in the face of rising tuition.
The income cut-off for need-based financial aid is low.
Parents are expected to contribute 25% of pre-tax income to the cost of tuition.
If you earn $80K a year and your child’s college tuition is $20K, you get nothing in terms of need-based financial aid. And that 25% doesn’t count room & board, books, etc.
So, it’s basically impossible for middle-class families to send their kids to college without taking out student loans. In fact, the entire higher-education system is built to force people into debt if they want to send their kids to college.
And it has a sinister underlying theme…
It’s always about the “irresponsible student” or the “hairdresser subprime loan borrower” who “should have known better”.
They should have known that housing prices eventually fall, even though “everyone” in the mainstream, including the chairman of the Federal Reserve said they would not. They should have read carefully the fine print instead of trusting the fancy loan officer.
And everyone knows that without a college education you will not succeed, so “borrow whatever it takes”. You’ll pay it back.
Two decades of further tweaks to the bankruptcy code ensued until 2005, when Congress passed the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. This Act made it so that no student loan — federal or private — could be discharged in bankruptcy unless the borrower can prove repaying the loan would cause “undue hardship,” a condition that is incredibly difficult to demonstrate unless the person has a severe disability. It essentially lumps student loan debt in with child support and criminal fines — other types of debt that can’t be discharged.
But our system is perfectly fine going after the invisible – those without a political voice – whether the poor or elderly who get crushed by inflation, or the 18 year olds who get out with $100K in debt and an art appreciation degree.
But the price of education should tell an even deeper story….
Quality of Education Suffers
The compounding irony is that not only does the price of education go up, but the quality goes down. Institutions become entrenched. There is little incentive evolve, tenure runs rampant. And the curriculum declines.
Higher education becomes both a commodity and a spectacle. Not a vehicle for progress or a reflection of the needs of the culture or the economy.
That may not be hyperinflation…but it’s very sad. College education quality has not risen proportionately with price.
Student loan debt is out of control by any and all measures. It’s a debacle that benefits no one besides the banker and the servicers. The schools lose by making themselves unviable in the long run.
The students come away with non-dischargeable student loans and enter a world without, for the most part, having any marketable skills.
Sadly, the student loans are just one more politically untouchable issue providing yet another source of highly flammable fuel that will result in more gasoline when the Fed is called in. | 0 |
Enviar para um amigo No modelo chinês, ele é sustentado por um regime autoritário e pode se expandir livremente, sem quaisquer contestações. O ocidental, teoricamente, deve respeitar determinadas regras democráticas, embora em caso de necessidade, essas regras possam ser sempre flexibilizadas. O capitalismo ocidental, que nos diz mais respeito, não olha para a geografia mundial com os mesmos olhos de quem examina um mapa. Ele não enxerga países. Mercados produtores e mercados consumidores. Seu único objetivo é o lucro acima de tudo. E para alcançá-lo não existem mais barreiras nacionais. Sua bandeira é o livre comércio. Todas as fronteiras abertas, não para facilitar a circulação das pessoas, mas para garantir a compra e venda de bens de consumo. Quando alguns países teimam em resistir e procuram defender suas riquezas em proveito de seus povos, os meios de persuasão vão de guerras comerciais às guerras reais. O Iraque não aceitou as condições das grandes companhias internacionais para explorar o seu petróleo e para puni-lo, criou-se o governo dos Estados Unidos, como o principal representante desse capitalismo belicoso, praticamente destruí o País. Quando se precisou prejudicar as economias da Rússia e do Irã, baseadas na produção e exportação do petróleo, se forçou a baixa no preço do produto nos mercados internacionais, prejudicando por tabela a economia da Venezuela. Mas não é apenas pela ação armada, que se calam os que resistem a esse capitalismo internacional e ainda sonham com um outro modelo de economia. Veja-se o caso da América do Sul. Depois de derrubar os governos do Paraguai e Honduras com golpes parlamentares, os interesses imperialistas se voltaram para a desestabilização dos governos dos dois principais países sul-americanos, Argentina e Brasil. No caso da Argentina, com uma ampla campanha de denúncias através de uma mídia corrupta e venal, foi possível se chegar ao poder por via eleitoral e liquidar o projeto populista dos governos do casal Kirchner e colocar no poder um político sensível aos interesses imperialistas. No Brasil, houve uma conjugação de forças entre um parlamento extremamente corrompido, o judiciário e a mídia, para afastar uma Presidente que, de alguma maneira, não seguia todos os pontos do modelo neoliberal que interessa ao capitalismo internacional. Não é coincidência, que o processo de desestabilizou do Governo Dilma tenha se iniciado através de um assalto a Petrobrás, que com a descoberta do pré-sal se tornara uma forte concorrente ás grandes empresas petrolíferas internacionais. Em 2013, Edward Snowden, ao divulgar alguns documentos secretos da Agência Nacional de Segurança dos Estados Unidos (NSA), mostrou que esse serviço espionava há algum tempo o trabalho da Petrobrás. Agora, o alvo principal na América do Sul é a Venezuela, que teve sua economia abalada pela queda fabricada nos preços internacionais do petróleo A mídia internacional (na Zero Hora existe um jornalista com uma obsessão quase doentia de falar mal da Venezuela), com o apoio de lideranças políticas golpistas internas, procuram derrubar um governo constitucional usando todas as armas possíveis. Apesar disso, com o apoio da população mais pobre, o Governo da Venezuela resiste e continua executando sua política de melhorias sociais no País. Embora isso não seja publicado na mídia golpista, o governo do Presidente Maduro aprovou para 2017 a aplicação de 73% do orçamento nacional, estimado em quase 850 milhões de dólares em projetos sociais, principalmente em educação e saúde. A médio prazo, as experiências com governos reformistas, no Brasil, Uruguai, Paraguai, Venezuela, Bolívia e Equador, nascidos a partir de inéditas mobilizações populares, estão condenadas a ser sepultadas pelas novas exigências do capital monopolista internacional, cada vez menos produtivo e mais financeiro. A longo prazo, a única meta pela qual vale a pena lutar é a busca de uma sociedade socialista, pois como diz Istvan Meszaros sobre o capitalismo no século XXI, a opção continua sendo a mesma citada por Rosa Luxemburgo, há quase 100 anos: socialismo ou barbárie. Marino Boeira é jornalista, formado em História pela UFRGS | 0 |
0 |
|
And don't forget their support for the Medicare Drug Prescription Bill in 2003 that enriched their coffers significantly. | 0 |
As we get older, improving our health and wellness is something that’s usually very important to the majority of people. As we age, it’s not uncommon to see medical problems or health deterioration... | 0 |
(AP) TEHRAN, Iran — Sustained gunfire rang out over central Tehran on Monday afternoon as guns targeted what officials said was a drone flying over the Iranian capital. [Many residents ran to rooftops and craned their necks to see what was happening. Others sought shelter as bursts of machine gun fire echoed through the streets. The Tasnim news agency quoted Tehran Governor Isa Farhadi as saying that the gunfire targeted a drone near restricted airspace in the capital. It wasn’t clear who owned the drone, which he described as a quadcopter. That suggests it may have been operated by a local hobbyist or aerial photographer rather than a foreign government. The purpose of its flight also wasn’t clear. The drone escaped — apparently intact — as Gen. Alireza Elhami, deputy chief of Iran air defense headquarters, was quoted by the Fars news agency as saying the drone flew out of the restricted airspace once it came under fire. This was not the first such recent incident. On December 23, residents of downtown Tehran awoke to the sound of fire as the army shot down a state TV drone that officials said had flown too close to the residence of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Monday marked the anniversary of the implementation of Iran’s landmark nuclear deal with world powers, which gave the Islamic Republic relief from crippling economic sanctions in exchange for curbs on its nuclear program. | 1 |
So much over such a simple proposition: When a financial professional gives you advice about the life savings in your retirement account, that person ought to act in your best interest. It took several years for this fiduciary rule to gain approval — firms are supposed to begin following the new rules in April — thanks to pushback from people in the financial services industry. And then, in the course of a week, we’ve seen President Trump tell the Labor Department to study this uncontroversial (and already ) proposition, which he wants to upend. A few days later came a big loss for industry players who challenged the legitimacy of the rule in Texas, where a federal judge ruled against them. But let’s put the focus back where it belongs: not on politics or the law, but on you. The best way to understand what the fiduciary debate is about — and to protect yourself — is to view this discussion through the lens of fees. Every time you do business with people in the financial services industry, ask them this: How much money are you making, and what are the different ways you are making it? If only there were a simple answer to this question all of the time. All of this fiduciary wrangling got started in large part because there has rarely been a simple answer in many parts of the industry. “The fiduciary rule ultimately comes down to the fact that some people are making a lot of money at the expense of other people who have no idea how much their adviser is getting paid,” said Lynn M. Dunston, who runs a financial planning firm in Denver, where the only fees he earns come directly from clients. The best (and by far, the funniest) explanation I’ve seen of what a fiduciary is and does comes from a video that a firm called HighTower Advisors posted on YouTube in 2012. There, they compare butchers and nutritionists. Butchers push meat, perhaps the best meat they have. Nutritionists, however, tell you what is best to eat, period, because they have your best overall health interests at heart and have no stake in how much meat you consume. When seeking advice on your life savings, presumably you would want to speak to the nutritionists and not the butchers. But the butchers of the financial world are in a pretty good spot right now. After all, we have just seen eight years of stock market gains. With an unpredictable new president in the White House, people have reason to be wary. So enter the annuity peddlers, and others touting safety, protections from downside risk, guarantees and the possibility of participating in future market gains, too. And wouldn’t you know it? The way these salespeople sold those products during the last downturn was a big part of what pushed the proponents of the fiduciary rule to act. You will be seeing these pitches soon enough, and when you do, there is a long list of questions you must ask. In fact, anytime anyone is trying to sell you an actively managed mutual fund, a real estate investment trust, or REIT, that you don’t understand or anything else even remotely confusing, hit them with each and every one of the following questions: How much money will you personally make in cash commission, now, if I select this product? And how much will you make later, in any sort of ongoing or trailing commission? Is there a bonus you are eligible for that comes as a result of your recruitment to this firm? Is it in jeopardy if you don’t make this sale? Are you earning more from selling me this product than you might from putting me in a similar product from a different company? Are you earning more than you might if you put me in a different vehicle from the same company? Is your company or the company that created this product running any contests that might lead to you getting to take a free trip if I buy this product? (For a fun virtual tour of the places your salesperson might go, see the two reports that Senator Elizabeth Warren has put out in the last couple of years.) And while we are discussing trips, do any of the companies that you work with offer “due diligence” trips? You know, the ones where you spend an hour learning about the products and 10 hours drinking and golfing? “My wife reads on Facebook that one of our mutual friends is down in Orlando at a fixed annuities conference,” said Patrick Rush, who sold annuities in a former life and is now a financial planner in Greensboro, N. C. “She’s like, ‘What is going on? How come you don’t win anything?’ ” Now, what about other forms of payment, say in points that you might redeem for merchandise? Mr. Dunston of Denver once sold annuities before he came upon what he describes as a better way to help clients (and his blog post on the journey is well worth a read). After a couple of big sales more than a decade ago, he had earned enough credits to exchange them for a diamond ring for his wife worth about $3, 500. The annuity provider, Allianz, told me that a thorough search of its records did not yield information that confirmed Mr. Dunston’s story, but Mr. Dunston said that it may have been a third party that ran the incentive program, and that he is certain he earned those points and that spiffy ring through Allianz. “You can see why advisers might be conflicted about offering something like this versus a index fund,” he said. “But I really thought I was doing the right thing at the time. ” More questions! Do you get to eat lots of free food? Mr. Rush, the Greensboro planner, well remembers all of the seminars he once attended at Ruth’s Chris, the steak house chain, courtesy of various financial services companies. How about hoops tickets in parts of the country? “There were certainly people who could provide Carolina or Duke seats,” he said. “You knew who to call. They weren’t going to be putting you up in the nosebleed seats either. ” Then, there is some . You will be offered all sorts of product features and extras, and you will need to ask the following questions: How much extra will I pay in fees (or how much might I sacrifice in returns or payouts) if I elect to receive a bonus on my annuity? Or for a guaranteed minimum income or benefit if I elect to take my money in monthly payments starting at some later date? What if I want a death benefit for my heirs? Are there specific charges for the insurance component of the product? Are there any penalties for pulling my money out early? As for any subaccounts in my annuity, are there expense ratios or fees for the money there? A separate management fee? Trading fees? A or other administrative fee? Please provide me an itemized list for any and all fees, thank you! Finally, does your firm stand to collect any fees that you yourself will not share in as part of your commission because they have favored one product or another or limited their platform to certain products and locked out others? There is no right answer to these questions, not exactly anyway. Some annuities can be useful (especially the simple fixed, immediate ones and similar products known as longevity insurance) and in some other cases you may get what you pay for in peace of mind. But many other annuities may cost 3. 5 percent annually when you add up all of the fees. For about of that or even less in some cases, you can find a fiduciary adviser who will give you advice on every aspect of your financial life and put you in solid (if boring, and simple) investments that cost a tiny fraction of what many annuities do. It’s anyone’s guess how much regulators will ultimately be looking out for you. All Jillian B. Rogers, a Labor Department spokeswoman, would say was that it is exploring options to delay the applicability date for the fiduciary rule. And she would not explain on the record why the department removed an explainer on the rule from its website recently, though an archived version is pretty easy to find. Whatever happens, however, so much will hinge on squishy terms like suitability, best interests, the reasonableness of fees, legal exceptions to any and all standards and whoever is adjudicating any disputes. Rather than get caught up in all of that, it’s probably best to protect yourself from the outset. And in an industry that makes a game of hiding lots and lots of fees every which way, the best possible response is to ask lots and lots of questions. | 1 |
The Algemeiner reports: San Francisco State University (SFSU) was hit by a lawsuit on Monday brought by students and local community members accusing the school of “an extremely disturbing and consistent pattern of animus. ”[Claiming that SFSU has allowed a “hostile environment” toward Jews since at least 1968, when the social College of Ethnic Studies was established, the plaintiffs said that the situation “has only gotten worse over time” and that “SFSU and its administrators have knowingly fostered this. ” The plaintiffs include two current students, one recent graduate and three members of the local Jewish community, represented in part by attorneys from the Lawfare Project, a legal think tank. All of the plaintiffs attended the April 2016 lecture by Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat, which was dramatically disrupted by students, including members of the SFSU student group General Union of Palestine Students (GUPS) who allegedly made “incessant threats and amplified chants,” including shouting, “Get the f*** off our campus!” and “Intifada!” Read more here. | 1 |
PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) — The last person to surrender in the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge takeover was released from prison hours after being acquitted on federal conspiracy charges Thursday afternoon .
David Fry was found not guilty of conspiring to impede workers from doing their jobs at the refuge through threats, intimidation or force. He was also acquitted of a firearms charge.
The Ohio resident spoke to KOIN 6 News before stepping onto the streets of downtown Portland for the first time in 9 months.
Fry said he was excited to reunite with family and friends to celebrate the victory, adding that his plight to end corruption is far from over.“It’s a wonderful feeling… to be acquitted by the highest authority in this country,” Fry said. “I definitely feel this was divine intervention playing in this.”
“We’ve all got to work together and start making some changes because our governments worldwide aren’t for the people,” he said. “They’ve become the opposite.”
He said guards at Multnomah County Jail treated him as if he were guilty, and that inmates are not often dealt with fairly or under the presumption of innocence.
“I guess this is the greatest example of why you don’t treat people as guilty because they can be acquitted,” Fry said.
Fry was one of the last 4 holdouts at the refuge and helped broadcast the final days of the standoff through YouTube livestreams. He allegedly threatened to commit suicide while on the phone with FBI crisis negotiators before he surrendered.
Defense attorneys called his father, William Fry, to the witness stand to discuss his motives for joining the occupation. William said his son was “frustrated with corruption” and wanted to support Dwight and Steve Hammond, who he believed were falsely characterized as terrorists.
Fry wanted to bring his computer equipment to Malheur, his father said, to broadcast what was going on and help people around the world understand the issue at hand. | 0 |
Wikileaks’ Assange Promises Hillary’s Arrest With Next Release 10/31/2016
TRUTHREVOLT.ORG
It has been a devastating period for the Hillary Clinton campaign. First, the FBI re-opened the investigation into her e-mail scandal and now, Julian Assange has promised that what’s in the next batch of e-mails to be published to Wikileaks will lead to her arrest.
Since the first week of October, there have been 21 batches released totaling 35,594 e-mails. According to a message on Twitter, there are more than 50,000 remaining.
In a broadcast for Russia Today, a London reporter said, “Assange will be releasing more material in what he says will provide enough evidence to see Hillary Clinton arrested.”
These will be the nail in Hillary Clinton’s coffin, she added.
Assange assured Russia has no involvement in his e-mail hacking like Democrats are claiming. The DNC servers, he said, were “ripe for hacking” and “riddled with holes.”
Video below: | 0 |
Share on Facebook If gummy bears, peach rings and gummy worms are a few of your favorite sweet treats, we urge you to stop reading now. The way most gum-based candy is made might scar you forever. If you've ever had a vegetarian friend turn down a fruit snack or cup of jello, you know it's because many of those products are made with gelatin. Gelatin is a gelling agent made from animal skin and bones. But knowing what gelatin is can't prepare you for seeing how it's made. Belgian filmmaker Alina Kneepkens created the horror movie short film below that shows ― in grim detail ― the way many gummy candies are made. Kneepkens unrolls the footage in reverse, starting with the finished candy before revealing its gory inception. Related: | 0 |
Ryan McMaken blog/high-taxes-northern-states-ruining-baseball/
Major League Baseball is an unexpected casualty as taxpayers flee high-tax states for more business-friendly and low-tax states. 3:32 pm on October 26, 2016 | 0 |
Donald Trump, Peacenik President? By Thaddeus Russell
U.S. presidents possess almost unilateral power to drop bombs on other countries, says historian Thaddeus Russell, and that's why it's very good news that Trump is most libertarian when it comes to foreign policy.
Russell, who's the author of A Renegade History of the United States and is currently writing a book on foreign policy, says Trump's enmity with the neocons at National Review and The Weekly Standard is "fantastic news for us and the world." He points out that Trump advisor (and likely future cabinet member) Newt Gingrich gave a 2013 interview with The Washington Times expressing second thoughts about his neocon past.
Though Trump has pledged to go after ISIS, his general philosophy seems far preferable to Hillary's systematic and carefully thought-out Wilsonian foreign policy. "I don't see a war with Russia and I don't see greater interventionism generally outside of [a] little pocket of the Middle East," says Russell.
Nick Gillespie caught up with Russell for an interview. Audio - Reason Podcast | 0 |
USA: The questions the people should be asking 06.11.2016 Given the dimension of the United States of America, given its economic power and given the fact that it is one of those nations that cannot help sticking its nose into other people's business, meddling and intruding where it was not invited, the forcoming election is of global importance and requires responsible voting. Here are some questions the people should be asking. Question 1: Has Hillary Clinton amassed a substantial or any part of her reported great wealth (some say hundreds of millions of dollars) while in public office? If so, how is that compatible with public service? Question 2: Is there a rumor that Hillary Clinton has used the Clinton Foundation to amass a fortune and if there is, to what extent is it truthful? The Clinton Foundation and foreign policy Question 3: There is an allegation that Hillary Clinton has used the Clinton Foundation to receive millions in payments from foreign states for access to contracts in return. This being the case, how ethical is it for a public figure to use a private foundation to conduct government policy, and obtain a fortune to boot? Is this what the USA's foreign policy ethics is about? Then why vote for her? Question 4: Hillary Clinton laughed and sneered when she heard that Muammar al-Qathafi, the Leader of the Libyan Jamahariya, had been cruelly murdered by terrorists. Is it correct for the leader of a country's diplomacy to giggle and guffaw at the news of a terrorist murder? Backing terrorists Question 5: Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State at the time when the Libyan government was toppled in an illegal act by NATO forces using terrorists on their own lists of proscribed groups. Is this in line with the established law of the United States of America? If not, then what does the law of the United States of America have to say about the chief of the country's diplomacy using terrorists to conduct foreign policy? Question 6: Hillary Clinton was responsible for sending Libya, the country with the highest Human Development Index in the African Continent, back to the dark ages, crawling with terrorists and infested by Islamic State. If she was capable of that as Secretary of State, then what would she do as President and how competent is she for that role? Question 7: Hillary Clinton, as mastermind of the Libyan debacle, is ultimately responsible for the acts of the terrorists she unleashed in that country. Has she, have the citizens of the United States of America, any idea of what these terrorists did? Reader discretion advised, for those easily offended please scroll down to question 8. These terrorists sliced the breasts off women in the streets, these terrorists forced five-year-old girls to watch their parents being tortured and raped and murdered with their throats cut, and as their parents' throats were still spurting blood and gasping for breath, these five-year-old girls were themselves raped before and after being beheaded. Boys as young as six have been impaled on railings (metal rails thrust through their anus until they come out of the child's throat). You cannot unleash this sort of filth, then laugh and giggle and turn your back and walk away. Or can you if you are the US Secretary of State, and get voted in as President despite it all? Question 8: How long has Hillary Clinton been in or around Government? How long has Hillary Clinton been in or around the White House? What has she actually achieved? Can she rightfully claim she is the Queen of Change? Or the Queen of barefaced liars who feathered her nest at the expense of the hard-working people of the United States of America? Question 9: Is there a rumor that a lady was paid 500,000 dollars to come on stage and lie about Donald Trump having abused her? Was it not more than a rumor? Wasn't it proven that she was paid to come into the campaign and lie? When they go low, you go high. I am not going to mention any names, but wasn't there more than a rumor about a certain family of Hillbillies in the White House, lies and er...? Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey | 0 |
WASHINGTON — Since the Obama administration formally accused Russia about a week ago of trying to interfere in the election, there has been intense speculation about whether President Obama has ordered the National Security Agency to conduct a retaliatory cyberstrike. The strongest hint so far has come from Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. who either revealed American plans for a strike or engaged in one of the better bits of psychological warfare in recent times. Taping an interview for NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Mr. Biden was asked whether the United States was preparing to send a message to the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin. Days before, the American intelligence agencies and the Department of Homeland Security declared that the Russian leadership was responsible for attacks on the Democratic National Committee and the leaking of stolen emails. “We’re sending a message,” Mr. Biden told Chuck Todd, the show’s host. “We have the capacity to do it. ” “He’ll know it,” Mr. Biden added. “And it will be at the time of our choosing. And under the circumstances that have the greatest impact. ” Later, after Mr. Biden said he was not concerned that Russia could “fundamentally alter the election,” Mr. Todd asked whether the American public would know if the message to Mr. Putin had been sent. “Hope not,” Mr. Biden responded. His warning seems to suggest that Mr. Obama is prepared to order — or has already ordered — some kind of covert action after the stolen emails were published online. That would require what is known in the intelligence agencies as a finding — a presidential determination authorizing covert action. Such a finding would allow the United States to make use of its newly developed arsenal of cyberweapons, which are under the control of the military’s Cyber Command, the N. S. A. and, in some circumstances, the C. I. A. Mr. Biden’s statement does not exclude the possibility of a response outside the realm of cyberspace. But most of the other options under discussion in the White House involve actions that would be public, such as economic sanctions under a 2015 presidential order on responding to cyberattacks. Such sanctions have never been invoked, but are well suited to cases like the presumed effort to influence the election. Some experts, however, say they may be insufficient. James G. Stavridis, the former supreme allied commander of NATO, wrote in Foreign Policy last week that the first step could be making America’s evidence against Russia public. “Revealing the names of the officials who authorized the cyberattacks against the United States would put Moscow in an extremely uncomfortable position,” wrote Mr. Stavridis, a former admiral who is now dean of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. “Ideally, the United States could reveal emails or conversations between Russian officials that demonstrated their intent to undermine the U. S. electoral process. ” But that would run counter to Mr. Biden’s “hope not” statement. Mr. Stavridis and others have advocated other steps, including knocking holes in the Kremlin’s wall of censorship so that opponents of Putin could begin to conspire with one another. “As a response to the Russian attacks on the U. S. democratic system, this would be both proportional and distinctive,” Mr. Stavridis wrote. It might also be deniable — a key to any covert action approved by the president. Many others have advocated using cybertechniques to expose Mr. Putin’s links to Russia’s oligarchs and reveal his financial holdings overseas, which are believed to be vast. But such steps would risk escalation, and advisers have warned Mr. Obama that the United States is more vulnerable than most nations. Mr. Putin initially denied any Russian involvement in the attacks. But in an interview several days ago, he said the important thing was not how emails from Hillary Clinton’s campaign had been hacked, but what they said. Sergey V. Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, went further. “We did not deny this,” he said of the hacking. But he added that the United States had offered no proof. A crucial question being debated in the White House is whether warnings like Mr. Biden’s will be enough to make Russia, or others, pull back in their hacking. The calculus behind the decision to formally accuse Russia was that the mere publication of the conclusion could temper the activity. If so, it may not have worked. WikiLeaks in the past few days has published thousands of emails stolen from the Gmail account of John D. Podesta, the chairman of the Clinton campaign. While Mr. Podesta has blamed Russia for the attack, intelligence agencies say they have not formally reached that conclusion. There are only two known cases in which Mr. Obama has authorized an offensive cyberaction. One was the operation against Iran’s nuclear program, Olympic Games. That operation was not detected by the Iranians for years, until an accidental release of the computer code made it obvious that its centrifuges were exploding because of a cyberattack. The other case has been action against the Islamic State, mostly to interfere with its communications or alter data in its systems. Those attacks were publicly announced by Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter and others, though no details were offered. The announcement seemed intended in part to cause Islamic State insurgents to question whether their internal communications were genuine. | 1 |
This Collage of Corrupt Presstitutes Making Fools of Themselves Is a Keeper
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-12/martin-armstrong-exposes-real-clinton-conspiracy-which-backfired-dramatically
The financial media can equally wallow in its incompetence and dishonesty. Instead of collapsing as predicted, the stock market rose 800 points on Trump’s victory.
The post This Collage of Corrut Presstitutes Making Fools of Themselves Is a Keeper appeared first on PaulCraigRoberts.org . | 0 |
in: Preparedness\Survival , US News Darned if we do and darned if we don’t. That basically sums up the current election cycle. I’d go so far as to say that everybody loses during this election, especially if the promised chaos erupts when the winner is announced. Regardless of which candidate “wins” the presidential election, I have a bad feeling about the aftermath. I think we could be on the cusp of the most widespread civil unrest since the Civil War. If you are interested in getting prepared for it but don’t want to read over all of the frightening possibilities, go here and sign up for a Prepping Crash Course that will help you be ready for impending chaos in a mere 24 hours. For those who are wondering how things might go down, let’s look at some scenarios. If Trump wins… There is so much anti-Trump wrath among Progressives that violence has already erupted at campaign rallies. Trump supporters had eggs and bottles thrown at them in San Jose , a police car was smashed and nearly 20 were arrested at a violent protest in Orange County, and a man was even arrested for trying to grab a police officer’s gun to assassinate Trump . And look at what Clintonites did to this homeless woman who was trying to protect Donald Trump’s star from being further defaced on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. YouTube Notice how many of these mob-minded cowards it took to terrorise one homeless woman…Classy, right? Now, think about how these people will react if Trump is somehow elected. If you have a sign in your yard, you will be a target for their rage. Got a Trump/Pence sticker on your car? Expect that it could be defaced. Even more recently, Penn State students were “triggered” by a pro-Trump rally and began tearing down signs, swearing at the pro-Trump kids, and disrupting their event. What’s more, it isn’t just Social Justice Warriors and Progressives folks would need to worry about. A top activist in the group, Black Lives Matter, took to Twitter to inform everyone exactly what would happen if Trump were to win the presidency. This was deleted but is archived here . The tweet was followed by this one, which is still u p… Don’t delude yourself. With a Trump victory, trouble is coming. And don’t think living in a small town keeps you safe. The population of Ferguson, Missouri is barely over 20,000 people – hardly a metropolis. If Clinton wins… With the newly intensified investigation into her corruptio n, it hardly seems possible that she could still win this election, but her supporters seem blind to the crimes she has committed. Instead of looking at the facts, they’re saying “First woman president YA !!!” With all of the collusion , it seems like the FBI is fighting a tough battle to see her indicted. There once was a day that this suspicion would be enough to keep the American people from voting for a person who is blatantly in it for she can personally gain. The Wikileaks email scandal continues, with new revelations about our government leading to possible criminal proceedings, impeachment and heaven only knows what else. As well, there’s a very, very good chance that the election will be rigged . Somehow, despite all that is going on, Clinton’s campaign is still planning her celebratory fireworks party , scheduled to start several hours before all the votes could even be counted. If this happens, Trump supporters will be enraged – and justifiably so. Joe Walsh, a former congressman, has already tweeted he’s “grabbing his musket.” And Walsh is not alone. Many Americans are sick and tired of the blatant, in-our-faces corruption. There is talk of revolution and even a quiet counter-coup going on behind the scenes. Others concur that unrest is coming. I’m not the only blogger out here in Bloggerland who thinks all hell will break loose regardless of who becomes presidents. Mike Adams of Natural News wrote , “My ANALYSIS of possible outcomes from the upcoming presidential election reveals that America only has a 5% chance of remaining peaceful after November 8. This does not mean the violence will occur on November 9th, but rather that events will be set into motion on that day which will lead to an escalation of violence (95% chance…) Check out his predictions of the possible scenarios . And from the more liberal side of the unrest coin, an essayist for Cracked.com still comes to a similar conclusion. “Over the last few weeks a growing number of people have started wondering, “Is it possible the United States is heading for a new civil war?”…Every time I wanted to dismiss those headlines I thought about my visit to Ukraine last year, to cover their ongoing civil war . The most common sentence I heard was, “It’s like a bad dream.” Up to the minute the shooting started, almost no one thought civil war was a serious possibility.” You need to get prepped. Immediately. What it all boils down to is that we need to be prepared. We need to be ready for any unrest that comes about as a direct result of the election – and I really believe that there will be some form of uprising against the result. I hope it will be nothing more than a few minor, isolated incidents, but I can’t get past the niggling feeling that all hell is just about to break loose. November 7 could be the last day of normalcy for quite some time. The governments of Germany and the Czech Republic have told their citizens to stock up on food, water and basic survival supplies in case of a national emergency. We need to be doing the same. If you would like to take a class to help you prepare for this, you can learn more here. If you don’t want to invest in a class, use this FREE handy checklist to make sure you’ll have everything you need. Post-Election Chaos Checklist Make sure everything is in order. While it’s unlikely that services like internet, electricity, and municipal water will be affected, it doesn’t hurt to be ready for that possibility. The key here is to make certain you don’t have to leave your home for the duration of the unrest, should it come your way. Check your pantry and fill any gaps in your food preps. Order emergency food buckets – if you order right away there is still time to get them before the election. | 0 |
Trump shocked to discover women can vote 08-11-16 DONALD Trump is furious after discovering that women can vote in elections. The Republican candidate was at a last-minute rally when he remarked on how it was lucky that ‘they’ couldn’t vote. However an aide then informed him that the US has enjoyed full female suffrage since 1920. After a brief explanation of what suffrage means, Trump said: “Even the fat and old ones? How many of their votes count as one man-vote? “I would not have said a lot of that shit had I known this. God damn it all to hell.” He added: “You know some of them can do magic too? That’s why they used to make them go and live in caves.”
Share: | 0 |
We Are Change
By J. Christian Adams
Via PJ Media
Leaked funding documents reveal an effort by George Soros and his foundations to manipulate election laws and process rules ahead of the federal election far more expansively than has been previously reported.
The billionaire and convicted felon moved hundreds of millions of dollars into often-secret efforts to change election laws, fuel litigation to attack election integrity measures, push public narratives about voter fraud, and to integrate the political ground game of the left with efforts to scare racial minority groups about voting rights threats.
These Soros-funded efforts moved through dozens of 501(c)(3) and (c)(4) charities and involved the active compliance with civil rights groups, government officials, and purportedly non-partisan groups like the League of Women Voters.
The leaked documents also reveal deliberate and successful efforts to manipulate media coverage of election issues in mainstream media outlets like the The New York Times .
Conservatives and Republicans have no opposing effort or source of funds that represents even a small fraction in opposition to level of the Soros-led manipulation contained in the leaked documents.
The documents reveal that the Soros campaign fueled litigation attacking election integrity measures, such as citizenship verification and voter ID. It funded long-term efforts to fundamentally transform election administration — including the creation of databases that were marketed to state governments for use in voter verification. It propped up left-leaning media to attack reports of voter fraud, and conducted racially and ideologically targeted voter registration drives.
The racially targeted voter registration drives were executed at the same time Soros dollars were funding other public relations efforts to polarize racial minority groups by scaring them about the loss of voting rights and the dangers of police officers.
The Soros documents reveal hundreds of millions of dollars being poured into the effort to transform the legal and media environment touching on elections. One document notes that poverty-alleviation programs are being de-emphasized for this new effort. It states: “George Soros has authorized U.S. Programs to propose a budget of $320 million over two years, with the understanding that the annual budget for U.S. Programs will be $150 million beginning in 2013.”
The purpose of the expansion is clear:
The increase in Democracy and Power Fund budget will expand funding of non-partisan voter engagement to catalyze participation from African-American, Latino, immigrant, and youth communities in particular, and to ensure a fair and just redistricting process. The increase in the Transparency and Integrity Fund will expand support for election reform, judicial independence and journalism.
Below are some highlights of this expansive Soros-funded campaign to alter the legal environment and rules of American elections.
Read more: https://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2016/11/07/leaked-documents-reveal-expansive-soros-funding-to-manipulate-federal-elections/
The post Leaked Documents Reveal Expansive Soros Funding to Manipulate Federal Elections appeared first on We Are Change .
| 0 |
Modern in Germany is increasingly being found to include criticism of the modern state of Israel in general and Jews in particular, according to a new report. [The Independent Expert Group on published its findings in Germany at the end of last month. It found Jews are “increasingly concerned for their safety due to everyday experiences of ” as the number surveyed who agreed with statements rose from 28 per cent in 2014 to 40 per cent in 2016. It added: “While the majority does not see current manifestations of as a relevant problem, Jews in Germany feel they are facing a growing threat … there is concern about among Muslims, these days especially in refugee and migrant populations. ” German broadcaster Deutsche Welle (DW) reports the study has the support of politicians from across the political spectrum, observing that more needs to be done to fight modern forms of in the country. The Expert Group said that while traditional forms of had declined somewhat, modern for example, criticism of Israel being transferred to Jews in general, remained “alarmingly popular”. About 200, 000 Jews live in Germany, Europe’s third largest community after Britain and France, up from only about 15, 000 who survivied after the end of the Nazi Third Reich. “Forty percent agree with ” Green Party member of the Bundestag Volker Beck told DW. “That’s almost half of the society. It says a lot about the intellectual environment in which Jews have to live. ” “New forms of have arisen, and unfortunately the end of the Holocaust and the Second World War didn’t mean the end of ” conservative MP Barbara Woltmann said. “It does worry me that around 20 percent latent still exists within the populace. ” The parliamentary panel report said rising Jewish fears were partly due to “the growing importance of social media” which was “key to the spread of hate speech and agitation”. The experts issued five “key demands” to fight . They include appointing an ombudsman, establishing a national data base for crimes and providing support for groups researching and trying to combat . As Breitbart Jerusalem reported, in Germany at the end of 2016 there were 2, 083 reported cases of attacks on Jews, Jewish property, and hate speech in 2015, up from just 691 cases in 2014. Previous analysis of crime figures had put the number of cases in 2015 at 1, 366, but closer analysis revealed that crimes such as the smashing of headstones in Jewish ceremonies, or starting fires at synagogues had been incorrectly classified as criminal damage or attempted arson in some states, with no mention made of the nature of the crimes. | 1 |
posted by Eddie F or centuries people have been looking into their teacups to find answers in the tea leaves. These brews and herbs have always held a spiritual energy . When you take time to make yourself a soothing cup of herbal tea, you are allowing yourself to go within. You soften your thoughts and begin to hear the voice of your intuition. The Art of Spiritual Tea Making In our current convenience-focused age, many just grab a tea bag and pop it into a cup of hot water. This instant tea is really just flavored water. If you want to gain all the spiritual benefits that a healing herbal infusion has to offer, you need to take some time in preparing it. Tea is best made in a closed vessel—either a teapot or a cup with a small saucer placed on top to serve as a lid. When you brew tea this way, you allow the beautiful aromatic qualities to recirculate back into the liquid. You know that uplifting fragrance emanating from peppermint tea? Well, that represents most of the spiritually healing herbal oils floating off into the atmosphere. If you brew it in a teapot or cup with a lid, the steam condenses back into the infusion. For most herbal teas and for maximum spiritual benefit to be had, you’ll want to brew it for at least five minutes in boiling water. You can allow your tea to brew longer and get an even more potent spiritually activating herbal infusion . A general rule is one teaspoon of herb per cup of water, plus one extra for the teapot. So if your teapot holds two cups of water, you would add three teaspoons of herb. Spiritual Properties of Various Herbs, Plants and Teas Calendula Calendula is a powerful spiritual herb that will bring healing as well as activate your innate healing abilities. When you drink calendula, you stand tall as a powerful healer. This tea repairs your aura and brings energetic protection. Chamomile Chamomile helps attract abundance. This pleasant tasting spiritual herb relaxes your energy, which allows you to become receptive. The Universe and God always have your best interests in mind. When things seem challenging, it can be for one of two reasons: You are trying to go in a different direction than where you are truly being guided, or you are unwilling to receive help and support along the way. When you drink chamomile, you let down your guard and let in the healing love of God and your angels. Fennel Fennel tea (made from the seeds) can help reduce sugar cravings. On an energetic level it gives you a “pat on the back.” As a healer or reader, you may focus on helping others rather than devoting time to yourself. By drinking this herbal, spiritually enhancing infusion, you remember that it’s okay to have a rest every now and then. You can relax, take a day off, and just enjoy life. Ginger Ginger tea releases anger and frustration. It helps you let go of resentment and jealousy, bringing you to a place of contentment and balance. Hibiscus Hibiscus tea makes a wonderful ruby-colored infusion. It allows you to accept your sensitive side. Know that being sensitive isn’t a weakness; it’s an asset! By picking up on the subtle energies around you, you will know much more easily when you should move on. The spiritual plant hibiscus brings you and your loved ones together. It heals past wounds and promotes forgiveness. Lavender Lavender is a legendary spiritually rejuvenating herb that relaxes your mind and quiets the ego voice. It is beautiful before a meditation, as it resonates with the third-eye chakra—your center of clairvoyance. This summons psychic visions and intuitive insights. Lavender brings a deeper spiritual understanding . This herb helps cast away any fears about embracing your spiritual gifts. Lemongrass Lemongrass is a lesser known spiritual herb that wards off distractions and procrastination. If you are struggling to get something done and finding many excuses not to do it, then you need lemongrass tea! It brings you clarity of purpose so you can get to work. It also shows you the tremendous benefit that completing this task will serve both you and others. Lemongrass sharpens your focus and stops people from interrupting your important job. Nettle tea Nettle tea is great for when you feel worn-out and drained. It is a highly nutritious infusion that supports your body physically. It provides energetic protection , giving you time to recharge. As your body and mind reset, you learn new ways to handle situations. Understand the lessons involved in your current situation and you won’t have to repeat them. Peppermint Peppermint is a common yet still powerful spiritual plant that helps motivate and inspire you, bringing you new creative ideas on how to achieve your dreams . It clears and balances the sacral and solar-plexus chakras, lending you confidence and self-esteem. Rose Rose tea is an ancient, sacred spiritual herb that opens your heart. It attracts compassion; understanding; healing; and, of course, love. When drinking this tea, you become very aware of your language. Every word you speak will have the essence of love attached to it. All your communications will be uplifting and centered around healing. You’ll find that you have no time for gossip or negativity. Instead, you will become an inspiration to those around you—who will wonder why you are so peaceful and then will want to join you on that path of tranquility. Rosemary Rosemary may not be an herb you’d commonly think of for tea. It tastes exactly like you’d expect, but the energy is beautiful! Rosemary has an affinity for the head area. It clears away unwanted thoughts, lifts negative thinking in favor of a positive attitude, and assists with concentration. Rosemary resonates with the third-eye chakra and releases pressure surrounding your spiritual path, making it a great spiritual herb to keep on hand. Allow yourself to enjoy this wonderful journey, and don’t put unnecessary deadlines in place. Saffron Saffron tea sounds so indulgent and somewhat royal. And saffron is the most expensive herb in the world. Thankfully, you only need the smallest amount to make a very powerful spiritually activating tea. Add five to ten good quality saffron threads (parts of the pistil of a crocus) to a cup of boiling water. Allow to steep for a minimum of ten minutes so the saffron can fully give itself to the water. Research trials have shown that saffron helps ease symptoms of premenstrual syndrome and feelings of depression. Spiritually, saffron unlocks the mysteries of the Universe, allowing you to learn deep, esoteric concepts. It awakens and clears all your energy centers and connects you to God, making it an essential spiritual herb for the seeker. Thyme Thyme is another spiritual herb you might not have considered brewing. This tea opens up your centers of communication and resonates with the throat chakra to help you speak and write with passion and purpose. If you’re finding it difficult to express yourself, try thyme tea. How to Take Herbal Medicines As a sensitive and spiritual person, you may not need high doses of herbal supplements, as your body is receptive to these healing compounds and will immediately begin to utilize them. Where it may take others three to four weeks to observe a change, you might see improvements in just a matter of days. You understand that what you eat changes your entire energy. You’ve noticed that you can’t handle certain foods or drinks because they just don’t agree with your delicate body. So, before you dive into high doses of spiritual herbs , check in with your intuitive feelings. Herbal medicines come in a variety of forms, including tablets, capsules, teas, liquid extracts, and tinctures. Whichever form you choose, please ensure it’s sourced from a reliable company, sustainably harvested, and organic or wild-crafted. This will give you the best results, as well as the highest energy and spiritual activation. Any form of spiritual herb will have a healing influence, yet there is something especially powerful about a liquid. When you take a tincture, it brings through the energy and vibration of the spiritual plant. Add the appropriate dose to a small glass of water. The amount of water isn’t important as long as you drink the entirety. If you are on any other medications or have preexisting health concerns, please always check with your health-care practitioner before starting any herbal medicines. Elder (Sambucus nigra) Elder (Sambucus nigra) is available in two forms—the berry and the flower. Elderberry is an excellent antiviral. In this case, though, we are more interested in the elder flowers, as they help promote sweating. The elder tree has a long history connected to ancient mysticism. Even farmers would refer to the spirit of this tree as the “Elder Mother.” This spiritual herb has a powerful energy that awakens your intuition and opens your chakras . Elder flowers have a connection to the head and are excellent for people with constant colds, runny noses, or hay fever. Ginger (Zingiber officinale) Ginger (Zingiber officinale) is a warming herb that stimulates your circulation. As your blood spreads through the superficial layers of your skin, it clears the eccrine glands. The ginger carries with it the nutrition that’s available to your body. Think of it like a courier transporting your vitamins and minerals to the locations that need them most. Along with this nutrition, your energy also flows through the same path. According to traditional Chinese medicine, the blood and energy/vital force follow one another. So if your circulation is stimulated, so too is your energy, and therefore your intuition. Peppermint (Mentha x piperita) Peppermint (Mentha x piperita) helps stimulate the eccrine glands and soothe an upset stomach. You may have noticed that when you have a cup of spiritually activating peppermint tea, your hands sometimes feel warmer. This doesn’t happen all the time, but when it does, it shows that the energy in your palm chakras has been awakened. Your hands are now more sensitive to energy, and you can use them as a natural divination tool. When you meet someone for the first time and shake hands, trust the impression that you receive. Peppermint tea will help you have more confidence in these intuitive messages . Heart-Healthy Herbs Herbal medicines have both physical and energetic properties. These heart-healthy spiritual herbs nourish and protect your physical heart, stimulate your heart chakra, and also heal you emotionally. Astragalus (Astragalus membranaceus) Astragalus (Astragalus membranaceus) is a legendary tonic spiritual herb that nourishes the heart. It may balance blood pressure, as well as help you better cope with stress. Astragalus is a wonderful regulator for the body. It corrects imbalances and helps you overcome any obstacles. Dan Shen (Salvia miltiorrhiza) Dan Shen (Salvia miltiorrhiza) is a spiritual herb that has a strong connection to the heart. It balances blood pressure and prevents your blood from becoming too thick. Dan Shen protects the heart and can reduce palpitations. This herb can be helpful when people have a fiery energy about them, seeming angry and aggressive. A red face that comes from anger or high blood pressure can be a sign that this herb is needed. Hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna) Hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna) is one of my favorite heart-healing spiritual herbs. I use it for both the physical and emotional heart. On a physical level, it protects the heart muscle. It nourishes this precious organ, helping strengthen and regulate it. Emotionally and energetically, it soothes a broken heart. I’ve used it for healing grief; difficult relationships; and feelings of being taken advantage of by friends, family, or partners. Hawthorn has a gentle energy, like a comforting friend giving you support. Korean Ginseng (Panax ginseng) Korean ginseng (Panax ginseng) is a powerful, tonic spiritual herb that deserves a great deal of respect. It stimulates and awakens the whole body. In contrast to the way caffeine stimulates, Korean ginseng heals and restores. It nourishes the heart and clears feelings of debility. Korean ginseng allows you to cope with stressful situations in a healthy way, and has even shown an ability to increase mental alertness and memory. Taking a dose just before an exam can help you remember more information—an effect made even more powerful when you combine it with ginkgo. Source: by Doreen Virtue and Robert Reeves, N.D. From Around the Web Founder of WorldTruth.Tv and WomansVibe.com Eddie ( 8988 Posts )
Eddie L. is the founder and owner of www.WorldTruth.TV. and www.Womansvibe.com. Both website are dedicated to educating and informing people with articles on powerful and concealed information from around the world. I have spent the last 36+ years researching Bible, History, Alternative Health, Secret Societies, Symbolism and many other topics that are not reported by mainstream media. | 0 |
Pinterest
Despite the multiple attempts to throw Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump off his game and into the gauntlet, he has proved resilient and potentially victorious.
The Clinton campaign has left no stone unturned in an attempt to destroy Trump and create distractions from her criminal activity.
However, one of the most reliable formulas is predicting a Trump victory.
According to the New York Post :
A data-crunching artificial intelligence system that’s correctly predicted the last three US presidential elections is picking Donald Trump to be the next commander in chief.
The AI system, called MogIA, crunches 20 million data points from sites such as Google, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to spew out its predictions, CNBC reported.
It shows that Trump has overtaken the social media engagement numbers of Barack Obama’s peak in 2008 — by 25 percent.
And that’s important, because the candidate in each election who led in engagement data ended up winning the presidency, according to MogIA creator Sanjiv Rai, founder of an Indian startup company called Genic.ai
Now, some of you may be raising an eyebrow to this “engagement data” since Trump is talked about a lot on social media–the good, the bad, and the ugly.
How does the data sort out positive and negative comments? Trump supporters talking about Trump, versus Hillary supporters criticizing Trump?
It turns out that doesn’t matter.
This same system–relying on engagement data–also successfully predicted Trump’s win in the Republican primaries.
Democratic presidential candidate should not get too comfortable in her alleged lead.
Ultimately, Trump supporters and Trump haters are extreme. But, ultimately, it appears no news is bad news.
As the founder of this artificial intelligence system stated, “If Trump loses, it will defy the data trend for the first time in the last 12 years since internet engagement began in full earnest,” Rai told CNBC.
Hopefully, come November, anyone possessing a modicum of human intelligence will vote this artificial intelligence prediction into reality. | 0 |
Here Are The Presstitutes Who Control American's Minds .
I just heard an NPR presstitute declare that Texas, a traditional sure thing for Republicans was up for grabs in the presidential election. Little wonder if this report on Zero Hedge is correct. Apparently, the voting machines are already at work stealing the election for Killary.
From my long experience in journalism, I know the American public is not very sharp. Nevertheless, it is difficult for me to believe that Americans, whose jobs, careers, and the same for their children and grandchildren, have been sold out by the elites who Hillary represents would actually vote for her. It makes no sense. If this were the case, how did Trump get the Republican nomination despite the vicious presstitute campaign against him?
It seems obvious that the majority of Americans who have been suffering terribly at the hands of the One Percent who own Hillary lock, stock, and barrel, will not vote for the people who have ruined their lives and the lives of their children and grandchildren.
Furthermore, if Trump's election is as impossible as the presstitutes tell us--Hillary's win is 93% certain according to the latest presstitute pronouncement--the vicious 24/7 attacks on Trump would be pointless. Wouldn't they? Why the constant, frenetic, vicious attacks on a person who has no chance? - Advertisement -
There are reports that a company associated with Hillary backer George Soros is supplying the voting machines to 16 states, including states that determine election outcomes. I do not know that these reports are correct. However, I do know for a fact that the oligarchic interests that rule America are opposed to Trump being elected President for the simple reason that they are unsure that they would be able to control him.
It is hard to believe that dispossessed Americans will vote for Hillary, the representative of those who have dispossessed them, when Trump says he will re-empower the dispossessed. Hillary has denigrated ordinary Americans who, she says, she is so removed from by her wealth that she doesn't even know who they are. Clearly, Hillary, paid $675,000 by Goldman Sachs for three 20-minute speeches, is not a representative of the people. She represents the One Percent whose policies have flushed the prospects of ordinary Americans down the toilet.
What is really disturbing is the pretense by the presstitute scum that Trump's lewd admiration for female charms is deemed more important than the prospect of nuclear war. At no time during the presidential primaries or during the current presidential campaign has it been mentioned that Russia is being assaulted daily by propaganda, threatened by military buildups, and being convinced that the United States and its European vassals are planning an attack.
A threatened Russia, made insecure by inexplicable hostility and Western propaganda, is a danger manufactured by the neoconservative supporters of Hillary Clinton.
If the American people are really so unbelievably stupid that they think lewd remarks about women are more important than avoiding nuclear war, the American people are too stupid to exist. They will deserve the mushroom clouds that will wipe them and everyone else off the face of the earth. - Advertisement -
Donald Trump is the only candidate in the primaries and the general election who has said that he sees no point in conflict with Russia when Putin has shown nothing but desire to work things out to mutual advantage.
In contrast, Hillary has declared the thrice-elected president of Russia to be "the new Hitler" and has threatened Russia with military action. Hillary talks openly about regime change in Russia.
Surely, in a free media at least one person in the print and TV media would raise this most important of all points. But where have you seen it?
Only in my columns and a few others in the alternative media. | 0 |
A 23 kiloton tower shot called BADGER, fired on April 18, 1953 at the Nevada Test Site, as part of the Operation Upshot-Knothole nuclear test series. | 0 |
WASHINGTON — Donald J. Trump appeared to soften some of his campaign positions on immigration on Sunday, but he also restated his pledge to roll back abortion rights and used Twitter to lash out at his critics, leaving open the possibility that he would continue using social media in the Oval Office and radically change the way presidents speak to Americans. In his first television interview since his upset victory on Tuesday, Mr. Trump repeated his promise to name a Supreme Court justice who opposed abortion rights and would help overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that recognized them, returning the issue to the states. Asked where that would leave women seeking abortions, Mr. Trump, on the CBS program “60 Minutes,” said, “Well, they’ll perhaps have to go — they’ll have to go to another state. ” On immigration, he said the wall that he has been promising to build on the nation’s southern border might end up being a fence in places. But he said his priority was to deport two million to three million immigrants he characterized as dangerous or as having criminal records, a change from his original position that he would deport all of the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the country. President Obama has deported more than two million undocumented immigrants during his time in office. Mr. Trump said that undocumented immigrants who are not criminals are “terrific people,” and that he would decide how to handle them after the border is secure. The House speaker, Paul D. Ryan, echoed the saying on Sunday that there would be no deportation force, something Mr. Trump had promised to create early in his campaign. “That’s not what we’re focused on,” Mr. Ryan said on CNN’s “State of the Union. ” Mr. Trump also said he considered the Supreme Court decision last year that validated marriages as settled, and that he was “fine with that. ” He endorsed popular aspects of President Obama’s health insurance law, including a provision that requires coverage of people with medical conditions and one that allows young people to remain on their parents’ plans until the age of 26. But even as he appeared to inch toward the political center, Mr. Trump used a series of postings on Twitter to argue that The New York Times’s coverage of him has been “BAD” and “very poor and highly inaccurate. ” He falsely stated that The Times had issued an apology to readers, an apparent reference to a letter to readers from The Times’s publisher, Arthur Sulzberger Jr. and its executive editor, Dean Baquet. The letter noted the unpredictable nature of the election and said The Times aimed to “rededicate” itself to “the fundamental mission of Times journalism. ” In the letter, The Times posed a series of what it called inevitable questions, including, “Did Donald Trump’s sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters?” Mr. Trump also claimed that the newspaper had been losing thousands of subscribers over its campaign coverage. In a Twitter message in reply to Mr. Trump, The New York Times Company said it had seen a “surge” in new subscriptions since the election — four times the rate. “We’re proud of our election coverage we will continue to ‘hold power to account,’” the company said. Mr. Trump, in another Twitter post, said The Times had falsely reported that he believed additional nations should acquire nuclear arms. However, in an interview in March with The Times, Mr. Trump, asked about the North Korean threat to its neighbors, said he thought the United States’ allies might need their own nuclear deterrent. “If Japan had that nuclear threat, I’m not sure that would be a bad thing for us,” he said. Later, he added, “The bottom line is, I think that frankly, as long as North Korea’s there, I think that Japan having a capability is something that maybe is going to happen whether we like it or not. ” His posts on Twitter were a striking public display from a man who, after winning the election, had worked to project an air of seriousness and first in a victory speech early Wednesday and then in an Oval Office meeting the next day with Mr. Obama, whom he called a “good man” for whom he had “great respect. ” But by Thursday evening, Mr. Trump was using Twitter to complain about demonstrations against his victory, saying they were being mounted by “professional protesters, incited by the media,” and branding them as “very unfair!” The social media sniping — unparalleled in the history of presidential communication — suggested that Mr. Trump plans to bring his confrontational style of speaking to Americans to the White House, working to undercut news outlets that do not comport with his views, silence his critics and elevate his own standing. On Sunday, he selected Stephen K. Bannon, the executive chairman of Breitbart News, a site known for its nationalist, racially charged and coverage, to be his chief strategist and senior counselor. It was only one indication of the extraordinary nature of the ’s tactics and those of his inner circle. In the “60 Minutes” interview, Mr. Trump suggested he would not hold to the longstanding tradition of presidents refraining from interfering in F. B. I. criminal matters, hinting that he would quiz the director, James B. Comey, about his handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server before deciding whether to dismiss him. “I’m not sure,” Mr. Trump said when asked if he would seek Mr. Comey’s resignation. “I would have to see — he may have had very good reasons for doing what he did. ” In an interview on Friday with The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Trump did not rule out prosecuting Mrs. Clinton. On Sunday, his campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, warned that Senator Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada and the minority leader, could face legal action for having said that Mr. Trump’s election had “emboldened the forces of hate and bigotry in America. ” Mr. Trump has said he is proud of how he has used social media to create his own version of events and communicate it to his followers. He suggested in the “60 Minutes” interview that he is reluctant to surrender that platform when he takes the oath of office in January. “I’m not saying I love it, but it does get the word out,” Mr. Trump said of Twitter during the interview, adding that his millions of followers on various social media sites had given him “such power” that it helped him win the election. “When you give me a bad story, or when you give me an inaccurate story,” Mr. Trump added, “I have a method of fighting back. ” He said, however, that he would be “very restrained” in his Twitter posts should he continue to make them as president. Mr. Trump is a highly public scorekeeper of his own accolades and accomplishments, and his elevation to the highest office in the land has not changed his instinct to crow about the smallest details. During the interview, Mr. Trump boasted that since his election, he had built up his social media following by tens of thousands of people. “I’m picking up now — I think I picked up yesterday 100, 000 people,” Mr. Trump said. The interview, which also featured Mr. Trump’s wife, Melania, and adult children, showed a side of the that he did not display during the campaign — a man awed and somewhat intimidated by the significance of the office to which he had just laid claim. “I’ve done a lot of big things I’ve never done anything like this,” Mr. Trump said. “It is — it is so big, it is so — it’s so enormous, it’s so amazing. ” Mr. Trump said he had been inaccurately portrayed as “a little bit of a wild man” during the campaign, and he promised that he would be able to tamp down some of his more heated speech as president. But he suggested that he would still use such tactics to galvanize his supporters, just as he did during his bid for the White House. “Sometimes you need a certain rhetoric to get people motivated,” he said. “I don’t want to be just a little nice monotone character. ” | 1 |
JERUSALEM — Even before Secretary of State John Kerry issued his scathing critique of Israeli policies on Wednesday, Donald J. Trump essentially told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to ignore it. “Stay strong Israel,” Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter. “January 20th is fast approaching!” Mr. Netanyahu responded warmly. “ Trump, thank you for your warm friendship and your support for Israel!” he wrote, adding Israeli and American flag emojis. Mr. Kerry’s Middle East speech brought together four giant personalities representing two radically divergent worldviews in one momentous clash. On one side was Mr. Kerry, venting years of frustration on behalf of President Obama and himself at what they consider Israeli intransigence. On the other were Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Trump, firing back at what they deemed a hypocritical betrayal of America’s closest friend in the Middle East. If Mr. Obama and Mr. Kerry were playing for history, Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Trump were playing for time. The departing administration intended for the speech to lay out a path to peace that they had tried to take, hoping to salvage some scrap of a legacy on the issue. The incoming administration and its Israeli ally were busy counting the days until the old team will be swept from the stage and a new alignment redefines the politics of the region. Mr. Obama and Mr. Kerry have painted Israel into a corner, providing ammunition to its critics and effectively isolating it on the world stage after a United Nations Security Council resolution last week criticizing Israeli settlements and the secretary’s sharp assessment on Wednesday. But in three weeks, Mr. Netanyahu expects unstinting support from Mr. Trump, who so far appears to be promising it. Amid the harsh exchanges was the increasing sense that the solution to the conflict favored by much of the world no longer seems plausible, at least for now. When Mr. Kerry outlined six principles for a final agreement, he largely tracked longstanding American orthodoxy. But unlike when President Bill Clinton did something similar 16 years ago, it sounded more like a requiem than a plan. “The positions he lays out are well known to all of us,” said Michael Herzog, a member of the Israeli negotiating team during the latest round of failed talks, led by Mr. Kerry in 2014. “There were no major surprises. The question is, does it really matter?” Indeed, among the blaring, polarized responses to Mr. Kerry’s speech, the one conclusion that drew agreement across political lines was that the solution may be all but buried. “This will go down in history as an eloquently delivered eulogy to the formula, which is in itself a recipe for disaster,” said Oded Revivi, the chief foreign envoy of the Yesha Council, which represents Israeli settlers. “John Kerry just gave an eloquent eulogy for the solution,” said Ali Abunimah, a activist who helped found the Electronic Intifada, a website focused on the Palestinian side of the conflict. While Mr. Netanyahu still formally supports a solution, few believe his heart is in it, and voices on the far sides of the conflict are increasingly talking about a solution, albeit one conceived in starkly different ways. From his right flank, Mr. Netanyahu faces calls within his coalition to give up the formula and instead annex parts of the West Bank. From the other side, some Palestinians now advocate a single state from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River in which everyone has an equal vote, knowing that Palestinians would ultimately outnumber Jewish citizens in such a country. The rift between Mr. Obama and Mr. Trump may further polarize a debate that has divided the world for decades. With such a harsh assessment by the departing Obama administration, Israel has for the moment lost its staunchest defender in the international arena, and its critics may feel emboldened to press for more action against it in the form of sanctions, boycotts or legal cases. Conversely, the impending arrival of Mr. Trump and his unqualified support for Israel have already inspired the Israeli right to press for more aggressive policies that would move the country even further from compromise. After nearly eight years with Mr. Obama, Mr. Netanyahu for the first time may feel little or no American pressure to make concessions. The status quo in the meantime is an uneasy coexistence with no obvious resolution in the near term. Palestinians live under military occupation surrounded by miles of walls and fences. Israelis build more homes for themselves while their forces raid communities, control movement through checkpoints and respond to provocations with decisive force. Israelis live under the constant threat of terrorism, enduring sometimes daily assaults by attackers wielding knives or driving cars into crowds. The Palestinian authorities venerate such “martyrs” and compensate their families financially. It is against that backdrop that the struggle of the four major figures in the twilight of an expiring presidency has played out in recent days and weeks. Underlying it was a deep divide over who was to blame for the long impasse in this part of the world. Mr. Obama and Mr. Kerry, while careful to call on the Palestinians to curb terrorism and incitement, seem to save most of their emotional energy for denouncing Mr. Netanyahu, who has come to grate on both of them. To the extent that the United States has presented itself as an honest broker in the conflict over the years, Mr. Obama and Mr. Kerry are viewed by many in Jerusalem as tilted to the Palestinian cause, despite the $38 billion they pledged to Israel’s defense over the next 10 years. Mr. Netanyahu has reacted to the United Nations resolution and Mr. Kerry’s speech as if they were “a declaration of war,” a phrase he reportedly used before the Security Council vote last week in trying to persuade New Zealand to drop the measure. Mr. Trump, after initially saying he wanted to be a neutral figure in the conflict, has thrown in his lot with Mr. Netanyahu, especially since the election, perhaps encouraging the prime minister to castigate the departing president and secretary. “Israelis do not need to be lectured about the importance of peace by foreign leaders,” Mr. Netanyahu said after Mr. Kerry’s speech. Still, some of Mr. Netanyahu’s domestic critics said he had brought this on himself. Former Prime Minister Ehud Barak wrote on Twitter that most of the world and Israel agreed with Mr. Kerry. “Bibi, on verge of messianic abyss, determined to go forward,” he added, using Mr. Netanyahu’s nickname. Reactions to Mr. Kerry divided along similar lines, only in reverse. Miri Regev, a minister in Mr. Netanyahu’s cabinet, told an Israeli news outlet that Mr. Kerry’s speech “gives hope to the terror organizations to eliminate Israel step by step. ” She also challenged the secretary to propose “having Washington divided” as he proposes to divide Jerusalem. The final break between Mr. Kerry and Mr. Netanyahu — and their patrons, Mr. Obama and Mr. Trump — came after years of conversations that never led to the accord the secretary sought. Mr. Kerry made a point of talking with Mr. Netanyahu often, more than was publicly known, hoping to build a relationship that would enable them to bridge their ideological differences. But Mr. Netanyahu never viewed it as in his interest, or in Israel’s, to go along with the American interloper. After all the stormy exchanges and recriminations, the remaining question is where Mr. Trump’s alliance with Mr. Netanyahu will lead. Mr. Trump fashions himself a deal maker, and this would be the ultimate deal. Having embraced one side of the conflict so avowedly, could he craft a mutually acceptable bargain where Mr. Obama and Mr. Kerry failed? Would he deem it in his interest to try? And would Mr. Netanyahu want him to? As Mr. Trump put it, Jan. 20 is fast approaching. | 1 |
EUROPEAN: “America – the whole world is counting on you.” His Pro-Trump video is getting brigaded Tweet
Its true, in Europe you need to hide in the woods to speak good about trump.
Do your news even report a fraction of the things I see in this sub? In Germany not a single bad thing about Hillary gets reported. | 0 |
Support Us HISTORY OF ILLUMINATI Full Documentary HD | 0 |
WASHINGTON — The Senate confirmed Steven T. Mnuchin, a former Goldman Sachs banker and Hollywood film financier, to be Treasury secretary on Monday, putting in place a key lieutenant to President Trump who will help drive the administration’s plans to overhaul the tax code, renegotiate trade deals around the world and remake financial regulations. By a vote of 53 to 47, the Senate confirmed Mr. Mnuchin, who was Mr. Trump’s top campaign . During a long debate over Mr. Mnuchin’s credentials, Democrats argued that his experience on Wall Street exemplified corporate malpractice that led to the 2008 financial crisis. The new Treasury secretary will have little time to celebrate. He will be under pressure to help finalize the Trump administration’s tax plan, accelerate the rollback regulations and raise the government’s borrowing limit. The administration has said it will release a comprehensive plan to rewrite the tax code in the coming weeks, and it will have to deal with the debt ceiling next month. While Mr. Mnuchin’s financial acumen has been praised by Mr. Trump and Republicans in Congress, Democrats have argued forcefully that he is not up to the job. They have painted him as a symbol of everything that is wrong with corporate America. “He was part of the cadre of corporate raiders that brought our economy to its knees,” Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, said on the Senate floor on Monday. There was also no shortage of . Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, referred to Mr. Mnuchin at the “foreclosure king. ” Senator Tammy Duckworth, Democrat of Illinois, described him as “greedy” and “unethical” while arguing the case against him. “Whether illegally foreclosing on thousands of families, skirting the law with offshore tax havens or helping design tactics that contributed to the 2008 financial crisis, Steve Mnuchin made a career — and millions of dollars — pioneering increasingly deceptive and predatory ways to rob hardworking Americans of their savings and homes,” Ms. Duckworth said. At a prickly confirmation hearing before the Senate Finance Committee last month, Mr. Mnuchin was scolded by Democrats for failing to disclose nearly $100 million in assets and for not revealing his role as a director of an investment fund based in the Cayman Islands, a tax haven. After the hearing, Democrats on the committee accused Mr. Mnuchin of lying for saying that OneWest Bank had not engaged in the controversial foreclosure practice of “ ” when he was its chief executive. The Democrats on the committee twice boycotted a vote on his confirmation, leading Republicans to breach protocol and push Mr. Mnuchin’s vote to the full Senate on their own. Just one Democrat, Senator of Joe Manchin III of West Virginia, broke with his party and supported Mr. Mnuchin. In a sign of the backlash that Democrats will face for siding with any part of Mr. Trump’s agenda, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee warned that Mr. Manchin’s vote would not go unnoticed. “We will ensure that Joe Manchin hears from his West Virginia constituents who disapprove of his voting with Wall Street against working families,” the group said in a statement after the vote. For Republicans, the resistance was chalked up to political theater. On Monday, Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, the Republican chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, accused Democrats of making Mr. Mnuchin a political pawn and described their concerns as a stall tactic. “Under any objective standard, Mr. Mnuchin has ample experience, credentials and qualifications for this important position,” Mr. Hatch said. “My colleagues have done all they can under the rules — even to the point of casting aside some longstanding customs and traditions of the Senate — in order to delay his confirmation. ” While Mr. Mnuchin struggled to show fluency with some aspects of the job during his confirmation hearing, Republicans and Democrats generally agreed that he was well versed on economic issues. He also struck a more moderate tone than Mr. Trump on issues such as trade and dealing with China. And Mr. Mnuchin left some experts dumbfounded after suggesting that “there would be no absolute tax cut for the upper class” — a promise that appears to be at odds with plans presented by Mr. Trump and House Republicans. Mr. Mnuchin was not the only member of Mr. Trump’s cabinet to be confirmed on Monday night. The Senate also voted in favor of David Shulkin to lead the Department of Veterans Affairs. A holdover from the Obama administration, Dr. Shulkin is currently the department’s under secretary of health and was approved by a unanimous vote. Mr. Mnuchin was the latest member of Mr. Trump’s cabinet to edge through the confirmation process on a largely vote. Last week, Tom Price was approved as secretary of health and human services and Betsy DeVos narrowly won confirmation to lead the Education Department. Things could become more complicated on Thursday, however, when Andrew Puzder, Mr. Trump’s choice for labor secretary, faces a committee hearing. Several Republicans on the committee have declined to support Mr. Puzder, a chain executive who critics say promotes policies that are harmful to workers. | 1 |
By Israel Shamir on November 5, 2016 Israel Shamir — The Unz Review Nov 3, 2016 I envy you, American citizens. I do not care about your military might, nor for your supreme currency, the US dollar. I envy your chance to deal on 11/8 a decisive blow to the rule of the Masters of Discourse. Though the Masters control the entirety of world media, and they decide what people may think and say from Canada to Hong Kong, only you, American citizens, can defeat them. This is a great chance, a unique opportunity not to be missed. The Masters of Discourse can be defeated. They are not stronger than any ruler of past. Trump has a great quality making him fit for the task: he is impervious to labels and libels. He had been called everything in the book: anti-Semite, racist, women hater, you name it. And he still survived that flak. Such people are very rare. We know he is against the Masters because every newspaper is against him. I never saw a similar onslaught but once, in Russia in 1996. Then President Yeltsin, an old drunkard who had brought Russia to collapse, had to run for his second term. His popularity was next to zero. Two per cent of Russians intended to vote for him. And then the oligarchs turned on their propaganda machine. Yeltsin’s competitor Gennady Zyuganov, a mild church-going post-communist, had been presented like a Hitler of his days. All the Russian media of the day belonged to oligarchs, and all of it participated in the onslaught. Zyuganov surrendered. Perhaps he won the election, but he congratulated Yeltsin with his victory. It was said that he was threatened with assassination unless… Others say he was bribed. I do not exclude both explanations, but for sure the might of united media can crush a timid man. In the days of the Jewish Temple, there was a Magrepha, a wind instrument able to produce diverse and frightening sounds. There is no agreement among the scholars about what sort of thing it was. Whenever it sounded, people were scared. The media of our days is a new Magrepha. If all of its outputs are united, they produce a terrible roar. Yes, the onslaught of the media upon Trump had been exceedingly unfair, but he survived it. What is even more important, you survived it. It does not matter what the polls say: they say what the newspapers tell them to say. Even people answer the polls according to the media prognoses: they are shy of saying they would vote for a man who … But at the moment of actual vote, they do what they know is right for them. Not for transgenders, not for Muslim brokers, not even for single mothers, but for themselves. You have a very good chance to win, and to defeat the witch and her supporters. We learned that the British people voted for Brexit, though all the media said that proposal had no chance. But we also learned from Brexit, that nothing is over until it is over. The Masters of Discourse will try every trick to steal the elections, and only their fear of armed rising may finally force them to acknowledge their inevitable defeat. We know that in 2015, when Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, was afraid of losing the elections, he revealed that the American intelligence has some superior software which allows them to falsify the elections. Perhaps, but he won despite this magical software, despite Obama’s wrath. Even in Israel, that favorite son of the Masters, the Masters are hated. The New York Times is always speaking good about Israel, but still Israelis do not like the newspaper. Nobody likes them, nobody likes an old aunt who tries to tell us what we can say and what we can’t. If Netanyahu could win, Trump can win twice. After the first debate of Trump and Clinton, people said: She won! But we shall vote for him. This was a very encouraging sign. Indeed every woman worth its salt would win an argument with her husband or son-in-law, let alone a pretender. That is the way we are made. The story of sirens enforces the belief that if you listen to a woman, she will bewitch you. Sirens actually ate the bewitched sailors; our womenfolk do not go to such extremes, but they can cause us a lot of trouble. Trump seems to be almost pure of heart and deed, as even extremely prejudiced media could not find anything really incriminating about him but bragging about having his way with women. I shall not recount so many proven accusations against Hillary. All of that can be found in the emails revealed by Julian Assange and his great Wikileaks team. The media kept mum about it, but the secrets can’t be kept forever. There are many practical things Donald Trump will be able to fix. He can return industries home, he can return American GIs home from four ends of the world, he can improve lot of working men. But he surely will set all of us free from the annoying bondage of the Masters. Just for that reason, go and vote, for yourself and for millions of us who aren’t entitled to.
Israel Shamir can be reached at
This article was first published at The Unz Review . | 0 |
(Before It's News)
A new year coming up, a new administration being sworn in, and new threats emerging, so will this be a winter like no other? Ice storms, power outages, mass shootings, financial crisis’s, possible attacks by other countries and civil unrest all loom large in the new year.
The nation’s power grids, yes plural because there are three of them are in disrepair, and much of the grid system relies entirely on computer systems, which it seems, are hacked on a daily basis. Russia is stirring and making war noises, North Korea has failed to launch but they keep trying and they will get it right soon enough, and then there is Iran running their fingernails down the chalkboard trying to get our attention. Iran wants a war because it takes the focus off of just how badly treated their people are and it always ends up being about money and power, so why not start a war is their thinking.
All in the name of something are wars started, wars are profitable, and they cover up a lot of atrocities committed by all parties, the fog of war, and all that. This winter we may or may not be in a war much may depend on just how the new administration handles things, however.
You cast your vote and pray for the best, of course, there is much more you must do. You as an individual and as a family or even as a community must prepare, because you may have to go it alone for days, weeks, or even months if the grid is hacked and shut down, or if we are attacked or if a natural disaster strikes. The world is in turmoil and much of what happens is simply out of your control, what you can control, however, is how you prepare and react.
You have to be prepared to live without your local, state or federal governments help. No garbage pickup, no clean water piped in, no natural gas for heat or cooking, and no snowplows patrolling the streets. Police will prioritize so that recent break-in with no injuries goes to the bottom of the list. Firefighters may be responding to fires set by violent protesters and ambulance services may have to respond to a mass shooting or injuries caused by rioting. You, the average citizen may very well be on your own, on your own in the dark in some cases for a very long time, in the winter of our discontent.
The weather will have an influence on you, and it must be dealt with along with the other threats looming. It may be time that you grocery shop for two weeks instead of stopping every night or every other night to grab something quick. This way you stand a good chance of having a week to a 10-day supply of food on hand for emergencies.
We generally recommend several months, and in some cases, several years’ worth of food, but the prepping landscape is changing, and finances are the biggest factor. For most Americans, it is not realistic to have a 6-month supply of food on hand, and with that being the case, you will have to adjust your shopping habits and meal preparation habits, so you do have some food reserves on hand at all times. It may not be much but it may be enough to get past many local disasters. If you can afford to have a 6-month supply on hand do so, but for many this is financially out of reach.
The problem with stockpiling food, however, is that it will need to be prepared and many today simply do not have the time or skills to properly prepare a meal, but during a crisis is not the time to try and learn to cook.
There is more to being prepared than having a spare bedroom filled with dehydrated foods, lanterns, batteries, tents, and sleeping bags. You also need skills, such as cooking, fire starting, how to stay warm outside when the wind chill factor is well below zero and how to prepare fresh foods like wild game or fish, for example, without making the family sick.
We have written dozens of articles about the skills needed, and it is well worth your time to review a few. This article is more about reminding you that regardless of what may be going on in the world, the biggest threat to you is usually local. Snow storms, local power outages, broken water mains, which means no clean water unless you boil it, or you lose a few days of work because of a snowstorm, or you experience icy road conditions and end up in the ditch or down a ravine. Local threats and national and world threats all have to be dealt with, but you start with the most likely at the time.
The Simplest Of Things Matter The Most
Keep your vehicle fueled up can save your life. If you run off into the ditch almost on empty, you can’t stay warm. You need a winter survival kit as well. Warm clothing and shoes for walking in snow and wet conditions, blankets and food and water protected from freezing. You don’t have to run out and buy emergency blankets, use one or two from the house and toss a spare jacket in the back and those old snow boots you never wear around the house. The simple things matter.
Buy a box of protein bars , and a case of water. For less than 12 bucks, you have water and food for a few days. Toss in some matches, a flashlight, gloves, a small shovel and hat and you are almost there without breaking the bank. You know what you need, it is just a matter of taking the time to do it, and if you look around the house you will find you may not have to run out and buy anything because you already have what you need.
You, of course, have to focus on the big picture as well, the threats from abroad, nuclear war, armed invasions and a major grid collapse but it is likely you will meet a snowstorm or icy roads before the other threats manifest themselves. Of course, we never know for sure, but life is always about the most likely and what is the most realist way of living your life day-to-day.
The post The Winter of Our Discontent: Survival appeared first on Preparing for shtf .
Source: prepforshtf.com | 0 |
Tuesday on his nationally syndicated radio show, conservative talker Rush Limbaugh pointed out the mood of the Democratic Party, which he described as resentful and unhappy, and noted liberal comedians are “consumed by hatred. ” This combination of negative emotions according to Limbaugh has made the Democratic Party “the largest hate group” in the country. Partial transcript as follows (courtesy of RushLimbaugh. com): Let me tell you something, folks. There is an inescapable observation and conclusion, and it is this. You have to look very hard — and you have to spend a long time looking — to find a genuinely happy or content political person. Whether they’re an activist or not. If they’re engaged in any way, shape, manner, or form of politics, they’re not happy, no matter what. When they elected Obama, they got angrier. They got more enraged. After every success they have, nothing is ever enough. No amount much success ever makes them happy. Every success they have seems to tell them how little they’ve actually done and how much more there is and how deeply resentful of that they are. The bottom line is: You just don’t encounter happy, laughing liberals. Even their comedians are consumed by hatred. The Democrat Party’s become the largest hate group in this country. Even their comedians are angry and enraged, and that suffices as comedy. I think it’s one of the reasons why comics have become primary sources of news for other liberals. So there’s never any happiness, there never is any contentment. You don’t see any real laughter. You just see a constant level of rage — and I’m telling you, it isn’t healthy. Talk about sustainable? That cannot be sustained. A healthy mind and heart cannot be sustained by the degree of rage and hatred that we see in the American left today. You have to ask: Why don’t their successes make them happy? Look at what they’ve done in the area of marriage. They’ve totally upended it. They have succeeded in not just redefining a word that has stood for however many number of years — tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of years — that humans have been plodding and walking the earth. And even after they succeed with this, they get angry. They don’t ever seem satisfied. It’s the most amazing thing. And we’re all paying the price for it, this constant rage, this constant anger. They lose elections, and it is taken as one of the most outrageous things that could happen. ( DailyRushbo) Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor | 1 |
ARLINGTON, Va. — The rise of Donald J. Trump, with his hostility toward free trade and vow to protect entitlements, is a sharp rebuke to the principles long championed by the billionaire brothers Charles G. and David H. Koch. But if the Koch brothers have lost the battle for conservative values in 2016, they are also quietly preparing for a long war. Their secret weapon is the Grassroots Leadership Academy: a training program dreamed up by the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, the political education arm of the Koch network, and intended to groom the next generation of conservative activists to shape the future of the Republican Party. Taking inspiration from icons of the left like Saul Alinsky, the Frankfurt School, and even President Obama’s Organizing for Action, the academy offers classes like “Messaging to the Middle” (about reaching not just the conservative base but also persuadable voters) community organizing and how to wage a successful public protest, complete with costumes. The goal is not just to equip activists to compete with the left, but also to help rebuild the conservative movement in the wake of a Trump loss — or even a Trump victory. The Kochs will be key figures in any discussion about what direction the party takes after 2016, and they are determined to steer it toward their vision. A band of trained volunteers focused on elections farther down the ballot could help raise their standing for 2018 and beyond. The network hopes that these activists will learn how to make a compelling, personal pitch to win over new converts to the cause, and that if volunteers are grounded in a strong philosophical understanding of principles, they will be better prepared not only to explain their beliefs but also to ward off candidates, like Mr. Trump, who do not espouse their vision. “We want a cultural shift of people being able to know what they want and how to talk to the people in their communities, so that in the future, when there are political leaders that want to demagogue issues, they do hit resistance,” said Levi Russell, the director of public affairs for Americans for Prosperity. After Americans for Prosperity spent more than $100 million during the 2012 election, yet failed to take back the White House or the Senate, the Koch network undertook a major and overhaul. It is spending $3 million on the training initiative, which officially began in February 2015, and plans to expand it next year. The effort has taken on newfound urgency because Mr. Trump has shown that Republican voters will support a candidate who denounces trade agreements and rejects the doctrine the Kochs have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to push. “This Republican nomination battle for president has demonstrated that no issue is ever fully won,” said Tim Phillips, the president of Americans for Prosperity. “You must keep competing and explaining. For example, why free trade is better, why entitlement reform is necessary. ” The group has held training sessions in roughly three dozen states, and about 10, 000 people have attended an academy program. The academy offers three tiers: two courses and, for those who have completed the first two levels, a final, intensive training at Americans for Prosperity’s headquarters here, with hotel and travel expenses underwritten by the group. The first level introduces trainees to the principles of economic freedom and prepares them, for example, to lobby their representatives about a particular issue. The second level of training seeks to turn the attendees into community activists, the sorts of people who could recruit and mobilize others. The curriculum is likely to intensify criticism of the Kochs, whose fortune is based largely on oil and petroleum, from liberals who view the brothers’ political work as stemming largely from their financial interests. One of the sessions, called the “Moral Case for Fossil Fuels,” teaches attendees to argue that “a turn away from fossil fuel use would ultimately be disastrous to humanity — especially the poorest of the poor. ” Slade O’Brien, vice president of the Grassroots Leadership Academy, said he had learned two big lessons from studying Democratic tactics. “It was incredibly it was truly at the level,” he said. “And they didn’t have to agree on everything to agree to work on something — that incremental victories matter, and they would work on those rather than swing for the fences and try to hit a home run. ” In Bethlehem, Pa. the second session of the training program was held in a conference room over the beer and liquor section of a Wegmans grocery. Fifteen people munched on turkey wraps and miniature cannoli as they listened to Mary Conway, a Republican organizer who worked for Senator John McCain’s and Sarah Palin’s 2008 campaign, run briskly through a series of slides with labels like “The Left Is Highly Organized” and quotations from Mr. Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals. ” With the intonation of a motivational speaker, Ms. Conway urged her students to focus on what makes a successful movement. “Successful or Unsuccessful,” read slides listing various movements, one of which was the civil rights fight of the 1950s and 1960s. “One thing the civil rights movement was very good at was capturing the new media,” Ms. Conway said. Several attendees were activists from local Tea Party groups. One was a political blogger. They offered their views on successful political movements — and, during a break, on the presidential race. It was a reminder that the network cannot always control who shows up. Charlie Knight, 70, a electrician who supports Mr. Trump, said he had come to the training because he wanted to be around “ people. ” “There’s only one person that I could possibly support, because the other one’s nothing but a liar,” Mr. Knight said. Mr. O’Brien, the Grassroots vice president, said he hoped the program would pay dividends over the long term. “You can’t just show up at somebody’s door six weeks before an election and build a relationship with them,” he said. He added that Mr. Obama’s wing was “magnificent at building up their volunteers and relationships over a period of time, and you have to give them credit. ” The leadership academy program still has some work to do. Though the Kochs have tried to make the conservative base more diverse, in a recent training session near Washington, the class of roughly two dozen was mostly older and white. While some of the budding activists seemed equipped to return home and wage a successful campaign, others seemed generally befuddled and uncomfortable with even the basics of social media, like Twitter and digital video. At one point, a man briefly dozed off during a session on the legislative process. “The big question going forward is what are the programs that these people get plugged into once they’re ready to get involved in politics,” said Sasha Issenberg, the author of “Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns,” a book the program’s leaders have consulted. “What the left has been very good about doing is taking enthusiastic activists, giving them training, but then plugging them into systems where their energy is well directed. ” Near the end of a Friday session in Arlington, the trainees divided into several teams. Each team had a designated “builder” whose goal was to recreate a small widget out of building blocks using only descriptions from teammates, relayed from one person to the next in what was, basically, a giant game of telephone. Some teams did better than others, but the description became increasingly garbled as it passed from person to person. The real point of the exercise, a moderator explained, was that “you constantly have to be working on communication skills if you want to be a leader. ” But when he asked the group what the lesson was, someone shouted out a message perhaps even more aligned with the project’s stated aim: “Cut out the bureaucracy!” the attendee said, to laughter. “Yeah, cut out the middle man and just say it right to the builder,” the moderator conceded. | 1 |
Good morning. This is the last day of our test of California Today, a daily update for our California readers. Thanks to everyone who told us what they want to see. We received more than 2, 500 emails. We’d still like to hear from you: CAtoday@nytimes. com All over California, communities are grappling with a shortage of affordable housing. Is Airbnb part of the problem? The company is increasingly at odds with local governments in the state. Los Angeles is considering major restrictions on home rentals, and wants Airbnb to help police hosts who skirt the rules. Airbnb has resisted, accusing officials of overreaching. The city of Sacramento approved regulations in January. Anaheim just banned rentals entirely. Residents had complained that Disneyland visitors had overrun their neighborhoods. Now, Airbnb is in a legal battle with its hometown, San Francisco, which has brought up wrenching questions about inequality, neighborhood change and the free market. Founded inside a San Francisco apartment, Airbnb is a major local success story. There are more Airbnb listings per capita in San Francisco than in any other United States city. The company has been celebrated there as a trailblazer in the sharing economy. But Airbnb has also become a focal point for anger at the tech industry — even more so than the Google buses that bring workers to jobs in Silicon Valley. rentals in San Francisco are being blamed, at least in part, for rising rents that are driving out longtime residents. Last year, Airbnb spent more than $8 million to defeat a ballot measure that would have limited rentals to no more than 75 nights a year. Last month, San Francisco supervisors unanimously approved an ordinance that would fine Airbnb $1, 000 per day for each host listed on its website who is not registered with the city. In suing to stop the law, Airbnb has emphasized its San Francisco roots. “This legislation ignores the reality that the system is not working and this new approach will harm thousands of everyday San Francisco residents who depend on Airbnb,” the company said. We spoke to our San reporter who has been covering Airbnb, Katie Benner, about why the company is such a flash point. “It’s this very visible sign of the problem,” she said. “Not just of gentrification, but of how wide the disparity is between people who have opportunities and people who don’t. ” • Gov. Jerry Brown has signed six gun control bills that will impose new restrictions on assault weapons and regulate the sale of ammunition. California may well have the toughest gun control laws in the country now. • The driver of a Tesla Model S electric sedan was killed in an accident when the car was in mode, and federal regulators are investigating. • The legal battle for Sumner Redstone’s $40 billion media empire is now focusing on his mental state. • A popular host of YouTube videos about gay rights was charged in Los Angeles with filing a false report about being severely beaten outside a gay club. • A Nielsen study on how we consume media finds people are still watching plenty of TV but services like Netflix and Amazon Prime are growing rapidly. • More than 100 Nobel laureates have a message for Greenpeace: Quit bashing genetically modified organisms and food. • “Hello, Jerry. ” In “Seinfeldia: How a Show About Nothing Changed Everything,” the author delivers a solid history of the series, our book reviewer writes. • Our reviewer’s take on Steven Spielberg’s “BFG”: It’s “a small, friendly movie, an attempt to reconcile the scale and dazzle of modern filmmaking with the quiet, mischievous charm of Roald Dahl’s book. ” • In “Tarzan,” our reviewer writes, “the filmmakers have given Tarzan a thoughtful, imperfect makeover. ” • Over the last year, California drivers have paid up to $1. 50 more than the rest of the country for each gallon of gasoline. The state attorney general is trying to find out why, and subpoenaed oil refiners as part of the investigation. [Los Angeles Times] • A San Francisco city supervisor believes arson may be the cause of a string of fires that have displaced residents in the Mission district. [San Francisco Examiner] • “While many complain of the obvious dysfunction in Washington, few see the incomparably greater danger of ‘nuclear doom. ’” Governor Brown found time to review a book about the nuclear age. [New York Review of Books] • Afraid of Zika? Check out this interactive map of where the Aedes aegypti mosquito, which carries the virus, has been found in California. [KQED] When questioned by reporters about the state budget, which he signed this week, Governor Brown responded with a parable, Aesop’s “The Ant and the Grasshopper. ” Aesop, an ancient Greek fabulist, “has some credibility,” Mr. Brown said. That was one of the governor’s less obscure literary references. Since returning to Sacramento in 2011 for a second stint as governor, he has quoted poets, religious scholars and biologists. He invoked the book of Genesis, Oliver Wendell Holmes, a king of Spain and “The Little Engine That Could” all in the same 2013 speech. “Over the mountain the little engine went — we are going to get over that mountain,” he said, making an analogy to California’s rail plan after quoting the children’s book. The unusual source material has perplexed some analysts. He was, of course, called “Governor Moonbeam” during his first spell in charge of the state. But his literary breadth may also help reinforce his image as a wise, old — well, experienced (he’s 78) — politician, who will keep his party’s impulses to spend in check. During a speech last year about climate change, Mr. Brown said proudly that he was among the last politicians with a classics degree. “It does come in handy,” he said, “because some of the same mistakes have been made over and over again. ” California Today is a weekday roundup that stays live from 6 a. m. Pacific time until late morning. What would you like to see here to start your day? Email us at CAtoday@nytimes. com, or reach us via Twitter using #CAToday. Follow the California Today columnist, Ian Lovett, on Twitter. | 1 |
LONDON — Prince Harry on Tuesday attacked the “racial undertones” of British news coverage and social media harassment of his new girlfriend, the American actress Meghan Markle. In an unusual statement, the prince, the grandson of Queen Elizabeth II, said that a line had been crossed in the reporting of his relationship with Ms. Markle, 35, whose mother is black and whose father is white. “Some of this has been very public,” read the statement, issued in the name of the prince’s spokesman, Jason Knauf. “The smear on the front page of a national newspaper the racial undertones of comment pieces and the outright sexism and racism of social media trolls and web article comments. ” The role and behavior of the news media are a particularly sensitive topic for Prince Harry and his brother, Prince William. Their mother, Diana, died in Paris in a 1997 car crash when pursued by paparazzi. Both princes, who were then 12 and 15, have said that their mother’s death made them wary of the news media, though the royal family has generally been skillful in getting favorable coverage and suppressing scandal. But internet competition and social media activity have accelerated and coarsened coverage of the prince’s relationship with a divorced, biracial woman who was already in the public eye as an actress. Since articles surfaced about Ms. Markle’s dating Prince Harry, the British tabloids have expressed surprise that a “brunette” would be his type and accused her of not being British enough for him. The Daily Mail ran an article headlined, “Harry’s girl is (almost) straight outta Compton: home of her mother revealed — so will he be dropping by for tea?” The article then wove together various racial stereotypes, lamenting Ms. Markle’s mother’s “ ” Los Angeles neighborhood, Crenshaw, and its “tatty homes,” and listing crime statistics for the area. Newspapers have been digging up suggestive photographs of Ms. Markle and examining her past relationships, and some comments on their websites and on social media have been explicit and racist. The prince’s statement, which confirmed his relationship with Ms. Markle, expressed fears for her safety and privacy. It noted that his office had regularly fought to keep defamatory articles out of the newspapers — which he said had offered large bribes to her . The statement also condemned the way that the news media has invaded Ms. Markle’s privacy and harassed her mother. In one instance, a palace official said a photographer had chased an assistant to Ms. Markle through the garage of her home in Toronto. The photographer had to be physically removed and the police called, the official said. One article in the tabloid The Sun was about Ms. Markle’s appearing on Pornhub, an adult website, even though the “steamy scenes,” as the newspaper called them, were not pornography but taken from a television series she acts in, “Suits. ” The Sun also ran a headline above an interview with Ms. Markle’s estranged sister, saying, “Don’t fall for my little sis, Harry, she’d be the next Princess Pushy,” a reference to the unkind nickname for Princess Michael of Kent. One comment piece in last weekend’s Mail on Sunday, by Rachel Johnson, said of Ms. Markle: “Genetically, she is blessed. If there is issue from her alleged union with Prince Harry, the Windsors will thicken their watery, thin blue blood and Spencer pale skin and ginger hair with some rich and exotic DNA. ” Ms. Markle described herself as biracial in an August 2015 interview with Elle magazine, saying, “My dad is Caucasian and my mom is . I’m half black and half white. ” The essay also discussed some of the racism she has experienced as a result. Afua Hirsch, writing in The Guardian, said: “It’s a subtle point, easily missed. Meghan Markle, Prince Harry’s apparent new love, is a ‘glamorous brunette,’ ‘a departure from Prince Harry’s usual type’ and ‘not in the society blonde style of previous girlfriends,’ according to The Daily Mail. I think what they are trying to say is that Markle, actor, global development ambassador and lifestyle blogger, is black. ” Even more scandalous to the tabloids, wrote Ms. Hirsch, is that Ms. Markle is older and divorced and played somewhat “raunchy scenes” in “Suits” and that “her mother is visibly black, with dreadlocks. ” Ms. Markle, who graduated from Northwestern University in 2003, married in 2011 and divorced two years later, a fact that has also been the source of attention from the news media. Prince Harry has criticized the news media before, but never in such an angry and formal fashion. He has gotten into public trouble in the past, with leaked photographs of parties in Las Vegas or wearing a Nazi costume. “Prince Harry is worried about Ms. Markle’s safety and is deeply disappointed that he has not been able to protect her,” the statement said. “It is not right that a few months into a relationship with him that Ms. Markle should be subjected to such a storm. ” “He knows commentators will say this is ‘the price she has to pay’ and that ‘this is all part of the game,’” the statement continued. “He strongly disagrees. This is not a game — it is her life and his. ” Ms. Markle is best known for her role as Rachel Zane on the television legal drama “Suits,” and she played an F. B. I. agent in the series “Fringe. ” She has also been involved in charitable work with nongovernmental organizations. Ms. Markle became a global ambassador for World Vision Canada this year, traveling to Rwanda for its clean water campaign, and she has worked for gender equality and women’s empowerment. | 1 |
WASHINGTON — When a handful of liberal advocacy organizations convened a series of focus groups with young black voters last month, the assessments of Donald J. Trump were predictably unsparing. But when the participants were asked about Hillary Clinton, their appraisals were just as blunt and nearly as biting. “What am I supposed to do if I don’t like him and I don’t trust her?” a millennial black woman in Ohio asked. “Choose between being stabbed and being shot? No way!” “She was part of the whole problem that started sending blacks to jail,” a young black man, also from Ohio, observed about Mrs. Clinton. “He’s a racist, and she is a liar, so really what’s the difference in choosing both or choosing neither?” another young black woman from Ohio said. Young like all voters their age, are typically far harder to drive to the polls than and older Americans. Yet with just over two months until Election Day, many Democrats are expressing alarm at the lack of enthusiasm, and in some cases outright resistance, some black millennials feel toward Mrs. Clinton. Their skepticism is rooted in a deep discomfort with the political establishment that they believe the former first lady and secretary of state represents. They share a lingering mistrust of Mrs. Clinton and her husband over criminal justice issues. They are demanding more from politicians as part of a new, confrontational wave of black activism that has arisen in response to police killings of unarmed . “We’re in the midst of a movement with a real sense of urgency,” explained Brittany Packnett, 31, a St. leader in the push for police accountability. Mrs. Clinton is not yet connecting, she said, “because the conversation that younger black voters are having is no longer one about settling on a candidate who is better than the alternative. ” The question of just how many young will show up to vote carries profound implications for this election. Mrs. Clinton is sure to dominate Mr. Trump among black voters, but her overwhelming margin could ultimately matter less than the total number of blacks who show up to vote. To replicate President Obama’s success in crucial states such as Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, she cannot afford to let the percentage of the electorate that is black slip far below what it was in 2012. And while a modest of black votes may not imperil Mrs. Clinton’s prospects, given Mr. Trump’s unpopularity among upscale white voters, it could undermine Democrats’ effort to capture control of the Senate and win other elections. Mrs. Clinton’s difficulties with young were laid bare in four focus groups conducted in Cleveland and Jacksonville, Fla. for a handful of progressive organizations spending millions on the election: the service employees union, a joint “super PAC” between organized labor and the billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer, and a progressive group called Project New America. The results were outlined in a presentation by Cornell Belcher, a Democratic pollster, and shared with The New York Times by another party strategist who wanted to draw attention to Mrs. Clinton’s difficulties in hopes that the campaign would move more aggressively to address the matter. Word of the report has spread in the constellation of liberal operatives and advocacy groups in recent weeks, concerning officials who saw diminished black turnout hurt Democratic candidates in the last two midterm elections. Adding to the worries is a separate poll of that Mr. Belcher conducted earlier in the summer indicating that Mrs. Clinton is lagging well behind Mr. Obama’s performance among young blacks in a handful of crucial states. In Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia, 70 percent of under 35 said they were backing Mrs. Clinton, 8 percent indicated support for Mr. Trump and 18 percent said they were backing another candidate or did not know whom they would support. In 2012, Mr. Obama won 92 percent of black voters under 45 nationally, according to exit polling. Over 25 percent of are between 18 and 34, and 44 percent are older than 35, according to 2013 census data. “There is no Democratic majority without these voters,” Mr. Belcher said. “The danger is that if you don’t get these voters out, you’ve got the 2004 John Kerry electorate again. ” In Ohio, for example, blacks were 10 percent of the electorate in the 2004 presidential race. But when Mr. Obama ran for in 2012, that number jumped to 15 percent. What frustrates many blacks under 40 is Mrs. Clinton’s overriding focus on Mr. Trump. “We already know what the deal is with Trump,” said Nathan Baskerville, a North Carolina state representative. “Tell us what your plan is to make our life better. ” Such talk can be frustrating to Mrs. Clinton’s aides, who point out that her first speech of the campaign was on criminal justice and that she has laid out a series of proposals on the topic. “It is on us to make sure that that’s known,” said Addisu Demissie, Mrs. Clinton’s voter outreach and mobilization director, adding of young black activists, “We share their goals, we share their values and we want to make sure that’s reflected through our campaign. ” The focus groups and interviews with young black activists suggest many of them are not aware of Mrs. Clinton’s plans regarding police conduct, mass incarceration and structural racism broadly. Christopher Prudhome, 31, recounted a recurring conversation he has with other as he travels around the country as the head of a nonpartisan group dedicated to registering young voters: They do not like either candidate. “Young people feel discouraged and apprehensive about the political process as is, and then they look at the two options in front of us,” said Mr. Prudhome, adding of Mrs. Clinton: “Nobody has seen an agenda for millennials. I don’t think they believe she cares about them. ” Part of Mrs. Clinton’s problem, said Symone Sanders, a former top aide to Senator Bernie Sanders’s campaign, is that the candidate is overly cautious and is conducting an outdated style of black outreach. Ms. Sanders has begun taking matters into her own hands. She said she was working with other young activists to recruit black celebrities for a millennial mobilization tour through Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and Virginia. “Black churches and an H. B. C. U. tour is just not going to cut it in 2016,” said Ms. Sanders, referring to historically black colleges and universities. “The Clinton campaign has to be willing to get out of what’s comfortable and get on the streets. ” Mr. Demissie said the Clinton campaign’s efforts were more expansive, pointing to voter registration efforts already underway in barbershops and salons as well as sneaker and video game stores. Mrs. Clinton has met with mothers of those who lost children at the hands of the police and has used the signature refrain that “black lives matter” in public remarks. But she and her husband also come from an earlier political tradition rooted in the Deep South, where black voters are primarily reached through the church and the threat of white conservative backlash is never far from mind. Today’s young voters are less likely to be found in black churches and more likely to be found in schools, loosely organized activist groups and online, said Ms. Packnett, the St. Louis activist. And the leaders are more diverse. “It’s not just heterosexual men,” she noted. Not only are younger black activists reached in different ways, they also have far higher expectations on leaders, dismissing boilerplate pleas for racial equality and justice as insufficient. “Gone is the day of patience,” said Tony J. Payton Jr. 35, a former Pennsylvania state representative. “No longer should we accept systemic racism. ” Doubts about how aggressively Mrs. Clinton will move to combat racism are at the heart of black suspicion toward her. Some said her 1996 reference to some young criminals as “” and the legislation that President Bill Clinton signed imposing stiff sentences on nonviolent offenders, have made today’s activists skeptical about her true intentions. “That stuff comes up unprompted,” Mr. Belcher said. Mr. Trump has turned to remarkably blunt language about blacks in recent weeks — portraying their communities as dystopian hellscapes and asking them, in courting their support, “What do you have to lose?” Some allies of Mrs. Clinton believe he is serving as her most effective lever. “He is literally saying something every day that is disrespectful to the black community,” said Michael Blake, a New York State assemblyman from the Bronx who worked on Mr. Obama’s campaigns and is close to many Clinton aides. Yet when voters in the focus groups were shown campaign fliers and asked to rate them, there was no mistaking what was most effective. A pamphlet with a picture of Mr. Trump that read, “We have to beat the racists,” fell flat with young black audiences. Scoring much higher were a stark black and white handout showing the names of those killed at the hands of the police and another with images of mothers of the victims that said, “Their Children Can’t Vote, Will You?” | 1 |
Email Ever wonder what’s on the mind of today’s most notable people? Well, don’t miss our unbelievable roundup of the best and most talked about quotes of the day: “ My friends have somehow gotten it into their heads that I’m attracted to ghosts. So every day I’ll get texts saying, ‘I just met a great, handsome ghost I want to set you up with for marriage.’ I want to lay this rumor to rest: I think ghosts are as ugly as rats. ” —Mindy Kaling On ghosts “ The second my successor swears in, I’m going to start chasing my Secret Service members. And they know it. ” —Barack Obama On what he'll be doing on January 20 at 12:00 p.m. “ I just remembered another fact about Jaws . The shark’s mouth is called Jaws, not the shark itself. ” —Steven Spielberg | 0 |
MELBOURNE, Australia — “So Ivan, are you calling Andy ‘Sir’?” Ivan Lendl paused and then laughed, which would surely seem strange to those who know him only as Andy Murray’s coach in the front row of the players’ box. “Definitely not,” Lendl said, chuckling some more before heading off down the crowded main hallway inside Rod Laver Arena at the Australian Open. Clearly, not much has changed in the Murray camp since his remarkable stretch run to the No. 1 ranking and a knighthood in 2016. He is still tough on himself on court and on the changeovers. Still Andy — not Sir Andy — to his peers and mentor in chief, Lendl. Still deadpan and droll with his voice that sounds as if it emanates from a mine shaft. Asked on Monday by the interviewer John Fitzgerald how Murray’s wife, Kim, was handling the transition to Lady Kim, Murray said, “No more swearing during my matches, for anyone who saw that a few years ago. ” He was referring to Kim’s courtside language during his semifinal victory over Tomas Berdych at the 2015 Australian Open. Her tirade did not go unnoticed, and she returned for the final cheekily wearing a shirt that read, “Parental advisory explicit content. ” Presumably, Lady Kim won’t be wearing that sort of thing in the players’ box from here on, either (or at least she wasn’t on Monday). “I haven’t found it distracting really,” Murray said of the knighthood. “I mean, I found out about it four or five weeks ago. Maybe if it happened a day or so, two days before the tournament. But I’ve had enough time to get my head around it. ” Just as he has had plenty of time to prepare himself for the role of No. 1, however long it lasts. I asked him on Monday, after his stuttering (5) victory over Illya Marchenko, if there had been any downside to No. 1, thinking he might bring up extra demands or burdens. “No,” he said. “It’s been great. I think because it’s taken me so long to get there, obviously I want to try to stay there. But also I feel like I’m mature enough now to handle it. Maybe if it happens when you’re very young, you might feel extra pressures. The responsibilities might feel a bit much, but I think because I’m much older and more mature, it’s been good. ” The conventional tennis wisdom is that it is harder to hang on at the top than to reach the top. “I hope not,” Murray said. But for anyone who believes that he now has nowhere to go but down, that is hardly true in Australia. He has reached five singles finals in Melbourne and lost all five. No man has done so well at any Grand Slam tournament without breaking through to win the title. Others have lost five finals in the same major event, including Lendl, who lost five at the United States Open. But he also won three. Bill Johnston lost six finals at the United States Championships, but won the event twice. John Bromwich lost five finals at the Australian Championships in the era, but won the title twice, too. Murray, at 29, is in unfortunately uncharted territory, all the more so because Novak Djokovic ended his own long run of frustration at the French Open last year by finally taking the title after reaching four semifinals and three finals. “Look, it’s still a remarkable record, five Slam finals in Australia, and deep down I think it means an enormous amount to Andy to finally complete the puzzle,” said Roger Rasheed, the Australian who once coached Lleyton Hewitt when Hewitt was chasing the title here without success. But Hewitt reached only one final in Melbourne. Murray is here and has a better winning percentage at the Australian Open than at any other Grand Slam tournament except Wimbledon. “Andy’s been so close,” Rasheed said. “What more does he have to do? Well, it’s not a matter of big changes. It’s just been a matter of points and the moments. ” It’s a matter of the opposition, too. The first of Murray’s Australian Open defeats in the final came against Roger Federer in 2010. The last four came against Djokovic in 2011, 2013, 2015 and 2016. “Andy played Roger in his prime and has been playing Novak in his prime,” Rasheed said. “It’s a handful of points changing the way the match falls. Andy’s showing he’s in his prime now. He just needs to get there and roll the dice again. ” Murray’s timing may still not be quite right. He played a great deal of tennis down the stretch in 2016 and was beaten by Djokovic in a final in Doha, Qatar, to start this season. Freshness just might be a factor down the stretch as well as Djokovic’s eagerness to restore the pecking order. But it does not seem quite right in light of their abilities that Djokovic has six Australian Open titles and Murray has not even one. He broke down in tears after losing to Federer in 2010. He stared vacantly into space after losses to Djokovic and sportingly came up with the right words amid major disappointment. And yet he insisted on Monday that his emotions were not mixed when he thought about this tournament. “Honestly, they’re totally positive,” said Murray, who plays Andrey Rublev in the second round on Wednesday. “I’ve had a lot of tough losses here, for sure. But I love it here. Played some great matches as well, but just haven’t managed to win the final. But, you know, I keep coming back to try. I’ll keep doing that until I’m done, but I still feel like I’ve got a few years left to try and do it. ” He is, by any measure, due for a change of fortune in Melbourne. And if you like your sports with foreshadowing, the only other top tennis player to receive a knighthood was Sir Norman Brookes, the Australian star of the early 20th century. Guess whose name has been given to the trophy awarded to the men’s champion at the Australian Open? | 1 |
For years, antinuclear activists, concerned parents, local officials and others have worried about Indian Point, a nuclear plant on the Hudson River in northern Westchester County that provides cheap energy and robust tax revenue, but also carries the risk of disaster. The news on Friday that the state had negotiated a deal that could shut down the plant within five years sent shock waves of jubilation, relief and anxiety through the suburbs north of New York City. On one side was an almost gleeful disbelief that what had seemed an insurmountable goal — ridding the county of nuclear power — would come to pass. Nada Khader, executive director of the Wespac Foundation, a nonprofit group in White Plains that advocates social justice, was told about the development by a reporter. “This is really amazing for Wespac, an organization whose many, many members have been working for decades to shut Indian Point,” she said. “All of us want to shift to safe energy. We absolutely welcome this news. ” But there were also misgivings about what the closing would mean for utility customers, Indian Point employees and the nearby schools that rely on the plant’s tax dollars. Officials in Westchester County said they were blindsided by the deal and were upset that they were not consulted. Robert P. Astorino, the county executive and a vocal supporter of Indian Point, which is in the village of Buchanan, said more than $4 million enters the county’s coffers every year from the plant, representing nearly 1 percent of the tax base. “No one from the governor’s office had the common courtesy to call the county affected by this,” Mr. Astorino, a Republican, said. “So we’re all trying to figure out what will happen in the future and the costs of this potential closure. There are enormous economic consequences to something like this. ” Perhaps no single entity will suffer the financial effects of the shutdown more than Hendrick Hudson schools, a district with 2, 400 students that draws from parts of a towns and villages near the plant. The superintendent, Joseph E. Hochreiter, said taxes from the company that owns Indian Point, Entergy, made up of the district’s $75. 8 million operating budget annually. “We’ve enjoyed some of the lowest property tax increases of any school district in Westchester County and that has made this a very appealing community to move to and stay in,” he said. “Entergy plays a major, major role in keeping taxes down. If they are not operating at the capacity that we’re accustomed to, we are going to have budget deficits. ” Converting Indian Point’s property to another use — whether residential or commercial — may not be possible, given the environmental history of the site. Still, after years of over the potential for a catastrophe, many residents said they would be happy to have a county. Opponents of the plant had seized on the Sept. 11 terror attacks and, later, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster in Japan to galvanize support for shutting Indian Point. More recently, critics had focused on fighting a natural gas pipeline that was constructed on the plant’s land. Elected officials, residents and environmental activists have criticized the project, saying that a rupture could unleash a nuclear catastrophe. While Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, a Democrat, has long called for the plant’s closing, few thought a decision to shut it down was imminent. Nancy Vann, a retired Wall Street lawyer who lives in Peekskill, has fought against Indian Point for years. She is president of Safe Energy Rights Group, which was formed in response to the natural gas pipeline. “I’m very, very happy about this,” she said, referring to news of the agreement. But like others, she was concerned about the plant’s spent fuel rods. Under the deal, they will be moved off site eventually. “Indian Point won’t be completely safe until the spent fuel rods are all put into hardened dry cask storage,” she said. “I just want people to realize that the fact that Indian Point is closing — and not immediately — doesn’t mean it will be safe right away. ” Michael B. Kaplowitz, chairman of the Westchester County Board of Legislators, listed other concerns — from the plant’s decommissioning costs and the fate of its 1, 000 employees, to the effects on the local area. While he is eager to see details of the deal, he said that on balance, shutting it made sense. “It’s a net societal gain because of the specter of terrorism,” he said. “The better the details are for the company, the worse it is for the rate payers and taxpayers. I’m hoping that given the leverage the state has that the tax payers and rate payers do better than the Entergy shareholders. ” “I can say,” he added, “that I’m encouraged that it looks like we are turning the page on a nuclear power plant that doesn’t belong 25 miles from New York City. ” | 1 |
Videos AT&T-Time Warner Merger: Another Media Consolidation That Puts Profits Over Consumers ‘The deals are driven by Wall Street’s insatiable desire for short-term growth at any cost,’ a media analyst at a consumer advocacy NGO wrote, warning about the risks of the deal. | November 2, 2016 Be Sociable, Share!
MINNEAPOLIS — Media analysts warn that a proposed merger between AT&T and Time Warner is more likely to enhance corporate bottom lines and pad the pockets of Wall Street investors than benefit consumers.
“Big mergers like this inevitably mean higher prices for real people, to pay down the money borrowed to finance these deals and compensate top executives,” said Matt Wood, policy director at Free Press, an NGO that protects net neutrality and online press freedom, in an Oct. 22 press release .
The media first reported that AT&T was in “informal” talks to merge with Time Warner on Oct. 20 . By Oct. 24, AT&T announced that Time Warner had agreed to be bought out by the telecommunications giant for $85.4 billion.
Currently, Time Warner represents one of a shrinking number of mass media conglomerates that increasingly control the vast majority of news available to Americans. AT&T is one of the world’s largest providers of mobile phone and landline services, and, as owner of DirecTV, a major player in the television marketplace as well.
Corporate executives have promised that the merger could make more content available to consumers , offer new options for mobile viewing , and provide alternatives to traditional cable TV. Representatives of both companies have also tried to mollify concerns that the deal would violate antitrust laws, claiming it represents the “vertical integration” of two different markets , rather than a merger of competitors.
Many media experts have expressed concern and skepticism about these claims, particularly in regard to the potential benefits to consumers. Wood suggested AT&T’s buyout of DirecTV, which was completed in July 2015 , should serve as a warning about the possible effects of this new, larger merger model. He warned:
“The deals are driven by Wall Street’s insatiable desire for short-term growth at any cost. And just as AT&T’s recent purchase of DirecTV was quickly followed by price hikes, there’s every reason to expect this potential tie-up would cost internet users and TV viewers dearly too.”
Kevin Kelleher , a reporter at Time magazine, weighed in on Oct. 24. He wrote that the deal “makes sense for media executives, less so for consumers,” as it’s unclear how bringing content creators and internet service providers together would actually benefit the end user. He continued:
“For now, concerns over the deal seem to be outweighing the benefits, which could end up being negligible. For decades, the pipes that streamed digital content remained largely independent from the companies that provided the content. And no consumers complained.”
Meanwhile, several senators have come out in opposition to the proposed merger, citing concerns about the ultimate implications for consumers, the role of Washington’s “revolving door” into the corporate world, and what this buyout could mean for the future of media consolidation.
On Sunday, Al Franken , a former TV actor and senator representing Minnesota, told The New York Times’ media reporter Jim Rutenberg that the merger could increase prices and reduce the number of choices available to consumers.
“When the company that controls the pipes, so to speak, owns this very, very large content provider, it can cause a whole bunch of different horribles for consumers,” Franken said.
Elizabeth Warren , a senator from Massachusetts known for her consumer advocacy, objected to Christine Varney’s involvement in the deal. Varney, an antitrust lawyer who has been hired to oversee the AT&T and Time Warner merger, previously worked for the Obama administration investigating antitrust claims. On Monday, Warren told Fortune:
“Americans have had it with regulators like Varney, who talk a good game about holding the bad guys accountable while counting down the days until they can collect a fat paycheck from the corporations they were supposed to regulate. The revolving door is out of control. If we want to hold corporate lawbreakers accountable, we can’t ask their friends to do it.”
Bernie Sanders , the senator from Vermont and former 2016 Democratic presidential candidate, also objected to the deal in an open letter published Wednesday on Medium. In addition to echoing the concerns shared by others like Franken, he warned that the buyout could provoke future media mergers that would further consolidate an already limited market.
“At a time when our telecommunications and media industries are already too concentrated, we should be focused on opening those markets to more competition, not less,” he wrote.
In the case that the merger does go through, AT&T’s ties to the national security state may also give rise to serious privacy concerns. A day after the AT&T-Time Warner merger was officially announced, Kenneth Lipp, a reporter at The Daily Beast, revealed that AT&T is storing customer information and selling it for profit . That, of course, came more than three years after Edward Snowden leaked classified information which detailed the telecommunications giant’s close collaboration with the NSA to spy on millions of Americans.
“Where you go, what you watch, text and share, with whom you speak, all your internet searches and preferences, all gathered and ‘vertically integrated,’ sold to police and perhaps, in the future, to any number of AT&T’s corporate customers,” Democracy Now! host Amy Goodman and her frequent collaborator, Denis Moynihan, wrote in an editorial published on Thursday .
“We can’t know if Alexander Graham Bell envisioned this brave new digital world when he invented the telephone. But this is the future that is fast approaching, unless people rise up and stop this merger.” Be Sociable, Share! | 0 |
On Tuesday’s broadcast of CNN’s primetime edition of “The Lead,” OMB Director Mick Mulvaney said that President Trump is willing to sign a government spending bill that doesn’t include money for a border wall, and “We just thought that it would be a good first step to get these things that everybody agrees on and take that idea of a government shutdown off the table. ” Mulvaney was asked, “A source close to efforts to avoid a government shutdown tells CNN that the Republican proposal in the House will not include funding for President Trump’s border wall with Mexico. Is President Trump willing to sign a government spending bill that does not include that money?” He answered, “Yeah. Because I think the bill — at least the offer that we received from the Democrats — the last couple days — included a good bit of money for border security. The Democrats said they’d go to the mat and shut the government down over the border wall, the bricks and mortar. But there’s a lot of things we agree on, both parties do, in securing the border. And it allows the president to follow through on his promise to make that border more secure, stop people coming over, stop drugs from coming over. So, there’s things we can do, by way of maintenance and technology, gates, bridges, roads, that kind of stuff, that make a real difference in that southern border security. ” Mulvaney added, “We’re not backing down. Keep in mind, this is just — this bill is just for the last five months of this year. … The discussion for what to do in fiscal year ’18, which starts October 1st, that discussion actually starts as soon as this bill is signed. So, we’re going to continue these conversations. We just thought that it would be a good first step to get these things that everybody agrees on and take that idea of a government shutdown off the table. ” Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett | 1 |
President Donald Trump’s announcement that he is launching a commission to investigate “election integrity” was only hours old before a politics professor at Rutgers University began organizing educators to “resist” the effort. [On Thursday, the White House announced that the president would sign an executive order creating the commission and charging it with reviewing the 2016 election to determine if there was any widespread vote fraud or vote suppression. The commission is to be headed by Vice President Mike Pence and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, the White House said. “The Commission will review policies and practices that enhance or undermine the American people’s confidence in the integrity of Federal elections,” a White House official reportedly told the Daily Caller. “This will include reviewing laws and activities that lead to improper registrations, improper voting, fraudulent registrations, fraudulent voting, and voting suppression. ” The commission would serve to fulfill another one of Trump’s campaign promises to root out voter fraud. Just after his election, for instance, Trump said he would launch a “major investigation” into illegal voting. I will be asking for a major investigation into VOTER FRAUD, including those registered to vote in two states, those who are illegal and … . — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 25, 2017, even, those registered to vote who are dead (and many for a long time). Depending on results, we will strengthen up voting procedures! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 25, 2017, But the news of the new commission had barely been reported when a Rutgers political science professor began organizing her “resistance” to the effort to investigate voter fraud. Lorraine Carol Minnite, a professor of political science, as well as an associate professor of public policy at Rutgers jumped to an educators listserve to enlist the participation of professors, teachers, and educrats across the country to oppose Trump’s commission. The message, also circulated by Rick Hasen, a leader in urging academics to oppose any election integrity projects, called on the education community to “resist participation” in the commission. If the President does indeed create a commission to study voter fraud and voter suppression in the American election system to be headed by the Vice Preisdent [sic] and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, I’m calling on scholars of election administration to resist participation of any kind in such an effort. We should expect a Commission to find “evidence” of rampant voter fraud across the U. S. and to recommend proposals to amend the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act to require to register and a national voter ID requirement, among other changes that will be damaging to voting rights and therefore, damaging to democracy. Not only did the Rutgers prof urge educators to turn their back on Trump’s commission, but she went on to propose they create their own working group to present alternate facts to Trump’s effort. I am proposing a Commission of scholars and voting rights advocates to gather information to inform the public. Such a commission (or a working group of some kind) does not need the participation of partisan luminaries or politicians for credibility. With the assault on democracy underway, the most important divide is not between Democrats and Republicans, it is between lies and the truth, and democracy and authoritarianism. Please email me if you would like to be involved in organizing a non (not ) partisan commission on voter fraud and voter suppression to offer evidence, facts and analysis that the public will need to sort through what we can anticipate will come out of a Commission. Minnite did not outline how this group might be “nonpartisan” when so few conservatives or even Republicans work in the field of education. Responding to Professor Minnite’s proposition, a spokesperson for the Public Interest Legal Foundation said, “The ink isn’t even on the paper yet and the #Resistance movement is already having fits. Why? Because the organized left is losing territory it, for generations, has lorded over with an almost perfect monopoly. Tinkering with election rules is a final safe harbor for a partisan entity that has lost on ideas and finds itself in the political wilderness. This is how the left acts when you play in their sandbox. ” Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail. com | 1 |
Q. If Trump wins can it be considered a repudiation of the national news mediocrity? A. I certainly hope so!
The performance of the major news outlets this election cycle has been something to behold. It’s been the worst, most shallow undertaking I can remember. And I remember the treatment Goldwater got.
I wrote here on Lew’s blog last week about the hysterical reaction Gloria Borger and others had to Trump’s unwillingness to promise to respect the election results in advance.
They acted like panicked teenage girls in a horror movie.
Pat Buchanan explains the media’s panic. “The establishment is terrified that it has lost the country,” he says. “The country no longer believes in its leadership.”
About time!
Now with the Comey development it won’t be long before Dems start talking about a rigged system.
Another moment of equal media idiocracy: When the Clintonistas blamed Russia for spilling DNC emails that showed its secret collaboration with Hillary and against Bernie Sanders.
Trump said “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing!”
The line wasn’t well-delivered. But it was still funny.
Even so, the joke was lost on the usual suspects. I watched CNN’s Jake Tapper’s visage grow dark as he expressed grave concern that Trump was inviting the Russians to interfere in our election.
The whole thing brings to mind an old vaudeville comedy routine with, let’s say, Joe and Moe: Joe: I’m offended by the media’s alarmist reaction to Trump’s email joke. Moe: Are you offended as a Trump supporter? Joe: No, I’m offended as a person with a sense of humor! 11:09 am on October 29, 2016 | 0 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.