NOVEMBER 30, 2018


NEWS AND VIEWS


HERE’S A SANDERS AND WIFE INTERVIEW. I THINK THEY ARE PROBABLY A GENUINELY HAPPY COUPLE. I HOPE SO!

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/30/us/politics/bernie-sanders-wife-jane.html
Bernie Sanders Steps Out With His Favored Political Partner: His Wife
By Sydney Ember
Nov. 30, 2018

PHOTOGRAPH -- Jane Sanders, the wife of Senator Bernie Sanders, is one of his closest advisors and was a regular presence on the 2016 presidential campaign trail.CreditCreditMary Altaffer/Associated Press

BURLINGTON, Vt. — When Jane Sanders introduced her event’s keynote speaker here on Thursday night, she called him “my best friend” but didn’t say his name.

“I won’t tell you who that is because I don’t want to give it away,” she quipped from the stage.

Exactly no one was surprised when her husband, Bernie Sanders, marched to the podium.

As speculation grows about whether Mr. Sanders will mount another bid for the White House, the Vermont senator had returned with his wife to his home state for the inaugural Sanders Institute Gathering, a three-day symposium to discuss issues like Medicare for All that he had pushed to popularize.

“The message of this weekend is we’re going to try to break through the silos that exist within the progressive community,” Mr. Sanders told a devoted crowd of about 200 people at a small presentation hall on the shores of Lake Champlain.

“Bernie 2020!” someone in the audience shouted later. The senator did not oblige.

Still, if the last days of 2018 are about trying to divine clues from potential presidential candidates — the words in their speeches, the tone of their tweets — Mr. Sanders’s appearance here with his wife, a fixture on the 2016 campaign trail and one of his closest advisers, would seem to be a big one.

Ms. Sanders has strode beside Mr. Sanders on every step of his political career, a devoted confidante but also a savvy strategist. They met during his campaign for mayor of Burlington in 1981. When he was elected to Congress in 1990, she served as a chief of staff. She helped him get elected to the Senate in 2006.

And in 2016, it was Ms. Sanders who helped smooth out her husband’s rough edges — warm where he could be gruff — playing a key role in the kind of humanizing effort that all campaigns undertake for a candidate. Should Mr. Sanders run for president again, it is a part she will almost certainly reprise.

Editors’ Picks
Poisoned Wildlife and Tainted Meat: Why Hunters Are Moving Away From Lead Bullets
Meet the New Freshmen in Congress: More Democrats, Diversity and Women
Emerging From Migos as His Own Man: The Metamorphosis of Offset

Mr. Sanders delivered the keynote address at The Sanders Institute Gathering in Burlington, Vt., on Thursday.

Credit -- April Mccullum/The Burlington Free Press, via Associated Press
Image -- Mr. Sanders delivered the keynote address at The Sanders Institute Gathering in Burlington, Vt., on Thursday.CreditApril Mccullum/The Burlington Free Press, via Associated Press

Ms. Sanders has also created some political tension for her husband. Federal authorities had been investigating her role in a 2010 land deal for a Vermont college that she ran at the time. His aides recently said prosecutors had dropped the investigation, which could not be independently verified.

Last year, Ms. Sanders helped found the Sanders Institute, a progressive think tank with a mission to “revitalize democracy.” It is, organizers insist, separate from the senator’s political campaigns.

But on Thursday night, many key figures in his orbit — including Jeff Weaver, his 2016 campaign manager; Nina Turner, now the president of the Sanders-aligned group Our Revolution; and Phil Fiermonte, a longtime aide — were in attendance, chummily holding court by the stage during the opening cocktail reception.

The actor Danny Glover was there, too, as was Cornel West, the scholar and activist. Even Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York, no doubt thrilled to be considered a progressive leader, was expected to make an appearance.

“It’s a gathering of the tribe,” Gunnar Lovelace, an entrepreneur from Los Angeles and a Sanders supporter, said as he eyed the attendees. Many had loaded their plates with Vermont cheeses and charcuterie.

Even with the hard-to-ignore undercurrent of 2020, however, the focus appeared to be more on policy than politicking. Mr. Sanders called again for the United States to end its support for Saudi Arabia in the war in Yemen, a foreign policy issue that has increasingly become a pillar of his message. He hit other high points of his stump speech, repeating his favorite lines about economic inequality and a $15 minimum wage.

“People do believe in our ideas,” he said, trumpeting his role in moving the Democratic Party to the left. “So what do we do?”

“We have got to make sure that the Democratic Party is not just a party of the east coast and the west coast,” he said, not quite taking the reins but not dropping them either. “It is a party of every state in this country.”

At the end of the night, he stepped off the stage and mingled with the audience. He did not seem like someone who wanted to leave.


ZUCKERBERG IS STILL IN THE HOT SEAT, OR RATHER, HE’S IN IT AGAIN. I REALLY WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT HIS PERSONAL ROLE IN THE 2016 ELECTION, AND HIS INTENTIONS. HE ALWAYS PLAYS THE INNOCENT, AND IT LOOKS MORE AND MORE LIKE HE WAS THE PUPPETEER AND WE ALL WERE THE PUPPETS. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT CEOS OF FACEBOOK AND OTHER CORPORATIONS SHOULD BE LEGALLY LIABLE FOR DISHONEST OPERATIONS, RATHER THAN SHIELDED FROM HARM BY THE CORPORATE STRUCTURE. WE NEED TO CHANGE THE FORM OF CORPORATIONS AND THE RULES UNDER WHICH THEY OPERATE, PERHAPS. ALL OF THAT CORPORATE PERSONHOOD IS ILLOGICAL AND WRONG, WITH UNFAIR RESULTS.

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-46401783
Tech Tent: Missing Mark Zuckerberg
Rory Cellan-Jones
Technology correspondent
@BBCRoryCJ on Twitter
NOVEMBER 30, 2018 5 minutes ago

PHOTOGRAPH -- An empty chair was prepared for Mark Zuckerberg REUTERS

For three hours this week Richard Allan was in one of the world's most uncomfortable seats.

In a Westminster committee room, parliamentarians from nine countries battered Facebook's European policy chief, mostly over one issue: why was he there instead of Mark Zuckerberg?

On this week's Tech Tent podcast, we ask whether - beyond the theatre - we learned anything new from the inquisition of Richard Allan.

Stream or download the latest Tech Tent podcast
Listen live every Friday at 15:00 GMT on the BBC World Service

He was on the back foot as the politicians accused his company of everything from playing fast and loose with user data, to aiding repression in Myanmar and threatening democracy around the world.

The best zinger came from a Canadian MP who said: "Our democratic institutions have been upended by fratboy billionaires from California, and Mr Zuckerberg's decision not to appear speaks volumes".

But what everyone was waiting to find out about was those internal Facebook documents seized from a businessman who is in a legal dispute with the social media giant.

In the event, the committee chairman Damian Collins opted not to publish the documents immediately.

But he did pluck one email from the pile. It was from a Facebook engineer in 2014 apparently sounding the alarm about a high level of Russian activity, with three billion data points a day being accessed from Russian IP addresses.

Richard Allan did not really have an answer when asked what action had been taken about this warning. Later, Facebook published the whole email chain which appeared to show that the engineers who had raised the issue subsequently concluded that there was not actually clear evidence of Russian activity.

Image copyrightAFP
Image caption
Facebook's European policy boss Richard Allan faced stiff questioning from MPs

So Facebook emerged from that clash relatively unscathed. But late in the day came evidence from another witness who suggested that on wider issues about access to user data, Richard Allan had been less than frank with the committee.

Easy access
Ashkan Soltani, a former technology advisor to the US Federal Trade Commission said that version one of the Facebook platform - before it was changed in 2014 - did allow developers unfiltered access to users' data, contradicting the evidence given earlier.

He also said that, in the 2011 settlement of its privacy case against Facebook, the FTC alleged that if a user had an app installed it had access to nearly all the users' profile information, even if set to private.

The following day Damian Collins was very critical of the performance of Richard Allan, telling a conference: "I don't think he was straight with the committee. Was it disingenuous? Yes. Was it misleading? Yes. Did he probably hold back relevant and important information? Almost certainly yes."

Facebook disputes that - and disagrees with the version of events laid out by Mr Soltani. The social media giant is also aggrieved at what it sees as the selective and biased use of documents obtained from a litigant, the app developer Six4Three, determined to paint it in the worst possible light.

This is a battle that is only going to get more bitter. In the coming days, Damian Collins plans to release a redacted version of the documents which may shed light on internal discussions at Facebook about how far to go in allowing developers access to users' data.

Prepare for more fireworks….


WITHOUT TRYING TO GET TOO DEEPLY INTO UNDERSTANDING THE CASE OF MYANMAR, BECAUSE IT’S REALLY COMPLICATED; IT LOOKS TO ME AS THOUGH WE HAD IN THIS COUNTRY THE SOWING OF VERY SIMILAR GROUP DIVISIVENESS AS THAT WHICH OCCURRED THERE AMONG THEIR PEOPLE, PERHAPS BECAUSE MANY “GOT ALL OF THEIR NEWS FROM FACEBOOK.” I HAVE NO TEMPTATION TO DO THAT, BECAUSE IT IS CLEARLY TO ME NOT A PRIMARY NEWS SOURCE. SEE WHAT YOU THINK. I WANT TO THINK THAT FACEBOOK DOESN’T DO THESE THINGS PURPOSELY, BUT PERHAPS BECAUSE REALLY HANDLING ALL THAT DATA IS TOO DIFFICULT FOR THE TECHS AT FACEBOOK TO SUCCEED ENTIRELY. FACEBOOK AS A GENUINE HUMAN INTERACTION TOOL IS TOO PROMISING TO HAVE TO SCRAP IT, BUT IF IT CAN’T CONTAIN ITSELF, THEN THE GODS OF THE INTERNET MAY NEED TO LIMIT THE WAY THEY FUNCTION OR THEIR SIZE, I THINK.

https://www.wired.com/story/how-facebooks-rise-fueled-chaos-and-confusion-in-myanmar/
HOW FACEBOOK’S RISE FUELED CHAOS AND CONFUSION IN MYANMAR
The social network exploded in Myanmar, allowing fake news and violence to consume a country emerging from military rule.
MCLAUGHLINBY TIMOTHY MCLAUGHLIN
JULY 6, 2018

THE RIOTS WOULDN’T have happened without Facebook.

On the the evening of July 2, 2014 a swelling mob of hundreds of angry residents gathered around the Sun Teashop filling the streets in the commercial hub of Mandalay, Myanmar’s second-largest city. The teashop’s Muslim owner had been accused, falsely, of raping a female Buddhist employee.

The accusations against him, originally reported on a blog, exploded when they made its way to Facebook—by then, synonymous with the internet in Myanmar. Many among the crowd had seen the Facebook post, which was widely shared including by a Mandalay-based ultra-nationalist monk named Wirathu, who has a massive following across the country.

As anger rose among the throngs of men, police struggled to disperse the growing crowds, firing rubber bullets and trying to corral rioters into certain sections of the city. Their efforts were largely unsuccessful. Soon, armed men were marauding through the streets of the royal capital on motorbikes and by foot wielding machetes and sticks. Rioters torched cars and ransacked shops.

A curfew was imposed in the city and surrounding townships. Authorities were fearful that the violence would spread to other towns that had seen outbreaks of religious violence the previous year. The mayhem did not spread, but during the multi-day melee in Mandalay two men—one Muslim and one Buddhist—were killed and around 20 others were injured.

The unrest was the latest in a string of flare-ups, often violent, between minority Muslims and Buddhists in the majority-Buddhist country of around 51 million since restrictions on free speech and the internet were steadily loosened starting in 2010. Waves of violence broke out in the western Rakhine state in 2012 between Muslims and Buddhists, leaving nearly 200 dead and displaced some 140,000, mainly Rohingya Muslims and reverberated across the country in the months and years that followed.


A firefighter sprays a smoldering building in the wake of clashes between Buddhists and Muslims that left at least 20 people dead in a the central Myanmar town of Meikhtila in 2013. KHIN MAUNG WIN/AP

After the unrest, which left scores of buildings in flames, Myanmar’s army took control in the city. KHIN MAUNG WIN/AP
In Naypyitaw, the country’s vast capital some 170 miles south of Mandalay, government officials quickly realized the seriousness of the unfolding situation. Chris Tun, the head of Deloitte’s Myanmar operations and a longtime member of the country’s tech community, received a frantic phone call. On the line was Zaw Htay, a senior official in the office of President Thein Sein, a retired general who until a few years earlier had served as the fourth most powerful figure in the junta and a loyal comrade to dictator Than Shwe.

Thein Sein’s military-backed party suffered a near-total defeat by Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy at the polls in November 2015. His term ended in March 2016. Aung San Suu Kyi, who is barred by the constitution from holding the presidency, serves as the country’s de facto leader with the title of State Counsellor. But the military is not under civilian oversight and retains an outsized role in the country’s political arena, controlling a quarter of all parliament seats as well as three key ministries.

Desperate for a way to stem the mayhem, Zaw Htay asked Tun—who worked previously in the United States and was involved in the US-ASEAN Business council, a Washington-based lobbying group focused on Southeast Asia—to try to contact Facebook on behalf of the President’s Office to see if anything could be done to halt the spread of disinformation.

Protesters hold placards and chant during a demonstration against Myanmar's de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi, as she attends an event at the Guildhall in the City of London on May 8, 2017.CHRIS J RATCLIFFE/GETTY IMAGES
“They started to panic and they did not know what to do,” says Tun, who left Deloitte last year. “He was quite worried.” Facebook does not maintain an office in Myanmar, and there was, according to Tun, confusion over how to reach officials at the company. Zaw Htay, who now serves at the spokesman for Aung San Suu Kyi's government, confirmed the phone call took place.

Tun’s attempts to contact Facebook officials in the United States dragged into the night but were unsuccessful. He eventually fell asleep. Soon, a decision was made by the President’s Office to temporarily block access to Facebook in Mandalay, Zaw Htay says.

The decision was the right one, he says, because it put a stop to the clashes. When Tun awoke the next morning, he had five or six emails from Facebook officials concerned over the site being unreachable, he says. (Five people, including a woman who admitted she was paid to make the false rape claim, were eventually sentenced to 21 years in prison for their roles in starting the riots.)

ON JULY 20, 2014, a little more than two weeks after the unrest, members of Myanmar’s budding tech scene gathered in a conference room at MICT Park, a badly dated office complex built in Yangon by the junta in a largely unsuccessful attempt to advance the country’s tech prowess.

A panel discussion had been hastily arranged after the riots with the help of Tun, Zaw Htay, and others. The participants included representatives from Google, the Asia Foundation, and the government, but most in the audience had come to hear—and demand answers—from Mia Garlick.

Garlick, Facebook’s director of policy for the Asia-Pacific region, whose remit included Myanmar, told the audience that in response to the violence the company planned to speed up translation of the sites’ user guidelines and code of conduct into Burmese. Garlick also explained how content was reviewed after it was flagged by users who found it to be offensive, though it was unclear how many people fluent in Burmese language were doing this work.

The Burmese language community standards promised by Garlick, however, would not launch until September 2015, 14 months after she spoke in Yangon. And even now, nearly four years later, Facebook will not reveal exactly how many Burmese speakers are evaluating content that has been flagged as possibly violating its standards.

Facebook also had at least two direct warnings before the 2014 riots that hate speech was exploding on the platform and could have real-world consequences.

Aela Callan, a foreign correspondent on a fellowship from Stanford University, met with Elliot Schrage, vice president of global communications for Facebook, in November 2013 to discuss hate speech and fake user pages that were pervasive in Myanmar. Callan returned to the company’s Menlo Park, California, headquarters in early March 2014, after follow-up meetings, with an official from a Myanmar tech civil society organization to again raise the issues with the company and show Facebook “how serious it [hate speech and disinformation] was,” Callan says.

But Facebook’s sprawling bureaucracy and its excitement over the potential of the the Myanmar market appeared to override concerns about the proliferation of hate speech. At the time, the company had just one Burmese speaker based in Dublin, Ireland, to review Burmese language content flagged as problematic, Callan was told.

A spokeswoman for Facebook would say only that the content review team has included Burmese language reviewers since 2013. “It was seen as a connectivity opportunity rather than a big pressing problem,” Callan says. “I think they were more excited about the connectivity opportunity because so many people were using it, rather than the core issues.” Hate speech seemed like a “low priority” for Facebook at the time, she says.

Myanmar was a small but unique market for the company, and Facebook has taken a multi-faceted approach in recent years to better serve users, Garlick says. This includes hiring additional Burmese speakers to review content, improving reporting tools, and “developing local and relevant content” to educate users on how to best use the platform. “We have been working over the years to sort of increase our resourcing and the work that we can do to try to reduce misuse and abuse of our platform and to try to drive the benefit that connectivity can have within the country,” she says.

To critics of the social media company, the early response to the Mandalay riots were harbingers of the difficulties it would face in Myanmar in the coming years—difficulties that persist to this day: A slow response time to posts violating Facebook’s standards, a barebones staff without the capacity to handle hate speech or understand Myanmar’s cultural nuances, an over-reliance on a small collection of local civil society groups to alert the company to possibly dangerous posts spreading on the platform. All of these reflect a decidedly ad-hoc approach for a multi-billion-dollar tech giant that controls so much of popular discourse in the country and across the world.

Today, four years since the riots, Facebook’s role in society is again under intense scrutiny, both in Myanmar and around the world. Myanmar’s military has been accused of rape, arson, and arbitrary killing of Rohingya Muslims during a campaign launched last year after militant attacks on police posts. The UN lambasted Facebook’s conduct in the crisis, which the global body says "bears the hallmarks of genocide,” by serving as a platform for hate speech and disinformation, saying Facebook had "turned into a beast.”

At the same time, Facebook and its founder Mark Zuckerberg are under global pressure for mishandling users’ data and the part the company played in influencing elections, particularly in the the United States. In April, Zuckerberg testified before Congress over two days on a myriad of problems within his company, from Russian agents using the platform to influence the US elections to a lack of data protections.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies at a joint hearing of the Senate Judiciary and Commerce committees in April. He told Congress in written testimony that he is "responsible for" not preventing the social media platform from being used for harm, including fake news, foreign interference in elections, and hate speech. TING SHEN/XINHUA/ALAMY

Myanmar came up in the hearings too. Why, the legislators wanted to know, hadn’t the company responded sooner to issues raised there.

Zuckerberg said Facebook had a three-pronged approach to address issues in Myanmar— “dramatically” ramp up its local language content reviewers, take down accounts of individuals and groups that generate hate speech, and introduce products specially designed for the country, though he offered few details on what these would entail.

Zuckerberg’s admission that Facebook needed to improve came too late for some critics who said he failed to adequately take responsibility for what has been a long-term issue. (UPDATE, July 19, 2018: Facebook announced on July 18 that it would expand its efforts to remove material that could incite violence.)

"From at least that Mandalay incident, Facebook knew. There were a few things done in late 2014 and 2015 and there was some effort made to try to understand the issues, but it wasn’t a fraction of what was needed,” says David Madden, a gregarious Australian who in 2014 founded Phandeeyar, a tech-hub in Yangon, the country’s largest city, that helped Facebook launch its Burmese language community standards. “That’s not 20/20 hindsight. The scale of this problem was significant and it was already apparent."


FOR THOSE OF US WHO BELIEVE IN LIFE, THIS IS A NO-BRAINER.

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2018-11-30/trump-oks-seismic-tests-for-oil-in-atlantic
Trump OKs Seismic Tests for Oil in Atlantic
The surveys, which haven't been conducted in decades, are criticized by environmentalists as extremely harmful to marine life.
By Alan Neuhauser, Staff Writer Nov. 30, 2018, at 3:59 p.m.

PHOTOGRAPH -- A blue whale spouts near oil rigs off the coast of Long Beach, Calif. MEL MELCON/LOS ANGELES TIMES VIA GETTY IMAGES

ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS slammed the Trump administration's announcement Friday that it plans to allow oil-seeking seismic surveys across an enormous swath of the Atlantic Ocean for the first time in decades, saying the tests will take a massive toll on ocean wildlife.

The move, which would allow five companies to conduct the tests in waters spanning Delaware to Florida, marks the most significant step since the 1970s to open the Atlantic to drilling, although several steps remain before such production might begin.

"What's exceptional is to see five companies all covering a region at this scale at the same time. It reflects a gold rush mentality," says Michael Jasny, director of the Marine Mammal Protection Project at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Seismic surveys are believed to be particularly harmful to marine life. The tests involve repeatedly blasting deafening booms underwater, often seconds apart for months at a time. Whales and dolphins, as well other underwater creatures, have especially sensitive hearing, and environmentalists fear the tests will injure or kill thousands of the mammals as well as fishes.

"Seismic airgun blasting would harm marine mammals and threaten fishing, and it is a precursor to drilling that coastal communities strongly oppose," Alex Taurel, director of the conservation program at the League of Conservation Voters, said in a statement. "Rather than setting our shores on the path to dirty and dangerous drilling, we should be investing in our nation's clean energy economy."

The move by the Trump administration Friday inherently acknowledges the harm that environmentalists fear. The National Marine Fisheries Service, which is part of the Commerce Department, issued what's known as an "incidental take" permit, which allows companies to injure even endangered and threatened wildlife while engaging in activities such as seismic surveys.

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, a division of the Interior Department, still needs to issue its own permits before the tests can begin, but the agency's acting director told Congress earlier this year that he would expect to greenlight the surveys as soon as two weeks after the approval from the Fisheries Service. A legal expert for one environmental group called is "a fait accompli."

The administration's approval for the surveys was not unexpected: Trump last year moved to open much of the U.S. coastline to oil and gas drilling. Nonetheless, the decision to move ahead Friday would appear to buck the governors of all seven of the affected states, including the Republican leaders of Maryland, South Carolina and Florida – both current Gov. Rick Scott and his newly elected successor Ron DeSantis.

The governors have sought exemptions from the Trump administration's drilling plan or have supported measures to shield their states' coastlines from offshore drilling, not only due to the impacts on wildlife but also due to potential disruptions to commercial fisheries as well as concern about leaks or ruptures that would befoul beaches and decimate tourism.

"We cannot afford to take a chance with the beauty, the majesty, and the economic value and vitality of our wonderful coastline," South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster told reporters in January.

Environmental groups said they were reviewing the permits granted by the Fisheries Service and exploring potential responses, including presumably possible lawsuits.

"The opposition to seismic blasting is broad and deep, and I know a lot of folks will want to fight this terrible decision and protect the coast in whatever way they can," Jasny says.


Fullscreen
Alan Neuhauser, Staff Writer

Alan Neuhauser covers law enforcement and criminal justice for U.S. News & World Report. He also contributes to STEM and Healthcare of Tomorrow, and previously reported on energy and the environment. You can follow him on Twitter or reach him at aneuhauser@usnews.com.


###

IF YOU WANT TO FISH, YOU GO WHERE THERE’S WATER, RIGHT?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-asks-mueller-hasnt-interviewed-hundreds-campaign-staffers-without-russian-contacts-164340382.html
Trump asks why Mueller hasn't interviewed 'hundreds' of campaign staffers without Russian contacts
Dylan Stableford Senior Editor, Yahoo News • November 26, 2018

Video -- Jeff Flake threatens to vote against judges

If you were running an investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives seeking to influence the 2016 presidential election, who would you interview: Trump campaign officials who you know met with Russians offering information on Trump’s opponent, Hillary Clinton, and others who had documented contact with Kremlin officials — or the ones who didn’t?

Special counsel Robert Mueller, understandably, has focused his investigation on Trump associates who had known contacts with Russia, such as former foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, who was scheduled to begin a 14-day sentence Monday for lying to the FBI. But President Trump, who has frequently urged Mueller to speed up his investigation, also wants him to interview “hundreds” of campaign associates who had no contact with Russia.

Donald Trump, Robert Mueller (Photo illustration: Yahoo News; photos: AP)

He didn’t say what he thought Mueller should ask them, or what information they could provide about a subject they know nothing about.

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
When Mueller does his final report, will he be covering all of his conflicts of interest in a preamble, will he be recommending action on all of the crimes of many kinds from those “on the other side”(whatever happened to Podesta?), and will he be putting in statements from.....

99.6K
9:33 AM - Nov 26, 2018
Twitter Ads info and privacy
51.5K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
....hundreds of people closely involved with my campaign who never met, saw or spoke to a Russian during this period? So many campaign workers, people inside from the beginning, ask me why they have not been called (they want to be). There was NO Collusion & Mueller knows it!

93.2K
9:44 AM - Nov 26, 2018
Twitter Ads info and privacy
53K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy


Mueller’s team has interviewed numerous Trump campaign officials and advisers, including Donald Trump Jr., senior adviser Jared Kushner, former communications director Hope Hicks and others.

Trump has repeatedly claimed, without evidence, that Mueller, a registered Republican, is conflicted in his role as special counsel, deriding the probe as a “witch hunt” and insisting there was “no collusion” between his campaign and Russia, and no obstruction of justice.

Earlier this year, Mueller referred several cases of U.S. lobbyists who may have failed to register their work supporting the Ukrainian government to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York. The cases involved Democratic lobbyist Tony Podesta; former Obama White House counsel Greg Craig and former Minnesota Republican Rep. Vin Weber. But none of them, to this point, have been charged.

Related Video: How Mueller’s probe has shaped Trump’s presidency

In August, Trump’s longtime personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, pleaded guilty to tax evasion and bank fraud after Mueller referred his case to federal prosecutors in New York. Cohen also admitted in federal court to making illegal campaign contributions “at the direction of a candidate for federal office,” directly implicating Trump in efforts to suppress, on the eve of the 2016 election, the stories of two women who alleged they had affairs with Trump in 2006 and 2007.

Since being appointed special counsel in March 2017, Mueller’s Russia probe has resulted in the indictments or guilty pleas of more than 30 people, including Papadopoulos, former national security adviser Michael Flynn, ex-campaign chairman Paul Manafort and Manafort deputy Rick Gates.

Trump, who has refused to be interviewed by Mueller’s prosecutors, submitted answers to questions from the special counsel last week. Mueller is expected to eventually issue a report to the acting attorney general, Mark Whitaker, who could then, in turn, pass along the findings to Congress.

Whitaker, though, has been critical of the probe. And Democratic lawmakers, including Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., have been trying to pass legislation to protect Mueller.

Appearing on ABC’s “This Week” Sunday, Alan Dershowitz, a Harvard law professor and frequent defender of Trump, said Sunday that the forthcoming report will be politically “devastating to the president.”

“I know that the president’s team is already working on a response to the report,” Dershowitz added.

_____

Read more from Yahoo News:

Trump’s new acting AG already has a plan to stop Mueller
White House authorizes ‘lethal force’ by troops at border
Trump raises baseless ‘infected’ ballot claims
Trump deflects questions on birtherism in Michelle Obama memoir
George Conway calls Trump administration ‘a dumpster fire’


YES, MR. PRESIDENT. OF COURSE, THEY DID.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/11/15/donald-trump-pushes-conspiracy-theories-florida-recount/1991767002/
Trump claims Florida voters wore disguises, latest in pattern of conspiracy theories
John Fritze, USA TODAY Published 6:00 a.m. ET Nov. 15, 2018 | Updated 6:29 p.m. ET Nov. 15, 2018

PHOTOGRAPH -- President Donald Trump delivers a speech during a ceremony at the American Cemetery of Suresnes, outside Paris, on Nov. 11, 2018, as part of Veterans Day and commemorations marking the 100th anniversary of the 11 November 1918 armistice, ending World War I.
(Photo: Saul Loeb, AFP/Getty Images)

“When people get in line that have absolutely no right to vote and they go around in circles," Trump told the Daily Caller in an interview. "Sometimes they go to their car, put on a different hat, put on a different shirt, come in and vote again. Nobody takes anything. It’s really a disgrace what’s going on.”

He also suggested there was rampant voter fraud because of what he described as a lax approach to verifying identification.

“If you buy a box of cereal – you have a voter ID,” Trump said.

The assertions were only the latest conspiracy theory embraced by Trump over the Florida gubernatorial and Senate elections as election officials raced to tally votes.

The machine recount of some 8 million votes cast in the races ended at 3 p.m. Eastern Standard Time Thursday after a federal judge in Florida declined a request by Incumbent Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson and his allies to push the deadline back so more votes could be counted. Nelson is trailing Republican Rick Scott by about 13,000 votes.

Experts who study the use of conspiracy theories in politics say the ongoing recounts in Florida have all the preconditions needed to fuel Trump’s decades-old penchant for embracing claims of subterfuge. The outcome is uncertain, the drama is high and the complexity of the issue makes it hard for voters to separate fact from fiction.

“It fits the pattern of everything he’s done so far,” said Joseph Uscinski, a political scientist at the University of Miami who has written on the issue. “The underlying message of all of Trump’s conspiracy theories is that the ‘elites’ sold out the interests of the American people.”

Trump’s use of conspiracy theories to rile up voters and shift the media’s attention is by now a well-known element of his communications strategy. He gained national prominence by questioning the citizenship of President Barack Obama. During his 2016 campaign he accused Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s father of associating with President John F. Kennedy’s assassin. He flirted with the notion that Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in his sleep in early 2016, may have been murdered.

All of those claims were baseless.


Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
When will Bill Nelson concede in Florida? The characters running Broward and Palm Beach voting will not be able to “find” enough votes, too much spotlight on them now!

102K
11:32 AM - Nov 13, 2018
Twitter Ads info and privacy
46.4K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

After winning the election, Trump explained his second-place finish in the popular vote by claiming millions of illegal ballots were cast for Democrat Hillary Clinton. Trump appointed a commission to investigate voter fraud, which never presented formal findings nor evidence to support his claim. Trump disbanded the group in January.

In the run-up to the midterm, Trump said that a caravan of Central Americans inching through Mexico toward the U.S. border included criminals and "unknown Middle Easterners." His administration never backed up the claim.

In theorizing about the razor-thin margin in the Florida governor and Senate races, Trump is returning to an issue – and a state – that has befuddled many Americans since the contested 2000 presidential race between Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore. The election was decided by the Supreme Court after a recount in Florida.

Election officials were once again racing to wrap up a statewide recount amid a flurry of lawsuits filed by candidates from both parties.

An email reviewed by the USA TODAY NETWORK showed a Democratic party leader in Florida encouraged volunteers to send altered election forms to voters in an effort to fix ballot signature problems. Though it’s not clear that any of those requests were accepted, election experts said the revelation is likely to raise new questions about the vote-counting process.

More: Email shows Florida Democratic official sought to use altered forms for reaching voters with ballot problems

Initial results put Scott ahead of Nelson in the state’s Senate race and indicated Republican Ron DeSantis had a healthy lead over Democrat Andrew Gillum in the state’s contest for governor. Those margins have shrunk, however, as election officials count outstanding ballots.

Trump and other Republicans have zeroed in on Broward County, which has struggled to meet state-imposed deadlines to post up-to-the-hour tallies of the count. They also point to a ruling against Broward County Supervisor of Elections Brenda Snipes that found she violated state law by destroying ballots too quickly after the 2016 election.

“When they call this woman incompetent, they’re wrong,” Trump told The Daily Caller. “She’s very competent but in a bad way.”

Though the issues Trump and others have raised have sparked bipartisan concern, there is no evidence Snipes or other officials are tampering with the outcome of the election. Democrats have suggested the problems have more to do with outdated voting machines and underfunded election offices.

Experts said the Florida recount is fertile ground for conspiracy theorists.

It’s “a perfect situation on which such theories can rest,” said Joanne Miller, a political scientist at the University of Delaware who has studied the issue. High uncertainty and high anxiety, she said, are among the factors that can cause people to believe unsubstantiated claims.

“There's also another aspect of elections that makes them ripe for conspiracy theories: The inherent competition surrounding an election, and therefore the stakes of the outcome, are high,” Miller said.

“It's more self-esteem protective to believe that an election outcome was due to fraud than to believe, for example, that it was due to the fact that the other party had policy positions that resonated better,” she said.

Trump, of course, is not the first president or high-profile figure to hold such theories. Then-first lady Hillary Clinton referred to what she described as a “vast, right-wing conspiracy” to explain the impeachment of her husband, President Bill Clinton, in 1998.

President Richard Nixon harbored theories that Washington insiders were out to end his presidency.

But Trump is unusual in his embrace of conspiracies and his desire to share them with supporters, experts said. Both the frequency and the extent of the claims Trump makes without offering evidence make him unique in his use of them, they said.

Those who have studied the president for years – including before his political debut – note that his approach, even in business, is to keep foes and friends alike off kilter and uncertain of his motives.

“He’s a salesman,” said Gwenda Blair, a Trump biographer. “The only way it works is if people keep watching.”


INFECTED FALSE BALLOTS -- THIS IS A VERY GOOD RUNDOWN OF THE TECHNICALITIES OF HOW ONLINE BALLOTING COULD BE HARMFUL, NOT THE LEAST OF WHICH IS SPREADING MALWARE ALL OVER OUR VOTING DATA. THAT SHOULD MAKE PEOPLE THINK. JUST GET A STAMP AND CARRY IT ON DOWN TO THE POST OFFICE.

https://www.commoncause.org/page/email-and-internet-voting-the-overlooked-threat-to-election-security/
Executive Summary

Over the past two years, revelations that our election systems have been targeted for cyberattack have roiled the U.S. Leaders of our national security apparatus have repeatedly warned that our election infrastructure continues to be targeted for online attacks by foreign intelligence. As state election officials grapple with the looming threat of cyberattack on election technology, there is a significant vulnerability that has been roundly ignored: transmission of ballots over the internet, including by email, fax and blockchain systems.

This report reviews the research that has been conducted by the federal government concluding that secure online voting is not yet feasible. We examine the insoluble security problems that are inherent to casting ballots online, including server penetration attacks, client-device malware, attacks to emailed and faxed ballots in transit, denial-of-service attacks, disruption attacks and the challenge to reliably authenticate voters.

The report foregrounds a serious, yet widely overlooked cybersecurity threat to state and county election infrastructure that receive ballots sent as attachments in the form of emails or digital faxes. In jurisdictions that receive ballots by PDF or JPEG attachment, election workers must routinely click on documents from unknown sources to process emailed or faxed ballots, exposing the computer receiving the ballots — and any other devices on the same network — to a host of cyberattacks that could be launched from a false ballot laden with malicious software. An infected false ballot would enter the server like any other ballot, but once opened, it would download malware that could give attackers backdoor access to the elections office’s network.

A review of publications on security best practices from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the National Association of Election Officials found no published guidance regarding the security of emailed ballots or recommendations for securing a computer terminal receiving emailed ballots.

Findings:

Federal government, military and private sector studies have examined the feasibility of internet-based voting and have concluded it is not secure and should not be used in U.S. government elections.

Thirty-two states permit online voting for some subset of voters.

In the 2016 general election, over 100,000 ballots were reported to have been cast online, according to data collected in the EAC’s Election Administration and Voting Survey. The actual number is likely much higher.

The federal agencies supporting states in improving their election security have not issued any warnings regarding the online return of voted ballots.

Ballots returned online can be undetectably changed by a variety of cyberattacks, including via malware on a user’s computer and server penetration attacks. The latter has been demonstrated live and in a “test” election.

Internet voting expands the opportunity for an attacker to engage in damaging disruption and denial-of-service attacks, aimed at disabling the system, prohibiting voters from casting ballots, and undermining voter trust in the election.

Receiving ballots as attachments can also expose a state or county election system to systemic election system attacks. Sophisticated attackers can spoof a legitimate voter’s emails and use fake ballots to deliver malware that can be used to gain entry into county or state election infrastructure.

New technologies, including blockchain, fail to resolve the insoluble security issues inherent with online voting. These issues include server penetration attacks, client-device malware, denial-of-service attacks and disruption attacks.

Conclusion

Until there is a major technological breakthrough in or fundamental change to the nature of the internet, the best method for securing elections is a tried-and-true one: mailed paper ballots. Paper ballots are not tamper-proof, but they are not vulnerable to the same wholesale fraud or manipulation associated with internet voting. Tampering with mailed paper ballots is a one-at-a-time attack. Infecting voters’ computers with malware or infecting the computers in the elections office that handle and count ballots are both effective methods for large-scale corruption.

Military voters undoubtedly face greater obstacles in casting their ballots. They deserve any help the government can give them to participate in democracy equally with all other citizens. However, in this threat-filled environment, online voting endangers the very democracy the U.S. military is charged with protecting.

Considering current technology and current threats, postal return of a voted ballot is the most responsible option. States that permit online return of voted ballots should suspend the practice. Federal agencies such as DHS and EAC should acknowledge the vulnerabilities introduced by permitting online voting and recommend that states curtail all online ballot return. Until they do, the integrity of Americans’ votes are at stake, and in many cases, the integrity of the election system is at risk.

Summary Recommendations

We recommend some basic precautions that election officials and voters should follow. [A comprehensive set of recommendations is at the end of this report.]

Recommendations for election administrators:

Map the network to ensure that the computer used to receive emailed or digitally faxed ballots is not connect- ed to or on the same network as the voting machine network, election management system (EMS) or voter registration system through the wired or wireless means.

Scan all incoming email and digital attachments for malware. The mail program should be configured to verify that attachments are of the expected type and fall into the typical size range. Important: Scanning may find attachments for executable malware programs but may be unable to detect malware inside a PDF or JPEG file. Malware inside such files is much more complex.

Ensure all ballots returned by electronic means are printed for counting and not electronically transmitted to the EMS for tallying.

Provide all voters with information and options for mailing ballots back by postal mail.

Ensure military voters are aware of the free expedited postal mail option available to them.

Recommendations for voters:

Voters who receive blank ballots in the mail are encouraged to mark the ballots and mail them back.

Voters who receive blank ballots by email are encouraged to print out the ballot and mark it by hand if possible. If marking the ballot using a computer, print out the final version and carefully review the choices before mailing it back.

Send the ballot back by postal mail. Military personnel in army, fleet or diplomatic post office (APO/FPO/ DPO) locations can return absentee ballots via Priority Mail Express using the free Express Mail Label 11-DOD.

After the 2018 general election, states that permit online return of voted ballots should eliminate the practice. This will require legislative action in most states. While imposing a quarantine on incoming ballots is helpful, that will by no means stop a sophisticated attacker from attempting to use ballots in a spear phishing attack or corrupting ballots in transit. Additionally, federal agencies charged with assisting states in strengthening their election security should exercise leadership and publish warnings regarding the online return of voted ballots.


###


FROM THE COMMENTERS SECTION BELOW, HERE IS A GEM: “LIFE ISN'T ABOUT WAITING FOR THE STORM TO PASS IT'S ABOUT LEARNING TO DANCE IN THE RAIN.” HOWEVER, THIS IS VERY LONG, SO I HAVE JUST SNIPPED OFF THE BOTTOM. TO SEE THEM ALL, GO TO THE WEBSITE.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/twitter-pelts-trump-with-photos-of-barack-obama-in-the-rain_us_5be76113e4b0769d24cdebb7?ncid=APPLENEWS00001
POLITICS 11/10/2018 08:56 pm ET Updated Nov 11, 2018
Twitter Pelts Trump With Photos Of Obama In The Rain After He Ditches Cemetery Visit
President dodges trip to honor U.S. war dead in France due to weather. Critics show how another leader behaved.
By Mary Papenfuss

Critics were stunned that President Donald Trump skipped a visit Saturday to the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery in France – where U.S. war dead were being honored – because of rain. They zapped him with a a series of tweets showing Barack Obama in downpours honoring those who fought in wars in what was bound to be particularly galling to the president.

As many as 1,800 American soldiers killed in the World War I battle of Belleau Wood are buried in the French cemetery. But Trump ditched his planned visit and stayed in his hotel room because of unspecified “scheduling and logistical difficulties caused by the weather,” according to a White House statement. Instead, a delegation led by Chief of Staff John Kelly traveled to the cemetery 50 miles outside of Paris by car. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron were among the world leaders who made the trip.

Barack Obama wipes the rain off his face as he meets Pentagon staff and family members of the victims of the September 11 att
JIM YOUNG / REUTERS
Barack Obama wipes the rain off his face as he meets Pentagon staff and family members of the victims of the September 11 attacks in a ceremony marking the eighth anniversary of the tragedy at the Pentagon in 2009.
Winston Churchill’s grandson Nicholas Soames, a member of the British Parliament, blasted Trump as “pathetic” and “inadequate” for failing to show up.

Twitter responded with scads of photos of Obama campaigning or speaking at various events in the rain. A number of them featured the former president in pelting rain honoring veterans or those killed in battle.

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Doc T.
@Recon7997
This is a real leader @realDonaldTrump. The rain...seriously? You have no idea what we go through in war and that's why us Vets should hold a special place in society. Thank you @BarackObama for being a pure class act! #Resist

12.7K
3:33 PM - Nov 10, 2018
4,111 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Erik Wells
@Erik_Wells
A real leader supports our fallen men and women in uniform in the rain, snow, sun, day, night, at home or overseas. True leaders do this because it is not about them, but those who paid the ultimate sacrifice. Shame on you @realDonaldTrump. Thank you! @BarackObama

8,152
2:08 PM - Nov 10, 2018
3,301 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

PoliticsVideoChannel
@politvidchannel
Dear @realDonaldTrump

Here's A photo of President Obama honoring our fallen war heroes in the Rain

Unlike You, a little rain never stopped him

4,128
3:57 PM - Nov 10, 2018
1,606 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Zach Dendas
@Zdendas1
Hey @realDonaldTrump here’s a picture of President Obama in the rain supporting his American troops on Memorial Day. Sad to know you’re too much of a gerber baby to go outside to pay homage to our American hero’s.

2,240
4:12 PM - Nov 10, 2018
673 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Jessiand2
@Jessiand2
@realDonaldTrump
Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass
It's about learning to dance in the rain.

Thank you @BarackObama

3,226
2:48 PM - Nov 10, 2018
1,161 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
View image on TwitterView image on TwitterView image on TwitterView image on Twitter

Matthew
@BRSMatthew
@GenMhayden @SteveSchmidtSES @TheRickWilson to paraphrase out “Commander In Chief,” — I like presidents who aren’t afraid of the rain @BarackObama

6,028
5:30 PM - Nov 10, 2018
1,181 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Louise Seeley
@liberrygirl65
Replying to @realDonaldTrump
This is what a real leader looks like.

1,231
6:08 PM - Nov 10, 2018
338 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Andre
@aandrefpeltier
Hey, @realDonaldTrump, remember when @BarackObama had to stand in the rain? Your life is pretty rough, I guess. #resist #resistance https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/trump-visit-us-cemetery-france-canceled-due-rain-59110258 …

888
5:44 PM - Nov 10, 2018
226 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Bethany Primrose
@BethanyPrimrose
Replying to @realDonaldTrump
You commemorate wars, not celebrate them. Also, you don’t pull a no-show because of rain. What a joke of leadership and respect. Thank God @BarackObama wasn’t afraid of melting in the rain.

1,420
5:50 PM - Nov 10, 2018
402 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Denizcan Grimes
@MrFilmkritik
This might be my favorite pic of Obama. And it's in the rain.

4,419
5:46 PM - Nov 10, 2018
1,310 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
View image on TwitterView image on Twitter

Dirk Dirkleton
@Derek_Hennett
On the left we have trump speaking France about Veterans Day in the rain. On the the right we have Obama speaking on Veterans Day in the rain.

1,170
4:04 PM - Nov 10, 2018
324 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

katgal
@katgal2
Replying to @realDonaldTrump
3,866
7:02 PM - Nov 10, 2018
2,013 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Concetta
@conbontalk
Replying to @BakerLuke
Obama in the rain.... Notice Michelle is using the umbrella..What difference between the two men!

1,414
11:24 AM - Nov 10, 2018
444 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

Mary Papenfuss
Trends Reporter, HuffPost



VIDEO ONLY -- I PUT THIS IN TO SEE WHAT WE MAY BE DOING WRONG, AND WHETHER THE TREND TO THE RIGHT CAN BE STOPPED. NOTE THE FILM TITLE.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCu7IT81gh8
How & Why Germans Bought Hitler's Pitch 24:18

NOVEMBER 29, 2018


NEWS AND VIEWS


WORLD ECONOMIES ARE LINKED. COULD WE BE DRIFTING TOWARD A 1930S SYNDROME AGAIN? I HOPE NOT!

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-46377309
Bank warns no-deal could see UK sink into recession
By Jill Treanor
Business reporter, BBC News
28 November 2018

VIDEO CLIP -- Carney warns of lower pound and higher inflation on no-deal

A no-deal Brexit could send the pound plunging and trigger a worse recession than the financial crisis, the Bank of England has warned.

It said the UK economy could shrink by 8% in the immediate aftermath if there was no transition period, while house prices could fall by almost a third.

The Bank of England also warned the pound could fall by a quarter.

The Bank's analysis comes after the Treasury said the UK would be worse off under any form of Brexit.

This Bank's scenario is not what it expects to happen, but represents a worst-case scenario, based on a so called "disorderly Brexit".

The scenario looks at the five-year period after the UK leaves the EU.

But by the end of 2023, the economy is expected to resume growing.

What did we learn from the Bank of England?
Brexit will make UK worse off, government warns
"These are scenarios not forecasts. They illustrate what could happen not necessarily what is most likely to happen.

"Taken together the scenarios highlight that the impact of Brexit will depend on the direction, magnitude and speed of the effect of reduced openness of the UK economy," Bank of England governor Mark Carney said.

What is a 'disorderly Brexit'?
The Bank of England has made a number of assumptions - not forecasts - about what would cause a disorderly Brexit.

The UK reverts to World Trade Organization rules
No new trade deals are implemented by 2022
The UK loses all access to existing trade agreements between the EU and third countries
Severe disruption at borders because of customs checks
Migration reverses from 150,000 a year to falling by 100,000 a year
The Bank of England does not give a probability of this happening.

What happens during this disorderly scenario?
Scenarios drawn up by the Bank of England show that GDP would fall by 8% in 2019 against its current forecast.

Growth would quickly resume and the economy would expand again by the end of 2023 but be smaller than where it was before.

Unemployment would rise to 7.5%, house prices fall by 30% and commercial property prices collapse by 48%.

Interest rates would reach 4%.

What other scenarios did the Bank of England consider?
The Bank looked at three other scenarios.

... a "disruptive" Brexit - one where the UK retained access to some trade agreements
... what might happen if trading arrangements were agreed to give the UK a "close" relationship
... what might happen if trading arrangements were agreed to give the UK a "less close" relationship

A close relationship is one with no customs checks, no regulatory barriers and a partial deal agreed on financial services.

A less close relationship is one where customs checks start after 2021 and other regulatory checks are put in place.

What happens in these scenarios?
If Brexit is disruptive rather than disorderly, GDP falls 3% over the five years to 2022, house prices slide 14%, and unemployment reaches 5.75%

If a close trading relationship is agreed, the economy could still be 1% smaller than if the UK had remained in the EU but 1.5% higher than the bank's most recent estimate.

If it is less close, the economy's growth could be 3.75% less than if the UK had remained in the EU and 0.75% less than forecast over the last inflation report.

These figures cover the period to 2023.

What does this mean for Theresa May?
By political reporter Brian Wheeler

Theresa May will not have told the Bank's economists what to say in their report but it is definitely helpful to her. The timing is significant too.

A leaked copy of Downing Street's media grid had today down as "economy". Tomorrow is "security".

So expect a steady drumbeat of official warnings about the dangers of a no-deal Brexit in the run up to 11 December's vote.

Downing Street's hope is that however much they hate her deal (and they do) MPs will come to view it as the only safe option.

The problem is that these kind of warnings, however well-grounded in facts and figures, are too easily written off as "project fear". The more scary they sound, the easier they are to dismiss.

What has been the political reaction?
Conservative MP and Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg has accused Mark Carney of talking down the pound - saying the Bank of England's warnings tonight "lack all credibility".

Speaking to the BBC, Mr Rees-Mogg said "project fear" had become "project hysteria".

And the pro-Brexit former Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith said: "The bottom line of both sets of reports is that project fear like Frankenstein's monster has been resuscitated and is stalking the land."

However, shadow chancellor John McDonnell said: "The Bank has confirmed what other independent reports this week have been telling us: a no-deal Brexit could be even worse than the financial crisis of 10 years ago, and the country would be much worse under Theresa May's deal," he said.

What else did the Bank say?
Mr Carney said the Bank was monitoring markets and indicated that it was ready to lend to UK banks if necessary.

He also indicated that banks might be allowed to hold less capital if risks became too great.

But he warned there was little the Bank could do.

"There is little monetary policy can do to offset the potentially significant hits to productivity and supply that Brexit could entail... the future potential of this economy and its implications of jobs, real wages and wealth are not in the gift of central bankers," he said.

What does it mean for the banking sector?

The Bank of England has exposed seven major lenders to a stress test which it said was two and half times more severe than the Brexit scenarios.

All seven lenders - Royal Bank of Scotland, HSBC, Barclays, Lloyds, Standard Chartered, Santander and Nationwide Building Society - passed the test.


MURDER MOST FOUL – A WEALTHY MAN, A “TECHNOLOGY EXECUTIVE,” KILLED HIS FAMILY MEMBERS OVER MONEY. PLENTY OF MONEY IS SUPPOSED TO ME US BETTER, NOT WORSE.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/colts-neck-nj-mansion-fire-murder-charges-against-brother-in-mansion-fire-slayings/
CBS/AP November 29, 2018, 11:03 AM
Brother killed family in N.J. mansion over finances, set fire as cover-up, prosecutor says

VIDEO – CBS NEWS LIVE

FREEHOLD, N.J. -- Prosecutors say financial motives led a New Jersey technology executive to kill his brother, the brother's wife and their young children before setting fire to their two homes.

Authorities say 51-year-old Paul Caneiro killed the family in Colts Neck and then set fire to their home and his own. They said he set the fire at his own home to destroy evidence and to make it look like the extended family was being targeted.

Paul Caneiro was charged with murder in the deaths of his 50-year-old brother, Keith, along with Keith's wife Jennifer, and their two children.

Monmouth County Prosecutor Christopher Gramiccioni says the financial motive stemmed from two businesses the brothers ran in Asbury Park, a technology firm and a pest control company. He says he cannot detail their financial picture. He says his office has also launched a financial investigation.

paul-caneiro-ap-18326076088416.jpg
Booking photo of Paul Caneiro. OCEAN TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPARTMENT

Paul Caneiro was also charged with aggravated arson, possession of a firearm and possession of a weapon for unlawful purpose, according to court records cited by NJ.com. Authorities say both a gun and a knife were seized from Paul Caneiro. Prosecutors said previously that Keith Caneiro was fatally shot but have not yet confirmed how the other three were killed. The criminal complaint indicates Paul Caneiro may have used the seized knife to stab one or more of the other three victims.

Paul Caneiro has been in custody since authorities accused him of setting fire to his Ocean Township home on Nov. 20, hours before flames were discovered at the Colts Neck mansion where Keith Caneiro and his family lived. Prosecutors say they believe Paul Caneiro roused his sleeping wife and daughters, who were not injured in the blaze, at the Ocean Township home.

"The fire was effectively a ruse designed to make it appear as if the overall Caneiro family was somehow targeted," Gramiccioni said.

He called it the "most brutal" crime he'd seen in his career.

Paul Caneiro's lawyer, Robert A. Honecker, did not immediately return a call seeking comment on the newest charges.

Honecker previously maintained his client was innocent and said his client was "devastated by the news of his brother and his family's deaths."

Police said Paul Caneiro used gasoline to fuel the fire at his two-story Colonial in Ocean Township, about 10 miles from his brother's $1.5 million home in Colts Neck.

Paul and Keith Caneiro were the principals in two businesses, a computer systems company called Square One and a pest control business, both housed above a trendy cafe in Asbury Park. Workers in the area frequently saw Paul Caneiro there.

Obituaries describe Keith's children as 11-year-old Jesse, who liked World War I and II history, video games and sports, and 8-year-old Sophia, who loved ice skating, ninja classes and making cookies with her nanny. Funeral services for the family are planned Sunday.

© 2018 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.



MORE DIRT ON FACEBOOK, AND THIS IS THE LAST STRAW FOR ME. I’M GOING TO REMOVE MY ACCOUNT. WELL, MAYBE NOT, BUT I AM TEMPTED. EVERY TIME I SEE THAT BOYISH, SMOOTH INNOCENT-LOOKING FACE OF ZUCKERBERG’S NOWADAYS AND READ YET ANOTHER STORY ABOUT WHAT HE HAS DONE, “INADVERTENTLY,” OF COURSE, I GET ANGRY. THE EXTENT TO WHICH PEOPLE DO HIDE BEHIND GOOD LOOKS AND WEALTH IS SAD.

https://gizmodo.com/george-soros-foundation-calls-facebook-vile-reprehensi-1830455147
FACEBOOK
George Soros Foundation Calls Facebook 'Vile,' 'Reprehensible' for Pushing Conspiracy Theories
Tom McKay
11/15/18 12:05amFiled to: OUR GARBAGE FACEBOOK

Photo: Francois Mori (AP)

The Open Society Foundations (OSF), a international philanthropic and grantmaking organization, has responded to a bombshell report that senior management at Facebook including Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg, CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and chief lobbyist Joel Kaplan were involved in hiring a Republican opposition research firm named Definers Public Affairs to counter the company’s growing list of critics—including by peddling conspiracy theories about OSF’s founder, Hungarian-American investor and Holocaust survivor George Soros.

Spoilers: They’re not happy.

On Wednesday, the New York Times reported that as critics ramped up a campaign charging that Facebook’s aggressive international expansion efforts led it to ignore numerous incidents in which it was “exploited to disrupt elections, broadcast viral propaganda and inspire deadly campaigns of hate around the globe,” the company sought to discredit those critics using a variety of dirty tricks. One of those was contracting Definers, which waged a campaign to “cast Mr. Soros as the unacknowledged force behind what appeared to be a broad anti-Facebook movement.”

Several of the groups affiliated with Freedom from Facebook, which was spearheading the effort to rein in the social media giant, had received payments from OSF—a link tenuous enough to be accurately characterized as yet another right-wing conspiracy theory about Soros.

Soros, who is frequently vilified by virtually the entire conservative movement and nearly constant target of anti-Semitic propaganda for his philanthropic initiatives, had a bomb arrive at his house in October. In a letter to Sandberg, and CC’d to Zuckerberg as well as major Silicon Valley figures and members of Congress, OSF President Patrick Gaspard drew a direct connection between Facebook’s alleged “smear campaign” and the attempted bombing. He added that the company’s behavior more broadly undermines “the very values underpinning our democracy.”

“As you know, there is a concerted right-wing effort the world over to demonize Mr. Soros and his foundations, which I lead—an effort which has contributed to death threats and the delivery of a pipe bomb to Mr. Soros’ home,” Gaspard wrote. “You are no doubt also aware that much of this hateful and blatantly false and anti-Semitic information is spread via Facebook.”

“The notion that your company, at your direction, actively engaged in the same behavior to try and discredit people exercising their First Amendment rights to protest Facebook’s role in disseminating vile propaganda is frankly astonishing to me,” Gaspard continued. “It’s been disappointing to see how you have failed to monitor hate and misinformation on Facebook’s platform. To now learn that you are active in promoting these distortions is beyond the pale.”

Gaspard added that Facebook had settled on Soros as a “deliberate strategy to distract” from its own scandals, writing: “This is reprehensible, and an offense to the core values Open Society seeks to advance. But at the bottom, this is not about George Soros or the foundations. Your methods threaten the very values underpinning our democracy.”

Gaspard asked for a meeting with Sandberg to directly discuss the issue and what Facebook plans to do in response. But it’s clear that after years of privacy scandals, accusations of complicity in spreading propaganda and enabling genocide, and amoral advertising tactics, the situation at Facebook is still getting worse.

Other revelations in the Times exposé included assertions that it enlisted Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer—who receives large donations from Facebook staff and whose daughter works for the company—to secretly pressure Senator Mark Warner into toning down his criticism of Facebook and make it clear he was expected to work with, not against, the company. The Times also wrote that Facebook supported the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act, which was opposed by sex workers’ advocates and by numerous tech companies, in part to curry favor with senators on both sides of the aisle who had criticized it in the past.

Finally, the paper reported that Definers runs an affiliate called NTK Network, which ran “dozens of articles” criticizing Facebook rivals like Google and Apple, and that NTK’s “content is frequently picked up by popular conservative outlets, including Breitbart.” In other words, while Facebook was publicly talking a big game about “fake news,” its PR partner was generating it.

The Open Society Foundations did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Gizmodo, and we’ll update this post if we hear back.

Update: 11/15/2018, 7:45 p.m. ET: In a statement to Gizmodo, OSF wrote:

The Open Society Foundations and a wide range of civil society organizations for the past three years have been targeted by disinformation campaigns across the world. These have often taken the form of large-scale attacks on the internet, carried out by players hostile to free expression, human rights, and democracy.

The latest revelations that Facebook hired a PR firm to discredit digital rights activists, George Soros, and the Open Society Foundations goes a step further: a major digital platform is not only hosting disinformation campaigns, but it is orchestrating and promoting them.

We urge Facebook to stop engaging in practices inspired by the enemies of democracy across the globe. Facebook should launch an independent investigation of what took place and to publish a full report disclosing the techniques that were used in their effort to compromise activists and George Soros.

Additionally, Color of Change, one of the civil rights groups that was involved in the Freedom from Facebook effort and received unrelated funding from Soros, wrote to Gizmodo:

Facebook is violating its most fundamental mission of building human connection, as well as the trust placed in it by billions of people, by advancing extremist far-right conspiracy theories that are aimed at denigrating Jews and belittling people of color. It is reprehensible, it is dangerous, and they should be ashamed.

Facebook’s response to our campaign, which challenged them to improve their platform and create safe conditions for Black people and other marginalized groups, was to fan the flames of anti-Semitism. By suggesting to reporters that Color Of Change is acting as the puppet of Mr. Soros merely because he is one of our many funders, they have given oxygen to the worst anti-Semitic conspiracy theories of the white nationalist Trump base. Those theories aim to not only dehumanize Jews, but also seek to deny legitimacy to progressive social movements led by people of color, by suggesting we have no agenda of our own. They are an attempt to divert attention from the conservative movement’s real attacks on our community’s vote, our health care, our liberty, and our jobs. And they breed violence. Facebook has become part of the same ecosystem that fed the fever dreams of Cesar Sayoc, accused of targeting Soros and others with pipe bombs, and Robert Bowers, the man who massacred 11 Jews in a Pittsburgh synagogue.


FACEBOOK’S HANDLING OF INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTS IS ALSO UNDER CRITICISM. IN THIS CASE OF KORRYN GAINES, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ASKED FACEBOOK TO REMOVE HER ACCOUNT, AND THEY COMPLIED.

THE STORY OF KORRYN GAINES IS SAD, BUT NOT UNCOMMON. THE ADL CAME INTO THIS STORYLINE BECAUSE SOROS’ OPEN SOCIETY FOUNDATIONS WORKS WITH THE ADL ON HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES, INCLUDING POLICE OVERREACH CASES SUCH AS THIS ONE. IN THIS KORRYN GAINES CASE, WHEN HER FAMILY POSTED SMARTPHONE FOOTAGE OF THE ABORTED ARREST/MURDER, AND THEN THE POLICE CONTACTED FACEBOOK AND CONVINCED THEM TO REMOVE GAINES’ FACEBOOK PAGE SO THEIR DEPARTMENT WOULDN’T HAVE TO TAKE SO MUCH PUBLIC ANGER. I UNDERSTAND THAT FROM ONE VIEWPOINT, BUT WHEN POLICE ENCOUNTER A DERANGED PERSON THEY FREQUENTLY END UP SHOOTING THEM, EVEN WHEN MORE HUMANE WAYS OF HANDLING IT ARE AVAILABLE.

READ A LITTLE OF THIS ANTIDEFAMATION LEAGUE DOCUMENT, WHICH SHOWS THE COMPLEXITY AND PARANOIA OF THESE PEOPLE’S THOUGHT PATTERNS. THEY MAY OR MAY NOT BE PSYCHOTIC, BUT THEY ARE OFTEN DISAGREEABLE, ILLOGICAL AND DOWNRIGHT MALICIOUS IN MY VIEW. ON THE SURFACE OF THE SITUATION, I THINK THEY ARE FUNNY, BUT NOT HARMLESS. IF I HAD A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN LIVING NEXT DOOR, I MIGHT MOVE. IT REMINDS ME OF THE ANTICS OF THE FASCINATING COMEDIAN/ACTOR/PROVOCATEUR SACHA BARON-COHEN. LOOK AT HIS “INTERVIEW” WITH BERNIE SANDERS AS HE TRIES TO CONVINCE BERNIE OF A SCREWBALL THEORY. THAT’S WHAT SOVEREIGN CITIZENS TEND TO BE LIKE. GO TO https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-gjf4WnkiI


https://www.adl.org/sites/default/files/documents/assets/pdf/combating-hate/Sovereign-Citizen-Documentary-Identifiers.pdf

Our work with Facebook began after the murder of Korryn Gaines by police*. We’ve sat across the negotiating table with Facebook for years, focusing on the goal of ensuring the safety of its Black users. The recent New York Times story shows that while we were operating in good faith trying to protect our communities, they were stooping lower than we’d ever imagined, using anti-Semitism as a crowbar to kneecap a Black-led organization working to hold them accountable.

[New York Times/Open Society Foundations]


READ THIS WHOLE WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE. THE DETAILS ARE SIMILAR TO THOSE IN MANY OF THE POLICE SHOOTING CASES, AND VERY SIGNIFICANT. IT’S NOT WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAD AN EXCUSE TO SHOOT, BUT WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS NECESSARY TO SHOOT. THE DESCRIPTION OF THIS WOMAN REALLY DOES SOUND LIKE THE SEVERAL “SOVEREIGN CITIZENS” THAT I HAVE READ ABOUT AND SEEN IN TWO VIDEOS. I’M SURE THEY INFURIATE POLICE OFFICERS. THEY ACT LIKE A THREE YEAR-OLD IN THE DEPARTMENT STORE WHEN HE CAN’T HAVE THE TOY GUN.

THEY DELIGHT IN PLAYING WORD GAMES WITH THE POLICE OFFICER AND QUESTIONING HIS “AUTHORITY” TO MAKE THEM DO ANYTHING AT ALL. ONE CASE WAS A VERY LARGE (FAT) BLACK MAN WHO WAS STOPPED UNDER THE STOPLIGHT AND REFUSING TO GO THROUGH IT. THE CAR WAS RUNNING, BUT HE WANTED TO CAUSE SNARLED TRAFFIC. THE OFFICER CALLED IN TWO MORE POLICE CARS AND STRONG-ARMED HIM OUT OF THE VEHICLE AND MOVED IT.

OFTEN THEY REFUSE TO PARTICIPATE IN CIVIL LIFE, LIKE BUYING LICENSE TAGS FOR THE CAR OR HAVING CAR INSURANCE IN FORCE. THEY FOLLOW A WHOLE COMPLICATED “PHILOSOPHY” OF LAW AND GOVERNMENT, IN ESSENCE RECOGNIZING NO LAW ABOVE THE LEVEL OF “THE COUNTY SHERIFF.” YOU MAY HAVE HEARD OF THIS. THIS LADY’S BRANDISHING A WEAPON IS NOT TYPICAL, BUT NOT UNHEARD OF. THE MOST FRIGHTENING CASE I HAVE READ ABOUT OCCURRED IN A COUNTY COURTHOUSE WHERE THE CLERK REFUSED TO DO SOMETHING LEGAL FOR HIM. HE WENT OUT ANGRILY AND BROUGHT A GUN BACK AND MAY HAVE SHOT THE LADY. THE ONE I WON’T FORGET IS WHEN A RURAL MAN FELT CHEATED BY A NEIGHBOR AND WENT OUT INTO THE WOODS, PICKED UP A LIVE RATTLESNAKE AND PUT THAT INTO THE MAN’S OUTDOOR MAILBOX. THEY ARE, IN ESSENCE, “NUT JOBS” OF A VERY DANGEROUS SORT, LIKE SOCIOPATHS. WATCH THIS VIDEO. THE WILD-EYED ARMED MILITIAS ARE OF THE SAME TYPE. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_y-gLm9Hrw.

SO WHAT DOES A POLICE OFFICER DO? FIRST, CALL FOR HELP. SECOND, CONSIDER HOW IMPORTANT THEIR CONCERN WITH THE CITIZEN IS IN THE FIRST PLACE. DELIVERING A WARRANT ISN’T WORTH THE DEATH PENALTY, AND BEING SHOT BY SAID INSANE PERSON ISN’T EITHER, SO DON’T GO RUSHING IN. THE MENTAL HEALTH INTERVENTION TEAM WAS NOT EVEN TRIED IN THIS CASE, WHO WOULD PERHAPS COME IN AN AMBULANCE AND HAVE A KNOCKOUT DRUG OR SOMETHING SIMILAR WITH THEM. THIRD, DEESCALATE. IF THEY DON’T KNOW HOW, THEY SHOULD BE TAUGHT HOW AND NOT PUT ON THE STREET WITHOUT KNOWING IT. THAT’S A FACTOR IN ARTICLE AFTER ARTICLE. DOES BEING CONSIDERED A HERO WEIGH MORE IN THE SCALES OF JUSTICE THAN INTELLIGENTLY DOING THEIR JOB?

Shooting of Korryn Gaines
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shooting of Korryn Gaines
Date August 1, 2016
Time 3:00 p.m.

Location Carriage Hill Circle, Randallstown, Maryland, U.S.
Type Shooting
Cause Police serving bench warrant, leading to standoff
Filmed by Korryn Gaines (filmed portions of the standoff)
Participants Korryn Gaines, Kodi Gaines, Baltimore police officers (names withheld)
Deaths Korryn Gaines (age 23)
Non-fatal injuries Kodi (Gaines' son, age 5)
Publication bans Upon police request, Facebook deactivated Gaines' social media accounts (Facebook and Instagram) featuring live coverage of the standoff

The shooting of Korryn Gaines occurred on August 1, 2016, in Randallstown, Maryland, near Baltimore,[1] resulting in the death of Gaines, a 23-year-old woman, and the shooting of her son, who survived. According to the Baltimore County Police Department, officers sought to serve Gaines a warrant in relation to an earlier traffic violation. Upon entering her apartment, the police officers were faced with the barrel of a shotgun being pointed at them which prompted them to draw their guns, resulting in a 6 hour long standoff. Gaines' five-year-old son was also grazed by a stray bullet.[2] Portions of the standoff were filmed by Gaines and posted to social-media networking sites where you can see her loading the shotgun, threatening to kill all the police officers outside her house, and attempting to convince her son that the police are there specifically to kill them; however, upon police request, Facebook deactivated Gaines' Facebook and Instagram accounts,[3] leading to criticism of the company's involvement in the incident.[4] In 2018, courts awarded the Gaines family $37 million in damages after finding that the first shot, fired by Royce Ruby and killing Gaines, was not reasonable, and thus violated their civil rights.[5]


http://www.nbc-2.com/story/18918507/sovereign-citizen-gets-30-days-for-court-antics
'Sovereign citizen' gets 30 days for disregarding rules
A woman who says she is not bound by the laws of the State of Florida earned another month in jail by ignoring the rules of the court Friday.
Friday, June 29th 2012, 5:14 PM EDT
Updated: Friday, June 29th 2012, 6:33 PM EDT

A woman who says she is not bound by the laws of the State of Florida earned another month in jail by ignoring the rules of the court Friday.

The woman, who claims to be named "Linda Louise Suae Potestate Esse*," was arrested in May after she refused to provide registration information to police for the vehicle she was driving.

[“Suae potestate esse” is a Latin legal phrase that means having full power over one's dominions; it is similar in nature to sui juris and used in the same way by sovereigns: as a concise declaration or emphasis of sovereign status.” https://www.adl.org/sites/default/files/.../Sovereign-Citizen-Documentary-Identifiers.pdf.]

She appears to be a part of the "sovereign citizen" movement, a group that believes state and federal laws don't apply to them.

The FBI says members of the group often do not pay their taxes and regularly create false license plates, driver's licenses and even currency.

Friday, Linda Louise continually ignored the judge's orders during her trial on charges for the registration violation and resisting arrest, so the judge gave her another 30 days in jail for contempt.

She is representing herself in the case. Linda Louise was put in contempt after making statements during her questioning of witnesses - which the judge instructed her not to do.

She apologized to the court but was held in contempt.

Her trial will continue July 3rd.

The FBI says the actions of some members of the sovereign citizen movement are certainly quirky, but not crimes.

However, the agency says there is an extremist element of the group, and they consider those people "domestic terrorists."


ROADSIDE TESTING OF DRUGS, BY POLICEMEN, SHOULD NOT BE LEGAL UNDER ANY CONDITIONS, NOR USED AS PROOF IN ANY TRIAL. NO, I DON’T KNOW WHAT THE LAW IS, BUT THAT DOESN’T MAKE SENSE. POLICE AND AGGRESSIVE POLITICIANS WANTING LAW AND ORDER PLAUDITS PROBABLY APPLIED PRESSURE FOR THIS; SOME OF THE “WAR ON DRUGS” THINKING, MAYBE. LOOK, TOO, AT THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN VICTIMIZED IN THE SAME WAY.

THE CITY IS DRAGGING ITS’ FEET ABOUT ACCEPTING BLAME OR MAKING AMENDS. ALSO, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE “DEBTORS’ PRISON” CASES, WHEN THE BAIL IS SET TOO HIGH, EVEN FOR A DRUG CHARGE, AND I WONDER WHY SHE WASN’T ALLOWED TO SEE A LAWYER BEFORE THAT. AND A LAB HAD ALREADY TESTED THE CANDY AND DECLARED IT NOT TO BE A DRUG, SO WHAT WERE THE SEVERAL DELAYS HERE? IN THE CONSTITUTION OUR LEGAL SYSTEM SOUNDS HIGH-FLOWN, BUT ON THE GROUND ITS’ FIBER IS VERY WEAK IN PLACES. THINGS LIKE IGNORANCE BRING THAT ABOUT. THIS IS A SMALL PLACE OF 26,424.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46393600
Georgia woman jailed as 'cops mistake candy floss for meth'
NOVEMBER 29, 2018 5 hours ago

Image copyrightDASHA FINCHER/FACEBOOK
Image caption -- Dasha Fincher says she missed the birth of her twin grandsons due to the wrongful jailing
GETTY IMAGES
Image caption -- A roadside drug test labelled old candy floss, also known as cotton candy, as a dangerous drug

A Georgia woman spent three months in jail after her bag of candy floss was mistaken for methamphetamine owing to a defective drug test, says a lawsuit.

Dasha Fincher, 41, is suing Monroe County, the police and a drug test company over the alleged mix-up during a traffic stop on New Year's Eve 2016.

The 41-year-old was held in custody because she could not afford her $1m (£780,000) bond.

The legal action argues the county violated her civil rights.

'My life was ruined by a police typo'
US man 'mistakenly injected with drugs'

She was arrested and charged with meth trafficking and possession of meth with intent to distribute, according to the lawsuit.

The court documents say she was improperly detained from 31 December 2016 until 4 April, when her charges of drug possession and trafficking were dropped.

Image copyrightDASHA FINCHER/FACEBOOK
Image caption
Dasha Fincher says she missed the birth of her twin grandsons due to the wrongful jailing

A state crime laboratory had already tested the bag of light blue candy floss - known as cotton candy in the US - and determined on 22 March it contained no drugs.

Ms Fincher says she missed important life events due to the unlawful jailing, including the birth of her twin grandsons and the chance to care for her daughter after a miscarriage.

In addition, the arrest remains on her record despite her innocence, according to the lawsuit.

Ms Fincher is seeking damages for negligence and wrongful actions, as determined by a jury, from Monroe County, the two officers who arrested her and the test manufacturer Sirchie.

County officials and Sirchie did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A 2016 ProPublica investigation found that cheap roadside drug tests "routinely produce false positives" that result in tens of thousands of Americans being wrongfully jailed.

According to a list compiled by the Washington Post, roadside tests have labelled cookies, mints, deodorant, and tea, among other harmless materials, as drugs.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ProPublica
ProPublica
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ProPublica is an American nonprofit organization based in New York City. It is a nonprofit newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest.[3] In 2010, it became the first online news source to win a Pulitzer Prize, for a piece[4] written by one of its journalists[5][6] and published in The New York Times Magazine[7] as well as on ProPublica.org.[8] ProPublica states that its investigations are conducted by its staff of full-time investigative reporters, and the resulting stories are distributed to news partners for publication or broadcast. In some cases, reporters from both ProPublica and its partners work together on a story. ProPublica has partnered with more than 90 different news organizations, and it has won four Pulitzer Prizes.



MADDOW BLOG

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/lawrence-clock-may-have-started-ticking-on-donald-trump-tonight-1384440387975
Lawrence O'Donnell talks with Rachel Maddow about the potential liability Donald Trump faces if his written answers to Robert Mueller's questions align with the lies Michael Cohen now admits to telling.
Nov. 29, 2018


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 11/29/18
Cohen plea shocker exposes Trump camp lies about Russia dealings
Rachel Maddow reports on Michael Cohen's surprise new plea deal with Robert Mueller and what it tells us about Donald Trump's relationship with Russia during the 2016 campaign while Russia was attacking the U.S. election to help Trump. Duration: 23:35


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 11/29/18
Cohen knowledge a 'very dangerous threat' to Trump
Anthony Cormier, reporter for Buzzfeed, talks with Rachel Maddow about his reporting on the Michael Cohen and the Trump Organization's pursuit of a Trump Tower Moscow project well into the 2016 campaign, and the threat Cohen's cooperation with Robert Mueller poses to the Trump Organization. Duration: 7:56


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 11/29/18
Cohen admission of lying to Congress prompts review of others
Rep. Jim Himes of the House Intelligence Committee, talks with Rachel Maddow about Michael Cohen's admission that he lied in his testimony to Congress, and what that means in terms of re-examining the testimony of other witnesses in the investigation of the Trump campaign and Russia. Duration: 6:50


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 11/29/18
Cohen guilty plea decision made in past two weeks: Vanity Fair
Emily Jane Fox, senior reporter for Vanity Fair, talks with Rachel Maddow about the timing of Michael Cohen's new guilty plea and whether it correlates with other developments in the Robert Mueller case. Duration: 4:04


THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 11/28/18
Unlike Nixon, Trump misconduct piling up in full public view
Rachel Maddow reviews the many ways that Americans have witnessed Donald Trump attempt to quash or otherwise undercut the special counsel investigation into his 2016 presidential campaign, unlike Richard Nixon, the full record of whose misdeeds were not publicly known until after his scandal had run its course. Duration: 24:55

NOVEMBER 28, 2018


NEWS AND VIEWS


I HOPE THIS KIND OF SQUABBLING OVER WHO GETS TO USE THE MIKE NEXT IS SMOOTHER IN THE FUTURE. IT WOULD BE BETTER HANDLED BY GIVING OUT NUMBERS, AND THE REPORTER WITH THE LOWEST NUMBER CAN GO FIRST. THE NUMBERS SHOULD BE IN A DECORATIVE BOWL, PRINTED ON CARDS, AND THE REPORTERS WOULD PERHAPS ALL GO UP TO GET THEIR NUMBER. THEN SANDERS OR TRUMP CAN GO DOWN THE LIST CALLING NUMBERS IN ORDER. IT SHOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR SANDERS TO KNOW AHEAD OF TIME WHAT REPORTER HAS EACH NUMBER, BECAUSE THEY VERY LIKELY MIGHT TRY TO KEEP ACOSTA FROM GETTING A QUESTION IN.

https://www.commondreams.org/further/2018/11/19/kissing-ring-after-acosta-wins-white-house-issues-imperious-new-rules-deter
Monday, November 19, 2018
Kissing the Ring: After Acosta Wins, White House Issues Imperious New "Rules" To Deter Further Uppitiness
byAbby Zimet, staff writer

PHOTOGRAPH – White House assistant reaches for Acosta’s mic. Caption: "If I want your opinion I'll give it to you." - Samuel Goldwyn

Backing down after a legal defeat at the hands of a Trump-appointed judge - the best kind! - a cornered White House Monday restored CNN's Jim Acosta's press credentials and then swiftly, dare we say vengefully issued a set of unprecedented new rules aimed at curbing further "unprofessional behavior," like, say, asking Il Douche a question he doesn't like. The rules, reminiscent of what you might find scrawled on a blackboard on the first diligent day of fourth grade: A journalist "will ask a single question and then will yield the floor to other journalists," said "yielding" consists of "physically surrendering" the microphone, follow-up questions will be permitted "at the discretion of the president" or his sycophants, and "failure to abide" by any of the rules may result in "suspension or revocation of the journalist's hard pass."

The decree, Sarah Sanders explained in a scolding, noxious, Sarah-esque letter, was created "with a degree of regret." For years - actually a century, others noted - White House reporters had attended countless press events "without engaging in the behavior Mr. Acosta displayed," and naturally they would have "greatly preferred to continue hosting (those events) in reliance on a set of understood professional norms." This is, of course, a bald-faced lie, as anyone who's ever witnessed the decades of rowdy, combative White House press conferences could attest. What's different today isn't Jim Acosta. It's that before there was always an adult in charge, and now there's a sick, mean, wildly insecure, tantrum-throwing malignant narcissist man-child whose daddy didn't love him enough, leaving a dangerous gaping hole the world, or at least the press, must now attempt to fill.

Alas, many noted, this is not their job - which is, as guaranteed and cherished by the Constitution, to question, challenge, poke, prod, doubt, hassle, confront and sometimes piss off people in power to arrive at the truth, a requisite of democracy. Rules that allow the banning of a reporter for asking an "unauthorized" follow-up question, argues Ben Wizner of the ACLU, “give the White House far too much discretion to avoid real scrutiny (and) should be revised to ensure that no journalist gets kicked out of the White House for doing their job.” Other critics blasted the attempt to "shave down to one question" the Constitutional right to free speech, noting that above all the rules, while "adorable," egregiously mandate "decorum" only for those seeking "to interview persons totally lacking any." Many want a rule Trump has to answer the damn question, or at least let a reporter ask it completely "BEFORE he starts his lying. Or insulting the reporter. Or deflecting."

Others wonder if the rules mandate starting each question with “Your Royal Highness” or "My Liege," though they agree kissing his ring is optional, as is genuflection. One brilliant suggestion: A dunk tank for anyone who fails to answer a question honestly. Even better, Rule 5: "Failure by the President or other White House official taking questions to answer said question may result in their temporary or permanent removal from office." At the very least, many propose serious ways for journalists to fight back: Keep asking any question that goes unanswered, hand the mike to Acosta every time, write their own rules, walk out en masse. Apt, given the gag rules landed the same day as the cowardly news that this year's White House Correspondents' Dinner will feature a historian, not a comedian; the group is evidently still smarting from Michelle Wolf's blistering roast of not just Trump but an-often-complicit mainstream media. "You helped create this monster," she declared, "and now you're profiting off of him." She's right. Time to buckle up.

PHOTOGRAPHS -- press_trump_hitler_46296992_775162122868

This is the world we live in. This is the world we cover.



https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/27/politics/bernie-sanders-climate-change-report-cnntv/index.html

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/11/25/tackle-climate-crisis-says-bernie-sanders-us-must-be-bold-and-aggressive-standing
Published on Sunday, November 25, 2018
byCommon Dreams
To Tackle Climate Crisis, Says Bernie Sanders, US Must 'Be Bold and Aggressive in Standing Up to Greed of Fossil Fuel Industry'
"We have got to rally the American people. The scientific community has made it 100 percent clear... this is a major crisis facing this country and our planet."
byJake Johnson, staff writer

PHOTOGRAPH -- "It is very clear that we have got to bring our people together to address this terribly important issue. And it is amazing to me that we have an administration right now that still considers climate change to be a hoax," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said. (Photo: CBS/Twitter)

In an interview on CBS's "Face the Nation" shortly after the Trump administration attempted to bury a devastating report on the climate crisis, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said it is more important than ever to unite the public around ambitious solutions to human-caused climate change as the White House actively works with the fossil fuel industry to make it worse.

"We need millions of people all over this country to stand up and demand fundamental changes in our energy policy in order to protect our kids and our grandchildren and the planet."
—Sen. Bernie Sanders

"It is very clear that we have got to bring our people together to address this terribly important issue. And it is amazing to me that we have an administration right now that still considers climate change to be a hoax," Sanders said. "We have got to rally the American people."

"The scientific community has made it 100 percent clear... this is a major crisis facing this country and our planet, and we have got to be bold and aggressive in standing up to the greed of the fossil fuel industry, who are more concerned about short-term profits than the planet we are leaving our kids and our grandchildren," Sanders concluded.

In an effort to build grassroots support for bold climate action as the corporate media fails to give the planetary emergency the attention it so badly needs, Sanders early next month is hosting a town hall titled "Solving Our Climate Crisis" in partnership with independent progressive media outlets.

The event will feature prominent environmentalists and scientists who are dedicated to "addressing the global threat of climate change and exploring solutions that can protect the planet from devastation and create tens of millions of good-paying jobs."

"We need millions of people all over this country to stand up and demand fundamental changes in our energy policy in order to protect our kids and our grandchildren and the planet," Sanders told the Huffington Post last week. "The good news is the American people are beginning to stand up and fight back."

Among those fighting back are youth climate leaders and their backers in Congress. As Common Dreams reported, the Sunrise Movement has staged sit-ins at the offices of Democratic leaders to demand that they back a Green New Deal.

Additionally, environmentalists and progressive lawmakers have pushed Democrats—who will control the House in the next Congress—to form a Green New Deal Select Committee and make Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez the chair.

According to the Sunrise Movement, 12 House Democrats have expressed their support for a Green New Deal Select Committee. Click here to contact your representatives if they are not on the list.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License


I THINK I SMELL SMOKE ....

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/27/manafort-held-secret-talks-with-assange-in-ecuadorian-embassy
Manafort held secret talks with Assange in Ecuadorian embassy, sources say
Trump ally met WikiLeaks founder months before emails hacked by Russia were published
Live: follow the latest US politics news
Luke Harding and Dan Collyns in Quito
Tue 27 Nov 2018 09.23 EST

PHOTOGRAPH -- Paul Manafort’s 2016 visit to Assange lasted about 40 minutes, one source said. Photograph: Carlo Allegri/Reuters

Donald Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort held secret talks with Julian Assange inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and visited around the time he joined Trump’s campaign, the Guardian has been told.

Sources have said Manafort went to see Assange in 2013, 2015 and in spring 2016 – during the period when he was made a key figure in Trump’s push for the White House.

In a statement, Manafort denied meeting Assange. He said: “I have never met Julian Assange or anyone connected to him. I have never been contacted by anyone connected to WikiLeaks, either directly or indirectly. I have never reached out to Assange or WikiLeaks on any matter.”

It is unclear why Manafort would have wanted to see Assange and what was discussed. But the last apparent meeting is likely to come under scrutiny and could interest Robert Mueller, the special prosecutor who is investigating alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

A well-placed source has told the Guardian that Manafort went to see Assange around March 2016. Months later WikiLeaks released a stash of Democratic emails stolen by Russian intelligence officers.

Manafort, 69, denies involvement in the hack and says the claim is “100% false”. His lawyers initially declined to answer the Guardian’s questions about the visits.

In a series of tweets WikiLeaks said Assange and Manafort had not met. Assange described the story as a hoax.

Manafort was jailed this year and was thought to have become a star cooperator in the Mueller inquiry. But on Monday Mueller said Manafort had repeatedly lied to the FBI, despite agreeing to cooperate two months ago in a plea deal. According to a court document, Manafort had committed “crimes and lies” on a “variety of subject matters”.

His defence team says he believes what he has told Mueller to be truthful and has not violated his deal.

Julian Assange
Facebook Twitter Pinterest
Why Manafort sought out Julian Assange in 2013 is unclear. Photograph: Facundo Arrizabalaga/EPA

Manafort’s first visit to the embassy took place a year after Assange sought asylum inside, two sources said.

A separate internal document written by Ecuador’s Senain intelligence agency and seen by the Guardian lists “Paul Manaford [sic]” as one of several well-known guests. It also mentions “Russians”.

According to the sources, Manafort returned to the embassy in 2015. He paid another visit in spring 2016, turning up alone, around the time Trump named him as his convention manager. The visit is tentatively dated to March.

Manafort’s 2016 visit to Assange lasted about 40 minutes, one source said, adding that the American was casually dressed when he exited the embassy, wearing sandy-coloured chinos, a cardigan and a light-coloured shirt.

Visitors normally register with embassy security guards and show their passports. Sources in Ecuador, however, say Manafort was not logged.

Embassy staff were aware only later of the potential significance of Manafort’s visit and his political role with Trump, it is understood.

The revelation could shed new light on the sequence of events in the run-up to summer 2016, when WikiLeaks published tens of thousands of emails hacked by the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence agency. Hillary Clinton has said the hack contributed to her defeat.

The previously unreported Manafort-Assange connection is likely to be of interest to Mueller, who has been investigating possible contacts between WikiLeaks and associates of Trump including the political lobbyist Roger Stone and Donald Trump Jr.

One key question is when the Trump campaign was aware of the Kremlin’s hacking operation – and what, if anything, it did to encourage it. Trump has repeatedly denied collusion.

Earlier this year Mueller indicted 12 GRU intelligence officers for carrying out the hack, which began in March 2016.

In June of that year WikiLeaks emailed the GRU via an intermediary seeking the DNC material. After failed attempts, Vladimir Putin’s spies sent the documents in mid-July to WikiLeaks as an encrypted attachment.

According to sources, Manafort’s acquaintance with Assange goes back at least five years, to late 2012 or 2013, when the American was working in Ukraine and advising its Moscow-friendly president, Viktor Yanukovych.

Why Manafort might have sought out Assange in 2013 is unclear. During this period the veteran consultant was involved in black operations against Yanukovych’s chief political rival, Yulia Tymoshenko, whom Yanukovych had jailed. Manafort ran an extensive lobbying operation featuring European former politicians.

He flew frequently from the US to Ukraine’s capital, Kiev – usually via Frankfurt but sometimes through London, flight records seen by the Guardian show.

Manafort is currently in jail in Alexandria, Virginia. In August a jury convicted him of crimes arising from his decade-long activities in Ukraine. They include large-scale money laundering and failure to pay US tax. Manafort pleaded guilty to further charges in order to avoid a second trial in Washington.

As well as accusing him of lying on Monday, the special counsel moved to set a date for Manafort to be sentenced.

One person familiar with WikiLeaks said Assange was motivated to damage the Democrats campaign because he believed a future Trump administration would be less likely to seek his extradition on possible charges of espionage. This fate had hung over Assange since 2010, when he released confidential US state department cables. It contributed to his decision to take refuge in the embassy.

According to the dossier written by the former MI6 officer Christopher Steele, Manafort was at the centre of a “well-developed conspiracy of cooperation” between the Trump campaign and Russia’s leadership. The two sides had a mutual interest in defeating Clinton, Steele wrote, whom Putin “hated and feared”.

In a memo written soon after the DNC emails were published, Steele said: “The [hacking] operation had been conducted with the full knowledge and support of Trump and senior members of his campaign team.”

As a candidate Trump warmly welcomed the dump of DNC emails by Assange. In October 2016 he declared: “I love WikiLeaks.” Trump’s comments came after WikiLeaks released a second tranche of emails seized from the email account of John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman.

The Trump White House subsequently sent out mixed messages over Assange and his legal fate. In 2017 and behind the scenes Assange tried to reach a deal with Trump’s Department of Justice that might see him avoid US prison.

In May 2017, Manafort flew to Ecuador to hold talks with the country’s president-elect Lenín Moreno. The discussions, days before Moreno was sworn in, and before Manafort was indicted – were ostensibly about a large-scale Chinese investment.

However, one source in Quito suggests that Manafort also discreetly raised Assange’s plight. Another senior foreign ministry source said he was sceptical Assange was mentioned. At the time Moreno was expected to continue support for him.

Last week a court filing released in error suggested that the US justice department had secretly charged Assange with a criminal offence. Written by the assistant US attorney, Kellen Dwyer, the document did not say what Assange had been charged with or when the alleged offence took place.



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/25/robert-mueller-donald-trump-russia-investigation
'He has moved incredibly quickly': Mueller nears Trump endgame
David Taylor in New York
Sun 25 Nov 2018 01.00 EST

PHOTOGRAPHS -- Robert Mueller in 2013, when he was FBI director, and Donald Trump last year. Photograph: Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images

A new urgency surrounds the Russia investigation, with Donald Trump Jr and longtime Trump ally Roger Stone in legal peril

David Taylor in New York

Sun 25 Nov 2018 01.00 EST Last modified on Mon 26 Nov 2018 04.25 EST
Shares
27,476

Robert Mueller in 2013, when he was FBI director, and Donald Trump last year. Photograph: Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images

Donald Trump only has himself to blame for Robert Mueller’s return to public life. The former FBI director, now 74, was asked to come out of retirement after Trump fired James Comey,on 9 May 2017.

RELATED: 'America's straightest arrow': Robert Mueller silent as urgency mounts

In March that year, on Capitol Hill, Comey revealed publicly that in July 2016 the FBI opened an investigation into Russian interference in the US election and possible Trump campaign collusion. During the election, Comey spoke openly about the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails. The Trump-Russia inquiry was kept secret.

Eight days after Comey was fired, the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, appointed Mueller as special counsel. Eighteen months later, the inquiry has led to indictments against 32 individuals and three Russian entities on charges ranging from computer hacking to obstruction of justice.

RELATED: Despite nearly daily false attacks from the president and his allies, the entire team has just kept its head down
Elizabeth de la Vega

Trump’s former campaign chair Paul Manafort and former national security adviser Michael Flynn both pleaded guilty to criminal charges and pledged to cooperate. Donald Trump Jr and longtime Trump aide Roger Stone are in legal peril.

Trump Jr orchestrated the now infamous Trump Tower meeting with a group of Russians after being promised “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. Stone has been under scrutiny over whether he joined the Russian conspiracy.

Trump, who would himself be in legal trouble if he knew of any conspiracy or obstructed justice, has consistently called the Mueller investigation a hoax and turned “NO COLLUSION!” into a catchphrase.

‘He has moved incredibly quickly’
The investigation, which cost more than $16.6m in its first 11 months, can be broken down into four distinct parts which have all led to indictments:

Manafort and his business connections to Russia following years of work in support of the former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych.
Russian use of fake social media accounts to influence the 2016 election.
Russian hacking of the Democratic party and the Clinton aide John Podesta – and the subsequent leak of thousands of emails by WikiLeaks.
Trump campaign connections to Russia – including the Trump Tower meeting and the adviser George Papadopoulos’s involvement with a professor who told him the Russians had “dirt” on Clinton including “thousands of emails”.
Advertisement

Anne Milgram, a law professor at New York University and a former prosecutor and attorney general of New Jersey, said Mueller and his 17 lawyers had done “a terrific job”.

“Months have gone by – people think it’s a long time – it is not in criminal justice,” she said. “He has moved incredibly quickly, got a lot of cooperation agreements, charges, done an extraordinary job of running down Russian hacking of the election.”

RELATED: Trump at bay: failure looms as Democrats load 'subpoena cannon'

Elizabeth de la Vega, a former federal prosecutor for the northern district of California, said: “Complex charges against nearly three dozen people [and] organizations in less than two years is unheard of. Federal investigations may go on for three or four years before charges are brought against a few defendants. Also despite nearly daily false attacks from the president and his allies, the entire team has just kept its head down and done their work.”

One indictment charging three Russian companies and 13 Russians goes into amazing detail about the companies, which had budgets of more than $1.2m a month and hundreds of staff creating fake content aimed at stirring up American voters.

Another indictment charges 12 members of the Russian military with hacking the Democrats and the Clinton campaign. The individuals are alleged to have created the site DC Leaks and created the Guccifer 2.0 persona, supposed to be a lone Romanian hacker who shared data with WikiLeaks.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Donald Trump Jr watches his father leave the stage on the night of 2016 Iowa caucus, in Des Moines. Photograph: Jim Bourg/Reuters

“It is really extraordinary, detailed evidence of the way the Russian government hacked the American election,” Milgram said. “What is still outstanding is are any Americans charged in connection with that, will Roger Stone be charged, will Mueller write a report on the president, what about Donald Trump Jr?

“High-level questions remain – how close did this come to the campaign? Were they involved in the coordinated release of the hacked emails of Podesta? What about the president’s efforts to fire Comey to allegedly obstruct justice?”

The grand jury
Little is known about the inner workings of Mueller’s investigation, which has been operating out of an office in south-west Washington, not far from the National Mall.

A grand jury has been convened, meeting at the DC federal court on Pennsylvania Avenue, midway between the White House and Capitol Hill. People appear either voluntarily or under subpoena and are questioned without their lawyer. The jury can weigh evidence and say whether charges should be brought.

Rob Goldstone, a British PR man for the Russian Agalarov family, fixed up the Trump Tower meeting with a promise of Russian dirt on Clinton.

“If it’s what you say, I love it,” Trump Jr wrote, before bringing in his brother-in-law Jared Kushner and Manafort. He had been promised “very high-level and sensitive information” as part of Russian support for Trump.

RELATED:
You have no lawyers, you’re on your own, so that’s pretty terrifying
Rob Goldstone

Goldstone met Mueller’s team voluntarily. He told the Guardian he was taken in an unmarked car for six or seven hours of interviews in February this year.

“It was a basic room,” he said, “a long table. I sat on one side and they sat on the other side with my lawyers sat next to me. There was something very methodical and logical about the approach to questions.

“There were about six people in total, a couple of FBI people and a couple of people from, I suppose, the Mueller team. Over the course of the day they asked me a series of questions about my email, the Trump Tower meeting and about my relationship with my clients, the Agalarovs.

“A lot of friends have asked me did you meet Robert Mueller? I’ve said even if he came in to change the lightbulb or adjust the air-conditioning I’d probably be horrified by the idea that he was there, considering I hadn’t heard he had been in anybody else’s. So I was thankful of the fact I didn’t see Bob Mueller.”

On 9 March, Goldstone voluntarily appeared before the grand jury. He said there were 22 or 23 people in tiered seating.

“Similar sort of thing,” he said. “The difference there, you have no lawyers, you’re on your own, so that’s pretty terrifying. Terrifying even if you know and believe you have nothing to fear.”

Unanswered questions
All eyes are on Manafort. Due to be sentenced on charges including bank and tax fraud on 8 February, he is cooperating.

Mueller’s team asked for a delay in the sentencing of Rick Gates, Manafort’s former partner and a key witness against him. Earlier this month they also asked for a delay before updating a judge about Manafort’s cooperation. On Monday, they will submit a report.

Paul Manafort looks on during the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, in July 2016.
Facebook Twitter Pinterest
Paul Manafort looks on with Donald Trump during the Republican national convention in Cleveland, in July 2016. Photograph: Rick Wilking/Reuters
Advertisement

Observers assume that means an indictment is imminent, against someone. If he is not cooperating fully, Manafort could be sentenced more harshly.

Milgram said: “Now the question you and I can’t answer is what does Paul Manafort have … is he cooperating against the president, is he cooperating against Donald Jr – and only Mueller knows that right now.”

Milgram suspects Mueller was aware the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, was likely to be removed after the midterm elections. The acting attorney general, Matthew Whitaker, is under pressure to keep his hands off the investigation.


Jerome Corsi: rightwing author pursuing plea deal with Robert Mueller
Read more
“I suspect there are a lot of cases already put into the grand jury, some of those could have been voted out and put under seal,” Milgram said. “I think Mueller will have done as much work as possible and have gotten as far as he can prior to the midterms, understanding there was a risk to the integrity of the investigation.”

She thought the investigation might have about six months left, although if Trump refuses a face-to-face meeting, Mueller could seek a subpoena to put him before the grand jury. That could be fought all the way to the supreme court.

There is a precedent, US v Nixon, when the justices ruled that the president must deliver subpoenaed materials to a district court. Sixteen days later, Nixon resigned.

If Mueller decides not to have that fight, he could write a report saying he believed the president obstructed justice. If he does not reach that conclusion, the Democratic-led House could issue its own subpoenas.

“It is a chess match,” said Milgram. “We’ll have to see how it plays out in the next year.”


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/23/jerome-corsi-robert-mueller-plea-negotiations
Jerome Corsi: rightwing author pursuing plea deal with Robert Mueller
Conspiracy theorist confirms reported negotiations to Guardian but does not offer details
Martin Pengelly and Jon Swaine
Fri 23 Nov 2018 16.18 EST

Opinion: Trump-Russia requires a new kind of journalism

PHOTOGRAPH -- Jerome Corsi is an associate of Donald Trump’s ally Roger Stone. Photograph: AP


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/23/cyberwar-network-propaganda-review-russia-rightwing-media-2016-election
Cyberwar, Network Propaganda review: did Russia or the right do most to help Trump?
Michael Cornfield
Fri 23 Nov 2018 01.00 EST

PHOTOGRAPH -- Rush Limbaugh looks on before joining Donald Trump at a rally in Cape Girardeau, Missouri this month. Photograph: Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images

Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Yochai Benkler, Robert Faris and Hal Roberts seek to shed light on the 2016 election

Since the Director of National Intelligence’s (DNI) interagency report of January 2017, it has been a truth selectively acknowledged that the Russian government took to the US media surreptitiously in 2016 to help elect Donald Trump president. But did it work? Were sufficient numbers of voters persuaded, mobilized and, crucially, demobilized by the efforts of the Internet Research Agency to swing the election in Trump’s favor?

RELATED:
How Russia cyber attacks helped Trump to the US presidency
Kathleen Hall Jamieson

To answer this question sufficiently requires not just additional evidence but also a theory of influence. Two books by top scholars in political communication have now weighed in – and they disagree in their conclusions.

Kathleen Hall Jamieson will have nothing of the euphemistic “meddling” as a descriptor of what the Russians did. She calls it cyberwar and she contends that America lost this battle. Jamieson brings great credentials to her brief, as she immodestly but accurately notes. Her oeuvre includes a peerless evaluation of Ronald Reagan’s visual and verbal rhetoric, standard histories of presidential television advertising and debates, and a dissection of Rush Limbaugh.

Cyberwar, however, is an odd book. It makes a special plead [sic] on behalf of Hillary Clinton: Russian trolls and hackers, abetted by the news media, robbed her of the presidency. The case presented is a Jenga tower of suppositions, hypotheticals, concessions, contingencies, qualifications, cherry picks and really good points. Jamieson writes protracted sentences (one has six sentence-length statements stacked up by semi-colons) that wind their way through academically conscientious but progressively dubious lists of the possible causes and effects of Russian interventions in the campaign discourse.

For instance (reviewer takes deep breath): Jamieson argues that news media gatekeepers watched the Sunday morning political talk shows on 9 October 2016 and spread the Russia-fanned notion to elite opinion leaders that, here you have it, Hillary Clinton is irredeemably rotten, and that these leaders in turn swayed colleagues running the first two presidential debates, and that sufficient numbers of debate watchers were turned away from Clinton by the unfairly crafted questions from the moderators to provide victory margins in crucially close midwestern states. Plausible? Yes. Factual? Yes. Conclusive? No, not without audience research data at each step along the pathway of influence. Jamieson supplies it at the second to last step, citing poll data that show a drop in Clinton’s reputation in mid- and late-October. That’s impressive. But attributing it to the Russians elongates the case beyond this reader’s credulity.

A far-right subnetwork traffics in vicious attacks, conspiracy theories and standard-bearers such as Trump

Yochai Benkler, Robert Faris and Hal Roberts, co-authors of Network Propaganda, contend that the Russians added icing on a cake 30 years in the baking. Their main subject is a state of political information disorder or “epistemic crisis”, of which the trolling and hacking affecting the 2016 presidential election are symptomatic.
permanent campaign
They document this warp in the public discourse through social network diagrams based on analysis of nearly 4 million online messages sent between 2015 and 2018, data they collected and sorted by telltale phrases: “Hillary Clinton”, “Donald Trump”, “deep state”, “email server”, etc. By including the websites of broadcast and print media, the authors are able to assess most of the media content about the campaigns. Their supervening question: Who linked to whom? Being linked to is an index of influence.

Topic by topic, day by day, these network maps exhibit a disturbing pattern. The galaxy of communications voices and channels in which presidential campaigns occur has been split in two. A legacy, mainstream, familiar subnetwork encompasses the center-right to the far left. Some of its sources make mistakes and spread mischievous and even malicious statements, but these tend to be challenged and corrected from elsewhere. (The Guardian attracted the 10th highest number of in-links, the most of any non-US based source in this grid.)

Trump greets Sean Hannity in Cape Girardeau.
Facebook Twitter Pinterest Trump greets Sean Hannity in Cape Girardeau. Photograph: Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images

RELATED: The latest major Trump resignations and firings

Meanwhile, a far-right subnetwork traffics in vicious attacks, arrant rumors, conspiracy theories and the valorizing of standard-bearers such as Trump. Its stars include Limbaugh, Steve Bannon, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Lou Dobbs; its central node is Fox News. This malign subnetwork not only does not repair to standard methods of verification as found in journalism, law, the academy and science, it also vilifies exponents of such methods as agents of oppression. In 2011, the authors note, Limbaugh dubbed these four truth-assessing institutions “the Four Corners of Deceit”.

The propaganda network distracts, disorients, disturbs and manipulates people to achieve certain political goals. For example, Trump’s reactions on Twitter to the release of the DNI report ranged from promising to investigate who leaked it to NBC News, to blaming Democrats for allowing the Russian hacking to succeed, to calling critics of his ties to Russia “stupid”. Those who read and link to the subnetwork are the people who do not acknowledge the truth of the report’s findings.

Given the extensiveness of this subnetwork, the authors assert, the Russian propaganda amplified more than it created. Its trolls and hackers were accessories, not perpetrators. (The same designation applies to Cambridge Analytica and Facebook.) And some of the intrusions were not all that effective. Attacks aimed at alienating Bernie Sanders supporters from Clinton largely failed because those supporters belonged to the evidence-based subnetwork and saw through the gambit.

Benkler, Faris and Roberts weave their findings into a dense but readable narrative that draws on a wide array of political science studies. They conclude that restoration and reunification of the cleaved system of US public communication cannot begin without “a series of electoral defeats that would force such a transformation”. Perhaps that series has begun.

Michael Cornfield is an associate professor of political management at the George Washington University


FACEBOOK IS NOW SETTING UP A FOCUS ON PRESENTING LOCAL NEWS, WHICH IF IT STAYS OUT OF POLITICS, I COULD FIND VERY INTERESTING, BUT THERE ARE NO BIGOTS LIKE THE LOCAL BIGOTS. THE LOCAL STORIES SHOULD NOT BE PRESENTED UNVERIFIED OR WITHOUT A FACT REBUTTAL. FACEBOOK IS AGAINST LIBERALISM. THE DEEP CONNECTION TO RUSSIA’S IRS FICTIONAL STORIES IS A SIGN, AND THIS RENEWAL OF THE SCAPEGOATING OF GEORGE SOROS IS A DEAD GIVEAWAY. FOR SHAME! SEE THE TWO ARTICLES BELOW. THEY HAVE SHARED CONTENT, BUT ARE NOT IDENTICAL.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/facebook-rolls-out-its-local-news-today-feature-400-u-n941301
Facebook rolls out its local news 'Today In' feature to more than 400 U.S. cities
Nov. 28, 2018 / 2:22 PM EST
By Michael Cappetta

Silhouettes of mobile users next to a screen projection of the Facebook logo on March 28, 2018.Dado Ruvic / Reuters file

Facebook announced on Wednesday that is expanding its feature that spreads local news and community information from governments to users based on their geographic location.

"Today In," which Facebook started testing last January in five U.S. cities, will now be available in more than 400 cities in the U.S., the company said in a blog post.

The dedicated section collects and aggregates relevant stories for local communities in a packaged form in the user’s News Feed. Facebook said the goal is to allow users to "catch up on news, events, and discussions happening in your community." The content comes from a mix of local news, community pages, and municipalities.

Facebook announced it would prioritize local news content in the News Feed in January 2018. Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, said in a blog post: “People consistently tell us they want to see more local news on Facebook. Local news helps us understand the issues that matter in our communities and affect our lives.”

While Zuckerberg emphasized the company’s interest in promoting local news, Anthea Watson Strong, Facebook’s product manager for local news and information, said the social network didn’t want to rush into creating the feature platform.

“We wanted to get this right,” Strong said. “We didn’t want to rush into expanding until we were driving value for these communities and their pages.”

Strong, who grew up in Tallahassee, Florida, said she follows her community using the "Today In" feature and is pleasantly surprised by the variety of local news she is able to get, that she may have previously missed out on because she does not follow every local page in the community.

“I loved seeing the Halloween parade from the school I attended while growing up and the Myers Park pool where I was a lifeguard,” Strong says.

This move comes as the company is battling widespread concerns about fake news, data privacy, and the hiring of a public affairs company with an in-house “fake news” operation.

Facebook faced additional criticism this week when Zuckerberg did not attend a U.K. Parliament hearing.

Facebook’s role in the news world has also been a subject of skepticism, particularly after announcing in early 2018 that it would be showing less news in its News Feed.

“We are super aware of the mistakes that have been made in the past. We are trying to be careful every time we make a move, how is this going to affect the community? How could this be misused?” Strong said. “This is a particular type of information that is hard to find. People want local news and information. It’s about the stuff happening down the street."

Michael Cappetta
Michael Cappetta is a producer at NBC News covering business and technology.


SANDBERG AND ZUCKERMAN “DIDN’T KNOW” WHAT WAS GOING ON. THAT’S POSSIBLE, BUT I WOULD BET MONEY THAT THEY DID.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/technology/facebook-definers-soros.html
Facebook Cuts Ties With Washington Firm That Sought to Discredit Social Network’s Critics
By Mike Isaac and Jack Nicas
Nov. 15, 2018

PHOTOGRAPH -- A Facebook logo reflected on an advertisement board outside the United States Capitol in Washington in October. Facebook had initially hired Definers Public Affairs, a consulting firm, to monitor news about the social network.CreditCreditTom Brenner for The New York Times

SAN FRANCISCO — Facebook said Thursday that it had ended its relationship with a Washington-based consulting firm, Definers Public Affairs, which spread disparaging information about the social network’s critics and competitors.

The move followed a New York Times article on Wednesday that described the kind of work that Definers did on Facebook’s behalf. Among other things, Definers worked to discredit activist protesters who were against Facebook, in part by linking them to the liberal financier George Soros. It also tried to deflect criticism of the social network by pressing reporters to look into rivals like Google.

Late Wednesday, Facebook decided to terminate its relationship with Definers after the publication of the Times article prompted an outcry, said a person familiar with the matter, who was not authorized to speak publicly. Top Facebook executives including Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg were not aware of the specific work being done by Definers, the person said.

In a statement, Facebook said it had not hidden its ties to Definers and disputed that it had asked the firm to spread false information.

“It is wrong to suggest that we have ever asked Definers to pay for or write articles on Facebook’s behalf, or communicate anything untrue,” a Facebook spokeswoman said in the statement.

“The relationship with Facebook was well known by the media — not least because they have on several occasions sent out invitations to hundreds of journalists about important press calls on our behalf,” the spokeswoman added.

Facebook confirmed on Thursday that it had ended its relationship with Definers, without citing a reason.

Definers was founded by veterans of Republican presidential campaigns and specialized in applying political campaign tactics to corporate public relations. Last year, Tim Miller, a Definers official and former spokesman for Jeb Bush, started a Silicon Valley chapter. He said in one interview that as technology firms mature, a goal should be to “have positive content pushed out about your company and negative content that’s being pushed out about your competitor.”

Facebook initially hired Definers to monitor news about the social network. It expanded its relationship with the firm in October 2017 when scrutiny of Facebook was increasing over how Russian agents had used the social media site to sow discord before the 2016 United States presidential election.

Editors’ Picks
The Lost Children of Tuam
Where in the World Is Denmark’s $2 Billion?
Was Interracial Love Possible in the Days of Slavery? Descendants of One Couple Think So

The Times reported on Wednesday that earlier this year, a conservative website called NTK Network began publishing stories defending Facebook and criticizing Facebook rivals like Google. NTK is an affiliate of Definers.

[Read the Times investigation of how Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg of Facebook responded to a series of scandals.]

In addition, Definers circulated a research document this summer casting Mr. Soros, the billionaire liberal donor, as the unacknowledged force behind what appeared to be a broad anti-Facebook movement. Definers pressed reporters to explore the financial connections between Mr. Soros and groups that had criticized Facebook, including a progressive group founded by Mr. Soros’s son and Color of Change, an online racial justice organization.

An official at Mr. Soros’s Open Society Foundations said the philanthropy had supported both member groups, but that no grants had been made to support campaigns against Facebook.

“We are proud to have partnered with Facebook over the past year on a range of public affairs services. All of our work is based on publicly available documents and information,” a Definers spokesman said in a statement.

He added, “The document referenced in the Times story regarding the anti-Facebook organization’s potential funding sources was entirely factual and based on public records.”

Mr. Miller said late Wednesday on Twitter that he was hurt by accusations that Definers’s work related to Mr. Soros was anti-Semitic. “Im disgusted by the rise of anti-semitism including people who have falsely targeted Soros. It’s deeply deeply personal. I’ve continuously fought the alt-right & others who spread racist lies & hate & will keep doing so,” he said.


Tim Miller
✔
@Timodc
· Nov 15, 2018
For ppl asking - Definers shared a narrow document about an anti-Facebook group's funding. It was entirely factual, as Open Markets organizers have acknoweldged they get funding from Soros. I have defended Soros from smears & conspiracies that weren't based in fact. 1/


Tim Miller
✔
@Timodc
On a personal note I'm really blown up by the accusations. Im disgusted by the rise of anti-semitism including people who have falsely targeted Soros. It's deeply deeply personal. I've continuously fought the alt-right & others who spread racist lies & hate & will keep doing so

789
1:27 AM - Nov 15, 2018
Twitter Ads info and privacy
371 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

After the Times article, other organizations also began re-evaluating their relationship with Definers. One of those was Crooked Media, which runs the popular political podcast Pod Save America. Mr. Miller is a frequent contributor to the podcast.

“We need to get to the bottom of Tim’s involvement in this work, and he won’t be contributing to Crooked more in the meantime,” Jon Favreau, Jon Lovett and Tommy Vietor, three of the hosts of the podcast, said in a statement published to Twitter on Wednesday.

[Subscribe to “With Interest.” It’s a Sunday newsletter with essential business insights that’ll prep you for the week ahead.]

Follow Mike Isaac and Jack Nicas on Twitter: @MikeIsaac and @jacknicas.


I WISH I DIDN'T LIKE FACEBOOK AS A COMMUNICATIONS METHOD, BECAUSE I ABSOLUTELY DON'T TRUST THEM AT ALL ANYMORE. LIARS AND CHEATS! BAH, HUMBUG!!

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbes/2018/11/21/facebook-admits-it-asked-definers-to-look-into-george-soros/#4b337af437c8
Nov 21, 2018, 08:50pm
Facebook Admits It Asked Opposition Firm Definers To Investigate George Soros
Laura Mandaro
Forbes Staff
I'm assistant managing editor for technology and innovation.

PHOTOGRAPH -- Facebook late Wednesday admitted it used Definers Public Affairs to research and spread information on George Soros' funding activities. BLOOMBERG NEWS

Facebook said Wednesday evening it had asked Definers Public Affairs to look into George Soros' funding activities after the billionaire philanthropist called the social network a "menace to society" in early 2018 and Facebook called for a deeper investigation of its critics.

"We had not heard such criticism from him before and wanted to determine if he had any financial motivation," wrote outgoing communications head Elliot Schrage on the Facebook blog. He said, at Facebook's behest, Definers investigated groups that were part of a “Freedom from Facebook” campaign and learned Soros was funding several of the coalition members. Definers then spread that information to the media to show "that this was not simply a spontaneous grassroots movement."

The admission, made on the eve of Thanksgiving, corroborates some of the reporting in an explosive New York Times investigation that detailed how Facebook hired the opposition research firm to counter criticism of its role in spreading Russian misinformation and exposing its users to the political-ad-targeting firm Cambridge Analytica.

Soros' Open Society Foundations has lambasted the tactics, which included distributing news stories via a partner site called NTK. Facebook's top executives have found themselves in a now familiar position — defending the way they've handled the internal knowledge that outside companies misused the activity of its 2.3 billion users to influence elections.

The Times says Facebook staff were aware in spring 2016, more than a year before making the disclosures public, that Russian hackers used the platform to interfere with the 2016 presidential election and that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg decided to publicly downplay concerns about interference. When Facebook finally revealed, in the fall of 2017, that a Kremlin-linked operation had reached nearly 150 million users with false posts in an effort to sway the 2016 election, Facebook launched an intensive lobbying and PR campaign to minimize criticism, including by hiring Definers.

Zuckerberg and Sandberg last week denied they knew about hiring the Washington, DC public relations firm led by political veterans who have worked and campaigned for Republican lawmakers such as Mitt Romney and Marco Rubio. Parts of its work were well known to the media after Facebook in October 2017 started to use the firm for advisories and arrange events, though the extent of that work — including using an affiliate news site to spread stories negative about its clients' rivals or critics — was not. After the newspaper published its report, Facebook fired Definers.

Schrage, who said he took responsibility Wednesday for deciding what Definers would do, said it also used the firm to investigate Facebook's competitors.

Some of the most stinging criticism that's followed the Times report has centered around Definers' information campaign on Soros, a frequent target of anti-Semitic campaigns that place him at the center of conspiracy theories, such as that he orchestrated the migrant caravan headed for the U.S. border.

"No matter how innocuously you may choose to represent it publicly, pushing the Jewish 'puppet masters' trope was intentional," wrote Rashad Robinson, president of Color of Change, in a letter Zuckerberg and Sandberg, which was shared with the media.

Definers spread information that Soros was a funder of Color of Change*, a civil rights organization that was part of the Freedom From Facebook* coalition, according to the Times report.

That approach, defended by Facebook as simple research into publicly available information, has a more sinister intent, said the nonprofit. "It is ripped from a playbook centuries in the making and directly linked to attempts to undermine the civil rights movement in the 1960s," said Robinson.

Sandberg speaks on Soros

Sandberg, in the same blog as Schrage, said "it was never anyone’s intention to play into an anti-Semitic narrative against Mr. Soros or anyone else. Being Jewish is a core part of who I am and our company stands firmly against hate. The idea that our work has been interpreted as anti-Semitic is abhorrent to me — and deeply personal."

Definers, which has said investigating Facebook's critics was a small part of its work for Facebook, issued a new statement Wednesday that said calling its research into Soros a "'smear campaign' against Mr. Soros and anti-Facebook groups is a completely false and an unfortunate part of the story."

©2018 Forbes Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.


COLOR OF CHANGE* --
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_of_Change


JEWISH ‘PUPPET MASTERS’ TROPE* --
https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/irn544992
https://forward.com/fast-forward/412436/jewish-billionaire-george-soros-drawn-as-puppet-master-in-florida-campaign/


THIS SITE IS VERY INFORMATIONAL, BUT EXTREMELY DISTURBING TO KIND PEOPLE. HOWEVER, I SUGGEST YOU TAKE A LOOK AT IT JUST TO SEE WHAT WE’RE UP AGAINST AS A DEMOCRATIC NATION WHICH PROTECTS ALL ITS’ PEOPLE WITH A TOTALLY EQUAL AND FAIR HAND. WE DO, DON’T WE?


FREEDOM FROM FACEBOOK –
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/27/18113343/facebook-color-of-change-meeting-george-soros
Facebook will meet with one of the groups it targeted with Soros opposition research
The social media company is now doing a liberal apology tour, too.
By Emily Stewart Nov 27, 2018, 9:50am EST

PHOTOGRAPH -- Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg testifies on Capitol Hill in September 2018. Drew Angerer/Getty Images

One of the civil rights activist groups reportedly targeted by opposition researchers that Facebook hired plans to meet chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg and other Facebook executives on Thursday. The group will discuss what exactly Facebook was up to when a Republican firm it hired sought to discredit those groups, in part by linking them to billionaire philanthropist George Soros.

Facebook has previously apologized after the company came under fire for anti-conservative bias when trying to curb the spread of fake news on the platform. This meeting shows that Facebook is taking a similar strategy with liberal groups.

Facebook agreed to undertake a civil rights audit this spring, including studying its impact on communities of color, amid concerns over discriminatory advertising and voter suppression tactics on the platform. Facebook confirmed that the meeting with activist group Color of Change would be happening but did not comment further.

Representatives from Color of Change, an online racial justice organization, told Vox they’ll discuss four demands they’ve made to Facebook as part of what the group describes as a “multi-year-effort to hold the tech giant accountable.”

Those demands include firing Joel Kaplan, Facebook’s lobbyist who hosted now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation party, and the public relations firms Facebook hired with to go after Color of Change. They also want Facebook to release the opposition research documents and commit to a public release of a civil rights audit of Facebook’s policies and practices.

Brandi Collins-Dexter, senior campaign director at Color of Change, said her group has been at the negotiating table with Facebook “for years,” and that they plan to continue, though she’s not particularly hopeful that talks will advance.

Facebook has developed something of a pattern on apologizing for past behavior but struggling to address the underlying issues. The pattern may be embedded in CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s infamous philosophy, “move fast and break things.”

“While we have been able to get a few policy changes, negotiations with them always feel like one step forward and five steps back,” Collins-Dexter said.

Why is Facebook meeting with Color of Change?
Color of Change was named in a blockbuster New York Times story earlier this month detailing Facebook’s behind-the-scenes efforts to downplay and deny a string of recent controversies, including the Cambridge Analytica data breach and Russia’s 2016 presidential election interference using its platform.

According to the Times, Definers Public Affairs, a Republican opposition research firm contracted by Facebook, pushed reporters to “explore the financial connections” between Soros, a liberal billionaire, and organizations agitating against it, including Color of Change.

“We want answers, we want resolutions. We want to see them stop treating this like a PR crisis and to start treating this like a crisis that’s impacting people on their platforms in very real, tangible ways,” Collins-Dexter told me. She will join Color of Change president Rashad Robinson and managing director of campaign ads Arisha Hatch at Facebook’s headquarters in Menlo Park, California, on Thursday.

Color of Change is a partner of Freedom from Facebook, a coalition that emerged earlier this year to call for the social media giant’s breakup. It is not an official member. Color of Change has been meeting with Facebook on a variety of issues tied to racial justice and civil rights since 2015, including black activists being “doxxed” online and allegations of the surveillance of black people on the platform.

Soros is a boogeyman to conservatives, and attacks on him often have an anti-Semitic tinge.

“No matter how innocuously you may choose to represent it publicly, pushing the Jewish ‘puppet masters’ trope* was intentional,” Robinson wrote in an open letter to Facebook last week calling for the meeting and asking Facebook for answers regarding the Times report.

Collins-Dexter said that Soros is not one of Color of Change’s top donors. According to campaign finance tracking website OpenSecrets, he donated at least $400,000 to the group in the 2016 election cycle. Dustin Moskovitz, who co-founded Facebook with Zuckerberg, is actually a much bigger supporter — he gave the group more than $1.5 million that cycle.

2018 hasn’t been a great year for Facebook

The already-heightened scrutiny on Facebook has increased in recent weeks amid stories from the Times and the Wall Street Journal about how it’s handled the scandals surrounding it, including WSJ’s report that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has told other Facebook executives that the company is at war. Facebook has defended itself in the face of criticism, and Zuckerberg and Sandberg have said they knew nothing of the opposition research prior to the Times’s story.

The Color of Change meeting signals that Facebook is putting on a charm offensive to try to get some of its detractors back on its side. It’s not all that different than from when Zuckerberg met with conservative leaders in 2016 to ease concerns that the company might be suppressing right-leaning news.

Though Color of Change is a partner of Freedom from Facebook, which is an offshoot of anti-monopoly think tank the Open Markets Institute, that think tank told Vox they have received no such overtures from Facebook.

“Nobody from Facebook has contacted us, so we do not have plans to meet with them this week,” Sarah Miller, deputy director of the Open Markets Institute, said in a phone interview.

She said the group launched an ad campaign last week on Facebook giving potential employees at Facebook the opportunity to blow a whistle or share information with them securely. “That was our next step,” she said.

Facebook certainly has a long way to go in rebuilding trust with its users, with its workers, and with investors. Just over half of Facebook’s employees are optimistic about its future, down from 84 percent a year ago. And Facebook’s stock price has declined by about 40 percent since July.

NEXT UP IN POLITICS & POLICY
Trump’s trade war on Christmas
Jared Kushner is getting an award from Mexico, and Mexicans aren’t happy about it
It’s official: Nancy Pelosi is Democrats’ nominee for speaker
The Senate is moving closer to ending US support for the war in Yemen
Trump’s beef with the Fed, explained
Martha McSally’s exit memo contains bad news for Trump



FAKE NEWS

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/facebook-hired-firm-house-fake-news-shop-combat-pr-crisis-n936591
Nov. 15, 2018 / 12:09 PM EST
By Michael Cappetta, Ben Collins and Jo Ling Kent

PHOTOGRAPH -- The entrance to Facebook headquarters in Menlo Park, CaliforniaElijah Nouvelage / Reuters file

The conservative lobbying firm that Facebook hired in the midst of an October 2017 public relations crisis about Russian disinformation included what one former employee told NBC News was an “in-house fake news shop” as part of its operations.

Facebook’s ties to the lobbying firm, Definers Public Affairs*, were first reported on Wednesday in The New York Times, which detailed how the group aimed to “discredit activist protesters [of Facebook], in part by linking them to liberal financier George Soros*,” who has become the subject of widespread right-wing conspiracy theories for his philanthropy work.

The report resulted in widespread criticism and accusations of hypocrisy by Facebook for its use of a lobbying firm that pushed narratives on behalf of its clients disguised as news articles. And some of the firm’s more inflammatory political ads for other clients were removed by Facebook itself for violating its advertising policies.

Definers runs a website called NTK Network*, which has a verified page on Facebook with more than 120,000 followers that publishes and promotes articles about the firm’s clients as well as their competitors.

A former employee of Definers, who asked not to be identified in order to protect professional relationships, told NBC News that NTK Network was “our in-house fake news shop.” Some clients would actively pay for NTK Network’s positive coverage, which the ex-employee said would then be pushed out through Facebook in the hopes of being picked up by larger conservative media outlets such as Breitbart.

One article currently being promoted on Facebook through NTK Network’s page promotes the page as having “the latest stories without the liberal bias,” according to Facebook’s publicly available ad index.

The former employee told NBC News the company would run positive stories about clients “at the end of the day” simply to “fill up space” on NTK Network’s website and feed, even if they didn’t specifically pay for NTK’s suite of services through Definers.

A NTK Network ad on Facebook. -- NTK is currently running an ad to promote a story published on Tuesday headlined “Conservatives Blast ITC Judge’s Ruling on Apple,” which refers to a patent dispute between Apple and Qualcomm. The former employee claimed Qualcomm had a relationship with Definers.

Qualcomm and Apple declined to comment.

The revelation highlights how public relations firms like Definers have been able to move beyond efforts to seed stories in the press on behalf of their clients and can now promote their own articles on Facebook in the guise of news, just as Russia promoted misinformation and divisive political rhetoric through disguised media publications. And now it turns out that Facebook was not just the platform for this kind of opposition work, but had actually hired a practitioner to do so on its behalf.

“After a year of increasingly worrying revelations about the scourge of misinformation on Facebook, it is still shocking to learn that Facebook itself employed the same tactics that bad actors have used to exploit its platform,” Justin Hendrix, executive director at NYC Media Lab, a university consortium focused on media technology, said.

“How can we ever trust this company?” Hendrix said. “It is apparently more willing to use misinformation tactics than to seriously police them.”

NTK Network declined to comment.

The ex-employee said that Facebook hired the firm to research opponents of Facebook following its problems with Russian disinformation. A current employee at Definers, who asked not to be named as they are not authorized to speak on behalf of the company, confirmed that Facebook began its working relationship with the firm in October of 2017.

Flake, Coons bill to protect Mueller fails in Senate

Within the first month of their working relationship, positive coverage of Facebook on NTK Network’s site was already up and running. On Oct. 31, one NTK headline stated: “Russian Content on Facebook Amounted to Just .004% of Total Content.” The article echoes statements delivered to Congress by Facebook general counsel Colin Stretch, who appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee in October 2017 to talk about Facebook’s role in the Russian disinformation crisis before the 2016 U.S. election.

The site’s positive coverage of Facebook, with no discernible negative content, continued for months, including a story headlined: “Facebook VP: Russian Goal Was to Divide, Not to Swing Election.”

Last month, while the social media giant was still working with Definers, Facebook removed some of NTK Network’s political ads for violating Facebook’s advertising policies, including one with the headline: “Are These Liberal Billionaires the Biggest Threat to Americans’ Second Amendment Rights?”

Other NTK Network ads attacking Democrats from earlier in 2018 were removed for “running without a ‘Paid For By’ label,” according to Facebook’s ad database.

Image: Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg appears before a Senate hearingFacebook founder Mark Zuckerberg appears before a Senate hearing about privacy and election meddling on Capitol Hill on April 11, 2018.David Butow / for NBC News file

Patrick Gaspard, president of the Open Society Foundations, the nonprofit group funded by Soros, called for Facebook to explain its actions.

“Your methods threaten the very values underpinning our democracy,” Gaspard wrote in a letter addressed to Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook’s chief operating officer. “I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this matter with you in person, and to hear what steps you might take to help remediate the damage done by this deeply misguided — and dangerous — effort carried out at Facebook’s behest.”

When asked about NTK’s working relationship with the social media company, Facebook directed NBC News to a company blog posted late Wednesday night, saying it had ended its relationship with the consulting firm.

“The New York Times is wrong to suggest that we ever asked Definers to pay for or write articles on Facebook’s behalf — or to spread misinformation,” Facebook wrote in its statement.

“Definers did encourage members of the press to look into the funding of ‘Freedom from Facebook,’ an anti-Facebook organization,” the company statement said. “The intention was to demonstrate that it was not simply a spontaneous grassroots campaign, as it claimed, but supported by a well-known critic of our company. To suggest that this was an anti-Semitic attack is reprehensible and untrue.”

Facebook spent a total of $3.3 million on lobbying in the first quarter of 2018, according to a public filing.

Facebook did not respond when asked if the company was aware of NTK Network’s existence, or its role in seeding news coverage that attacked clients’ enemies and pushed client narratives on its platform, while the companies worked together.

CORRECTION (Nov. 16, 2018, 5:42 p.m. ET): An earlier version of this article misstated Facebook's payment to Definers Public Affairs. Facebook spent $3.3. million on all of its first-quarter lobbying in 2018, not $3.3 million with Definers.

Michael Cappetta
Michael Cappetta is a producer at NBC News covering business and technology.

Ben Collins
Ben Collins covers disinformation, extremism and the internet for NBC News.

Jo Ling Kent
Jo Ling Kent is the business and technology correspondent for NBC News.



https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ntk-network/

NTK NETWORK

RIGHT BIAS

These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Right Bias sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

Notes: NTK Network is a news and opinion website that has a strong right wing bias. All stories tend to favor the right and denigrate the left through the use of loaded words and story selection. NTK does a good job of sourcing their information to a variety of Left-Center, Least Biased and Right-Center sources, however they also sources to far right sources that have a mixed record with fact checkers, such as the Washington Free Beacon. In many ways NTK Network is similar to the Washington Free Beacon, in that they take a credible source of information and use spin to create a different narrative. So, the information may be factual, but the message may lack context or mislead with a right wing bias. An excellent example is how NTK Network routinely reported on the Clinton Uranium story when it has been debunked for several years. Overall, we rate NTK Network Right Biased based on story selection/wording and Mixed for factual reporting due to promotion of debunked stories and use of sources that have failed fact checks. (D. Van Zandt 12/15/2017)

Source: https://ntknetwork.com

THE PERMANENT CAMPAIGN

POLITICO -- Morning Score
Your guide to the permanent campaign*
GOP researchers get into the news business
By ELENA SCHNEIDER (eschneider@politico.com; @ec_schneider)10/06/2016 10:00 AM EDT
With Maggie Severns, Theodoric Meyer and Kevin Robillard

The following newsletter is an abridged version of Campaign Pro's Morning Score. For an earlier morning read on exponentially more races — and for a more comprehensive aggregation of the day's most important campaign news — sign up for Campaign Pro today. (http://www.politicopro.com/proinfo)

COME ON IN, THE WATER'S WARM — “GOP researchers try the news business,” by Campaign Pro’s Maggie Severns: “When Democrat Ted Strickland joked about the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia during a recent AFL-CIO event, the Ohio Senate candidate met a familiar fate: A recording device spread his words from the meeting to the internet, where news outlets and social media spent a day blasting Strickland’s comment. But the way Strickland’s gaffe traveled was unusual. The audio was obtained by an under-the-radar website called NTK Network — which happens to be run by operatives connected to Republican opposition research firm America Rising, and is headquartered in the same building. ... America Rising co-founder Joe Pounder and three colleagues launched NTK (short for Need to Know) Network this summer as a side project, along with three colleagues who work for America Rising or Definers Public Affairs ... Pounder and others post collections of links and footage they think will raise eyebrows on a clean, image-heavy site, alongside other developing stories and news of the day about topics less germane to conservative political junkies — like the NFL or, this week, Kim Kardashian.” Full story.

MSNBC VIDEOS

http://www.msnbc.com/maddowblog
Trump judge pick may be too controversial even for Republicans
11/27/18 09:57PM
Rachel Maddow reports on the delay of the confirmation vote for Donald Trump nominee for U.S. District Court Judge for the Eastern District of North Carolina, Thomas Farr, and wonders if his record of apparent racist vote suppression may be an obstacle to gaining sufficient votes.


http://www.msnbc.com/maddowblog
Schiff: Manafort double-dealing Mueller a 'very serious blunder'
11/27/18 09:47PM
Rep. Adam Schiff talks with Rachel Maddow about news from the New York Times that Paul Manafort was trying to double-deal Robert Mueller, and what the House Intelligence Committee will investigate of the matter when Democrats take control of the House. watch


Mueller to detail Manafort's 'crimes and lies' in new filing
11/27/18 09:40PM
Rachel Maddow reports on what is expected next in the Paul Manafort case, including a detailed "sentencing submission" from the Robert Mueller team that "sets forth the nature of the defendant's crimes and lies." watch


http://www.msnbc.com/maddowblog
NYT: Manafort lawyer told Trump team about Mueller interactions
11/27/18 09:29PM
Barbara McQuade, former U.S. attorney, talks with Rachel Maddow about the legal implications of new reporting from the New York Times that Paul Manafort likely lost his plea deal with Mueller in part because his lawyer was telling Donald Trump's lawyers about what Mueller was asking Manafort. watch


http://www.msnbc.com/maddowblog
Apparent Mueller docs connect dots from Trump camp to Wikileaks
11/27/18 09:12PM
Rachel Maddow reports on apparent drafts of legal documents for a plea agreement for Jerome Corsi with Robert Mueller that describe Corsi's middle-man role between the Trump campaign and Wikileaks. watch


http://www.msnbc.com/maddowblog
Elections ending in exact tie show value of every vote single
11/27/18 09:00PM
Rachel Maddow reports on a state house race in Alaska that has ended in an exact tie, and that's not even the first election to end that way this year! watch


http://www.msnbc.com/maddowblog
Tuesday's Mini-Report, 11.27.18
By Steve Benen 11/27/18 05:30PM
Today's edition of quick hits:

* Afghanistan: "Three U.S. service members were killed and three were wounded in Afghanistan when an improvised explosive device detonated Tuesday, NATO officials said. An American contractor was also wounded when the device detonated near Ghazni city, the NATO-led Resolute Support mission said in a statement."

* An important scoop: "Two months before WikiLeaks released emails stolen from the Clinton campaign, right-wing conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi sent an email to former Trump campaign adviser Roger Stone anticipating the document dump, according to draft court papers obtained by NBC News."

* Seems fair: "Former FBI director James B. Comey apparently isn't too impressed with the mental prowess of President Trump's acting attorney general. Matthew G. Whitaker 'may not be the sharpest knife in our drawer,' Comey said during a radio interview on Monday night in which he sized up the man Trump installed this month to replace ousted attorney general Jeff Sessions."

* A new tax package for the lame-duck session? "House Republicans on Monday evening unexpectedly released a 297-page tax bill they hope to move during the lame-duck session of Congress. The legislation would revive a number of expired tax provisions known as 'extenders,' address glitches in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and make a range of changes to savings- and retirement-related tax provisions."

* Hmm: "The head of Russia's GRU military intelligence agency, General Igor Korobov, has died at aged 62, Russia's defense ministry says. Gen Korobov, who took up the post in 2016, is said to have died after 'a serious and long illness' on Wednesday."

* Noted without comment: In interviews with "Fox & Friends," former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's team "chose the topics for interviews, and knew the questions in advance. In one instance, according to emails revealed in a Freedom of Information Act request submitted by the Sierra Club and reviewed by The Daily Beast, Pruitt's team even approved part of the show's script."

RELATED:
The border fence stands at the United States-Mexico border along the Rio Grande river in Brownsville, Texas, Aug. 5, 2014. (Photo by Shannon Stapleton/Reuters)
Mexico requests 'full investigation' after US tear-gas incident
By Steve Benen 11/27/18 12:46PM

You've probably seen the photograph of a migrant mom with her two young children running from a smoking tear-gas canister. It's a memorable image: "Both children are clad only in T-shirts, and one appears to be wearing a pull-up diaper. One child is barefoot, another wears flip-flops."

One of the first questions that come to mind looking at the image is why we're supposed to be afraid of this Honduran family. That, of course, leads to the related question of why U.S. officials fired tear gas at them. Reuters reports that Mexico -- the country we fired the tear gas into -- would like some answers.

Mexico's foreign ministry presented a diplomatic note to the U.S. government on Monday calling for "a full investigation" into what it described as non-lethal weapons directed toward Mexican territory on Sunday, a statement from the ministry said.

U.S. authorities shot tear gas canisters toward migrants in Mexico on Sunday near the border crossing separating the Mexican city of Tijuana from San Diego, California, after some of them attempted to cross into the United States.

I'll be eager to hear the Trump administration's response, because at this point, the defense for the what transpired at the border needs work.

Donald Trump claimed yesterday, for example, that officials "had to" use the chemical agent, adding hours later, "We had tremendous violence -- three Border Patrol people yesterday were very badly hurt through getting hit with rocks and stones."

The president appears to have made that up. As NBC News reported, "That's false, according to the president's own administration. The Department of Homeland Security said Monday that there were no injuries during the weekend clashes in which border agents used tear gas against migrants seeking to enter the U.S."


http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/tuesdays-campaign-round-112718
Tuesday’s Campaign Round-Up, 11.27.18
11/27/18 12:00 PM
By Steve Benen

Today’s installment of campaign-related news items from across the country.

* Mississippi will hold its U.S. Senate runoff election today, and Donald Trump headlined two events for incumbent Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R) yesterday. At one event, the president said of Mike Espy (D), “How does he fit in with Mississippi? I mean, how does he fit in?” For the record, Espy, who is black, is a lifelong Mississippian, whose family has been in the state for generations. He “fits in” fine.

* On a related note, Barack Obama recorded a robocall for Espy, which reached households yesterday. “My name may not be on the ballot, but our future is, and that’s why I believe this is one of the most important elections in our lifetime,” the former president said on the recording. “Make a plan to vote tomorrow. I’m counting on you to be in line to vote before polls close.”

* Will House Democrats pick up their 40th seat of the cycle by flipping a California district that had been called for the Republican? It sure looks like it.

* In Maine’s 2nd congressional district, where Rep. Bruce Poliquin (R) lost as a result of ranked-choice voting, the congressman requested a recount yesterday, citing concerns about “computer-engineered rank voting” and “artificial intelligence.” I have no idea what he’s talking about.

* Rep. Mia Love (R-Utah) conceded yesterday, in her remarks, she said her party’s president has “no relationships, just convenient transactions.”

* Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.), one of the leading House Democrats opposed to Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) reclaiming the Speaker’s gavel, indicated yesterday that he’s prepared to negotiate with Pelosi about the party’s leadership posts. That suggests his campaign against her isn’t going especially well.

* The latest Gallup poll, released yesterday, found Donald Trump’s approval rating dropping to 38%, while his disapproval rating climbed to 60%, which ties this president’s worst disapproval rating to date.


* And with one week remaining before Georgia’s runoff special election for secretary of state, Trump tweeted his support yesterday for Republican Brad Raffensperger. In the process, the president suggested he doesn’t know what Georgia’s secretary of state does, telling the public that Raffensperger “is tough on Crime and Borders, Loves our Military and Vets. He will be great for jobs!”



http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/mexico-requests-full-investigation-after-us-tear-gas-incident
Mexico requests ‘full investigation’ after US tear-gas incident
11/27/18 12:46 PM—UPDATED 11/27/18 12:50 PM
By Steve Benen

PHOTOGRAPH -- The border fence stands at the United States-Mexico border along the Rio Grande river in Brownsville, Texas, Aug. 5, 2014. Photo by Shannon Stapleton/Reuters

You’ve probably seen the photograph of a migrant mom with her two young children running from a smoking tear-gas canister. It’s a memorable image: “Both children are clad only in T-shirts, and one appears to be wearing a pull-up diaper. One child is barefoot, another wears flip-flops.”

One of the first questions that come to mind looking at the image is why we’re supposed to be afraid of this Honduran family. That, of course, leads to the related question of why U.S. officials fired tear gas at them. Reuters reports that Mexico – the country we fired the tear gas into – would like some answers.

Mexico’s foreign ministry presented a diplomatic note to the U.S. government on Monday calling for “a full investigation” into what it described as non-lethal weapons directed toward Mexican territory on Sunday, a statement from the ministry said.

U.S. authorities shot tear gas canisters toward migrants in Mexico on Sunday near the border crossing separating the Mexican city of Tijuana from San Diego, California, after some of them attempted to cross into the United States.

I’ll be eager to hear the Trump administration’s response, because at this point, the defense for the what transpired at the border needs work.

Donald Trump claimed yesterday, for example, that officials “had to” use the chemical agent, adding hours later, “We had tremendous violence – three Border Patrol people yesterday were very badly hurt through getting hit with rocks and stones.”

The president appears to have made that up. As NBC News reported, “That’s false, according to the president’s own administration. The Department of Homeland Security said Monday that there were no injuries during the weekend clashes in which border agents used tear gas against migrants seeking to enter the U.S.”

As the Washington Post reported, Trump added yesterday that some of those who were tear-gassed were “grabbers” who took others’ children to protect themselves, but the evidence to substantiate the claims doesn’t exist.

In the meantime, the White House and its allies have invested quite a bit of time arguing that tear gas is effectively meaningless. The president himself called it “very minor” and “very safe.” (It’s neither minor nor safe, especially for young children.)

In conservative media, one Fox News guest said of pepper spray, “It’s natural. You could actually put it on your nachos and eat it.” Conservatives have peddled this line before, and it’s plainly untrue.

As for Mexico’s request for “a full investigation” into Sunday’s incident, we don’t yet know whether the White House will agree to such scrutiny.