JULY 26, 2018


NEWS AND VIEWS


A RIGHTIST GURU IS IN HOT WATER, BUT NOT HOT ENOUGH FOR MY TASTES.

https://www.cnet.com/news/youtube-wont-let-infowars-broadcast-live-for-the-next-90-days/
YouTube won't let Infowars broadcast live for the next 90 days
In the matter of conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, YouTube is taking a (very small) stand.
BY SEAN HOLLISTER
JULY 25, 2018 12:25 PM PDT

A screenshot of Alex Jones speaking in a YouTube video

Would YouTube actually give Infowars the boot? It doesn't seem in any hurry to do that. Screenshot by Joan E. Solsman/CNET

How much is too much for the social networks to stand? In the case of right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and his Infowars channel, we haven't quite found out -- but on Wednesday, YouTube fired another warning shot by removing four of his videos, as well as the ability to broadcast live to YouTube for 90 days.

According to a post at Infowars that's since been corroborated by CNET, The Alex Jones Channel has received another strike for posting four videos that include "violent or graphic content" -- videos that no longer appear to exist on his YouTube page.

(CNET won't link directly to the videos, but one of them includes a man violently shoving a kid to the ground, with the title "How To Prevent Liberalism: A Public Service Announcement." The videos don't appear to include the one in which Jones pretends to shoot special prosecutor Robert Mueller, which doesn't seem to have been on YouTube to begin with.)

Does that mean Infowars is about to be banned from YouTube? Not really. While YouTube has a three-strikes policy -- it'll delete a YouTube channel after the third offense -- the company is only considering these four videos to be worth a single strike, and Jones can appeal.

And though Infowars already got a strike in February, it didn't last: A YouTube strike stays in effect for only three months after it's issued. That means Infowars remains at strike one.

So, like Facebook, it appears YouTube will continue to tolerate much of Infowars for now.

"We have long standing policies against child endangerment and hate speech. We apply our policies consistently according to the content in the videos, regardless of the speaker or the channel," said YouTube in an emailed statement.

Infowars didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

CNET Magazine: Check out a sample of the stories in CNET's newsstand edition.



https://www.cbsnews.com/news/youtube-pulls-right-wing-infowars-videos-suspends-live-streaming-capability/
By EMILY TILLETT CBS NEWS July 26, 2018, 8:53 AM
YouTube pulls 4 videos from right-wing Infowars

In an effort to slow a surge of graphic content on its platform, Youtube has reportedly pulled down four videos posted by Infowars, the ultra right-wing site run by Alex Jones, according to Variety.

"We have long-standing policies against child endangerment and hate speech," YouTube said in a statement to Variety. "We apply our policies consistently according to the content in the videos, regardless of the speaker or the channel."

YouTube has been cracking down on conspiracy-theory videos in an effort to stop misinformation from being spread.

In two of the videos posted by InfoWars, Jones rails against Muslims and claims they're taking over control of European countries. Another, "How To Prevent Liberalism – A Public Service Announcement" depicts a man shoving a young child to the ground. A fourth video, "Shocking 'Drag Tots' Cartoon Sparks Outrage" compared the creators behind an animated show with children dressed as drag queens to Satanists. All four videos are still featured prominently on Infowars' site.

An InfoWars post titled "SHARIA-COMPLIANT YOUTUBE REMOVES VIDEOS CRITICIZING ISLAMIC IMMIGRATION" suggested the removal of its videos violated YouTube's own policies. The move by YouTube means Infowars is unable to use live broadcast capabilities on its main channel and runs the risk of being banned altogether.

Infowars author Paul Joseph Watson writes, "the strike goes against Youtube's own policy, which explains that it is permissible to post graphic content 'in a news, documentary scientific or artistic context' so long as it is not gratuitous." Watson goes on to say that YouTube "could have simply slapped an age restriction on the videos but instead leapt straight to copyright strike*, further illustrating how this is a part of a wider assault to remove the Alex Jones Channel."

The author claims that outlets like CNN and Buzzfeed have been lobbying for social media sites to shut down Infowars, adding that the platform is being "policed by an arbitrary electronic lynch mob."

Jones had previously claimed on Twitter that YouTube was leading a campaign to take down his channel as part of an "internet purge," which YouTube disputed back in March. The site confirmed to CBS News at the time that advertisers had asked to be removed form [sic] running ads on Jones' branded channels.

© 2018 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.


COPYRIGHT STRIKE* -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube_copyright_strike

YouTube copyright strike
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Not to be confused with YouTube Content ID claim.

A YouTube copyright strike is a copyright policing practice used by YouTube for the purpose of managing copyright infringement and complying with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.[1] The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is the basis for the design of the YouTube copyright strike system.[1] For YouTube to retain DMCA safe harbor protection, it must respond to copyright infringement claims with a notice and take down process.[1] YouTube's own practice is to issue a "YouTube copyright strike" on the user accused of copyright infringement.[1] When a YouTube user has three copyright strikes, YouTube terminates that user's YouTube channel, removes all of their videos from that user's YouTube channel, and prohibits that user from creating another YouTube channel.[1][2]

Some users have expressed concern that the strike process is unfair to users.[3] The complaint is that the system assumes guilt of YouTube users and takes the side of copyright holders even when no infringement has occurred.[3]

YouTube and Nintendo were criticised by Cory Doctorow, a writer for the blog Boing Boing, due to them reportedly treating video game reviewers unfairly by threatening them with strikes.[4]

Copyright strikes have also been issued against creators themselves, as happened when Miracle of Sound's channel was hit with multiple copyright strikes as a result of automated strikes by the distributor of their own music.[5]


WHAT’S WRONG WITH MATERNITY CARE IN THE USA? MAYBE IT’S A NUMBER OF THINGS, IF BETTER TRAINING AND A SIMPLE CHECKLIST FROM THE ALLIANCE FOR INNOVATION ON MATERNAL HEALTH COULD MAKE SUCH A LARGE DIFFERENCE. CALIFORNIA IS MOCKED BY “CONSERVATIVES” FOR THEIR CONSTANT INNOVATIONS AND FADS, BUT IF THEIR WILLINGNESS TO TRY NEW THINGS IS INVOLVED IN THIS, THEN I’M 100% FOR THEM.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-most-dangerous-place-to-give-birth-in-developed-world-usa-today-investigation-finds/
CBS NEWS July 26, 2018, 6:15 AM
U.S. "most dangerous" place to give birth in developed world, USA Today investigation finds

A USA Today investigation finds the United States is the "most dangerous place to give birth in the developed world." Every year in the U.S., more than 50,000 mothers are severely injured during or after childbirth and 700 die. USA Today's investigation, "Deadly Deliveries," claims women are dying and suffering life-altering injuries during childbirth because hospitals are not following long-known safety measures.

Maternal death in the United States has been steadily rising. The U.S. now has the highest rate in the developed world. USA Today conducted a four-year investigation into the nation's hospital maternity wards and spoke to several families who lost loved ones and to women who were permanently harmed during their deliveries.

In one example, Ali Lowry had internal bleeding after having a baby by C-section. It took medical staff hours to act on the warning signs, and in that time she nearly bled to death. Ali needed a hysterectomy to stop the bleeding. She and her husband, Shaun, sued Knox Community Hospital in Ohio and settled out of court. The doctor and hospital denied wrongdoing, and Knox Community told CBS News it could not comment on the case due to patient privacy laws.

"Experts say that about 50 percent of the deaths of women from childbirth-related causes could be prevented if they were given better medical care and that's a really surprising thing given that we're one of the wealthiest countries in the world and we spend so much on medical care. We're not just talking about the women who die, we're talking about 50,000 U.S. women who are suffering life-altering harms," USA Today investigative reporter Alison Young told "CBS This Morning" on Thursday.

Young said the two leading causes of childbirths deaths and injuries are hemorrhage and severe hypertension – which requires hospitals to pay close attention to a patient's blood pressure and blood loss levels. USA Today's investigation found that medical professionals are often "eye-balling" how much blood a woman loses during childbirth instead of measuring it for warning signs that something's not right. The answer? More training.

"These things have been known for many years as things that need to be done but it needs to be made a priority at hospitals," Young said. "One of the things that is being advocated for by groups like the AIM group (Alliance for Innovation on Maternal Health Programs) is having checklists."

One exception is California where hospitals and safety advocates have instituted practices that have cut the state's maternal death rate in half. Unfortunately, Young said, other hospitals around the country have been slow to adopt the same measures.

"They're one of the early adopters where an organization out there has really pushed hospitals to follow these evidence-based best practices," Young said.

USA Today's full investigation includes a state-by-state ranking of maternal harms and deaths as well as a guide with tips for how patients can advocate for themselves during childbirth.

To hear more about some of the women the paper spoke to for their investigation, watch the video in the above player

© 2018 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.


I DO HOPE THE PROSECUTOR DOESN’T CRUCIFY MICHAEL COHEN BECAUSE THEY CAN’T OR ARE UNWILLING TO TACKLE TRUMP HIMSELF. MUELLER SEEMS STRONG ENOUGH NOT TO DO THAT. COHEN CERTAINLY ISN’T INNOCENT, BUT HE’S NOT THE BOSS IN THIS SITUATION EITHER. TRUMP CLEARLY IS.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/wsj-top-trump-organization-official-subpoenaed-to-testify-in-michael-cohen-probe/ar-BBL6A7z?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
WSJ: Top Trump Organization official subpoenaed to testify in Michael Cohen probe
By Clare Foran and MJ Lee, CNN
JULY 26, 2018 1 hr ago

Allen Weisselberg, a top Trump Organization official and the company's longtime chief financial officer, has been subpoenaed to testify as part of the ongoing criminal investigation into President Donald Trump's former attorney Michael Cohen, The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday, citing people familiar with the investigation.

The Journal reported that it is unclear whether Weisselberg has gone before a grand jury, when the subpoena was issued and what exactly prosecutors want to ask him, but that he is considered to be a witness in the probe.

Weisselberg and a representative for the Trump Organization did not respond to the Journal's requests for comment. A spokesperson for the US attorney's office in Manhattan, which is investigating Cohen, declined to comment to the newspaper.

The news follows CNN's publication of a recording from September 2016 of a conversation between Cohen and Trump discussing how they would buy the rights to a Playboy model's story about an alleged affair with Trump. During the conversation, Cohen can be heard mentioning Weisselberg by name, saying at one point, "I've spoken with Allen Weisselberg about how to set the whole thing up."

Michael Cohen, a longtime personal lawyer and confidante for President Donald Trump, leaves the United States District Court Southern District of New York on May 30, 2018 in New York City. (DON EMMERT/AFP/Getty Images)
© DON EMMERT/AFP/Getty Images Michael Cohen, a longtime personal lawyer and confidante for President Donald Trump, leaves the United States District Court Southern District of New York on May 30, 2018 in New York City. (DON EMMERT/AFP/Getty Images)

A former Trump Organization employee told CNN that Weisselberg being subpoenaed as part of the Cohen probe is the "ultimate nightmare scenario for Trump" because Weisselberg knows "anything and everything" about the finances of the Trump Organization.

"Allen knows where all the financial bodies are buried. Allen knows every deal, he knows every dealership, he knows every sale, anything and everything that's been done -- he knows every membership. Anything you can think of," the person said.

The person described Weisselberg as overseeing every dollar that went in and out of the Trump Organization -- and as the individual who personally gave Trump updates on these matters.

The slippery slope for Trump, this person said, is that his personal finances were so closely tied to the Trump Organization's finances -- "Donald Trump is the Trump Organization."

The President lashed out at Cohen after the release of the recording, saying on Twitter, "what kind of a lawyer would tape a client?"

Key parts of what exactly can be heard in the recording have been disputed. Trump has denied having an affair with Karen McDougal, the former Playboy model.

CNN's Kara Scannell and Eli Watkins contributed to this report



ROHRABACHER IS QUOTED BELOW AS SAYING THAT JULIAN ASSANGE IS “A VERY HONORABLE MAN.” THAT’S A LITTLE LIKE TRUMP’S COMMENT ABOUT THE WHITE SUPREMACIST RALLY IN CHARLOTTESVILLE – WHICH THEY WANT TO DO AGAIN AS AN ANNIVERSARY EVENT, A RECENT ARTICLE SAID – THAT THERE ARE “'SOME VERY FINE PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES.'”

ASSANGE’S ACTIONS AGAINST CLINTON AND THE DNC CONCERNING THE EMAILS, NOT TO MENTION HIS SEXUAL INVOLVEMENT WITH A YOUNG TEENAGE GIRL IN A SCANDINAVIAN COUNTRY, SWEDEN, MAYBE, (THAT’S WHY HE HAS TO STAY IN THE EMBASSY TO AVOID ARREST). HE HAS, OR HAD, A WARRANT OUT AGAINST HIM. ALL IN ALL, HE IS NOT MY IDEA OF AN “HONORABLE MAN.” THE PAINFUL FACT IS THAT THE RICH AND THE POOR HAVE VERY DIFFERENT IDEAS ABOUT HOW TO EVALUATE A PERSON, ESPECIALLY IF THEY WERE BORN RICH; AND IF WE WERE TO LEAVE OUT ALL THE INFORMATION ABOUT AN INDIVIDUAL’S RELATIVE WEALTH AND PRIVILEGE, THE AFFLUENT WOULD TOO OFTEN BE TOTALLY CONFUSED BY THE QUESTION. THEIR AFFLUENZA WOULD BLOCK THEIR ABILITY TO REASON THEIR WAY THROUGH IT. THERE WAS A VERY GOOD SHORT STORY IN THE ELLERY QUEEN MAGAZINE – YOU REMEMBER THAT PUBLICATION, PERHAPS – IN WHICH THIS COUPLE WERE DISCUSSING ANOTHER WITH INTEREST, BUT THE WOMAN WOULD SAY PERIODICALLY, “BUT THEY AREN’T OUR KIND OF PEOPLE.” IN THE END OF THE STORY IT WAS MADE PLAIN THAT THE COUPLE WERE FROM MAFIA FAMILIES. NOT OUR KIND, INDEED.

OF COURSE, FROM WHAT I CAN SEE OF ROHRABACHER IN THIS ARTICLE, ROHRABACHER HIMSELF IS SUSPICIOUS IN MY OPINION. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW MANY LEGISLATORS OF BOTH PARTIES, HAVE INTERACTIONS BEYOND EMBASSY PARTY CHAT WITH RUSSIANS, ESPECIALLY TO THE DEGREE THAT THE WHOLE TRUMP FAMILY HAS DONE. ARE THEY ALL CONNECTED FINANCIALLY WITH THEM? PERHAPS THEY NEED A GOOD PLACE TO LAUNDER THEIR MONEY.

THIS IS THE KIND OF CORRUPTION THAT REALLY BOTHERS ME. IT’S NOT JUST THE LEVEL OF PRIVILEGE, BUT THE ABUSE OF THEIR POSITIONS IN THE GOVERNMENT AND THE EFFECT ON THE QUALITY OF THEIR DECISIONS. LOBBYING IS IN THE SAME CATEGORY, TO ME. SEE THE VERY INTERESTING ABSTRACT BELOW ON THAT SUBJECT, AND THE FACT THAT IT WAS PROHIBITED EARLY ON. NOW, LOBBYISTS ARE EVEN HIRED AS “EXPERT” CONSULTANTS ON EXTREMELY IMPORTANT ISSUES – THE ENVIRONMENT, FOR INSTANCE – TO GUIDE CONGRESS INTO MAKING THEIR INDUSTRY-FAVORING DECISIONS ON LAWS AND REGULATIONS. THAT’S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THERE ARE VERY FEW IF ANY OLD-GROWTH FORESTS LEFT IN THE USA.

SHORTLY AFTER TRUMP WAS INAUGURATED, THERE WAS A MOVE TO MODIFY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY’S PLATFORM STANCE TO MAKE IT MORE PALATABLE TO THE RUSSIANS. I THINK THAT WAS OVER THE EMBASSIES, WHICH OBAMA TOOK AWAY FROM THE RUSSIANS DUE TO THEIR PROMINENT ROLE IN THROWING THE 2016 ELECTION. TRUMP WANTED TO GIVE THEM BACK, BECAUSE PUTIN HAD ASKED HIM TO DO IT, JUST FOR HIM. FROM THE BEGINNING HE HAS BEEN AFRAID OF PUTIN, OR IN DEBT TO HIM, PERHAPS. WHATEVER IT IS, THE COUNTRY IS BEING HARMED BY IT.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gop-lawmaker-dined-with-alleged-russian-agent-in-dc-report/ar-BBL6Mbl?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
GOP lawmaker dined with alleged Russian agent in DC: report
Justin Wise JULY 26, 2018 1 hr ago

PHOTOGRAPH – ROHRABACHER

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) once dined with the Russian woman who was indicted earlier this month on charges of acting as an unregistered foreign agent of Moscow, according to ABC News.

The network reported on Thursday that Rohrabacher's office confirmed he met with the then-28-year-old Russian at French eatery Bistro Bis in Washington, D.C., in February 2017.

In addition, federal officials told ABC that Butina had arranged a meeting two years earlier in St. Petersburg that Rohrabacher attended.

The report comes about a week after Rohrabacher first admitted he met with Butina while visiting Russia with a congressional delegation in August 2015. Rohrabacher pushed back against its potential significance, though, saying he was joined by another U.S. lawmaker, along with other Americans.

Rohrabacher has also defended Butina, telling Politico that the charges against her are "bogus."

The Department of Justice (DOJ) alleges that Butina was being directed by a "high-level" Russian official as she forged relationships with the NRA and conservative politicians from 2015 to 2017.

Rohrabacher's office confirmed to ABC that the lawmaker is is the unnamed congressman who met with her in the DOJ's indictment.

ABC also notes that the meeting with Butina - as well as the references to Rohrabacher in an FBI affidavit - add to a growing list of his interactions with figures involved in special counsel Robert Mueller's probe.

The New York Times reported in May that the FBI warned Rohrabacher in 2012 that Russian spies were trying to recruit him as an "agent of influence."

Rohrabacher's office is claiming that, as the chairman of the committee overseeing U.S. relations in Eastern Europe, it was necessary for him to meet with contacts from Russia.

"Given any level of Russian activity or interest in relations with the United States, it is not surprising their agents or even their transplanted citizens would be magnetized toward the business of the subcommittee overseeing Russia and its chairman," Rohrabacher's spokesman, Kenneth Grubbs, told ABC News. "It is also proper that Chairman Rohrabacher would be guardedly open to their communications."

Speaking about Rohrabacher's contacts with Butina, Grubbs said the talks "all came under the normal, fact-finding auspices of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia, and Emerging Threats."

Rohrabacher has also traveled to London to meet with Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, which released emails during the 2016 election that the intelligence community believes were hacked by the Russians.

"He's a very honorable man," said Rohrabacher, who has reportedly floated a pardon deal for Assange.


FOR MORE ON ROHRABACHER’S HIGHLY CONSERVATIVE, IDIOSYNCRATIC AND PERHAPS UNLAWFUL, STANCES, SEE THE FOLLOWING:

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/gop-rep-takes-risky-stand-support-housing-discrimination
GOP rep takes a risky stand in support of housing discrimination
05/29/18 12:00 PM
By Steve Benen

PHOTOGRAPHER -- In this Nov. 13, 2013 file photo, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif. speaks during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington. Lauren Victoria Burke/AP Photo

Which congressional districts are most likely to flip from “red” to “blue” in 2018? A good place to start is with the districts that Hillary Clinton won in 2016, but which are currently represented by Republican lawmakers.

Take California’s 48th congressional district, for example, where Clinton narrowly prevailed, while far-right Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R) won re-election with relative ease. Democrats at the state and national level believe they have a real chance to succeed here, thanks in part to Rohrabacher’s antics and assorted controversies.

Take last week’s developments, for example, when Rohrabacher effectively endorsed housing discrimination against LGBTQ Americans.

Rohrabacher initially made the remarks last week while speaking to a group of National Association of Realtors members who had congregated in his office. Members of the group were there to ask Rohrabacher to support HR 1447, a bill that would add sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of classes protected against discrimination in the Fair Housing Act (FHA) under the Civil Rights Act of 1968.

“I presented the Fair Housing Act to him along with [information on HR 1447],” Wayne Woodyard, one of the NAR members in the room, told NBC News. “Almost before I could finish, he let out, ‘I will not support it.’”

Woodyard went on to say, “There were about 10 people in his office, and we were all kind of shocked.” When a former aide to the congressman suggested he may not fully understand the issue at hand, Rohrabacher reportedly responded, “No, I do understand.”

The more the realtors tried to steer him away from endorsing discrimination, the more the Republican lawmaker rejected their appeals.

The National Association of Realtors, which had backed Rohrabacher’s re-election, soon after announced it had withdrawn its support.

NBC News’ report added, “California’s housing laws make it illegal to explicitly discriminate against someone due to their sexual orientation or gender identity. For example, a home seller in California wouldn’t legally be able to include ‘Same-sex couples need not apply’ on their housing ad.”

There’s a bipartisan bill pending in Congress that would extend similar protections nationwide, but it’s apparently a bill Rohrabacher won’t support – even if it costs him supporters, even if it affects his re-election prospects.

According to the Orange County Register’s account, Rohrabacher told the delegation of realtors, “Every homeowner should be able to make a decision not to sell their home to someone (if) they don’t agree with their lifestyle.” The congressman later confirmed the accuracy of the sentiment.

Primary Day in California is a week from today, and thanks to the state’s unique top-two primary system, there’s a decent chance Rohrabacher will effectively win re-election thanks to the large number of Democrats running in this district.

Explore:
The MaddowBlog, California, Dana Rohrabacher, Discrimination, Equality and LGBT


PRESIDENT TRUMP REALLY DOES HAVE A BIZARRE TURN OF MIND. LOOK AT THIS SERIES OF TWEETS. THEY USED TO BE FUNNY TO ME, BUT NOW THEY ARE JUST TIRESOME, AND REALLY UNINTELLIGENT.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mueller-examining-trump%E2%80%99s-tweets-in-wide-ranging-obstruction-inquiry/ar-BBL6dFY?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
Mueller Examining Trump’s Tweets in Wide-Ranging Obstruction Inquiry
By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT and MAGGIE HABERMAN
JULY 26, 2018 4 hrs ago

Video by Associated Press TRUMP – MUELLER PROBE DISASTER FOR OUR COUNTRY 3:09

WASHINGTON — For years, President Trump has used Twitter as his go-to public relations weapon, mounting a barrage of attacks on celebrities and then political rivals even after advisers warned he could be creating legal problems for himself.

Those concerns now turn out to be well founded. The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, is scrutinizing tweets and negative statements from the president about Attorney General Jeff Sessions and the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey, according to three people briefed on the matter.

Several of the remarks came as Mr. Trump was also privately pressuring the men — both key witnesses in the inquiry — about the investigation, and Mr. Mueller is examining whether the actions add up to attempts to obstruct the investigation by both intimidating witnesses and pressuring senior law enforcement officials to tamp down the inquiry.

Mr. Mueller wants to question the president about the tweets. His interest in them is the latest addition to a range of presidential actions he is investigating as a possible obstruction case: private interactions with Mr. Comey, Mr. Sessions and other senior administration officials about the Russia inquiry; misleading White House statements; public attacks; and possible pardon offers to potential witnesses.

None of what Mr. Mueller has homed in on constitutes obstruction, Mr. Trump’s lawyers said. They argued that most of the presidential acts under scrutiny, including the firing of Mr. Comey, fall under Mr. Trump’s authority as the head of the executive branch and insisted that he should not even have to answer Mr. Mueller’s questions about obstruction.

But privately, some of the lawyers have expressed concern that Mr. Mueller will stitch together several episodes, encounters and pieces of evidence, like the tweets, to build a case that the president embarked on a broad effort to interfere with the investigation. Prosecutors who lack one slam-dunk piece of evidence in obstruction cases often search for a larger pattern of behavior, legal experts said.

Full screen
1/3 SLIDES © T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York Times

Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mr. Trump's lead lawyer, dismissed Mr. Mueller’s interest in the tweets as part of a desperate quest to sink the president.

The special counsel’s investigators have told Mr. Trump’s lawyers they are examining the tweets under a wide-ranging obstruction-of-justice law beefed up after the Enron accounting scandal, according to the three people. The investigators did not explicitly say they were examining possible witness tampering, but the nature of the questions they want to ask the president, and the fact that they are scrutinizing his actions under a section of the United States Code titled “Tampering With a Witness, Victim, or an Informant,” raised concerns for his lawyers about Mr. Trump’s exposure in the investigation.

A spokesman for Mr. Mueller’s office declined to comment.

Mr. Trump’s lead lawyer in the case, Rudolph W. Giuliani, dismissed Mr. Mueller’s interest in the tweets as part of a desperate quest to sink the president.

“If you’re going to obstruct justice, you do it quietly and secretly, not in public,” Mr. Giuliani said.

Mr. Giuliani was referring to more typical obstruction cases, where prosecutors focus on measures taken in private, like bribing witnesses, destroying evidence or lying under oath. While some of Mr. Trump’s private acts are under scrutiny, like asking Mr. Comey for loyalty, his public conduct is as well. That sets this investigation apart, even from those of other presidents; Richard M. Nixon and Bill Clinton were accused of privately trying to influence witness testimony.

But as in those cases, federal investigators are seeking to determine whether Mr. Trump was trying to use his power to punish anyone who did not go along with his attempts to curtail the investigation.

If Mr. Mueller opts to tailor a narrative that the president tried to obstruct the Russia investigation, he would have to clear several hurdles to make a strong case. He would need credible witnesses (Mr. Comey and Mr. Sessions have been the target of concerted attacks by Mr. Trump and allies, undercutting their standing) and evidence that Mr. Trump had criminal intent (the special counsel has told the president’s lawyers he needs to question him to determine this).

“There’s rarely evidence that someone sits down and says, ‘I intend to commit a crime,’ so any type of investigation hangs on using additional evidence to build a narrative arc* that hangs together,” said Samuel W. Buell, a professor of law at Duke University and former senior federal prosecutor. “That’s why a prosecutor wants more pieces of evidence. You need to lock down the argument.”

NARRATIVE ARC* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Story_arc]

It is not clear what Mr. Mueller will do if he concludes he has enough evidence to prove that Mr. Trump committed a crime. He has told the president’s lawyers that he will follow Nixon- and Clinton-era Justice Department memos that concluded that a sitting president cannot be indicted, Mr. Giuliani has said. If Mr. Mueller does not plan to make a case in court, a report of his findings could be sent to Congress, leaving it to lawmakers to decide whether to begin impeachment proceedings.

Investigators want to ask Mr. Trump about the tweets he wrote about Mr. Sessions and Mr. Comey and why he has continued to publicly criticize Mr. Comey and the former deputy F.B.I. director Andrew G. McCabe, another witness against the president. They also want to know about a January episode in the Oval Office in which Mr. Trump asked the White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, about reports that Mr. McGahn told investigators about the president’s efforts to fire Mr. Mueller himself last year.

Mr. Trump has navigated the investigation with a mix of public and private cajoling of witnesses.

Around the time he said publicly last summer that he would have chosen another attorney general had he known Mr. Sessions was going to recuse himself from the Russia investigation, Mr. Trump tried behind closed doors to persuade Mr. Sessions to reverse that decision. The special counsel’s investigators have also learned that Mr. Trump wanted Mr. Sessions to resign at varying points in May and July 2017 so he could replace him with a loyalist to oversee the Russia investigation.

After Mr. Trump tried last July to get Mr. Sessions to resign, the president began a three-day public attack on a variety of fronts — tweets, a Rose Garden news conference and a Wall Street Journal interview — criticizing Mr. Sessions, raising the specter that he would fire him.


Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
Attorney General Jeff Sessions has taken a VERY weak position on Hillary Clinton crimes (where are E-mails & DNC server) & Intel leakers!

6:12 AM - Jul 25, 2017
67.6K
52.4K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

A day later, Mr. Trump doubled down, criticizing both Mr. Sessions again and Mr. McCabe, who was the acting F.B.I. director at the time.


Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
Why didn't A.G. Sessions replace Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe, a Comey friend who was in charge of Clinton investigation but got....

9:48 AM - Jul 26, 2017
61.3K
37.6K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
...big dollars ($700,000) for his wife's political run from Hillary Clinton and her representatives. Drain the Swamp!

9:52 AM - Jul 26, 2017
72.2K
43.5K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Similarly, Mr. Trump’s relationship with Mr. Comey was strained from the start by the president’s encroachment on the typically independent Justice Department. In late March of 2017, the president asked Mr. Comey to put out word that he was not under investigation. Mr. Comey demurred, and when the president called about two weeks later to ask again, Mr. Comey responded that he had passed along the proposal to the Justice Department, he later testified.

That request having gone nowhere, Mr. Trump issued an indirect threat the next day about Mr. Comey’s job. “It’s not too late” to ask him to step down as F.B.I. director, he said in an interview with Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business Network. The special counsel wants to ask the president what he meant by that remark.

A few weeks later, in early May, an aide to Mr. Sessions sought derogatory information about the F.B.I. director. Mr. Sessions, his aide told a Capitol Hill staff member, wanted one negative article a day in the news media about Mr. Comey, a person familiar with the meeting has said.

Four days later, Mr. Trump fired Mr. Comey, citing at first his management of the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server to handle classified information.

By the fall, Mr. Comey had become a chief witness against the president in the special counsel investigation, and Mr. Trump’s ire toward him was well established. His personal attacks evolved into attacks on Mr. Comey’s work, publicly calling on the Justice Department to examine his handling of the Clinton inquiry — and drawing the special counsel’s interest.


Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
Wow, FBI confirms report that James Comey drafted letter exonerating Crooked Hillary Clinton long before investigation was complete. Many..

6:21 AM - Oct 18, 2017
82.4K
35.5K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
...people not interviewed, including Clinton herself. Comey stated under oath that he didn't do this-obviously a fix? Where is Justice Dept?

6:27 AM - Oct 18, 2017
70.3K
31.7K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
As it has turned out, James Comey lied and leaked and totally protected Hillary Clinton. He was the best thing that ever happened to her!

6:56 AM - Oct 18, 2017
90.2K
46.7K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Mr. Mueller’s deputies told Mr. Trump’s lawyers they also wanted to question the president about similar statements at the time by the White House press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

“The Department of Justice has to look into any allegations of whether or not something is illegal or not,” Ms. Sanders said at a press briefing last September. “That’s not up to me to decide. What I’ve said and what I’m talking about are facts. James Comey — leaking of information, questionable statements under oath, politicizing an investigation — those are real reasons for why he was fired.”

Mr. Trump’s lawyers have pushed back against the special counsel about the tweets, saying the president is a politician under 24-hour attack and is within his rights to defend himself using social media or any other means.

The president continues to wield his Twitter account to pummel witnesses and the investigation itself, ignoring any legal concerns or accusations of witness intimidation. This week, he moved to strip the security clearances of six former senior national security officials, including Mr. Comey, Mr. McCabe and some of his most outspoken critics. And he tweeted false claims about the Russia investigation.


Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
So we now find out that it was indeed the unverified and Fake Dirty Dossier, that was paid for by Crooked Hillary Clinton and the DNC, that was knowingly & falsely submitted to FISA and which was responsible for starting the totally conflicted and discredited Mueller Witch Hunt!

6:30 AM - Jul 23, 2018
105K
55.9K people are talking about this



APPARENTLY, ANOTHER SNOWBALL IS ROLLING DOWN THE HILL NOW. MUELLER IS MOVING SLOWLY, AS TRUMP HAS COMPLAINED, BUT HE IS TREATING THIS INVESTIGATION LIKE A DIAMOND CUTTER DOES A PRIZED STONE. HE HAS HIS REASONS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOZNGmGB-2g
#POLITICS #FoxNews #latestnews360
Special Counsel Mueller just launched an official obstruction of justice investigation into Trump
POLITICS NEWS
Published on May 30, 2018

Special Counsel Mueller just launched an official obstruction of justice investigation into Trump

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into whether President Trump is guilty of obstruction of justice goes beyond his firing of FBI Director and now includes the pressure Trump has put on Attorney General Jeff Sessions since he recused himself from the investigation into the Trump campaign’s involvement in Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, reports The New York Times.

“The special counsel’s interest,” announced the Times, “demonstrates Mr. Sessions’s overlooked role as a key witness in the investigation into whether Mr. Trump tried to obstruct the inquiry itself.”

In interviews with current and former White House officials, Mueller’s investigators have pushed hard for information on Trump’s treatment of Sessions and, says the newspaper, “whether they believe the president was trying to impede the Russia investigation by pressuring him.

Mueller’s team also interviewed Sessions at length this past January.

High on the list of the four dozen or so questions Mueller wants to ask Trump is whether or not president tried to get Sessions to reverse his recusal from the Russia investigation.

Sessions is a Trump loyalist but he has resisted frequent efforts to get him to reverse his recusal because it was done on the advice of Justice Department lawyers after his false statements during his confirmation hearing before the Senate were discovered about his contacts with various Russians before and after the election.



AH, THE LIVES OF THE RICH AND FAMOUS

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/facebook-stock-price-plummets-largest-stock-market-drop-in-history/
By AIMEE PICCHI MONEYWATCH July 26, 2018, 4:37 PM
Facebook stock suffers largest one-day drop in history, shedding $119 billion

Facebook lost about $119 billion of its value on Thursday, marking the biggest one-day loss in U.S. market history.

The company's shares plunged $41.24, or almost 19 percent, to $176.26 a day after the social media giant reported disappointing results. The slide is the largest decline market capitalization in history, exceeding Intel's $91 billion single-day loss in September 2000, according to Bloomberg data.

Founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who has a 13 percent stake in Facebook, saw his fortune dropped by more than $12 billion in less than 24 hours, to around $74 billion.

Investors were spooked by Facebook's forecast showing that its number of active users is growing less quickly than expected, while the company also took a hit from Europe's new privacy laws.

The report, which marked Facebook's first full quarter since the Cambridge Analytica scandal, startled investors with a bevy of red flags about setbacks to its revenue and user growth. Indeed, the drop Thursday morning was sharper than the multi-day stock slide in March following revelations of data misappropriation by Cambridge and others. (Facebook shares dropped 17.8 percent then, bottoming out at $151.65 on March 28.)

Yet Facebook is hardly a stranger to a volatile stock price and has rebounded from previous mishaps, including Cambridge Analytica. While several analysts downgraded the stock, others say they still have faith in the company to grow over the long-term.

"Even the best hitters strike out sometimes," wrote Wedbush analyst Michael Pachter, who lowered his 12-month price target to $250 from $275, in a research report. "In our view, the sell-off is overdone and largely unwarranted."

Still, investors weren't prepared for many of the bombshells dropped by Facebook Chief Financial Officer David Wehner.

fb-stock-july.png
A hit from Europe
European advertising revenue growth in Europe "decelerated more quickly than other regions," partially because of the new European privacy laws, Wehner said. That surprised investors because of the belief that the new laws wouldn't hurt revenue.

The new laws were only in effect for one month of the quarter, which means the company may feel more of an impact in the current quarter. The new regulations are also affecting user growth in the region because of the impact of requiring consumers to opt-in to Facebook and to linking their accounts to third-party websites, Pachter said.

"The implementation of GDPR gave a large number of Facebook users control over their privacy, and it should have been patently obvious to investors (and to us) that allowing users control would result in slightly lower engagement," he noted, alluding to Europe's General Data Protection Regulation privacy rule.

Instagram worthy?
Some investors were also dismayed with Facebook's revelation about Instagram Stories, which allow users to post videos or photos that disappear after a day. Like Facebook, Instagram depends on ads to generate revenue, and Stories is supposed to help sell more ads.

But Wehner said the product has "lower levels of monetization," while adding that the company plans to invest in growing the service. "That's going to have a negative impact on revenue growth," he noted.

Profitability woes
Facebook has drawn investors because of its fast growth of users and profits. Yet both categories are facing headwinds. In case of the latter, Wehner noted that "total expense growth will exceed revenue growth in 2019," pushing down operating margins.

Investors closely watch operating margins because they serve as an important metric for profitability. The lower the operating margin, the less profitable the business. Facebook warned that its operating margins would fall from its current 44 percent to the "mid-30s."


User growth was "lackluster," Pachter noted.

So is it time to unfriend Facebook? Some analysts argue that its long-term outlook is favorable, with RBC Capital Markets' Mark Mahaney writing that the sell-off may represent "one of the best entry points you can get on FB," according to Bloomberg.

And in the view of BTIG analyst Rich Greenfield, Facebook is making an investment that will pay off down the road.

"Facebook is actively choosing to make less money, deprioritizing near-term monetization to drive engagement to even higher levels to capture even more of their 2.5 billion monthly users' time and attention," he wrote. "Legacy media executives... should not be rejoicing -- they should be afraid, very afraid."

Richest people in the world: Forbes' top 20 billionaires of 2018
22 Photos
Richest people in the world: Forbes' top 20 billionaires of 2018
© 2018 CBS Interactive Inc.. All Rights Reserved.


MADDOW TIME

THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 7/25/18
NRA quiet on alleged role as Russian conduit in Butina charges
Rachel Maddow shows that prosecutors in the Mariia Butina case say their evidence overlaps with other investigations, and notes that the NRA has been oddly silent on how they're cast as a tool of Russia in the Butina charges. Duration: 22:41


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 7/25/18
Legal pressure on Trump-friendly publish could be bad for Trump
Rebecca O'Brien, law enforcement reporter for the Wall Street Journal, talks with Rachel Maddow about how legal pressure on Donald Trump-friendly publisher American Media over payments to Karen McDougal could end up becoming a legal problem for Trump. Duration: 9:14