text
stringlengths 1
134k
| label
int64 0
1
|
|---|---|
The leading candidate to become the chairman of the Democratic Party shared his Capitol Hill press conference with a leading advocate for Islamic radicals, Nihad Awad, who is the director of the Council on Relations, or CAIR. [Candidate Rep. Keith Ellison’s decision to share the microphone with CAIR director on Wednesday afternoon highlights the willingness of party activists to deepen their alliance with the small number of radical Muslim voters living in the United States, despite the huge ideological conflicts between the party’s liberal base and the Muslim groups’ toxic Islamic ideology and aggressive Arab politics. Ellison is a leading candidate to become chairman of the Democratic National Committee, who will be chosen by a party vote in late February. He has public support from the Democrats’ leader in the Senate. Sen. Chuck Schumer, but faces growing opposition from former labor secretary Tom Perez. The press conference was called to protest President Donald Trump’s popular policy to curb immigration of people with “hostile attitudes. ” Both Ellison and Awad insisted the hostile attitudes policy is even though it only seeks to exclude people who: do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent ideologies over American law … those who engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including “honor” killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation. Ellison is already facing criticism for his closeness to the Islamic groups. For example, the League flipped from support to opposition. His public appearance with Awad could add to his political problems. In a Tweeted photograph from Ellison’s office, Awad is the partly bald man with a red scarf standing to left of the microphones. Ellison is just to the right of the microphones, wearing a red tie and holding a sheet of paper. Khizr Khan, Gold Star father, warns of boycott after travel ban | US news | The Guardian https: . — Rep. Keith Ellison (@keithellison) February 1, 2017, The same scene is shown a Tweet from Ellison’s ally, Rep. Luis Gutierrez, who a advocate for much greater immigration, and also an advocate for the early release of a jailed Puerto Rican terrorist leader. A great turnout of allies and supporters. #NoBanNoWall #twill #chicago @repjoecrowley pic. twitter. — Luis V. Gutierrez (@RepGutierrez) February 1, 2017, Breitbart has frequently noted that the CAIR group is so closely entwined with Islamists and with jihadis that court documents and news reports show that at least five of its people — either board members, employees or former employees — have been jailed or repatriated for various financial and offenses. Breitbart has also published evidence highlighted by critics showing that CAIR was named an unindicted in a criminal effort to deliver $12 million to the HAMAS jihad group, that CAIR was founded with $490, 000 from HAMAS, and that the FBI bans meetings with CAIR officials. “ In 2009, a federal judge concluded that “the government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR … with Hamas. ” Breitbart reporters have been pushed out of CAIR press conferences several times. | 0 |
Vice-Emperor Pence’s Plane Skids Dangerously Off Runway
Zeiger October 28, 2016 He’s survived. I guess some Jew’s prayer remains unanswered tonight.
While there was the makings of a tragedy, the heavens themselves have intervened to keep the Glorious Leader’s lieutenant safe and sound.
While there is currently any evidence that this accident was caused by human malfeasance, I’ll just go ahead and assume this was conjured by the Kabbalistic magic of vengeful Rabbis trying to thwart the God-Emperor’s rise to power.
ABC news :
A charter aircraft carrying Donald Trump’s running mate Mike Pence slid off the runway Thursday night while landing at LaGuardia Airport in the New York City borough of Queens, prompting a temporary closure of the entire airport.
About an hour and a half after the incident, one of LaGuardia’s two runways has reopened for arriving and departing flights. The FAA said the airport’s other runway will remain closed indefinitely pending clearing of the aircraft. Immediately back into action.
According to the FAA, there were no injuries among the 37 people onboard the Boeing 737, which was arriving from Fort Dodge, Iowa.
Pence tweeted, “So thankful everyone on our plane is safe. Grateful for our first responders & the concern & prayers of so many. Back on the trail tomorrow!” So thankful everyone on our plane is safe. Grateful for our first responders & the concern & prayers of so many. Back on the trail tomorrow!
— Mike Pence (@mike_pence) October 28, 2016
According to an ABC News reporter on the aircraft, the GOP vice-presidential candidate came back to check on everyone on the plane and said there was mud on the windows and the plane had skid onto the grass.
According to The Associated Press, the plane made a rough impact when it landed. The AP also reported that the pilot slammed on the brakes and passengers could smell burning rubber.
— Ines de La Cuetara (@InesdLC) October 28, 2016
On one hand, whenever I hear about airplane shenanigans involving high-level American politicians, my first reflex is to assume some kind of nefarious plot. But things seem relatively straightforward here.
It was raining, the runway was slippery, and the plane just had a rough landing.
But if anything, this event will still help the Trump campaign. Because of all the scandals involving the Clintons these days, many people will have a vague suspicion that this might have been an attempt on Pence’s life by system agents. People are already speculating in that direction on Twitter.
Again, there is not reason as of yet to seriously entertain conspiracy theories. But that doesn’t mean those perceptions don’t exist. And it doesn’t mean they don’t affect the election. | 0 |
0 Add Comment
FOLLOWING inquiries made by Barnardos CEO Fergus Finlay, it was revealed that Ireland has spared neglecting refugee children here in Ireland by limiting the number the country has taken into just one.
“We’ve a lot on our plate at the minute, and we’ve to concentrate on the children we have in places like Direct Provision Centres before taking on the task of letting down even more vulnerable and exposed children,” the government confirmed in a statement earlier today.
A date for the expected arrival of a second orphaned child of the Syrian War has not been put forward yet by any State agency, but optimists within the government remain characteristically upbeat.
“Don’t use my name but I’d say we could even have a third child land in Ireland by 2050,” a nervous unnamed government TD shared.
“This is serious, as many as 25% of children here are technically living in poverty so we’ve a responsibility to neglect those children through a lack of State investment and government solutions before we can neglect refugees, God knows how many inquiries into how the country has failed children are ongoing at the moment, but we’ve got to prioritise them, it may sound selfish but it’s common sense,” a spokesman for the government confirmed.
The government did, however, confirm a lavish patting themselves on the back ceremony in Dublin Castle this evening after being reminded of the fact they had taken in one refugee child.
To find confirmation of when a second child will be taken in by Ireland click HERE. | 0 |
Jewish Exodus From GOP Driving Rise of Neo-Con Left
Eric Striker Daily Stormer October 27, 2016
The 2016 Presidential election has shown the worthlessness of wing labels, as MoveOn.org menopausals in fanny packs who opposed the Iraq war join hand in hand with the very Neo-Con Jews that planned it in an attempt to thwart the anti-war candidacy of Donald Trump. Well-funded think-tanks and NGOs speaking on behalf of discredited and dutifully misrepresented ideologies, from Catholicism to “ Human Rights ,” are tripping over one another to come up with a new and unique justification for an American clash with Russia and Iran over some Jihadists in the Syrian Civil War.
The merge between the cultural Marxist Left and Zionist neo-liberal war mongering has been accelerating in intellectual spaces for the last few years now, and now the foil of Donald Trump, whose blunt and direct rhetoric offends the shallow Pavlovian sensibilities of Venti-sipping bespectacled “world citizen” bourgeois jizz bags, is cementing this disturbing amalgamation.
Darlings of the faux-dissident Left, like Michael Moore and hardline Jewish supremacist Bill Maher, have dropped all pretense of being renegade opponents of war and vulture-capitalism by taking money (Moore) or putting racial interests (Maher) ahead of any principles and seamlessly submerging themselves as transitory ambassadors and cogs in new Wall Street first, invade-the-world Democrat machine of Hillary [‘s Jew donors ].
Somehow Donald Trump, the only candidate opposed to NAFTA and TPP, against reckless foreign interventions and regime-changing, who backs the closing of the carried interest loophole that allows investment banking firms to dodge massive amounts of taxes, who in his Gettysburg contract to the American people promised to bust bloated Zionist cartels like Comcast – is triggering the singularity of everyone from the Communist Party USA and the National Review.
The message is clear: the liberal left is the humanitarian alibi for plutocratic money, while the conservative right employs moral preening and Christianity to manipulate public opinion. The only principle that unites both is the foaming at the mouth globalist hostility towards white working people of their (((patrons))) and (((intellectuals))), which supersedes everything else. This is why when push comes to shove, there is no meaningful difference between the left and the right.
The Trumpian collapse of the “Reagan coalition” has made neo-con Jews flee the GOP. People like Jerry Falwell Jr. are realizing that the agreement to push Israel and “free” trade on their largely working class and rural followers in exchange for some socially conservative concessions has been a one way street, and are now beginning to practice a degree of autonomy clinging to Trump’s coattails. Jewish neo-cons like Jennifer Rubin have for years perceived red state protestants as corruptible rubes incapable of self-starting thought, and are now enraged that the Goyim are going their own way.
They were right to a point, as the Bush era shows, but as these churches and institutions struggle to keep White people in their pews, they are beginning to reflect and adapt to the dreams and desires of the people they serve. The leading Jewish Republicans of America are looking for a new shell to crawl into, which is why most of them are advocating votes and support for Hillary Clinton. If Trump wins, they will certainly be migrating en masse to the Democratic party, and DNC Zionist plutocrats like Haim Saban will be anticipating them with open arms.
We are already seeing this to an extent right now. For example, “Republican” Jew Robert Kagan has been a huge Hillary Clinton promoter, to the point where his wife, the Jew Victoria Nuland, is being eyed as a candidate for Secretary of State under a future Democratic administration. Malleable and obedient Clinton was lavished with praise  during her stint as Secretary of State in anti-Trump Jew “conservative” Bill Kristol’s Weekly Standard.
The Cancer of (((Post-Modernism))) Devours Its First Political Victim
Encapsulating the rising New-New-Left is the young Jewish millennial being groomed by the New York Times and other establishment Jew publications as a future globalist brain-trust cabal member, Milo Beckman. In an extended piece called “Don’t vote for Hillary Clinton because you have to–vote for her because she’s a true progressive ,” Beckman rationalizes Hillary’s love of pointless military interventions as a way for liberals to impose their values around the world, and says that progrssives ought to defer to Hillary wanting to kill millions of people because she has more credentials (modern Leftists believe credentials come before common sense):
Okay, letâs talk about foreign policy.
So why is she a hawk?
Well first, letâs be clear: Itâs very easy, and very damaging, to pretend that foreign policy can be divided into âhawkâ and âdoveââââthat some people want more war and some people want less. Obviously, this isnât close to true.
And yet, point by point, Clinton has recommended more aggressive military action in a number of situations. Foreign Policy magazine identifies seven total examples: Haiti, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Libya, bin Laden, and Syria. Why?
1) Hillary Clinton is a liberal transnationalist. She believes in the primacy of human rights, particularly of individuals against oppressive governments. She dreams of a future system where nations are encouraged to adhere to international norms by something like the UN on steroids.
2) Hillary Clinton believes in firm commitment to international agreements. The only way to bring about this future globalist order, the argument goes, is to honor our present commitments and compel others to do the same.
3) Hillary Clinton does not see inaction as morally distinct from action. As long as youâve factored in all costsâââin lives, dollars, and potential long-term unintended consequencesâââshe believes every viable course of action (including inaction) should be considered on its merits. As with domestic policy, she has little patience for non-interventionist ideologues.
4) Hillary Clinton equates military might with moral responsibility. In the end, she is a cold realist: Whoever has the biggest stick sets the agenda. By shirking international responsibilities, the United States transfers power to the next biggest stick.
In this context, many of Clintonâs âhawkishâ decisions make a good deal of sense. AgainâââIâm not saying I personally support the decisions, but I understand where sheâs coming from. Itâs not because she doesnât care about brown lives or doesnât understand that actions have consequences.
But as relativist as I am, there are some things that I canât really argue with. Girls should be allowed an education. Governments shouldnât gas their citizens. We absolutely shouldnât expect to correct every infraction, but itâs not exactly innocent to sit back and let Putin dictate what happens in Syria either.
And when it really comes down to it, I feel woefully unqualified to make these kinds of judgments. I always have to remind myself: Clinton is smarter than me, more knowledgeable and more experienced than me. I should absolutely voice my concerns when I have them, but I shouldnât pretend that this kind of reasoned disagreement is even close to disqualifying.
Another manifestation of the New-New-Left is the gaslighting of journalist Michael Tracey. A number of liberal trolls on twitter and in the mainstream media have been bombarding guilty-by-association accusations against the once-respected leftist journalist for the horrible crime of… covering Wikileaks and accurately juxtaposing Trump and Hillary Clinton’s policies.
In fact, the establishment mulattoes vying for a place in the NWO are working the “white privilege” angle hard on White Leftists who are hesitant about voting for the female George W. Bush. If you don’t vote for Hillary, it’s because you’re racist. There have been dozens of articles sighted to attack weak-willed White Sociology majors in this vein , looking to bully thoughtful left-leaning White people into supporting the borderless global capitalist status quo.
In-house extreme Left-wing intellectuals like (((Noam Chomsky))) have endorsed Hillary, not to mention (((Bernie))). Their stance is clear: risking a third world war with Russia is a worthy risk if it means maintaining an uncontrolled flow of non-Whites to replace America’s majority population. Those Leftists who are smart enough not to get on the Hillary bandwagon have seen their solicitations to media appearances cut down to a trickle – see Cornel West’s last appearance on Real Time With Bill Maher to see what it looks like when they do get on.
While their snark and condescension assumes it’s only “right-wing” people who fall into line like sheep, the way the Left has reigned in its radical elements in an attempt to propel Hillary to victory is a testament to the incredible weakness of the “far-left”: it is trotted out when it supports a plutocratic agenda (non-White immigration, intervention in Syria, Ukraine or Libya, using fag “rights” and feminism as a geopolitical club to fan discord in Russia and Iran), then put back into the box once it achieves this goal (or in the case of former libertarian left Julian Assange, many leftists are hoping to put him in a casket).
A minority of genuine, authentic Marxists and Leftists notice that the mass media is giving Evan McMullin a titanic amount of undeserved publicity, while pretending Green Party’s Jill Stein is non-existent. Kooky Gary Johnson was at the beginning featured all over the place, but he too is fading into obscurity once polls registered him taking more votes from Hillary than Trump.
The only choice in 2016, of the two major parties, is Donald Trump, whether you’re on the left or the right. The White labor left in states like Ohio and Pennsylvania will ignore their union bosses and vote for Trump. The new GOP is on the path of becoming an actual Worker’s Party, to quote Trump. Those who seek to contain the excesses of capitalism, globalization and foreign war (whether left or right) to any degree this election cycle should honestly weight the options – the choice becomes obvious.
This isn’t about Left vs Right, it’s about Whites vs Jews. You can pick your own side, or go back to being used as a dupe, no different than those patriotards during the Bush era that liberals used to mock. | 1 |
In the latest in radical climate doomsaying, a new report warns that fossil fuel consumption will need to be reduced “below a quarter of primary energy supply by 2100” to avoid possibly disastrous effects on global temperatures. [In their report, titled “Pathways for balancing CO2 emissions and sinks,” a team of eight scientists warns that “anthropogenic emissions need to peak within the next 10 years, to maintain realistic pathways to meeting the COP21 emissions and warming targets. ” The statement was immediately repackaged by environmentalists to read: “Scientists say we have ten years to save the earth. ” As is always the case in studies of this sort, the scientists juggle dozens of variables, none of which is entirely predictable and which taken together tell us virtually nothing about the future of the environment. Although the scientists admit that “there are significant uncertainties associated with projecting energy consumption several decades into the future,” they fail to acknowledge a number of even greater uncertainties implicit in their calculations. Despite their valiant efforts to produce trustworthy projections, the scientists rely on basic presumptions that are contested by extremely capable minds within their own field. Dr. Duane Thresher, a climate scientist with a Ph. D. from Columbia University and NASA GISS, has stated bluntly that it is “mathematically impossible for climate models to predict climate. ” Appealing to corollaries of the “Butterfly Effect,” Thresher said that climate forecasting is “a quintessential example of this phenomenon” because of the elevated number of variables playing into climate phenomena. “Climate models are just more weather models,” Thresher has noted, “which have a theoretical maximum predictive ability of just 10 days into the future. ” “Predicting climate decades or even just years into the future is a lie, albeit a useful one for publication and funding,” he said. Undaunted, the team of scientists has declared that achieving global, net decarbonization of human activities “would halt and even reverse anthropogenic climate change through the net removal of carbon from the atmosphere. ” Among the many unproven assumptions behind this assertion is the implied claim that climate change (itself a contested concept) is a function solely of carbon emissions, such that “net decarbonization” would halt or reverse it. Here the scientists state as fact what is by all accounts very much an unproven hypothesis. In recent studies, plants have been found to adapt to a greater carbon concentration in the atmosphere, unexpectedly accelerating their ability to assimilate carbon, something unaccounted for in the new report. Moreover, there is still significant debate within the scientific community regarding the precise relationship between carbon presence in the atmosphere, global temperatures and the health of the planet. While this study takes for granted that carbon dioxide is an evil that must be severely restricted, other eminent scholars have suggested that the contrary is true. One such scientist, Dr. William Happer, professor emeritus of physics at Princeton University and a member of the National Academy of Sciences, has insisted that the earth can handle substantially more carbon dioxide than is currently found in the atmosphere and would actually benefit from a higher concentration. “We’ve heard that CO2 is a demon molecule that causes global warming,” Happer has stated, whereas in reality more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere produces increased crop yields and a greener planet. According to Happer, an increase in carbon dioxide would only benefit both plant life and human life. Similarly, Dr. Indur Goklany, who has previously represented the United States on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has asserted that the rising level of carbon dioxide in the earth’s atmosphere “is currently net beneficial for both humanity and the biosphere generally”. The benefits are real, whereas the costs of warming are uncertain,” he said in a 2015 paper titled “Carbon Dioxide: The Good News. ” Follow Thomas D. Williams on Twitter Follow @tdwilliamsrome | 0 |
During an interview on SiriusXM 102 Radio Andy’s program “Alter Family Politics” on Thursday, Senator Elizabeth Warren ( ) said she was “troubled” by President Obama accepting a $400, 000 for an upcoming speech to Wall Street firm Cantor Fitzgerald. Warren said, “I was troubled by that. One of the things I talk about in the book is the influence of money. I describe it as a snake that slithers through Washington, and that it shows up in so many different ways here in Washington. People understand that — the money that goes into campaign contributions. And when I say ‘understand,’ I don’t mean they think it’s okay, but at least people see it. The money that goes into hiring lobbyists. ” She continued, “But it’s also the money that goes into experts, the money that goes into think tanks that have theses shadowy funders, and the think tanks always come up with the things the shadowy funders want them to come up with. Even advertising how — I talk about the studies that show that when an industry takes out ads, it changes the news coverage. I even talk about the United States Supreme Court and how much more it is becoming because of money that’s being spent in Washington. So, I — the influence of dollars on this place is what scares me. I think it ultimately threatens democracy. ” ( RCP Video) Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett | 0 |
By Alice Salles
Months before President George W. Bush’s speech on September 11, 2002, the New York Times reported at the time, White House officials confirmed the Bush administration had already been “ [planning its Iraq strategy] long before President Bush’s vacation in Texas ” in August of that same year.
The strategy was to persuade the public and Congress that the United States and its allies should confront the “threat from Saddam Hussein .”
The now infamous 9/11 anniversary speech — and the speech before the United Nations following the anniversary remarks — both stressed the importance of “ [ridding] the world of terror. ” But before speaking to the United Nations, Bush made the clearest case for war.
Claiming “ our principles and our security are challenged today by outlaw groups and regimes that accept no law of morality and have no limit to their violent ambitions ,” Bush presented his case against Iraq, claiming Hussein had only “ contempt for the United Nations … [claiming] it had no biological weapons. ”
Making the case that Iraq had a clandestine “ weapons program … producing tens of thousands of litres of anthrax and other deadly biological agents for use with Scud warheads, aerial bombs and aircraft spray tanks ,” Bush and his administration sold the invasion of Iraq with lies .
How the Bush Administration and the Media Sold the Iraq War
In 2003, Bush’s secretary of state, Colin Powell, laid out Bush’s rationale for war in Iraq, saying Iraq had been given several chances to “comply” with U.N. resolutions regarding the country’s possession of weapons of mass destruction.
He added that America had “proof” the Hussein regime had “evacuated” — not destroyed — its weapons, adding that the U.S. government had “ satellite photos that indicate[d] that banned materials [had] recently been moved from a number of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction facilities. ” But what the media then failed to dig into was how the evidence presented by Powell had been introduced in a way that helped the administration make the case for war, even as Powell himself knew — or at least seemed to know — that there was a possibility they were putting “ half a million troops in Iraq and march[ing] from one end of the country to the other [to] find nothing .”
On the day Powell delivered his speech, then-CIA operations officer Valerie Plame Wilson noticed his claims “ simply did not match the intelligence which she had worked on daily for months .”
Making use of claims made by a discredited Iraqi defector code-named “Curveball,” Powell ignored the fact the CIA had deemed the source a “fabricator” and used the source’s shaky evidence to convince the media, as well as other global powers, they should all go along with the U.S. plan.
At the time, the New York Times , which had previously openly reported that the Bush administration had been planning on “selling” the Iraq war using the best marketing strategies at hand, published a number of opinion pieces reinforcing the idea that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. After reports proved Bush’s rationale for war had been debunked, the prestigious publication had to retract .
The late Michael Ratner, an attorney who served as the president emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York, once accused the “liberal media,” along with the government, of selling the Iraq war not by simply claiming Hussein had WMDs, but also “ by claiming that there was a relationship between Saddam Hussein, who led Iraq at the time, and al-Qaeda .”
By referring to al-Qaeda repeatedly during his U.N. speech , Powell spoke to people’s fears. That was a logical strategy considering the country had been healing from the 9/11 terror attacks. But the media failed to question this link, which had been established via a source who had been tortured .
Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi was a high-value CIA detainee who “ provided bogus information ” as he was waterboarded. As Ratner pointed out , anyone “ would have said anything to stop being waterboarded .”
Then-Vice President Dick Cheney and other members of the Bush administration had pressured the CIA to find a way to connect Iraq and al-Qaeda, an effort that ultimately helped boost the case for war before the international community.
What the White House wanted finally materialized when officials tortured al-Libi.
The man who was waterboarded into providing phony info on the al-Qaeda link to Iraq later died in a Libyan prison of an apparent suicide.
Like Iraq, the Media Now Sells the Political Class’ Lies on Russia, Syria
When Bush was trying to sell the Iraq war to Congress, Hillary Clinton, then a New York senator, voted in favor of authorizing his administration to go into Iraq, basing her decision “ as much on advice from her husband’s advisers as from Bush administration officials .”
While she now claims her vote was a mistake, she proved herself to be consistently pro-intervention as secretary of state under President Barack Obama and as a presidential candidate, having gone so far as to suggest that going against Russia in Syria by enacting a no-fly zone could “ save lives and hasten the end of the conflict .” Privately, however, she gave a speech to Goldman Sachs in which she acknowledged establishing a no-fly zone is Syria would kill “a lot” of Syrian civilians.
Ever since the Arab Spring, the Obama administration has beat the war drums against Russia by pushing for more U.S. presence in Syria via official and unofficial means . Now, his choice for president is pushing the story that Russia — a.k.a. Syria’s partner in its war against Islamist rebels and ISIS terrorists — is illegally attempting to exert influence over the U.S. election — and the media embraces the move, publishing story after story claiming officials know the Kremlin was behind the cyber attacks against the Democratic National Committee and the election systems in Arizona and Illinois. Without evidence, however, these reports are toothless but still influential enough to make many Americans believe Russia is, indeed, a threat .
While Russia’s role in Syria isn’t as humanitarian as its officials would like us to believe, its proximity to Syria plays an important role in its own affairs, making its involvement in the conflict more logical than America’s.
Like al-Qaeda, ISIS fighters have repeatedly used U.S. intervention in the Middle East to recruit more fighters . And like what happened prior to the Iraq war, the U.S. government — and the Fourth Estate — are working tirelessly to sell the public on yet another unjustified war.
Luckily, Americans aren’t as gullible in 2016 as they were in 2003, as many now keep up with the news by seeking more independent channels.
But will the next administration bother to ask us our opinion before launching into another war? Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos ( Click for details ).
Contributed by The Anti-Media of theantimedia.org .
The “Anti” in our name does not mean we are against the media, we are simply against the current mainstream paradigm. The current media, influenced by the industrial complex, is a top-down authoritarian system of distribution—the opposite of what Anti-Media aims to be. At Anti-Media, we want to offer a new paradigm—a bottom-up approach for real and diverse reporting. We seek to establish a space where the people are the journalists and a venue where independent journalism moves forward on a larger and more truthful scale. | 1 |
Welcome to Breitbart News’s third day of inauguration coverage. President Donald Trump attended a inaugural prayer service this morning and then delivered remarks at the CIA headquarters “to thank the men and women of the intelligence community. ” Meanwhile, women’s rights and activists took to the streets in Washington, D. C. and in “sister marches” around the world to protest the election of President Trump the day after his inauguration. [All times eastern. 10:1o PM: “And the reason you’re my first stop is that, as you know, I have a running war with the media. They are among the most dishonest human beings on earth,” Trump said. The approximately 400 CIA employees broke out into applause after Trump said this. In addition to making it seem, falsely, like he was in a feud with the intelligence community, Trump said the media “showed an empty field” during his inauguration. “We had a massive field of people. You saw that, packed,” Trump said. He then noted that when he woke up Saturday morning, he turned on the TV and noticed, “I get up this morning, I turn on one of the networks and they show an empty field. I said, wait a minute. I made a speech. I looked out. The field was, it looked like a million — a million and a half people. They showed a field where there were practically nobody standing there. And they said, ‘Donald Trump did not draw well. ’” He added, “We have something that’s amazing because we had it looked — honestly, it looked like a million and a half people. Whatever it was, it was. But it went all the way back to the Washington Monument. And I turn on [the tv] and by mistake I get this network, and it showed an empty field. ” “So, we caught them,” he said. “And we caught them in a beauty, and I think they’re going to pay a big price. ” Trump went on to note yet another lie perpetuated by the media. Specifically, Zeke Miller of Time magazine falsely reported that Trump removed the bust of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. from the Oval Office. The bust of the esteemed, late civil rights leader was never removed. (President Barack Obama had removed the bust of Winston Churchill from the Oval Office shortly after he moved in and replaced it with MLK Jr. ’s). “In the Oval Office, there’s a beautiful statue of Dr. Martin Luther King,” Trump said. “And, I also happen to like Churchill … He doesn’t come from our country, but had a lot do with it. He helped us, real ally. ” Trump had requested that Churchill’s bust be replaced in the Oval Office upon his move into the White House. “But there was a cameraman that was right in front of it. So Zeke, Zeke from Time Magazine” wrote a fake news story, Trump said. “I would never do that. I have great respect for Dr. Martin Luther King. And it was right there. But this is how dishonest the media is. ” Trump added, “I love honesty. I like honest reporting. ” And finally, he told the CIA, “I love you. I respect you. There’s nobody I respect more. you’re going to do a fantastic job. And we are going to start winning again, and you are going to lead the charge. Thank you. I’ll be back. ” White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer also pointed out the lies perpetuated by the media during his emergency press conference Saturday. “Some members of the media were engaged in deliberately false reporting,” Spicer said. “Photographs of the Inauguration proceeding were intentionally framed in a way to minimize the enormous support it had gathered on the National Mall,” he said. He noted earlier how Miller of Time magazine “falsely tweeted out that the bust of MLK, Jr. had been removed from the Oval Office. “This was just plain wrong. ” 7:20 PM: “Some members of the media were engaged in deliberately false reporting,” Spicer said. He explained that one reporter “falsely tweeted out that the bust of Martin Luther King, Jr. had been removed form the Oval Office … This was just plain wrong. ” The false report, which Spicer described as “irresponsible and reckless,” came from TIME magazine pool reporter Zeke Miller: Tweeting again: wh aide confirms the MLK bust is still there. I looked for it in the oval 2x didn’t see it. My apologies to my colleagues, — Zeke Miller (@ZekeJMiller) January 21, 2017, Apology accepted https: . — Sean Spicer (@PressSec) January 21, 2017, Thanks to White House Chief of Staff for this wonderful picture of the MLK bust in the oval pic. twitter. — Sean Spicer (@PressSec) January 21, 2017, Spicer further noted that the media had attempted to paint Trump’s inauguration as appearing much smaller than President Barack Obama’s. “Photographs of the Inauguration proceeding were intentionally framed in a way to minimize the enormous support it had gathered on the National Mall,” Spicer said. He added, it was the first time in the nation’s history that white floor coverings had been used to protect the grass and that they amplified empty spaces, whereas the grass had minimized the appearance of spaces in the past. “Inaccurate numbers regarding crowd size were also tweeted,” Spicer said. “No one had numbers, because the National Park Service, which controls the National Mall does not put any out. ” He said this also applies to any attempts to count the numbers of protesters during the “Women’s March” on Saturday. “There’s been a lot of talk in the media about holding President Trump accountable. Well, I’m here to tell you that it goes two ways. We’re going to hold the press accountable as well. The American people deserve better,” Spicer said. “And as long as he serves as the messenger of this incredible movement, he will take this message directly to the American people where his focus will always be. ” Spicer’s criticism of the media’s fake news reporting resulted in a media meltdown on social media. MSNBC correspondent Reid called Spicer “the new Baghdad Bob. ” Sean Spicer is the new Baghdad Bob. That was positively Soviet. https: . — Joy Reid (@JoyAnnReid) January 21, 2017, Think Progress’s Judd Legum suggested Spicer had “torched his credibility” for confronting the media’s misreporting with the truth: Spicer torching his credibility on DAY ONE, — Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) January 21, 2017, Naturally, other media figures from the New York Times, Washington Post, Huffington Post, and Salon also complained: In that rendition of history Spicer gave, with no q’s taken and false info given, the reality of what’s happening w rallies doesn’t exist. — Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 21, 2017, Spicer, before walking out without questions, says they will begin to hold the press ”accountable.” No idea what that means. — Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 21, 2017, I’m relieved @PressSec Spicer hauled in press to whine about crowd estimates. I worried he was going to announce we nuked Denmark. — Dana Milbank (@Milbank) January 21, 2017, 1) 100% false 2) Spicer knows it 3) Trump trotted out Spicer to say this and watched 4) this is ridiculous. https: . — Jennifer Bendery (@jbendery) January 21, 2017, OMG: Spicer is accusing media of ”intentionally framing” photographs to minimize inauguration turnout! — Joan Walsh (@joanwalsh) January 21, 2017, 5:32 PM: “We won’t go away, welcome to your first day,” women marchers chanted near the White House. It’s ironic that they’re threatening to never leave, since many of the protesters are actually leaving tomorrow or the next day after having been bussed in from around the country and even from Canada. For them to actually stay and occupy Washington, D. C. would cost millions per day — an unrealistic possibility. It’s much more likely these protesters are going to catch their bus or their flight home in the next day or so and depart the national political stage without gaining any real ground. Part of the reason for their looming irrelevancy was evident in the disorganized nature of the march — which was actually more of a giant gathering downtown. Protesters did not have a clear message of what they were asking for — other than venting anger at the fact Donald Trump is the duly elected and inaugurated president of the United States — and did not even march in a coordinated way in any particular direction throughout DC other than to just wander around in groups of a few hundred chanting one thing or another like the aforementioned threat to never leave or another age old Democratic Party protester chant “This is what Democracy looks like. ” Sure, celebrities like Madonna and Ashley Judd and top Democrats like newly elected California Sen. Kamala Harris joined in with speeches but the largely incoherent message that asks for nothing reasonable — the only thing they seem to be demanding is that President Trump go away, something that will not happen — leaves the women marchers against Trump leaving Washington empty handed. 4:48 PM: “Yes, I’m angry. Yes, I’m outraged. Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House, but I know that this won’t change anything,” Madonna told the crowd to roaring applause. Are you ready to shake up the world?” Madonna asked the crowd. “Welcome to the revolution of love, to the rebellion, to out refusal as women to accept this new age of tyranny, where not just women are in danger but all regionalized people. Where being uniquely different, right now, might truly be considered a crime. ” Moments later, Madonna dropped the on live TV. According to The Hollywood Reporter, “The singer’s remarks aired uncensored on CNN and MSNBC. ” “It took this horrific moment of darkness to wake us the fuck up. ” she said. The pop performed two of her biggest songs “Express Yourself” and “Human Nature. ” During the latter, Madonna changed the song’s lyric to say “Donald Trump — suck a dick. ” She also led the crowd of revelers in a chant: “I’m not your bitch. ” Madonna also sent a vulgar message to her and protester’s “detractors. ” “And to our detractors that insist that this march will never add up to anything, fuck you! Fuck You!” she said. Madonna at #WomensMarch: “It took this horrific moment of darkness to wake the f — up. ” pic. twitter. — Hollywood Reporter (@THR) January 21, 2017, 3:11 PM: Good to note that while this strange affair is happening — with Madonna dropping and dancing around like the aging “fairground stripper” Elton John once accused her of being, Ashley Judd spewing vile accusations of incest, and Michael Moore bellowing about “Trump carnage” — the Trump and Pence families quietly and reverently attended church today and then the president met with the CIA. 3:02 PM: Breitbart’s Dr. Susan Berry reports: The tens of thousands of women marching in the Women’s March on Washington demonstration in Washington, D. C. Saturday are “mostly white” and experiencing “therapy” for their anxiety over Hillary Clinton’s election loss to Donald Trump in November, the Washington Post reports. Read the rest here. 2:53 PM: The Fahrenheit director offered the crowd of Trump protesters some advice on how to stop the nomination of Betty DeVos, President Trump’s pick to head the Department of Education. “On Monday, call (202) . Call your representative and your two Senators, and number one we do not accept Betty DeVos as our secretary of education,” Moore told the crowd. “That’s day one. Make it part of your daily routine. ” “I want you to make this a part of your new daily routine: Call Congress every single day,” he added. “Brush your teeth, make the coffee, walk the dog and call Congress. ” Moore also declared war on the Democratic Party, saying, “the old guard of the Democratic Party has to go. ” “We have to take over the Democratic Party,” Moore said. “God bless the Democrats who fought with us. Who’ve done so many good things. It’s no knock on them” he explained before railing against the Electoral College. “Twice now, we won the White House, yet they walked through the door!” At one point during his speech, Moore held up a copy of Saturday’s Washington Post and ripped it up. “I don’t think so!” Moore said while holding up the newspaper with a headline that read “Trump Takes Power. ” At Women’s March on Washington, Michael Moore rips up front page on Pres. Trump’s inauguration https: . pic. twitter. — ABC News (@ABC) January 21, 2017, “Look at what we’ve already accomplish here today,” Moore told the crowd. “The majority of Americans didn’t want Donald J. Trump in the White House and we’re here today as their representatives. ” 2:28 PM: A number of news media outlets are reporting on the numbers at the protest crowd, speculating that it might be bigger than the inauguration crowd the day before. No hard numbers are available yet. But it’s useful to remember what Breitbart’s Daniel Flynn noted yesterday when he wrote: MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow juxtaposed Barack Obama’s inauguration boasting people as far as the eye can see with Trump’s crowd failing to extend to the Washington Monument. She didn’t mention that Washington, D. C. favored Mrs. Clinton over Mr. Trump 91 percent to four percent on Election Day. Nor did she speak of the local welcome wagon, which on Inauguration Eve gored Trump supporters with flagpoles and read “Make America Great Again” on hats as “Please Throw a Battery at Me. ” Sometimes watching at home is the better part of valor. 2:10 PM: Actress Ashley Judd grotesquely accused President Trump of incest, claiming that he has “wet dreams” about his own daughter. Video of her remarks are here. So much for “When they go low … ” 2:05 PM: Photo from Breitbart’s Raheem Kassam below. These folks aren’t the “picking up after yourselves” types like the Tea Party members who famously left the Mall in DC cleaner than they found it in 2010 during the Restoring Honor Rally. 2:04 PM: “It’s been a heartrending time to be both a woman and an immigrant in this country,” the Ugly Betty star said. “Our dignity, our character, our rights have all been under attack, and a platform of hate and division assumed power yesterday. ” Ferrera, who spoke at the Democratic National Convention last summer, said that the Trump administration and the Congress don’t represent America. “But the president is not America. His cabinet is not America. Congress is not America,” she said. “We are America. And we are here to stay. ” Actress America Ferrera speaks at the #WomensMarch in Washington, DC: ”Our rights have all been under attack” https: . — CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) January 21, 2017, “We march today for our families and our neighbors, for our future, for the causes we claim and for the causes that claim us,” the actress added. Ferrera told the crowd of protesters that President Trump is not the “moral core” of America. “We march today for the moral core of this nation, against which our new president is waging a war. He would like us to forget the words, ‘Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free,’ and instead, take up a credo of hatred,” she said. The Women’s March on Washington coincide Saturday with dozens of protests around the world. Hillary Clinton took to Twitter Saturday to show support for the protesters marching and rallying against Trump. “Thanks for standing, speaking marching for our values @womensmarch. Important as ever,” Clinton tweeted. “I truly believe we’re always Stronger Together. ” Thanks for standing, speaking marching for our values @womensmarch. Important as ever. I truly believe we’re always Stronger Together. — Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) January 21, 2017, 12:00 PM: Breitbart News’ Amanda House, Lee Stranahan, and Raheem Kassam report that turnout for the march in Washington, D. C. is massive, with a “sea of pink pussy hats” clogging the streets. Huge crowds at today’s #WomanMarch pic. twitter. — Lee Stranahan (@stranahan) January 21, 2017, Thanks for standing, speaking marching for our values @womensmarch. Important as ever. I truly believe we’re always Stronger Together. — Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) January 21, 2017, | 1 |
The USA has a great idea of what's in store for it, that's the NWO plan. Don't think this is by "accisdent" or "mistake". | 0 |
After several acts of violence by the El Salvadorian gang, the New York State Police have decided to create a special unit to counter . [Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) announced on Wednesday that he is deploying 25 state troopers to Long Island to combat the notoriously violent street gang, The Wall Street Journal reported. The announcement comes days after the gruesome murders of four teenagers there, which investigators say is related to . “We will do everything we need to do to eliminate this criminal organization,” Cuomo said during the press conference. The new unit is expected to share intelligence, surveillance assets, and other resources with law local enforcement. The Federal Bureau of Investigation said on Monday that Long Island is home to more than 200 dedicated members of . Recent Long Island area murders by include those of Nisa Mickens and Kayla Cuevas as well as five other individuals by a group of mostly illegal alien members, Breitbart Texas reported. Attorney General Jeff Sessions is expected to visit a dangerous section of Long Island on Friday where he will speak about the violence from . Ryan Saavedra is a contributor for Breitbart Texas and can be found on Twitter at @RealSaavedra. | 0 |
Breitbart Senior Editor MILO will appear on HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher” tonight at 10PM EST, where the two will discuss free speech on college campuses following the riot at UC Berkeley earlier this month. [Journalist Jeremy Scahill pulled out of the show on Wednesday, citing MILO’s appearance as the show’s main guest. “Milo Yiannopoulos is many bridges too far” wrote Scahill in a statement. “He has ample venues to spew his hateful diatribes. There is no value in ‘debating him. ’” Following Scahill’s protest, Maher defended MILO’s upcoming appearance on the show. “Liberals will continue to lose elections as long as they follow the example of people like Mr. Scahill whose views veer into fantasy and away from bedrock liberal principles like equality of women, respect for minorities, separation of religion and state, and free speech,” declared Maher in his response. “If Mr. Yiannopoulos is indeed the monster Scahill claims — and he might be — nothing could serve the liberal cause better than having him exposed on Friday night. ” | 0 |
Six NATO nations eager to increase Black Sea presence - Stoltenberg Published time: 26 Oct, 2016 18:49 Get short URL © Daniel Mihailescu / AFP US, Turkey and Poland are among the NATO member states which confirmed their readiness to dispatch naval units to the Black Sea in 2017, boosting the alliance’s presence in the region, according to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.
Stoltenberg noted “progress” in in strengthening NATO’s presence in the Black Sea Region in his statement after the meeting of the block’s defense ministers in Brussels on Wednesday. Read more Aegis destroyer USS Carney enters Black Sea to replace US 6th Fleet flagship
“With a Romania-led multinational framework brigade on land and we’re working on measures in the air and at sea,” he said.
According to the secretary General, several member-states “indicated their willingness to contribute to our presence in the Black Sea region on land, at sea and in the air, including Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Turkey and the US.”
“Other allies are also looking into how they can contribute,” he added.
The plans on enhancing Black Sea presence will be finalized during another meeting on NATO ministers in February.
Following Crimea’s reunification with Russia, NATO has been increasingly concerned about the Black Sea is turning into a “Russian lake.”
Since the spring of 2014, NATO warships, including missile cruisers from the US and other allied nations, have been patrolling the Black Sea on a rotational basis, never leaving the area unattended.
NATO decided to increase their presence in the Black Sea during a summit in Warsaw in July, calling it a response to Russia’s increasing military capabilities and is a gesture of support to its Eastern European members. | 0 |
Brent Musburger is calling it a career at ESPN after being the man in the booth at sporting events enjoyed by millions of Americans, most prominently when he was the lead voice for CBS Sports in the 1980s. Musburger, who is 77, said he was leaving active sportscasting to help his family get a sports handicapping business started and to use some of the millions of airline miles he has earned for recreational travel. His last game will be the men’s basketball game Tuesday night. That takes him back to Rupp Arena, where he called Villanova’s upset over Georgetown in the final of the N. C. A. A. tournament in 1985. Musburger and ESPN said his comments about the Oklahoma football player Joe Mixon that were criticized as insensitive during the Sugar Bowl this month had nothing to do with his exit. On the broadcast, Musburger said that he hoped Mixon, who had been suspended for a year after punching a woman and breaking her jaw, would make the most of his second chance. He did not initially talk about Mixon’s victim. A former sportswriter, Musburger’s broadcast fame took off through his work on “N. F. L. Today,” the pro football pregame show. He broadcast the N. B. A. college basketball, the Masters golf tournament and tennis — most of CBS’s marquee events. He was behind the mike for one of college football’s most memorable plays, Doug Flutie’s “Hail Mary” pass that beat Miami for Boston College in 1984. He confessed to Flutie later that it took him awhile to identify Gerard Phelan, Flutie’s roommate, as the receiver of that pass — and Flutie told him he didn’t know, either, until he had run off the field. Musburger was abruptly dropped by CBS in 1990 in what was perceived as a salary dump, then went to work for ABC and ESPN. “Brent made every event feel larger,” said Stephanie Druley, ESPN senior vice president for events and studio production. “To me, there is probably not a greater storyteller as a person. He can spin a yarn like nobody else, and it made games definitely more enjoyable to watch. ” Musburger’s opportunities for national exposure grew more limited in recent years when ESPN assigned him to its SEC Network for college football. But he still called college basketball regularly, and even though ESPN has been trying to save money lately by cutting talent, Druley said the network had no interest in seeing him leave. Sportscasting today “has become more and more numbers driven, advanced statistics and everything,” Musburger said. “That’s fine. I was never going to change because I’m a people guy. I like pulling up a chair in a saloon with a cold beer and telling stories. ” Musburger took heat in 2013 when he extolled the attractiveness of an Alabama quarterback’s girlfriend, a controversy he found silly. “I called a beauty queen beautiful,” he said. “Are you kidding me?” He said he hoped people felt comfortable listening to him. “Not everyone approved of everything I said,” he said. “I understand that. I come from a sportswriting background, and I’m not afraid to take a position on certain things from time to time. But for the most part, I thought people should be coming to a game to escape for three hours and forget about what their individual problems are. ” He said he was not ready to fully retire (“I don’t do shuffleboard well,” he said) but his decision lets ESPN escape from an uncomfortable decision. Having a broadcaster of college games publicly identified with a sports handicapping business wouldn’t fly. That accounts for the odd timing of his departure in the middle of the college basketball season his family wants the site fully operational by the N. C. A. A. men’s basketball tournament. If anything, the move will force Musburger to change a pat answer when he is approached by fans. “They always ask me my favorite game, and I always say, ‘The next one,’ ” he said. After Tuesday, that will no longer be applicable. | 1 |
Sociedad La tarifa familiar de Movistar Fusión incluirá las líneas de los amantes "TRAE A TU AMANTE A MOVISTAR Y HAZ QUE SE AHORRE LOS DOS PRIMEROS MESES", REZA LA OFERTA telefonía
La operadora de telefonía Movistar ha presentado esta semana una nueva oferta para los clientes que cuentan con la tarifa familiar del plan Fusión. A partir de ahora, además de contemplar las líneas del matrimonio y de los hijos, se incluirá también en la misma factura el consumo de las líneas de los amantes. “Cada titular podrá traer a uno o dos amantes a su paquete disfrutando de descuentos de hasta el 50%”, explica la compañía.
Incluso si los amantes en cuestión residen en el extranjero, el nuevo paquete Fusión incluye descuentos de hasta el 30% en “roaming” para las escapadas fugaces a París. Y, por sólo diez euros más al mes, los abonados dispondrán de 5 gigas extra para poder enviar y descargar sin límite todas las fotografías de genitales y posados con lencería sexy a través de WhatsApp o correo electrónico.
“Si te interesa esta oferta pero estás con otra compañía, date de alta igualmente y gozarás de nuestra total discreción. Nadie tiene por qué enterarse”, promete Movistar, que cree que “una cosa es respetar la permanencia y otra que haya que cerrarse a la posibilidad de disfutar de otras compañías”.
Para los clientes que aún no disponen de amante, Movistar ha diseñado también una atractiva oferta de captación. “Ofrece a tu compañero de la oficina con el que siempre cruzas miraditas descuentos de hasta el 30% en el nuevo iPhone 7 y no se podrá resistir”, propone la operadora. | 0 |
WASHINGTON — Donald J. Trump has settled on Gen. John F. Kelly, a retired Marine general whose son was killed in combat in Afghanistan, as his choice for secretary of Homeland Security, putting a seasoned commander with personal experience of the costs of war in charge of protecting the nation’s borders. and popular with military personnel, General Kelly, 66, rose to run the United States Southern Command, which put him in charge of the military jail at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and exposed him to immigration, drug trafficking and other problems over a sprawling area that encompasses 32 countries in the Caribbean, Central America and South America. In that job, General Kelly often took a tough tone on border security, warning Congress last year about the risks of smuggling rings in Mexico and Central America that spirited “tens of thousands of people,” including unaccompanied children, “to our nation’s doorstep. ” “Terrorist organizations could seek to leverage those same smuggling routes to move operatives with intent to cause grave harm to our citizens or even bring weapons of mass destruction into the United States,” General Kelly said in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee. In 2010, General Kelly earned a painful distinction when his son, Lt. Robert Michael Kelly, was killed after stepping on a land mine while leading a platoon in Afghanistan. General Kelly became the military officer to lose a son or daughter in Iraq or Afghanistan. Mr. Trump, according to a person briefed on the decision, has not yet formally offered the job to General Kelly, who is out of the country. The plans to roll out the appointment next week, along with his remaining national security choices, including secretary of state. Immigration advocates reacted to the news with measured approval, in large part because Mr. Trump did not choose Kris Kobach, the Kansas secretary of state, who is known for his extreme views on immigration and had been championed for the post by groups. Frank Sharry, the executive director of America’s Voice, an immigration reform group, said General Kelly’s warnings about terrorist groups using smuggling rings were “a little over the top. ” But he said they were understandable coming from a general. “One positive thing is that he understands the problem of root causes of immigration,” said Mr. Sharry, noting that General Kelly had spoken about the need to stem violence in Central American countries, a core cause of immigration toward the United States. General Kelly would be the third retired general to get a senior position in Mr. Trump’s cabinet, reflecting the ’s comfort with military men in important national security posts. He has selected Gen. James N. Mattis as defense secretary and named Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn as national security adviser. He is also considering David H. Petraeus for secretary of state. But it is General Kelly’s experience with nonmilitary issues at Southern Command that put him in line for the Homeland Security post. Less focused on combat than other regional military commands, Southern Command has a reputation for emphasizing “soft power” over hard military might. It gets deeply involved in issues such as migration, organized crime and disaster relief, as well as programs to train local militaries. “A lot of the work we do with countries in our hemisphere focuses on transnational threats, like crime and drugs,” said Jeremy B. Bash, a onetime chief of staff to a former defense secretary, Leon E. Panetta, who worked closely with General Kelly at the Pentagon. “It is an excellent preparation for someone whose job it is to protect the border. ” General Kelly served as the senior military assistant to both Mr. Panetta and his predecessor, Robert M. Gates. He forged close ties to Jeh Johnson, who was then the Pentagon’s general counsel and later became secretary of Homeland Security. Mr. Johnson, a person briefed on the matter said, considered General Kelly to take over the Secret Service after it fell into disarray amid a skein of scandals and security lapses. On Wednesday, Mr. Panetta endorsed General Kelly, calling him an “excellent choice” and urging the Senate to confirm him. “He has led our women and men in uniform and understands what it takes to keep our nation safe,” Mr. Panetta said in a statement. General Kelly, several former colleagues said, was revered in the Marine Corps for his loyalty, humility and honesty. On the issue of Guantánamo Bay, his reputation for candor and bluntness sometimes put him at odds with the White House’s preferred narrative. In March 2013, when a mass hunger strike swept the detainees in the prison, General Kelly testified before Congress that the root cause of the unrest was mounting despair among prisoners that they would never go home because Mr. Obama, stymied in part by congressional transfer restrictions, appeared to have lost interest in closing it. “In talking to the hunger strikers, they had great optimism that Guantánamo would be closed,” he testified. “They were devastated when the president backed off — at least their perception — of closing the facility. ” He also sought $200 million to rebuild prison facilities and housing for guards at the detention center, an awkward request when the president was saying it would be closed — and during a time of budget cuts. At a news conference at the Pentagon marking the end of his command, General Kelly offered a characteristically frank assessment of what would happen if former detainees with terrorism: “If they go back to the fight, we’ll probably kill them. So that’s a good thing. ” As Mr. Panetta’s military assistant, General Kelly worked to carry out the Obama administration’s policy of allowing women into combat roles. But he later questioned the policy, saying the military would have to lower its physical standards to fulfill the requirement. “If we don’t change standards,” he told reporters, “it will be very, very difficult to have any numbers — any real numbers come into the infantry, or the Rangers or the SEALs, but that’s their business. ” As a wartime commander, General Kelly led troops in intense combat in western Iraq. In 2003, he became the first Marine colonel since 1951 to be promoted to brigadier general while in active combat. He has said little publicly about the death of his son in Afghanistan. But it may have played a role in his selection. Mr. Trump, people close to the transition said, wanted people on his national security team who understood personally the hazards of sending Americans into combat. Choosing a bereaved father could also help heal the rift from Mr. Trump’s clash in the summer with Khizr and Ghazala Khan, the parents of Capt. Humayun Khan, who was killed in 2004 during the Iraq war. The Khans appeared on behalf of Hillary Clinton during the Democratic convention, and later came under sharp criticism from Mr. Trump. | 1 |
Ivanka Trump, the first daughter and an assistant to the president, told Breitbart News exclusively that her father’s policies focused on childcare and paid maternity leave are “central to the economic empowerment of women. ”[“These policies are central to the economic empowerment of women and they will ensure economic growth and job creation across the country,” Ivanka Trump told Breitbart News via email after an appearance in Berlin, Germany, alongside German Chancellor Angela Merkel, International Monetary Fund managing director Christine Lagarde, and the Netherlands’ Queen Maxima. “Ensuring that women enter and stay in the workforce is vital as well as breaking down the barriers for female small business owners so they can become job creators,” Ivanka Trump continued. “It was such an honor to be invited by Chancellor Merkel to participate in today’s panel to discuss these topics and many others that are crucial to stimulating the economy at home,” she added in her emailed statement to Breitbart News. “I look forward to continuing this dialogue as well as implementing concrete policies to advance these issues that will ultimately benefit all Americans. ” Ivanka Trump’s appearance at the event, the Summit in Berlin, comes as her father, United States President Donald Trump, nears the end of his first 100 days in office. The audience at the event was rough on the first daughter when she spoke favorably about her father, but she powered through to present the Trump family’s viewpoint on the world stage. “I’m very, very proud of my father’s advocacy — long before he came to the presidency but during the campaign, including in the primaries, he’s been a tremendous champion of supporting families and enabling them to thrive,” she said. She also added during the panel that her father always treated women and men equally, and that “there was no difference” between the way he treated her and the way he treated her brothers Donald, Jr. and Eric. “As a daughter, I can speak on a very personal level,” she added. “I grew up in a house where there was no barrier to what I could accomplish beyond my own perseverance and tenacity. That’s not an easy thing to do he provided that for us. ” And she praised her father for empowering women in his administration. “The team basically going through the vetting and hiring process — six out of eight of those people are women,” Ivanka Trump said. During the campaign, in Pennsylvania, Ivanka appeared alongside her father to roll out the ’s childcare and maternity leave policy platforms. Ivanka Trump told Breitbart News at the event in Aston, Pennsylvania, in September 2016, in an exclusive interview: One of the major elements is allowing for the cost of child care to be tax deductible for up to four children, and it’s based on the average cost of child care in that person’s state. If you don’t pay taxes, then there’s an expansion of the existing Earned Income Tax Credit — so you get an additional refund for that. This is not only for child care but also for dependent care. Women are predominantly caregivers so that’s why this is most beneficial for women, but it’s also about helping American families. She also said there would be the creation of Dependent Care Savings Accounts to help with childcare: Secondly, there is the creation of a Dependent Care Savings Account (DCSA) — which is effectively like a Healthcare Savings Account (HSA) — to allow people to save dollars, make contributions, and if you’re a low income person the government will actually match up to 50 percent of the first $1, 000 contributed with a cap of $2, 000 per year. It rolls over, it can be used for school choice, and it’s sort of an expansion of the school choice program in that this money can be used towards that, it can be used for adult daycare if you’re caring for an adult dependent, or for enrichment activities so it’s a great way to incentivize people to save. All of this and more, she added then in that September 2016 interview with Breitbart News, was part of a “fresh perspective” a Trump presidency would bring to the table. “One of the great promises of a Trump presidency is bringing new solutions, fresh perspective to the table in a way that, unfortunately, we haven’t had the benefit of for a very long time,” she said. “I think this is one more example of that. ” | 1 |
With Democratic leaders increasingly worried about a lack of passion for Hillary Clinton among young black voters, President Obama is rolling out a new and more personal campaign message: “It’s about me. ” The president told this weekend he would consider it a “personal insult” if they did not vote for Mrs. Clinton, implicitly putting his name on the line as his former secretary of state struggles to replicate the coalition that delivered him victories in 2008 and 2012. “My name may not be on the ballot, but our progress is on the ballot,” Mr. Obama said on Saturday night at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation gala dinner in Washington, where Mrs. Clinton also spoke. “Tolerance is on the ballot. Democracy is on the ballot. Justice is on the ballot. ” Mr. Obama has previously made the case for Mrs. Clinton during campaign stops and in his speech at the Democratic National Convention. But his remarks on Saturday carried a more personal tone, and a tacit acknowledgment that he may be the only one who can bring out the coalition of young, black and Latino voters who Democrats are counting on on Nov. 8. “That speech went beyond the room. It went beyond the moment,” said Donna Brazile, the interim chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee. “That was the president essentially saying, ‘Don’t leave it on the field. ’” During the Democratic primary race, Mrs. Clinton enjoyed tremendous support from voters, especially older black women, who helped her beat back a challenge from Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. And Mrs. Clinton now holds a gaping advantage of 83 percentage points over the Republican presidential nominee, Donald J. Trump, among black voters, according to a New York News poll released last week. But many Democrats say Mrs. Clinton’s statistical advantage obscures concerns about turnout and voter apathy. Younger black voters, in particular, have expressed misgivings about Mrs. Clinton because of some of the policies of her husband’s administration. These voters specifically point to the 1994 crime bill, which put more police officers on the streets, but also led to tougher sentences for nonviolent drug offenders and the overhaul of welfare, which reduced federal assistance for the poor by nearly $55 billion over six years. In addition, it is hard for Mrs. Clinton to replicate the deep personal affection and pride that many feel for Mr. Obama. “People say, ‘It doesn’t matter because Hillary Clinton will get 90 percent of the vote,’” said Charlie King, a prominent New York Democrat. “The question is, ‘Ninety percent of what?’ Turnout makes a difference. ” With 50 days until the election, Minyon Moore, a senior adviser to the Clinton campaign, called Mr. Obama’s remarks on Saturday “a true call” to his coalition of supporters. In part, the speech reflected the president’s eagerness to use the outsize sway he has with black voters, especially younger people who had not been engaged in politics before his bids for the White House. But in recent days, advisers to Mr. Obama say, the president has grown exasperated with the tenor of the campaign — including the of questions about his birthplace, an issue that he and many of his supporters have long regarded as racist. While his advisers have suggested his most powerful role in the Clinton campaign is as a convert who has come to respect his onetime rival, Mr. Obama is also determined to warn his supporters about the dangers of failing to turn out and essentially ceding the presidency to Mr. Trump. Mr. Obama’s speech coincided this weekend with massive efforts by the Clinton campaign, including the dispatching of 55, 000 volunteers to lead more than 2, 000 events in Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Ohio. “Are we where we need to be? Probably not,” Ms. Moore said. “Are we going to get to where we need to be? Absolutely. ” The blunt and personal language from Mr. Obama seemed to reverberate. By 9 a. m. Sunday, the Rev. Al Sharpton began taking calls from black listeners to his “Keepin’ It Real” radio program who said they had misgivings about Mrs. Clinton, but could not bear to insult Mr. Obama. “Making not voting synonymous with an insult to the president is a shot in the arm,” Mr. Sharpton said in an interview. After devoting much of the summer trying to woo white suburban voters turned off by Mr. Trump, the Clinton campaign has refocused its efforts to a big turnout push directed at black and young voters. In the weeks since Labor Day, Mrs. Clinton has held rallies before largely black crowds in Cleveland, at a historically black college in Charlotte, N. C. and at a college in Greensboro, N. C. She spoke about her deep ties to black churches while at the National Baptist Convention in Kansas City, Mo. she called into Tom Joyner’s radio program when she was home sick with pneumonia and, this past week, she addressed the Black Women’s Agenda Symposium. The Clinton campaign plans to employ Mr. Obama and the first lady, Michelle Obama, as much as possible in the coming weeks, making particular use of the couple in Florida, Ohio and North Carolina — in areas of those states that Mr. Obama won handily in 2008 and 2012. After campaign aides insisted in June that Mr. Obama would not be pigeonholed to reach voters, whose support appeared steady for Mrs. Clinton, the campaign has appeared to acknowledge his help is needed, sending him to cities like Philadelphia and Charlotte, which are home to many black voters. “There’s some thought that without him on the ticket, the same enthusiasm might not be there for Hillary Clinton,” said Representative Charles B. Rangel of New York. “I think it’s very smart for the president to say it’s not just Hillary Clinton in the future, it’s the wiping out of all the progress we made not just over Obama years, but over the many, many years. ” If schedules permit, the campaign would like to organize another rally featuring Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton side by side. “It’s a little bit of magic when they’re on stage together,” Ms. Moore said. In a panel discussion this weekend in Washington, Marc H. Morial, the chief executive of the National Urban League, forcefully told a young woman who suggested that some people may not vote because of frustration that “this is not the first generation to be frustrated and not voting is not a viable nor intelligent strategy. ” Mr. King and Mr. Morial are also participating in “Barack Obama Election Day,” a designated day on Nov. 1 during which civil rights leaders will seek to engage in battleground states around issues, such as an overhaul of the criminal justice system, which Mr. Obama championed. “It’s all about creating some enthusiasm around this race, if not necessarily around a candidate,” Mr. King added. Not everyone finds that pitch or Mr. Obama’s remarks compelling, especially given that have been such a loyal voting bloc for the Democrats and the Clintons over the years. “Absolutely hate this framing of the necessity of voting (for Democrats) that places all the blame on marginalized and young folks,” Vann R. Newkirk II, a writer for The Atlantic, said on Twitter. “Black folks have done above and beyond their part already. ” | 1 |
Backdoor Survival October 29, 2016
The topic of using expired prescription drugs comes up frequently in survival and preparedness circles. Although there are many articles detailing with the efficacy of outdated meds, one question I get over and over again is “what do I do when the meds run out?”
Whereas there is no single clear answer, one thing we can all start to do now hangs on to our old, unused meds. For the most part and with very few exceptions, they will be viable for two to twelve years beyond their expiration date. The secret is to keep them in a cool, dark, location that is not too dissimilar from your food storage.
In another exclusive article for Backdoor Survival, Dr. Joe Alton, a medical doctor who is well versed in survival medicine, is here today to give us an update on the use of expired drugs in a survival setting. In addition, for those of you that have asked, he is providing us with links you can use to initiate your own research on this important topic.
Of course, as with anything preparedness related, let your own good judgment prevail.
An Update on Expired Drugs in Survival Settings
In normal times, replacing expired medicines isn’t a major issue. You call your physician and get a refill for “fresh” meds. Medicine bottle descriptions and those in print and online sources tell you to discard any drug that has gone expired, a recommendation so common that it’s considered standard.
You might be surprised to know, however, that expiration dates have only been government-mandated since 1979. The expiration date is simply the last day that the pharmaceutical company will guarantee 100% potency of the product. In other words, you won’t grow a horn in the middle of your forehead or another ill effect if you take the drug the week after it expires. Indeed, it is rare for expired drugs, especially in pill or capsule form, to be any riskier than the non-expired versions.
This is an important issue to those preparing medically for survival scenarios. If you believe that some disaster will take society to the brink, then you should also understand that such a scenario also means that it’s unlikely that pharmaceutical companies will be functioning to manufacture drugs. Therefore, at one point or another, a well-supplied survival medic will have to make a decision regarding the use of an expired medication.
This is a decision that also must be made by government agencies such as FEMA and the Department of Defense. Federal warehouses store tens of millions of dollars’ worth of drugs meant for use in peacetime disasters. When these drugs expired, the forklifts came out and huge quantities of life-saving medicines were discarded. | 0 |
Customers of YouTube TV, the upcoming television cable package from YouTube, will be forced to watch commercials even on recorded shows, according to a report. [“Let’s say a subscriber decides to record ABC’s ‘Blackish’ episode in hopes of being able to catch up on it in a few days, skipping over the ads while they watch. Within 24 hours, though, YouTube likely will have the version of that show available, since many TV networks offer cable providers at least the last five episodes for catch up on demand,” explained The Wall Street Journal. “In versions of shows, TV networks typically disable over ads to make sure they get credit from marketers who pay for the commercials. ” “If YouTube TV does have the version of Wednesday night’s ‘Blackish’ available, then it won’t let its subscribers watch a recorded version that allows for ” they continued. “Instead, viewers will be forced to watch the episode and all of the ads, even though consumers thought they saved the show on their DVR. ” The move has been attributed to YouTube’s various deals with companies such as Disney, 21’st Century Fox, and NBC Universal, though it has also been noted that “if the version doesn’t exist, the YouTube TV subscriber will be able to watch a recorded version and skip ads. ” YouTube TV, which was announced in March, acts as a “skinny bundle” to compete with cable television providers at a much lower price. As reported by Breitbart Tech’s Jack Hadfield last month, “YouTube TV will cost customers only $35 a month, which gets them 6 accounts, 3 of which can be used to stream live TV concurrently, and access to 40 different networks, including ‘ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, ESPN, regional sports networks, and dozens of popular cable networks,’ according to a recent entry on the official YouTube blog. ” “Each of the accounts will be personalized and utilize searching algorithms, similar to Netflix’s profile system,” wrote Hadfield. “Users also gain access to YouTube Red original shows and an unlimited cloud DVR (1 per account) to record live TV. ” The service is only initially available in select U. S. cities, including New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and the San Francisco Bay Area. Charlie Nash is a reporter for Breitbart Tech. You can follow him on Twitter @MrNashington or like his page at Facebook. | 0 |
The facial recognition database used by the FBI is “out of control,” according to a new report by The Guardian. [“Approximately half of adult Americans’ photographs are stored in facial recognition databases that can be accessed by the FBI, without their knowledge or consent, in the hunt for suspected criminals,” reported The Guardian on Monday. “About 80% of photos in the FBI’s network are entries, including pictures from driver’s licenses and passports. The algorithms used to identify matches are inaccurate about 15% of the time, and are more likely to misidentify black people than white people. ” “These are just some of the damning facts presented at last week’s House oversight committee hearing, where politicians and privacy campaigners criticized the FBI and called for stricter regulation of facial recognition technology at a time when it is creeping into law enforcement and business,” they continued. During the committee hearing, chairman Jason Chaffetz praised the positives of using facial recognition technology before also raising concerns about some of the more negative potential uses. “Facial recognition technology is a powerful tool law enforcement can use to protect people, their property, our borders, and our nation … But it can also be used by bad actors to harass or stalk individuals,” declared Chaffetz. “It can be used in a way that chills free speech and free association by targeting people attending certain political meetings, protests, churches, or other types of places in the public. ” “For those reasons and others, we must conduct proper oversight of this emerging technology,” he continued, adding that body cameras with the potential to scan faces while walking down the street were the “most concerning. ” In their report, The Guardian added, “Unlike with the collection of fingerprints and DNA, which is done following an arrest, photos of innocent civilians are being collected proactively. ” “The FBI made arrangements with 18 different states to gain access to their databases of driver’s license photos,” they explained, adding, “Last year, the US government accountability office (GAO) analyzed the FBI’s use of facial recognition technology and found it to be lacking in accountability, accuracy and oversight, and made recommendations of how to address the problem. ” Brian Brackeen, CEO of the movie and theme park facial recognition company Kairos, also criticized the lack of regulation for facial recognition software and databases, proclaiming the commercial side of the industry to be “five years ahead” of FBI. According to The Guardian, Brackeen claimed “he was ‘not comfortable’ with the lack of regulation,” before adding “There has got to be privacy protections for the individual. ” Charlie Nash is a reporter for Breitbart Tech. You can follow him on Twitter @MrNashington or like his page at Facebook. | 0 |
Friday during the U. N. Security Council’s session on Syria, Russia’s deputy U. N. envoy Vladimir Safronkov said President Donald Trump missile strike on Syria in response to that country’s alleged use of chemical weapons was an “act of aggression,” which will “only facilitated the strengthening of terrorism. ” Safronkov said via a translator, “On the night of the 7th of April, the United States attacked the territory of sovereign Syria. We describe that attack as a flagrant violation of international law and an act of aggression. We strongly condemn the illegitimate actions by the U. S. The consequences of this for regional and international stability could be extremely serious. This attack was a flagrant violation of the 2015 memorandum on preventing incidents and ensuring security during our operations in Syrian airspace and the ministry of defense of Russia has stopped its cooperation with Pentagon under that memorandum. ” He continued, “Of recent times the United States administration has often talked about combat international terrorism and this was just — this justified American troops and their allies being present on Syrian territory. Although they were there without the invitation of the legitimate government of Syria and without the approval of the security council of the United Nations. Manipulating articles of the United Nations charter beyond any criticism. The aggression by the U. S. has only facilitated the strengthening of terrorism. The attack came against Syrian armed forces structure and its air force. That is against those who over all these years have been combatting terrorism. It’s not difficult to imagine how much the spirits of these terrorists have been raised after the support from Washington. ” Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN | 0 |
Apocalyptic sounds in the skies are back! This time in Slovakia. Please scroll down for video
They call it ‘The Hum,' a phrase coined by the geoscientist David Deming of the University of Oklahoma to describe the ‘mysterious and untraceable sound that is heard in certain locations around the world by two to ten percent of the population.' The noises might vary from roaring sounds in the middle of the night, to prolonged periods of noise which sound like intense industrial activity taking place in the sky. Most unusually of all, ordinary people in cities such as York in England have claimed to hear trumpet horns coming from the sky playing chilling bars of music. Strange noises heard over the sky in Slovakia
Now Slovakia has become the latest location to these bizarre and completely inexplicable noises, which have been recorded on video.
As of yet, no one has been able to offer a completely coherent explanation for these mysterious sounds. Some have suggested that the chilling noises might be caused by changes in the Earth’s core which could eventually lead to a complete polar shift. However, aside from speculation, there is little evidence to suggest that this particular theory is true. According to Deming, they may well be caused by enormous amounts of collated feedback from telephone transmissions and aircraft which are operated by the United States Navy to communicate with submarines. However, this explanation is deemed to fall short as these noises became particularly apparent in 2011 and 2012 and if Deming is correct, there should have been previous indications of this feedback reaction before this period .
Some people have suggested that the noise could be being caused by projects such as the HAARP weapons program, which is believed to be dedicated to working on high-tech weather modification technology. If this explanation is correct, it could not explain not only the unusual noises but also why they are so often accompanied by a bizarre phenomenon in the sky, such as those which have been detected in Slovakia in recent months.
And here is another recent video. Chilling to the bone:
This article (Apocalyptic sounds in the skies are back! This time in Slovakia. ) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with full attribution and a link to the original source on Disclose.tv Related Articles | 0 |
Venezuela marked its fiftieth day of nationwide protests against the socialist government Saturday, with an estimated 160, 000 peaceful protesters taking the streets of Caracas and another 40, 000 congregating in Táchira, state, home to one of the nation’s most resilient movements. [Venezuelans around the world also congregated in cities with large diaspora populations to demand an end to dictator Nicolás Maduro’s regime. In Miami, celebrations of Cuban Independence Day on Saturday merged with Venezuelan exile protests against Maduro. Protesters in Caracas — participating in a march the opposition called “We are Millions” — demanded elections on Saturday, as well as an end to the military violence against unarmed protesters that has left 47 dead since protests began in late March. The protest spanned from the main Francisco Fajardo highway to the Ministry of the Interior in the capital. Francisco Fajardo has been home to some of the most violent clashes between protesters and the Bolivarian National Guard (GNB) which Maduro has permitted to use tear gas, rubber bullets, and armored tanks to killed protesters. The highway has also been the scene of two of the most iconic images of the protests so far: an elder woman defying an armored tank and a nude young man climbing a tank holding a Bible, demanding an end to violence. “I am still here despite all this,” Leonard Quintero, a stylist, told Presse. “No fear, because we have to support and defeat this with resistance. ” Police attacked protesters with tear gas and rubber bullets yet again. The most violent incident in Caracas on Saturday, however, was a panicked attack on an individual the crowd accused of being a thief and Chavista, who protesters doused in gasoline and set on fire. The man has been identified as Orlando Figuera, 21. (Warning: Graphic Images) In addition to violence from the military, protesters often have to contend with attacks from Chavista gangs known as colectivos, who beat and shoot unarmed protesters as an intimidation measure. In Táchira, a Colombian border state that has borne the brunt of much of Maduro’s violence, multiple reports estimate that over 40, 000 Venezuelans took the streets of the capital, the college town San Cristóbal, to demand an end to the Maduro era. Táchira was among the first states to rebel against Chavismo, beheading a statue of Chávez during the 2014 wave of protests. The mayor of San Cristóbal, Daniel Ceballos, was arrested by secret police (Sebin) in 2014 for supporting the protests. Ceballos was sentenced to 12 months in prison in 2014, but remains detained in what his mother has condemned as deplorable conditions. Maduro recently deployed 2, 600 troops to the region in response to peaceful protests. A esta hora, los valientes de Coloncito, Táchira, recorren sus calles en procesión. Ante feroz represión, siguen con más fuerza en la calle! pic. twitter. — María Corina Machado (@MariaCorinaYA) May 22, 2017, Freddy Guevara se apareció sorpresa en Táchira (Video) https: . pic. twitter. — DolarToday® (@DolarToday) May 20, 2017, In Miami, Venezuelan exiles joined Cuban Americans at José Martí Park, named after the Cuban founding father, holding signs reading “Liberty Trumps Tyranny” — a nod to President Donald Trump’s repeated vows to support dissidents from both Cuba and Venezuela, and calling for an end to state violence against protesters in the South American country. “We hope that Trump blocks the oil of Maduro,” one protester, Carlos Fernandez, told the local outlet WSVN. “That will throw down not only Maduro, but also [Cuban dictator] Castro. ” Venezuela’s government is closely tied to the communist dictatorship in Cuba, and has provided the island with free oil for nearly two decades in exchange for doctors, medical supplies, and support on the international stage. The Venezuelan newspaper El Universal estimated the Miami congregation to be about 2, 000 people strong. At press time Monday, hundreds had congregated throughout Venezuela for Day 52 of protests. These assemblies appeared focused on demanding that the socialist government reform their economic policies and allow the distribution of humanitarian aid, particularly medicine and food. Venezuela’s Pharmaceutical Federation (Fefarven) estimates the nation is lacking 85 percent of medications on the World Health Organization (WHO)’s list of drugs required to run a functional health care system. Hospitals and pharmacies have faced shortages of staples like ibuprofen, birth control, and cancer drugs for years. #22Mayo Sin miedo #Lara sale a la calle este lunes, nuestra lucha no se detiene. Hoy por los pacientes, por los Venezolanos alzamos la voz pic. twitter. — María Teresa Perez (@perezmateresa) May 22, 2017, ”Queremos medicinas, no queremos represión” corearon antes del inicio de la marcha de sector salud #PZO | vía @mramirezcabello pic. twitter. — Francisco Sucre (@fcosucre) May 22, 2017, #22May Desde #Anzoategui exigimos la Apertura del Canal Humanitario. #GranMarchaPorLaSaludYLaVida pic. twitter. — Armando Armas (@ArmandoArmas) May 22, 2017, | 1 |
It was quite a night for the American swim team. Katie Ledecky, the most dominant female swimmer in Rio, demolished her own record in the freestyle. Ledecky finished the 400 with a time of 3 minutes 56. 46 seconds. Ledecky’s historic performance fired up the U. S. men’s 4x100 relay team, which added Michael Phelps to the mix on race day. That move paid off when Phelps swam an incredible second leg in 47. 12, which his coach Bob Bowman said was one of his fastest, to lead the Americans to victory over France. The gold was Phelps’s 19th. He’s sure to add more in these Games. Follow us here for the latest updates on our Olympics coverage. In the first big surprises of the Olympic tennis tournament, Novak Djokovic, the world’s dominant tennis player, and the doubles team of Venus and Serena Williams were upset in the first round. Djokovic had made the Olympic gold medal in singles one of his big priorities for 2016. He could not make it past the first round, and when it was over, both he and his conqueror, Juan Martín del Potro, were in tears in Rio de Janeiro. In a raucous atmosphere on center court at the Olympic Tennis Center, Del Potro produced one of the most remarkable performances of his career: upsetting Djokovic, (4) (2). The Williamses lost, to the Czech team of Barbora Strycova and Lucie Safarova. The defeat was the Williams sisters’ first loss playing together at the Olympics. They won the gold medal in 2000, 2008 and 2012, and Sunday’s surprise defeat came against a team that had never won a match together. — CHRISTOPHER CLAREY How to Watch: NBC broadcasts on a tape delay, but you can stream all the events here. The Dutch cyclist Annemiek van Vleuten was involved in a spectacular crash near the end of the women’s road race at the Olympics on Sunday, suffering a concussion and fracturing her spine. Van Vleuten was leading the race by 40 seconds about 12 miles from the finish and was heading downhill when she failed to negotiate a turn, hit the curb and tumbled over her handlebars, landing on her head. The Dutch team said that van Vleuten had suffered a concussion. She was in stable condition in the intensive care unit of a Rio de Janeiro hospital. “Annemiek went through a total CT scan and is stable now,” said the team’s chief medical officer, Cees Rein van den Hoogenband. “No internal bleedings or damage. She will stay in intensive care for the next 24 hours. She is fully conscious, and her reactions are adequate. She also suffers from three minor fractures in her lumbar spine. ” — VICTOR MATHER Simone Biles lived up to her reputation as the world’s greatest gymnast in her first day of competition. In the qualifying competition, Biles had the highest score, ahead of her teammates Aly Raisman and Gabby Douglas. She was also first in three apparatus — the floor exercise, the balance beam and the vault. And the American team also finished in first place. The team competition is Tuesday. Here is why Simone Biles is unbeatable. In the Pool: Sarah Sjostrom of Sweden broke her own world record with a 55. 48 seconds to win the women’s butterfly. The defending champion Dana Vollmer, who returned to competition last summer after the birth of her first child, won the bronze. She was trying to become the first mother from the United States to win an individual swimming gold. Paralympics officials have done what Olympics officials chose not to do, barring all Russian athletes from their Games after an elaborate cheating scheme. Speaking on Sunday in Rio de Janeiro, the head of the International Paralympic Committee, Philip Craven, decried Russia’s “thirst for glory” and “medals over morals” mentality, calling the of doping among Russia’s top disabled athletes “abominable. ” — Rebecca Ruiz Miles the flamboyant American world champion with the distinction of having a fencing move named after him, was beaten by Artur Akhmatkhuzin of Russia, in the round of 32 of the men’s foil on Sunday morning. tried his signature move, in which he whips his sword around the back of his head or back, four times but did not score with it. He will still compete in the team event on Friday as part of a strong American team that will be a medal contender. — Victor Mather Blowout Alert: It was expected to be a blowout. It was. The American women’s basketball team got its Olympics underway against Senegal. The final score was . Breanna Stewart, Sylvia Fowles and Diana Taurasi each had 15 points for the United States. First for Kosovo: Competing as an independent nation in the Olympics for the first time, Kosovo did not wait long for its first gold medal. Majlinda Kelmendi won the women’s judo competition. Some will tell you the first several days of the Summer Olympics are all about the pool. (The Australians have learned to swim again! Michael Phelps is still around! And so are Ryan Lochte’s abs!) There are a bevy of stars, and more medal ceremonies than you can handle. And of course, the smell of chlorine really brings you back to your childhood. But if you are in Rio for the Games (or even are watching from home) do what the locals do: Go to the beach. In a feat of intrepid reporting, John Branch spent the entire day and night at Copacabana Beach on Saturday, listening to the waves and watching Olympic athletes play in the sand. Read about John Branch’s beach vacation here. | 1 |
Russia’s track and field team is barred from competing in the Olympic Games this summer because of a doping conspiracy, an extraordinary punishment without precedent in Olympics history. The International Association of Athletics Federations, the governing body for track and field, announced the decision Friday, ruling in a unanimous vote that Russia had not done enough to restore global confidence in the integrity of its athletes. Russia won 18 medals in track and field — including eight golds — at the last Summer Olympics. But when the Rio Games begin on Aug. 5, no track and field athletes will compete under the Russian flag. Not even East Germany, which conducted a notorious doping scheme throughout the 1960s, ’70s and ’80s, faced such a penalty. “Politics was not playing a part in that room today,” Sebastian Coe, the head of the track and field organization, said about the vote Friday. “It was unambiguous. ” The case against Russia has advanced over the last seven months. Reports by the World Agency and by news organizations have detailed a doping scheme that punctured the integrity of the Olympics, seemingly upending many of the results from the 2008 Beijing Games, the 2012 London Games and the 2014 Sochi Games. The allegations were and detailed: Athletes were given a cocktail of banned substances and liquor authorities helped athletes evade drug tests by surreptitiously swapping out tainted urine thousands of incriminating samples were destroyed drug testers were threatened by members of Russia’s Federal Security Service. But perhaps the most influential force in the track organization’s decision was the outcry from athletes outside of Russia. A groundswell of Olympians across sports agitated for penalties after WADA had been slow to respond. “Athletes have been losing sleep,” said Lauryn Williams, a track and field and bobsled athlete from the United States. “You can’t have faith in anybody who is Russian. ” The Russian ministry of sport said in a statement Friday that it was disappointed in the ruling. “We now appeal to the members of the International Olympic Committee to not only consider the impact that our athletes’ exclusion will have on their dreams and the people of Russia, but also that the Olympics themselves will be diminished by their absence,” the ministry said. The I. O. C. the ultimate authority over the Games, was scheduled to discuss the decision on Tuesday. If Olympics officials amended the ruling against Russia, it would be an unusual move, as they have historically deferred to the governing bodies of specific sports. Russian track and field athletes have been suspended from international competition since last fall, after publication of a WADA report accusing the nation of an elaborate doping program. Although Russia denied those accusations, the country’s track and field authorities did not contest the suspension when given an opportunity in November. Since then, however, Russian officials have striven to persuade global that they could be trusted in coming Olympic competitions, volunteering to go beyond standard eligibility requirements and to send only athletes who have not been disciplined for drug use. Global track officials said Friday that individuals who could “clearly and convincingly show they are not tainted by the Russian system” — because they have been outside the country and subject to rigorous testing — could individually petition to compete for a neutral team. Such a policy could prove controversial. The sophistication of Russia’s operation, have said, has made some athletes on steroids appear clean because incriminating urine samples have been swapped out or because athletes imbibed drugs with liquor to minimize the period during which the drugs can be detected. “Two or five or 100 negative tests do not mean an athlete is clean,” Rune Andersen, chairman of the I. A. A. F. task force that is monitoring Russia, said Friday. He said that the loophole for individuals had been created at the recommendation of lawyers who were mindful of possible court challenges Russian athletes will have the opportunity to appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Switzerland. “We do not believe that every Russian athlete cheated,” said Stephanie Hightower, the president of USA Track Field, who took part in Friday’s vote. “It is unfortunate and regrettable that some may pay a penalty for the serious transgressions of their federation. ” On Friday, hours before the vote, Russia’s sports minister, Vitaly Mutko, made a final appeal, releasing an open letter to the I. A. A. F. that had been sent privately on Wednesday. “Russia fully supports fighting doping,” Mr. Mutko wrote, citing independent drug testing of Russian athletes that had been conducted by authorities from Britain in recent months and a new law that would make it a criminal offense “for an athlete’s coach and entourage to support doping. ” Those overtures were not enough. Mr. Andersen said Friday that Mr. Mutko had privately acknowledged that Russia had inherited a doping culture from the Soviet Union. Perhaps further contributing to officials’ skepticism, WADA released information days before Friday’s vote that called into question the credibility of Russia’s reforms. The agency said that the testing authorities from Britain had been threatened by members of Russia’s Federal Security Service and that many athletes — a significant number of them track and field competitors — had evaded drug tests with the help of sports officials as recently as this month. have provided further details on the clandestine doping scheme the report described. Fearing for their safety, at least three of them have fled to the United States. In Los Angeles, Grigory Rodchenkov, Russia’s former antidoping lab director, told The New York Times that he had worked for years at the direction of the Russian government to ensure the country’s dominance in international competition. He said he had provided a cocktail of steroids and liquor to sports officials, who in turn provided those drugs to the country’s top athletes. According to Dr. Rodchenkov, Russian athletes took that cocktail to prepare for the 2012 Summer Olympics in London. They stopped taking the drugs one or two weeks before they were scheduled to be tested, he said, to avoid being caught. “If you’re fighting doping, Russia should be withdrawn from the Olympics,” Dr. Rodchenkov said in Los Angeles last month. “Doping is everywhere. Many people in Russia don’t want to tell the truth. Lies and fear are absolute. ” Russian authorities have vehemently disputed Dr. Rodchenkov’s account, calling it the “slander of a turncoat. ” In a phone interview Friday, Dmitri Svishchev, head of the State Duma’s committee on sports, culture and youth affairs of Russia, called the decision “an injustice,” adding, “Russia has never denied that it has problems with doping, just as any other country. ” In general, nations have been barred from the Olympics because of geopolitical considerations, not doping. After both world wars, losing nations were kept out of the next Games. South Africa was barred from 1964 to 1988 because of its policies of apartheid. Yugoslavia was prevented from entering team events in 1992 because of United Nations penalties over the war in the Balkans. It is unclear whether the I. O. C. can or will overturn the I. A. A. F.’s ban when it meets on Tuesday. The I. O. C. ’s president, Thomas Bach, has emphasized in recent weeks “the difficult decision between collective responsibility and individual justice,” suggesting sympathy for Russian athletes with clean histories who are seeking to make it to Rio. Still, Mr. Bach has also emphasized a “ ” policy and said that if other Russian sports organizations were proved to be ridden with cheating, they, too, could be kept from the Olympics. Katie Uhlaender, a skeleton racer from the United States, said it was difficult to react to Friday’s decision because the I. O. C. had yet to respond. “If there are Russian athletes that can prove beyond reasonable doubt that they’re clean, let them compete,” she said. “But I literally started crying at the details of the Sochi scandal,” she said, referring to Dr. Rodchenkov’s account of having substituted out Russian athletes’ incriminating urine. “What does it even mean to ban Russia?” she said. “Is sending them to their room or putting them in a timeout going to solve the problem?” | 1 |
PLAINS, Ga. — The solar panels — 3, 852 of them — shimmered above 10 acres of Jimmy Carter’s soil where peanuts and soybeans used to grow. The panels moved almost imperceptibly with the sun. And they could power more than half of this small town, from which Mr. Carter rose from obscurity to the presidency. Nearly 38 years after Mr. Carter installed solar panels at the White House, only to see them removed during Ronald Reagan’s administration, the former president is leasing part of his family’s farmland for a project that is both cutting edge and homespun. It is, Mr. Carter and energy experts said, a effort that could hold lessons for other pockets of pastoral America in an age of climate change and political rancor. But Mr. Carter’s project, years in the making, has come into operation at a dizzying moment for renewable energy advocates. Although solar power consumption has more than doubled in the United States since 2013, President Trump has expressed skepticism about the costs of such energy sources, and he has pledged to revive the nation’s languishing coal industry. Yet in some of the rural areas where Mr. Trump enjoys substantial support, renewable energy projects have emerged as important economic forces. “I hope that we’ll see a realization on the part of the new administration that one of the best ways to provide new jobs — and productive and innovative jobs — is through the search for renewable sources of energy,” Mr. Carter, 92, said in an interview at his former high school. “I haven’t seen that happen yet, but I’m still hoping for that. ” Although Mr. Carter, now decades removed from the night in February 1977 when he donned a cardigan sweater and spoke of the country’s “energy problem,” remains a keen student of energy policy, the solar project is also an extension of his legacy here. Mr. Carter has long shaped Plains, where he is known as “Mr. Jimmy,” and the Sunday school teacher’s grin — in snapshots, in paintings and in caricature on Christmas ornaments and a peanut statue — is hard to miss. The presidential seal graces welcome signs, which are illuminated, fittingly, by solar electricity, and the Jimmy Carter National Historic Site has attracted more than 1. 6 million visitors since 1988. The project on Mr. Carter’s land, which feeds into Georgia Power’s grid and earns the former first family less than $7, 000 annually, did not need to be large to serve much of Plains, population 683 or so. It began when a solar firm, SolAmerica, approached Mr. Carter’s grandson Jason Carter about the possibility of installing panels here. The former president, who was 11 when his boyhood home got running water after his father installed a windmill, did not need convincing and became deeply involved with the project, writing notes in the margins of the lease agreement and visiting the site regularly. Mr. Carter, Jason Carter recalled this week, regularly sent pictures of the construction on the farmland, which he often passed during walks here with his wife, Rosalynn. “When I told people we were getting solar panels, they said, ‘In Plains? ’” said Jan Williams, who runs the Plains Historic Inn and helps to organize Mr. Carter’s regular Sunday school classes, which remain a draw for tourists. “They say, ‘Well, that’s because of Jimmy Carter.’ It is because of Jimmy Carter. Plains is all because of Jimmy Carter. ” The Plains project, limited in size, according to Mr. Carter and SolAmerica, because of what existing infrastructure could handle, is far from the first solar effort in Georgia. But it is among the projects in a state where, after years of reluctance, regulators have demanded that the predominant utility company place a greater emphasis on solar power. In this state, and in other parts of the country where many residents are unconvinced of climate change, renewable energy supporters have often tailored their pitches to focus on economic benefits. A plurality of Georgia’s electric generation jobs are in solar, according to the Department of Energy. “The old politicized arguments about renewable energy being for coastal liberals just don’t play anymore in parts of the country where they’re experiencing firsthand the economic benefits of renewable energy development and job creation,” said Jodie Van Horn, the director of the Sierra Club’s Ready for 100 campaign, which pushes American cities to commit to entirely renewable energy offerings. Renewable energy supporters do not have to ignore climate change arguments entirely, though. In 2014 in Sumter County, which includes Plains, 62 percent of residents believed that global warming was happening, according to an estimate from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication. That is slightly higher than some counties in metropolitan Atlanta. But Mr. Trump’s ascension has placed new pressure on renewable energy boosters. Although Mr. Trump has pledged to promote a policy that would “make full use of our domestic energy sources, including traditional and renewable energy sources,” he has proudly depicted himself as a champion of coal. Stan Wise, the chairman of the Georgia Public Service Commission, which has no Democratic members, said he expected solar to endure, in part because it had “found its niche. ” “It may not grow as quickly in this country without benefit of federal government assistance, but I think if you leave these entities alone, whether it’s coal or gas or solar, they’ll find their way if they’re right in your state,” said Mr. Wise, who noted that Georgia Power had, after a bidding process, accepted Mr. Carter’s proposal to participate in a solar program it runs. But Mr. Trump’s views have alarmed Mr. Carter. “I’m afraid — and hope that I’m wrong — that Trump might do the same thing that Ronald Reagan did and say we can be sufficient ourselves without renewable energy,” Mr. Carter said. “But I hope he doesn’t do that. ” This week, though, Mr. Carter’s energy ambitions were decidedly more local when, dressed in jeans with a small mud stain near his left ankle, he alighted from a gray Ford pickup truck to see the solar panels again. But the memories of Mr. Carter and his wife were not far from the presidency. “It’s very special to me because I was so disappointed when the panels came off of the White House, and now to see them in Plains is just terrific,” Mrs. Carter said softly after a ceremony. | 1 |
in: General Health , Sleuth Journal , Special Interests Everyone feels stress from time to time, but many of us are unaware of the fact that many commonly-experienced imbalances in health may actually be our body’s way of responding to physical and mental stress. Recent scientific studies have indicated that the human body’s reaction to stress could be one of the main causes of many life-threatening diseases, including heart disease and cancer. When we feel that we are in danger, a stress response surges through us and our bodies under-go an explosion of stress hormones that, over-time, are hazardous to our health. Ways Stress Negatively Affects Your Health 1. Increased Heart Rate When we enter into the fight or flight mode, the heart-rate naturally speeds up. While this may be a great thing if we need to run quickly, overtime this can significantly tire out the heart and lead to cardiovascular diseases, increased cholesterol and even excess belly fat . 2. Digestion Slows When we go into a state of stress, the energy needed for digestive processes is immediately sent to external areas of the body, such as the head, heart and limbs. This leads to a whole host of chronic stress-related digestive conditions. Chronic constipation and irritable bowel conditions are directly related, in many cases, to chronic stress. In fact, estimates show that as many as 20 percent of Americans experience chronic constipation and symptoms of IBS. Changes in appetite are also a stress-related condition. When we experience mental and emotional stress, we often reach for comfort foods to give us the false sensation of being calm. Similarly, some people react in the opposite way, losing their appetites when stress or anxiety levels are high. 3. High Blood Pressure Problems Studies show that when we are under stress, blood flow to the brain and muscles increase up to 400 percent. While this may be useful if we are planning on leaping into a tree, over time, chronic stress creates the scene for high blood pressure conditions or even a stroke. 4. Weight Gain Evidence shows that increased cortisol hormone levels caused by prolonged stress can lead to overall weight gain . 5. General Muscle Tension and Chronic Fatigue Muscles become tight when we are stressed. Because the muscles are constantly in a “gripping” state, they later become over-worked and leave us with a general sensation of body fatigue. Studies show that generalized back pain may also be a response to chronic stress-related muscle gripping along the spine. 6. Insomnia and Other Sleep-Conditions When the mind is continually spinning and stressing on the problems of life, it can be hard to unwind when the day is over. Insomnia is a sleep condition that is directly related to mental stress. 7. Reduced Happiness and Quality of Life Stress causes negative mental and emotional reactions. When we are stressed, it can be difficult for us to establish healthy social relationships, as we are constantly working to preserve personal stasis. 8. Immune Conditions Stress negatively effects the blood cells that aid in your body’s ability to ward off infections, leading to greater likelihood of developing colds, flu and degenerative disorders. 9. Other Conditions Many modern studies are now linking the experience of chronic stress with a multitude of conditions. In fact, estimates show that up to two-thirds of all medical visits are for stress-induced conditions. Other stress-related conditions include depression, anxiety, migraine headaches, lack of sexual desire, chronic fatigue syndrome, IBS, immune disorders, memory loss, reproductive disorders, cold and flu conditions , skin imbalances such as acne, stunted growth and hair loss. On a Personal Note We all get stressed out at some point. It’s inevitable and part of life. However, there are a few things you can do to help relieve stress, as well as stop it from coming in the first place. I recommend the following for stress relief: Exercise Daily | 0 |
Cinecôa e o imaginário rupestre 27.10.2016 | Fonte de informações: Pravda.ru O Festival Internacional de Cinema de Foz Côa - Cinecôa regressa em 2016 com um cartaz diversificado e pensado para diferentes públicos. De 17 a 19 de Novembro, o auditório de Vila Nova de Foz Côa vai exibir oito longas metragens, seis curtas e muitos filmes de animação para os mais pequenos.
O destaque desta edição vai para o filme "Altamira", do conceituado realizador Hugh Hudson , já que permite um paralelismo entre a caverna de Altamira, conhecida como a Capela Sistina da arte rupestre, e as gravuras do Parque Arqueológico do Vale do Côa. "Não é de forma inocente que abrimos assim o Cinecôa. O filme, protagonizado por Antonio Banderas, faz uma grande aproximação entre dois pontos fulcrais da arte rupestre europeia, como são Altamira e Foz Côa", explica António Valente, membro da organização.
Hugh Hudson vai estar presente no Cinecôa para mostrar a sua mais recente obra no dia 17 . "Trata-se de um realizador inglês que é o autor de 'Momentos de Glória', um filme que ganhou quatro Óscares, e que marcou todo um conjunto de gerações", destaca António Valente.
No dia 18, será exibido o filme-concerto Nosferatu, Eine Symphonie des Grauens , um clássico alemão de 1922, dirigido por Friedrich Wilhelm Murnau, e será acompanhado, em palco, pela Orquestra do Norte .
Do Cinecôa constarão ainda filmes recentemente produzidos em Marrocos, Espanha, Reino Unido, França, Luxemburgo, Brasil e Cuba. A entrada é gratuita e são esperadas cerca de 3 mil pessoas ao longo dos três dias .
O Festival Internacional de Cinema de Foz Côa também vai distinguir António-Pedro Vasconcelos , realizador de obras cinematográficas como "Jaime", "Os Imortais", "Call girl" ou "Os gatos não têm vertigens", filme que abriu o Cinecôa na edição anterior. "Vamos homenagear um dos realizadores mais polémicos e com os filmes mais vistos pelo público português. Será exibido o seu último filme - Amor Impossível, seguido de um concerto da filha, Patrícia Vasconcelos, que acaba de lançar um disco", refere António Valente.
Organizado pela Câmara Municipal de Vila Nova de Foz Côa, o Cinecôa acontece ininterruptamente desde 2011, ano da sua estreia, e já homenageou ou contou com a presença de figuras marcantes do cinema como Manoel de Oliveira, Lisandro Alonso, Benoît Jacquot, Teresa Vilaverde ou Tino Navarro.
Daniel Faiões | 0 |
Former National Security Adviser and retired Lt. General Mike Flynn caused quite a stir by offering testimony to Congress and the FBI in exchange for immunity on Thursday. [Many jumped to conclusions, often the same reporters who insisted requests for immunity by members of Hillary Clinton’s inner circle were routine and entirely meaningless. Here are five things known with certainty about the Flynn case at this time: Requests for immunity are not admissions of guilt. We should get that out of the way right up front since so many people who know better are getting it wrong. It is certainly fair to comment on immunity deals or talk about the impression they convey. The details of the immunity agreements for certain figures in the Clinton email scandal were downright bizarre, and arguably impeded the investigation, rather than enhancing it. Clinton partisans argued that other immunity grants were routine and implied absolutely nothing untoward. One reason Flynn’s immunity offer brought such a wave of innuendo in response is that Flynn himself said last year, while discussing the Clinton email scandal, “When you are given immunity, that means you have probably committed a crime. ” Bringing his own words back to haunt him is irresistible for his critics. Furthermore, President Trump said essentially the same thing about immunity deals when talking about Clinton. Bringing his words back to haunt him is absolutely irresistible for the media. But no, as Business Insider points out in one the posts about Flynn and Trump being haunted by their words, “a request for immunity does not amount to an admission of guilt,” and “a person granted immunity may still be criminally prosecuted for crimes revealed in the testimony as long as the activity is confirmed with independent evidence. ” The difference here is that the media didn’t want to jump to conclusions about what any of those Clinton immunity deals meant. Flynn’s attorney said he desires immunity to escape a “highly politicized witch hunt environment. ” The statement issued by Flynn’s attorney Robert Kelner on Thursday explains why Flynn offered to testify in exchange for immunity. According to Kelner, Flynn “certainly has a story to tell, and he very much wants to tell it, should the circumstances permit. ” After recounting the details of Flynn’s lengthy “life of national service,” Kelner states the media is “awash with unfounded allegations, outrageous claims of treason, and vicious innuendo directed against him. ” “He is now the target of unsubstantiated public demands by Members of Congress and other political critics that he be criminally investigated,” Kelner points out. “No reasonable person, who has the benefit of advice from counsel, would submit to questioning in such a highly politicized, witch hunt environment without assurances against unfair prosecution. ” Flynn’s most serious legal jeopardy may involve contacts with Turkey, not Russia. Flynn’s offer involves testimony about contacts with Russia, and his tenure as National Security Adviser ended because of a conversation he had with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, but nothing illegal about that conversation has yet been demonstrated. The more serious problem for Flynn could be his connections with the government of Turkey. CIA Director James Woolsey said last week that Flynn met with Turkish officials last summer to discuss Turkey’s extradition of exiled cleric Fethullah Gulen, accused of masterminding the July coup attempt against President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Woolsey claims he walked into the middle of a conversation between Flynn and Turkish officials in New York, in which the idea of staging a covert operation “in the dead of night to whisk this guy away” was discussed. Woolsey has variously described this conversation as either “startling and illegal,” or “naive” and without “credibility. ” Flynn has “registered with the Justice Department as a foreign agent for $530, 000 worth of lobbying work before Election Day that may have aided the Turkish government,” according to Fox News. The White House has said President Trump was not aware Flynn was working for the Turks. Fortune describes the precise allegations Flynn may end up facing over Turkey: On March 7, after being fired as National Security Adviser, Flynn belatedly filed a FARA disclosure that revealed that, through his firm, Flynn Intel Group, he had worked in 2016 on behalf of Inovo BV, a firm based in Netherlands and owned by a Turkish businessman with links to the Turkish government. Flynn’s firm was paid $530, 000 by Inovo. Flynn’s FARA filing (available here) revealed that the September 19 meeting occurred and that Gülen was discussed. But the filing claims that Flynn’s work was on behalf of Inovo, not the Turkish government, and that it concerned merely “the political climate in Turkey” and “doing business in Turkey,” related to the export of natural gas. But Woolsey’s statements to the Journal and CNN, and the FARA filing now suggest this was either false or a woefully incomplete account of the client and the purpose of Flynn’s work — that Flynn was actually advising the Turkish government about the extrajudicial removal of a green card holder from the United States. Turkey’s foreign minister and the of Erdoğan, the country’s energy minister, were Flynn’s interlocutors that day about putting Gülen “out of action. ” FARA is the Foreign Agents Registration Act, and it would appear to be the clearest example of a law Flynn might be charged with violating. However, former prosecutor Andrew McCarthy, now a writer for National Review, said on Thursday that Flynn was “unlikely to be prosecuted” for his late filing as a foreign agent. A few contacts could still prove troublesome. Flynn’s communication with Ambassador Kislyak may have resulted in no legal charges — he was dismissed because his account of the conversations to the White House, particularly Vice President Mike Pence, was not completely accurate. Yet questions have still been raised about a $33, 000 speaking engagement for the Russia Today news agency and $23, 000 of speeches he gave to Russian firms. Democrats have alleged these speeches may have violated the Emoluments Clause. Flynn’s offer of testimony for immunity has not been accepted yet. The Senate Intelligence Committee reportedly told Flynn it was “not receptive” to his offer “at this time” on Friday. Rep. Adam Schiff ( ) ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said there are “many more witnesses and documents to obtain” before any immunity request from Flynn would be considered. Schiff took the opportunity to pronounce it was a “grave and momentous step” for a former National Security Adviser to the President of the United States to ask for immunity from prosecution,” but he gave no sign of granting it. A spokesman for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes ( ) said on Friday there has been a “preliminary conversation with Michael Flynn’s lawyer about arranging for Flynn to speak to the Committee,” but the discussion “did not include immunity or other possible conditions for his appearance. ” Schiff said the House Intelligence Committee would defer to the Justice Department, which at the time of this writing has given no indication it will offer Flynn immunity. | 1 |
Donald J. Trump delivered a blistering attack on Wednesday against Hillary Clinton, calling her unreliable and more concerned with herself than with the American people as he sought to regain his footing after a tumultuous month that imperiled his candidacy. In a speech seeking to build his case against the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee by labeling her a “ liar,” Mr. Trump moved to soothe concerns among Republicans alarmed by gaping wounds after his racial attacks on a federal judge and his boast after the terrorist shooting in Orlando, Fla. He said Mrs. Clinton would not create jobs, portraying her as a former secretary of state who “may be the most corrupt person ever to seek the presidency. ” “The choice in this election is a choice between taking our government back from the special interests, or surrendering our last scrap of independence to their total and complete control,” Mr. Trump said. The professionalized presentation, with two teleprompters flanking the lectern in a ballroom of the Trump SoHo hotel in Manhattan, represented a stark contrast to how Mr. Trump has handled the last month of his campaign, and came two days after he fired his campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski. Since securing the Republican nomination, Mr. Trump has allowed himself to be pummeled by Democrats, doing little to fashion an overarching message or even to frame his view of the race. But on Wednesday, he moved to regain the offensive, making a forceful case that he chose to enter public service because of his concerns for the country, a contrast he tried to draw with Mrs. Clinton. “She believes she is entitled to the office,” Mr. Trump said. “Her campaign slogan is ‘I’m with her.’ You know what my response to that is? I’m with you, the American people. She thinks it’s all about her. I know it’s all about you. ” The remarks were welcomed by Mr. Trump’s supporters, who have fretted that he is turning the campaign into a referendum on himself instead of President Obama and Mrs. Clinton. Carl Paladino, a Trump ally who was in the room for the speech, said that the candidate “likes to speak extemporaneously” but that his more scripted approach on Wednesday was necessary. “He told everybody why Hillary shouldn’t be there, he gave a factual foundation for those statements,” Mr. Paladino said. “That type of speech has to be scripted. ” Mr. Trump has promised turnarounds in his undisciplined approach before, only to undercut his own remarks in a day or two with a Twitter blast or provocative public remarks. And on Thursday, he heads to Scotland, a business trip tied to his golf courses. The Manhattan address highlighted an intensifying level of combat between Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton, who in Raleigh, N. C. on Wednesday shot back at the Manhattan businessman for questioning her commitment to her faith just a day before. “As we Methodists like to say,” she told hundreds of supporters, pausing for effect and knowing applause, “do all the good you can for all the people you can in all the ways you can. ” Later, she suggested that Mr. Trump’s speech on Wednesday was part of an effort to distract voters from his lack of substance or policy depth. “That’s even why he’s attacking my faith,” she said. “Sigh. ” Mr. Trump sought to portray Mrs. Clinton as responsible for the tumult in the Middle East, but her campaign tried to deprive the speech of attention by announcing that she had received the endorsement of Brent Scowcroft, the national security adviser to Presidents Gerald R. Ford and George Bush. Mr. Trump explicitly blamed her for the death of United States Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens during the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on a diplomatic outpost in Libya. Mr. Trump began his speech with a focused message about jobs and the economy, lamenting a lost era in the United States of bringing change on a grand scale, and the absence of his signature boastfulness added gravitas. But the address was denounced by Mr. Trump’s critics as a patchwork of sound bites as opposed to a presentation of new ideas. Mr. Trump did little to lay out specifics of his agenda beyond attacking trade deals and immigration. And his new, more sober approach was undercut by factual inaccuracies and embellishments, as well as flimsy claims — at one point, Mr. Trump suggested that Mrs. Clinton was probably the victim of blackmail from Chinese hackers who gained access to her email account while she was the secretary of state. Mr. Trump quoted extensively from the book “Clinton Cash,” written by a Republican author who was forced to correct several inaccuracies after the book went to press. He said the United States was the “highest taxed country in the world,” which is not true. He said there might be five Supreme Court vacancies for the next president to fill, a number that has not been suggested before. Mr. Trump overtly appealed to supporters of Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont to back him instead of Mrs. Clinton, borrowing from the senator’s own words to describe her as unfit for office. “Hillary Clinton wants to be president, but she doesn’t have the temperament, or, as Bernie Sanders said, the judgment, to be president,” Mr. Trump said. “When I see the crumbling roads and bridges, or the dilapidated airports, or the factories moving overseas to Mexico or to other countries, I know these problems can all be fixed, but not by Hillary Clinton,” Mr. Trump said, adding, “Only by me. ” Mr. Trump did use the speech to sand down the edges of his past remarks about Muslims, acknowledging that some people who follow Islam are “peaceful” while never mentioning his proposed ban on Muslim immigrants. With the speech, Mr. Trump was trying to amplify Mrs. Clinton’s high negative poll ratings with voters, a majority of whom view her as dishonest, as he seeks to alter the current trajectory of the presidential campaign. He seized on controversies surrounding the Clinton Foundation and her tenure at the State Department to accuse her of “theft,” adding, “She ran the State Department like her own personal hedge fund. ” But Mr. Trump, who once lamented in an interview that the turn of the century was the last time America was “great,” provided a hopeful message, suggesting the advent of a second industrial revolution during his presidency. “Massive new factories will come roaring into our country,” he said, “breathing life and hope into our communities. ” That theme, accompanied by his attacks on free trade, is one that Mr. Trump employed to great effect in the nominating fight, and some of his aides believe it could appeal to Sanders supporters in a general election. While Mr. Sanders has yet to endorse Mrs. Clinton, he balked at the idea that his followers would support Mr. Trump. “I suspect he ain’t going to get too many of those people,” Mr. Sanders said on when asked about Mr. Trump’s courting of his supporters. “I think the vast majority of the people who voted for me understand that Donald Trump, in a dozen different ways, is literally unfit to be president of the United States. ” | 1 |
Over the weekend, The Times published this investigation into the agency that Michael T. Flynn was leading before he stepped down. Read our updated article on Mr. Flynn’s resignation. WASHINGTON — These are chaotic and anxious days inside the National Security Council, the traditional center of management for a president’s dealings with an uncertain world. Three weeks into the Trump administration, council staff members get up in the morning, read President Trump’s Twitter posts and struggle to make policy to fit them. Most are kept in the dark about what Mr. Trump tells foreign leaders in his phone calls. Some staff members have turned to encrypted communications to talk with their colleagues, after hearing that Mr. Trump’s top advisers are considering an “insider threat” program that could result in monitoring cellphones and emails for leaks. The national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, has hunkered down since investigators began looking into what, exactly, he told the Russian ambassador to the United States about the lifting of sanctions imposed in the last days of the Obama administration, and whether he misled Vice President Mike Pence about those conversations. His survival in the job may hang in the balance. Although Mr. Trump suggested to reporters aboard Air Force One on Friday that he was unaware of the latest questions swirling around Mr. Flynn’s dealings with Russia, aides said over the weekend in Florida — where Mr. Flynn accompanied the president and Japan’s prime minister, Shinzo Abe — that Mr. Trump was closely monitoring the reaction to Mr. Flynn’s conversations. There are transcripts of a conversation in at least one phone call, recorded by American intelligence agencies that wiretap foreign diplomats, which may determine Mr. Flynn’s future. Stephen Miller, the White House senior policy adviser, was circumspect on Sunday about Mr. Flynn’s future. Mr. Miller said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that possibly misleading the vice president on communications with Russia was “a sensitive matter. ” Asked if Mr. Trump still had confidence in Mr. Flynn, Mr. Miller responded, “That’s a question for the president. ” This account of life inside the council — offices made up of several hundred career civil servants who advise the president on counterterrorism, foreign policy, nuclear deterrence and other issues of war and peace — is based on conversations with more than two dozen current and former council staff members and others throughout the government. All spoke on the condition that they not be quoted by name for fear of reprisals. “It’s so far a very dysfunctional N. S. C. ,” Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said in a telephone interview. In a telephone conversation on Sunday afternoon, K. T. McFarland, the deputy national security adviser, said that early meetings of the council were brisker, tighter and more decisive than in the past, but she acknowledged that career officials were on edge. “Not only is this a new administration, but it is a different party, and Donald Trump was elected by people who wanted the status quo thrown out,” said Ms. McFarland, a veteran of the Reagan administration who most recently worked for Fox News. “I think it would be a mistake if we didn’t have consternation about the changes — most of the cabinet haven’t even been in government before. ” There is always a shakedown period for any new National Security Council, whose staff is drawn from the State Department, the Pentagon and other agencies and is largely housed opposite the White House in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. President Barack Obama replaced his first national security adviser, Gen. James Jones, a former supreme allied commander in Europe, after concluding that the general was a bad fit for the administration. The first years of President George W. Bush’s council were defined by clashes among experienced bureaucratic infighters — Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Colin Powell among them — and by decisions that often took place outside official channels. But what is happening under the Trump White House is different, officials say, and not just because of Mr. Trump’s Twitter foreign policy. (Two officials said that at one recent meeting, there was talk of feeding suggested Twitter posts to the president so the council’s staff would have greater influence.) A number of staff members who did not want to work for Mr. Trump have returned to their regular agencies, leaving a hole in the experienced bureaucracy. Many of those who remain, who see themselves as apolitical civil servants, have been disturbed by displays of overt partisanship. At an meeting about two weeks into the new administration, Ms. McFarland told the group it needed to “make America great again,” numerous staff members who were there said. New Trump appointees are carrying coffee mugs with that Trump campaign slogan into meetings with foreign counterparts, one staff member said. Nervous staff members recently met late at night at a bar a few blocks from the White House and talked about purging their social media accounts of any suggestion of sentiments. Mr. Trump’s council staff draws heavily from the military — often people who had ties to Mr. Flynn when he served as a senior military intelligence officer and then as the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency before he was forced out of the job. Many of the first ideas that have been floated have involved military, rather than diplomatic, initiatives. Last week, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis was exploring whether the Navy could intercept and board an Iranian ship to look for contraband weapons possibly headed to Houthi fighters in Yemen. The potential interdiction seemed in keeping with recent instructions from Mr. Trump, reinforced in meetings with Mr. Mattis and Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson, to crack down on Iran’s support of terrorism. But the ship was in international waters in the Arabian Sea, according to two officials. Mr. Mattis ultimately decided to set the operation aside, at least for now. White House officials said that was because news of the impending operation leaked, a threat to security that has helped fuel the move for the insider threat program. But others doubt whether there was enough basis in international law, and wondered what would happen if, in the early days of an administration that has already seen one botched military action in Yemen, American forces were suddenly in a firefight with the Iranian Navy. Ms. McFarland often draws on her television experience to make clear to officials that they need to make their points in council meetings quickly, and she signals when to wrap up, several participants said. And while Mr. Obama liked policy option papers that were three to six pages, council staff members are now being told to keep papers to a single page, with lots of graphics and maps. “The president likes maps,” one official said. Paper flow, the lifeblood of the bureaucracy, has been erratic. A senior Pentagon official saw a draft executive order on prisoner treatment only through unofficial rumors and news media leaks. He called the White House to find out if it was real and said he had concerns but was not sure if he was authorized to make suggestions. Officials said that the absence of an orderly flow of council documents, ultimately the responsibility of Mr. Flynn, explained why Mr. Mattis and Mike Pompeo, the director of the C. I. A. never saw a number of Mr. Trump’s executive orders before they were issued. One order had to be amended after it was made public, to reassure Mr. Pompeo that he had a regular seat on the council. White House officials say that was a blunder, and that the process of reviewing executive orders has been straightened out by Reince Priebus, the White House chief of staff. Still, Mr. Flynn presents additional complications beyond his conversations with the Russian ambassador. His aides say he is insecure about whether his unfettered access to Mr. Trump during the campaign is being scaled back and about a shadow council created by Stephen K. Bannon, Mr. Trump’s top strategist, who was invited to attend meetings of the “principals committee” of the council two weeks ago. For his part, Mr. Bannon sees the United States as headed toward an inevitable confrontation with two adversaries — China and Iran. Mr. Flynn finds himself in a continuing conflict with the intelligence agencies, whose work on Russia and other issues he has dismissed as subpar and politically biased. Last week, in an incident first reported by Politico, one of Mr. Flynn’s top deputies, Robin Townley, was denied the security clearance he needed before he could take up his job on the council as the senior director for Africa. It was not clear what in Mr. Townley’s past disqualified him, and in every administration some officials are denied clearances. But some saw the intelligence community striking back. Two people with direct access to the White House leadership said Mr. Flynn was surprised to learn that the State Department and Congress play a pivotal role in foreign arms sales and technology transfers. So it was a rude discovery that Mr. Trump could not simply order the Pentagon to send more weapons to Saudi Arabia — which is clamoring to have an Obama administration ban on the sale of cluster bombs and weapons lifted — or to deliver bigger weapons packages to the United Arab Emirates. Several staff members said that Mr. Flynn, who was a career Army officer, was not familiar with how to call up the National Guard in an emergency — for, say, a natural disaster like Hurricane Katrina or the detonation of a dirty bomb in an American city. At the meeting, Mr. Flynn talked about the importance of a balanced work life, taking care of family, and using the time at the council to gain experience that would help staff members in other parts of the government. At one point, the crowd was asked for a show of hands of how many expected to be working at the White House in a year. Mr. Flynn turned to Ms. McFarland and, in what seemed to be a joke, said, “I wonder if we’ll be here a year from now?” | 1 |
US impunity erodes world justice → Deficit hysteria invades the presidential campaign The smog of decades-old fiscal wars crept into the final debate—and the folks who want to cut Social Security managed to sneak in. By Todd Gitlin Posted on October 27, 2016 by Todd Gitlin
Whether you think Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton prevailed in last week’s debate—Clinton by sounding like an adult, Trump by clenching his jaw to keep from foaming at the mouth—one undisputed winner was an entity called the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget . That awkward mouthful adorns a letterhead think tank that moderator Chris Wallace cited twice as an authority on the purportedly world-shattering dangers of government overspending.
The CRFB wears the bluest of ribbons at the forefront of the parade of worthies who have been shaking their fists at a falling fiscal sky for decades. Let’s call them the Responsibles. They are a wholly owned subsidiary of the Bowles-Simpson-Peterson Establishment, which has long crusaded to cut Social Security benefits and otherwise put federal government spending in a chokehold. Erskine Bowles is the financier and onetime White House chief of staff for former President Bill Clinton, who has apparently never met a corporate board he didn’t like to join. Alan Simpson is the former Republican senator from staunchly Republican Wyoming who once likened Peter G. Peterson is a billionaire who served as President Richard M. Nixon’s Commerce secretary, a veteran of the Wall Street investment firms Lehman and Blackstone who has been beating the drums for public austerity since at least 1992. In 2010, Peterson joined Warren Buffett and Bill Gates in agreeing to give half their wealth to charity. On the receiving end of Peterson’s largesse, reputed to add up to $458 million between 2007 and 2011, was the foundation that has sported his name
If Trump were a normal Republican candidate, we would have heard a great deal more about nightmarish debt and entitlement crises during this campaign. Even as Republican presidents from Reagan to George W. Bush ran up the deficit and Bill Clinton ran surpluses, Republicans and Blue-Dog Democrats have thundered consistently on—deficit, deficit DEFICIT, brought on by tax-and-spend liberals . This was the theme song behind the so-called sequester deal of 2012
Officially, these worthies can lay claim to the label because they do feature center-right Democrats (Leon Panetta is the best known) to lend a certain sheen. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul A. Volcker enjoys widespread esteem, so when he co-authors a New York Times op-ed with Peterson, and refuses to engage the progressive counterarguments , the conventional wisdom gets one more boost and the regressiveness of their argument is obscured.
Volcker and Peterson allow that bending the medical cost curve would help Medicare in the long run, but fail to acknowledge that the long run has already arrived. Panicky Americans are left to quaver at the unwarranted expectation that Social Security will go bust before they get to collect. Volcker and Peterson ignore the promise of progressive taxation. A financial transaction (or Robin Hood ) tax does not interest them. Neither does cracking down on the corporate practice of tax evasion with shell games of offshoring profits . The appallingly regressive nature of the Social Security payroll tax does not catch their eyes. As the New America Foundation’s Steven Hill wrote in July
Calling proposals to balance the budget by further cutting the social safety net “nonpartisan” disguises the skewed nature of the center-right consensus that chokes off grown-up debate on the options. Americans are allergic to straightforward ideological disputation, so if we’re not looking closely, we regard “nonpartisanship” as a surrogate for “fairness and balance.” There’s not a progressive in the Responsible pack. But why should there be? However willing clear-headed progressives are to acknowledge that government spending is not a sure-fire solution to everything that ails the body politic—not even close—they think that a good deal of unnecessary suffering could be avoided with the judicious use of deficits. This prospect
American politics is deadlocked in no small part because of received opinion—what Paul Krugman This post was first published on BillMoyers.com
Todd Gitlin is a professor of journalism and sociology and chair of the Ph.D. program in communications at Columbia University. He is the author of 16 books , including several on journalism and politics. His next book is a novel, The Opposition. Follow him on Twitter: @toddgitlin | 1 |
BREAKING: Hillary Just LOST The Black Vote… Trump Is Going ALL THE WAY To The White House Hillary Just Lost The Black Vote To a Black Lives Matter mom’s outrage and a pharmaceutical bro’s whims. Here’s how:
Brett MacDonald | Twitter | Facebook |
NEW YORK — Today was not a great day for the Clinton campaign. Recently leaked emails from within the Clinton campaign have reached the ears of some prominent members of the Black Lives Matter community — members whom the emails were about. They are particularly upset about a series of emails that seems how to best “use” the victims of gun violence while making sure those victims were black. Understandably, some of the members have taken to speaking out against her campaign now. In a word, they’re pissed.
Erica Garner, the daughter of controversial man who died after being put in “chokehold” by a New York officer has been one of the most vocal critics. “I’m troubled by the revelation that you and this campaign actually discussed ‘using’ Eric Garner …. Why would you want to ‘use’ my dad?” she tweeted.
That was way earlier today. She hasn’t stopped since: “If you vote for her (Clinton) by default you are endorsing her and whatever she does. Remember her hiding being Negros(sic) that supported the crime bill?” If you vote for her by default you are endorsing her and whatever she does. Remember her hiding being Nergos that supported the crime bill?
— officialERICA GARNER (@es_snipes) October 27, 2016
But here’s the real kicker: “I don’t care what BLM activists endorse #Hillary … They WILL continue more of the same, they don’t care about Black lives and I got proof!” I dont care what BLM activists endorse #Hillary … They WILL continue more of the same, they dont care about Black lives and I got proof!
— officialERICA GARNER (@es_snipes) October 27, 2016
But that’s not the only setback the Clinton campaign saw today. Martin Shkreli, the controversial “pharma-bro” and top-tier troll, had a very alarming announcement for the music community: if Trump wins, he will release his previously unheard music from the Beatles, Nirvana, and, mot importantly to the black community, Wu-Tang. If Trump wins, my entire unreleased music collection, including unheard Nirvana, Beatles, and of course, Wu-Tang, comes out, for free.
— Martin Shkreli (@MartinShkreli) October 27, 2016 This article was written by Brett MacDonald. If you enjoyed this story or did not, hate mail can be left in the comments below and the author totally won’t ignore it. Compliments or questions may be sent to @ TweetBrettMac . on Twitter! VOTE FOR DONALD J. TRUMP! TOGETHER WE WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter! 5.7K SHARES | 0 |
By Luke Rudkowski In this video Luke Rudkowski covers more geopolitical moves and how the recent presidential election with Hillary Clinton is making the situation... | 0 |
“The Great British Bake Off,” a hit reality TV show that has been hailed as a cheery avatar of multicultural, modern Britain, has been torn apart in recent days over a decision by producers to leave its longtime home at the BBC for a rival network, an announcement that surprised its hosts and prompted two of them to quit on Tuesday. “We were very shocked and saddened to learn yesterday evening that Bake Off will be moving from its home,” two of its four hosts, Sue Perkins and Mel Giedroyc, said in a joint statement. “We’re not going with the dough. ” Ms. Perkins and Ms. Giedroyc are both comedians who provide witty banter that is sprinkled throughout the show. Its other two hosts, professional bakers Paul Hollywood and Mary Berry, have not announced if they intend to remain with the program when it moves to its new home, Channel 4. The Guardian reported on Monday that none of the four hosts were consulted during the negotiations. Channel 4 announced the move in a statement on Monday that said it had signed a deal with the show’s producers, Love Productions, and will begin broadcasting the show in 2017. Both companies emphasized that Britons would still be able to watch the show without cost, but they will now have to contend with commercials. The BBC is publicly funded and does not have commercials, nor does the show’s American home, PBS, where it is shown under the name “The Great British Baking Show. ” It is also available in the United States on Netflix. “We believe we’ve found the perfect new home for ‘Bake Off,’ ” Richard McKerrow, the creative director of Love Productions, said in a statement. “It’s a public service, broadcaster for whom Love Productions have produced high quality and highly successful programmes for more than a decade. ” Mr. McKerrow added that he believed Channel 4 would “protect and nurture” the show “for many years to come. ” Jay Hunt, the chief creative officer of Channel 4, said she was “delighted” that the deal would “keep this much loved show on television. ” “The Great British Bake Off” follows a group of amateur bakers as they execute increasingly complex recipes and is noteworthy among reality shows because its contestants are uniformly pleasant and likable. It is devoid of both the interpersonal drama and the cash prize that are the hallmarks of American reality TV. There are no screaming fights, just spongecake. The show has had a significant cultural impact in Britain and beyond. Its diverse, cast has been heralded as a microcosm of modern Britain as it wrestles with questions of national identity in the wake of its surprise vote in June to leave the European Union. More than 10 million viewers in the United Kingdom watched its season premiere last month, and it has spawned a fleet of spinoffs in other countries. Many viewers in Britain reacted negatively to the news that an iconic TV show was leaving the country’s iconic national broadcaster. Julia MacFarlane, a BBC producer, shared a picture on Twitter of the broadcaster’s newly redecorated cafeteria, whose walls were adorned with the image of two of the hosts of “Bake Off. ” Those viewers were not alone. The BBC made no secret of its displeasure with the move. Shortly before Channel 4 announced it had acquired the rights to the show, the BBC issued what amounted to a plea to “Bake Off” producers, saying in a statement that it had “grown and nurtured the programme over seven series and created the huge hit it is today. ” In their joint statement, Ms. Perkins and Ms. Giedroyc agreed with that sentiment. “We made no secret of our desire for the show to remain where it was,” they wrote. “The BBC nurtured the show from its infancy and helped give it its distinctive warmth and charm, growing it from an audience of two million to nearly fifteen at its peak. ” “We’ve had the most amazing time on Bake Off, and have loved seeing it rise and rise like a pair of yeasted Latvian baps,” they added. “We wish all the future bakers every success. ” In the end, the BBC said its disagreement with Love Productions came down to money. “We made a very strong offer to keep the show but we are a considerable distance apart on the money. The BBC’s resources are not infinite,” the BBC statement said. “GBBO is a quintessentially BBC programme. We hope Love Productions change their mind so that Bake Off can stay ad free on BBC One. ” It was a rare moment of drama for a show noted for its placidness. When asked via email to comment on the news that “Bake Off” had found a new home, a BBC spokesperson replied tersely, “We’re not adding anything to the statement. ” | 1 |
LU Staff
Promoting and defending liberty, as defined by the nation’s founders, requires both facts and philosophical thought, transcending all elements of our culture, from partisan politics to social issues, the workings of government, and entertainment and off-duty interests. Liberty Unyielding is committed to bringing together voices that will fuel the flame of liberty, with a dialogue that is lively and informative. Commenting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more .
You may use HTML in your comments. Feel free to review the full list of allowed HTML here . Facebook Comments Disqus Comments Trending on Liberty Unyielding | 0 |
To liberals, racism is at the heart of almost every action we take. If they think they can take something as stupid as holding a sign and make it a rallying cry for social justice warriors, they will. Of note: The person holding the “BLACKS FOR TRUMP” sign is white. pic.twitter.com/Bn3hJyiVZO
— Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) October 25, 2016
One Twitter user remarked that he had seen men holding “Nasty Women” signs while attending rallies for Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton, so he didn’t see what the big deal was. Advertisement - story continues below
Because the internet is a truly wonderful place (sometimes), black Trump supporters started flooding Twitter with photos of themselves posing with Trump signs to counter the liberal narrative that no blacks support Trump. @TPuff44 @oliverdarcy there are black people next to her, I've seen males holding "nasty women" signs at HRC rallies..not a big deal
— Jorgie (@jorgiecakes) October 25, 2016
Despite what the media might want you to think, there are a fair number of blacks who support Trump . In fact, The Gateway Pundit reported that a series of polls indicated that Trump may receive more black votes than any GOP presidential candidate since Richard Nixon in 1960.
If the liberal media actually did their job correctly, we wouldn’t even be hearing about this non-issue. Instead, because they are so desperate to avoid talking about the WikiLeaks emails that are hurting Clinton’s campaign, they will look for anything to distract the American people. Advertisement - story continues below | 0 |
Bk November 7, 2016 @ 5:00 am
I have time thinking move city. Live in northern Spain and in recent years have been tens of thousands of Moroccans. Rape of young girls is now commonplace. The schools are filled with Muslim children, many veiled women, mosques everywhere and Maghrebi youths committing crimes. I want to go to a small traditional village where not see anything Islamic. jo503 November 7, 2016 @ 4:04 am
Poor girl… Having a trouble in her country and fleeing it for having a better life… And then we ask ourselves why Europe is falling down… People are scared being called racist so they shut up or leave… Poor little girl… | 0 |
Print
[Ed. – The earth has lost millions of species throughout its history, according to current research. You couldn’t prove a catastrophic loss of wildlife since 1970 by the experience of humans; the animals are still all around us, and many of them are flourishing to the detriment of human-inhabited areas. This report sounds like the tendentious exaggeration of something that is to be expected, but is framed in alarmist terms.]
The number of wild animals living on Earth is set to fall by two-thirds by 2020, according to a new report , part of a mass extinction that is destroying the natural world upon which humanity depends.
The analysis, the most comprehensive to date, indicates that animal populations plummeted by 58% between 1970 and 2012, with losses on track to reach 67% by 2020. Researchers from WWF and the Zoological Society of London compiled the report from scientific data and found that the destruction of wild habitats, hunting and pollution were to blame.
The creatures being lost range from mountains to forests to rivers and the seas and include well-known endangered species such as elephants and gorillas and lesser known creatures such as vultures and salamanders.
The collapse of wildlife is, with climate change, the most striking sign of the Anthropocene, a proposed new geological era in which humans dominate the planet. “We are no longer a small world on a big planet. We are now a big world on a small planet, where we have reached a saturation point,” said Prof Johan Rockström, executive director of the Stockholm Resilience Centre, in a foreword for the report. | 0 |
After making waves with a dress at last Sunday night’s Grammy Awards and subsequently topping the singles chart on Amazon, singer Joy Villa revealed in an exclusive interview that she has one more goal in mind. [She wants to go to the White House and perform her rendition of Queen’s 1977 classic, “We Are The Champions,” for President Donald Trump. “That is my goal,” she said of singing that song for Trump. “That is what I would love to do. I would like to show an outpouring of support and perform for the president. And that would be just the cherry on top of everything. “ Villa continued: “And also to create a wave of support for our president for Americans for patriotism and just for tolerance and love. And just changed the narrative. In the award shows. In the Grammys. In the red carpet. Anything that pops up. So it is a more fair portrayal of actually what Americans are feeling and thinking. Because we don’t all think like how they are telling us to think. And that is my whole platform. ” Villa was speaking in an interview to air on this reporter’s Sunday night talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio,” broadcast on New York’s AM 970 The Answer and NewsTalk 990 AM. Upon arriving at the Grammys, Villa took off a white robe to reveal a red, white and blue dress emblazoned with the sparkling words “Make America Great Again” and had “Trump” on the hem. Villa’s Grammys appearance skyrocketed her album to #1 on Amazon’s digital chart. In an initial interview last week, Villa confirmed to this reporter that she is a Trump supporter and that she voted for the president. Asked why she decided to essentially troll the Grammys, Villa explained that she was “tired” of Hollywood’s treatment of Trump supporters. “I was tired of the bullying,” she said in a phone interview. “I was tired of being pushed down so that I couldn’t say my beliefs. And being fearful of losing sales. Losing fans. Losing bookings. Losing contracts and sponsorship. You know, that’s my day to day. And a lot of my friends have the same thing. And we live in Hollywood, which is supposed to be the most open viewpoint city. But the truth is there was a lot of hate and a lot of negativity and I wanted to change the storyline to love and support and unity as an American. ” Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio. ” Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook. | 0 |
One in 10 pregnant women in the continental United States with a confirmed Zika infection had a baby with brain damage or other serious birth defects, according to the most comprehensive report to date on American pregnancies during the Zika crisis. The report, published Tuesday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, also provided more evidence that the risk of birth defects was greater when women were infected in the first trimester of pregnancy. Fifteen percent of women with confirmed Zika infection in the first trimester had babies with birth defects, the report found. “It’s an important report because it’s a more complete cohort now, so we’re getting a little more information,” said Dr. Roberta DeBiasi, chief of pediatric infectious diseases for the Children’s National Health System in Washington, who was not involved in the study. “It does answer that the first trimester is the worst,” she said. “But you can’t take away from this, ‘Oh, as long as I’m not infected in the first trimester, it will be fine. ’” The study indicates that almost every state reported at least one woman with a suspected Zika infection in pregnancy. Some of the women were infected by mosquitoes in the continental United States, but all 51 cases of birth defects reported in the study were traced to infections acquired in one of 16 countries or territories in Latin America or the Caribbean, including Puerto Rico. “The one thing that didn’t exactly surprise me, but sobers me, is that these reports come in from 44 states,” said Dr. Anne Schuchat, acting director of the C. D. C. “This isn’t something that only the docs in Florida need to worry about clinicians in every state need to know. ” The report found that babies with birth defects were about as likely to be born to infected women who had no Zika symptoms as they were to women with symptoms, like rash or fever. In general, 80 percent of Zika infections do not produce symptoms. But the report did not resolve the question of whether symptomatic infection in pregnancy is more dangerous to a fetus than asymptomatic infection, experts said. That is because researchers may not have been aware of all the asymptomatic Zika cases: Some women without symptoms may not have gotten tested for Zika, and consequently, their cases would not be reported. C. D. C. officials also pointed to another possible shortcoming in the data: Despite a C. D. C. recommendation that brain scans be performed on all babies born to women with possible Zika infection, only 25 percent of the babies in the study had brain imaging, so the actual number of impaired infants could be higher. “I think it is very likely that we are underestimating the birth defects that follow Zika in pregnancy,” Dr. Schuchat said. “Some babies that are born looking pretty much O. K. are eventually diagnosed with some effects of congenital Zika syndrome. ” The report analyzed 1, 297 pregnancies reported from Jan. 15 through Dec. 27, 2016, in the 50 states and Washington, D. C. Of those, 972 with laboratory evidence of possible Zika infection were considered “completed,” resulting in 895 live births and 77 losses, a designation that could include stillbirths, miscarriages and abortions. Birth defects, ranging from the condition of abnormally small heads, known as microcephaly, to neural tube defects and eye malformations, occurred in 5 percent, or 51, of those pregnancies, including 45 live births. Of the 250 cases where the presence of a Zika infection was confirmed with laboratory testing, 10 percent, or 24 pregnancies, resulted in birth defects, the report said. All but eight of the 51 cases involved severe brain abnormalities such as microcephaly the others had impairments that included other brain malformations and dysfunction in the central nervous system. Fourteen of the pregnancies were traced to infection in the first trimester, while 28 could have been infected during any trimester. The rest were missing information on the timing of infection. Dr. Schuchat emphasized the report’s finding that only “one out of four babies who was born had gotten the type of neuroimaging that we recommend. ” Dr. DeBiasi said that even when her hospital’s Zika program had detected probable infection in pregnant women and urged the hospitals where they planned to deliver to perform brain scans, that had sometimes not occurred. “Even if they look 100 percent beautiful at birth, they all need to get an ultrasound of the head,” Dr. DeBiasi said. Since only 25 percent of babies in the report had brain scans, “it’s possible that some of the other 75 percent have problems, too. ” | 1 |
Putin Says He Can Work With New Trump Government November 09, 2016 Putin Says He Can Work With New Trump Government
Russian President Vladimir Putin congratulated businessman Donald Trump on his victory in the U.S. presidential election in a telegram on Wednesday, the Kremlin said.
"Putin expressed hope for joint work to restore Russian-American relations from their state of crisis, and also to address pressing international issues and search for effective responses to challenges concerning global security," the Kremlin said in a statement.
Putin also said he was sure a constructive dialogue between Moscow and Washington would serve the interests of both countries, the Kremlin said. | 0 |
Trump Will Beat Hillary With These Tricks Find out how Donald Trump will defeat Hillary Clinton Infowars Nightly News - October 28, 2016 Comments
Luciferian leftist darling Saul Alinsky has influenced everyone from Barack Obama to Hillary Clinton with his Marxist handbook, Rules For Radicals.
Well, the left has finally gotten a taste of its own medicine with Donald Trump, who understands the winner in politics is usually whoever’s on offense. NEWSLETTER SIGN UP Get the latest breaking news & specials from Alex Jones and the Infowars Crew. Related Articles Download on your mobile device now for free. Today on the Show Get the latest breaking news & specials from Alex Jones and the Infowars crew. From the store Featured Videos FEATURED VIDEOS A Vote For Hillary is a Vote For World War 3 - See the rest on the Alex Jones YouTube channel . The Most Offensive Halloween EVER! - See the rest on the Alex Jones YouTube channel . ILLUSTRATION How much will your healthcare premiums rise in 2017? >25% © 2016 Infowars.com is a Free Speech Systems, LLC Company. All rights reserved. Digital Millennium Copyright Act Notice. 34.95 22.46 Flip the switch and supercharge your state of mind with Brain Force the next generation of neural activation from Infowars Life. http://www.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/brainforce-25-200-e1476824046577.jpg http://www.infowarsstore.com/health-and-wellness/infowars-life/brain-force.html?ims=tzrwu&utm_campaign=Infowars+Placement&utm_source=Infowars.com&utm_medium=Widget&utm_content=Brain+Force http://www.infowarsstore.com/health-and-wellness/infowars-life/brain-force.html?ims=tzrwu&utm_campaign=Infowars+Placement&utm_source=Infowars.com&utm_medium=Widget&utm_content=Brain+Force Brain Force – 25% OFF 34.95 22.46 Flip the switch and supercharge your state of mind with Brain Force the next generation of neural activation from Infowars Life. http://www.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/brainforce-25-200-e1476824046577.jpg http://www.infowarsstore.com/health-and-wellness/infowars-life/brain-force.html?ims=tzrwu&utm_campaign=Infowars+Placement&utm_source=Infowars.com&utm_medium=Widget&utm_content=Brain+Force http://www.infowarsstore.com/health-and-wellness/infowars-life/brain-force.html?ims=tzrwu&utm_campaign=Infowars+Placement&utm_source=Infowars.com&utm_medium=Widget&utm_content=Brain+Force Brain Force – 25% OFF 34.95 22.46 Flip the switch and supercharge your state of mind with Brain Force the next generation of neural activation from Infowars Life. http://www.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/brainforce-25-200-e1476824046577.jpg http://www.infowarsstore.com/health-and-wellness/infowars-life/brain-force.html?ims=tzrwu&utm_campaign=Infowars+Placement&utm_source=Infowars.com&utm_medium=Widget&utm_content=Brain+Force http://www.infowarsstore.com/health-and-wellness/infowars-life/brain-force.html?ims=tzrwu&utm_campaign=Infowars+Placement&utm_source=Infowars.com&utm_medium=Widget&utm_content=Brain+Force Brain Force – 25% OFF 34.95 22.46 Flip the switch and supercharge your state of mind with Brain Force the next generation of neural activation from Infowars Life. http://www.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/brainforce-25-200-e1476824046577.jpg http://www.infowarsstore.com/health-and-wellness/infowars-life/brain-force.html?ims=tzrwu&utm_campaign=Infowars+Placement&utm_source=Infowars.com&utm_medium=Widget&utm_content=Brain+Force http://www.infowarsstore.com/health-and-wellness/infowars-life/brain-force.html?ims=tzrwu&utm_campaign=Infowars+Placement&utm_source=Infowars.com&utm_medium=Widget&utm_content=Brain+Force Brain Force – 25% OFF 34.95 22.46 Flip the switch and supercharge your state of mind with Brain Force the next generation of neural activation from Infowars Life. http://www.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/brainforce-25-200-e1476824046577.jpg http://www.infowarsstore.com/health-and-wellness/infowars-life/brain-force.html?ims=tzrwu&utm_campaign=Infowars+Placement&utm_source=Infowars.com&utm_medium=Widget&utm_content=Brain+Force http://www.infowarsstore.com/health-and-wellness/infowars-life/brain-force.html?ims=tzrwu&utm_campaign=Infowars+Placement&utm_source=Infowars.com&utm_medium=Widget&utm_content=Brain+Force Brain Force – 25% OFF 34.95 22.46 Flip the switch and supercharge your state of mind with Brain Force the next generation of neural activation from Infowars Life. http://www.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/brainforce-25-200-e1476824046577.jpg http://www.infowarsstore.com/health-and-wellness/infowars-life/brain-force.html?ims=tzrwu&utm_campaign=Infowars+Placement&utm_source=Infowars.com&utm_medium=Widget&utm_content=Brain+Force http://www.infowarsstore.com/health-and-wellness/infowars-life/brain-force.html?ims=tzrwu&utm_campaign=Infowars+Placement&utm_source=Infowars.com&utm_medium=Widget&utm_content=Brain+Force | 0 |
WASHINGTON — Congressional Republicans, donning “Make America Great Again” hats on Tuesday, celebrated their impending control of government, sidestepping questions about disarray in Donald J. Trump’s transition efforts while Democrats struggled to unify behind their leadership after a brutal election defeat. “Welcome to the dawn of a new unified Republican government,” Speaker Paul D. Ryan said at a news conference Tuesday after a meeting with House Republicans. “This will be a government focused on turning Trump’s victory into real progress for the American people. ” Mr. Ryan, whose renomination was unanimous, deflected questions about Mr. Trump’s selection of Stephen K. Bannon, the former chairman of Breitbart News with ties to nationalists, as his chief strategist, and questions about the role of Mr. Trump’s children in the new administration. Mr. Trump “is so successful because he’s surrounded himself with good people,” Mr. Ryan said. As for Mr. Bannon, who has relentlessly attacked Mr. Ryan, he said, smiling stiffly, “I’m not looking backward. ” Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, who has led House Democrats since 2003, found herself facing unexpected pushback in her own efforts. She postponed a vote that had been scheduled for Thursday until Nov. 30, yielding to the demands of members who asked for more time to reassess. The delay is likely to favor Ms. Pelosi, who will have time to remind members of the money she has raised for them over the years and consolidate her support, which runs deep, especially among the women in her caucus. But the building unease with the status quo in their ranks was clear on Tuesday, members said. Before a tense meeting with members, some had urged Representative Tim Ryan of Ohio, 43, to challenge Ms. Pelosi, 76. He has not yet decided whether to run against her. Representative Marcy Kaptur, an Ohio Democrat who once challenged Ms. Pelosi, said she had previously signed a letter expressing support for her but noted that she would be willing to take a second look at someone from the Rust Belt, where Hillary Clinton lost in what had been Democratic strongholds in presidential elections. “I ran against her for this very reason, that our region needed more voice,” Ms. Kaptur said. Ms. Pelosi called a meeting with other party leaders Tuesday afternoon, and several senior Democrats said there was a jittery feeling in her camp. “We just got a shellacking last Tuesday,” said Representative G. K. Butterfield, Democrat of North Carolina and the chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus. “We got an unexpected defeat, and we’ve got to recalibrate and decide how we go forward. ” Democrats were especially stung by Mrs. Clinton’s loss among voters. “We’re the party of Franklin Roosevelt,” said Representative Brendan Boyle of Pennsylvania. “We should not be struggling as a party the way we are with voters. And the fact that we are signals that we need to talk. ” The battle reflects a larger debate within the Democratic Party — being played out in its choice for the next chairman of the Democratic National Committee — pitting those who want to rebuild the base of President Obama’s support among newer and more diverse voters and those who want to court anew the party’s white voters, especially in the Midwest. Among Republicans, there was ambiguity of a different sort as they struggled to determine who was in charge of Mr. Trump’s policy agenda. For now, it appears that Vice Mike Pence is making the calls to Capitol Hill. “Nobody really knows,” former Speaker John Boehner said of Mr. Trump’s agenda in an interview with CNBC. He added, “He is barely a Republican. He could barely be a Democrat as well. Nobody really knows where he is going. ” Other Republicans were generally positive about the prospects of a government in their full control, in spite of the early signs of a bumpy transition. Most Republicans said they knew nothing about Mr. Bannon and had little knowledge of his background. “I really have only met him once,” said Representative Peter King, Republican of New York. “People I’ve spoken to in the campaign have a high regard for him. That’s really all I know. ” There were also clear signs that not all of Mr. Trump’s appointments and legislative notions would get unanimous support from his party. Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, spoke out against the possibilities of either Rudolph W. Giuliani or John Bolton as nominees for secretary of state. “Bolton is a longtime member of the failed Washington elite that Trump vowed to oppose, hellbent on repeating virtually every foreign policy mistake the U. S. has made in the last 15 years,” Mr. Paul wrote in an editorial. Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, said he supported much of Mr. Trump’s agenda, but was also critical of his views on Russia and many of his previous policy proposals on immigration. “I will not vote for a bill that treats a grandmother and a drug dealer the same,” Mr. Graham said. | 1 |
Senators can help reduce the continuing bloodshed in Chicago by confirming Sen. Jeff Sessions as the new Attorney General, says executive director Chris Cox. [The political response to this situation has been immoral. But help is on the way with a new AG. #confirmsessions. https: . — Chris Cox (@nracwc) December 31, 2016, Sen. Jeff Sessions’ nomination hearing is expected to begin next week, amid fierce opposition from progressive groups. Breitbart News previously reported that Chicago ended 2016 with nearly 800 homicides for the year. The Chicago Tribune reports that there were a total of 779 homicides between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2016, an increase of nearly 300 homicides over 2015 figures. And there were a 4, 385 shootings — fatal and combined — in Chicago during 2016. The response to this carnage has been business as usual. The Tribune summed up the response to Chicago’s rise in homicides by suggesting there are “few answers” for curtailing the violence. It has long been known that one of the biggest problems in the status quo response to Chicago gun crime is the lackadaisical approach to prosecuting individuals who violate federal gun laws in the city. The NRA made this very point in Amercia’s 1st Freedom in August 2015: In 2014 in Chicago, over 2, 500 people were shot — nearly 400 of them fatally — and police seized more than 6, 252 guns. Yet out of those 6, 252 guns seized, Fardon’s federal prosecutors saw fit to pursue just 62 weapons prosecutions. In other words, for every 100 guns police seized, federal prosecutors made just one prosecution. With nearly 800 homicides in Chicago last year, the ’s Cox labels the lackluster response to death upon death as “immoral” and posits Sessions’ confirmation as the means to reverse the lack of prosecutions for gun law violations. 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. | 0 |
Report Copyright Violation Hey Black Americans - Hispanics will out number you soon thanks to Hillary Hispanics are now an equal percentage of the population to blacks and in the next 8 years Hispanics will outnumber blacks and your vote wont matter to the Democrats.More blacks die in the womb thanks to Hillary and the DNC and BLACKS are voting for it..."Frankly I had thought that at that time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of." 7/2/09 Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Page 1 | 0 |
(Member since Aug 20, 2011), 16 fans, 4 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1564 comments Reply to Arlan Ebel:
I liked his music, and I liked him generally, I guess you could say I was a fan, until I actually met him and interacted with the guy on a personal basis. After seeing his true face revealed, I liked him, not at all.
Like the Nobel itself, which revealed its true face when they gave the peace prize to Obama. They're both dead to me now. OneZombiePoet, and OneEmpiricalSnot, trying to reconcile the carnage they have sneezed into the world, by paying prizes to "talented" individuals. I don't buy it.
Reminds me of those cheap online site come ons, asking for content submissions or feedback, then publishing them every one, but paying for none. Sometimes taking it all, or offering a single 'prize' by lottery, or just an ego trip of imagined 'fame'.
It's all so cheap and lurid, where's the integrity? Submitted on Saturday, Oct 29, 2016 at 12:28:29 AM | 0 |
Wikileaks has given the public plenty to review in the past month. Having released the emails of Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair, John Podesta, practically everyday, many astounding... | 0 |
There’s a forgotten scene in the third season of “The Sopranos” when the wives of the show’s mob crew, sitting inside a local Italian restaurant, turn to the delicate subject of Hillary Clinton, Monica Lewinsky, infidelity and marriage. It’s 2001 and Mrs. Clinton is headed to the Senate. The women assembled around the table, all of whom know their husbands are unfaithful, are simultaneously disgusted by Mrs. Clinton and in awe of her. “I can’t stand that woman,” says Angie Bonpensiero. “I don’t know,” says Rosalie Aprile. “Maybe we could all take a page from her book. ” It’s left to the boss’s wife, Carmela Soprano to sort through her own messy emotions. She veers from instinctive revulsion (“to be humiliated in public then walk around smiling all the time”) to grudging admiration for how a woman not unlike herself, overshadowed by a cheating spouse, has emerged as powerful, independent figure in her own right. “She’s a role model for all of us,” Mrs. Soprano says on second thought, as the wives nod in agreement. In the latest episode of The we examine a potent electoral force we rarely talk about when we talk about the campaign: pop culture. Both Mrs. Clinton and Donald J. Trump are stars in their own right, who have spawned — and inspired — television characters and shows from “The Apprentice” (Mr. Trump) to the “The Good Wife” (Mrs. Clinton). We talk to the chief television critic at The New York Times, James Poniewozik, about how television and film characters past and present inform our views of both candidates — or have been created in the candidates’ images. “They are both characters in pop culture, characters in mass media, whose stories we have literally been hearing for decades,” Mr. Poniewozik says of the candidates. “Usually in an election, there’s some narrative of some new character you haven’t encountered before: Barack Obama in 2008, George W. Bush in 2000. Here, it’s two American television serials having a crossover episode. ” So if this campaign is a crossover television event, how would Mr. Poniewozik, as a TV critic, review the show? “I think the writers have really taken it over the top. It’s like watching ‘Scandal’ in its eighth season where you just feel that they have exhausted every possible trick and they’re emptying their notebooks at you. ” Would you commit to another season? “I think I’d like to see it recast. ” And we chat with Susan Dominus, of The Times Magazine, about the surprising ways that gender is playing out in pop cultural depictions of Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton in this campaign, a topic she is studying closely this year. “If we are going to extend gender stereotypes all the way to their worst place, it’s celebrity, lightweight — that reads as in some ways feminine and inconsequential or not perceived as a real threat,” Ms. Dominus says. And in that sense, Mr. Trump, in some ways, is the more feminized figure. “For all of his bluster, when was the last time that people were this obsessed with a candidate’s hair?” Ms. Dominus asks. “It was Hillary in 2008!” From a desktop or laptop, you can listen by pressing play on the button above. Or if you’re on a mobile device, the instructions below will help you find and subscribe to the series. On your iPhone or iPad: 1. Open your podcast app. It’s a app called “Podcasts” with a purple icon. (This link may help.) 2. Search for the series. Tap on the “search” magnifying glass icon at the bottom of the screen, type in “The ” and select it from the list of results. 3. Subscribe. Once on the series page, tap on the “subscribe” button to have new episodes sent to your phone free. You may want to adjust your notifications to be alerted when a new episode arrives. 4. Or just sample. If you would rather listen to an episode or two before deciding to subscribe, tap on the episode title from the list on the series page. If you have an internet connection, you’ll be able to stream the episode. On your Android phone or tablet: 1. Open your podcast app. It’s a app called “Play Music” with an icon. (This link may help.) 2. Search for the series. Click on the magnifying glass icon at the top of the screen, search for the name of the series and select it from the list of results. You may have to scroll down to find the “Podcasts” search results. 3. Subscribe. Once on the series page, click on the word “subscribe” to have new episodes sent to your phone free. 4. Or just sample. If you would rather listen to an episode or two before deciding to subscribe, click on the episode title from the list on the series page. If you have an internet connection, you’ll be able to stream the episode. | 1 |
Analysts had grave predictions for the future of Twitter following the release of the company’s 4th quarter earnings Thursday. [Speaking to Bloomberg, Brian Wieser, an analyst at Pivotal Research Group, discussed Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and the division of his time between Twitter and his other company Square. “The fact that they’ve tolerated having a shared CEO is remarkable given the situation they’re in,” he said, “Unfortunately, it’s a situation of investor indifference — everyone is used to Twitter’s troubles by now. ” The company’s earnings for the fourth quarter were $717 million, falling short of Wall Street predictions of $740 million. Twitter’s sales growth of 1% slowed dramatically from the 48% gain for the same quarter last year. Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Jitendra Waral believes this will be a big issue for Twitter in the coming year: “Sales growth recovery for Twitter will be very challenging in 2017. Google and Facebook results show robust ad environment in the fourth quarter. ” Waral stated that Twitter’s sales growth “is showing their strategies are not working. ” Twitter has been relying on live video partnerships with larger brands such as Dick Clark Productions in recent months in an attempt to attract more users to their platform, a move that hasn’t seemed to yield much success. The company also introduced new video ad monetization features, allowing to be played before videos. However, advertising revenue decreased from the year previously, with the company reporting revenue of $638 million. James Cakmak, an analyst at Monness Crespi Hardt Co. believes that although Twitter has carved out a niche in the political world, “It’s still in an identity crisis. People that use Twitter get it, the world conceptually gets it, but your average potential user doesn’t. ” Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, however, currently has no plans to step down as CEO of Square, saying, “This focus, and this team, allows me and gives me a lot of confidence I can continue to focus on the meaningful things at both companies and we have the right prioritization in front of us. ” “Late last year, we really flattened the org … so I could be closer to the product,” he said. “Now we’ve spent a year going through and making sure we reset the foundation on what we’re executing and what our priorities are, we have a lot more confidence that we can move a lot faster on bigger things. ” Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolan or email him at lnolan@breitbart. com. | 0 |
Home / Badge Abuse / “Isolated Incident” Every Police Dept in America Failed to Meet Minimum Standard for Use of Force “Isolated Incident” Every Police Dept in America Failed to Meet Minimum Standard for Use of Force Jay Syrmopoulos June 19, 2015 1 Comment
(TFTP) — In a blistering rebuke of the current state of policing in the United States, a report issued by Amnesty International USA stated that all 50 U.S. states failed to meet international standards on use of deadly force by law enforcement officers.
The stunning report lays bare the fact that U.S. police are killing without any formal obligation to respect or preserve human life.
In an interview with The Guardian , Amnesty USA executive director Steven Hawkins said the report’s findings revealed a “shocking lack of fundamental respect for the sanctity of human life.”
“While law enforcement in the United States is given the authority to use lethal force, there is no equal obligation to respect and preserve human life. It’s shocking that while we give law enforcement this extraordinary power, so many states either have no regulation on their books or nothing that complies with international standards,” Hawkins said.
With recent protests in Baltimore and Ferguson, over police killings, there has been an ever-growing spotlight being shined on the culture of policing.
Amnesty analyzed each of the 50 U.S state’s statutes regarding use of lethal force. They then compared them against the United Nations accepted principles of only using lethal force “in order to protect life” in “unavoidable” instances after first attempting to utilize “less extreme means.”
UN guidelines go on to state that officers should identify themselves and give a clear warning of the intent to use deadly force.
The report found that none of the 50 states met these international standards for using lethal force, stating:
“None of the laws establish the requirement that lethal force may only be used as a last resort with non-violent means and less harmful means to be tried first. The vast majority of laws do not require officers to give a warning of their intent to use firearms.”
The U.S. constitutional standard is less stringent, as set by a 1985 Supreme Court case Tennesse v Garner. The court held that an officer may use deadly force to prevent a suspect from escaping if “the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.”
Even so, 13 U.S. states failed to meet that constitutional standard, instead choosing to use extremely vague language in their statutes, which can be manipulated to allow for force use well beyond accepted standards. For example, North Dakota allows for deadly force against “an individual who has committed or attempted to commit a felony involving violence,” without ever defining what level of violence would warrant lethal force.
Nine states have absolutely no statutes on the books regarding officer use of lethal force– Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Ohio, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming – as well as Washington D.C., meaning that inevitably police investigate themselves based on some arbitrary standard.
The analysis found that only eight states had a requirement of a verbal warning before engaging in the use of deadly force. And in nine states, police can legally use lethal force during a time of rioting. In Pennsylvania, for example, a statute on use of force declares use of lethal force legitimate if “necessary to suppress a riot or mutiny after the rioters or mutineers have been ordered to disperse.”
Amnesty’s report states that in following international standards, all fatal incidents should be mandatorily reported and impartially investigated. The U.S. does no such thing, as the FBI runs a completely voluntary database.
According The Guardian:
The report also suggests taking action at all levels of government, making recommendations to the president, Congress and the US justice department, along with state legislatures and individual law enforcement departments. Amnesty suggests that laws be brought into compliance with international standards at every level, and that the justice department oversee a national commission “to examine and produce recommendations on policing issues, including a nationwide review of police use of lethal force laws … as well as a thorough review and reform of oversight and accountability mechanisms”.
Hawkins went on to say that he expects pushback from the police and their unions, but stated, “with so much attention on law enforcement and its use of lethal force within the US, in the next legislative session this report will produce some energy for change.”
The push for police accountability is now reaching a fever pitch in the U.S., as the current policing paradigm is unsustainable. With so many great ideas for systemic reform on the table, and so many great minds pushing for accountability, it seems only a matter of time before the current “good ole boy” power structure comes crumbling down.
Jay Syrmopoulos is an investigative journalist, free thinker, researcher, and ardent opponent of authoritarianism. He is currently a graduate student at University of Denver pursuing a masters in Global Affairs. Jay’s work has previously been published on BenSwann.com and WeAreChange.org. You can follow him on Twitter @sirmetropolis, on Facebook at Sir Metropolis and now on tsu . Share Google + Isaid Dilligaf
Defund these assholes and take their toys away…NOv is coming Police…YOU are about to be outnumbered and outgunned for the first time in your pussy lives, you are going to really earn your money….America is about to grind you up and spit your filthy ass out for all your abuses against us…Time to pay the piper cowards… Social | 1 |
With spring in the Texas air, some Baylor University students were navigating the social challenges of another party, chatting and dancing while trying not to spill their drinks. Amid the swirl, a petite freshman named Jasmin Hernandez lost sight of her friends. Then Tevin Elliott, a Baylor football player dating someone she knew, appeared. Earlier he had been pouring hard liquor for Ms. Hernandez and other underage students now he was insisting that her friends had gone outside. When Ms. Hernandez expressed doubts, she said, he began pulling her by the wrist toward the door, telling her they had gone outside. But the farther they strayed into the darkness, the more she argued that her friends were back at the party, and that they should return. Without a word, she later said in a lawsuit, the linebacker picked up the freshman and made his violent intentions clear. Panicking, Ms. Hernandez told him that she was sorry if she gave him the wrong impression that they should just go back to the house and forget this ever happened that she was, in fact, gay. He acted as though he did not hear. When Mr. Elliott finished raping her behind a secluded shed, an angry Ms. Hernandez used an expletive in demanding her shirt back. “He tossed it over to me,” she later recalled. “And that was the end of the interaction. ” Ms. Hernandez, who has appeared on ESPN and who spoke to The Times for this article, assumed that her rape was a horrible but isolated incident at Baylor, a private university of nearly 17, 000 students that takes pride in its Baptist foundation. And she wasn’t alone in believing that: Even after Mr. Elliott was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in 2014, Baylor officials said they considered him to be a solitary bad actor preying on a campus of goodness. As three leading members of Baylor’s Board of Regents later described their sense of him at the time: “an isolated case. ” Mr. Elliott has subsequently been accused of sexually assaulting several other women, and since the rape of Ms. Hernandez in 2012 the allegations of sexual assault by Baylor football players have multiplied, causing incalculable damage to the university’s reputation and leading to resignations and firings, including those of the president, the football coach and the athletic director. The crisis has left alumni apoplectic, students outraged, donors turning on one another, and the Board of Regents bracing for the next blow. Lawsuits clutter the courts, with more than a dozen women, including Ms. Hernandez, claiming that they had been assaulted amid a campus culture that put them at risk. Two months ago, John Clune, a Colorado lawyer who specializes in cases of campus assault and who had already resolved three other women’s claims against Baylor, filed a lawsuit on behalf of an alleged victim that sought, in part, to quantify the crisis. It made the startling claim that at least 52 rapes by at least 31 players had occurred from 2011 through 2014 — a period when the Baylor football program became a dominant force in the highly competitive Big 12 Conference. Baylor’s interim president has said in a statement that he cannot confirm Mr. Clune’s numbers, which followed other troubling figures that Baylor’s board gave to The Wall Street Journal in October: assaults on 17 women by 19 players, including four gang rapes. Collectively, the cases have become a cautionary parable for college athletics, one in which a Christian university seemed to lose sight of its core values in pursuit of football glory and protected gridiron heroes who preyed on women. In a statement to The New York Times on Monday, Baylor officials said the university was committed to “doing the right thing” — through repeated apologies and making 105 recommended changes to its policies and structure. “Our mission statement calls for a caring community based on Christian principles, and any act of sexual violence is inimical to these standards,” the statement said. Even so, the scandal has not sat well in Texas. Last week, the Texas Rangers, the statewide law enforcement agency, confirmed that it had begun a preliminary investigation into Baylor. That announcement came days after a state representative, Roland Gutierrez of San Antonio, filed a resolution urging Gov. Greg Abbott to have the Rangers investigate “the obstruction of justice surrounding the sexual assault of young female students at Baylor University. ” And this week, a federal judge rejected Baylor’s request to throw out a lawsuit filed against the university by 10 women who say they were sexually assaulted while they were students. Judge Robert L. Pitman of Federal District Court ruled that each plaintiff had “plausibly alleged that Baylor was deliberately indifferent to her report( s) of sexual assault, depriving her of educational opportunities to which she was entitled. ” For most of her freshman year, Ms. Hernandez was passionate about the Baylor green and gold. A native of Southern California, she came to the university’s verdant campus in Waco to study nursing on an academic scholarship. She loved her teachers and friends, and enjoyed cheering on the ascendant football team — a sudden powerhouse, thanks in part to the likes of her future attacker, Mr. Elliott. She arrived at a time of athletic excellence so bountiful that the school year came to be known as the Year of the Bear. The football team had its first Heisman Trophy winner in the quarterback Robert Griffin III the men’s basketball team reached the N. C. A. A. tournament’s round of eight for the second time in three years and the women’s team went for the national championship. This run of success was all the more extraordinary for what had come before: decades of mediocrity in major sports, with the lows far outnumbering the highs. Then, before the 2008 season, the university hired Art Briles as its football coach. And things changed. Mr. Briles was Texas to the core — a quarterback for his father at Rule High School, a wide receiver at the University of Houston and a coach at five Texas high schools before he entered the college ranks. Along the way, he devised an explosive offensive system that seemed to attack the end zone on every snap. He inherited a Baylor program that had not had a winning season since 1995. What’s more, schools like Baylor, then a choice for top recruits in one of the country’s most states, rarely experience quick turnarounds. But the new coach pulled it off by his third year, the Bears were winning more than they lost. The university and its alumni responded, reportedly paying the charismatic Mr. Briles one of the highest salaries in college sports and embarking upon a campaign that led to the $266 million construction of McLane Stadium — a breathtaking football cathedral that abuts the Brazos River and Interstate 35. Just before the 2014 season, Mr. Briles marveled at the visual and emotional power of the stadium, saying, “Show me something better. ” Mr. Briles imagined the impression the sight would leave on an child looking out the window of a passing car. “They’re going to say, ‘Momma or Grandmother, man, look at that place,’” he said. “‘That place is beautiful. Where is that?’ And she’s going to say, ‘Baylor.’ “And then so for the rest of their lives they’re going to associate Baylor with excellence. And that’s hard to come by and the only way to get it is through the production of image. “So our image is good. ” The promise of McLane — named after Drayton McLane Jr. Class of ’58, who made his fortune with a business — helped stimulate capital campaigns that focused on a new scholarship fund and a new campus for the business school. “Success in athletics means that all boats rise,” Kenneth W. Starr, then the university’s president, told The Times in 2014. Mr. Starr had arrived at Baylor in 2010 with a formidable résumé and a clear vision. A former solicitor general, federal judge, law school dean and independent counsel — the Javert in the President Bill Clinton sex scandal — he promised an administrative stability that the university had lacked in recent years. He raised Baylor’s academic profile and presided over ambitious efforts, all while endearing himself to undergraduates. He was the avuncular “Judge Starr,” leading freshmen on a pregame sprint across the field to invigorate the crowd at each home game. The dynamic pairing of Mr. Starr and Mr. Briles signaled to students and alumni alike that, with the twinning of their respective strengths, Baylor was going places. Along the way, the university’s football players appeared on giant posters, on computer screen savers — just about anywhere you looked on campus. A bronze statue of Mr. Griffin, midthrow, greeted visitors to McLane Stadium when it opened in 2014. The message was clear: Our heroes. But myriad court cases suggest that as the boats of Baylor rose, to use Mr. Starr’s analogy, standards fell overboard. Baylor and its football program, it seemed, began to value talent above all else. Baylor’s football team signed up transfers with disciplinary issues in their pasts. There was Shawn Oakman, for example, a huge defensive end dismissed from Penn State’s team for stealing a sandwich and grabbing a female store clerk by the wrist. And Sam Ukwuachu, a former Freshman defensive end kicked off Boise State’s team for reasons that were left publicly unclear at the time his later testified that he had assaulted her. (Mr. Briles has said that he was unaware of the assault accusation.) According to the lawsuit filed by Mr. Clune, the lawyer from Colorado, the football staff at the Baptist institution employed a “‘Show em a good time’ policy,” in which current players offered alcohol and drugs to high school prospects visiting the campus and introduced them to female students. The lawsuit also alleged that the university unofficially used its hostess program, the Baylor Bruins, to further entice recruits. It said that “attractive female students” in the Bruins were expected to ensure that recruits had a good time on campus by, for example, engaging “in sexual acts with the recruits to help secure the recruits’ commitment to Baylor. ” The university’s interim president, David E. Garland, has called these allegations “disappointing and horrifying,” and has said that “none of the activities described in the filing align with our past or current institutional recruiting practices. ” A particularly notorious allegation in the lawsuit is that Kendal Briles, a former assistant coach and Art Briles’s son, enticed one recruit by saying: “Do you like white women? Because we have a lot of them at Baylor and they LOVE football players. ” The younger Mr. Briles declined to comment through a spokeswoman for his current employer, Florida Atlantic University. As for the assault accusations, Baylor’s Board of Regents later concluded that the football program’s coaches and staff “reinforced an overall perception that football was above the rules, and that there was no culture of accountability for misconduct. ” Baylor, they wrote, “failed to take sufficient action to identify, eliminate, prevent and address a potential hostile environment in individual cases. ” As Jasmin Hernandez would learn. Visiting the Baylor campus in the spring of 2011, Ms. Hernandez found the thrill of a rising university to be contagious. Everyone “seemed really excited to be there,” she recalled, the sense being “If you go here, there are good things ahead. ” Nothing embodied that excitement as much as the football team. Ms. Hernandez attended several games her freshman year, and participated in some rituals, such as wearing a football jersey with the number of her graduation year and cheering on the players and coaches as they took the field. “Really cool,” she recalled. But after Ms. Hernandez was raped, she would allege in a lawsuit filed last year, she encountered an indifference on campus — even a callousness — that baffled and wounded her. Her friends at the party immediately took her to a nearby hospital, where she recounted the assault for a Waco police officer. Her worried mother arrived from California and, almost immediately, asked the university’s counseling center to provide her daughter with mental health services. But, the lawsuit claimed, the counseling center was too busy to see her daughter — and so was the student health center. “I went in, told them I’d been sexually assaulted by another student, and asked if there was someone I could talk to, like a medical doctor,” Ms. Hernandez said. “They told me all their appointments through the end of the semester were taken. I went back several times. Every time they denied me — told me there was nothing they could do. ” The academic services department also said there was nothing it could do, the lawsuit claimed. No accommodations could be granted, the Hernandezes were told. According to the lawsuit, Ms. Hernandez’s mother reached out to Mr. Briles and was told by his secretary that his office had heard of the alleged rape by one of his budding stars and was looking into it. But Mr. Briles did not return several calls from Ms. Hernandez’s father, the lawsuit claimed, adding that the university “did not take any action whatsoever to investigate. ” Baylor has disputed Ms. Hernandez’s narrative in a court filing, but it did not respond to questions seeking elaboration. University officials have said in another court filing that Ms. Hernandez was Mr. Elliott’s fifth alleged assault victim at Baylor — her lawsuit said she was the sixth who had reported a sexual assault to Baylor — and that Mr. Briles was indeed apprised of her alleged assault. In addition, they said, only extraordinary interventions by Mr. Starr and Mr. Briles kept Mr. Elliott from suspension or worse because of academic misconduct. Mr. Briles, in a written statement released last week, said that he “did not cover up any sexual violence” and “had no contact with anyone that claimed to be a victim of sexual or domestic assault,” and that whenever alerted of an alleged assault, he would send the clear message that “the alleged victim should go to the police. ” All the while, Ms. Hernandez was determined to follow through with her Baylor career. But she could not. “I was extremely emotionally unstable,” she said. “It’s not that I couldn’t live my daily life, because I could, but it was very interrupted by turbulent emotions that I couldn’t exactly predict and that I didn’t know how to deal with. ” After posting poor grades during the school year — a decline that she attributed to her trauma — Ms. Hernandez was informed by Baylor that she had lost her academic scholarship. She dropped out of the school she once loved, returned to California and began therapy. That fall, the Baylor Bears were and won the Big 12. In early 2014, Mr. Elliott was convicted of sexually assaulting her and sentenced to 20 years in prison. That fall, the Bears were again and shared the Big 12 championship with Texas Christian. Baylor was moving on. The first clear signal that the Elliott case was more than a Baylor aberration came in the late summer of 2015 — two years after a damaged Ms. Hernandez quietly dropped out — when Texas Monthly published a disturbing account of the alleged rape of another Baylor woman by another football player: the troubled transfer from Boise State, Sam Ukwuachu. This episode was said to have occurred nearly two years earlier, in October 2013, while Mr. Ukwuachu was sitting out the football season as a transfer student. According to Texas Monthly, Baylor officials had conducted only a cursory investigation in deciding not to pursue the sexual assault claim against Mr. Ukwuachu, who was eventually convicted and sentenced to 180 days in jail and 10 years’ probation. Testimony in the case against the Mr. Ukwuachu was devastating. “He was using all of his strength to pull up my dress and do stuff to me,” said the victim. Baylor’s president, Mr. Starr, promptly issued a letter addressed to “Baylor Nation. ” It began: “By God’s grace, we are living in a golden era at Baylor University. However, today we are filled with profound sadness. ” He expressed grief for the victim, asserted that those who engage in sexual violence would “find no shelter” on campus, and announced that a faculty member with prosecutorial experience would investigate the circumstances of the Ukwuachu case. That professor’s weeklong inquiry convinced Mr. Starr of the need for a more comprehensive investigation. The Board of Regents soon hired Pepper Hamilton, a Philadelphia law firm with experience in investigating potential violations of Title IX, the federal law mandating gender equity in higher education. Pepper Hamilton’s inquiry lasted several months. The complete results of its investigation, which included interviews with central figures and access to a million pieces of information, have never been made public — because, the university said, they were delivered orally to the Board of Regents. Releasing all of them in written form, several regents later said, would have taken an additional six months. University officials have said they limited public information in deference to federal privacy law, confidentiality agreements and victims’ presumed feelings. But critics say that asking only for an oral report is a standard tactic for avoiding full accountability. The board’s public summary of that Pepper Hamilton briefing, in May 2016, was still damning. In a report, the board excoriated its own institution — and itself — for failing to adhere to a federal requirement that victims of campus sexual assault receive a “prompt and equitable response” from their college. In one instance, it reported, a student was retaliated against for reporting an assault other students, it added, may have feared being stigmatized for reporting assaults that involved underage drinking or premarital sex. Investigations, they wrote, “were conducted in the context of a broader culture and belief by many administrators that sexual violence ‘doesn’t happen here. ’” Most of the report addressed the entire university — though a few pages near the end focused squarely on the football program. Football officials, it charged, had set up a parallel justice system for their players, did not properly report complaints to the rest of the university and in some cases tried to keep law enforcement authorities out. Mr. Briles, the revered coach who had led Baylor to gridiron glory, was effectively fired. Mr. Starr, the affable president who reveled in that glory, was demoted he later resigned. Ian McCaw, the athletic director, was placed on probation with sanctions by the university for mishandling sexual assault allegations he, too, later resigned, and now holds the same position at Liberty University. The board also vowed institutional changes. And it apologized to Baylor Nation. “We were horrified by the extent of these acts of sexual violence on our campus,” Richard S. Willis, then chairman of the Board of Regents, said. “This investigation revealed the university’s mishandling of reports in what should have been a supportive, responsive and caring environment for students. ” The board’s confessional housecleaning may have been intended, at least in part, to begin putting this episode in the past. Instead, the scandal has continued to define — or redefine — Baylor. Other women have followed the lead of Ms. Hernandez, filing lawsuits claiming sexual assault by Baylor students, athletes and . One recounts the alleged gang rape of a young Bruins hostess by two football players, one of whom supposedly tried to “stare down” a worried young man who had dared to interrupt the moment. Implicated football players have left or been expelled. Mr. Oakman, the defensive end who had transferred to Baylor from Penn State, became at least the third former player to be indicted on sexual assault charges. His criminal case, in which he has pleaded not guilty, is pending. Some changes have come. Outsiders have taken over as football coach and athletic director, and a search committee is engaged in finding a permanent president. A few of the 105 recommendations concern the board itself, a structurally insular institution whose voting members are primarily determined by current membership. In addition, the Big 12 took the rare, if largely symbolic, step of withholding a quarter of Baylor’s payouts — about $6 million this year, according to The Associated Press, and more in years to come — until promised changes are actually made and, as the Big 12 board chairman said in a statement, “systems are in place to avoid future problems. ” In its statement to The Times, Baylor said: “There should be no doubt that, rather than worrying about its ‘brand,’ Baylor leadership has been focused on doing the right thing. ” The university went on to say that its efforts to address and repair the damage done far surpass those taken by any other educational institution. “No other college or university has, at its own initiative, undergone such a thorough ” it said. “No other college or university has made such wholesale leadership changes based on that . No other college or university has eagerly embraced an ambitious slate of 105 recommended changes. And, despite the accusations of some, no other university has been as transparent about its failings. ” But some critics say that the university should not be so quick to flatter itself — pointing out that, among other things, it was slow to make a clean break from the Briles era. Although it hired an acting football coach last year, it retained nearly all of Mr. Briles’s staff, including his son and . These Briles loyalists made known their continued allegiance to those accused of presiding over a football culture in which sexual violence seemed to thrive. The university has also been criticized for not being fully forthcoming about the scandal. A group of alumni and donors, Bears for Leadership Reform, has demanded full transparency, beginning with the release of all material related to the Pepper Hamilton briefing. Its members include Mr. McLane, after whom the football stadium is named. Last month, the reform group called on the university to reveal how much it was paying in legal fees to have recommendations from the Pepper Hamilton report carried out. The group estimated that the scandal had cost Baylor $223 million in expenses such as legal fees and settlements as well as in lost revenue from projected contributions. The developments are so numerous and the media attention so intense that Baylor’s website has a page called, simply, “The Facts” — as in “The Facts About the Sexual Assault Crisis at Baylor. ” Here you can find links to “Latest Updates,” “University Improvements” and “Setting the Record Straight. ” The “Facts” page reflects how Baylor’s embattled Board of Regents, after months of silence, has adopted a new public relations strategy that is less opaque and more aggressive in a bid, officials acknowledged, to make the public narrative accurate. For example, in responding to a lawsuit filed by a dismissed football staff member, university officials recently released text messages that seem to demonstrate how Mr. Briles sought to cover up various misdeeds by some of his players. Those text messages presumably came from the trove of information accumulated by the Pepper Hamilton investigation — the very information that reformers and others are demanding be made public without prejudice. Mr. Briles sued for defamation — he dropped the suit just before the text messages were released — accusing Baylor of making a “scapegoat” of him, perhaps to make a case that the problem had been solved, like a limb amputated before gangrene has spread. University officials replied in a court filing that Mr. Briles was “not a ‘scapegoat’” but “part of the larger problem. ” Several donors asked last June that Mr. Briles, 61, be reinstated or at most suspended unless the Regents could offer more evidence of his complicity, which the regents declined to do at the time, university officials said in a court filing. After Mr. Briles’s text messages were released, Bears for Leadership Reform said it was “appalled. ” Then there are the likes of John Eddie Williams Jr.: a member of the Class of 1976, a former nose guard for the Baylor football team, a successful Houston lawyer and a benefactor so generous that the field at McLane Stadium was named after him. He is also a member of Bears for Leadership Reform, and he is furious at what he said was the university’s mismanagement of this crisis — including its lack of transparency. “When you have horrible events like occurred at Baylor, you need to have transparency, and that’s the only way we’ll move forward,” Mr. Williams said. “Let the word come out. Let it come out, the good, the bad, the ugly. Put it all on the table. “That’s how we learn from our mistakes and move forward. ” The steady stream of revelations would seem only to have helped the case of Jasmin Hernandez, who, in pressing charges against her rapist, struck the first powerful blow against Baylor’s disturbing culture. This week, her lawyer secured court permission to incorporate new information into her lawsuit — including the allegation of 52 sexual assaults by at least 31 players over four years. (A prime defense cited by the defendants in her case — Mr. Briles, Mr. McCaw and Baylor — is that her claims are by a statute of limitations.) She is now a junior at California State University, Fullerton. And, yes, she remembers some of the good experiences she had at Baylor: the supportive friends, the passionate teachers, the many engaging activities. But Ms. Hernandez said that the Baptist university in Waco simply was not ethical when dealing with allegations of sexual assaults by its revered football players — or, for that matter, when dealing with the traumatized victims of those sexual assaults. As new revelations have come out, she said, she has been “shocked” — yet, at the same time, “not surprised. ” She does not closely follow the many news accounts of the continuing scandal, especially those that concern her case. “I don’t care to see myself through that light,” said Ms. Hernandez, once a scholarship member of Baylor University’s Class of 2015. | 1 |
By Learn Liberty “Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority” – Justice Paul Stevens. When we think of anonymity on the internet,... | 0 |
When “The Good Wife” had its premiere, there was a clear line from Hillary Clinton to Alicia Florrick (Julianna Margulies) the ambitious lawyer who came into her own after her politician husband’s sex scandal. But the show had another Clinton figure all along: Diane Lockhart (Christine Baranski) who hired, befriended and ultimately fell out with Alicia. A leonine liberal not allergic to money or a highball of fine Scotch, she rose in a boy’s club through alliances, compromise and knowing how much of herself to conceal. Diane begins “The Good Fight” ready for a change. Like certain other people of her political persuasion recently, she meets a less happy kind of change than she was expecting. But for her — and for this improbable but promising spinoff — it ends up being an invigorating new start. The series opens a year after the end of “The Good Wife,” in which Diane hauled off and smacked Alicia for revealing, in order to win a court case, that Diane’s husband, Kurt McVeigh (Gary Cole) had had an affair. Now, Diane is leaving her Chicago law firm and shopping — alone — for a retirement vineyard in Provence. That sounds like the premise of a typical TV spinoff (Frasier moving to Seattle, Rhoda to New York). But “The Good Fight” does not find Diane struggling to grow a decent carignan or getting to know her quirky Provençal neighbors. Her nest egg was invested with two of her oldest friends, Henry and Lenore Rindell (Paul Guilfoyle and Bernadette Peters) who plowed it into a Ponzi scheme. Effectively broke and jobless, she’s forced to start over. She ends up across town, at a mainly firm run by Adrian Boseman (Delroy Lindo) reunited with Lucca Quinn (Cush Jumbo) Alicia’s old comrade. Other familiar faces include Marissa Gold (Sarah Steele) who returns as Diane’s assistant the viperous law partner David Lee (Zach Grenier) and Charles Abernathy (Denis O’Hare) one of the quirky judges on the original show’s packed bench. By the end of its run, “The Good Wife” grew so sprawling that it played like several shows sharing the same hour. “The Good Fight,” also run by Robert and Michelle King, doesn’t reinvent the franchise so much as pare off a manageable chunk. It’s still distinctive, though, for a new drama to star an actress in her 60s. The upgrade plays to Ms. Baranski’s range, as she conveys both Diane’s desperation and the will it takes to master and move past it. “The Good Fight” pairs her comeback story with that of the newly minted lawyer Maia Rindell (Rose Leslie, “Game of Thrones”) who is dogged by her parents’ scandal much as Alicia was by her husband’s. She’s the good daughter, guarded, shellshocked and a bit of an enigma. Lucca, meanwhile, often plays the sounding board for Diane, as if she and Maia were going halfsies on Alicia’s role. Alicia herself is a sort of absent presence here. When Diane tells Maia why she’s willing to take seemingly unsavory clients, she seems to allude to their falling out: “People I thought with all my heart were guilty turned out to be innocent,” she says. “People I thought were saints — they weren’t. ” Basically, Diane is doing the same job in a different location, and so is “The Good Fight,” which will stream online on the CBS All Access subscription service. The first two episodes go online Sunday night, with additional episodes every Sunday. The pilot will show on regular CBS Sunday (edited for time and broadcast standards) after which CBS will have to pray that its traditional TV audience can find the internet. I can sum up how the move from network to streaming changes the show in one word. Unfortunately, it’s a word I can’t repeat here. Diane utters it about 20 minutes into the pilot it appears copiously thereafter. It’s not as jarring as you might think. “The Good Wife” had an unusual maturity and moral ambiguity for a broadcast drama now “The Good Fight” has the expletives to match. (The episodes also run slightly longer.) The Kings often argued that “The Good Wife” deserved credit for churning out 22 episodes a year for CBS, implying that the show might have been different if given the shorter season of a cable or streaming series. But “The Good Fight,” despite having 10 episodes, so far plays much the same — the snappy dialogue, the technology obsession, the structure. It contrasts with, say, AMC’s “Better Call Saul,” which established a different voice for a different protagonist. Consistency is no crime, but it will be interesting to see if the show evolves. The firm setting, for instance, might shake up the often very white legal world of “The Good Wife. ” Also, with Alicia gone, “The Good Fight” has a less direct connection to politics, with one early exception — the universal exception, Donald J. Trump. The first episode, “Inauguration,” opens with a scene (added well into shooting) of Diane watching Mr. Trump’s swearing in, stunned. The surprise election result turns the series’ premise into an unintended metaphor. Diane stands in for a certain breed of liberal who expected to be able to take a breather, the glass ceiling shattered, the gains consolidated. Instead, her financial ruin — the scam, we learn, wiped out “many of the nation’s liberal elites” — leaves her to claw her way back. Oddly, this makes the series feel more than if it had aired as planned, during a triumphalist Clinton administration. Diane Lockhart would never admit this, but Mr. Trump may have done her a favor. | 1 |
TULSA, Okla. — On a particularly windy day in the Crutchfield neighborhood here, the writer S. E. Hinton was touring the renovations of the future Outsiders House museum. The rundown Craftsman bungalow was where the Curtis brothers — Darry, Sodapop and Ponyboy — lived in the 1983 Francis Ford Coppola movie based on Ms. Hinton’s book “The Outsiders. ” The book, which celebrates its 50th anniversary this month, was arguably one of the most influential young adult books of its time, and leading this tour was the fanboy Danny O’Connor, 48, who made his own contribution to history as a member of the 1990s group House of Pain. Mr. O’Connor, who lives in Beverly Hills, Calif. bought the Outsiders House for $15, 000 in 2016, determined to turn it into a museum. During the recent tour, Mr. O’Connor was showing Ms. Hinton a hard cover of “The Outsiders,” pointing out a wide paper sash wrapped around the jacket that read in bright orange, “A remarkable novel about teenagers, for teenagers, by a teenager. ” Mr. O’Connor has been on a quest to find artifacts to include in the museum, amassing a collection of memorabilia from the movie, vintage photographs and editions of the book. Next on his search list, he told Ms. Hinton, 68, was a tub like the one Rob Lowe (Sodapop Curtis in the movie) stepped out of with just a towel wrapped around his waist. “All the girls love that scene,” Mr. O’Connor said. No matter that the book is 50 years old, or that the movie was filmed in this part of town more than three decades ago. Once you’re a fan of “The Outsiders,” you’re always a fan of “The Outsiders,” which is why when Mr. O’Connor posted about the tub on Facebook, it was shared over 220 times. Soon there will be a tub. Since “The Outsiders” was first published in 1967, over 15 million copies have been sold. It is a constant on and reading lists and has been translated into 30 languages. Fanfiction. net counts 8, 100 stories based on the book. The hashtag #staygold, which is inspired by a Robert Frost poem that appears in the book, is attached to more than 300, 000 Instagram posts. Search the internet for “stay gold” and you’ll find both the name of a cafe on the Jersey Shore and a Swedish rock band’s debut album. Ms. Hinton fields daily questions on Twitter from fans who ask, “What do you think when people say ‘Stay golden’ instead of ‘Stay gold’?” (Answer: It makes her cringe.) That “The Outsiders” has permeated the culture so deeply is still somewhat surreal to even Ms. Hinton. “The rest of my books I wrote, but ‘The Outsiders’ was meant to be written. I got chosen to write it,” she said. “That’s the only way I can deal with it. ” Ms. Hinton, who still lives in Tulsa, goes by Susie. In 1966, Ms. Hinton’s editor, Velma Varner, suggested she use her initials out of concern that her given name, Susan Hinton, would “throw some of the boy readers off. ” She continued to use the initials, even in more recent publications. When Ms. Hinton was 16, after failing creative writing in her junior year of high school, she wrote “The Outsiders. ” The teacher who failed her was not happy that Ms. Hinton liked to mention this in every interview. She sold the book when she was 17. It was published when she turned 18. It has, quite literally, always been part of her life. For Ms. Hinton, the book is something of a time capsule of her own emotionally driven teenage angst. “I think that’s why it still resonates with teens, because they feel like that,” she said. “Your feelings are over the top. You’re feeling and seeing injustice, and you’re standing up against it. ” In “The Outsiders,” justice comes by way of class warfare between the greasers, a gang of poor teenage boys, and the Socs, the rich kids from the other side of town. What may be most remarkable about the greasers is their ability to show great affection and emotion despite the cultural norm of the 1960s. In almost every chapter, someone is crying or on the verge of tears. “You’d be to find a book where boys are this emotional,” said Daniel Kraus, books for youth editor at Booklist, a review magazine published by the American Library Association. “They’re crying, they’re embracing, they’re holding each other in bed. ” This adds to the greaser mythology, Mr. Kraus said. Jennifer Buehler, an English education professor at St. Louis University, believes that the greasers’ experience, and their need to be seen as human, is similar to what many marginalized groups today are also trying to claim. “The fact that the character development is so strong in this book plays a crucial part in its power and its enduring relevance,” she said. While Professor Buehler believes other factors contribute to the book’s endurance — the universal title and the seemingly genderless author — she credits librarians and teachers for supporting the book from the start. In 1988, an influential award further cemented the canonical status of the book, she said, when it received the first Margaret A. Edwards Award for lifetime achievement in writing for young adults. “So even though ‘The Outsiders’ was 21 years old, and the movie had some life, there’s something about that literary award from the world of librarians and library service that helped teachers along their way. ” For fans, it seems, the book’s longevity is based on its relationships. Recently, the connection between Johnny Cade and Dallas Winston spawned a subset of fan fiction called slash, in which two male (or two female) characters are involved romantically. Some fans on Twitter in October became confrontational when Ms. Hinton disagreed with their interpretation that the relationship between Johnny and Dallas was a romantic one. “I have no problem with anyone interpreting my books anyway they want,” Ms. Hinton said. “But I’m getting these letters that are, ‘Just say you wrote it gay and I’ll be satisfied.’ Well, your satisfaction isn’t at the top of my priorities. Fifteen years old in Tulsa, Okla? The word was not even in common use. So, no. ” It’s possible that this new shift is simply an additional sign that “The Outsiders” continues to influence young readers. That after five decades, it shows no indication of becoming dated. “I’m as amazed as anybody else that it’s lasted as long,” Ms. Hinton said. “So many people say to me after reading it, ‘I’m looking at people differently now than I used to,’” she said. “Let’s all quit judging each other. ” | 1 |
By wmw_admin on October 27, 2016 henrymakw.com — Oct 26, 2016 Fozdyke is usually wrong so Trump fans may rejoice at this prediction. As for the rest, I present it for those who have the interest and stamina to decipher. To the Memory of Peacocks & the Hyena King by Aloysius Fozdyke — (henrymakow.com) I’m loving the American presidential election, the Global Election Management System and fractionalized or fictionalized voting. All sizzle and no steak. One of the better smoke and mirrors shows. American presidents are selected not elected! The sheeple are so easy to fool there’s hardly any fun in it any more. Donald is two-faced and adult diaper Hillary is genital-centred and unwell. ‘Did you just soil yourself?’‘Sure! Do you think I smell this bad all the time?’ It doesn’t matter if every American votes for Donald Trump, because the results will give the election to Hilary Clinton. It’s about sizzle without the steak. We let the sheeple vote so that they feel they still have choices that matter. The outcome is irrelevant, provided that the sheeple feel that they’re contributing and that they still have choices. For what it’s worth, have a look at ‘fractional voting’. We’re so close to conquering and getting the only thing we’ve ever wanted – everything! And honestly, in return we give the masses what they want, which in truth isn’t much at all, just illusions. We give them choices between two predetermined political outcomes, but allow them to select from a myriad of supermarket junk foods, television programmes and glossy magazines, because that’s what they deserve – inconsequential options and diversions. The social crash will be after the American presidential elections – even if Trump wins, which he won’t. The media has conditioned the masses to the predetermined fact that Hilary will win and being placidly obedient, Americans will accept that result. It’s not like our people have to be careful any more. As my mentor used to say, ‘The Lord is my shepherd and eventually, like all good shepherds he will lead you to the slaughterhouse’. Being herd animals, sheeple want safety, not freedom. They want to work harder and longer for less and less. They already live in fear of their own governments while constructing their own prisons. ‘We the sheeple…’ Yeah, right! Right hand path spiritualities – like Xtianity – are suffering and death centred. So we will give you what you want: suffering and death. The third world war is what’s needed to bring Old Numb-Nuts back, with all his egregious double standards. And remember, he came not to bring peace, but a sword, so essentially we’ll continue giving the masses what they want – just like we always have. Enjoy! ESOTERIC SATANICA | 0 |
Damon Linker writes at The Week that, while he’s glad Michael Flynn is no longer serving as Donald Trump’s national security advisor, he warns fellow liberals not to cheer the “deep state” taking out a political enemy by “dishing to reporters about information it has gathered clandestinely. ”[From The Week: The whole episode is evidence of the precipitous and ongoing collapse of America’s democratic institutions — not a sign of their resiliency. Flynn’s ouster was a soft coup (or political assassination) engineered by anonymous intelligence community bureaucrats. The results might be salutary, but this isn’t the way a liberal democracy is supposed to function. Unelected intelligence analysts work for the president, not the other way around. Far too many Trump critics appear not to care that these intelligence agents leaked highly sensitive information to the press — mostly because Trump critics are pleased with the result. “Finally,” they say, “someone took a stand to expose collusion between the Russians and a senior aide to the president!” It is indeed important that someone took such a stand. But it matters greatly who that someone is and how they take their stand. Members of the unelected, unaccountable intelligence community are not the right someone, especially when they target a senior aide to the president by leaking anonymously to newspapers the content of classified phone intercepts, where the unverified, unsubstantiated information can inflict politically fatal damage almost instantaneously. The real story here is why are there so many illegal leaks coming out of Washington? Will these leaks be happening as I deal on N. Korea etc? — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 14, 2017, President Trump was roundly mocked among liberals for that tweet. But he is, in many ways, correct. These leaks are an enormous problem. And in a less polarized context, they would be recognized immediately for what they clearly are: an effort to manipulate public opinion for the sake of achieving a desired political outcome. It’s weaponized spin. Read the rest of the story here. | 0 |
Speaking of “Big Little Lies,” HBO’s glossy new melodrama starring Reese Witherspoon, Nicole Kidman and Laura Dern, an HBO executive has said, “We’re not doing ‘Desperate Housewives’ here. ” Maybe they should have thought harder about that. Whatever surface advantage “Big Little Lies” may have in sophistication and seriousness over “Desperate Housewives,” it could have learned a few lessons from that ABC potboiler in how to tell a story and keep an audience entertained. Like “Desperate Housewives” in its first season, “Big Little Lies” (which begins Sunday and was based on a novel by the Australian writer Liane Moriarty) juxtaposes the mystery of a suspicious death with the seemingly perfect everyday lives of a group of mostly prosperous women. The main characters, all suspects in the mystery, are linked because their children attend the same progressive elementary school in Monterey, Calif. which is said to be “a private school at a price. ” Their lives, of course, are anything but perfect, and the show’s drama comes from unspooling the tangles of violence, infidelity and frustration just below the surface. It doesn’t come from the mystery, which, through six of the season’s seven episodes, hangs offscreen like a dead fish. The show’s writer, the veteran David E. Kelley, and director, Vallée (“Dallas Buyers Club”) do not show the process of detection at all — no evidence, no clues, no cops showing up at inconvenient times. We don’t even know who’s dead, a cliffhanger (or red herring?) presumably saved for the last episode. What we do get are snippets of police interviews with a Greek chorus of minor characters — other parents from the school — who happily testify to the imperfections of the leads. Turning the mystery into such a complete MacGuffin as a way to foreground the domestic drama might make sense if that drama were, say, interesting. But the real problem with “Big Little Lies” is that the women’s stories, however well acted and artfully photographed, are just a compendium of clichés about angst. Not interested in the mom who’s bored with her husband and mired in a midlife crisis because she can’t have it all? (The original big little lie.) Then how about the Silicon Valley executive who goes ballistic when her daughter reports being bullied at school, the event that may or may not have led to the mysterious death? Or the abuse victim who’s reluctant to leave her husband, a subplot that’s more disturbing but also strays into “Fifty Shades” territory? Ms. Witherspoon, Ms. Kidman and Ms. Dern do everything they can to bring their stock characters and situations to life, and from moment to moment they can be fun to watch. Ms. Dern is particularly sharp as the tech hotshot — she has just been named to the board of PayPal — who melts down as she finds she’s unable to protect her daughter, or even to figure out what’s happening to her. All their characters, as well as that of a new, less wealthy mom played by Shailene Woodley, are “rounded” — their Type A outbursts balanced by moments of humor and compassion. This is done so obviously that rather than making them more realistic, it just makes them more mushy and indistinct. If they’re so nice, why do they behave so badly to one another? The show is premised on the idea that that’s just the way it is these days for overstressed moms, which may be true in real life but isn’t, in itself, a satisfactory motivator for drama. Ms. Kidman and Ms. Witherspoon are executive producers of “Big Little Lies,” and you can see what they probably thought they had — a sexy that would also be a commentary on issues important to women their age (40s). But the mystery is a sham, and the drama doesn’t have anything new or interesting to say. (The plot involving Ms. Kidman’s character and her violent, younger husband, played by Alexander Skarsgard, has a creepy energy, though. It’s as unoriginal as the other story lines, but it keeps you watching.) Still, there’s value in a series in which at least one of these accomplished actresses is almost always onscreen. And there’s no shame in enjoying the lifestyle pornography. Setting the story in Monterey, a tourist town, may not make much sense — the characters portrayed here would be much more likely to live up the coast in Woodside or Atherton — but it allows for many scenes to be shot in gorgeous oceanside homes. Visually, at least, “Big Little Lies” is the perfect television beach read. | 1 |
While there are few details currently known on this developing situation, conflicting reports indicate that between 3-5 individuals have been shot in Azusa, California near a polling station.
Authorities are calling the developing situation ‘volatile’ and have ordered residents to ‘shelter in place.’
Via AzusaPD Twitter
Critical Incident: Please stay out of the area of Fourth St & Orange Ave. All residents in the area shelter in place.
— Azusa Police (@AzusaPD) November 8, 2016
All personnel are tied up with the critical incident. Please refrain from calling our dispatch center, all updates will be posted here
— Azusa Police (@AzusaPD) November 8, 2016
In addition to the ‘shelter in place’ order for residents, Slauson Middle School and a near by polling station have been placed on lockdown.
“Active shooter with high powered rifle” by Slauson and Memorial Park pic.twitter.com/RGzBRGS86r
— paul (@saddgranola) November 8, 2016
There’s an active shooter in my city and at my old middle school pic.twitter.com/kmxT45jwj3
— marco soto (@warzoneintro) November 8, 2016
It is currently unknown if the shooter has been apprehended or if they are still at large.
Via LATimes
The Los Angeles County Fire Department reported firefighters were treating four patients, but their injuries were not immediately known because the situation was “not contained.”
We will continue to update as new details surface.
| 0 |
WASHINGTON — The Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee rebuffed calls on Tuesday to recuse himself from the panel’s investigation into Russian meddling in the presidential election, as Democrats accused him of stalling the inquiry by canceling the committee’s meetings. Representative Devin Nunes of California, the chairman, said he would continue to lead the House investigation despite accusations from Democrats — including his committee’s ranking member, Representative Adam B. Schiff of California — that he is too close to President Trump to conduct an impartial inquiry. “Why would I not?” Mr. Nunes told reporters on Tuesday morning. Pressed about concerns from Democrats, he added, “That sounds like their problem. ” The announcement that the committee would not hold a meeting on Tuesday as expected with James B. Comey, the F. B. I. director and Adm. Michael S. Rogers, the director of the National Security Agency — a briefing Mr. Nunes insisted needed to happen before the committee could move forward with its public hearings — startled some Democrats. They added that the cancellations went further, including a regular meeting later in the week. Representative Jim Himes of Connecticut, a Democrat on the committee, called it “profoundly concerning. ” “Effectively, what has happened is the committee’s oversight, the oversight of our national intelligence apparatus, has come to a halt because of this particular issue,” he said. Mr. Nunes disputed that the investigation had stalled, though he noted that it was difficult for the committee “to move forward with interviews and depositions” until members could speak to Mr. Comey again. “Nothing has been canceled,” Mr. Nunes said. “Everything is moving forward as is. ” He also said the committee had invited Mr. Comey to appear once more, though it was unclear when that might happen. A committee spokesman said the request had been extended to Admiral Rogers as well. Mr. Schiff did not sign the letter, two aides said. Speaker Paul D. Ryan maintained on Tuesday to reporters that he saw no reason for Mr. Nunes to step away from the investigation. Last week, Mr. Nunes said he briefed Mr. Ryan on information indicating Mr. Trump or members of his transition team might have been “incidentally” caught up in legal surveillance of foreign operatives by American spy agencies. Mr. Ryan said on Tuesday that he did not know the source of that information. In a new on Tuesday, The Washington Post reported that the White House had tried to block Sally Q. Yates, who was fired by Mr. Trump as acting attorney general in January, from appearing before the committee, apparently arguing that much of her testimony could be banned from discussion by presidential privilege that shields certain sensitive information from the public. In letters later obtained by The New York Times, her lawyer pushed back, asserting that much of what Ms. Yates would address had already been described publicly by senior administration officials. The letters were dated late last week, around the time Mr. Nunes abruptly announced his decision to scrap a public hearing. Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, rejected the report as “100 percent false,” saying the White House would not bar Ms. Yates from testifying. He also rejected the idea that the White House had pressured Mr. Nunes to cancel the hearing. “I hope she testifies,” he said. “I look forward to it. ” Mr. Schiff said he was “deeply concerned” by the cancellation of the hearing with Ms. Yates and other former officials, which he said would have focused at least in part on Michael T. Flynn, the national security adviser who resigned after it was revealed that he lied to White House officials, including Vice President Mike Pence, about his contacts with Russia. It was the latest development in a week in which bipartisan cooperation quickly collapsed. Last week, without consulting Mr. Schiff, Mr. Nunes bumped a planned public hearing with James R. Clapper Jr. the former director of national intelligence John O. Brennan, the former C. I. A. director and Ms. Yates, who was fired after she instructed Justice Department officials to not carry out Mr. Trump’s first proposed travel ban. Tensions had escalated on Monday after the confirmation that Mr. Nunes had traveled to the White House grounds last week to view what he described as classified intelligence documents. A day after that, he announced to the news media, and then to Mr. Trump, that he had seen information indicating that members of the Trump transition team may have been caught up in legal surveillance. “None of us, Democrat or Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, still has any idea what he’s talking about,” said Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the Democratic vice chairman of the committee. Mr. Schiff and Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the top House Democrat, led calls for Mr. Nunes to recuse himself, arguing that he had proved himself incapable of leading an impartial investigation. Representative Walter B. Jones, a North Carolina Republican who has joined Democrats in calling for more scrutiny of Russian meddling in the election, also called on Tuesday for Mr. Nunes to step away from the investigation. Mr. Nunes was a member of the Trump transition team, as well as a vocal supporter of Mr. Trump’s campaign. | 1 |
Email
Among the many Wikileaks emails that were dumped this summer, it was clear that Hillary Clinton is not as popular as the media would have you believe. In fact, it became clear that she has no real support in a hacked email to the point where she was forced to pay young voters to stump online for her.
The Gateway Pundit reported :
She's the astroturfed candidate. Hillary is SOOO unpopular that she has to pay off young voters to support her and show up at her rallies.
5 Biggest Scoops from the #DNCLeaks WikiLeak
Wikileaks released nearly 20,000 hacked emails it says are from the accounts of Democratic National Committee officials on Friday.
The emails are devastating for Hillary Clinton. According to at least one hacked email Hillary Clinton has no real support and must pay youth voters to defend her online. She also pays millennials to show up at her rallies.
Hillary's support is all a lie. It's all astroturfed. Everything this woman does is all a lie – even her rallies are fabricated.
If Attkisson's explanation were not enough, how about this tweet regarding the mainstream media putting their collective useful idiot heads together to pitch the same propaganda about Donald Trump. 5 Biggest Scoops from the #DNCLeaks https://t.co/vmTiepsPkj
— Mike Cernovich 🇺🇸 (@Cernovich) July 23, 2016
This should have come as no surprise.
If you remember when her campaign kicked off in 2015, I reported on the fact that more than 50% of her Twitter followers were either completely fake or inactive .
Additionally, when she had her Iowa kickoff event, a whopping 22 people showed up . The majority of those were reporters!
Hillary Clinton only has the backing of the media and rabid anti-American liberals, and even then, it looks like she's having to pay them to actually do anything to support her. In other words, her candidacy is completely contrived. | 0 |
WASHINGTON — New sanctions that the Trump administration imposed on Friday to punish Tehran’s latest ballistic missile test marked the beginning of what officials called the end of an era in which the United States was “too tolerant of Iran’s bad behavior. ” In what was described as the first in a series of efforts to confront Iran around the globe, the ban on banking transfers was levied against 25 Iranians and companies that officials said assisted in Tehran’s ballistic missile program and support of terrorist groups. The immediate trigger for the sanctions, which drew from a list of targets drawn up last year by the Obama administration, was Iran’s missile test last Sunday. The exact details of the test remain shrouded in considerable mystery. But the way the two countries jabbed at each other — with the White House saying it would “no longer tolerate Iran’s provocations that threaten our interests,” and Iranian state news media vowing retaliation — had distinct echoes of the darkest days before the July 2015 nuclear accord was reached. In striking that deal 19 months ago, the Obama administration was gambling that, over time, Washington and Tehran would learn how to manage their differences and cooperate on one or two discrete projects, starting with eliminating the Islamic State. But that era never arrived. And with the announcements on Friday, it became clearer than ever that leaders in both countries now see an advantage in taking a hard line — each betting that the other does not have the stomach for a risky, expensive confrontation. “The danger is that this is the first stage in an escalation that could culminate in a military confrontation between Iran and the United States, or Iran and Israel,” said Karim Sadjadpour of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “The entire eight years of the Obama administration was an example of unprecedented but largely unreciprocated overtures for cooperation with Iran in the Middle East. The Iranians weren’t interested. And now, the Iranians sense the rest of the world would not line up with the Trump administration. ” The sanctions themselves are unlikely to have a significant effect on Iranian action. They strike at specific companies and arms traders from Iran to Lebanon and China. Mr. Obama took similar steps a year ago, after another Iranian missile test. But by and large, his administration tried to tensions — and at one point even assured European banks that, under the nuclear deal, they were free to resume transactions with Iran without fear of American retaliation. In announcing the new sanctions, the White House made clear that it planned to call out every violation, and respond. The Treasury Department took the unusual step of describing the inner workings of three networks that produce technology for Iran around the globe, in an effort to expose front companies and signal a new level of pressure on Tehran. “The international community has been too tolerant of Iran’s bad behavior,” said Michael T. Flynn, the president’s national security adviser. “The ritual of convening a United Nations Security Council in an emergency meeting and issuing a strong statement is not enough. The Trump administration will no longer tolerate Iran’s provocations that threaten our interests. ” Kate Bauer, a former Treasury official who is now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said the sanctions and the announcements surrounding it were “a way to take back the narrative, to declare that this is not a ‘ era. ’” “By providing so much public detail about the networks that feed Iran’s missile program,” she said, “they will cause significant disruption. ” Even inside the White House it is unclear how much further, beyond sanctions, President Trump is willing to take the confrontation. While he suggested during his campaign that he might scrap the nuclear deal, which he described as a “disaster,” both his defense secretary, Jim Mattis, and his secretary of state, Rex W. Tillerson, made clear during their confirmation hearings that the world was better off with the accord, for the next decade at least, because of its prohibitions on Iran amassing enough enriched uranium or separated plutonium to manufacture even a single nuclear weapon. The Iranians have largely complied with every provision of the deal, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, which conducts regular inspections of the nuclear facilities. When small violations have been found, the Iranians have quickly rectified them, including by shipping fuel out of the country. But nothing in the nuclear agreement deals with Iran’s support of Hezbollah or other terrorist groups, or its missile testing. A United Nations Security Council resolution, also negotiated in Vienna as the nuclear accord was being completed, calls on Iran to show restraint in testing, and prohibits test flights of a missile that could carry a nuclear warhead. Iran maintains that none of its missiles are designed for that purpose, though outside experts note it would be fairly easy to alter one to fit a warhead. It is unclear exactly what Iran was testing last weekend. Its missile traveled about 600 miles before its vehicle exploded. That may have been accidental, or an intentional detonation. Reports in Germany have suggested that a cruise missile — harder to strike with missile defenses — was also launched, but American officials have not confirmed that. But in both Washington and Tehran, the test itself was clearly less important than the symbolism of the moment. Mr. Trump wanted to demonstrate he would not tolerate even minor infractions of Iran’s commitments. For their part, the Iranians wanted to demonstrate that they would continue any activity not specifically prohibited by the nuclear accord, and would not be intimidated. On Friday, hours after the sanctions were announced, the Foreign Ministry in Tehran promised to impose “legal restrictions” on an unspecified number of American individuals and entities — in effect, a retaliatory blacklist. Since Americans are already prohibited from doing business in Iran, it was far from clear what they had in mind. In a statement carried on state television, the ministry said the identities of the American targets would be announced later, and that those targeted “were involved in helping and founding regional terrorist groups. ” That appeared to be a response to a part of the sanctions aimed at Iran’s support for various proxy forces in the region, including the Houthi rebels in Yemen. A senior administration official called Iran’s moves “destabilizing. ” Asked whether the administration believed Iran controlled everything that Houthi rebels were doing in Yemen, he conceded that Tehran may not make every tactical decision but said it arms and supports the rebels. He said that the sanctions were “initial steps in response to Iranian provocative behavior. ” The official spoke at a briefing for reporters under rules, set by the administration, that prohibited naming those conducting it. Democrats did not criticize the sanctions, and even some former members of the Obama administration said they saw value in pushing back against the Iranians. But Senator Mark Warner, Democrat of Virginia, who serves on the Senate Intelligence Committee, warned against provoking Iran into further action. “I urge the administration to bring clarity to their overall strategy towards Iran, and to refrain from ambiguous rhetoric — or provocative tweets — that will exacerbate efforts to confront those challenges. ” | 1 |
By Sarah Jones on Tue, Nov 1st, 2016 at 12:30 am The United States District Court in New Jersey ordered discovery on Donald Trump and the RNC's poll monitoring efforts, with a hearing on November 4th, just days before the November 8th election. Share on Twitter Print This Post
Republicans are being ordered to explain their comments that they will be monitoring the polls for “voter fraud”.
The United States District Court in New Jersey ordered discovery on Donald Trump and the RNC’s poll monitoring efforts, with a hearing on November 4th, just days before the November 8th election.
The order demands affidavits from several parties, including from someone with personal knowledge about the defendant’s (RNC’s) efforts with the Trump campaign to monitor precincts around the country, “as indicated by Kellyanne Conway”.
Affidavits are also demanded from several Republican operatives in various states who are said to be conducting state wide “voter fraud” monitoring and poll monitoring, such as RNC member Rob Gleason’s efforts to recruit persons to act as poll watchers in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and RNC member Ronna Romney McDaniel’s efforts in Michigan to prepare a “massive, statewide anti-voter fraud effort”.
The RNC must also answer for Governor Mike Pence’s comments that the Trump campaign is working with state governments and secretaries of state to ensure “ballot integrity”.
This is what happens when you have zero regard for election law and try to go vigilante.
Rick Hasen at Election Law Blog noted that the discovery granted is pretty broad, “Pretty broad discovery required in short order, with hearing on November 4.”
However, “The judge rejected much of the discovery sought by the DNC given the time frame, but this should alone should be pretty educational on what efforts are actually going on behind the scenes.”
The DNC filed a lawsuit against the Republican National Committee for violating a 1982 court order intended to prevent voter intimidation over Donald Trump’s claims that the election is rigged and that his supporters need to go to the polls to intimidate voters.
Donald Trump’s urging that his supporters go to polling places other than their own (often in “urban” areas) to watch voters is a clear violation of the consent decree and the court isn’t likely to stand for it.
So now discovery has been court-ordered, which is just more bad news for Republicans who are already facing an uphill battle in their bid for the White House.
It’s exceptionally unpatriotic to try to intimidate fellow citizens from exercising their right to vote. Everyone has the right to vote free of intimidation. Don’t let anyone dissuade you from voting.
The full court ruling is available here. | 0 |
As fans gathered on Rockefeller Plaza in Manhattan, Al Roker pulled up in a big red delivery truck, ready to give America what it wanted: Twinkies. The snack cakes flew through the air into the crowd pressed against metal barriers. One man shoved treats into his mouth. Another “Today” host tucked Twinkies into the neckline of her dress. Across the nation in the summer of 2013, there was a feeding frenzy for Twinkies. The iconic snack cake returned to shelves just months after Hostess had shuttered its bakeries and laid off thousands of workers. The return was billed on “Today” as “the sweetest comeback in the history of ever. ” Nowhere was it sweeter, perhaps, than at the investment firms Apollo Global Management and Metropoulos Company, which spent $186 million in cash to buy some of Hostess’s snack cake bakeries and brands in early 2013. Less than four years later, they sold the company in a deal that valued Hostess at $2. 3 billion. Apollo and Metropoulos have now reaped a return totaling 13 times their original cash investment. Behind the financial maneuvering at Hostess, an investigation by The New York Times found a blueprint for how private equity executives like those at Apollo have amassed some of the greatest fortunes of the modern era. Deals like Hostess have helped make the men running the six largest publicly traded private equity firms collectively the executives of any major American industry, according to a joint study that The Times conducted with Equilar, a board and executive data provider. The study covered thousands of publicly traded companies privately held corporations do not report such data. Stephen A. Schwarzman, a of Blackstone, took home the largest haul last year: nearly $800 million. He and other private equity executives receive more annually than the leaders of Facebook and Apple, companies that revolutionized the way society communicates. The top executives at those six publicly traded private equity firms earned, on average, $211 million last year — which is about what Leon Black, a founder of Apollo, received. That amount was nearly 10 times what the average bank chief executive earned, though firms like Apollo face less public scrutiny on pay than banks do. Private equity firms note that much of their top executives’ wealth stems from owning their own stock and that they have earned their fortunes bringing companies back to life by applying their operational and financial expertise. Hostess, a defunct snack brand that was quickly returned to profitability, is a textbook example of the success of this approach. Yet even as private equity’s ability to generate huge profits is indisputable, the industry’s value to the work force and the broader economy is still a matter of debate. Hostess, which has bounced between multiple private equity owners over the last decade, shows how murky the jobs issue can be. In 2012, the company filed for bankruptcy under the private equity firm Ripplewood Holdings. Months later, with Ripplewood having lost control and the company’s creditors in charge, Hostess was shut down and its workers sent home for good. Without investment from Apollo and Metropoulos, Hostess brands and all those jobs might have vanished forever after the bankruptcy. The way these firms see it, they created a new company and new jobs with higher pay and generous bonuses. But the new Hostess employs only 1, 200 people, a fraction of the roughly 8, 000 workers who lost their jobs at Hostess’s snack cake business during the 2012 bankruptcy. And some Hostess employees who got their jobs back lost them again. Under Apollo and Metropoulos, Hostess shut down one of the plants they reopened in Illinois, costing 415 jobs. The collapse and revival of Hostess illustrates how even in a business success, many workers don’t share in the gains. The episode also provides a snapshot of the economic forces that helped propel Donald J. Trump to the White House. Since losing his job at Hostess in 2012, Mark Popovich has had three jobs, including one that paid about $10 an hour, half what he made at the . A lifelong Democrat and devoted “union man,” Mr. Popovich said he supported Mr. Trump, the first time he ever voted Republican. “It’s getting old, getting bounced around all the time,” said Mr. Popovich, a Ohio resident. Such frustrations stem from broader shifts in the economy, as all types of companies turn to automation to cut costs and labor unions lose their influence. While these changes have helped keep companies profitable, private equity has used these shifts in the workplace to supercharge wealth far beyond that of the typical chief executive. And yet, Mr. Trump did not focus on private equity on the campaign trail, instead blaming the plight of the American working class on a shadowy cabal of elitist Democrats and Wall Street bankers who support trade deals that ship jobs overseas. “People understand jobs going to China,” said Michael Hillard, an economics professor at the University of Southern Maine. “But no one has ever heard of these private equity firms that come in and do all this financial engineering. It is much more complicated and less visible. ” The industry’s trade group, the American Investment Council, says it is sensitive to these issues as private equity’s role in the economy expands. The industry now controls huge swaths of the American work force: 4. 4 million employees at over 7, 500 companies, according to PitchBook, a private financial data platform. By some measures, Blackstone is one of the nation’s 10 largest employers and one of its biggest landlords. The firm’s Mr. Schwarzman, is advising Mr. Trump on job creation. “At a time when many Americans are concerned about the country’s economic viability, private equity has proven itself in communities throughout the United States as an effective solution,” said James Maloney, the American Investment Council’s spokesman. “Sustainable growth strategies, adherence to responsible investments and a approach are all a part of the private equity model. ” The Times investigation of the Hostess deal shows that today’s private equity also uses another set of tactics, like special dividends and tax arrangements, that maximize profits in creative, yet financially risky ways. A year after the layoffs at the Hostess plant in Illinois, Apollo and Metropoulos arranged for the company to borrow about $1. 3 billion. Apollo and Metropoulos used most of that sum to pay themselves, and their investors, an early dividend on their investment. The firms also found a way to make money even after the company was sold. The firms, The Times investigation found, struck a deal to collect as much as $400 million over the next 15 years, based on what Hostess’s future tax savings might be. These winnings do not come without risk to the private equity firms, which are often taking a gamble on troubled companies, and when they fail, the firms probably lose out. And this is not a simple story of powerful investors enriching themselves while some workers struggle. Teachers and firefighters also benefit from private equity. Pension funds that pay retirement benefits to public servants now depend on private equity to generate huge returns. Without it, taxpayers could bear more of the costs. “Hostess’s comeback was a ” an Apollo spokesman said in a statement, adding that its investment benefited workers, communities, investors and consumers. “After teaming up to take on the daunting financial and operational challenge of creating a new company around the Hostess brand, Apollo and Metropoulos Co. completed a highly successful private equity investment. ” On a more basic level, Americans enjoy what private equity has owned: GNC vitamins, affordable jewelry at Zales, and birthday parties at Chuck E. Cheese’s. Hostess’s new owners rode a wave of nostalgia for the company’s snack cakes, a euphoria that even spread to a sprawling Long Island estate. At a wedding there in 2013, packaged cupcakes were offered to guests. It may seem an unusual choice, but this party had a special affinity for the snack cake. The bride’s father is an executive at Apollo. Leon Black grew up in a family that had a home in Westport, Conn. and an apartment on Park Avenue in Manhattan. He attended Dartmouth and Harvard Business School. But when Mr. Black traveled to Lubbock, Tex. to speak to a group of retired teachers, he emphasized a humbler side of his pedigree. “You should know,” Mr. Black said, according to a video recording of the February 2012 meeting, “my mother was a teacher, my sister was a teacher, my is a teacher. We have a lot of teachers in our family. ” Mr. Black had good reason to flatter the retirees: Pension funds for teachers and other public workers are some of the biggest investors in Apollo’s funds and have helped make Mr. Black a very rich man. Mr. Black, or an affiliated limited liability company, owns homes in Beverly Hills, Miami Beach and several locations in New York, an analysis of real estate records shows. This year, he bought the $38 million house in Beverly Hills that had belonged to the actor Tom Cruise. Private equity’s relationship with pension funds is mutually beneficial. As countless baby boomers reach retirement at a time of historically low interest rates, public pension funds need to achieve returns that match their liabilities — and private equity has delivered. Nearly half of private equity’s invested assets now come from public and private pensions around the world. Private equity uses this pension fund money to place bets on companies like Hostess, and Texas teachers have shared in the profits from the deal. The Teacher Retirement System of Texas has invested in the fund that bought Hostess. And that fund has reaped 27 percent net during the three years it owned Hostess, significantly more than the stock market returned in that period. “You need to get people in whom you trust and who will keep up our fund,” said Fran Plemmons, a former president of the Texas Retired Teachers Association who was a teacher and principal for 25 years. “If they do that, you need to get out of the way. ” Ms. Plemmons said her $31, 200 yearly pension allows her to live modestly but comfortably. High returns from private equity investments, she said, help keep pension payments flowing to retired school workers across Texas, which trickles down into the local economy. For the teachers in Lubbock, Mr. Black described the “secret sauce” behind its success: buying the debt of financially troubled companies or purchasing an entire company. The investments, he said, are “ if not contrarian. ” Hostess fit that formula. Not only were Americans turning to healthier snacks and eating less junk food, but Hostess had its own challenges. In 2012, the baking company had gone through a bruising bankruptcy, its second in a decade. The company laid off most of its 18, 500 unionized drivers, loaders and bakers, not long after the bakers’ union voted for a companywide strike rather than accept another round of concessions. But what was disaster for previous owners looked like treasure to Apollo and Metropoulos. When Hostess lenders auctioned off the company in early 2013, Apollo and Metropoulos bought some of Hostess’s snack cake brands, which included Twinkies and Ding Dongs. Snack cakes still produced some of the highest profit margins in the food industry and Hostess cakes were particularly . The bankruptcy also provided Apollo and Metropoulos a clean slate, liberating them from union contracts, labor rules and debt and pension payments. One group of workers who had no place at the new Hostess: the unionized drivers, who transported snack cakes and bread to grocery stores nationwide. Now, Hostess would send its baked goods to warehouses, where retailers like Walmart would ship to individual stores. Ronald Litland, 44, delivered Hostess products in Illinois for 10 years. After he was laid off in 2012, he enrolled in a college in hopes of finding a new career in information technology. When his unemployment benefits ran out, he delivered pizzas. He never finished school, but is still paying back student loans and taking care of his son. “I have a hard time making ends meet,” said Mr. Litland, who earns about $24, 000 a year. Like the drivers, Hostess’s baking operation was also cut back. Apollo and Metropoulos chose to buy only a handful of its roughly one dozen snack cake bakeries. Other parts of the former Hostess baking empire were scaled back as well. Food companies picked off some of Hostess’s bread brands, but reopened only a small fraction of the bakeries. Before being laid off from Hostess, Mr. Popovich made about $20 an hour. Every year, he went on vacation in the Bahamas or St. Martin. His health insurance covered the $385, 000 cost when his wife needed major surgery. “I lived a good life,” said Mr. Popovich, whose most recent job driving a forklift at a solar panel plant paid about $16 an hour. Mr. Popovich is also entitled to a pension, which he was promised after working more than two decades at Hostess. But he recently received a letter at his home in Toledo, Ohio, warning that the pension fund was nearly insolvent. Apollo and Metropoulos are not obligated to contribute to the pension fund, which is managed by a labor union. Nor do they have to pay the severance that Hostess was obligated to pay Mr. Popovich when he was laid off. Those liabilities were wiped out in the bankruptcy. At a brick bakery in Schiller Park, Ill. Twinkies started rolling off the line nearly a century ago. And when Apollo and Metropoulos bought some of Hostess’s cake plants and brands out of bankruptcy in 2013, Schiller Park’s plant was one of the fortunate few to reopen. “Schiller Park, We ♥ You,” read a billboard that Hostess sponsored in the town, the heart carved into the image of a Twinkie. The celebration was . Just over a year after the plant’s grand reopening, Hostess shut it down. The fallout was swift. All 415 employees were fired, some for the second time in two years. Schiller Park lost one of its largest employers, creating a ripple effect through this tiny suburb of Chicago. The plant itself, an institution so old that it predated nearby O’Hare International Airport, was suddenly vacant. “We got our hopes up again,” said the town’s mayor, Barbara J. Piltaver. “And then all of a sudden, we had a big hit. ” The story behind the rise and fall — and fall again — of the Schiller Park plant encapsulates private equity’s relationship with workers and labor unions. It’s a complicated issue. A prominent study of investments across the country concluded that private equity has increased productivity while leading to a minor overall decline in jobs relative to the broader economy. Private equity’s trade group says its own analysis of county demographics found that private equity investment increases jobs growth in local economies, though the data was limited. In Schiller Park, Janice Ryan worked at the Hostess plant for about 20 years before the 2012 bankruptcy. She walked to work from her nearby home. And she was relieved to return, after several months of unemployment, to be part of what many workers believed was the company’s comeback. Schiller Park was a starting point for getting Twinkies back on the shelves by summer 2013. As part of that push, many Schiller Park employees worked shifts, six days a week, and could volunteer for a seventh day. “We were all proud of what we accomplished,” said Michael Spina, who worked for Hostess for many years in St. Louis and then moved to Schiller Park to help manage production when the plant reopened. What the workers were never told, however, was that Apollo and Metropoulos had no plans to keep Schiller Park in operation over the long term. “Schiller, in essence, was a contingency plan, opened only to ensure that initial demand could be met,” Hannah Arnold, a Hostess spokeswoman, said in a statement. She added that the setup of the bakery — its low ceilings and lack of a loading dock — was not conducive to the company’s future plans. The company says it could not tell workers of its plans because of labor rules. The expendability of Schiller Park reflects Apollo and Metropoulos’s plans to run a more efficient operation than their predecessors did. And that model requires far fewer workers than the one that existed for decades. In 2012, Hostess had about 8, 000 employees and eight bakeries dedicated exclusively to snack cakes. Six other plants produced at least some desserts. Today, the new Hostess has only three plants and 1, 200 workers. At Schiller Park, some workers earned a dollar less per hour than what workers were paid under the previous owners. Others earned more, the company said. Still, they qualified for bonuses, owed no union dues and received health insurance and dental care. Instead of pensions, they were enrolled in 401( k) plans. Former employees recalled grueling shifts when temperatures inside the plant neared 110 degrees. The workers were given Gatorade to rehydrate. “Bakeries are hot places,” Mr. Spina said. “But Schiller Park could really be a hot son of a bitch. ” Veronica Pacheco, who lives in Schiller Park and joined the Hostess bakery when it reopened in 2013, described “freezing” wintertime conditions that were equally arduous. She said she wore scarves and heavy gloves under her work garments. Ms. Arnold, the Hostess spokeswoman, noted that prospective employees answered a questionnaire about whether they were willing to work in “extreme seasonal temperatures. ” The company said it spent about $100, 000 upgrading the heating and system, but stopped short of a total overhaul. There were other hazards as well. In 2014, Todd Kemp was injured after heaps of Twinkie mix spilled on the factory floor, causing him to slip and injure his shoulder, back and knee. He has since had four operations. Ms. Arnold said Apollo and Metropoulos inherited old equipment, some of it in disrepair, adding that Schiller Park “was in the worst condition of the four bakeries by far. ” C. Dean Metropoulos, the billionaire Greek immigrant whose firm has invested in other food brands like Vlasic pickles and Pabst Blue Ribbon beer, personally oversaw the upgrading and cleaning of the facility, Ms. Arnold said. “He also focused on ensuring workers had new uniforms and better shoes, to make long days standing more comfortable,” she said. Over the long term, Apollo and Metropoulos looked outside Schiller Park to generate profits. Hostess employed “extended technology” to make the Twinkie, already jokingly thought to be capable of surviving nuclear war, even more everlasting. The company perfected its secret recipe until it contained the right amount of enzymes to better retain moisture. The enzymes extended shelf life of some products to 65 days from 26 days. The company also turned to automation. At a plant in Emporia, Kan. Hostess installed an automated baking system that churned out more cakes with fewer workers. William Toler, Hostess’s chief executive, said the company spent more than $140 million “to get the business up and running, and certainly our results suggest we made very good choices. ” The Hostess plant in Columbus, Ga. had another advantage: government subsidies. The state’s economic development agency provided Hostess with tax credits to push along the deal. The Town of Columbus chipped in a $1 million grant to award Hostess for creating jobs. “We’re not doing it to be nice guys, we’re doing it to create jobs,” said Wylly Harrison, who worked on the deal for the Georgia Department of Economic Development and said that the state was thrilled Hostess came back. Hostess said it also received incentives from Emporia, the State of Indiana and the City of Indianapolis. Employment totals at those plants have since increased. Hostess did not receive any incentives in Illinois. Three workers interviewed by The Times said they believed that the final straw for Schiller Park was when they voted to rejoin a union. Hostess fought the effort. The company plastered the plant with posters urging workers to vote “no. ” The union prevailed, but not for long. Around the time union officials had planned to start contract negotiations in August 2014, Hostess announced it was shutting down the Schiller Park plant. Ms. Arnold, the Hostess spokeswoman, said the unionization vote did not factor into the decision to close Schiller Park. Employees, she said, were provided severance and an opportunity to apply for a Hostess job in another state. Union officials declined to comment. Since then, unions have made limited inroads at Hostess. Whereas 83 percent of the work force was unionized in 2012, Hostess recently said in a securities filing that about 30 percent of employees belonged to a union in Indianapolis and Columbus. Its flagship facility, Emporia, is not unionized. “Both Apollo and Metropoulos have owned and operated numerous companies that had union employees,” Ms. Arnold said, adding that “Metropoulos has always enjoyed good, working relations with unions and their members. ” For all the profits Apollo and Metropoulos squeezed out of the Hostess factories, a deal hatched in a hotel room on Fifth Avenue in New York shows how private equity can have its snack cake and eat it, too. There, in the Versailles Room at the St. Regis, Apollo and Metropoulos began the process of extracting returns from the company, less than a year after shutting the Schiller Park plant. Most investors seeking profit have to wait for the right moment to sell a company or take it public. But private equity uses a different playbook. First, Apollo and Metropoulos arranged for Hostess to borrow money from the banking giant Credit Suisse. The two firms then pocketed about $900 million of that money for themselves and their investors. Hostess, meanwhile, is stuck repaying the debt. This type of deal is known as a dividend recapitalization, and it is a staple of private equity’s strategy. These deals provide private equity firms an opportunity to profit before they even sell a company, an added bonus to the firms and their investors, including public pensioners. Since 2012, private equity firms have arranged hundreds of such deals, totaling over $148 billion in debt, according to Thomson Reuters. Hostess’s dividend deal was the third largest of 2015. This financial engineering is crucial to private equity’s success — and to building the personal fortunes of the industry’s executives. With each dividend recapitalization, more money pours into Apollo, which then flows to the firm’s executives. It comes with risks. Of all the companies that carried out dividend recapitalizations since 2012, about 10 percent have faced a credit rating downgrade within six months of the deal, according to Global Market Intelligence and Standard Poor’s Ratings, which notes that many factors could lead to a downgrade, including excessive debt. Although Hostess has not been downgraded, it now describes itself in public filings as “highly leveraged. ” Mr. Toler, the Hostess chief, said that even after the dividend payout, the company “had plenty of capital to work with. ” At the same time it was paying dividends to investors, Hostess earmarked $8 million to pay bonuses to workers, including those in the bakeries. A few months after the dividend deal, Apollo and Metropoulos entered into negotiations to sell the company. Instead of being sold outright, Hostess would be acquired by a shell company, created by another private equity firm, the Gores Group. And still, they arranged more ways to profit. Apollo and Metropoulos retained a combined 42 percent stake in the company, which is now publicly traded. After investing only $186 million in cash when they bought the company in 2013 (they took out debt to help finance the rest of the $410 million deal) Apollo and Metropoulos’s investment is now worth 13 times that initial cash investment. Tracing how these enormous returns wind their way into Mr. Black’s pocket is a byzantine task. Mr. Black collected a $100, 000 salary and no bonus in 2015. How did Mr. Black, on such a relatively modest salary, come to acquire an art collection that is said to include one of Edvard Munch’s “ Scream” series, which he bought in 2012 for about $120 million, then the highest price ever paid for a painting? The answer is that Mr. Black and other private equity executives make their money in ways that set them apart from most other industries. Mr. Black’s share of the Hostess profits, from the partial sale and the $900 million in cash they pulled out of the company, will be reflected in a series of distributions he collects from Apollo’s publicly traded stock. The size of the distribution depends on the size of the profits from deals like Hostess. Last year, Mr. Black’s distributions totaled $181 million. Other shareholders in Apollo — which include money managers like Fidelity — also receive these distributions. But Mr. Black, as the largest shareholder of a company he in 1990, gets the largest payout. While Mr. Black receives the most money at Apollo, one of his partners and Joshua Harris, took home $121 million last year. Mr. Harris is part owner of the Philadelphia 76ers and the New Jersey Devils. Mr. Black has noted that if Apollo’s investments fail to make money, then its executives also miss out. Like most private equity firms, Apollo collects a management fee from investors and earns 20 percent of profits from the firm’s investments, once its investors recoup their original money and reap profits of their own. Private equity’s advantages don’t end there. Apollo’s share of the profits on Hostess or any deal ultimately flows to Mr. Black and his fellow shareholders in the company in ways that lower their tax burden. The industry’s 20 percent cut of profits — also known as carried interest — is taxed at a capital gains rate that is roughly half the 40 percent ordinary income rate for the nation’s highest earners. And since private equity executives receive much of their money from carried interest — or in the case of Mr. Black, distributions largely made up of carried interest — they enjoy a tax advantage over workers. This is what’s known as the “ loophole” — a tax treatment held up during the presidential campaign as evidence that the rich fail to pay their fair share. Private equity managers argue that this treatment is not a loophole or even unique to private equity. Its use originated from the cut of profits that ship captains reaped for “carrying” goods. In the Hostess deal, Apollo and Metropoulos found even more ways to use the tax code to their advantage. The firms are entitled to collect a large portion of tax benefits that Hostess could earn well into the future. The idea is that by selling a stake in Hostess before they could realize these benefits, Apollo and Metropoulos could leave money on the table. These arrangements, which are now commonplace in private deals, allow the firms to collect cash from a company they may no longer own. The Hostess “ ” benefits, according to previously unreported securities filings and estimates by the Apollo spokesman, could provide Apollo and Metropoulos up to $400 million for the next 15 years or more. Looking out over those next 15 years, nothing seems guaranteed to Mr. Popovich, the former Hostess worker from Toledo. Right before Thanksgiving, Mr. Popovich was laid off from his most recent job at the solar panel plant. The idea of searching for work at age 58 is daunting. He has been sending out his résumé, but has not received a call back. “It’s been four jobs in four years,” he said. “Here we go again. ” | 1 |
Students at New York University, where a year of undergraduate education can run to about $66, 000 in room, board, tuition and fees, often complain about the cost of four years at the school in Greenwich Village. Now, N. Y. U. has a suggestion for them: Finish faster. On Friday, the university announced a series of measures that make it easier to graduate in under four years, part of an initiative aimed at diminishing the university’s enormous affordability problem. In some ways, the school is just catching up with its students. Ellen Schall, a senior presidential fellow and the head of the university’s affordability steering committee, which is tackling college cost on a number of fronts, said that about 20 percent of N. Y. U. students already graduated ahead of schedule. “We were surprised,” Professor Schall said. “That’s part of what convinced us we needed to make this more transparent and more available to more students. ” Students have long found ways to make it through school more quickly to save money. But there is increasing momentum to formalize the process in the face of ballooning outrage over college costs and student debt — while N. Y. U. is expensive, many other private universities cost $60, 000 or more a year. Gov. John Kasich, Republican of Ohio, pushed to make it easier for students in his state to graduate from public colleges early by allowing more credits from high school or technical programs. Gov. Scott Walker, Republican of Wisconsin, included in his budget proposal this month that schools in the University of Wisconsin system should create a degree for 60 percent of its programs by the summer of 2020. Purdue University in West Lafayette, Ind. which is a state school, has also been experimenting with degree options. Among elite private institutions, official programs remain rare, though Wesleyan University, the Connecticut liberal arts school, announced a formalized track about five years ago. N. Y. U. ’s “acceleration” effort relies on a few shifts. For example, while students pay for 18 credits per semester, many actually take only 16, officials said, so the university will increase the number of courses it offers. It will also allow many students to transfer in up to eight credits from other schools, like local community colleges where they can take inexpensive classes over the summer — in the past, this has been allowed on a basis. In addition, the university has trained advisers to help students create schedules that will get them to their goal. But some who study education wonder what students will miss if they rush through their undergraduate years, and they worry about who will feel pressure to make those sacrifices. Sara a professor of higher education policy at Temple University, said that shaving time off college as a way to make it more affordable could raise some troubling questions. In college, she said, there is academic learning, but there are also important experiences outside the classroom, like the social networks students build, study abroad programs and internships — assuming students do not have to hold down jobs that crowd out those things in the first place. While some students can get what they need academically in three years, Dr. said, packing in all those credits can take away from the time they can spend on other things. “We agree that the price of college is a problem,” she said. But she questioned whether the solution was “to essentially have less college, or less time in college. ” “It’s interesting,” she said of accelerated schedules, “but it worries me. ” Michael S. Roth, the Wesleyan president disputed the idea that there was something uniquely effective about an undergraduate education. “I don’t think there’s anything magical about eight semesters, or six, or 10, for example,” he said. “ I think it’s just a convention. ” The tracks are not always popular, however. Mr Roth estimated that about 20 Wesleyan students annually graduate in three years, up from roughly three a year before they made the option official. As of this May, Purdue expects 14 students to have graduated in three and a half years or less, since the program was announced in 2014. “So far, we haven’t had a lot of takers,” said Josh Boyd, director of undergraduate studies in the Brian Lamb School of Communication at Purdue. “When we speak to parents, they tend to be more excited about it than the students. ” Indeed, many American students take six years to graduate from college. Ashley an N. Y. U. English major who is on track to graduate this May after just three years, said that she did not regret speeding through. While she had to skip some fun classes, like dance, she has had time for plenty of experiences. She interned at the International Rescue Committee, she has worked as an office assistant and an executive assistant, and she studied abroad in Madrid. Ms. said she decided to hustle through to save money. She expected to receive less financial aid her senior year because her mother planned to go back to work. But this track is not for everyone, she said. Ms. who describes herself as a planner, said she knew she wanted to be an English major when she was a junior in high school. Students who need time to to figure that out, as most do, would be better served taking their time, she said. “I definitely think this is a way to ease the burden for now, but I don’t think it’s a solution” to the cost of college, Ms. said. “It doesn’t take into account every type of student, and every type of student should have the ability to make college affordable to themselves. ” Professor Schall agreed that this solution was not for everyone, nor did it suffice on its own. The affordability committee, which was convened by N. Y. U. ’s president, Andrew Hamilton, is experimenting with a variety of ways to cut down on costs and give students a financial lift. There are items — Facebook can alert students if there is food left over after staff meetings — and those that are much larger. The university froze the cost of room and board this school year for the first time in decades. Tuition increased this year, but Professor Schall said it was the lowest percentage increase in 20 years. Couldn’t N. Y. U. and other colleges solve the problem just by cutting how much they charge? Professor Schall said there was a constant pressure on universities to increase their capacity to teach and do research, “and those things are expensive. ” “There is no silver bullet,” she continued. “If we could triple our endowment, that would be lovely, but short of that, we’re looking at everything from the price of books to the use of temporary employees,” she said. “We’re trying to be as creative as we can. ” | 1 |
LIFESTYLE
Finland’s education system is considered one of the best in the world. In international ratings, it’s always in the top ten. However, the authorities there aren’t ready to rest on their laurels, and they’ve decided to carry through a real revolution in their school system.
Finnish officials want to remove school subjects from the curriculum. There will no longer be any classes in physics, math, literature, history, or geography.
The head of the Department of Education in Helsinki, Marjo Kyllonen, explained the changes:
“There are schools that are teaching in the old-fashioned way which was of benefit in the beginning of the 1900s — but the needs are not the same, and we need something fit for the 21st century.“
Instead of individual subjects, students will study events and phenomena in an interdisciplinary format. For example, the Second World War will be examined from the perspective of history, geography, and math. And by taking the course ”Working in a Cafe,” students will absorb a whole body of knowledge about the English language, economics, and communication skills.
This system will be introduced for senior students, beginning at the age of 16. The general idea is that the students ought to choose for themselves which topic or phenomenon they want to study, bearing in mind their ambitions for the future and their capabilities. In this way, no student will have to pass through an entire course on physics or chemistry while all the time thinking to themselves “What do I need to know this for?”
The traditional format of teacher-pupil communication is also going to change. Students will no longer sit behind school desks and wait anxiously to be called upon to answer a question. Instead, they will work together in small groups to discuss problems.
The Finnish education system encourages collective work, which is why the changes will also affect teachers. The school reform will require a great deal of cooperation between teachers of different subjects. Around 70% of teachers in Helsinki have already undertaken preparatory work in line with the new system for presenting information, and, as a result, they’ll get a pay increase.
The changes are expected to be complete by 2020.
What do you think about all these ideas? We’d love to hear your opinion, so let us know in the comments.
Preview photo credit ZouZou | 0 |
BRIARCLIFF MANOR, N. Y. — Donald J. Trump, aided by two teleprompters, presented the version of himself on Tuesday evening that Republican Party officials had desperately craved — softer, serious and sophisticated. “I understand the responsibility of carrying the mantle and I will never ever let you down,” Mr. Trump said in a speech at his golf club here. “I will make you proud of your party and our movement. ” Mr. Trump’s disciplined performance was geared at soothing nervous voters and at stopping the flight of Republicans. And it came just hours after Mr. Trump reminded them why they had been concerned in the first place. A series of missteps and vicious attacks — with targets that included former rivals, entire nationalities and religious groups — has led to fears that Mr. Trump has doomed Republican chances of taking back the White House and keeping the party’s hold on the Senate. It was the type of calm performance that Mr. Trump has delivered before, only to revert to form within days. “Tonight’s speech doesn’t change much,” said Dan Senor, who supported Senator Marco Rubio of Florida in the primaries and who has been an adviser to Speaker Paul D. Ryan. “Even tonight, there are conversations that maybe, just maybe, he says these offensive things because he actually believes them. ” Mr. Trump’s challenges culminated in a series of destructive episodes over the last two weeks: He insinuated that the federal judge presiding over a lawsuit against Trump University was biased against him because of the judge’s Mexican heritage he belittled members of his staff on a conference call and he left his aides scrambling — yet again — to impose discipline on an operation characterized for months by its chaotic, freewheeling ethos. On Tuesday, after Mr. Ryan said the remarks about the judge were “racist,” Mr. Trump released a statement saying, “I do not feel that one’s heritage makes them incapable of being impartial. ” But he did not apologize, as many Republican leaders had asked him to do. Mr. Ryan maintained his endorsement of Mr. Trump, but Senator Mark S. Kirk of Illinois withdrew his. And Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who never publicly endorsed Mr. Trump, urged Republicans who had endorsed the candidate to withdraw their support. On Wednesday morning, Mr. Trump tweeted tauntingly at MSNBC host Joe Scarborough after he said Mr. Trump was “acting like a racist. ” His top policy adviser, Sam Clovis, told a Republican group in Iowa that the judge in the Trump University case belongs to an “ ” Hispanic group, according to The Des Moines Register. “They are waiting for him to change, and he is not going to change,” Vin Weber, a former Republican congressman from Minnesota who supported Gov. John R. Kasich of Ohio in the primaries, said on Tuesday. “This is like the old story of the scorpion and the frog — the Republican Party is the frog and Donald Trump is the scorpion, and we want these assurances he’s going to stop doing these things but he can’t, because it’s in his nature. ” Tim Pawlenty, a Republican and the former governor of Minnesota, was not quite as pessimistic, saying he still had “hope for at least some improvement. ” “Even modest changes would help,” he said. Though Mr. Trump vanquished a legion of primary opponents without much change in demeanor or strategy, he is entering a race in which he is trailing in polls. His support among suburban voters in battleground states is especially low, according to polling conducted by Republican groups. Aides are discussing ways to keep Mr. Trump focused during the next few weeks. Among the options is deploying his three oldest children, who have urged him in the past to act “more presidential,” as well as his Jared Kushner, to travel with him in a rotation. At the same time, the Trump operation is relying on the Republican National Committee, as well as on several “super PACs” that support him, to handle tasks typically overseen by a presidential campaign. But the party has had its own defections because of Mr. Trump, including by the woman who led efforts for Hispanic media outreach and who is said to have told colleagues she could not stomach defending him on television. The Trump campaign is also working to ramp up its operations, with the candidate holding at least four events this week. On Thursday, 70 donors are to meet at Trump Tower in New York, followed by lunch at the Four Seasons hotel. Mr. Trump is expected to attend both the meeting and the lunch. And on Friday evening, Mr. Trump is to attend a in Richmond, Va. though the invitation that went out just over a week before the event did not specify where it would be held. It also did not have host names, tiers of donors or even a request for a specific dollar amount — all basics of most political . Mr. Trump has complicated matters by resisting efforts to engage in routine telephone calls to donors and to make gentle requests of people to write checks. Some donors who have been approached have given tepid responses, worried about their names showing up in a public filing. Some aides have also grumbled privately about a trip Mr. Trump has planned for the end of the month to Scotland and Ireland, to tour his golf courses. Three aides, speaking anonymously to discuss internal frustrations, said they worried that the trip would distract him from his campaign. The team has spent weeks working on hiring new members of staff, including Jim Murphy, a longtime Republican operative, as the national political director. Mr. Murphy’s predecessor lasted six weeks in the job. The Trump team has had trouble filling positions, in part because some Republicans they tried to recruit turned down their offers, worried about how a Trump line on their résumé could affect their job prospects. The campaign has spent two months searching for a communications director, after an early prospect fell through, according to one of the three aides and two people who were approached about possible jobs. Mr. Trump’s campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, said that the candidate was always planning for a progression. “The campaign evolves, as it always does, from a primary strategy to a strategy, and there are very different issues,” Mr. Lewandowski said. “He’s going to refocus on jobs and the economy. ” Mr. Trump made clear on Monday that regardless of his campaign staff members’ job titles, he was his own chief strategist. On a conference call first reported by Bloomberg Politics, Mr. Trump belittled his aides for having sent a memo urging surrogates to stop talking about the judge in the Trump University case. Instead, Mr. Trump said, his supporters should keep criticizing the jurist, Gonzalo P. Curiel, and should suggest the reporters asking questions about his comments are “racists. ” Ben Carson, a former 2016 hopeful now supporting Mr. Trump, said party leaders and voters should not expect a different version of Mr. Trump for the general election. “It’s very hard to change somebody,” he said. Mr. Carson said he believed that Mr. Trump could be perfectly suited for the moment. “We’re in more of a W. W. E. brawl stage as a nation right now,” Mr. Carson said, referring to World Wrestling Entertainment, “and the people who tend to appeal to that group tend to do better. ” | 1 |
Why Trump Won and Why Clinton Lost
Hillary Clintons stunning defeat reflected a gross misjudgment by the Democratic Party about the depth of populist anger against self-serving elites who have treated much of the country with disdain
By Robert Parry November 10, 2016 " Information Clearing House " - " Consortium News " - In the end, Hillary Clinton became the face of a corrupt, arrogant and out-of-touch Establishment, while Donald Trump emerged as an almost perfectly imperfect vessel for a populist fury that had bubbled beneath the surface of America.
There is clearly much to fear from a Trump presidency, especially coupled with continued Republican control of Congress. Trump and many Republicans have denied the reality of climate change; they favor more tax cuts for the rich; they want to deregulate Wall Street and other powerful industries all policies that helped create the current mess that the United States and much of the world are now in.
Further, Trumps personality is problematic to say the least. He lacks the knowledge and the temperament that one would like to see in a President or even in a much less powerful public official. He appealed to racism, misogyny, white supremacy, bigotry toward immigrants and prejudice toward Muslims. He favors torture and wants a giant wall built across Americas southern border.
But American voters chose him in part because they felt they needed a blunt instrument to smash the Establishment that has ruled and mis-ruled America for at least the past several decades. It is an Establishment that not only has grabbed for itself almost all the new wealth that the country has produced but has casually sent the U.S. military into wars of choice, as if the lives of working-class soldiers are of little value.
On foreign policy, the Establishment had turned decision-making over to the neoconservatives and their liberal-interventionist sidekicks, a collection of haughty elitists who often subordinated American interests to those of Israel and Saudi Arabia, for political or financial advantage. The war choices of the neocon/liberal-hawk coalition have been disastrous from Iraq to Afghanistan to Libya to Syria to Ukraine yet this collection of know-it-alls never experiences accountability. The same people, including the medias armchair warriors and the think-tank scholars, bounce from one catastrophe to the next with no consequences for their fallacious group thinks. Most recently, they have ginned up a new costly and dangerous Cold War with Russia.
For all his faults, Trump was one of the few major public figures who dared challenge the group thinks on the current hot spots of Syria and Russia. In response, Clinton and many Democrats chose to engage in a crude McCarthyism with Clinton even baiting Trump as Vladimir Putins puppet during the final presidential debate.
It is somewhat remarkable that those tactics failed; that Trump talked about cooperation with Russia, rather than confrontation, and won. Trumps victory could mean that rather than escalating the New Cold War with Russia, there is the possibility of a ratcheting down of tensions.
Repudiating the Neocons
Thus, Trumps victory marks a repudiation of the neocon/liberal-hawk orthodoxy because the New Cold War was largely incubated in neocon/liberal-hawk think tanks, brought to life by likeminded officials in the U.S. State Department, and nourished by propaganda across the mainstream Western media.
It was the West, not Russia, that provoked the confrontation over Ukraine by helping to install a fiercely anti-Russian regime on Russias borders. I know the mainstream Western media framed the story as Russian aggression but that was always a gross distortion.
There were peaceful ways for settling the internal differences inside Ukraine without violating the democratic process, but U.S. neocons, such as Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, and wealthy neoliberals, such as financial speculator George Soros, pushed for a putsch that overthrew the elected President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014.
Putins response, including his acceptance of Crimeas overwhelming referendum to return to Russia and his support for ethnic Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine opposing the coup regime in Kiev, was a reaction to the Wests destabilizing and violent actions. Putin was not the instigator of the troubles.
Similarly, in Syria, the Wests regime change strategy, which dates back to neocon planning in the mid-1990s, involved collaboration with Al Qaeda and other Islamic jihadists to remove the secular government of Bashar al-Assad. Again, Official Washington and the mainstream media portrayed the conflict as all Assads fault, but that wasnt the full picture.
From the start of the Syrian conflict in 2011, U.S. allies, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and Israel, have been aiding the rebellion, with Turkey and the Gulf states funneling money and weapons to Al Qaedas Nusra Front and even to the Al Qaeda spinoff, Islamic State.
Though President Barack Obama dragged his heels on the direct intervention advocated by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Obama eventually went in halfway, bending to political pressure by agreeing to train and arm so-called moderates who ended up fighting next to Al Qaedas Nusra Front and other jihadists in Ahrar al-Sham.
Trump has been inarticulate and imprecise in describing what policies he would follow in Syria, besides suggesting that he would cooperate with the Russians in destroying Islamic State. But Trump didnt seem to understand the role of Al Qaeda in controlling east Aleppo and other Syrian territory.
Uncharted Territory
So, the American voters have plunged the United States and the world into uncharted territory behind a President-elect who lacks a depth of knowledge on a wide variety of issues. Who will guide a President Trump becomes the most pressing issue today.
Will he rely on traditional Republicans who have done so much to mess up the country and the world or will he find some fresh-thinking realists who will realign policy with core American interests and values.
For this dangerous and uncertain moment, the Democratic Party establishment deserves a large share of the blame. Despite signs that 2016 would be a year for an anti-Establishment candidate possibly someone like Sen. Elizabeth Warren or Sen. Bernie Sanders the Democratic leadership decided that it was Hillarys turn.
Alternatives like Warren were discouraged from running so there could be a Clinton coronation. That left the 74-year-old socialist from Vermont as the only obstacle to Clintons nomination and it turned out that Sanders was a formidable challenger. But his candidacy was ultimately blocked by Democratic insiders, including the unelected super-delegates who gave Clinton an early and seemingly insurmountable lead.
With blinders firmly in place, the Democrats yoked themselves to Clintons gilded carriage and tried to pull it all the way to the White House. But they ignored the fact that many Americans came to see Clinton as the personification of all that is wrong about the insular and corrupt world of Official Washington. And that has given us President-elect Trump.
Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, Americas Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com .
Š 2016 Consortium News | 1 |
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter I’ve always dreamed of having my own indoor garden so that I can be self-sufficient during winter, but I live in a tiny apartment and have no room for a hydroponic system… Or so I thought! Thanks to the NutriTower , this dream of mine is now possible! The NutriTower The NutriTower is a vertical hydroponic system specifically designed for indoor use. It is the first system to use the patent-pending vertical lighting design. This technology allows you to grow more food than ever before without taking up valuable floor space! In just under 2 square feet of floor space, with up to 48 pots, it’s the most efficient method of growing food on the market.
The NutriTower is a vertical hydroponic system that is simple, elegant and efficient. The patent-pending vertical lighting design and the gravity fed nutrient delivery system make this the most effective way of growing food in your home year round. Strong custom extruded aluminium frame The only system with vertical lighting Energy efficient high output bulbs Standard 24 pot layout is highly customizable Pots are easily removed for maintenance Gravity does most of the work Large reservoir means less maintenance Quiet pump runs only a few minutes each hour Individual timers so you’re in control Small footprint allows it to be placed anywhere
The NutriTower is designed to be flexible to its users needs. You can customize your systems to be more oriented toward leafy greens or fruits and vegetables or a m i x ! Because it is a hydroponic system, there is no messy soil to deal with.
My friends from the Valhalla Movement who have personally seen and interacted with the system have loved it so much they will use it in their own greenhouse inspired earthship ! If you are still not convinced why this system is awesome, click here to learn 8 reasons why the food revolution might happen in your kitchen! | 0 |
NETHERLANDS has a new Muslim political party called ‘DENK’ (Think) created by Muslim colonizers for Muslim colonizers Founded by 2 Turkish Muslims, Tunahan Kuzu and Selçuk Öztürk, after being booted out of the Dutch Labour Party, the Denk Partij (Think Party) is the first political force in Europe established by Muslims and is attracting controversy for its affiliation with the Turkish Islamist regime, rejection of the Armenian Genocide, and radical anti-Israel positions. DENK is also proposing a 1,000 strong ‘racism’ police and national anti-immigration registry which will target anyone who says anything ‘Islamophobic’ against Muslims. Legal Insurrection is reporting ( h/t Truth Revolt ) that the Netherlands’ pro-Muslim immigration Denk Party is pushing for a thousand-strong “Racism Police” to go after thought and speech crimes against Muslims which would result in a registry for offenders, fines, and re-education camps. The party, dominated by members of Turkish and Muslim origin was founded in 2014 by two former-socialist Turkish politicians but it already sits in the Dutch parliament and is hoping to mobilize the country’s million-strong mainly Muslim immigrant population (out of about 17 million overall) and growing Muslim population, currently at about 7 percent, in the parliamentary elections to be held early next year. Tunahan Kuzu and Selçuk Öztürk Among the Denk Party’s latest proposals are the renaming of streets and tunnels suggestive of Dutch colonial and slave trading history, changing the term “foreigner” to “Turkish and Surinamese Dutch person,” creating a thousand-man “Racism Police,” establishing stricter sentences for “racist and discriminatory behavior,” and listing offenders on a nationwide “Racism Register” — you know, just like child molesters. This multicultural champion has close ties to Erdogan’s Turkish-Islamist AKP party and it refuses to recognize the genocide of Armenian Christians. According to a recent Dutch poll, nearly 90 percent of young Turkish-Dutch sympathize with ISIS — 90 percent . This is the Denk Party’s political base. Denk Party stands in the tradition of George Galloway’s Respect Party in UK, a new mutant ideology taking root in Europe that fuses leftist “social justice” issues with political Islam, dipped in fierce hatred for Israel and Western heritage. Last month, the Denk Party attracted media attention when party’s leader and Dutch MP Tunahan Kuzu refused to shake hands with the visiting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netenyahu. What should worry the freedom-loving people — on the either side of the Atlantic — is not just the outrageous nature of Denk Party’s proposals, but the determined effort already underway in Europe to criminalize “undesired” speech and political dissident. The E.U. has long been pressuring its media to omit mentions of Islam when Muslims are involved in terrorism. UK Express DENK proposes a ban on words like ‘native’ and ‘immigrant’ would be introduced, alongside a national holiday to celebrate Muslim diversity. The party aims to reinvent Dutch national identity, and the program is geared towards tackling the institutional racism/Islamophobia it says is endemic in the Netherlands. And part of that is scrapping the government’s ideals of integration, claiming this should not be expected of Muslim migrants, but rather an atmosphere of ‘mutual acceptance’ should be adopted. (In other words, forcing Dutch natives to give up their customs and culture and accommodate the Muslim way of doing things) Tackling racism/Islamophobia should begin in schools, with pro-Islam attitudes promoted in the classroom through citizenship classes, and that students are regularly tested to see if they are meeting the required benchmark. | 0 |
Are The Polls Rigged Against Trump? All Of These Wildly Divergent Surveys Cannot Possibly Be Correct Posted on Tweet Home » Headlines » Finance News » Are The Polls Rigged Against Trump? All Of These Wildly Divergent Surveys Cannot Possibly Be Correct
The tracking polls put out by Rasmussen, the L.A. Times and IBD/TIPP have all consistently shown that the race is either tied or Donald Trump is winning by a small margin. But Fox News has Hillary Clinton ahead by six points, Bloomberg has Clinton ahead by nine points, and the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Clinton ahead by twelve points. What in the world is going on here?
From Michael Snyder :
Some of these polls are going to turn out to be dead wrong. With just over two weeks to go until election day, some surveys are showing a very tight race, while others say that Hillary Clinton has a massive lead. For example, the tracking polls put out by Rasmussen, the L.A. Times and IBD/TIPP have all consistently shown that the race is either tied or Donald Trump is winning by a small margin. But Fox News has Hillary Clinton ahead by six points, Bloomberg has Clinton ahead by nine points, and the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Clinton ahead by twelve points. So what in the world is going on here? If the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll is correct, we are likely to see a landslide of historic proportions for Clinton, and this is what many of the experts are now projecting. But if Rasmussen and the L.A. Times are correct, the race could easily go either way. So who are we supposed to believe? Could it be possible that some of the polls are rigged against Trump?
Well, when you take a closer look at the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, it does appear that it is not as accurate as it could be. It turns out that those that conducted the survey purposely included 9 percent more Democrats than Republicans…
“METHODOLOGY – This ABC News poll was conducted by landline and cellular telephone Oct. 20-22, 2016, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 874 likely voters. Results have a margin of sampling error of 3.5 points, including the design effect. Partisan divisions are 36-27-31 percent, Democrats – Republicans – Independents.”
But as Zero Hedge has pointed out, registered Democrats have never outnumbered registered Republicans by 9 percent at any point over the last several decades.
So how in the world can ABC News and the Washington Post possibly justify their methodology?
Other major surveys have also purposely oversampled Democrats. The following comes from Gateway Pundit…
With all the liberal distortions and dishonesty we decided to have a small team of actuarial and statistics professionals take a look at a couple of the recent polls to get their take on the reliability of these polls. They selected the recent FOX poll from October 14 showing Hillary up by 7 and the WSJ/NBC poll from October 16 showing Hillary with an 11 point lead.
The first observation is that both polls are heavily skewed towards Democrats . At a high level, the FOX poll consists of 43 Dems to 36 Reps to 21 Other while the NBC poll shows 44 Dems to 37 Reps to 19 Other.
By selecting more Dems the polls are designed to provide a Dem result.
Our experts next analyzed the data and calculated results using the same data from the two surveys on a split of 40 Dems, 40 Reps and 20 Other. The results show that using either sets of data Trump comes out ahead with a larger margin of victory using the FOX data.
Why would these major news organizations purposely try to give us distorted results?
One reason to do this would be to try to discourage Trump voters. If they believe that Donald Trump is going to lose big, that might discourage some of them from going out to vote.
At this moment, the Real Clear Politics average of national polls has Trump down by 5.6 percent. But some polls actually have him winning. Here are the nine latest surveys that Real Clear Politics has compiled…
ABC News Tracking: Clinton +12
IBD/TIPP Tracking: Trump +2
Reuters/Ipsos: Clinton +4
Monmouth: Clinton +12
There is a 14 point swing between the polls that show Trump up by 2 points and the polls that show Clinton up by 12 points.
This should not be happening. There is no way in the world that there should be a 14 point difference between scientific polls at this stage in the game. On November 8th the polling organizations that were way off are going to be exposed, and it will be exceedingly difficult for them to regain their credibility afterwards.
At this point, some of the largest news organizations in the country are openly projecting a Clinton landslide. For example, Reuters says that Clinton now has a 95 percent chance of winning…
Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton is on a definite path to the White House, according to the latest Reuters/Ipsos States of the Nation poll.
The survey, released Saturday, found that Clinton is on track to win more than 300 votes in the Electoral College, which would solidly secure her the presidency. If the election were held this week, Clinton would win 326 Electoral College votes while Trump would win only 212, the poll said.
According to Reuters, Clinton currently has a 95 percent chance of winning the White House .
If Reuters isn’t right about this they are going to end up looking awfully foolish.
An analysis by the Associated Press also has Clinton as the overwhelming favorite. And it is true that the poll results coming out of individual states seem to show Clintonwith a seemingly insurmountable lead on the electoral map.
But once again, can we trust those polls?
Trump has regularly dismissed the national polls, but on Sunday his campaign manager did admit on national television that they are losing. The following comes from the New York Post…
Donald Trump’s campaign manager on Sunday acknowledged something her boss hates to do — losing.
“We are behind,” Kellyanne Conway admitted on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
The GOP nominee routinely brushes off negative polling as untrustworthy but Conway said Democrat Hillary Clinton does have an edge.
However, it is important to remember that the big national polls have been very wrong in the past. Back in 1980, a Gallup survey that was released on October 26th showed Ronald Reagan trailing Jimmy Carter by 8 points, but of course Reagan went on to win the election by a landslide…
“For weeks before the presidential election, the gurus of public opinion polling were nearly unanimous in their findings,” wroteJohn F. Stacks for TIME in April 1980. “In survey after survey, they agreed that the coming choice between President Jimmy Carter and challenger Ronald Reagan was ‘too close to call.’ A few points at most, they said, separated the two major contenders.
“But when the votes were counted, the former California Governor had defeated Carter by a margin of 51% to 41% in the popular vote — a rout for a U.S. presidential race. In the electoral college, the Reagan victory was a 10-to-1 avalanche that left the President holding only six states and the District of Columbia.”
Could a similar thing happen on November 8th?
Without a doubt, Trump supporters are far more enthusiastic than Clinton supporters are, and that matters. The key on election day is to get your voters to turn out in large numbers, and the fact that Donald Trump is drawing record crowds to his rallies is a very good sign.
But even if Donald Trump legitimately wins the election, it could still be stolen from him via election fraud.
In recent days Democrats have been playing down the idea that this could possibly happen, but the truth is that even Barack Obama has admitted that election fraud is a major problem in the past. For instance, just consider what he said about this back in 2008…
“Well, I tell you what it helps in Ohio, that we got Democrats in charge of the machines,” Obama said regarding the threat of election-rigging.
He continued, “Whenever people are in power, they have this tendency to try to tilt things in their direction. That’s why we’ve got to have, I believe, a voting rights division in the Justice Department that is nonpartisan, and that is serious about investigating cases of voter fraud.”
“That’s why we need paper trails on these new electronic machines so that you actually have something that you can hang on to after you’ve punched that letter—make sure it hasn’t been hacked into,” he added, admitting that even Democrats have “monkeyed around” with election results:
“I want to be honest, it’s not as if it’s just Republicans who have monkeyed around with elections in the past. Sometimes, Democrats have, too.”
I know that these comments almost sound too good to be true, but you can actually watch video of Obama making these comments right here. And it is odd that he specifically mentioned Democrats having control of the voting machines in Ohio, because I documented extreme voting irregularities in Ohio in the last election during a recent visit to Morningside.
And an increasing number of Americans are starting to become concerned about election fraud. In fact, a brand new Reuters survey found that 70 percent of Republicans believe that if Hillary Clinton wins the election it will be “ because of illegal voting or vote rigging”.
So even if Hillary Clinton gets into the White House, she may find that she has an exceedingly difficult time trying to govern the nation.
A lot of people have made a lot of predictions about the outcome of this election, and we don’t have very long until we find out who was right and who was wrong.
At this point, voting has already begun in many states, and the early results in Nevadadon’t look encouraging for the Trump campaign…
According to the estimable Nevada journalist Jon Ralston, Democrats have a 20-percentage-point turnout edge so farbased on early and absentee voting in Clark County (home to Las Vegas), Nevada. And they have a 10-point edge in Washoe County (home to Reno).
But in the key swing state of Florida, so far 498,153 Republicans have voted compared to just 478,175 Democrats. So that would seem to be some very good news for the Trump campaign, because Trump cannot win without carrying the state of Florida.
To me it seems as though Americans are more emotionally invested in this campaign than they have been in any presidential campaign in decades.
The stakes are incredibly high, and in just over two weeks we will find out what happens.
Let us just hope and pray that America makes the right choice. This entry was posted in Finance News and tagged Michael Snyder , rigged polls , The Economic Collapse Blog . Bookmark the permalink . Post navigation | 1 |
For the last three years, JPMorgan Chase’s hiring practices in China were at the center of a federal bribery investigation. Now, just as the bank is preparing to settle with federal prosecutors and the Securities and Exchange Commission, another round of scrutiny has emerged. JPMorgan’s top regulators — the Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency — are seeking to impose their own penalties in the China hiring case, according to people briefed on the investigations. In recent days, the Fed sought a $62 million fine from the bank, and the O. C. C. is expected to seek its own punishment, according to the people, who were not authorized to discuss the private negotiations. Those agencies, which were not previously known to be involved in the case, could announce a settlement alongside the S. E. C. and prosecutors in the coming months. The Fed and O. C. C. investigations stem from the bank’s efforts to hire the children of China’s ruling elite — and in some cases link those jobs or internships to securing business with Chinese companies. But unlike the S. E. C. and federal prosecutors, the banking regulators are not focused on the bribery aspect of the case, but rather a breakdown in controls and practices that allowed the improper hiring to take place. The actions from banking regulators would come on top of the roughly $200 million that JPMorgan is expected to pay to the federal prosecutors in Brooklyn and the S. E. C. the people briefed on the matter said, the majority of which would go to the S. E. C. With prosecutors, the bank appears to have scored a moral victory by avoiding criminal charges, the people briefed on the matter said. Instead of facing charges, the bank negotiated a rare nonprosecution agreement. Yet for JPMorgan, the Fed’s and O. C. C. ’s involvement complicates the outcome of the case and throws into doubt the timing of a settlement. If JPMorgan were facing only the S. E. C. and the prosecutors, the case might have concluded sooner and at a cheaper cost. The latest developments are an unexpected twist that underscore the banking regulators’ increasingly aggressive stance toward Wall Street misdeeds. In the fallout from the 2008 financial crisis, regulators have demanded that big banks tighten their controls and bolster oversight of their employees. Banks that failed to do so in the past have paid tens of billions of dollars in fines, much of it stemming from dubious mortgage practices in the years before the crisis, a departure for agencies once known for their light enforcement touch. Spokesmen for the Fed and the O. C. C. declined to comment. A spokesman for the Justice Department’s Criminal Division in Washington, which is working with the Brooklyn prosecutors in the case, also declined to comment, as did a spokeswoman for the S. E. C. JPMorgan did not comment, but the bank addressed the investigations in its most recent quarterly regulatory filing, stating that it was “responding to and cooperating with these investigations. ” Wells Fargo, which long marketed itself as the country’s Main Street lender and largely avoided penalties, is now the latest bank to find itself in the of regulators. The bank agreed this month to pay $185 million in fines, including $35 million to the O. C. C. for fraudulently opening as many as 1. 5 million bank accounts and potentially issuing hundreds of thousands of credit cards that had not been authorized by customers. In prepared remarks before the Senate Banking Committee on Tuesday, Thomas Curry, the comptroller of the currency, said his agency was considering taking action against individual Wells Fargo executives, “including directors, officers and employees who violate any law or regulation, engage in unsafe or unsound practices or breach fiduciary duty. ” The Federal Reserve has stepped up its enforcement efforts as well. Daniel Tarullo, a Federal Reserve governor who leads many of the central bank’s regulatory oversight efforts on Wall Street, recently remarked that banks have not done enough to change their cultures. And when banks misbehave, he said, regulators should hold individual bankers accountable. “There is a need, I think, for a focus on individuals as well as the fines put on the institutions,” Mr. Tarullo said in a televised interview on CNBC this month. The Fed’s recent enforcement cases reflect this focus on individual wrongdoing. In 2015, the Fed chose to bar six bankers from the industry, twice the number in 2014. The year before that, the Fed did not take any such actions. And just last month, the Fed took action against a former Goldman Sachs executive, seeking to bar him from the industry in a case that stemmed from 2014, when a junior Goldman employee received confidential government information from a Federal Reserve employee in New York. The Fed also fined Goldman $36 million. When the China hiring investigation first came to light in a article in The New York Times three years ago, it was the latest regulatory woe to plague the bank. It came on the heels of the bank’s London whale trading scandal, in which its traders lost $6 billion in bungled derivative bets, and around the time a mortgage settlement with the Justice Department cost $13 billion. Billions of dollars in fines later, the bank has largely retreated from the spotlight, which now appears to shine on Wells Fargo and other rivals. Even so, the government’s roughly $200 million settlement with JPMorgan in the China case could draw attention from lawmakers who argue that banks are too big — and systemically important — to indict. No individual employees are expected to be criminally charged, the people briefed on the matter said, and the bank will probably receive a nonprosecution agreement, a form of corporate probation that comes in exchange for concessions and penalties. Alternatively, prosecutors could have sought a criminal guilty plea, or a agreement, which involves the filing of charges that are deferred and is generally viewed as more onerous than a nonprosecution deal. With the growth in guilty pleas and agreements on Wall Street, nonprosecution deals have become less common for Wall Street banks. Ultimately, evidence in the case may have limited the options for prosecutors, who have a higher burden of proof than the S. E. C. For one thing, there is nothing inherently illicit about hiring people, and prosecutors may have struggled to show an explicit quid pro quo from the bank to Chinese officials. And in many cases, the job or internship candidates may have been qualified anyway, or JPMorgan may have secured the business regardless of the hiring. JPMorgan’s lawyers also urged prosecutors not to criminalize hiring practices — including something as simple as awarding an internship — that were common in the region. And yet the bank had a formal program for hiring the children of China’s elite, once called “Sons and Daughters. ” The bank went as far as to use spreadsheets that listed the bank’s track record for converting a hire into a business deal, The New York Times reported in 2013. The investigation into JPMorgan’s hiring practices has brought to the fore an enduring issue for foreign banks competing for deals in China, where people’s “guanxi,” or social connections, sometimes count for more than their business experience. The culture of cultivating connections has fed widespread use of kickbacks and bribery across industries. For decades, Wall Street banks have sought to hire the sons and daughters of China’s elite — princelings — potentially to curry favor. When announced, the JPMorgan case would represent one of the first major crackdowns on a big bank for violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which prohibits giving “anything of value” to a foreign official to obtain business with a government entity. The S. E. C. filed a similar case last year against Bank of New York Mellon, which agreed to pay $14. 8 million to settle the accusations. Once JPMorgan puts its China hiring settlement behind it, regulators will most likely turn to the hiring practices of other banks, including HSBC and Deutsche Bank. These and other banks have publicly disclosed the existence of the investigations. Indeed, before JPMorgan stepped up its hiring, bank employees lamented the loss of business to a rival bank with a more formal hiring effort. “We lost a deal to DB today because they got chairman’s daughter work for them this summer,” one JPMorgan investment banking executive remarked to colleagues, using the initials for Deutsche Bank. | 1 |
Share on Twitter Print This Post
The FBI is examining how a Hillary Clinton aide handled emails. The examination has nothing to do with the Democratic nominee, her emails, or her email server.
According to Newsweek’s Kurt Eichenwald, the “scandal” is related to the process Clinton aide Huma Abedin used to print out emails for the then secretary of state to read.
Eichenwald reported: Because Clinton preferred to read documents on paper rather than on a screen, emails and other files were often printed out and provided to her either at her office or home, where they were delivered in a diplomatic pouch by a security agent. Abedin, like many State Department officials, found the government network technology to be cumbersome, and she had great trouble printing documents there, investigative records show. As a result, she sometimes transferred emails from her unclassified State Department account to either her Yahoo account or her account on Clinton’s server, and printed the emails from there. It is not clear whether she ever transferred official emails to the account she used for her husband’s campaign.
Abedin would use this procedure for printing documents when she received emails she believed Clinton needed to see and when the Secretary forwarded emails to her for printing. Abedin told the FBI she would often print these emails without reading them. Abedin printed a large number of emails this way, in part because, investigative records show, other staff members considered her Clinton’s “gatekeeper” and often sent Abedin electronic communications they wanted the Secretary to see.
The entire scandal is about how emails were printed. It has nothing to do with how Hillary Clinton handled emails or classified information. The investigation is related to how an aide printed emails for Hillary Clinton to read. No wonder Comey didn’t provide more details in his letter to Congress. The details of what is being examined are an embarrassment to the FBI.
There is no evidence that Clinton’s aide committed a crime. For the printing of the emails to be deemed criminal, there must be evidence that Abedin intended to leak classified information. There remains zero evidence of criminal activity.
The FBI examination of new emails is turning out to be one of the most overblown red herrings of the 2016 election , and Comey’s behavior is a disgrace to the US intelligence community.
The new information destroys Republican hopes that the new emails were the game changer that could save them from defeat . Republicans may spend the remaining days pushing the emails, but their behavior will be the hallmark of a desperate party that is facing a crushing defeat.
The emails won’t change anything in 2016, but they will give Congressional Republicans a reason to keep investigating Hillary Clinton in 2017 and beyond. In other words, James Comey is already delegitimizing Hillary Clinton’s potential presidency. | 0 |
. Obama Pushes ‘Fake News’ Talking Point — It’s A ‘Threat To Democracy’ This piece can be seen as a continuation of " Red Alert: The War on Alternative Media Has Begun... Print Email http://humansarefree.com/2016/11/obama-pushes-fake-news-talking-point.html This piece can be seen as a continuation of " Red Alert: The War on Alternative Media Has Begun ." As Democrats and Hillary Clinton supporters come to terms with a Donald Trump administration, the ‘fake news won him the election’ talking point was pushed to new heights as the outgoing president suggested ‘fake’ media websites are undermining the political process. “If we are not serious about facts and what’s true and what’s not… if we can’t discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda, then we have problems,” Obama said during a news conference in Germany. Obama suggested that ‘fake news’ affects voter opinions of candidates “in an age where there is so much active misinformation, and it’s packaged very well, and it looks the same when you see it on a Facebook page or turn on your television.”Yes folks, the alternative or ‘fake’ media is now able to look the same as CNN, which interviews its own camera people and tells viewers that they are protesters. “If everything seems to be the same and no distinctions are made, then we won’t know what to protect,” Obama said. “We won’t know what to fight for.” In other words, Obama is saying that the rigged playing field has now been leveled, and that’s a problem for the establishment. “Part of what’s changed in politics is social media and how people are receiving information,” he went on to say, adding “It’s easier to make negative attacks and simplistic slogans than it is to communicate complex policies. But we’ll figure it out.” Yeah, because the mainstream media certainly doesn’t engage in negative attacks or simplistic slogans. As we have documented, the ‘fake news’ talking point originated with a far left SJW writer , who spread around a list of websites to avoid if you want ‘real news’. The list included Infowars and Breitbart News. The idea is to attempt to force Google & Facebook to censor conservative websites. The talking point also dovetails with Twitter promising to purge numerous accounts belonging to members of the ‘Alt-Right’, egged on by partisan groups like The Southern Poverty Law Center. Other web tools, such as Quantcast jumped on the bandwagon and introduced tools to identify the so called ‘fake news’ sites. However, the move has rapidly backfired , as people quickly realized the whole talking point is part of a bitter backlash tantamount to censorship . Meanwhile, the Mainstream Media has been caught faking news countless times, which had serious consequences worldwide: | 0 |
The sign on the subway door says it plainly: “Riding or moving between cars is prohibited. ” Generally, the sign is obeyed. But during an untamed time, not long ago, New Yorkers routinely slid open the doors at the ends of train cars and stood in the open space as the train hurtled through the tunnel. New Yorkers like the future president of the United States. “I understand the subway very well,” President Trump told The New York Times on Wednesday when quizzed about his knowledge of the city’s infrastructure. “I used to ride between the cars. ” That was in his days at School in Queens, Mr. Trump said, which were in the late 1950s. As the city and the subway system deteriorated in subsequent decades, riding between cars became part of the chaotic subterranean landscape: Trains were covered with graffiti and broke down often, passengers smoked cigarettes or worse, and doors between cars banged open and shut of their own accord, practically inviting trespass. “The people who ride our system now consider the ability to cross between cars their personal right,” a subway official wrote in 1983 to a federal safety board that was pressing the Transit Authority to outlaw crossing between cars when the trains were stopped. A law against traveling between the cars of a moving train was already on the books. On an N train on Thursday, Ronald Dupree, a bouncer and car salesman who grew up in Brownsville, Brooklyn, recalled his childhood pastime fondly. “It was something to do — you’d feel the breeze,” Mr. Dupree, 46, said. The police “didn’t care about it back then,” he said. About a decade ago, the police began cracking down, after it was finally made illegal in 2005 to cross between cars of a stopped train. The fine for switching cars is $75. “Seven years ago, I was cutting from one car to the other and I got a summons,” Mr. Dupree said. “I haven’t done it since then. ” Benjamin Kabak, who writes the Second Ave. Sagas subway blog, said that he seldom sees people riding between cars anymore. In wilder times, passengers moved between cars for reasons other than fun. Jake Dobkin, the founder of the news site Gothamist who writes the Ask a Native New Yorker column, would switch cars in the early 1990s “to escape particularly strong smells or danger,” like groups of bigger youths who seemed intent on mugging him. If a train was too crowded to board, passengers on the platform would push open the folding gates connecting the cars and let themselves on that way. “That was a great trick,” said Kevin Dresser, a graphic designer who moved to the city in the early ’90s. These days, doors between cars are locked on some lines, though they still open on others. An exploit on an N train Thursday morning confirmed that a childhood impression had not changed: To stand between cars, with the East River or the F. D. R. Drive rushing vertiginously beneath you, gripping the black rubber straps and feeling the connected cars shift under your feet, remains an exhilarating experience. Not that you should do it. Ever. In recent years, several people lost their footing and fell to their deaths. In December, a man tumbled between cars of an F train in Manhattan and was decapitated. On Thursday, Chief Joseph Fox of the New York Police Department’s transit bureau took to Twitter to warn riders: Don’t be like the president. But there are times when a locked door poses its own dangers. On Tuesday, Rebecca Odes was on an F train in Brooklyn and the doors did not open when it got to her station. She went to the end of the car and tried the door. It would not budge. “It was pretty freaky to be trapped,” she said. The doors opened after a couple of minutes. Still, Ms. Odes, a of Wifey. tv, said, “as the mother of a teenager now I feel like there is a certain comfort in knowing that hanging out between cars is not an option. ” The president’s parents might have wished for the same. “They were not happy,” Mr. Trump said. “I used to love to do that. Those were the old days. ” | 1 |
Tweet Widget by Timothy Shenk
In order to downgrade the centrality of slavery to the development of the United States and global capitalism, mainstream historians attempt to depict the slaveholding classes as provincial actors. However, the slave owners were the most powerful people in the country. “Southerners imagined—and worked to build—an American republic whose foundation was slavery.” They wanted a strong United States, with a strong military, to protect slavery. When Slaveholders Controlled the Government — An Interview with Matthew Karp
by Timothy Shenk
This article previously appeared in Dissent Magazine and Portside .
“Ideologically, slave labor fit in very well in a world increasingly dominated by free trade, expanding European empires, and hardening racist science.”
Booked [1] is a monthly series of Q&As with authors by contributing editor Timothy Shenk. For this interview, he spoke with Matthew Karp about This Vast Southern Empire [2] (Harvard University Press, 2016).
Between 1789 and 1850, the United States had twelve presidents. Ten of them owned slaves; the only two that didn’t were both named “John Adams.” The United States was a pioneering democracy, but its democracy was shaped by the demands of a slaveholding elite that had immense—and often decisive—authority over its government. Princeton historian Matthew Karp explores the consequences of this arrangement in This Vast Southern Empire . He focuses on the influence Southerners wielded over foreign policy, but Karp’s inquiry opens up new perspectives on much more, including the dynamics of proslavery ideology, the world-making ambitions of Southern elites, and the origins of a Civil War that broke American democracy in two. It is a history driven by the intertwined forces of white supremacy, state power, and coerced labor—and it is a history that would persist long after the Confederacy’s demise.
Timothy Shenk: When Americans talked about a “vast Southern empire” before the Civil War, what did they have in mind?
Matthew Karp: The short answer is that they weren’t talking about an independent Southern republic, but the entire United States.
It’s easy to find sectionalism in Southern politics before the Civil War, but the most powerful antebellum Southerners—from Andrew Jackson to Jefferson Davis—were nationalists, not separatists. What John C. Calhoun really wanted, as Richard Hofstadter wrote long ago, was not for Southerners to leave the Union but to dominate it, which they more or less did in the thirty years before the Civil War.
Southerners imagined—and worked to build—an American republic whose foundation was slavery. In their minds, this was a powerful state, continental in scope and hemispheric in influence, which put the preservation of slaveholding property at the center of U.S. politics and U.S. foreign policy. That’s what they meant by “this vast Southern empire,” and that’s the focus of the book.
Shenk: Especially in popular discussions, slaveholders are often seen as advocates of small government and states’ rights. What does looking at the foreign policy visions promoted by leading proslavery figures do to that image?
Karp: It’s true that in many antebellum political arguments, Southern leaders emphasized the limited powers of the federal government. But when slavery and states’ rights came into conflict, the abstract commitment to limited government vanished pretty quickly. The outstanding example is the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, which overrode personal liberty laws in the northern states and required federal marshals to assist slaveholders in capturing runaway slaves.
You can look at this and say, “Aha, they’re hypocrites!” But the use of federal power to defend slavery went far beyond hypocrisy—it was a cornerstone of antebellum Southern politics. Looking at U.S. foreign policy makes this especially clear. On many important questions of foreign relations—the annexation of Texas, for instance—supposed small-government ideologues suddenly morphed into bold advocates of federal power. Proslavery Southerners also served as by far the most aggressive champions of U.S. military and naval expansion. They didn’t do this because they were hypocrites, but because they believed the world’s strongest bulwark for slavery was not the weak state governments of the South, but the entire United States.
Shenk: One of the most fascinating characters in this book, and in all of U.S. history, is John C. Calhoun. He was the most incisive thinker the plantation elite had—Richard Hofstadter called him “the Marx of the master class”—and he’s a central figure in your account. What do we learn about Calhoun by bringing his foreign policy into the spotlight?
Karp: We think of Calhoun as the quintessential antebellum Southern sectionalist. But from the perspective of foreign and military policy, he was much closer to a bold proslavery nationalist. As Secretary of State, he pushed aggressively for Texas annexation, bypassing Congress (and cutting constitutional corners) to offer military aid to Texas in 1844. Through the antebellum years he remained a relatively consistent advocate for army and navy expansion.
Sometimes we imagine Southern slaveholders like Calhoun as isolated elites, barricaded in the parlors of their plantation homes. But Calhoun was also a bold proslavery internationalist . He paid close attention to the politics of slavery and abolition in Europe and in Latin America, and he was very assiduous about directing U.S. power to sustain slavery in Cuba and Brazil. For him, the international strength of slavery and the international strength of the United States were tightly bound together.
Shenk: Recent historians have paid a lot of attention to the commercial relationships that bound the United States and the United Kingdom before the Civil War. As you note in the book, during this period “Britain was the world’s largest consumer of goods produced by American slaves.” But you also observe that this was the same period when the UK both abolished slavery and embarked on a renewed drive to establish a global empire. From the perspective of the American South, this combination seemed like a total jumble of ideological, cultural, and economic issues that the UK would have to sort out if they wanted to develop a coherent vision of their country’s place in the world. And it gets even more confusing when you remember that figures like Calhoun had spent most of 1812 pushing for a disastrous war with Britain. How did slavery’s defenders make sense of all this?
Karp: Southern elites saw Britain as both a vital commercial partner and a potentially dangerous strategic enemy. That’s not necessarily incoherent, but it is confusing. It helps to approach Southern attitudes toward Britain from a chronological perspective.
It’s hard to overstate the importance of the British abolition of slavery in 1833. Overnight, the policy of the world’s most powerful empire was now distinctly hostile toward one of America’s most fundamental institutions. In the early 1840s, Southern leaders in and around the administration of President John Tyler believed that defending slavery against British abolitionism should be a top strategic priority for the United States. There were many dimensions to this effort, from naval expansion to Cuba diplomacy, but in some sense it culminated with the U.S. annexation of the Republic of Texas, which was in 1845 the fourth largest slaveholding society in the world.
By the 1850s, after the Texas annexation and the U.S.-Mexico war, the strategic situation had changed. Slaveholders were cheered by the apparent “failure” of emancipation in the West Indies—obviously, it wasn’t a failure for the emancipated slaves, but sugar production in Jamaica and elsewhere plummeted after abolition. Across the 1850s, slaveholding leaders eagerly reprinted evidence that Britain had soured on abolition, and was ready to accept the dominance of slave-produced staples (from the United States, Cuba, and Brazil) in the world market. This was a somewhat optimistic view, but by 1861, Southerners sincerely viewed Britain much more as a commercial partner than as a strategic rival.
Shenk: For a long time, historians tended to think of the antebellum South as an almost feudal holdover from the past that could not stand up to the forces of modernity. In the last decade or so, however, scholars have become much more likely to depict it as thoroughly modern. Where does your research fall in that debate?
Karp: You’re right about the tendency of the recent scholarship. In a lot of ways, my book is congruent with that work, although I do think there are limits to a social or economic interpretation of slavery that concentrates entirely on its modern characteristics.
Really, though, the book is less about whether slavery was or was not “modern,” and more about the fact that leading slaveholders believed it was. I like what the historian Frederick Cooper says: scholars should stop “shoehorning political discourse into modern, antimodern, or postmodern discourses” and instead “listen to what is being said in the world.” What slaveholders said, over and over again, was that “modern civilization” and African slavery were fundamentally compatible. Economically, they argued, slave labor was necessary to produce vital agricultural staples. And ideologically, slave labor fit in very well in a world increasingly dominated by free trade, expanding European empires, and hardening racist science. I think the most powerful slaveholding politicians—Calhoun, Jefferson Davis, Alexander Stephens, and so on—believed this most of all. We have to understand that belief to understand antebellum politics.
Shenk: By 1861, elite Southerners were no longer convinced the United States could serve as the agent of their interests, and so they break off to form the Confederacy. You argue that we should see the launching of the Confederate States of America as their “boldest foreign policy project.” What do we gain by thinking of the Confederacy in this way?
Karp: Slaveholding leaders didn’t want to abandon the Union. But their grip on the federal government was overthrown by the election of Abraham Lincoln and the Republican Party in 1860. Suddenly the power of the national state—which they had spent decades building up—could be used to not to strengthen slavery, but to undermine it.
All the same, I don’t think Southerners would have seceded without the confident belief that a slaveholding Confederacy could thrive on the world stage. In the book I look at two of the most famous Southern documents from early 1861—the Mississippi declaration of secession [3] and Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens’s “ cornerstone address [4].” Both are very candid about the central importance of slavery, and in contemporary discussions they are often brandished as clear evidence that slavery, not state rights, drove Southerners to secede (like the way Jon Stewart cites [5] the Mississippi declaration in this [5] episode of the Daily Show).
That’s all true, but what’s most interesting about these documents is that they make a fundamentally international case for slavery. “Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery—the greatest material interest of the world”: that’s the second sentence of the Mississippi declaration. It wasn’t just that slaveholders believed Britain and other European powers would come to their aid in a war against the North, although they did believe that. It was that their entire ideological and strategic worldview depended on a belief in the global necessity of slave labor. European states might oppose slavery in the abstract, but they could not escape the deeper principle of racial inequality upon which slavery rested. “The truth of this principle may be slow in development,” Stephens admitted in his famous address, but so was the case with the controversial principles of Galileo or Adam Smith. Ultimately, he and other Confederate leaders were confident that the fundamental ideas of racial hierarchy and coerced labor would receive “full recognition . . . throughout the civilized and enlightened world.” That international confidence, I think, was a true ideological cornerstone of the Confederate project.
Shenk: The book’s epigraph comes from Karl Marx—“In the foreign, as in the domestic policy of the United States, the interests of the slaveholders served as the guiding star”—and its footnotes are studded with classic works of Marxist scholarship, but your methodology here doesn’t follow the standard practice among Marxists. Your concern is with policymaking elites, and while you’re clearly aware that their work isn’t taking place in a vacuum, you’re not trying to write a history from the bottom up. Is there a contribution that you’re trying to make by shifting the angle of focus?
Karp: Part of the issue here is that the literature on slavery and the Old South is, in some ways, the richest literature in U.S. history—the crown jewel of American historiography, as I’ve heard it described. And the best books on Southern politics, from the 1960s to the 2000s (many of them written from a Marxist or Marx-ish perspective), have been grounded very firmly in the social world of the antebellum South.
I would say that my book’s focus on elite actors and elite sources should not be seen as a criticism of that literature, but an indirect appreciation of its richness. Historians are so accustomed—as we should be—to viewing slaveholders at the top of a complex pyramid of class, racial, and gender hierarchies in Southern society, that for a long time, we forgot that they were also the nation’s most powerful political leaders, and the world’s most powerful slaveholding class. Only in the past fifteen years or so have historians begun to look more systematically at slaveholders as leading national and international actors, as well as Southern social elites. Done right, I think, these approaches don’t contradict each other—they complement each other.
Shenk: You end the book by discussing a speech by that W.E.B. Du Bois gave at Harvard’s 1890 commencement, when he was twenty-two. In his address, Du Bois portrayed the Confederacy’s president Jefferson Davis as not just a successful politician but as the representative product of a whole civilization. Thirteen years after he made this argument, Du Bois wrote in The Souls of Black Folk , “the problem of the twentieth century is the problem of the color line.” Do you see a connection running from the history you examine here and the world that Du Bois saw at the turn of the twentieth century?
Karp: Du Bois titled his 1890 address “ Jefferson Davis as a Representative of Civilization [6],” and by that he meant, provocatively, not just the civilization of the Old South, but all contemporary Western civilization itself. Davis’s life and career, according to Du Bois, prefigured the major world developments of the turn of the twentieth century—the destruction of indigenous populations, the strengthening of a global color line, the extension of Euro-American empires over Asia, Africa, and Australia. It’s an incredibly powerful and ambitious speech for anyone to give, let alone a twenty-two year old undergraduate.
Many historians would object to Du Bois’s intellectual genealogy here. Davis’s side, after all, lost the Civil War: the Confederacy was destroyed and slavery was abolished. The leading players in the world of 1890—from industrial tycoons from to European imperialists—seemingly owed little to Jefferson Davis or the slave South. U.S. President Benjamin Harrison was himself a Union Army veteran, who had marched with General Sherman into Georgia.
But what I like about Du Bois’s speech is that he refuses, unlike so many later writers, to consign Davis to a distant and departed past, entirely walled off from the twentieth-century future. Davis and other slaveholding elites thought and acted as power players in a rapidly modernizing world. Their battlefield defeat should not blind us to the ways in which many of their core ideas—about racial hierarchy, coerced labor, and imperial state power—survived long after 1865.
That doesn’t mean that the Civil War, Confederate defeat, and slave emancipation were irrelevant. If anything, it underlines their significance. The larger point, though, is that when we look back at Davis and his ilk, we should not regard them as antiquarian curiosities, but as ambitious contenders for power in an uncertain mid-nineteenth century world.
Shenk: Historians know you as a specialist in the antebellum South, but in the wider world you’re better known for your writings on contemporary politics, especially for your essays in Jacobin , which were some of the sharpest analyses of the Bernie Sanders campaign in this entire election cycle. On the surface, at least, those two don’t seem to have a lot in common. Do you see any common threads running through the two? What was it like wrapping up this book while also spending so much time with your feet planted in 2016?
Karp: I’m not sure they do have much in common! I turned in my final draft of the book in January, just as the Democratic primary really got underway and Sanders emerged as a surprising contender for the nomination. It was fortunate timing, because after working on the book for years, I now had some free time to get involved in contemporary politics.
To the extent that there is a connection between these things, it might have to do with my sense of slaveholders as a nineteenth-century ruling class. Our most powerful elites today are very different, and I don’t want to make a serious analogy between the two. But in the very general sense that slaveholders were a small and self-conscious class, nationally powerful, internationally sophisticated, and totally confident in the future of their system—despite various warning signs all around the globe—their outlook is, in some ways, comparable to the outlook of today’s big capitalist class. And control of the American national state was—as it remains today—absolutely fundamental to the operation of ruling class power.
I agree with other historians and commentators, like Manisha Sinha [7] and Chris Hayes [8], that the contemporary left could stand to learn from the anti-slavery movement. The key, though, is not only to isolate and weaken the gun lobby or fossil fuel industry, for instance, but to develop a popular and more comprehensive critique [9] of the political-economic system—a twenty-first century version of the “Slave Power” argument. Slaveholders, after all, didn’t just represent a sector of the economy; they controlled the government. For all its weaknesses, I do think the Sanders campaign represented a major step forward in this larger project, and I’m probably unreasonably optimistic about the possibilities going forward. Matthew Karp is Assistant Professor of History at Princeton University, and the author of This Vast Southern Empire [2] . Timothy Shenk is a Carnegie Fellow at New America and a contributing editor at Dissent. He is the author of Maurice Dobb: Political Economist [10]. | 1 |
On Thursday, The New York Times obtained a draft version of a State Department memo that sharply criticizes the Obama administration’s Syria policy and calls for limited military strikes against that country’s government. The memo, signed by 51 diplomats, was sent through an agency “dissent channel” that was established during the Vietnam War to air internal criticism. Because the memo is written by and for government officials, its language can be difficult to parse. What follows is an annotation of 10 key lines, many of which were marked SBU, for “sensitive but unclassified” (U is unclassified). Discussion of the memo has focused on the dissenters’ indictment of their own leader’s policy. Many of their points have been debated inside the administration for years, and there are complicated arguments on both sides. While their proposed solution excludes some significant points, there is a core truth in this document: Current policy has little answer for how to break out of a status quo that is disastrous and steadily getting worse. State Department officials have been pushing for years for a limited military intervention in Syria along these lines. The Central Intelligence Agency joined the department in backing airstrikes in internal administration discussions in 2012 and 2013 the Pentagon and National Security Council were opposed. President Obama has decisively ruled out such strikes, in part out of concern for the absence of popular support for American involvement in another war in the Middle East. But the fighting — and its devastating humanitarian toll — has ground on and in some cases expanded, so the rationale for deploying United States military power has, in the eyes of the dissenters, grown only more urgent. “ weapons” are things like cruise missiles launched from far enough away that Syria could not retaliate. The dissenters’ stated goal of using them, along with airstrikes, is not to topple President Bashar of Syria, but to pressure him toward a peace deal. Proponents of such a plan often cite the 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, which helped push that country’s leaders to reach a diplomatic agreement over the conflict in Kosovo. Some say that parallel is flawed because of the active involvement of Russia and Iran in this war, suggesting that those countries might escalate their activity in support of Syrian forces to counterbalance any American strikes. (The memo here also refers to Daesh, an Arabic acronym for the Islamic State.) This line indicates both why these diplomats are speaking up and why their dissent is being met with skepticism. Because the White House has chosen to emphasize diplomacy, the State Department is being asked to pursue a strategy it does not fully support. Citing the war’s toll is a way for the diplomats to express their frustration with that arrangement. It is also a way to draw attention to the costs of allowing the status quo to continue. However, opponents of intervention argue that just because the status quo is bad does not mean that bombing Syrian government forces would improve things. Some accuse State Department officials like these dissenters of “ ”: a reasoning that the situation is so awful that something must be done, and airstrikes are something, therefore airstrikes are a good policy. This statement argues that airstrikes will entrench Syria in an unsolvable stalemate, thereby giving the Syrian leader no choice but to negotiate. The latest peace efforts have gone nowhere at a time when Mr. Assad, backed by Russian forces, is winning on the battlefield. If Mr. Obama wants to negotiate an end to the conflict, the dissenters say, the United States and its allies have to show a willingness to match Russian muscle and give Mr. Assad a clear signal that he cannot win a meaningful victory solely on the ground. This approach risks worsening the war’s toll in the short term, and there is no guarantee that the United States could break the Syrian president’s will soon. But the memo highlights the fact that Russia’s expanded military involvement changed the status quo, and the United States has not found a way to change it back, leaving the administration with less leverage. Airstrikes against Syrian government forces, the memo argues, would also help defeat the Islamic State. Most analysts agree that Mr. Assad’s abuses and the Syrian civil war have both fueled the Islamic State’s rise, as the memo says. But while these dissenting diplomats argue that a peace deal would allow Syria’s government and Syrian rebels to join together to fight the Islamic State, others worry that rebels — including the Kurdish YPG, or People’s Protection Units — would turn against one another to fight for power. This happened in Afghanistan in 1992, when rebels who had defeated the government began a yearslong civil war among themselves, and likewise in Libya in 2011. The memo suggests that, were the United States to impose a zone over Syria, the fighting would cool — and that this, in turn, would lessen the suffering of Syrians (including refugees and I. D. P. or internally displaced persons) and open more space for peace talks. This is an ambitious prediction. Research by Micah Zenko of the Council on Foreign Relations found that airstrikes account for only a fraction of deaths in Syria. Mr. Zenko also found that zones tend to escalate wars rather than calm them. Syria would be particularly tricky, given that many airstrikes are carried out by Russian rather than Syrian warplanes. The memo does not address whether a zone would apply to Russia or how Washington could enforce it without risking a major conflict. This makes two sharp points about why Syria peace talks never seem to go anywhere. First, the United States has little leverage to force Syria to make concessions or keep its promises. Second, negotiations have involved several countries and groups, each with its own agenda. The Obama administration has been unable to address either of these factors. The memo contrasts this with the Iran nuclear deal, which worked in part because the United States imposed economic sanctions and also because talks were streamlined between two sides, with Iran on one and the United States mostly leading the other. This is an important critique of the president’s choice of diplomacy over intervention: It is difficult to see any path for peace talks unless Washington finds a way to assert far greater leverage. The United States missed a window to assert such leverage earlier in the conflict because of internal and a mistaken White House conclusion, in 2012, that Mr. Assad was about to fall without being further pushed. Airstrikes, the memo argues, could be the leverage the United States needs to commandeer the negotiations and force Syria to compromise. This intervention would need to be forceful enough to overpower not only Mr. Assad, but also his Russian and Iranian backers, who have so far shown a willingness to escalate their involvement to keep their ally in power. The only way for the Obama administration to Syria’s allies is to surpass their commitments, which at this point could require something as extreme as a ground invasion. The most revealing aspect of this memo is what it excludes. It does not address how to resolve the deep disagreements even among allies about what a peace deal should look like. It does not offer a legal basis for war against Syria, which Russia would surely block at the United Nations. It does not say how to remove Mr. Assad without letting the Syrian government collapse. The memo is as much about registering frustration, even outrage, with the current policy as it is about offering a detailed alternative. In that sense, it is also as revealing about matters internal to Washington — questions of blame and responsibility — as it is about the prospects for ending Syria’s nightmare. | 1 |
Aug. 19 was an eventful day for Paul Manafort. That morning, he stepped down from guiding Donald J. Trump’s presidential campaign, after a brief tenure during which Mr. Trump won the Republican nomination, Democrats’ emails were hacked and the campaign’s contacts with Russia came under scrutiny. Dogged by revelations about past financial dealings in Ukraine, Mr. Manafort retreated from public view. But behind the scenes, he was busy with other matters. Papers were recorded that same day creating a shell company controlled by Mr. Manafort that soon received $13 million in loans from two businesses with ties to Mr. Trump, including one that partners with a billionaire and another led by a Trump economic adviser. They were among $20 million in loans secured by properties belonging to Mr. Manafort and his wife. The purpose of the loans is unstated in public records, although at least some of them appear to be part of an effort by Mr. Manafort to stave off a personal financial crisis stemming from failed investments with his . The transactions raise a number of questions, including whether Mr. Manafort’s decision to turn to lenders was related to his role in the campaign, where he had agreed to serve for free. They also shine a light on the rich real estate portfolio that Mr. Manafort acquired during and after the years he worked in Ukraine. Mr. Manafort, often using shell companies, invested millions of dollars in various properties, including apartments and condos in New York, homes in Florida and Virginia and luxury houses in Los Angeles. Mr. Manafort’s ties to Ukraine and Russia have come under scrutiny as federal officials investigate Russian meddling in the American presidential election. Investigators are known to have examined aspects of his finances, including bank accounts he had in the secretive tax haven of Cyprus there is no indication his recent loans are part of the inquiry. The source of the money for the real estate purchases is not clear, and Mr. Manafort never filed lobbying registrations for his work in Ukraine that would have disclosed his compensation. Such registrations are necessary for activities that involve influencing policy and public opinion in the United States, and some of Mr. Manafort’s Ukraine work appeared to fall into that category. officials in Ukraine say $12. 7 million in “off the books” cash payments were earmarked for him in a handwritten ledger kept by the political party of the deposed strongman Viktor F. Yanukovych. Last month, a Ukrainian lawmaker released documents that appeared to corroborate one of the ledger entries, and on Wednesday The Associated Press reported confirmation of another payment. The two payments in 2007 and 2009, totaling $1. 2 million, were routed through shell companies in Belize to a bank account in Virginia belonging to Mr. Manafort’s consulting firm. Mr. Manafort has previously claimed the ledger is a fake. On Wednesday, he issued a statement that did not dispute the ledger entries, but suggested that any payments he received were legal because they were not made in cash. “Mr. Manafort has always denied that he ever received any cash payments for his work and has consistently maintained that he received all of his payments, for services rendered, through wire transfers conducted through the international banking system,” the statement said. Separately on Wednesday, a spokesman for Mr. Manafort said he had “received formal guidance recently from the authorities” on the need to register, retroactively, for lobbying work in Ukraine, and was “taking appropriate steps in response. ” Mr. Manafort was advised last week that he should file the belated registration within 30 days to come into compliance with the law, according to a person with direct knowledge of conversations between Mr. Manafort’s lawyers and the Justice Department. One of Mr. Manafort’s recent loans, previously unreported, was for $3. 5 million in September from the private lending unit of Spruce Capital, a small New York investment firm that has a Ukrainian connection through the billionaire Alexander Rovt. An American citizen who made his fortune in the privatization of the fertilizer industry in Ukraine and has long done business in that part of the world, Mr. Rovt is a financial backer of Spruce, whose Joshua Crane has been a developer of Trump hotel projects. Mr. Crane did not respond to requests for comment. Mr. Rovt, who donated $10, 000 to Mr. Trump’s campaign on Election Day — the campaign refunded most of it because it was over the legal maximum of $2, 700 — said he had never met Mr. Manafort and was not involved in the loan to him. “I did not recommend him or put the parties together,” Mr. Rovt said in an email provided by his lawyer. Mr. Manafort declined to answer specific questions about any of his loans, other than to say that they “are personal and all reflect arm’ transactions at or above market rates. ” He derided the interest that his finances had generated in the news media and among researchers, some of whom have even set up a website that dissects his loans. “There is nothing out of the ordinary about them,” Mr. Manafort said, “and I am confident anyone who isn’t afflicted with scandal fever will come to the same conclusion. ” Scandal has trailed Mr. Manafort since his earliest work as an international lobbyist and consultant in the 1980s, when he testified before Congress about influence peddling to win federal housing contracts and was linked to $10 million in cash that a confidant of the Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos claimed was delivered to Mr. Manafort in a suitcase. In the 1990s, Mr. Manafort’s work for clients such as the Angolan rebel leader Jonas Savimbi was cited in a human rights watchdog report, “The Torturers’ Lobby,” which examined Washington consultants who catered to brutal regimes. Mr. Manafort went to work for Mr. Yanukovych and his Party of Regions in the and during that time also entered into business deals with two oligarchs, Oleg Deripaska of Russia and Dmytro Firtash of Ukraine. Both deals, which were ultimately unsuccessful, involved the use of murky offshore companies and were tainted by allegations that cronies of Mr. Yanukovych’s schemed to funnel assets out of Ukraine. The transaction with Mr. Deripaska, a billionaire industrialist close to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, involved the attempted purchase of a Ukrainian cable telecommunications business using $18. 9 million that Mr. Deripaska invested in a Cayman Islands partnership managed by Mr. Manafort. The cable business was controlled by offshore shell companies that Ukrainian investigators said were used by Mr. Yanukovych’s inner circle to loot public assets. And last summer, the Ukrainian investigators announced the discovery of the handwritten ledger, said to have been kept in the offices of Mr. Yanukovych’s political party before he was ousted in 2014, which showed the $12. 7 million in payments designated for Mr. Manafort. The nature of Mr. Manafort’s work in Ukraine appeared to concern his family, according to text messages belonging to one of his adult daughters, Andrea, which were hacked last year and posted on a website used by Ukrainian hackers. The thousands of messages span from 2012 to 2016 and include references to millions of dollars Mr. Manafort apparently transferred to his two daughters. In one text written in 2015, Ms. Manafort, a lawyer, called her father’s activities in Ukraine “legally questionable,” and in a separate exchange with her sister, Jessica, she worried that cash he gave them was tainted by the violent response to the uprising that ultimately led to the downfall of Mr. Manafort’s client, Mr. Yanukovych. “Don’t fool yourself,” Ms. Manafort wrote. “That money we have is blood money. ” In addition to the money he gave his daughters, Mr. Manafort also began acquiring a number of real estate assets during the years he worked in Ukraine, several of them costing millions of dollars and bought with cash. Among them is an apartment in Trump Tower in Manhattan, bought in 2006 for $3. 7 million, and a Brooklyn brownstone bought in 2012 for $3 million. Being able to cite his Trump Tower address came in handy when he pitched his services to Mr. Trump’s campaign early in 2016. By then, Mr. Manafort had been out of American politics for many years, but he expressed a desire to get back in the game and offered to work free, suggesting that he did not need the money. Soon, however, he was embarking on a borrowing spree, using his many properties as collateral, including a summer home in the Hamptons valued at more than $11 million. The transactions began with the filing of papers that created the shell company, Summerbreeze L. L. C. on Aug. 19 as Mr. Manafort’s resignation as campaign chairman was being announced. Shortly thereafter, Summerbreeze obtained the $3. 5 million loan from the Spruce Capital unit. In November, after Mr. Trump won the presidential election, Summerbreeze received a second loan, for $9. 5 million, from Federal Savings Bank of Chicago, which focuses on affordable mortgages for military veterans and is headed by Stephen M. Calk, a senior economic adviser to Mr. Trump at the time. The collateral for the loan included Mr. Manafort’s Hamptons home and other assets. In addition to the loans taken out on the Hamptons house, Mr. Manafort has recently obtained mortgages on another property. Those loans, totaling $6. 6 million, were obtained in January on a brownstone in Brooklyn and also came from Federal Savings Bank in Chicago. Mr. Manafort declined to explain the purpose of his loans. But a review of public records suggests at least some of them are connected to efforts to salvage investments he made with Jessica Manafort’s husband, Jeffrey Yohai, whose real estate business filed for bankruptcy in December. Mr. Yohai faces a lawsuit by another who claims he exploited his connections to Mr. Manafort “to meet numerous public figures and celebrities” and solicit investments from them Mr. Yohai denies the accusations. In an affidavit filed in the bankruptcy case, Mr. Manafort said he had decided to “assist with additional funding to protect my existing investments,” totaling more than $4 million, in several luxury properties in California owned by limited liability companies controlled by Mr. Yohai. Why Mr. Manafort opted to go to Spruce Capital and the Chicago bank for the loans is unclear. For Federal Savings, Mr. Manafort’s loans amount to about 5. 4 percent of the bank’s total assets. Mr. Calk did not respond to messages seeking comment, and a spokeswoman for Federal Savings said it would not discuss its customers’ business. At Spruce Capital, the loan secured by the Hamptons house appeared to be somewhat unusual. Of the 40 transactions listed under “recent activities” on the investment group’s lending unit website, it was the only one outside of New York City and the sole loan involving a house. Mr. Crane, the of Spruce Capital, had previously been involved in two Trump projects, including a Trump International Hotel Tower in Waikiki. Mr. Rovt, who has partnered with Mr. Crane’s firm on several major real estate investments in New York and is an investor in its lending business, is active in the community. Last year, he took part in a small panel discussion on Ukrainian relations at Manor College in Pennsylvania, where he shared the stage with Andrii V. Artemenko, a member of the Ukrainian Parliament. The New York Times reported in February that Mr. Artemenko worked behind the scenes with Michael D. Cohen, President Trump’s personal lawyer, and Felix H. Sater, a former business associate of Mr. Trump’s, to relay a proposed peace plan to the White House. Mr. Rovt, through his lawyer, said that he knew Mr. Artemenko, but that he was “not involved in any peace proposal. ” As for his excessive donation to Mr. Trump in November, it stands out, given that Mr. Rovt had previously donated almost exclusively to Democrats during the election — — including $2, 700 to Hillary Clinton in February 2016. Mr. Rovt said the reason was simple: Friends had been encouraging him to support the Trump campaign. “So,” he said, “I finally did. ” | 1 |
2016 presidential campaign by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
Donald Trump, the white nationalist that claimed to oppose the corporate establishment, appears to have won the U.S. presidency. But, “even the victory of the openly bigoted Trump poses an opportunity to right our political ship.” The Democrats were not “our” party, but the party that thought they owned us. Their “rejection must be complete and blame must be laid squarely at their feet” for raising those chickens that have come home to roost. Freedom Rider: Dump the Democrats for Good by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
“The Democrats were so entrenched in their corruption and self-dealing that they didn’t see the Bernie Sanders campaign for modest reform as the savior it might have been.”
This columnist did not see a Donald Trump victory coming. The degree of disgust directed at an awful candidate was more than I had predicted. Neither the corporate media, nor Wall Street nor the pundits nor the pollsters saw this coming either. Their defeat and proof of their uselessness is total. Those of us who rejected the elite consensus and didn’t support Hillary Clinton should be proud.
Black people are now in fear and in shock when we ought to be spoiling for a fight. All is not lost. Even the victory of the openly bigoted Trump poses an opportunity to right our political ship. Not the electoral ship, the political one. For decades black Americans have been voting for people who have done them wrong. Bill Clinton got rid of public assistance as a right, and undid regulations that kept Wall Street in check. He put black people in jail and yet black people didn’t turn on him until he and his wife tried to defeat Obama. But Obama gave us more of the same. Bailouts of Wall Street, interventions and death for people all over the world, and a beat down of black people who still loved him. Despite the fear of Republican victory we end up losing whenever a Democratic presidential candidate wins.
“Obama bailed out banks, insurance companies, Big Pharma and even Ukraine.”
Victory is ours if we dump the Democrat Party and their black misleaders. The Democrats were so entrenched in their corruption and self-dealing that they didn’t see the Bernie Sanders campaign for modest reform as the savior it might have been. Instead they marched in lock step with a woman who was heartily disliked. Sanders went along as the sheep dog who led his flock straight over the cliff. The Democrats inadvertently galvanized people who had stopped participating in the system and who want change from top to bottom.
One of our biggest problems lies not in facts but in perceptions. What did Democrats do for black people? The Democrats ship living wage jobs off shore in corrupt trade deals like NAFTA and TTP. They don’t prosecute killer cops or raise the minimum wage. Trump will be hard pressed to deport more people than Obama did. The list of treachery is very long.
When Donald Trump asked black people, “What have you got to lose?” his words were met with derision. But in reality he posed a good question. What do we have to show for years of Democratic votes? Obama bailed out banks, insurance companies, Big Pharma and even Ukraine. But he didn’t rebuild Detroit or New Orleans. The water in Flint, Michigan is still poisoned and the prisons are still full.
“There may be opportunity in this crisis if we dare to seize it.”
The outpouring of love for Barack Obama was purely symbolic. In state after state, black people who gave him victory in 2008 and 2012 stayed home. They loved seeing him and his wife dressed up at state dinners but they were never fully engaged in politics because that is not what Democrats want. The love was phony and void of any political intent. Donald Trump will be president because of that veneer of political activism.
As for white people who voted for Trump, of course many of them are racists. However they are not without valid complaints. They don’t want neoliberalism but black people don’t either. They don’t want wars around the world and neither do black people. We corrupt our own heritage of radicalism in favor of shallow symbolism. While we slept walk in foolish nostalgia for Obama and cried at the thought of him leaving office, white people kept their hatred of Hillary to themselves or lied to pollsters. They want America to be great again, great for them. White nostalgic yearnings are dangerous for black people, and we must be vigilant. But there may be opportunity in this crisis if we dare to seize it.
Republicans have been the white people’s party for nearly 50 years. Trump just made it more obvious. He didn’t tell us anything we didn’t already know. We don’t have to be the losers in this election. Let us remember what we have achieved in our history. Half of black Americans didn’t even have the right to vote in the 1960s yet made earth shattering progress in a short time. But we must understand the source of that progress. It came from struggle and daring to create the crises that always bring about change.
“The dread of redneck celebration should not be our primary motivation right now.”
Yes white people will strut for president Trump but that doesn’t mean we must submit as if we are in the Jim Crow days of old. We have ourselves to rely on and we can reclaim our history of fighting for self-determination. The dread of redneck celebration should not be our primary motivation right now. Before we quake in fear at white America we must send the scoundrels packing.
The black politicians and the Democratic National Committee and the civil rights organizations that don’t help the masses must all be kicked to the proverbial curb. The rejection must be complete and blame must be laid squarely at their feet.
Those of us who voted for the green party ticket of Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka must stand firmly and proudly for our choice. We must strategize on building a progressive party to replace the Democrats who never help us. We must applaud Julian Assange and Wikileaks for exposing their corruption. There should be no back tracking on the fight to build left wing political power.
“We must strategize on building a progressive party to replace the Democrats who never help us.”
The black people who didn’t return to the polls shouldn’t be blamed either. Those individuals must have personal introspection that is meaningful and political. Their lack of enthusiasm speaks to Democratic Party and black misleadership incompetence. We should refrain from personal blame and help one another in this process as we fight for justice and peace.
The end of the duopoly is the first step in liberation. Staying with a party that literally did nothing was a slow and agonizing death. Sometimes shock therapy is needed to improve one’s condition. If we don’t take the necessary steps to free ourselves this election outcome will be a disaster. Instead, why not bring the disaster to the people who made it happen? The destruction of the Democratic Party and creation of a truly progressive political movement is the only hope for black America. Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR, and is widely reprinted elsewhere. She maintains a frequently updated blog as well as at http://freedomrider.blogspot.com. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgendaReport.com. | 1 |
HOUSTON, Texas — A Texas woman who was the “Jane Roe” in the 1973 abortion case of Roe v. Wade died in a Katy assisted living facility on Saturday. [Although Norma McCorvey, her real name, became famous for the part she played in the landmark U. S. Supreme Court decision, she became a Christian and spoke out against abortion. “Texas Right to Life was honored to work alongside Ms. McCorvey for years,” Elizabeth Graham of Texas Right to Life told Breitbart Texas. “Jim and I were so blessed to work with her during the last decades of her life on causes. ” Graham added, “Much later, she realized she was just a pawn in the system. ” Graham said it was important to note that McCorvey never had an abortion, saying she “choose life instead. ” “We are saddened to hear of Norma’s passing, yet we are eternally grateful for her courageous witness that she fully embraced,” said Texas Values President Jonathan Saenz. “I had the honor of interacting with her over the years and I know she can now rest safely in the arms of our Lord. ” Her death, reported by the Washington Post early Saturday afternoon, was confirmed by Joshua Prager. Prager is a journalist who has been working on a book on the historic Supreme Court decision that has sparked decades of debate over abortion rights. The defendant in the case, “Wade” was County District Attorney Henry Wade. She reportedly died from a heart ailment in an facility in Katy, a suburb of Houston. The Washington Post reported: Ms. McCorvey was a complicated protagonist in a legal case that became a touchstone in the culture wars, celebrated by champions as an affirmation of women’s freedom and denounced by opponents as the legalization of murder of the unborn. When she filed suit in 1970, she was looking not for a sweeping ruling for all women from the highest court in the land, but rather, simply, the right to legally and safely end a pregnancy that she did not wish to carry forward. In her home state of Texas, as in most other states, abortion was prohibited except when the mother’s life was at stake. On Jan. 22, 1973, the Supreme Court handed down its historic ruling, written by Justice Harry A. Blackmun, articulating a constitutional right to privacy that included the choice to terminate a pregnancy. Since the ruling of the U. S. Supreme Court in the landmark case, approximately 50 million legal abortions have been estimated to have been performed in the United States, according to the New York Times. Editor’s Note: This story has been updated with additional information. Lana Shadwick is a writer and legal analyst for Breitbart Texas. She has served as a prosecutor and associate judge in Texas. Follow her on Twitter @LanaShadwick2. | 0 |
An uncomfortably high number of positive tests results for tuberculosis came back to a west Texas border senior day care center, putting city health officials on alert as they monitor the cases to see if any show signs of active TB. [The City of El Paso Department of Public Health confirmed Wednesday that 65 TB tests came back positive following the preliminary testing of 199 individuals in April. The health department began testing people at a local adult day care after one person in the center’s care tested positive for the sometimes fatal pulmonary disease. The venue where the swarm of positive TB diagnoses occurred is the La Victoria Adult Day Care Center, according to the El Paso Times. Officials believe all those tested may have had contact with patient zero. However, officials remain vigilant. More center members and workers could have been exposed to the bacteria. “While this is a relatively high rate of positivity, we must also consider, among other factors, that any elderly population will likely have higher positivity rates due to prior exposure,” said Robert Resendes, El Paso Public Health Director, in a prepared statement. He cautioned: “A positive test could be unrelated to this particular exposure event. ” So far, none of the the individuals testing positive exhibited active TB symptoms, say El Paso health department officials. Further testing will be conducted as part of an ongoing investigation to determine if others contracted the illness or if any of the 65 people begin to show active TB signs. “What we want the attendees and the community at large to know is that there is a systematic process in place to ensure everyone’s safety,” added Resendes. Those people who tested positive will receive detailed information on their results and undergo further health exams which include physical evaluations by Department of Public Health TB nurses along with chest at no cost to them, say local health officials. TB is caused by the Mycobacterium tuberculosis bacteria which attacks the lungs, but it can damage other organs in the body including the kidneys, brain, or spine. The disease spreads from the coughs, sneezes, wheezes, and other respiratory fluids of a person with an active infection. It tends to affect people who spend time with an infected person every day, although El Paso health officials indicate catching TB may require close contact for extended periods of time. Breitbart Texas reported TB can spread quickly once the bacteria becomes active because an individual will manifest symptoms like chest pain, muscle fatigue, weight loss, lethargy, and coughing up blood. Not everyone infected with TB gets sick if the bacteria remains dormant, considered latent TB. Previously, El Paso health officials commented that El Paso’s rates for tuberculosis is “roughly double the nation’s’” and called this rate consistent with other “border communities. ” TB rates are higher along the border. with TB and diabetes is more common along the border than in the rest of the state, according to the Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS). The World Health Organization (WHO) lists TB one of the world’s top 10 causes of death, but it is curable with proper treatment. DSHS adds some TB strains are resistant to treatment drugs. In 2015, nine people in Texas were diagnosed with multidrug resistant TB but none of the state’s cases were extensively drug resistant, the most difficult form of the illness to treat. People with compromised immune systems are most for contracting TB. That includes individuals with diabetes, severe kidney disease, certain forms of cancer and cancer treatments, malnutrition, and drugs that treat ailments like rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, and Crohn’s disease, the Mayo Clinic reports. Infants, young children, and the elderly are part of the high risk group. Follow Merrill Hope, a member of the original Breitbart Texas team, on Twitter. | 0 |
Share on Facebook Pass me a tissue, please... I'll admit it: I cry during movies… and books, music, and podcasts. Depending on how my hormone levels are, I might preemptively grab tissues and just watch the movie alone. Though a lot of people smirk when they see me watch movies in tears, I'm really fine with it. Truth be told, people who cry over movies tend to have something that a lot of others haven't really cultivated: empathy . It takes a special type of person to have empathy. Many people out there — narcissists and sociopaths, for example — are born without it and live their entire lives without ever really putting themselves in other peoples' shoes. This means they can't really feel for other people. Though a lack of empathy could come in very handy for a used car salesman, it's not always a good thing. Actually caring about others' situations takes strength — a lot of it. Life is brutal to some people and if you're able to actually put yourself in someone else's shoes and feel that pain, it says something about you. You're strong enough to actually withstand that pain, but to feel it nonetheless. You're strong enough to be strong for others. You're strong to the point that you understand where they're coming from and are able to actually feel what they're feeling. It's never a wimpy thing to actually care for another person, even if that person is a fictional character in a movie. It shows that you actually have a heart, and that it's a heart that can break itself for others. Though it can be broken, by the end of the movie, you know it's been patched back together. Being able to recover that quickly says something else about people who cry during movies: they can bounce back like no one else's business , and are strong enough and smart enough to actually separate reality from fiction. Of course, that's not the only reason people cry at the movies. There are also tears that flow because you've been where a character has been — tears of memories that are painful. I have often found it cathartic to see movies that have people going through things I have, simply because it allows me to let some of my bottled up feelings loose in a healthier way. I'd like to see how anyone could doubt someone's strength when they actually confront things that have hurt them in the past. Then, there's the kind of tears that flow when you're really just overwhelmed with the artistic genius of a film. It's not just something pretentious people do, either. It's called Stendhal Syndrome in its more advanced forms and it means that a work of art moved you to the point that you're having both physical and emotional symptoms. Having gotten it after watching the movie Casshern , I can honestly tell you that it takes a lot of strength to jerk yourself out of that physically-altering sense of awe. For people who are really susceptible to the way that art moves them, actually viewing a seriously good movie, listening to a good radio show, or even reading the right comic can be a test of your ability to keep a straight face. It can also be a major roller coaster ride — one which forces you to face and embrace emotions most others choose not to look at . If you ask me, that's a lot of strength to shoulder. Maybe it's not the kind of strength that most people think about when they think of a strong person, but it's the most important kind of emotional strength: empathy. And to a point, intelligent acuity it takes to cry at a movie is something you really can't deny. Even if we aren't lifting 100 pounds, we are exploring our emotions, and that can lift our spirits higher than anything else out there. Related: | 0 |
Good morning. We’re trying something new for our readers in Asia and Australia: a morning briefing to your day. What do you like? What do you want to see here? Email us with your feedback at asiabriefing@nytimes. com. Here’s what you need to know: • Little more than a week before Election Day in the United States, the F. B. I. has become enmeshed as never before in a presidential race. Hillary Clinton and her team launched an attack on the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, James B. Comey, after he disclosed that the agency was looking into a batch of messages that could be related to the inquiry into whether she and aides mishandled classified information. The Justice Department obtained a warrant for the messages, on the computer of the estranged husband of a top Clinton aide. Donald J. Trump continued to improve in polls, including in Florida, a state he must win for a chance at the presidency. • The shadowy presidential adviser at the center of the South Korea’s deepening political scandal returned from Europe to apologize for “wrongdoings” and pledge to appear before prosecutors. Concerns that she was allowed too much influence in the government prompted protests that pushed President Park to purge eight aides over the weekend. • The Taliban have seized more territory in Afghanistan this year than at any time in their struggle against the government. Over the last week, scores of Afghan soldiers and at least three army posts surrendered to the militants. The Taliban are increasingly using social media to advertise their victories. • Italy is recovering from one of its strongest earthquakes in decades. Search and rescue teams were converging on the stricken area, in the center of the country, where many buildings were damaged and thousands were homeless. No deaths were immediately reported. • About 300 million of the world’s children breathe highly toxic air, according to a United Nations report. More than of them are in South Asia, where pollution is at least six times levels considered safe. • Thousands of fighters are joining Shiite militias to further Iraq’s campaign to free the city of Mosul from the Islamic State. The Iraqi military said the total force is now over 40, 000. • After we posted a video about women in Saudi Arabia voting and running for office for the first time, nearly 6, 000 Saudi women poured out their hearts about living in a society where male relatives oversee all aspects of their lives. Some said subtle change was in progress, but many spoke of anger and fear. “I live a lie just so that I wouldn’t end up getting killed,” said one. • Canada and the European Union signed a trade agreement that counters the widespread trend. Canada’s prime minister, Justin Trudeau, said the deal would show that “trade is good for the middle class and those working hard to join it. ” • Global trade is slipping. That’s partly because developed nations are moving toward curbing free trade, and partly because reduced consumption and investment are drags. • The five bidders for the assets of the Hanjin Shipping Company’s route between Asia and the United States have until Nov. 7 to submit final bids. • In Manila, a competition between tycoons has given new life to a project to build a new airport for the capital. • Australian leaders are concerned about a mining magnate’s Chinese partners as the group becomes the only bidder for a swath of land bigger than Portugal. • Here’s a snapshot of global markets. • The king of Morocco ordered an investigation into the death of a fish vendor who was crushed by a compactor last week while trying to save more than $10, 000 worth of swordfish confiscated by the authorities. His death set off protests that reached the capital, Rabat. [The New York Times] • Australia’s government plans to permanently block all asylum seekers trying to reach the country by boat from ever gaining entry. [Sky News] • China sets off on its 33rd Antarctic expedition this week, sending more than 250 people on an icebreaker for months to hunt for a site for its fifth research station. [Global Times] • Dozens of people were reported killed in western Yemen after airstrikes by a military coalition hit a security complex, which included a prison. [The New York Times] • Iceland’s Pirate Party won second place in a general election, prompting the prime minister to resign. The party aims to pass the first constitution. [The New York Times] • Diwali, the Indian festival of lights, is being commemorated for the first time at the United Nations in recognition of the holiday’s celebration in member nations around the globe. The Secretariat building in New York will be lit for the holiday through tonight. • By elevating President Xi Jinping to the title of “core leader,” Communist Party officials have shown that, willingly or not, they’ve bowed to his dominance. • Pen Sovann, the first prime minister of Cambodia after the brutal Khmer Rouge government, died in the country’s southern Takeo Province. He was 80. • The first genetic study of Rattus norvegicus, otherwise known as the brown rat, shows that the rodent evolved slowly on the cold, open plains of northern China or Mongolia, and spread globally over the last few centuries — largely thanks to colonialists. When ghosts and witches, Elsas and Spidermen, take the streets tonight, candy might not be the only thing collected after saying ” . ” Since 1950, orange boxes with a coin slot have gone with Halloween traditions. The change goes to Unicef, the United Nations Children’s Fund. And it is all thanks to a Pennsylvania schoolteacher who decided to follow a children’s parade led by a cow in Philadelphia. The world was still recovering from World War II in the late 1940s when the Reverend Clyde Allison and his wife, Mary Emma Allison, had their three children not for candy, but soap and clothing for relief efforts in Europe. But the idea to give back on Halloween needed more legs. It found them when Mrs. Allison followed the parade to a department store, where a Unicef booth was taking in donations. That first year, children carried boxes that were soon replaced with the official orange ones. Over the years the for Unicef has raised at least $175 million, with funds going toward improving health care, clean water and education. The “constructive approach to Halloween,” a 1955 Times article on Oct. 30 noted, encouraged American youngsters “to develop the sense of international citizenship responsibility that is essential in today’s shrinking world. ” Remy Tumin contributed reporting. Your Morning Briefing is published weekday mornings. What would you like to see here? Contact us at asiabriefing@nytimes. com. | 1 |
This is not a guilt trip. Pile the presents to the sky, by all means. may want to throw every last dollar into the Planned Parenthood bucket. If that’s your thing, do it. But let this column be an additional seasonal reminder that generosity is a trait that nearly all of us share and hope to imprint on the children and teenagers in our orbit. So if you’re so inclined, commit yourself to doing at least one thing before the end of the year to bring the gift of giving to young people. Here are six ideas to get you started: FAMILY HISTORY Why be generous? It’s a perfectly reasonable question for an innocent kindergartner or oppositional teenager to ask. One of the best reasons is to honor your own family’s history of having been helped, as I’ve written before. Every family has one, if you stop to think about it. Mine includes receiving financial aid at two schools over the course of a decade, a mother who survived premenopausal breast cancer thanks to some excellent medical care, and grandparents on my wife’s side who survived the Holocaust and were welcomed to the United States. So tell your family history to your children, grandchildren, nieces or students. Update it each year with new examples of others who helped you out along the way. Kids love hearing these stories, and it helps them understand why you feel moved to support the causes you do. YOUR CHARITABLE PIE One of the most meaningful family conversations I can recall resulted from explaining to our older daughter how we divide our charitable budget. To my wife and me, the list of organizations was a pretty good inventory of the things we cared about most. But was there anything missing, we wondered? There was, according to our who made the case for donating to a scholarship fund at her camp. You don’t have to lead with the total dollar amounts or disclose them at all. Instead, drop 100 beans on the table, divide them into piles and then label each pile, noting that for every $100 you give away, this is how you divide it up. Still, you should be prepared for possible questions about how much you give, which may lead inevitably to ones about how much you make and how much you have. Not all children have the financial knowledge to make sense of the answers or the discretion to keep the numbers to themselves, but by the time they’re in their late teenage years, they are often ready. FINDING A CAUSE Not every family, let alone every child, has a burning desire to help in some particular area. Annie Hernandez, the executive director of the Frieda C. Fox Family Foundation, suggested the possibility of a tour. Call your local community foundation (the local entities that help collect and redirect charitable dollars) ask to speak with a program officer, disclose your budget and see if that person is willing to take you to see organizations and neighborhoods where assistance would be helpful. No, this is not poverty tourism or akin to favela tours you’re seeking out an expert precisely to avoid any insensitivity and to try to establish a lasting relationship. And even if the person you speak with can’t help you in person, he or she may be able to send you to other local organizations that are compatible with your general areas of interest. FUNDS The best giving program I’ve ever encountered is the yearlong effort that the seventh graders take on at the Brandeis School of San Francisco. Rather than give one another token bar and bat mitzvah gifts, the students and their families at the Jewish day school take the money they would have spent, toss it into a giant pile and let the children give it away. With additional the total can sometimes exceed $30, 000. Essentially, it’s a that opens in the fall and closes the following summer, featuring representing charities who visit the school regularly to request a share through pitches to the students. As part of the school’s Judaic Studies curriculum, students pair off, establish an area of interest, find three local organizations that help in that area and then present one of them to classmates for further evaluation. Criteria for the culling include the importance of the problem, proof of the organization’s effectiveness and how big of an impact the students’ gift could make given the size of the organization. Each one is ripe material for extended conversation, which is exactly the point. Students can change their minds about their allocation votes at least once before the day comes to dole out as much as $5, 000 per group. “Every year at the culminating event, there are parents crying,” said Jody Bloom, who teaches the Judaic Studies class. “It’s a lot of the reason that they send their kids to the school in the first place. ” GIVING CIRCLES Many schools are not equipped to support curriculums that feature actual dollars, but nothing is stopping parents from establishing something like it outside the classroom. Mandy Kao, a mother of three in Houston and a real estate entrepreneur, had herself participated in a charitable giving circle, where a group of people pool resources to make collective decisions about grant making, when she decided to start a circle for her three boys and other children a few years ago. The group of youths raise money through a Mother’s Day brunch and other activities and receive matching funds from an organization called Asian Islanders in Philanthropy. They’ve made grants to youth soccer programs that help refugees and to Big Brothers Big Sisters in an effort to try to encourage more to serve as mentors. In Manhattan, Sara a consultant, is about to start a giving circle just for boys. She was plotting against the reality that by the time middle school rolls around, some children want nothing to do with members of the opposite sex, while others want everything to do with them. Either way, she figured, it would work better if it was just her sixth grader and his male friends. “It’s an easier way to have what might be a challenging conversation,” she said. “And to do something his mom was asking him to do. ” For many years, Jen Bokoff, a Brooklyn resident who works in philanthropy, has done a circle with her family each Hanukkah. She and her relatives each bring $10, regardless of age, and then talk for a bit about an organization they favor. Everyone’s names go into a hat, someone picks and then that person’s organization gets all the money. SHARING December can be a sad time for many adults, often because they feel diminished by the lavish holiday tales that flow through their social media feeds. Nevertheless, Ms. Hernandez is a big believer in talking about whatever giving we do, because it normalizes it as a regular holiday activity. So how best for a family to share in a way that will not subtly shame some other adult having a more materialistic holiday? Ms. Bokoff is the director of knowledge services at the Foundation Center, which helped build a website for families and educators called youthgiving. org. In her world, the giving talk is often around donors’ treasure, time, talent and ties. Treasure is the money. Time and talent are about volunteering, which children should certainly do too in their areas of interest. As for the ties, that’s about your network — and for and children, their most powerful networks may be digital ones. “They can use those platforms to share causes they care about,” Ms. Bokoff said. “And if they do it, their friends are more likely to as well. ” | 1 |
Although the NRA Annual Meetings were abuzz with excitement over a speech from President Trump, a growing number of women in leadership, and a diverse lineup of speakers, Politico Magazine suggests it is still struggling to make black gun owners feel welcome. [Politico Magazine reports that it was amazing “just the how white the crowd was” at the booths set up at the Annual Meetings. Yet they spoke to Dwayne Williams — a black man who was at the meetings with this wife — as a way to show the NRA has a problem appealing to black gun owners. The problem with this approach is that Williams told them how he has watched the NRA’s outreach to black gun owners change that he went from uninterested in joining the organization in 2012 to becoming a member in 2014. Williams spoke to the diversity of shooters and spokespersons in NRA ads and commercials. He said, “Now the NRA’s commercials are featuring different shooters. You don’t just see the white guy — you see the white women, the Asian guy, the Hispanic guy, the black guy not just the NRA, but the gun industry in general. ” In other words, in a column titled, “The NRA’s Struggle to Prove Black Guns Matter” — a column intended to show that the organization is struggling to connect with black gun owners — Politico Magazine highlighted a black gun owner who outlined how the NRA had connected with him. This is a very strange way of trying to show that the NRA is not connecting with black gun owners. It is even stranger when you consider that one of the NRA Leadership Forum’s featured speakers was Antonia Okafor — a black, female NRA member and concealed carry proponent. And her message was clear — the Second Amendment protects rights that belong to every American, regardless of race: No matter the color of your skin, no matter where you come from, no matter your economic status or your education level, whether you’re young or old or a man or a woman, if you’re a citizen of this country, you have a constitutional right to your Second Amendment and a freedom to protect yourself and your family. There is no doubt the NRA is a political success. Truth be told, they are a political powerhouse. But it is equally true that the NRA is diverse, and those who walked the floors of the Annual Meetings this year saw not simply old white men, but old black men too. And there were women — black, white, and Hispanic — and entire families where parents were pushing their children in strollers or holding onto their hands as they walked the 15 acres of guns. 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. | 0 |
During an interview aired on Wednesday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “For the Record,” House Speaker Representative Paul Ryan ( ) stated that while there are “a lot of different ways of getting Mexico to contribute” to the construction of a border wall, and defining how Mexico pays for it, “we’re going to pay for it, and front the money up,” and stated the cost would be somewhere between $ billion. Ryan said, “Well, first off, we’re going to pay for it, and front the money up, but I do think that there are various ways, of as you know — I know your question is, ‘Is Mexico going to pay for the wall?’ There’s a lot of different ways of getting Mexico to contribute to doing this, and there are different ways of defining how exactly they pay for it. Point is, he has a promise that he made to the American people, which is to secure our border. A wall is a big part of that. We agree with that goal, and we will be working with him to finance construction of a physical barrier, including the wall, on the southern border. ” Ryan was then given a cost estimate ranging between $ billion for the cost of the wall, which he said is “about right. ” ( Erica Werner) Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett | 0 |
Women in hijabs and men in jeans strolled along Fifth Avenue in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, on Saturday night beneath the signs of stores and restaurants written in Arabic. It would have seemed a typical Saturday night in one of New York’s largest neighborhoods. Except that inside those storefronts and cafes, there was worry, disbelief and emergency meetings, prompted by President Trump’s executive orders that temporarily banned and green card holders from seven predominantly Muslim countries. Among those countries was Yemen. At the Social Center, 20 business and community leaders from across the city met to share information in Arabic and English about friends and relatives detained at airports across the United States. Everyone knew someone, or was connected with someone on social media who was affected. They decried the president’s executive orders. “Trump grew up in Queens, Yemenis were his neighbors,” Kaled Alamarie, 44, said. “That’s his New York. ” Mr. Alamarie came to the United States when he was 10. He is a Giants season ticket holder and works for the city’s Department of Environmental Protection. His brother, Amrr, 24, was born in New York and is a director of the John Adams High School STEM Academy in Ozone Park, teaching math, science and technology. “What drew me out today is that I have an immigration case pending for my wife,” Amrr Alamarie said. His wife, from Yemen, has been unable to get a visa to the United States for two years and now does not know when that will happen. They have a daughter. “It’s hard not seeing myself living that American life,” he said. Yemen is embroiled in a war between rebels aligned with Iran known as Houthi and Saudi fighters that forced the closure of the United States embassy in Sana in 2015. For Yemenis seeking American visas, most have had to go to Malaysia or Djibouti to wait. Under President Barack Obama, some Yemenis had their United States passports confiscated in Sana. “Everybody’s afraid,” said Zaid Nagi, 38, who came straight from the protest at Kennedy International Airport to the emergency meeting. “What kind of guarantee do we have if they don’t honor a visa they issue themselves? Or a birth certificate? Where do they draw the line?” Anas Alhajj, 26, said he was involved in student uprisings in Sana. He received asylum, and now works for a Yemeni newspaper based in Bay Ridge. He said he is worried that his status could be revoked. “You have to understand where we came from, there’s a lot of hardship, dictatorships,” Kaled Alamarie said. “In their mind, they’re thinking that they’re going to disappear, just like they disappear in Egypt, in Yemen. They just don’t believe it. ” The meeting was organized by Debbie Almontaser, the president of the board of directors for the Muslim Community Network and a national board member of the Committee. “If you know people who are at the airports, let them know to refuse to go back on the plane and not to sign any documents. Ask for a lawyer,” she said to the group of men around the table. “Fear,” she said earlier in the day, “is reverberating through our community. ” But there was also pride. Ibrahim Qatabi, a legal assistant at a nonprofit, said that his came by boat to the United States from Yemen. He then worked in Buffalo for the railroad. Mr. Qatabi’s grandfather worked for the Ford Motor Company. “And now to be treated as a citizen?” said Mr. Qatabi, 37, who works for the Center for Constitutional Rights. “We’re not refugees,” he said. “The people who were rejected today are relatives of U. S. citizens. ” Mr. Qatabi said he worried about the psychological effect this order, which has been described as a Muslim ban, could have. “What we worry about more than ever is that Trump’s executive orders will embolden and encourage people to be racist, to openly discriminate against minorities, against people who come from the Middle East and especially these seven countries. ” But one neighborhood activist in the community in Bay Ridge was conspicuously absent. She said she thought the temporary ban was good policy. Kathy Khatari, an who married into a family and is a proud Muslim, said that she fully supported Mr. Trump — cheers him, in fact. Ms. Khatari said: “Who cares, as long as we know who we are letting in. Do you know an ordinary Yemeni from someone from ISIS? No — because we don’t. I’ll take inconvenience for safety. ” Yemen was the site of the first counterterrorism raid that Mr. Trump authorized, an attack of Qaeda headquarters that had killed an estimated 14 Qaeda fighters and one American commando, the Pentagon said on Sunday morning. For those in Bay Ridge, the fighting seemed so distant. The manager of the popular Yemen Café on Fifth Avenue, Nasser Alsubai, 28, disagreed about the imminent danger, or implication that people seeking to come to the United States from these seven countries were terrorists. He is a United States citizen, naturalized after he came to New York at age 6. “Any Yemeni family that you find here in America are all working hard to support family in Yemen,” Mr. Alsubai said. “How is going to make things better toward his agenda?” he added of Mr. Trump. “He’s going to make us go back in time. Like the camps with the Japanese. We’re fighting all over the world for every single country to have democracy, but we’re not doing it here. ” | 1 |
Republican nominee Donald Trump has claimed that the media is rigging this election against him.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
The media has made Donald Trump. Without the media, Trump would be nowhere in this election. The real rigging by the media is their shameless reporting on documents illegally leaked by the Russians to influence our election in Donald Trump’s favor.
Trump is a creation of the media. He has expertly played the media in this campaign, gaining vastly more coverage than Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton . He even received some 20 minutes of free coverage when the media covered a purported announcement about his claim that President Obama was not born in the United States.
Trump spent about 30 seconds on the birther issue and the rest of the coverage amounted to about $1 million dollars’ worth of free media advertising for his campaign and, incidentally, his new hotel as well.
According to the TV News Archive, Trump has received about twice as many television mentions as Clinton: 1.1 million for Trump as compared to 571,485 for Clinton. | 0 |
The thing celebrity magazines never mention about Johnny Depp’s current problems — the foreclosures on his homes, how he was said to have cut off his fingertip in a marital dispute, the fact he may need to sell a small French village to cover debts associated with the subsequent divorce — is how his challenges are relevant to the Trump administration. Mr. Depp has appeared in some of the (“Pirates of the Caribbean”) and weirdest (“Yoga Hosers”) films of the past 30 years, earning him an estimated $650 million. Being a rich movie star, however, does not necessarily bring great financial savvy. Over the past decade, Mr. Depp has paid more than $5. 6 million in interest on overdue taxes, has lent millions of dollars to people unlikely to pay him back and has unwisely splurchased a number of questionable investments, not the least of which is that town near St. . These money missteps, Mr. Depp says, are not his fault. Back in 1999, you see, Mr. Depp hired a firm named the Management Group to oversee his finances. But instead of protecting his fortunes, those financial advisers “engaged in years of gross mismanagement, and at times, actual fraud,” according to a lawsuit Mr. Depp filed against the company. (The Management Group filed a countersuit on Tuesday denying wrongdoing and arguing that it “did everything possible to protect Depp from his own irresponsible and profligate spending. ”) The alleged fiscal malfeasance visited upon Mr. Depp occurred over 16 years, but the actor was unaware of this skulduggery, his lawsuit asserts, because he simply wasn’t paying much attention to what was going on. Mr. Depp, by his own admission, often had no idea what was occurring in his bank accounts and would regularly sign whatever documents the Management Group put before him, without bothering to read what they said, on the assumption that his financial adviser “was behaving as a loyal fiduciary and prudent steward of his funds and finances,” his lawsuit asserts. And this is where the Trump administration comes in, because that word — fiduciary — is at the heart of a battle raging within the federal government over how much responsibility we ought to bear in managing our own finances, and how much we should trust the people giving us advice. (Fair warning: The next few paragraphs are wonky, but I promise we’ll get back to Johnny Depp.) In 2015, President Barack Obama asked the federal government to force most of the nation’s financial advisers — those people who tell us which stocks to buy for our 401( k)’s — to abide by what’s known as the fiduciary standard, a set of rules that would require advisers to give their clients the best possible advice (rather than, say, advice that pays those advisers the highest fees). “It’s a very simple principle,” Mr. Obama said at the time. “You want to give financial advice, you’ve got to put your client’s interests first. ” For most financial advisers, becoming a fiduciary was no big deal, because they had been giving good advice anyway. For instance, the investment firm Merrill Lynch said it would voluntarily hold its retirement advisers to the new standard. “We view the Department of Labor Fiduciary Rule as a positive step for the industry and great news for investors,” reads a company web page. Other investment firms, however, were less enthusiastic about the new rules and began furious attacks. Their objections ranged from the ridiculous (suggesting that tens of thousands of financial advisers would retire en masse to protest the new rule) to the legitimate (profits of some advisers are likely to fall, and the fees paid by some investors may rise under the new rule what’s more, there will most likely be some lawsuits against a small number of advisers as everyone tries to figure out how the new rules work). When Donald J. Trump was elected president, the new fiduciary rules weren’t complete, and now some of his advisers are urging him to freeze or overturn them. The fiduciary rule might be “the dumbest decision to come out of the U. S. government in the last 50 to 60 years,” Anthony Scaramucci, an investment manager and newly appointed White House official, said at a conference, vowing to “repeal it as soon as we can. ” Republicans in Congress have introduced legislation to kill the rules. In truth, this battle is part of a broader clash within the federal government that is likely to shape Mr. Trump’s presidency. At the core of those who oppose the new fiduciary rules is a basic belief: People ought to bear more responsibility for monitoring their finances and lives. The fiduciary standard, its critics claim, does a disservice to the nation by placing the burden of financial accountability on advisers, rather than on us, the people who should be paying attention to what occurs with our bank accounts. We should be expected to scrutinize the advice we receive, these critics say, rather than accept it unthinkingly. A fiduciary protection enfeebles us by guaranteeing we’ll receive only good advice. That argument might seem preposterous — what’s the point of seeking advice if you can’t trust the advice giver? — until you consider situations like Johnny Depp’s. (See, I promised we’d get back to him.) Mr. Depp’s situation is so complicated that, in most ways, the federal fiduciary rules don’t apply. And his lawsuit will be unaffected by whatever President Trump proposes, because it has been filed in state court. Nonetheless, his suit is illuminating, because it demonstrates that instead of glibly dismissing the rules’ critics, we ought to acknowledge the challenges they voice. Consider, for instance, the claims made by Mr. Depp’s lawyers that the Management Group never once paid the actor’s taxes on time in 16 years (which the company disputes). That’s not great, but at the same time, how many years should a tax adviser miss a deadline before it’s the client’s responsibility to replace him? What’s more, according to the countersuit filed by the Management Group, Mr. Depp’s financial distress was a result of his tendency to overspend — at a rate of $2 million a month — on items like 14 homes, a chain of islands in the Bahamas, $30, 000 per month on wine, and $3 million to blast the ashes of Hunter S. Thompson from a cannon. “I need to give my kiddies and famille as good a Christmas as possible,” Mr. Depp wrote to his financial advisers when they counseled him to “take it easy on holiday spending,” according to the firm’s countersuit. “On those few occasions when Depp said he was ready to change his ways, he never did,” the countersuit continues, “and he always went back to his uncontrolled spending. ” For its advice and services, the Management Group was paid $28 million out of Mr. Depp’s accounts. And this is where questions regarding the fiduciary standard come into play, because while Mr. Depp is clearly prone to some very bad financial choices, just as clearly the Management Group has allowed those decisions to occur. If the Management Group were held to the fiduciary standard, his advisers would probably have had more of an obligation to stop Mr. Depp from doing foolish things with his money, like giving it away or impulsively buying a French town. And, if Mr. Depp disregarded that advice, the Management Group might have had an obligation to cut ties with the actor, or at the very least, stop paying itself millions of dollars from his accounts. But, by the same token, Mr. Depp should also have paid at least a little attention to what was going on. Being a movie star shouldn’t excuse you from the obligation of balancing your checkbook once in a while. And that’s the rub for observers like me (and perhaps you) who believe Mr. Obama’s fiduciary rules are good policies and should become established law: We don’t like having to defend the irresponsible choices of people like Johnny Depp. We don’t want citizens to be encouraged to think less about their finances and retirement rather, we want them to think more. Mr. Trump’s advisers have a point when they argue that these new rules might make it easier for average Americans to pay less attention to what’s going on. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have these laws. In the movies, you can assume that everything will work out in the end. Real life, unfortunately, is more messy. Relying on personal responsibility often isn’t enough. And so though we might be annoyed by the whimpers of movie stars, listening to their complaints about the agony of having too many houses is a small price to pay to make sure good advice stays that way. There are no clear heroes and villains in this story, or most others. Let’s hope the president chooses the right script. | 1 |
Here’s what we learned in Week 6 of the N. F. L. season: ■ Dak Prescott is really good. Prescott, Tony Romo’s threw for 247 yards and three touchdowns in a Cowboys victory in Green Bay, and increased speculation that the job will remain his even after Romo returns. ■ The N. F. C. East is for real. Dallas improved to the Eagles ( ) and Redskins ( ) played a tough game against each other, and the Giants ( ) were resilient in beating the Ravens. Last season, Washington won the sorry division at and got whipped by Green Bay at home in the first round. ■ The Patriots are worthy Super Bowl favorites. Pats haters held out hope that last week’s huge effort by Tom Brady was fueled by bitterness over his suspension. Well, either his bitterness lasted two weeks, or he really is still the Tom Brady we all remember. Brady torched the Bengals for 376 yards in a win. ■ The Steelers are not worthy Super Bowl favorites. Pittsburgh looked bad on both sides of the ball in losing to a previously poor Dolphins team, . Ben Roethlisberger briefly left the game with an injury, and if he’s not healthy, the Steelers are a team. ■ After a huge win over Atlanta, the Seattle Seahawks once again look like the team to beat in the N. F. C. Last year’s team to beat, the Carolina Panthers, are and searching for answers. The Cowboys beat the Packers in Green Bay, in a game that drew attention for Dak Prescott’s record breaking and Mike McCarthy’s decision making. Prescott, who took over at quarterback for the Cowboys when Tony Romo broke a bone in his back in preseason, has played extremely well in leading the Cowboys to a record. Early on against the Packers, he completed his 163rd straight pass without an interception to start a career, a new record. The previous record holder was Tom Brady. Prescott eventuallly threw an interception, but finished 18 for 27 for 247 yards and three touchdowns, outplaying Aaron Rodgers. Prescott’s strong start has led to open speculation that he will retain the starting job, even after Romo returns, as he is expected to do around midseason. The Cowboys have insisted Romo will reclaim the spot when he is ready, but every week that Prescott plays well increases the pressure on the decision. Athletes and fans alike took to social media to make the argument for keeping Romo on the bench: The Packers struggled in part because of some decisions by coach McCarthy. Trailing with a at the Cowboys’ 19, McCarthy elected to kick a field goal. Down he kicked again on at the 25. Then, with a at the Cowboys’ 38 and trailing he decided to go for it. Rodgers’s pass attempt fell incomplete. The Packers were trailing by early in the fourth quarter when they found themselves with a fourth down and 10 at Dallas’s 16. Despite being in deep hole on the scoreboard, they went back to opting for points on the board, kicking a field goal that only closed them to within 11. The Cowboys responded with a touchdown drive to pull ahead, . Rodgers, the M. V. P. continued to play below his standards. He missed open receivers, threw his fourth interception of the year, and fumbled near the end zone to kill a Packers’ drive in the fourth quarter. The Lambeau Field faithful let him have it with a chorus of boos late in the game. He hasn’t had a passing game since Week 9 of last season. Seahawks Slug It Out With Falcons: Steven Hauschka’s field goal with 1:57 remaining capped the 20th career fourth quarter or overtime comeback for Seattle quarterback Russell Wilson, and the Seahawks pulled out a wild win over the Atlanta Falcons on Sunday. Here’s how they won. The Panthers had to win. Off to a start a year after a dazzling Super Bowl season last year, the team mounted a furious comeback against the Saints only to lose on a field goal, . The deficit the Panthers overcame would have been the biggest in team history had they won. Drew Brees completed an bomb to Brandin Cooks, to give the Saints a lead. It was the second longest touchdown pass of the season. The longest, 98 yards, was also Brees to Cooks, against the Raiders. Brees was for 465 yards in the wild game. After trailing the Panthers came all the way back and scored a touchdown to close the score to . Then they missed the extra point. But Cam Newton dove into the end zone with three minutes left after a long pass interference call and completed a conversion to tie the game at . There was enough time for one more New Orleans drive, which culminated in the by kicker Wil Lutz. Cam Newton, last year’s MVP, was for 312 yards, two touchdowns and one interception. Carolina is now quintupling last year’s regular season loss total. The Saints improved to . For a minute there it looked like Tom Brady and the New England Patriots might be in a little bit of trouble. A week after Brady played like Superman in his return from suspension, Andy Dalton of the Bengals was matching him and the Patriots held a slender lead at halftime. But normal service resumed in the third quarter. Brady repeatedly found his old favorite, Rob Gronkowski, and the host Patriots raced into a comfortable lead they would not relinquish. Brady’s final numbers were again magnificent: for 376 yards and three touchdowns. Gronkowski had seven catches for 162 yards and a touchdown. The Patriots won with ease, In the end it was not really a return to form for Dalton, who has struggled to match last year’s numbers. Dalton finished for 254. The Bengals, who have made the playoffs six of the last seven years, fell to . The Steelers’ fast start to the season came to a screeching halt as they were completely outplayed by the Dolphins, . Ben Roethlisberger went down with a left knee injury late in the first half. He left under his own power after being hit by Jordan Phillips, but he was limping. To make matters worse, he was intercepted on the play. Landry Jones came in to finish the half for Pittsburgh. Roethlisberger emerged for the second half though, and entered the game at the first opportunity. But the Steelers offense never got in gear. Roethlisberger was for 189 yards. But the team was blanked in the second and third quarters, and a garbage time touchdown in the fourth was no help. The Steelers had been riding high at and figured to have little trouble in Miami against the Dolphins. Read more here. Chiefs Humble Raiders: With two weeks to stew over a lopsided loss, the Kansas City Chiefs went back to basics and put together a balanced offense that allowed the running game to shine. Spencer Ware ran for a 131 yards and a touchdown, Alex Smith picked apart Oakland’s struggling defense and the Kansas City Chiefs shut out Derek Carr and the Raiders in the second half of a victory Sunday. Here’s how the Chiefs won. Giants Snap Losing Streak: The Giants, winless in their three previous games, fumbled the football on their first offensive play of Sunday’s game against the Baltimore Ravens. They did not have a first down in the first quarter, when they fell behind by 10 points, a development that had sellout crowd at MetLife Stadium booing early and often. Then, in the second quarter, the Giants’ chief offensive weapon, wide receiver Odell Beckham Jr. jogged to the locker room with an injury. But if the dispiriting opening sequences of Sunday’s contest were all too familiar to Giants fans, who have endured four successive seasons without a playoff appearance, the rest of the game revealed a new Giants resilience. Led by two of the players who had been most maligned during the recent losing streak — quarterback Eli Manning and Beckham, who returned to the game — the Giants ( ) stormed back twice to stun the Ravens ( ) and earn a victory. Read Bill Pennington’s report here. Redskins Beat Eagles: Kirk Cousins threw for 263 yards and two touchdowns and the Washington Redskins ran roughshod over one of the NFL’s top defenses in a victory over the Philadelphia Eagles on Sunday. The running attack of Matt Jones, Robert Kelley and Chris Thompson combined for 231 yards and a touchdown as the Redskins ( ) won their fourth consecutive game. After starting the season Washington has its best record through six games since 2008. Here’s how the Redskins won. Lions Beat Rams: The Detroit Lions are starting to turn around their season, finding ways to make enough plays on both sides of the ball in the final minutes to win. Matt Prater made a tiebreaking, field goal with 1:29 left and Rafael Bush followed with a interception two plays later, giving Detroit a win over the Los Angeles Rams on Sunday. Read more here. The nation had been watching San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick kneel during the national anthem this season in protest against police brutality and racism. What it hadn’t seen in quite a while was Kaepernick throw a football, or scramble out of the pocket. In his first start since last season, Kaepernick gave San Francisco 49ers fans something to cheer about with a score to Torrey Smith in the second quarter of the 49ers game against the Buffalo Bills on Sunday. It was a brief celebration. Niners fans probably noticed that Smith was wide open on the play, but Kaepernick underthrew him, and he had to come back and catch it at his heels. Ultimately, the 49ers were thoroughly outplayed by the Bills, who won, . Kaepernick, who kneeled again during the anthem, finished an uninspiring for 187 yards and that lone touchdown. | 1 |
Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Notify me of new posts by email. PLEASE DONATE TO KEEP BARE NAKED ISLAM UP AND RUNNING. Choose DONATE for one-time donation or SUBSCRIBE for monthly donations Payment Options GET ALL NEW BNI POSTS/LINKS ON TWITTER Subscribe to Blog via Email
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Email Address | 0 |
As protests against Donald Trump and an imminent presidential administration enter a sixth day, politicians, lobbyists, bureaucrats, and other officials are primarily concerned about the continuity of government. Those inside the Beltway aim to normalize the specter of a Trump presidency, even though a number of them recognized Trump as dangerous months ago. But now, while a seedy cast of characters congeals around Trump to form the administration that will run the United States, resistance has the most potential to discourage and undermine Trump before his administration enacts some of the worst parts of his agenda.
President Barack Obama’s administration expanded and institutionalized several powers, especially related to national security, which will make it easier for Trump to impose his authority domestically and internationally. Those now-entrenched powers fuel much of the panic among the progressive establishment, and because Obama faced minimal challenge, dire threats exist.
Aware of the discontent with Trump’s victory, Obama remarked the day after Election Day, “We have to remember that we’re actually all on one team. This is an intramural scrimmage. We’re not Democrats first. We’re not Republicans first. We are Americans first. We’re patriots first. We all want what’s best for this country.”
“Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and the chance to lead,” Clinton declared during her concession speech. She also stated, “Our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power, and we don’t just respect that. We cherish it.”
Only a few months ago Clinton argued Trump could not be trusted to make “life-or-death decisions” because he is “thin-skinned” and quick to get angry when facing even the “smallest criticism.” She invited voters to imagine what apocalyptic event might transpire if he had his “finger anywhere near the button,” a clear reference to nuclear weapons. She maintained a Trump presidency would “embolden” the Islamic State. She suggested he would start a “trade war” with China, and his plans would create $30 trillion of debt. She said it mattered Trump “makes fun of disabled people, calls women pigs, proposes banning an entire religion [Islam]” from the country,” and “plays coy with white supremacists.”
Not only that, Clinton aggressively pushed the idea that Trump worships Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, has a network of advisers with ties to the Kremlin and business assets linked to Russian oligarchs, encouraged Russia to interfere with the U.S. election to help elect him, and his foreign policy will be everything on Putin’s “wish list.”
Along the same lines, Obama previously suggested Trump’s rhetoric helped the Islamic State carry out its agenda. Obama also stated, “If somebody can’t handle a Twitter account, they can’t handle the nuclear codes.”
Let’s get this straight: Trump is a Kremlin agent and temperamentally unfit businessman, who traffics in bigotry, racism, and hate, that will make Americans less safe and possibly even commit a rash act that leads to nuclear armageddon. But we need to remember we’re all on the same “team” and have an “open mind” about Trump. Give a man with all the characteristics of a tyrant a “chance to lead.”
This is the problem with New Democrats, like Obama and Clinton. Their political identity is defined by bipartisanship and compromise.
President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore were part of the rise of New Democrats in the early 1990s. They stood with conservative Democrats, who broke with labor, civil rights, and other liberal causes. They pushed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). They backed welfare repeal, bills which fueled the rise of mass incarceration, and signed a 1997 budget that slashed millions for social programs like Medicare and Medicaid. They put corporate interests over environmental protections. They encouraged the deregulation of industry, which greatly boosted Wall Street. Altogether, the Clintons enabled the right and worked with conservatives as unfettered capitalism expanded and the liberal class was further decimated. (For more, read Lance Selfa’s book, “The Democrats: A Critical History.”)
The danger of this kind of bipartisanship is further exemplified by the fact that Obama refused to prosecute officials in President George W. Bush’s administration for torture. He clung to the wrongful notion that his administration had to move forward without looking backward. Now, Trump may push for pro-torture former CIA official Jose Rodriguez, who destroyed videotapes documenting torture, to be CIA director, and Rodriguez could run the CIA and reinstitute torture policies because he never was held accountable. In fact, he was able to write a book and go on a speaking tour defending his role in torturing captives in the “War on Terrorism.”
In addition to impunity for torture, the failure of liberals to challenge Obama means Trump will have a targeted assassination program and flying killer robots to kill any terrorism suspect or enemies he puts on either of the kill lists established by Obama. He will have a massive global surveillance apparatus, which NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden exposed to the world, that remains more powerful than ever in spite of a few minor reforms. He will have structures in place to build on Obama’s record number of deportation of immigrants. More than 2.5 million were deported, and this is why Trump can confidently plan to deport millions of immigrants during his presidency.
Democrats and their liberal supporters have allowed for the development of a body of law that allows the Justice Department to prosecute whistleblowers with the Espionage Act and treat them as spies. The crackdown on truth-tellers also enables the government to snoop on the communications of reporters and even threaten journalists with jail time so they reveal whether their source was someone who disclosed information without authorization. Plenty of people in institutions will want to blow the whistle on Trump, and Trump will use the blueprints for controlling the flow information that Obama designed to guide his administration.
As journalist Branko Marcetic wrote for Jacobin, Trump will have “boundless and unchecked ability to start wars.” Obama repeatedly stretched the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) in order to “attack ISIS in Iraq, Libya, and Syria, declaring the group an ‘associated force.’ Without any formal declaration of war, the United States currently has ground troops in all three of those countries — thousands , in the case of Iraq.” Obama also pursued an illegal war in Libya that turned into a major disaster.
The era when J. Edgar Hoover ran the FBI was a dark chapter when activists, journalists, and citizens were targeted for their political associations and ties to groups or organizations put on enemies’ lists. Politicians in the 1970s reacted to revelations of abuse of power with hearings aimed at reversing this trend toward authoritarianism. But in recent decades, the Democrats have displayed little concern for how power is abused. They fully embrace the FBI, which still keeps tabs on political activists and has infiltrated and targeted Muslim Americans in their communities.
It must also be be kept in mind that Obama passed the National Defense Authorization Act, which contains a provision that enables the indefinite detention of individuals. Despite a lawsuit against this part of the law, which did not succeed, it remains in force under Trump unless Obama rolls it back.
Aside from executive power, Trump does not find climate change to be a real and actual serious threat. Obama and the Democrats have had several grand opportunities, especially when faced with the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipeline projects, to take a stand on fossil fuel extraction. Democrats were encouraged by individuals appointed by Bernie Sanders to include language in the party platform that called for fossil fuel reserves to be kept in the ground . Clinton Democrats and Democratic National Committee appointees opposed protecting the planet, and now Trump can help TransCanada complete the Keystone XL pipeline and cheer Dakota Access, as it colonizes and further destroys indigenous land while contributing to climate change.
It did not take long for Trump to show how tolerant he will be of dissent. He tweeted, “Just had a very, open and successful presidential election. Now professional protesters incited by media are protesting. Very unfair.” This is what an autocrat says to justify cracking down on freedom of expression.
One does not respond to a political moment by calling for unity, like Obama did. It is not the time to beg Trump to include Democrats in his agenda. There is no need for phony praise of Trump’s “respect” for institutions or the “rule of law,” whatever that means. And yet, Obama addressed this moment with a convoluted sports metaphor.
“I think of this job as being a relay runner—you take the baton, you run your best race, and hopefully, by the time you hand it off you’re a little further ahead, you’ve made a little progress,” Obama declared. “And I can say that we’ve done that, and I want to make sure that handoff is well-executed, because ultimately we’re all on the same team.”
Obama, who was complicit in the expansion of power that Trump will be able to enjoy, may see himself as on the same team. However, many Americans and people outside the U.S. face threats to their freedom and lives because the president worked to make dangerous policies part of a bipartisan consensus. Therefore, the appropriate response to what lies ahead is constant protest, especially since a lack of opposition leaves a vacuum that Trump forces may regard as consent or acquiescence to their perilous plans.
The post The Complicity Of Obama, Democrats Set Stage For Dangerous Trump Presidency appeared first on Shadowproof .
| 1 |
In an interview on Salt Lake City’s KSL’s “The Doug Wright Show,” Sen. Mike Lee ( ) said if given the opportunity to be nominated by the president to the Supreme Court, he would not turn it down. Host Doug Wright laid out a scenario that the president would make such an appeal to Lee that he was sorely needed by the country to serve on the high court. “If he asked me that question I would not say no,” he said. “Now, I want to qualify that by first of all by pointing out that I’m grateful to have just been reelected to the U. S. Senate. This is the job I wanted. This is the job I sought twice now and the job I was elected to now twice. And I’m grateful to have been reelected with the support of 70 percent of voters in Utah. ” “That said, if the president approached me in the manner you just described, I wouldn’t tell him no and I’m honored to be on that list. ” ( The Hill) Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor | 0 |
The junior senator from Nebraska told Breitbart News he was pleased with Judge Neil McGill Gorsuch, President Donald J. Trump’s nominee to replace Justice Antonin G. Scalia on the Supreme Court, who died Feb. 13, creating the current vacancy. [“It is obviously a great pick by the president,” said Sen. Benjamin E. “Ben” Sasse (R. .) who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee and was one of the guests invited to the White House for the announcement. “I think it’s going to be really hard for people, who are serious about the Constitution to oppose this guy,” he said. “If you read Judge Gorsuch’s opinions, what you are going to find his policy preferences,” he said. Gorsuch believes in the courts protecting rights and not in courts trying to remake society, said the senator. “He says the constitutional system allows the Congress to write the laws, not the courts and the judges, who think about they are . ” In a statement released by his office, the senator said that when Gorsuch was confirmed to his current bench at the Tenth Circuit of the U. S. Court of Appeals in Colorado, the vote was unanimous from Republicans and Democrats, including Minority Leader Charles E. “Chuck” SChumer (D. . Y.). “Senator Schumer is about to tell Americans that Judge Gorsuch kicks puppies and heckles piano recitals,” he said. “That’s hogwash. Democrats are working overtime to cast Judge Gorsuch as a reflexive partisan but, as I said when Justice Scalia died, there are no Republican or Democratic seats on the Supreme Court. ” Sasse said the confirmation of Gorsuch is a teachable moment. “This shouldn’t be a partisan debate but an opportunity to teach our kids civics,” he said. “In the coming weeks, everyone who loves the Constitution should celebrate the uniquely American idea that government power must be limited and that those in power must be checked and balanced. ” Sasse told Breitbart News that he, along with other members of the Judiciary Committee, participated in the selection process with Trump’s staff. “They had been reaching out to us in the course of the past two weeks — honoring the ‘advice and consent’ clause of the Constitution. ” The Nebraskan said the Trump team did a good job seeking out suggestions from others as well as they put together the nomination for the president. Sasse’s praise for the president’s pick for the Supreme Court and for Trump’s process stands in sharp contrast to the senator’s posture during the 2016 campaign cycle. Then, the senator was one of the Republican Party’s most adamant critics of Trump and the poster boy for the #NeverTrump movement. In a May 4 open letter Sasse posted on Facebook, he said he was voting for neither Trump nor his Democratic rival Hillary R. Clinton: “If you are one of those rare souls who genuinely believe Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are honorable people — if they are the role models you want for your kids — then this letter is not for you. Instead, this letter is for the majority of Americans who wonder why the nation that put a man on the moon can’t find a healthy leader who can take us forward together. ” Although the senator resisted calls for him to run as an independent, he was critical of his party’s nominee for president throughout the campaign, so much so that Clinton used tape of Sasse talking about Trump in one of her attack ads against the New York City developer. “I have never met him before, but the president went through a very transparent process,” Sasse said. “All through the campaign, he had 21 names that he talked about and he said he would try his best to pick the best jurist,” he said. “Our Founders envisioned people serving on the Supreme Court with a lifetime appointment, not a term. The American people want to hire and fire the people, who write policies, when you read the judge’s opinion — he is the kind of judge the Founders envisioned,” he said. “”He is a super guy and this is a tremendous pick by the president. ” Gorsuch did not waste any time visiting Capitol Hill for courtesy calls with senators Wednesday morning. No confirmation hearings are yet scheduled. | 1 |
White House press secretary Sean Spicer was spotted at the Pentagon on Friday, reporting for duty as a member of the U. S. Navy Reserve, according to several reports. [SPOTTED: @PressSec is at the Pentagon in his Navy uniform, apparently performing his duty as a reservist. — Steven Portnoy (@stevenportnoy) April 14, 2017, Spicer is a Navy commander in the reserve, assigned to work with the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He wore his military uniform during his appearance at the Pentagon on Friday. Spicer has 17 years of experience in the reserves, according to the Military Times, and has spent his civilian career as a spokesman for the Republican National Committee (RNC) and the Office of the U. S. Trade Representative during the Bush administration. Trump supporters reacted to the news with delight. “He’ll speak for us. He’ll fight for us. An American Patriot!” noted Mike Himsworth, a retired Air Force Intelligence Officer: @Spitfirehill Service above self … Our Presidential Press Secretary is also U. S. Navy Commander Sean Spicer. A Patriot indeed! pic. twitter. — Mike Himsworth (@MikeHimsworth) April 14, 2017, | 0 |
RIO DE JANEIRO — Every four years, the same questions tend to surface before the Summer Olympics: Will the host city be ready? Is Usain Bolt still the world’s fastest man? And what sort of cushy digs will the United States basketball players find for themselves? The Games are underway, Bolt is back to defend his sprinting titles, and once again, the men’s and women’s basketball players from the United States are avoiding the athletes’ village. Carmelo Anthony, Kevin Durant, Diana Taurasi and the rest of their teammates are staying on a luxury cruise ship, docked at a pier on the other side of the city. If the team’s lodging seems standoffish, that is by design. U. S. A. Basketball, the organization that oversees the national men’s and women’s teams, has shunned the athletes’ village since 1992. The team stayed on a ship at the 2004 Games in Athens, then used hotels in Beijing in 2008 and London in 2012. “The boat we’re staying on is very nice, very secluded,” said Angel McCoughtry, who is playing in her second Olympics. “Let’s be honest — how can our men’s and women’s teams stay in the village? They would get bombarded, especially the men’s team. They won’t have peace. ” The players, particularly the men, are exceedingly well paid as professionals. But other highly compensated athletes seemingly have no qualms about mixing with the other Olympians in the village. Bolt, probably the biggest star of these Games, checked into the village the other day. Michael Phelps, the world’s most famous swimmer, ran into Novak Djokovic, the men’s tennis player in the world, in the village and asked for a selfie. The United States women’s gymnastics team, the showpiece of the American delegation, is also in the village. In fact, a majority of the 554 American athletes stay there. Jerry Colangelo, the director of U. S. A. Basketball, said keeping the basketball players in seclusion was a matter of security. “Our players are probably the most recognizable athletes in the world,” he said, explaining the “extra precaution” being taken. “We have our own idea of how to do that,” Colangelo said. “We can’t just throw them in with — once the International Olympic Committee decided they wanted pro players, to allow pro players to play, we have to protect them. They’re very valuable assets. ” Fans are kept at a distance behind a guarded fence with metal detectors, but they have been sticking their cellphones through the fencing to take photographs of the ship — the Silver Cloud, part of the Silversea Cruises fleet, which can accommodate 296 people. U. S. A. Basketball officials are circumspect when asked about the accommodations. Reporters are invited to tour the athletes’ village, but not the ship, bobbing in place at the Pier Mauá. There are 46 N. B. A. players and 26 W. N. B. A. players at these Games representing many countries. Several who do not play for the United States seemed to be enjoying life at the village last week. Andrew Bogut, a couple of months removed from playing in the N. B. A. finals with the Golden State Warriors, was sitting in the village on Thursday, decked in a Team Australia suit, eating food from McDonald’s with two teammates. Leandro Barbosa and Nene are staying there, too, along with all the other Brazilian Olympians. Manu Ginobili of Argentina posted on Twitter a view from his room in the village. Pau Gasol, Ricky Rubio, Jose Calderon and the other players of Spain snapped photographs around the village grounds all week. Tina Charles, who won a gold medal with the United States women’s team in 2012, said the team’s accommodations meant that “you’re not able to interact with athletes, you’re not able to see them every day, build relationships, build friendships that way. ” Maya Moore, appearing at her second Games, said she understood the pros and cons, but she said the ship made it easier to focus. “There is a level of socialization that happens in the village that takes energy,” she said. “Over the course of two weeks, it can wear on you, even if it’s a little bit. ” The Plaza Mauá, on the city’s eastern waterfront, where the ship is docked, was revamped as one of the legacy projects of these Games, with new museums and areas for outdoor activities. Warehouses along the pier are now used as event and party spaces. Taurasi, one of the women’s team captains, lightheartedly described the ship as having “a nice, Russian décor. ” Jimmy Butler, a member of the men’s team, said there were a pool, a gym, social rooms and conference rooms. Players can order room service anytime. “Same thing we’d do in a hotel,” Butler said. “It just floats. ” | 1 |
"Era muy buena gente": enfermera, acusada de asesinar a 8 pacientes en Canadá 52 GMT
Las muertes tuvieron lugar entre los años 2007 y 2014 en residencias para personas de edad avanzada. Geoff Robins Reuters
Elizabeth Tracy Mae Wettlaufer, una enfermera de 49 años, ha sido acusada de haber asesinado a ocho pacientes de edad avanzada en la provincia canadiense de Ontario, según ha declarado en una rueda de prensa este martes la Policía, citada por CBC News .
Las muertes tuvieron lugar entre los años 2007 y 2014 en residencias para personas mayores en las localidades de Woodstock y Londres. Según los datos disponibles, las víctimas tenían entre 75 y 96 años. Siete pacientes fallecieron debido a una dosis letal de un medicamento, mientras que la causa del deceso de la otra víctima no ha sido revelada.
Wettlaufer fue registrada como enfermera en la provincia en 1995 y renunció al Colegio de Enfermería de Ontario a finales del pasado mes de septiembre, después de que la Policía iniciase una investigación acerca de la muerte de ocho pacientes.
Los amigos y vecinos de Wettlaufer quedaron en estado de 'shock' tras conocer la noticia. Según la vecina Karen Price, la enfermera " era muy buena gente , y era fácil hablar con ella". El enfermero que "se aburría" en Alemania y otro caso en Japón
El pasado mes de junio fue abierta una investigación por la muerte de 33 personas en un hospital de Delmenhorst (Baja Sajonia, Alemania). Niels H., un antiguo enfermero que en el 2015 fue condenado a cadena perpetua por asesinar a dos de sus pacientes, podría haber estado involucrado en esas muertes.
Durante el juicio, el acusado expresó sus condolencias a las familias de las víctimas y declaró que, "por aburrimiento" , inyectaba sobredosis de medicamentos a algunos enfermos para disminuir su presión sanguínea, con el objetivo de llevarlos al borde de la muerte y demostrar su capacidad para reanimarlos.
El pasado mes de septiembre la Policía japonesa emprendió la búsqueda de un 'ángel de la muerte' que habría matado hasta a 48 pacientes de un hospital de Yokohama envenenando sus sueros intravenosos. Todas las muertes se registraron entre julio y septiembre, y todas las víctimas estaban internadas en la misma planta del centro médico. | 0 |
ALERT: If you see this particular voting machine, here is what you do Oct 28, 2016 Previous post
If you’re in one of 16 key states – including battleground states like Florida and Pennsylvania – make sure you double-check your ballot… better yet, bypass the electronic voting machines altogether and request a paper ballot.
Why? Because we’ve discovered that the company providing many of the voting machines for as many as 16 states – Smartmatic, has deep ties to leftist globalist George Soros.
These machines were used in Venezuela and have been tied to the so-called “landslide” victory of President Hugo Chavez and his supporters, WikiLeaks is revealing .
Since then, Smartmatic bought out California-based Sequoia Voting Systems and is now involved in American elections, the Truth Division is reporting .
According to Smartmatic’s website, “In less than one year Smartmatic tripled Sequoia’s market share” and “has offered technology and support services to the Electoral Commissions of 307 counties in 16 States.”
In 2007, Smartmatic announced the sale of Sequoia, “given the difficult climate in the United States marketplace, tainted by a non-stop debate against foreign investment, especially in the election technology area.”
Their website includes a flow-chart that describes how the company has contributed to elections in the U.S. from 2006-2015 with “57,000 voting and counting machines deployed” and “35 million voters assisted.”
After this report’s publication, Smartmatic updated its website to remove the flow chart and declare that “Smartmatic will not be deploying
FOR ENTIRE ARTICLE CLICK LINK | 0 |
Planet Progressive 3
On Dec. 4, hundreds of veterans will muster at the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in North Dakota. The mission: To stop the Dakota Access Pipeline.
“Most civilians who’ve never served in a uniform are gutless worms who’ve never been in a fight in their life,” Wes Clark Jr. declares. “So if we don’t stop it, who will?”
Clark Jr. is one of the most vociferous opponents of the Dakota Access Pipeline, a controversial 1,170-mile project that, if and when it is completed, will shuttle an estimated 470,000 barrels of crude oil every day from North Dakota to Illinois. “It’s immoral, and wrong, and dangerous to us all,” Clark Jr. adds.
He doesn’t fit the traditional tree-hugger mold. He’s not a hippie. Nor is he a member of the Lakota or Dakota tribes, the two Native American group known collectively as the Sioux. He’s a former Army officer and the organizer of an upcoming three-day deployment of U.S. military veterans to the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in southern North Dakota, the site of an escalating months-long standoff between law enforcement-backed security contractors and activists that has so far resulted in multiple injuries, more than 500 arrests, and a United Nations investigation of potential human rights abuses.
According to an “operations order” for the planned engagement, posted to social media in mid-November, “First Americans have served in the Unites States Military, defending the soil of our homelands, at a greater percentage than any other group of Americans. There is no other people more deserving of veteran support.”
Clark Jr. is a 47-year-old writer, political commentator, and activist based in California. Joining him in the fight is Michael A. Wood Jr., a Marine Corps veteran and former Baltimore police officer who retired his badge in 2014 to become an advocate for national police reform. Earlier this month, the duo formed Veterans Stand For Standing Rock with the hope of drawing scores of veterans, as well as fire fighters, ex-law enforcement officers, emergency medical personnel and others to the battleground for a three-day “deployment” in early December to “prevent progress on the Dakota Access Pipeline and draw national attention to the human rights warriors of the Sioux tribes.” Both men say they’re prepared to take a bullet, rubber or otherwise, for a cause they believe should be of critical importance to any patriotic American.
“This country is repressing our people,” Wood Jr. says. “If we’re going to be heroes, if we’re really going to be those veterans that this country praises, well, then we need to do the things that we actually said we’re going to do when we took the oath to defend the Constitution from enemies foreign and domestic.”
The Standing Rock Sioux Reservation was originally established as part of the Great Sioux Reservation under Article 2 of the Treaty of Fort Laramie of April 29, 1868. In 1877, the U.S. government initiated the still ongoing process of chipping away and dividing the land it had granted to the people of the Lakota and Dakota nations, with significant reductions taking place in 1889 and then again during the 1950s and 1960s, when the Army Corps of Engineers built five large dams along the Missouri River, uprooting villages and sinking 200,000 acres of land below water.
When the Corps of Engineers returned to Standing Rock in 2015, it was to assess whether or not it should approve a path for the Dakota Access Pipeline across the Missouri River, a project that would involve construction on some of the land that had been stripped from the Sioux, who still regard it as sacred — although, that fact seems to have been ignored, maybe even intentionally, in the assessment.
Because the Corps neglected to consult the Standing Rock Sioux, as it was required to do under the National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106), the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Interior, and the American Council on Historic Preservation all criticized the assessment, but the project was eventually approved. The decision was a major victory for Energy Transfer Partners, the Texas-based parent company of Dakota Access LLC, which estimates the pipeline will bring $156 million in sales and income taxes to state and local governments and create thousands of temporary jobs.
For the Standing Rock Sioux, the Dakota Access project poses two immediate threats. First, the pipeline would run beneath Lake Oahe, the reservoir that provides drinking water to the people of Standing Rock. (An earlier route that avoided native lands was ruled out in part because it posed a danger to drinking water.) Second, according to the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, the building of the pipeline would destroy the sacred spots and burial grounds that were overlooked in the Corps’ assessment. But as the protests have intensified, and more outsiders, including members of more than 200 Native American tribes from across North America, have become involved, Standing Rock has, for some, come to represent something much bigger than a struggle between a disenfranchised people and a government-backed, billion-dollar corporation. It’s a battle to save humanity from itself.
“Mother Earth’s axis is off and it’s never going back,” says Phyllis Young, a Sioux tribal elder. “And we have to help keep it in balance for as long as we can. I am a mother and a grandmother. Those are my credentials to ensure a future with clean drinking water — a future of human dignity, human rights, and human survival.”
Young grew up on the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. She has been present at many of the protests and says she’s seen people brutalized at the hands of the security contractors and law enforcement officials guarding the land where the drilling is set to take place. It was Young who got Clark Jr involved. In late summer, she was in Washington, D.C., lobbying for the military to promote an alternative (and scientifically dubious) clean energy source called low-energy nuclear reaction, when she heard of a military veteran who was a forceful advocate for environmental conservation. Clark Jr. was eager to help. He spent weeks trying to assemble a legal team for the Standing Rock Sioux, and even contacted Independent Diplomat, a nonprofit organization that helps governments navigate complex diplomatic processes. “I pulled all of the levers, and none of them worked,” Clark Jr. recalls. Then, in early November, the plan dawned on him: He’d bring his fellow veterans. Lots of them. And they’d come prepared to put their lives on the line.
“We’re not going out there to get in a fight with anyone,” Clark Jr. says. “They can feel free to beat us up, but we’re 100% nonviolence.”
You may have heard of Clark Jr.’s father. Wesley Clark Sr. retired from the Army in 2000 as a four-star general. His career began in the jungles of Vietnam, where he was shot four times during an enemy ambush near Saigon, and culminated in a posting as Supreme Allied Commander Europe during the Kosovo War. In 2004, he ran for the Democratic Party presidential nomination on platform that criticized the Iraq War and called for measures to combat climate change. Clark Jr., who was born in Florida while Clark Sr. was in Vietnam and grew up on military bases throughout the United States and Europe, seems to have inherited both his father’s commanding spirit and his progressive ideals.
Clark Jr. had just graduated from Georgetown’s School of Foreign Service when he joined the Army as a cavalry officer. He served on active duty from 1992–1996 — “nothing dangerous,” he says. On Sept. 11, 2001, he was living in New York City, and after seeing the towers fall, he decided to re-enlist. “I was like, ‘I’m going back in. I’m going to go in there and fuck people up,’” he recalls. It was Clark Sr., the decorated war hero, who convinced him not to. As Clark Jr. recalls, his father foresaw U.S. military intervention in Iraq and warned that as a soldier he would be fighting a war that had nothing to do with defeating al Qaeda. “He was right, but I’ll tell you, I’ve never felt worse about a decision in my life,” Clark Jr. says.
Clark Jr. may never have served in combat, but when he talks about Standing Rock, he sounds like a battle-hardened general. This isn’t his first foray into boots-on-the-ground environmental activism. He’s currently working with an organization called Climate Mobilization, which is focused on “building and supporting a social movement that causes the US federal government to commence WWII-scale climate mobilization.” But he’s perhaps best known as a co-host of the political web series The Young Turks. On the The Young Turks website, Clark Jr. is described as an Army veteran “currently trying to save human civilization from climate change.” The impending confrontation at Standing Rock, he says, will be “the most important event up to this time in human history.”
Vets Standing For Standing Rock was announced via an official sounding letter formatted like a five-paragraph military operation order, breaking down the “opposing forces” — “Morton County Sheriff’s office combined with multiple state police agencies and private security contractors” — “Mission,” “Execution” and “Logistics,” among other things. A packing list virtually mirrors the ones issued to soldiers preparing to deploy to the field (minus the weapons). But there are also parts of the document that read like a revolutionary manifesto. Under the section titled “Friendly Forces,” for example, the op order states, “we are there to put our bodies on the line, no matter the physical cost, in complete nonviolence to provide a clear representation to all Americans of where evil resides.”
The document was accompanied by a link to a GoFundMe campaign that has raised nearly $20,000 of its $100,000 goal since it was created on Nov. 11. The money, Clark Jr. says, will only be used for helping volunteers with transportation costs and then bailing those who are arrested out of jail.
Wood Jr. says the op-order was Clark Jr.’s idea, but the two men agree that organizing like a military unit is the smartest approach, especially because most of the people expected to join them on the ground have served.
“It’s simple and we have clearly defined goals, so people don’t get caught up in the confusion,” says Wood Jr., who served with the Baltimore Police Department for more than a decade. “One of the issues the police are going to face is that our level of planning and coordination is vastly superior to theirs, so they may end up with a problem when it comes to that.”
Here then is the plan: On Dec. 4, Clark Jr. and Wood Jr., along with a group of veterans and other folks in the “bravery business,” as Wood Jr. puts it — 500 total is the goal, but they’re hoping for more — will muster at Standing Rock. The following morning they will join members of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, including Young, for a traditional healing ceremony. With an eye toward the media, old military uniforms will be donned so that if the veterans are brutalized by the police, they are brutalized not as ordinary citizens, but as people who once served the government they are protesting against. Then body armor, ear plugs, and gas masks will be issued to those who didn’t bring their own. Bagpipes will play, and traditional Sioux war songs will be sung. The music will continue as everyone marches together to the banks of the Missouri, on the other side of which a line of guards in riot gear will be standing ready with rifles, mace, batons, and dogs. Then, the veterans and their allies — or at least the ones who are brave enough — will lock arms and cross the river in a “massive line” for their “first encounter” with the “opposing forces.” The goal is to make it to the drilling pad and surround it, arm in arm. That will require making it through the line of guards, who have repelled other such attempts with a level of physical force Sioux tribal members and protesters have described as “excessive” — claims that recently prompted a United Nations investigation. Of course, that’s what the body armor and gas masks are for.
“We’ll have those people who will recognize that they’re not willing to take a bullet, and those who recognize that they are,” says Wood Jr. “It’s okay if some of them step back, but Wes and I have no intention of doing so.”
Of course, as most veterans know full well, even the best plans go out the window the moment the shit hits the fan. It seems probable that the group will be met by fierce resistance from those charged with keeping people out of the construction site. Despite a recent decision by the Corps of Engineers to delay further work on the pipeline, Energy Transfer Partners is still hoping to complete the project by January. The segment that will cross beneath the Missouri at Standing Rock is the last major piece of the puzzle. Strengthening the resolve of the company’s executives is the fact that Energy Transfer Partners CEO Kelcy Warren donated more than $100,000 to elect Donald Trump, and Trump himself owns stock in the company. “I’m 100% sure that the pipeline will be approved by a Trump administration,” Warren told NBC News on Nov. 12.
Nonetheless, Clark Jr. and Wood Jr. remain undeterred. If anything, the likelihood of approval only makes them more determined. After all, this is war.
“The Joint Chiefs of Staff labeled the climate emergency as the number one security threat to the country, and they’ve been labeling it that for years,” Clark Jr. says. “All you need to do is put an overlay on any map in the world where there’s a water and crisis and you’re going to see massive political violence in that location. And unless we act, we’re going to be dealing with that exact same situation right here in the United States.” Tell us what you think Related Posts | 1 |
On the Tuesday edition of Breitbart News Daily, broadcast live on SiriusXM Patriot Channel 125 from 6AM to 9AM Eastern, Breitbart Alex Marlow will continue our discussion of the Trump administration’s agenda. [Breitbart Texas Brandon Darby will discuss the lack of border wall funding in the current House budget. Breitbart Business and Finance editor John Carney will the latest economic numbers and stock market performance in the Trump economy. Breitbart London’s Chris Tomlinson and Virginia Hale will update us on the latest development in the French presidential race. Breitbart’s Ezra Dulis will discuss Bill Shine’s resignation from Fox News — a move which Sean Hannity warned would mean the “end of FNC as we know it. ” Colorado state senator Ted Harvey, the Chairman of the Committee to Defend the President (formerly known as the Stop Hillary PAC) will discuss support for Karen Handel’s Congressional campaign in Georgia’s 6th district. Live from London, Rome, and Jerusalem, Breitbart correspondents will provide updates on the latest international news. Breitbart News Daily is the first live, conservative radio enterprise to air seven days a week. SiriusXM Vice President for news and talk Dave Gorab called the show “the conservative news show of record. ” Follow Breitbart News on Twitter for live updates during the show. Listeners may call into the show at: . | 0 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.