June 10, 2017


News and Views


THE DEATH OF ADAM WEST – THE FIRST BATMAN.

http://ew.com/tv/2017/06/10/adam-west-family-guy-seth-macfarlane/
Family Guy creator Seth MacFarlane pays tribute to Adam West: 'You're irreplaceable'
DAN SNIERSON@DANSNIERSON
POSTED ON JUNE 10, 2017 AT 2:30PM EDT

The death of Adam West is hitting Hollywood hard, and Family Guy creator Seth MacFarlane is among those honoring the TV legend, who died on Friday after a battle with leukemia. The 88-year-old actor was, of course, most famous for playing Batman, but he also was well-known for lending his voice to another role — that of the Quahog Mayor Adam West on MacFarlane’s animated Fox sitcom.

The 88-year-old actor was, of course, most famous for playing Batman, but he also was well-known for lending his voice to another role — that of the Quahog Mayor Adam West on MacFarlane’s animated Fox sitcom.

“Family Guy has lost its mayor, and I have lost a friend,” MacFarlane said in a statement on Twitter. “Adam West was a joy to rk with, and the kind of guy you always wanted to be around. His positivity, good nature, and sense of fun were undeniable, and it was always a big jolt of the best kind of energy when he walked in to record the show. He knew comedy, and he knew humanity.

“I am beyond fortunate to have had the privilege of working with him, and he will be profoundly missed by all of us. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for all that you have given, Mr. Mayor. You’re irreplaceable.”

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
Follow
Seth MacFarlane ✔ @SethMacFarlane
1:40 PM - 10 Jun 2017
24,166 24,166 Retweets 60,617 60,617 likes

Twitter Ads info and privacy

West played the delusional, unscrupulous mayor in more than 100 episodes of Family Guy, with the most recent installment airing last month. West also voiced another character that was a distorted version of himself in a 1997 episode of the animated Cartoon Network series Johnny Bravo that MacFarlane wrote. MacFarlane was then inspired to bring West into the Family Guy fold.



NOW TO THE ALL TOO REAL WORLD. THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE ON JEFF SESSIONS SPEAKS OF THE FACT THAT COMEY DIDN’T TRUST HIM WITH THE INFORMATION ABOUT TRUMP. THE REASONS WHY HE WOULDN’T ARE MANY, IN MY VIEW. SESSIONS HAS A LONG HISTORY OF RACIAL BIGOTRY AND THE EXTREME STINGINESS OF CERTAIN “CONSERVATIVE” POLITICIANS WHO HAVE BEEN IN OFFICE FOR AS LONG AS I CAN REMEMBER IN THIS COUNTRY. THEY’RE A GOOD OLD BOY’S CLUB, AND THEY LOVE TRUMP. HE PUT THEM BACK IN POWER, AFTER ALL. GO TRUMP! AS FOR HOW COMEY FEELS ABOUT POLITICS, HE IS AN INDEPENDENT AS OF 2016. I DON’T THINK THAT SWITCH FROM THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS AN UNRELATED ISSUE TO THE ARRIVAL IN POWER OF DONALD TRUMP AND HIS FOLLOWING, INCLUDING SESSIONS.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-does-attorney-general-jeff-sessions-fit-into-the-comey-situation/
By JEFF PEGUES CBS NEWS June 9, 2017, 6:59 PM
How does Attorney General Jeff Sessions fit into the Comey controversy?

As the nation's top law enforcement officer, the attorney general is supposed to be a firewall between the president and the FBI. So where was Jeff Sessions during the firing of former FBI Director James Comey?

Comey left no doubt he didn't trust Sessions during his testimony Thursday. He told senators he didn't feel comfortable telling Sessions that President Trump had pressured him to stop the FBI's investigation of fired national security adviser Michael Flynn.

"Our judgment, as I recall, was that he was very close to and inevitably going to recuse himself for a variety of reasons," Comey said. "We also were aware of facts that I can't discuss in an open setting that would make his continued engagement in a Russia-related investigation problematic."

Those reasons are unclear -- but Sessions had failed disclose at least two meetings with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. They were reported in the media in early March, and one day later, Sessions did recuse himself.

pegues-sessions-comey-2017-6-9.jpg
Former FBI Director James Comey made it clear in his Congressional testimony that he didn't trust Attorney General Jeff Sessions CBS NEWS

"I never had meetings with Russian operatives or Russian intermediaries about the Trump campaign," Sessions said at the time.

Last night, the Justice Department said Sessions' decision was based on his "participation in President Trump's campaign" and it "was for that reason alone"

Comey testimony raises questions
Play VIDEO
Comey testimony raises questions

"When I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story," Mr. Trump told NBC News after he fired Comey.

Sessions recommended firing Comey last month, and agreed with a memo written by his deputy that criticized Comey's handling of the Clinton email investigation. But the president has said he got rid of the FBI director because of the Russia probe.

"How would you characterize Attorney General Sessions adherence to his recusal, in particular with regard to his involvement in your firing?" Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden asked Comey.

"If, as the president said, I was fired because of the Russia investigation, why was the attorney general involved in that chain? I don't know," Comey answered.

The Justice Department is adamant Sessions recommended Comey be fired for "effectiveness of his leadership," not the Russia investigation. The attorney general is scheduled to testify on Capitol Hill next week.



THE DOJ UNDER SESSIONS MAY BE VERGING FROM THE PROTECTION OF CITIZENS RIGHTS TO PROTECTING THE WHITE HOUSE IN ITS ETHICS ISSUES AND SEEMING TRANSGRESSIONS. SEE THIS CBS ARTICLE, AND THEN THE FOLLOWING REPORT FROM THE WATCHDOG, CREW, WHICH DISCUSSES TRUMP’S ETHICS QUESTIONS -- OF A MULTIPLE VARIETY, RATHER THAN MERELY THE EMOLUMENTS CLAUSE. WHEN I READ THIS, WITHOUT LOOKING UNDER EACH SET OF LINKS, I DID SOME, HOWEVER AND FOUND QUITE A FEW THINGS THAT I HAD HEARD ABOUT IN THE NEWS, BUT KNEW VERY LITTLE ABOUT THEM. THAT IS AT WEBSITE: https://www.citizensforethics.org/trump-inc-ethics-crisis-trumps-first-100-days/ (CREW). I SUGGEST YOU GO TO THE SITE AND READ THEM DIRECTLY FROM THERE, SO YOU CAN CLICK ON THE LINKAGES FOR EACH SUBJECT TO UNDERSTAND BETTER WHY CREW IS SUING TRUMP AND HIS WHITE HOUSE. IT’S MORE THAN IRREGULAR FOREIGN PAYMENTS.

PARTICULARLY NOTE THE SECRET VOTE, HELD BEFORE INAUGURATION DAY, BY WHICH THE HOUSE REPUBLICANS SOUGHT TO DEFANG “THEIR OWN WATCHDOG”: “In addition, even before inauguration day, House Republicans sought to gut their own watchdog, the Office of Congressional Ethics, in a secret vote announced only hours before; an unprecedented public outcry forced them to abandon this plan.”


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/doj-argues-trump-organization-can-accept-foreign-money/
By KATHRYN WATSON CBS NEWS June 10, 2017, 2:56 PM
DOJ argues Trump can take foreign money without violating Constitution

Photograph -- Ivanka Trump speaks during the grand opening of the Trump International Hotel in Washington, DC on October 26, 2016. MANDEL NGAN/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

The Department of Justice (DOJ) claims President Trump can accept goods and services from foreign governments without congressional approval, despite the constitutional prohibition against U.S. officials' acceptance of foreign payments or gifts without congressional approval.

In response to a lawsuit filed by watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics (CREW), attorneys for the group claim foreign officials are doing business with Trump properties as a way to curry favor with the president.

The DOJ argued in a Friday filing that the constitutional provision, known as the emoluments clause, doesn't apply to fair-market transactions, like hotel bills or office rent. Bloomberg first reported on the filing.

CREW is looking for U.S. District Judge Ronnie Abrams in New York to determine once and for all whether the president is violating the Constitution via his vast business empire. The DOJ's motion on Friday sought to dismiss the suit.

The DOJ cited George Washington to support its claim that the provisions of the emoluments clause were "not designed to reach commercial transactions that a president (or other federal official) may engage in as an ordinary citizen through his business enterprises." Washington, who left his business interests in the hands of his nephew upon assuming office, required weekly reports from Mount Vernon managers and responded with detailed instructions, the DOJ said.

"Neither the text nor the history of the clauses shows that they were intended to reach benefits arising from a president's private business pursuits having nothing to do with his office or personal service to a foreign power," the DOJ said in the recent court filing. "Were plaintiffs' interpretation correct, presidents from the very beginning of the Republic, including George Washington, would have received prohibited 'emoluments.'"

Ivanka Trump: "I manage any conflict" that arises with Trump International Hotel
Play VIDEO
Ivanka Trump: "I manage any conflict" that arises with Trump International Hotel

Mr. Trump's business empire continues to plague his presidency, despite Mr. Trump's claim after winning the election that the president, "can't have a conflict of interest."

Before he took office, Mr. Trump promised his businesses would donate any proceeds from foreign governments to charity. But when pressed by those like Maryland Democratic Rep. Elijah Cummings to explain how the president is fulfilling that pledge, the Trump Organization released a sparsely worded pamphlet that failed to describe how Mr. Trump's companies are tracking and donating foreign payments.

But the pamphlet did reveal the Trump Organization is relying on foreign representatives to self-report to a Trump company if they are paying for something in their official capacity or if a foreign government is footing the bill. According to the Trump Organization pamphlet, "It is not the intention nor the design of this policy for our properties to attempt to identify individual travelers who have not specifically identified themselves as being a representatives of a foreign government entity on foreign government business."

Cummings responded that he has "grave concerns" the president may be accepting illegal foreign payments.



CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON (CREW)

https://www.citizensforethics.org/trump-inc-ethics-crisis-trumps-first-100-days/
TRUMP INC: THE ETHICS CRISIS IN TRUMP’S FIRST 100 DAYS

Donald Trump spoke often during the presidential campaign of his intention to “drain the swamp” – that is, to clean up the corruption, influence, and cronyism that is too prevalent in Washington. Unfortunately, the first 100 days of the Trump administration has had precisely the opposite effect, bringing in conflicts of interest and ethical and legal problems on a massive scale not seen since at least President Nixon and perhaps ever.

At the core of these problems is President Trump’s decision not to divest from his vast business empire. President Trump controls an organization made up of hundreds of different companies in at least 20 countries. The Trump Organization operates hotels, buildings, golf resorts, and other businesses, and also sells the right to use the Trump name to brand properties and other businesses his companies do not own. Despite numerous bipartisan calls well before his inauguration for President Trump to follow the example of every modern president and sell his interests in these businesses, and in the face of warnings that failure to do so would give rise to intractable conflicts of interest, President Trump has refused to divest. As a result, the American people have no way of knowing whether key decisions in the areas of taxes, regulation, environmental policy, employment and housing discrimination, foreign policy, trade, and many others are being made in the best interest of the country or in President Trump’s own financial interest. And when these businesses receive payments or benefits from foreign or U.S. federal or state governments – as the evidence shows they do day in and day out – President Trump violates our fundamental anti-corruption laws: the Constitution’s foreign and domestic emoluments clauses.

The tone set by President Trump’s unwillingness to curb his own massive conflicts of interest has reverberated through the federal government. Ethics issues confronted nearly all of President Trump’s major cabinet nominees, leading several, including Secretary of the Army nominee Vincent Viola, Secretary of Labor nominee Andrew Puzder, prospective Secretary of the Navy nominee Philip Bilden, and Deputy Secretary of Commerce nominee Todd Ricketts to drop out before even receiving a confirmation hearing. Ethics issues contributed to fierce confirmation battles for others, notwithstanding the President’s party’s majority in the Senate, including Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross, and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, among others. In some cases, even where a nominee was confirmed, conflicts of interest and ethics issues followed them into office, forcing recusals from participating in significant agency work or, if they do participate, risking the legal validity of that work. For example, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency Scott Pruitt have already announced significant recusals, although even these recusals may not go far enough in some cases.

Complying with ethics rules also has presented difficulties outside the confirmation process for White House and other executive branch officials, leading to complaints, discipline, and a firing. Director of Strategic Initiatives Chris Liddell appears to have run afoul of the federal criminal conflict of interest statute by attending and possibly organizing at least three meetings between President Trump and business executives from companies in which he held millions of dollars in stock. Nepotism issues have also arisen with President Trump’s hiring of his daughter and son-in-law, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner. High-profile White House and executive branch employees have also improperly used their official positions within the first 100 days; in two cases, this was to endorse products, with Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway endorsing Ivanka Trump’s clothing line on national television and Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin advising viewers of a live online interview to take their children to see Lego Batman, a movie he executive produced. In another case, a White House official appeared to improperly use his official position for politics, in violation of the Hatch Act, when Director of Social Media Dan Scavino, Jr. urged his Twitter followers to defeat a member of Congress who opposed President Trump’s healthcare legislation from an effectively official account. At least one White House official appears to have already violated the ethics pledge each official signs upon being hired — Chief Strategist and Senior Counselor to the President Stephen Bannon reportedly communicated repeatedly with his most recent former employer, Breitbart News Network, about official matters. National security advisor Michael Flynn resigned after only 24 days on the job after having improper conversations about sanctions with Russian officials during the presidential transition period; afterwards, it was revealed that he had also failed to disclose at least $68,000 in income from Russian-related organizations on his initial financial disclosure form.

Outside individuals advising President Trump have also faced serious ethics questions. For example, billionaire investor Carl Icahn has been named a special advisor for overhauling the country’s regulatory framework, and has reportedly advised President Trump on relevant personnel and policies, including the head of the Environmental Protection Agency and an existing regulation requiring fuel companies to use certain amounts of biofuel. It has been reported that one of Icahn’s companies would have saved more than $200 million in costs last year if his suggested change to the biofuel regulation had been in place; as an outside advisor, however, Icahn has asserted he is not required to follow government ethics rules that would ensure his advice is understood in its proper context.

Administration officials also appear to have failed to comply with basic transparency obligations, such as the legal requirements to maintain presidential records and to properly document who outside the government is advising President Trump. With respect to presidential records, issues include the use of phone apps that automatically delete messages, improper deletion of records such as tweets, and the possible use of private email accounts without proper record-keeping. The issues of transparency relating to who is advising the president include apparent failures to comply with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which requires basic information be kept and released about any advisory group that includes people outside the government; President Trump has used such groups on matters such as filling a Supreme Court vacancy and setting policy relating to manufacturing sector jobs. President Trump has also rolled back one of his predecessor’s major transparency initiatives, releasing White House visitor logs.

Even what little the administration claims to have done to drain the swamp has proved to be more illusory than real. President Trump’s ethics executive order included a five-year lobbying ban after leaving the administration, but it intentionally left out the previous ban on lobbyists working at government agencies they recently lobbied. As a result, lobbyists quickly have been hired at several agencies. And less than 100 days in, the administration has already granted at least one waiver of the five-year ban. At the same time, any progress on reducing special interest influence has been undercut by President Trump’s own former campaign aides setting up shop as lobbyists with access to the president.

Compounding these problems, the agencies that oversee and monitor government ethics have come under fire during this period. The Trump administration and its supporters sought to discredit the Office of Government Ethics after its director said publicly that President Trump should divest from his businesses, as other modern presidents had. In addition, even before inauguration day, House Republicans sought to gut their own watchdog, the Office of Congressional Ethics, in a secret vote announced only hours before; an unprecedented public outcry forced them to abandon this plan.

Far from draining the swamp, the first 100 days of the Trump administration have illustrated the importance of prioritizing ethics when entering public service – and the negative consequences when a president fails to do so. This failure of leadership resounds through the administration and the government as a whole, and ultimately harms our democracy and the interests of the American people. These lessons should be learned now, before more damage is done.

President Trump’s Failure to Divest: The Root of the Issue

President Trump’s Cabinet: Conflicted Nominees, Flawed Process

Betsy DeVos – Secretary of Education
Scott Pruitt – Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
Wilbur Ross – Secretary of Commerce
Tom Price – Secretary of Health and Human Services
Jeff Sessions – Attorney General
Rex Tillerson – Secretary of State
Withdrawn Nominees – Vincent Viola, Andrew Pudzer, Philip Bilden and Todd Ricketts

White House Staff and Advisors: Close Trump Aides Off to a Bad Start

Misuse of Public Office to Promote Products
Conflict of Interest
Violating the Ethics Pledge
Misuse of Office for Partisan Politics (Hatch Act)
Improper Foreign Contacts, Payments and Agency
Outside Advisors Skirting Ethics Rules
Nepotism and Conflicts of Interest – Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump
Ignoring the Wall Between Government and Business – Eric Trump and Donald Trump, Jr.

President Trump Fills the Swamp – With Lobbyists

Undermining Ethics Agencies

Attacks on the Office of Government Ethics
Attacks on the Office of Congressional Ethics

Questions about Basic Transparency Obligations

Retaining Presidential Records Under the Law
Documenting Outside Advisory Committees
White House Visitor Logs – President Trump Reverses Course


DOCUMENTING OUTSIDE ADVISORY COMMITTEES --

President Trump and his top aides repeatedly have turned to outside groups and individuals to help them formulate policy. In doing so, they may have triggered the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (“FACA”). They have not, however, complied with those transparency obligations.

The FACA is an open-government law that, with respect to the Executive Office of the President, is triggered whenever a committee is advising the president and is not “composed wholly of full-time, or permanent part-time, officers or employees of the Federal Government.”[i] Committees subject to the FACA must make publicly available the committee’s “records, reports, transcripts, minutes, appendixes, working papers, drafts, studies, agenda, or other documents which were made available to or prepared for or by” the committee.[ii] Beyond these disclosure requirements, such committees must file a charter; publish notices of their meetings in the Federal Register; hold public meetings; and document each meeting with detailed minutes.[iii] FACA also requires advisory committees to be “fairly balanced in terms of the points of view represented,” and prohibits them from being “inappropriately influenced by the appointing authority or by any special interest.”[iv]

President Trump appears to have ignored these requirements for multiple committees. For example, knowing that he would have a Supreme Court vacancy to fill at the outset of his administration and likely several more during his term in office, President Trump assembled a committee to give him recommendations. Committee members include the Federalist Society’s Leonard Leo Jr. and Jim DeMint of the Heritage Foundation,[v] along with Vice President Mike Pence, White House Counsel Donald McGahn, and Chief Strategist and Senior Counselor to the President Stephen K. Bannon.[vi] Reportedly, Attorney General Jeff Sessions also is advising the President on Supreme Court nominees.[vii]

This committee has the earmarks of an advisory committee subject to the FACA: due to the participation of Leo and DeMint,[viii] it is not composed entirely of full-time federal employees, and it was formed to provide advice to the president on Supreme Court nominees. Yet the committee has not complied with any of the FACA’s requirements, leaving the public in the dark about the committee’s recommendations and even whether the committee is “fairly balanced,” as the statute requires.

These same concerns were raised with the committee the president formed as part of his “Manufacturing Jobs Initiative” that includes CEOs and labor leaders.[ix] The White House has attempted to place this committee beyond the FACA’s reach by using certain “magic” words to delineate its responsibilities, namely the claim that the group is not expected to provide “consensus advice or recommendations.”[x] But the actual function of the committee belies this claim. Dow Chemical CEO Andrew Liveris, who is organizing the first series of meetings, has described the purpose of the committee as “offer[ing] perspectives and information to President Trump and his Administration on a variety of policy priorities.”[xi] Toward this end, the committee “will help identify and work with experts from across the country to make U.S. manufacturing more competitive.”[xii] Directly after the committee’s first meeting, Mr. Liveris told reporters that “the White House wanted the CEOs to present recommendations in 30 days.”[xiii] Another committee member, Tesla and Space X CEO Elon Musk, announced via Twitter his plan to use a subsequent meeting to “seek advisory council consensus & present to President.”[xiv] These descriptions simply do not square with a group that does not provide “consensus advice or recommendations.” Yet despite the committee’s status as one subject to the FACA, to date the White House has refused to comply with any of the FACA’s mandatory requirements.

Other potential FACA issues are on the horizon. For example, as a presidential candidate, Donald Trump formed a “coalition of gun enthusiasts to advise him on Second Amendment issues” just days before the election.[xv] Although the White House now describes the group as a “campaign coalition,” some of its co-chairs hope to have an ongoing role advising the president, and expect Donald Trump Jr. to serve as “a conduit between the advisory group and the White House.”[xvi] Any ongoing work of the group may implicate FACA, depending on the group’s composition and its relationship to the president.

The FACA affords a level of transparency that ensures that the work of groups composed of government and non-government members advising the president is publicly accessible. At a time when the president is relying increasingly on outsiders for advice and direction – individuals who are not subject to the ethical and other disclosure obligations imposed on federal employees – this access is more important than ever.




http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sessions-agrees-to-testify-before-the-senate-intelligence-committee-next-week/
By KATHRYN WATSON CBS NEWS June 10, 2017, 6:18 PM
Sessions to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee

Photograph -- Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself Thursday, March 2, 2017, from investigations involving the Trump campaign. CBS NEWS

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has agreed to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday, days after fired FBI Director James Comey's testimony left lingering questions about the FBI investigation into Russian election meddling and any ties between Russia and the Trump campaign.

Sessions announced his intention to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Saturday in letters to the chairmen of House and Senate appropriations subcommittees, where he had been scheduled to testify Tuesday. Sessions said he learned members of those subcommittees planned to ask him questions about the investigation into Russian election meddling, and decided the Senate Intelligence Committee was a more appropriate venue to field those questions.

"Some members [of the appropriations committees] have publicly stated their intention to focus their questions on issues related to the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, from which I have recused, and for which the Deputy Attorney General appointed a special counsel," Sessions wrote. "In light of reports regarding Mr. Comey's testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, it is important that I have an opportunity to address these matters in the appropriate forum."

"The Senate Intelligence Committee is the most appropriate forum for such matters, as it has been conducting an investigation and has access to relevant, classified information," Sessions continued. "Therefore, I am pleased to accept the invitation to appear before members of that committee on June 13th."

Sessions did not specify whether he would testify in an open or closed setting.

Comey questions Sessions' involvement in his firing
Play VIDEO
Comey questions Sessions' involvement in his firing

Sessions said he would send Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to the appropriations subcommittees in his stead to discuss budget matters.

Comey's testimony raised lingering questions surrounding Sessions' recusal from the FBI's Russia probe. Comey told the Senate Intelligence Committee Thursday that he couldn't discuss the "problematic" reason why the FBI believed Sessions would have to recuse himself from the investigation. The DOJ fired back with a response saying Sessions recused himself only because he was involved in President Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

Paula Reid contributed to this report.



MURDER MOST FOUL -- GO TO THE WEBSITE BELOW AND LOOK AT THIS MAN’S FACE. HE IS PRETTY CLEARLY DERANGED, YET HE IS POSSIBLY GOING TO BE SUBJECT TO THE DEATH PENALTY. WE DEFINITELY NEED TO IMPRISON PEOPLE LIKE THIS, BUT IT SHOULD BE IN A LONG-TERM LOCKED WARD. I DON’T THINK IT SERVES ANY PURPOSE TO PUT THEM TO DEATH. THEY DON’T NEED “PUNISHMENT,” BUT COMPASSIONATE AND FIRM CONFINEMENT, WHICH SHOULD INCLUDE PROPER MEDICATION. WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS INCREASE GREATLY THE MENTAL HEALTH BENEFITS UNDER MEDICARE AND MEDICAID, SO THAT OUR WHOLE POPULATION WILL BE GIVEN TREATMENT AS NEEDED, RATHER THAN MERELY AFTER THEY HAVE JUST MURDERED SEVERAL PEOPLE, AS WE SEE HERE.

AT THE SAME TIME, THIS MAN AND THOSE LIKE HIM MUSTN’T BE CONSIDERED SAFE TO BE ALLOWED TO LIVE ON THEIR OWN, EVEN WITH MEDICATION. THAT’S HOW SO MANY OF THEM ARE EMERGING TO THE LIGHT OF DAY NOW WITH A GUN IN THEIR HAND. THEY HAVE NEEDED TREATMENT FOR MONTHS OR YEARS, AND RECEIVED NONE. WHEN A “MOVEMENT” LIKE THIS NEO-NAZI PHILOSOPHY EMERGES FROM UNDER IT’S ROCK, THOSE WHO ARE MENTALLY UNBALANCED ALREADY ARE APT TO BREAK OUT IN VIOLENCE.

WE ALSO NEED TO FIND A MORE RELIABLE WAY TO IDENTIFY SUCH INDIVIDUALS BEFORE THEY COMMIT A CRIME. I WOULD ALMOST SUGGEST MANDATORY HEALTH CHECKUPS INCLUDING PSYCHOLOGICAL ILLNESS. AS FAR AS I HAVE HEARD, THERE IS NO MECHANISM BEING USED SO FAR FOR MONITORING SUCH THINGS; BUT IF WE CAN SPY ON PEOPLE VIA INTERNET AND OTHER WAYS FOR PURELY POLITICAL REASONS, I DON’T SEE WHY OUR CLEVER TECHNOLOGY SHOULDN’T BE USED TO DETECT AND CAPTURE THESE INDIVIDUALS. THEY ARE A “THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY,” AND TO OUR COMMUNITIES. BREITBART AND OTHER ALT-RIGHT SITES HAVE RECRUITED A FRIGHTENING NUMBER OF THEM IN THEIR ROLE AS PURVEYORS OF HATE LITERATURE; AND SUCH INTERNET COMMUNICATION CENTERS “STIR THE POT” OF HATRED, JUST LIKE THIS MAN. IN THIS COUNTRY WE SO OFTEN THINK ONLY IN TERMS OF SIN AND CRIME, WHILE DANGEROUS MENTAL ILLNESS FLOURISHES BENEATH OUR NOSES UNDETECTED; IN THE ALT-RIGHT INSTANCES, THE HATE-BASED PATRIOTISM AND RELIGION THAT HAS GROWN UP IS ACTUALLY BEING GIVEN ACCEPTANCE AMONG A FRIGHTENING NUMBER OF AMERICANS. THIS MAN IS A PRIME EXAMPLE.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/adam-purinton-faces-hate-crime-charges-in-fatal-shooting-of-indian-engineer/
CBS/AP June 9, 2017, 6:00 PM
Kansas man charged with hate crime in fatal shooting of Indian engineer

Photograph -- In this Monday, May 15, 2017 file photo, Adam Purinton, charged in the Olathe Austins bar shootings, appears in Division 8 at the Johnson County District Courthouse in Olathe, Kansas. DAVID EULITT / AP

KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- A Kansas man charged with fatally shooting an Indian national at a suburban Kansas City bar has been indicted on federal hate crime and firearms charges.

The Justice Department announced Friday that Adam Purinton, 51, of Olathe, Kansas was indicted by a federal grand jury.

The man allegedly killed and another wounded by Purinton on Feb. 22 at Austins Bar & Grill in Olathe, were Indian nationals. The victim was 32-year-old Srinivas Kuchibhotla and the injured man was his friend, Alok Madasani. A third man, Ian Grillot, was shot and wounded when he tried to intervene.

Police investigate suspected hate crime against U.S. citizen of Indian descent
Play VIDEO
Police investigate suspected hate crime against U.S. citizen of Indian descent

The shooting raised fears of more attacks on immigrants following President Trump's election and his push for a ban on immigrants from some countries. Officials in India also expressed concern about their citizens' safety in the U.S., where many work in technology and other industries.

An affidavit released in March said Madasani told detectives that the gunman asked if their "status was legal" before he opened fire.

The indictment announced Friday alleges Purinton shot the two Indian men because of their "actual and perceived" race, color, religion and national origin. The indictment also alleges Purinton committed the crimes after premeditation and planning, attempted to kill more than one person and created a grave risk of death to others at the scene. The indictment also accuses Purinton of violating federal firearms laws.

The indictment alleges Purinton shot Kuchibhotla and Madasani because of their perceived race, color, religion and national origin.

Witnesses said Purinton yelled at the two Indian men to "get out of my country" before pulling the trigger in the attack. A bartender at Austins Bar and Grill in Olathe said Purinton used racial slurs before firing.

After the shooting, Purinton, who is white, drove 70 miles east to an Applebee's restaurant in Clinton, Missouri, where he made the shocking admission to a bartender.

"He asked if he could stay with me and my husband, and he wouldn't tell me what he did. I kept asking him, and he said that he would tell me if I agreed to let him stay with me," the bartender said. "Well, I finally got him to tell me and he said, like, that he shot and killed two Iranian people in Olathe."

Hate crime? Two Indian men shot inside Kansas bar
Play VIDEO
Hate crime? Two Indian men shot inside Kansas bar

The Justice Department said in a news release that it will decide later whether Purinton will face the death penalty.

Kuchibhotla and Madasani had come to the U.S. from India to study and worked as engineers at GPS-maker Garmin. The company issued a statement to CBS News in May saying they were "deeply saddened by this terrible and senseless tragedy," and that they would "grieve this tragedy as a community, our thoughts and prayers are with all involved."

Purinton is jailed in Johnson County, Kansas, on $2 million bond on murder and attempted murder charges. His public defender, Michael McCulloch, did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

Kuchibhotla's widow, Sunayana Dumala, attended a vigil in Olathe on Friday, describing her husband as "a very lovable soul," CBS affiliate KCTV reports.

"He did not deserve a death like this," Dumala told the crowd. "I need an answer. I need an answer from the government. What is it they're going to do to stop these hate crimes?"


SO WHAT CAN BE DONE IN THE SHORT TERM? READ THE FOLLOWING FROM THE RELATIVES OF ONE OF THESE TWO HINDUS WHO WERE MURDERED.

“THERE IS A KIND OF HYSTERIA SPREADING .... THE SITUATION SEEMS TO BE PRETTY BAD AFTER TRUMP TOOK OVER AS THE US PRESIDENT.” THIS IS ONLY ONE WAY IN WHICH THE WORLD OUTSIDE OUR AMERICAN BUBBLE IS TAKING NOTICE. THOSE IN CHARGE IN THE LEGISLATURE NEED TO LOOK AT THIS COMBINATION OF CALLOUS DISREGARD AND INCOMPETENCE FROM THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION TO BE GROUNDS FOR IMPEACHMENT. I THINK IT IS LITERALLY A NATIONAL EMERGENCY. WE ARE DEFINITELY NOT VIEWED AT THIS POINT IN TIME AS THE “CITY UPON A HILL.” I DON’T THINK THAT IS A PERMANENT SITUATION THAT CAN’T BE TURNED AROUND BY OUR CLEANING HOUSE IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS, OR I HOPE NOT. OF COURSE, OUR BEING A NATION OF LAWS AND NOT OF MIDNIGHT RAIDS FROM A SHADOWY GROUP OF AUTHORITIES, OUR WAY TO THAT GOAL WILL NOT BE IMMEDIATELY ATTAINABLE. I’M IN AGREEMENT WITH THE INDIAN WOMAN QUOTED BELOW -- WE NEED EFFECTIVE ACTION NOW.

IN ENGLAND AND SOME OTHER PLACES THERE IS A LEGAL MECHANISM CALLED A “VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE.” MAYBE WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT HERE, RATHER THAN HAVING TO FIND AND DOCUMENT SPECIFIC “CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS” IN AN A TRIAL, CALLED IMPEACHMENT. SEE THIS VERY INTERESTING SLATE ARTICLE ON VOTES OF NO CONFIDENCE IN THE US. IT DOES SOMETIMES HAPPEN, BUT IT IS PURELY SYMBOLIC. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT MORE COMMONLY OCCURRING, AND WITH TEETH.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2007/05/vote_of_no_consequence.html

THE FACT THAT SPICER CALLED THE LINKAGE BETWEEN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S APPROACH AND GOALS WITH THIS RISE IN FANATICISM AND VIOLENCE, “A BIT PREPOSTEROUS,” DOES NOT ENCOURAGE MY HOPE, THOUGH. WE NEED TO PRAY FOR A NATIONAL REPENTANCE AND “TURNING AWAY FROM OUR SINS.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2017/06/kansas-adam-purinton-indicted-hate-crime-killing-two-indian-immigrants/529905/
Kansas Man Indicted for Hate Crime
Adam Purinton could face the death penalty or life in prison for a February 22 shooting, which killed one Indian immigrant and wounded another.

A federal grand jury has indicted Adam Purinton—the man who shot two Indian immigrants at a bar in Olathe, Kansas on February 22—for a hate crime, the U.S. Department of Justice announced Friday. Purinton, a 52-year-old resident of Olathe, was also accused of violating a federal firearms statute. He was previously charged with first-degree murder and two counts of attempted murder, and is currently being held in the Johnson County jail on a $2 million bond. If convicted, Purinton could face the death penalty or life in prison.

On March 6, a Johnson County judge released an affidavit accusing Purinton of fatally shooting Srinivas Kuchibhotla and attempting to kill Alok Madasani, both 32-year-old engineers at a tech firm who had immigrated from India to the U.S. The two men were reportedly sitting together on the patio of Austins Bar & Grill when Purinton, wearing a white shirt and a white scarf on his head, told them to “get out of my country.” Madasani later told police that Purinton also asked if their “status was legal.” At that point, two bar patrons, including 24-year-old Ian Grillot, attempted to intervene by asking Purinton to leave. Purinton was escorted from the premises by bar employees, but returned to the patio 30 minutes later with a handgun.

According to the affidavit, this is when the shooting began. While Madasoni was shot once in the leg, Kuchibhotla incurred three bullet wounds and was later pronounced dead at the University of Kansas Hospital. Purinton also shot Grillot in the hand and upper chest after Grillot chased him in the wake of the incident. The bullet barely missed Grillot’s carotid artery and succeeded in fracturing a vertebrae in his neck. “A lot of people are calling me a hero … and it’s not like that,” Grillot told the local KMBC 9 News. “I was just doing what anyone should have done for another human being.”

Less than five hours after the shooting, Purinton was arrested at an Applebee’s after telling the bartender he had “done something really bad” and was “on the run from the police.” According to the bartender, Purinton eventually confessed he had “shot and killed two Iranian people in Olathe,” mistaking the victims’ race. A statement from the DOJ, released Friday, reads: “The indictment alleges that Purinton committed the offenses after substantial planning and premeditation, attempted to kill more than one person in a single criminal episode, and knowingly created a grave risk of death to others on the scene.” The indictment also claims Purinton shot at Madasoni and Kuchibhotla due to their “actual and perceived race, color, religion, and national origin.”

The shooting prompted concern among the victims’ family members, who feared the U.S. was no a longer safe place for Indians. “There is a kind of hysteria spreading that is not good because so many of our beloved children live [in America],” Venu Madhav, a relative of Kuchibhotla, told The Washington Post. In a statement to the Hindustan Times, Madasani’s father, Jaganmohan Reddy, also urged parents in India not to send their their children to the U.S. “The situation seems to be pretty bad after Trump took over as the U.S. president,” Reddy said in February.

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer has since argued there is no link between President Trump’s immigration policies and an increase in racially-motivated violence in the U.S. “To suggest that there’s any correlation I think is a bit absurd,” Spicer said at a February 24 press briefing. In front of a joint session of Congress on February 28, Trump also responded to the incident in indirect terms, saying that “we are a country that stands united in condemning hate and evil in all its forms.” At a vigil held a few days earlier, Kuchibhotla’s widow, Sunayana Dumala, demanded more than words. “I need an answer from the government,” she said. “What is it they’re going to do to stop these hate crimes?”

ARIA BENDIX is a frequent contributor to The Atlantic, and a former editorial fellow at CityLab. Her work has appeared on Bustle and The Harvard Crimson.
Twitter.


GO TO THE CBS NEWS WEBSITE AND SEE THESE 13 PHOTOGRAPHS OF BLACK FAMILIES AND FAMILY DOCUMENTS AFTER THE END OF SLAVERY. OTHER THAN BEING BLACK, THEY LOOK JUST LIKE OUR WHITE FAMILY PHOTOGRAPHS FROM THE SAME PERIOD. NO FANCY CLOTHING, BUT FAMILY UNITY. THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST OF CBS’ PHOTO GALLERIES THAT I’VE SEEN.

http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/information-wanted/

Families torn apart

In the time of slavery in America, families would routinely be torn apart. Parents would be sold from their children, husbands torn from their wives, siblings were separated or ran away, and they would not know anything of what happened to their loved ones.

In the late 1800s, after the Civil War, freed slaves would place Information Wanted ads in newspapers, searching for those family members. A project at Villanova University is developing a catalog of the ads for use by genealogists and researchers.

CREDIT: Library of Congress



THIS ARTICLE ON SCENTS IS LESS IMPORTANT THE OTHERS TODAY, SO I PUT IT LAST, BUT THE ISSUE OF WEARING SCENT, HAVING “AIR FRESHENERS” IN CARS AND HOMES, AND ONE OF THE VERY WORST – HAIR SPRAY – ARE INDEED FULLY AS PROBLEMATIC AS SMOKING. I HAVE HAD A “SICK HEADACHE,” FOR YEARS WHEN PEOPLE JUST WEAR TOO MUCH PERFUME, OR THE SCENT IS FROM ONE OF THOSE BITING NOSE ASSAULTING CHEMICALS THAT SOME WOMEN AND MEN SEEM TO LOVE.

PEOPLE GET OFFENDED AT THE IDEA OF BEING CONSTRAINED IN THEIR PERSONAL CHOICES, BUT SOMETIMES SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE. IT IS A MATTER NOT JUST OF PERSONAL PREFERENCE, BUT OF HEALTH. LET’S GET SMART AND MAKE A LAW BANNING PERFUMES, SMELLY HAND LOTIONS, SMELLY SHAMPOOS AND HAIR SPRAY, “LOUD” AFTERSHAVE, ETC. FROM THE WORKPLACE AND OTHER PUBLIC FUNCTIONS. IT’S IN THE VERY SAME CATEGORY AS SMOKING, AND IF THAT ISN’T TO BE ALLOWED IN PUBLIC ANYMORE, THEN THIS SHOULDN’T BE EITHER.

AS FOR MY OWN PERSONAL DEFENSE AGAINST IT, I TAKE ZYRTEC, SUDAFED WHEN NEEDED, KEEP A SMALL SUPPLY OF DRAMAMINE IN MY HANDBAG, USE MY GOOD FLONASE NASAL SPRAY, AND ONE OF THOSE SMALL PACKS OF NASAL TISSUE WHEREVER I GO, BECAUSE THERE IS NO WAY TO PREDICT WHERE I WILL BE ASSAULTED BY THESE VOLUNTARY FORMS OF AIR POLLUTION. I DON’T LIKE TO ASK PEOPLE TO STOP WEARING IT, BUT IF BUSINESSES WOULD TAKE THAT ACTION, I WOULD SILENTLY CHEER OUT OF PURE JOY.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23431290-600-causing-a-stink-the-truth-about-fragrances-and-your-health/?utm_source=NSNS&utm_medium=ILC&utm_campaign=webpush&cmpid=ILC%257CNSNS%257C2016-GLOBAL-webpush-fragrances
FEATURE 7 June 2017
Causing a stink: The truth about fragrances and your health
Headlines claim scented candles can cause cancer and air fresheners trigger asthma. Is it a load of hot air or is it time to go fragrance-free at work?
By Clare Pain

ART IMAGE: Morgan Schweitzer

KATE Grenville realised in her early 30s that wearing perfume gave her a headache. She could manage that. Then it was other people’s perfumes too. But things really got out of hand on a recent trip when she was forced to ask her taxi driver to remove the air freshener in his cab, and later caught herself sealing her hotel room door with tape to keep out the smell from corridor fragrance diffusers.

“I had a nasty feeling that I’d just crossed one of life’s little boundaries,” she writes in her new book The Case Against Fragrance. “It was possible I’d joined the section of humanity that thinks the moon landings were faked by the CIA.”

In fact, when Grenville started investigating, she found she was far from belonging to such a clique. Surveys suggest that many of us feel negative health effects from fragrances, and if recent headlines are to be believed, our love of a good spritz could be causing asthma, migraines and even cancer. The issue is causing such a stink that some compare it to passive smoking, and are calling for scent-free workplaces and schools.

“The results are stunning and consistent. In Australia, a third of the population, and in America, over a third of the population, report one or more types of health problems when exposed to fragranced consumer products,” says Anne Steinemann of the University of Melbourne.

So how worried should we be? Are scented products making people sick, and what should we do about it?

Fragranced goods haven’t always been so ubiquitous. Prized by the ancient Egyptians and Romans, fragrances . . . .



WELL, THIS CLEARS THE QUESTION UP ENTIRELY!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UW2ZndKqcg&feature=player_embedded
A RANDY RAINBOW PARODY
“KOVFEFE”