Shared posts

25 Jul 22:15

Artificial intelligence can be 'sexist, racist,' say profs

by -NO AUTHOR-

(COLLEGE FIX) — Two professors from Stanford University argued recently in an article that A.I., or artificial intelligence, can be “sexist and racist” and that the technology community needs to implement “systematic solutions” to counteract this threat.

James Zou and Londa Schiebinger note in an article on Stanford’s website that, in some instances, Google Translate can change pronouns from female to male. As well, “Software designed to warn people using Nikon cameras when the person they are photographing seems to be blinking tends to interpret Asians as always blinking.” Additionally, “Word embedding, a popular algorithm used to process and analyse large amounts of natural-language data, characterizes European American names as pleasant and African American ones as unpleasant.”

25 Jul 22:14

Private eye charged with spying on Richard Simmons: report

by Mike Scott
The New Orleans native and fitness guru has been in seclusion since 2014.
25 Jul 22:14

Louisiana does away with sales tax holidays for next 7 years. Here's why.

by The Associated Press
One tax holiday was geared toward back-to-school shopping.
25 Jul 22:13

The Imperial Naivete Of The American Public

by Tyler Durden

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTowMinds blog,

The nation's premier corporate profit engines / social media giants are the ideal platforms for undermining the U.S. via the sowing of disintegration.

Whether it's stated or not, one source of the inchoate outrage triggered by Russian-sourced purchases of adverts on Facebook in 2016 (i.e. "meddling in our election") is the sense that the U.S. is sacrosanct due to our innate moral goodness and our Imperial Project: never mind that the intelligence agencies of all great powers (including the U.S.) meddle in the domestic affairs and elections of other nations, including those of allies as well as geopolitical rivals-- no other great power should ever meddle with U.S. domestic affairs and elections.

In effect, meddling in the domestic affairs and elections of other nations is the raison d'etre of all great power intelligence agencies:

It's Time for a Little Perspective on Russia (Current Affairs)

Our outrage is based on Imperial Naivete: the naivete of a public lulled into a warm and fuzzy sense of moral superiority based on the notion that we only go to war to save the good and punish the evil, and if we meddle in other nations' domestic affairs and elections, we're only doing so for their own good.

If we weren't a kindly, generous Empire, we'd let them go down the drain without trying to set them straight.

And since people tend to react poorly to Imperial meddling, we have to do it real sneaky-like using our alphabet agencies (CIA, NSA, et al.) and Alphabet itself (Google) and all the other tech giants so beloved by financial analysts agog at their immense profits and power.

There's another aspect of Imperial Naivete: the American public naively assumes that their Imperial Project is so god-like in its powers and prowess that no other great power should be able to meddle in our domestic affairs and elections.

In other words, we're outraged to be vulnerable to any blowback, any intrusion, any meddling.

We implicitly or explicitly reckon that its our Imperial right to, say, blow up a wedding party in a destabilized nation we're "helping," killing dozens of innocent attendees, all on the off-chance we might nail a bad-guy who happened to be in attendance.

If he survives the slaughter, well, we'll blow up the next wedding party he attends.

That is to say, there are no limits on our execution of power because we're morally superior and this grants us carte blanche on everything from undeclared war to slaughtering wedding parties to manipulating (meddling) in every other nation's domestic affairs and elections.

This is broadly defined as "protecting our interests," which just so happen to extend into every nook and cranny of the globe. There are no corners of the planet that are not of interest to the Imperial Project.

The great irony in all this is the 2016 meddling was so easy and cheap, thanks to Facebook and the rest of America's Big tech / Big Data quasi-monopolies. As I explained in How Much of our Discord Is the Result of the "Engagement" Advert Revenue Model of Social Media? (October 24, 2017), Facebook's model for generating outsized profits is tailor-made for arousing conflict, discord, disunity and Balkanization.

The reality is Facebook is just too tempting a tool to sow division and conflict.In effect, other powers would be fools not to exploit Facebook et al.

Meanwhile, the stock market analysts love all the profits Facebook reaps. I hope you discern the irony: the nation's premier corporate profit engines / social media giants are the ideal platforms for undermining the U.S. via the sowing of disintegration.

And the social-media / corporate media addicted U.S. populace is also tailor-made for meddling: a populace addicted to its mobile phones, social media and divisive mainstream media is the ideal populace for those seeking to disrupt and fragment.

So let's go back to the offending adverts purchased on Facebook in 2016. It seems that the purpose of those campaigns wasn't necessarily to elect Trump but to sow conflict and discord in the U.S. populace.

I'd say if that was the goal, it's working frightening well. Meanwhile, we laud our tech overlords and spend an ever-increasing number of hours on news feeds, threads, social media, search and corporate-owned media.

Maybe the real problem is our own naivete about our Big Tech / Big Data corporations. Poking thumbs in other people's eyes is immensely profitable--not to the nation being torn apart, but to the Big Tech / Big Data /Social Media -Marketing corporations we are addicted to.

In loving social media and mobile telephony, we're loving our servitude and our vulnerability to meddling.

Many thanks to G.F.B. for illuminating these issues, which are unexplored by the mainstream media (no surprise there...).

*  *  *

Summer Book Sale: 30% off Kindle editions, 25% off print editions. If you're interested in real solutions, check these out:

A Radically Beneficial World ($6.95 Kindle, $15 print)
Read the first chapter for free.

Money and Work Unchained ($6.95 Kindle, $15 print)
Read the first section for free (PDF).

Resistance, Revolution, Liberation ($6.95 Kindle, $15 print)
Read the first chapter for free.

*  *  *

My new book Money and Work Unchained is now $6.95 for the Kindle ebook and $15 for the print edition. Read the first section for free in PDF format. If you found value in this content, please join me in seeking solutions by becoming a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

25 Jul 22:13

Rand Paul Goes After Brennan: ‘Revoke John Brennan’s Security Clearance!’

by Virginia Kruta
'I will meet with the President and I will ask'
25 Jul 22:12

Rally to Support #Assange in Face of #DeepState Threat | @Suzi3D

by Shane Stranahan
25 Jul 22:11

Four Arrested After Acid Attack on Three-Year-Old Boy in England

by Victoria Friedman
Four men have been arrested in connection to an acid attack on a three-year-old boy in Worcester, England, on Saturday.
25 Jul 22:11

Anger over girl jailed for abortion after being raped by brother

by Staff Reporter
'It is clear that the judge involved didn't really examine this case,' activist says
25 Jul 22:11

Dying groundskeeper to testify in ROUNDUP cancer trial...


Dying groundskeeper to testify in ROUNDUP cancer trial...


(Third column, 15th story, link)


25 Jul 22:10

Confirmed: DOJ Used Materially False Information To Secure Wiretaps On Trump Associate

by Mollie Hemingway

Newly released documents confirm House and Senate investigators’ claims that the Department of Justice and FBI used materially false and misleading information to secure wiretaps on Carter Page, a former volunteer foreign policy advisor to President Trump. The highly redacted documents released in response to Freedom of Information Act requests show how the FBI was able to convince the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to surveil the Naval Academy graduate and energy consultant for a year of his life.

The wiretap was applied for and granted in October 2016, shortly before the end of the presidential campaign. Approved applications last for 90 days. The Department of Justice requested and received three renewals, for a total of one year of surveillance. Despite claiming to the court in 2016 that “the FBI believes that Page has been collaborating and conspiring with the Russian Government,” the government has yet to charge Page with breaking any of the serious laws it alleges he knowingly transgressed.

Here is what the highly redacted FISA applications show us thus far.

The Dossier Provided an Essential Part Of Application

As members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and Senate Judiciary Committee previously reported, a salacious and unverified dossier was essential to the government’s case for spying on Page. The information from the dossier is presented to the court as if it’s believable.

For instance, the application states, “the FBI has learned that Page met with at least two Russian officials during this trip.” The only way it learned that was through the dossier. Steele’s claim that Page had a “secret meeting with Igor Sechin, who is the President of Rosneft [a Russian energy company] and a close associate to Russian President Putin” to lift sanctions is included.

Another secret meeting with Igor Nikolayevich Divyekin to discuss releasing dirt on “Candidate #2” to “Candidate #1’s campaign” is mentioned. Also, while Page had left the campaign by the time the wiretap was sought, it is clear that the FBI believed its wiretap would find information on the Trump campaign, stating that the “Russian government’s efforts are being coordinated with Page and perhaps other individuals associated” with the Trump campaign.

The Dossier Was Not Verified

As House and Senate members reported, there is no evidence the dossier was verified before being used in the applications. For instance, there is no evidence as of July 2018 that either of the two meetings above that Steele claimed happened ever occurred. There was obviously no verification of these claims in 2016, or even an indication that the FBI desired verification. Page has repeatedly denied that he met with these individuals.

The Applications Employed Circular Reporting

As senators Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) wrote earlier this year, “The application appears to contain no additional information corroborating the dossier allegations against Mr. Page, although it does cite to a news article that appears to be sourced to Mr. Steele’s dossier as well.”

As the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence reported, “The Carter Page FISA application also cited extensively a September 23, 2016, Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff, which focuses on Page’s July 2016 trip to Moscow. This article does not corroborate the Steele dossier because it is derived from information leaked by Steele himself to Yahoo News.”

These reports are accurate — the Yahoo News story sourced to Steele is cited extensively and repeatedly. Even worse, the FBI repeatedly claimed Steele is not the source of the article. Isikoff has confirmed Steele was of course his source.

Cites Steele’s Credibility, Despite Overwhelming Evidence To Doubt It

For the first application, the FBI reported that the previous reporting of Steele (identified as Source #1) had been corroborated and used in criminal proceedings and that Steele was deemed “reliable” by the FBI. They said they were unaware of any derogatory information on him. They said he wasn’t told about the motivation of the funder of the research.

There are a few problems with this. One is that the application itself admits that Steele was working with sub-sources. We now know he never visited Russia for his research but had other people gathering information from Russians, including from Russian government officials. Since the information was actually provided by these second- and third-hand sources, it is their reliability the FBI should swear to, not Steele’s. Just because he once had reliable information or had a source with reliable information doesn’t mean that all or even most of the sources he compensated for information will be even remotely reliable.

The other problem is that at some point in the process, the FBI realized their source was unreliable in multiple ways, yet they continued to swear to the court otherwise. Soon after the first application, the FBI had to terminate the relationship with Steele because he broke a promise to not share information with the press.

What’s more, he broke that promise out of fear that Clinton might lose the election, suggesting extreme motivation. He claimed he had not shared information with the press before the end of October 2016, but that was not true. He later testified to a British court that he’d briefed numerous media outlets throughout the waning months of the U.S. election.

The Applications Made Materially False Claims

Again, the dossier was essential to the wiretap applications, and its credibility was sourced not to the veracity of its claims, but to its author. So Steele’s lies were a problem. How did the FBI and DOJ handle this? Not well.

The FISA applications cited Isikoff’s September 23 Yahoo News article, which you would have to be an idiot to not realize was sourced to Steele. Take this paragraph, for example:

But U.S. officials have since received intelligence reports that during that same three-day trip, Page met with Igor Sechin, a longtime Putin associate and former Russian deputy prime minister who is now the executive chairman of Rosneft, Russian’s leading oil company, a well-placed Western intelligence source tells Yahoo News.

A well-placed Western intelligence source? You don’t say! What an obvious way to describe the non-American researcher who is the sole source of the claim! But note how the FBI reported the inclusion of this Yahoo News article in the dossier:

Footnote 18, application: “Source #1 told the FBI that he/she only provided this information to the business associate and the FBI. REDACTED The FBI does not believe that Source #1 directly provided this information to the press.”
Footnote 19, first renewal: “Source #1 told the FBI that he/she only provided this information to the business associate and the FBI. REDACTED The FBI does not believe that Source #1 directly provided this information to the identified news organization that published the September 23rd News Article.”
Footnote 20, second renewal: “Source #1 told the FBI that he/she only provided this information to the business associate and the FBI. REDACTED The FBI does not believe that Source #1 directly provided this information to the identified news organization that published the September 23rd News Article.”
Footnote 22, third renewal: “”Source #1 told the FBI that he/she only provided this information to the business associate and the FBI. REDACTED The FBI does not believe that Source #1 directly provided this information to the identified news organization that published the September 23rd News Article.”

As Sens. Graham and Grassley wrote earlier this year:

In Steele’s sworn court filings in litigation in London, he admitted that he ‘gave off the record briefings to a small number of journalists about the pre-election memoranda [i.e., the dossier] in late summer/autumn 2016.’ In another sworn filing in that case, Mr. Steele further stated that journalists from ‘the New York Times, the Washington Post, Yahoo News, the New Yorker, and CNN’ were ‘briefed at the end of September 2016 by [Steele] and Fusion at Fusion’s instruction.’ The filing further states that Mr. Steele ‘subsequently participated in further meetings at Fusion’s instruction with Fusion and the New York Times, the Washington Post, and Yahoo News, which took place mid-October 2016.’…

The first of these filings was publicly reported in the U.S. media in April of 2017, yet the FBI did not subsequently disclose to the FISC this evidence suggesting that Mr. Steele had lied to the FBI. Instead the application still relied primarily on his credibility prior to the October media incident.

Anyone should have doubted the credibility of a man who claimed he wasn’t Isikoff’s source. But to do so after his sworn court filings admitting to any number of press briefings during the campaign is downright scandalous.

The True Funding Of Dossier Was Oddly Obscured

House Intelligence Committee members complained that the wiretap applications failed to disclose that the dossier was funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. Sens. Grassley and Graham said the FBI revealed the political origins of the dossier to only a “vaguely limited extent.”

That’s true. Donald Trump shows up in the application as Candidate #1 and Hillary Clinton shows up as Candidate #2. The Republican Party is identified as Political Party #1. So it would have been easy to note that the dossier was secretly bought and paid for by Candidate #2 and Political Party #2. Instead, a veritable word salad is deployed to hide that significant fact.

The court is told Source #1 was told “that a U.S.-based law firm had hired the identified U.S. person to conduct research regarding Candidate #1’s ties to Russia” and that Source #1 wasn’t told about the motivation behind the research. The FBI surmises that Source #1’s boss — Fusion GPS’ Glenn Simpson — wanted information to discredit Candidate #1’s campaign.

Critics of the House and Senate investigators say it’s obvious that referred to Hillary Clinton and the Democrats. But remember that Simpson and Fusion GPS had also been hired by the Washington Free Beacon to gather information to discredit Candidate #1’s campaign. The Free Beacon contracted with Fusion GPS through January 2017.

And the Clinton secret funding is relevant. In the second renewal, the application says:

Page sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Voting Section, urging the review of what Page claimed was ‘severe election fraud in the form of disinformation, suppression of dissent, hate crimes and other extensive abuses led by members of [Candidate #2’s] campaign and their political allies last year.’ In his letter, Page claims that he has not directly supported a political campaign since September 2016, but continues to be subjected to personal attacks by former members of Candidate #2’s campaign based on fictitious information. Page wrote that his academic lecture and related meetings with scholars and business people in Moscow had no connection to the U.S. election. Page attributes the assertions in the September 23rd News Article that Page met with two senior Russian officials (i.e., Sechin and Diveykin) while he was in Moscow in July 2016 to give the commencement address at the New Economic School, which Page claims is ‘false evidence,’ to Candidate #2s campaign. Page further claims that the information relied on by Candidate #2’s campaign, certain members of the U.S. Congress, and the media are lies that were completely fabricated by Candidate #2’s paid consultants and private investigators. [emphasis added]

You don’t say! While the redacted application renewal does not indicate why this letter from Page is included, it is clear that the government continues to believe “Candidate #2’s paid consultants and private investigators” over the word of the surveilled American citizen. From the date of his letter, two more wiretap applications are pursued and granted.

What In The World

It remains possible that Page is the most talented spy who ever walked the earth and fully deserved to be surveilled by the federal government. It is also possible that the surveillance was ordered merely because the country has an intelligence apparatus that was unable to recognize their main source was a liar whose sub-sources were at best playing him and whose recklessness left his little partisan research project open to manipulation by foreign adversaries.

Barring those options, our intelligence apparatus misled a FISA court with materially false claims.

25 Jul 22:10

Let’s Get Some Things Straight About The Impact Of Russian Meddling

by Rachel Stoltzfoos

The rhetoric over Russia’s attempt to influence the 2016 election is somehow becoming more hysterical. Russian “meddling” is out. Russian “information warfare” is in. Trump didn’t exercise bad judgment by sucking up to Vladimir Putin in Helsinki. He committed treason, a felony punishable by death. John Podesta foolishly giving a Russian hacker his email password resulted in our generation’s Pearl Harbor. Informing voters about the content of Democratic National Committee emails ahead of an election is on par with terrorists murdering 3,000 Americans on 9/11.

Yes, Trump is feeding the frenzy with his unwillingness to clearly, consistently, and unequivocally back the U.S. intelligence assessment that Russia mounted an election interference campaign, and that Putin is personally responsible. But that doesn’t justify the wild exaggerations of the interference campaign’s success coming from the media.

Spinning a predictable interference campaign that had no measurable impact on the outcome of the election into a successful attempt to plant a Russian stooge in the White House by manipulating voters is not only dishonest, it helps Putin achieve one of his primary goals of sowing division and undermining faith in our democracy.

Here are some things we need to get straight about the impact of Putin’s interference campaign.

1. Russia Did Not Compromise the Vote Count

Intelligence agencies and Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who is investigating Russian interference, have repeatedly said that Russia did not tamper with a single ballot cast in the election or change the vote tallies. The assessment the director of national intelligence released in January said that although Russian operatives did gain access to state and local electoral boards, none of the systems they accessed were involved in tallying votes.

Mueller’s team also has found no evidence Russia affected the vote count, which he has made clear in two indictments. In a statement on the most recent indictment of 12 Russian operatives, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said: “There’s no allegation that the conspiracy changed the vote count or affected any election result.”

2. There Is No Evidence Russia Persuaded Anyone to Vote Differently

While it’s clear one of Russia’s meddling goals was to manipulate voters, there is no evidence they succeeded in changing the outcome of the election, or even persuaded a single voter to change his or her ballot. Aside from the stolen emails, which had a debatable impact, the influence campaign Russia orchestrated really didn’t amount to much.

The DNI assessment found Russia used state-run media outlets and social media trolls to push propaganda aimed at influencing voters, and congressional investigators later released examples of ads Russia purchased on Facebook and Google aimed at turning voters against Clinton. The media played up these revelations, in one case going so far as to harass an elderly woman on her front lawn because she unwittingly crossed paths with a Russian troll on Facebook. But again, there is no evidence any of these tactics had a measurable effect on the election result.

Google found Russia spent “tens of thousands of dollars” on ads, and Facebook revealed Russians spent about $100,000 on ads over a two-year period. These are minuscule expenditures, especially compared to what the Hillary and Trump campaigns dumped into political ads on Facebook — a combined $81 million.

Also, many of the ads weren’t exactly sophisticated. Here’s an example of the kind of content that allegedly swung the election:

3. The Email Theft Resulted in More-Informed Voters

While the propaganda campaign’s effect was likely negligible, the stolen emails certainly had more of an impact. Liberals might argue the emails cost Hillary the election by exposing that her nomination was rigged, thereby suppressing turnout, especially from Bernie Sanders supporters.

But even if this were true, her loss would be a consequence of voters having more information about the inner workings of the campaign — not misinformation. The emails were not doctored. Russia didn’t dupe or manipulate voters here, except to the extent that letting them see the truth is considered manipulation.

4. The Email Theft Did Not Require Sophisticated Abilities

Obviously, it’s still concerning that a foreign power stole emails. But again, this was not the result of a complicated hacking scheme. In fact, Hillary’s emails weren’t “hacked” at all. John Podesta was simply tricked into giving away his login information to the hackers. He opened the front door and they walked right in. In the case of the DNC, the hackers duped a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee staffer into providing her credentials, and they used that to access the DNC network.

5. There Is Zero Evidence Trump Is a Russian Puppet, or that Russia Can Blackmail Him

Journalists, federal investigators, Congress, and other motivated parties have been searching for more than two years now for evidence that Trump colluded with Russia to win the election, as well as evidence that Putin has compromising information on Trump he can use to blackmail him. Zero hard evidence has turned up so far to support either of these suspicions. Period.

The Mueller probe has not resulted in collusion-related charges for the campaign or Trump, more than a year into his investigation. In addition, the release of top secret warrant applications Saturday confirm that, to spy on the Trump campaign, the FBI relied heavily on completely unverified and now discredited opposition research paid for by Democrats and compiled by a Hillary supporter.

This salacious dossier on Trump put together by Christopher Steele was not substantiated when the FBI used it to obtain the spy warrants, and it is not substantiated now. Incredibly, we now know Steele leaked information to the press in an attempt to manipulate the election in Clinton’s favor, and that the FBI used that very press report to corroborate his dossier in all four of the warrant applications. These facts should call into question the judgment of the FBI and its basis for the investigation.

While it’s fair to ask why Trump was so obsequious in Helsinki, there simply isn’t any evidence Putin has the ability to blackmail him, or that he or his campaign worked with Russia to win the White House. These assertions are purely speculative.

6. Thousands of People Did Not Die

Post-Helsinki, it’s apparently in bounds to call Trump a traitor, and credible news outlets are putting the Russia influence campaign on par with Pearl Harbor and 9/11. Politico and The Washington Post recently ran stories pushing this outlandish narrative, equating the death of thousands of Americans to Russia trolling a few people on social media and tricking someone into giving up an email password.

A Politico article claims: “Piece by piece, name by name, one operational detail after the next, special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation has documented that the Russian attack on the American homeland and the American people was every inch as organized, expansive, penetrating and daring as that Japanese run on our fleet or bin Laden’s plan to use civilian airliners as weapons.”

Yes, the influence campaign targeted the heart of American democracy. But comparing it to Pearl Harbor — a surprise attack when more than 3,500 Americans were killed or wounded, and a significant number of battleships and aircraft destroyed — is absurd. Yes, Russia distributed stolen emails and tried to propagandize Americans on social media. But it’s ridiculous to compare this to the $10 billion in damages following 9/11, and the inestimable cost to hundreds of thousands of Americans who lost friends and loved ones. The Russians didn’t knock down any towers. No one went to a funeral. The Pentagon remains intact.

Here’s what did happen: Putin ordered an influence campaign that resulted in state-run media continuing to push propaganda, a few Facebook ads and memes aimed at influencing voters, and the release of private emails into the public sphere. None of this required sophisticated capabilities, and there is no evidence Russia successfully influenced a single voter, let alone influenced the outcome of the election.

Russia did not tamper with any ballots. There is no hard evidence the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. There is no evidence Russia has dirt on Trump. Americans were not physically harmed. None of this reason to panic. Or to declare war. Or to execute the president for treason.

The same people who are upset Trump made Putin look good at a press conference have spent two years now working the country into a panic by portraying him as an absolute mastermind capable of marring the integrity of our democracy. Talk about a win for Putin. Yes, Russia continues to pose a serious threat, but let’s not give Putin more credit than he is due.

25 Jul 22:10

Planned Parenthood NYC Removes Obscene Ad Touting Abortion As Crucial To Free Sex

by Georgi Boorman

Warning: This article quotes an obscenity-riddled advertisement.

Planned Parenthood of New York City began an ad campaign this month called “protect our freedom to f-ck.” In it, actors, from an old man playing chess to a shirtless lady in a laundromat to a drag queen applying makeup, say things like “f-ck me,” “f-ck anyone with a washer and dryer in their f-cking apartment,” “f-ck dancers,” and “f-ck your hottest f-ck, bartender.”

The ad ends with an African-American woman doing a sassy head swivel and saying, “F-ck New York and everyone in it.” A pink screen reads, “Protect our right to safely f-ck whoever the f-ck we want. Donate to Planned Parenthood of New York City.” It’s super classy.

While some of the Twitter commenters said the ad was “brilliant” and suited the intended audience (i.e. New Yorkers), every Internet ad effectively has a global audience, and it wasn’t well-received among plenty of folks. More than a few called it “trash” and others wondered aloud whether the ad was a parody.

Planned Parenthood removed the 45-second ad from YouTube sometime Friday night, but you can still find it via other accounts. While the ad’s vulgarity merits criticism, its core message is much more pernicious.

PP of NYC is saying one or both of the following things in this spot, and they are both lies. The first is that there is any government threat to any adult’s freedom to have sex, and the second is that abortion is necessary for a good sex life.

Planned Parenthood Is Making Up Fake Threats

New Yorkers’ freedom to have sex with “whoever they want” is not under any threat.

Planned Parenthood of New York State just endorsed Gov. Andrew Cuomo as a strong defender of the Left’s sacred cow of sexual libertinism. “Now more than ever we need experienced leaders who understand the importance of protecting access to abortion in New York state,” a spokesman for the organization told the New York Post.

Let’s dispel the notion that that any powerful entity is seriously trying to prevent people from having sexual relations. If anything, powerful entities are subsidizing and preferencing sterile, non-committed, and risky sex through taxpayer and insurance payouts for contraception, abortion, and sexually transmitted diseases.

The age of consent in New York is 17, and the state isn’t exactly undergoing a conservative or Christian revival of sexual ethics, so it’s not like there’s even social pressure to maintain abstinence or even monogamy. The federal government hasn’t made any moves recently to restrict people’s ability to “f-ck whoever the f-ck they want,” either.

Is Planned Parenthood facing cuts to taxpayer money? You bet. Are closely held religious organizations allowed to not pay for an employee’s abortifacients? Yep. Are government agents crashing through doors to break up New York orgies? That’d be a no.

Most notably, the ad doesn’t mention any specific policy threats to the “freedom to f-ck.” Given that the whole point is to urge donations to protect this freedom, one might reasonably assume there really aren’t any.

On top of that, Planned Parenthood’s core business of abortion isn’t under threat in New York City, either. Despite the hysterical rhetoric from PP and pro-abortion advocates all over the country—“Reproductive health and rights are under attack like never before,” reads Planned Parenthood Action Fund’s donation page—abortion and contraceptive access remain pretty secure everywhere, not to mention New York City.

The city alone has a whopping 40 facilities that provide “abortion care.” There are no significant roadblocks to obtaining birth control (minors can get a birth control prescription without parental permission and Planned Parenthood hands out condoms for free) and no major restrictions on abortion like waiting periods, “mandated parental involvement,” or gestational cutoffs. The only restriction is on self-induced abortion, which is dangerous to the mother and fatal to the baby.

To Planned Parenthood, Sexual Freedom Is a License to Kill

If your “right” to f-ck while sticking others with the consequences isn’t being infringed upon by lawmakers, then the other interpretation suffices. Yet it is just as mendacious.

Planned Parenthood campaigns for two “sexual health” procedures over anything else: abortion and birth control. Not cancer screenings. Not even HIV testing, although that’s certainly important to them. Definitely not prenatal care.

Planned Parenthood wants contraceptives paid for by taxpayers or other insurance holders via raised premiums to cover no-copay pills, and easy access to abortions—also heavily or, “ideally,” entirely subsidized. (Oh, and to be able to sell the parts of aborted babies, but let’s not get off track). Why? Because this is how PP makes a lot of money. These advocacy positions are self-interested, not public-health-oriented, just  like the lobbying of any other big business.

Like Planned Parenthood’s business model, the ad’s logic is truly twisted, and its language certainly Orwellian. What PP of NYC is effectively saying here is, “There is no such thing as sexual freedom if you aren’t allowed to kill the babies that sex makes, or if others aren’t paying for your sexual choices by subsidizing birth control.” They are defining freedom as state sponsorship of their sexual ethic: screwing whoever you want, whenever you want, as whatever identity you want, with the power to kill your own children so they don’t get in the way.

PP wants sexual promiscuity endorsed by the state and by the culture, and if that promiscuity comes at the expense of another human’s life, well, they want you to think no one should criticize you for it. No one should dare try to convince you to not kill your child. That would be sinful, fascist and cruel.

And if anyone dares pressure the government to—Gasp! Horror!—restrict your ability to kill your baby, expect a cyclone of deceit and thuggery from the alphabet soup and feminist fronts to converge on you, batter your defenses, and flood your comfortable spaces until you surrender.

Remember, PP reminds us, you’re not free until everyone else pays for and celebrates your life choices, no matter how bad they are! This kind of freedom looks suspiciously like totalitarianism, don’t you think?

25 Jul 22:10

Millennial Whines About Getting By On $4,000 A Month While Her Parents Pay Her Expenses

by Bre Payton

A woman who says she lives rent-free in New York City, earns $25 an hour as a marketing intern, and gets an $1,100 monthly allowance from her parents and grandfather plus more than $2,000 from them to pay her rent, feels guilty calling a Lyft to go home at night and whines about paying the check at dinner.

There’s so much to unpack in this recent Money Diaries post over at Refinery 29 — the series in which women from across the country earning various levels of income write anonymously about their finances. First of all, how on earth is this author earning $25 an hour as an intern? Her salary totals $2,990 each month, in that case. In addition, she earns $100 every week or two from babysitting and receives an allowance from her family

“On top of my intern salary, my parents give me a $800/month allowance, and my grandpa also wires me $300 every month (#blessed),” she writes. #Blessed indeed. There might be other descriptions.

Here’s a list of her monthly expenses, which made me laugh out loud.

Monthly Expenses
Rent: I live in a one bedroom/one den apartment. The total rent is $4,050. My share is $2,100 (my parents pay) and my roommate’s share is $1,950. (She lives in the den.)
Student Loan Payment: $0 (I’m still in school, and my parents pay for my education.)
Health Insurance: $0 (I’m on my parents’ plan.)
MoviePass: $9.95
Sugared + Bronzed Pass: $40.76 (I get one Brazilian sugaring a month.)
Equinox Membership: $210
Phone Bill: $0 (I’m on my parents’ plan.)
Netflix, Spotify, Amazon: $0 (I use my parents’ accounts.)

So she lives rent free, has no other expenses, aside from a MoviePass and getting a “Brazilian sugaring” once a month in addition to her fancy gym membership. Yet her parents and grandparents give her $1,100 a month although she has no real expenses and takes home nearly $3,000 a month.

The real issue I take with her money diary post is not that she has plenty of money — in fact, more power to her — but that she’s a cheapskate to her friends. At various points at a weekend in the Hamptons with her girlfriends, she whines about not getting fully reimbursed by her other friends for the Lyft ride back to their place after a night out and is constantly complaining about how much things cost.

1:06 a.m. — Time to go home. The music gets shut down, even though the guys who are throwing it have a permit. I open Uber and see that an XL costs $76, so I freak out. Maybe I’ll wait and see if someone else can stomach calling it?

1:11 a.m. — My friends are too drunk and won’t leave, so I call it. I check Lyft, and a big car is only $33. Two girls in my car play dumb and don’t pay me. $12

If you’re living rent-free in New York City  — at one point she lets it slip that her apartment building has a cobbler (#fancy) — you don’t need to worry about ordering an Uber XL for all your friends one night when you’re out. Yet feeling bad about ordering cars and apologizing for taking an Uber is something this woman does a lot.

Here she is apologizing and justifying ordering a Lyft Line to go home from a babysitting gig one night.

10:06 p.m. — I opt to take a shared Lyft because I wanted to get home quicker. I usually get a lot of guilt-ridden anxiety from choosing to take cars, but I relax once I realize the subway is only $1.78 cheaper than this ride. $4.53

Girl, stop. You’re taking in more than $4,000 a month and have zero expenses. It doesn’t matter if you take a Lyft to get home at night! Order a car and enjoy the ride knowing that you can easily afford it.

Here she is complaining about paying a $45 dinner bill in the Hamptons.

8:38 p.m. — Dinner is delicious, but the service is terrible and the food is overpriced. The edamame comes out last, and my steamed veggie dumpling appetizer is forgotten. We get individual checks because some of my friends ordered drinks and some of us got more food. My check is $45.09…I’m in shock, but swallow my pride because #HamptonsPrices. $45.09

A $45 bill at a sushi place in the Hamptons shouldn’t come as a shock. Again, it’s okay to spend money going out to dinner with your friends! But nevertheless here she is on another night out at dinner complaining about the bill, and insisting that the waiter bring them free wine because they had to wait for a table.

7:45 p.m. — The waiter tells us it’ll be a five-minute wait. Those five minutes pass, and then another 20 minutes pass, and suddenly we’ve been waiting for 45 minutes. In that time, a guy I used to sleep with shows up at the same restaurant with his squad of guy friends. The whole restaurant is mayhem. I just want some fooooood.

8:42 p.m. — We finally sit down at a lovely table outside. Z. and I order two small pizzas and a grilled calamari appetizer to share. I tell her that there’s no chance we leave without getting some free stuff. I suggest to the waiter that he brings us some wine on the house, and he does. He also brings us a panna cotta dessert with our check. $36.62

Feeling like you’re owed a free glass of wine because you had to wait for a table is so extra, I can’t even.

The anonymity Refinery 29 grants its Money Diarists makes it impossible to verify the details of this specific woman’s lifestyle. But as an avid reader of the series, I’ve noticed that many of these women, who often earn generous salaries, feel the need to apologize for spending money or feel like they need to spend column inches justifying their purchases. It’s your money, you can spend it how you want! If you feel guilty about enjoying yourself too much or being too privileged, then take the time to do something for others. Volunteer, donate money, get involved in local charities to better understand their needs — financial and otherwise. Living for only yourself can be boring –and this girl seems to be very bored all of the time because she spends half of her day at work sitting on her hands. If you’re an intern and don’t have things to do, ask for more work! If there’s none to be had, then maybe try freelancing articles on the side or taking a master class online. There are solutions to these problems.

These women often feel the need to fake frugality. They force their friends to split the Lyft fee with them or take a Lyft Line instead of a regular Lyft to save $2 or buy a $6.99 growler of cold brew coffee at Whole Foods instead of grabbing a latte at a coffee shop, all in the name of “saving money.” This is so obnoxious.

Please don’t pretend to be frugal or a penny pincher or feel the need to justify ordering a car when it’s clear that you don’t have to take the subway home late at night. It makes even less sense for these women to pretend to scrimp when they are not investing any money or doing anything with the cash they’ve amassed. The #faux-frugality is insulting to people who really do need to watch their wallets.

Here’s to more women owning their financial situations and spending (or saving) their money how they want. I hope to read Money Diaries from women who are more generous with their friends — when they can afford it.

25 Jul 22:08

Elizabeth Warren Supporter Shoves Warren Challenger At Rally, Is Promptly Apprehended

by Kyle Morris
'The megaphone is a symbol of free speech and here this guy is shoving it into the face'
25 Jul 22:07

Bush 41's doctor killed in drive-by-bicycle shooting

by -NO AUTHOR-

(NEWSWEEK) — Authorities released a sketch of a man suspected of shooting and killing a doctor who had treated former President George H.W. Bush.

Cardiologist Mark Hausknecht, 65, was shot twice riding a bicycle to work in Houston on Friday at about 9 a.m. local time.

The gunman, who was also riding a bike, fled the scene, and Hausknecht was taken to hospital after flagging down an ambulance, where he died of his injuries.

25 Jul 22:06

Why Did 'Russian Agent' Butina Meet With Obama's Fed, Treasury Officials In 2015?

by Tyler Durden

Accused Russian spy Maria Butina had far more significant contacts in Washington than previously known - having taken part in April, 2015 meetings between a visiting Russian official and two senior officials at the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve, according to Reuters which sites people familiar with the meetings, as well as a report from a Washington think tank that arranged them.

The two officials were Stanley Fischer, Fed vice chairman at the time, and Nathan Sheets, who was then-Treasury undersecretary for international affairs. 

Fischer, and Israeli-American economist, served as governor of the Bank of Israel from 2005 - 2013 before President Obama nominated him to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors in January, 2014. He resigned in late October for personal reasons.

Sheets, head of Global Macro at Prudential, was formerly the Global Head of International Economics at Citigroup after having spent for 18 years at the Federal Reserve. He was nominated by Obama for his Treasury position in February, 2014.

In April, 2015, Fischer and Sheets met with Butina and Alexander Torshin - then the Russian Central Bank deputy governor, where they participated in separate meetings with Fischer and Sheets to discuss US-Russian economic relations during President Obama's administration. 

Fischer, an in email to Reuters, confirmed he met with Torshin and his interpreter. While he could not recall details, Fischer said the conversation involved “the state of the Russian economy” and Torshin’s new role as deputy central bank governor.

“I recall Mr. Torshin mentioning, as an aside, that he planned to attend a meeting of the National Rifle Association, a fact that I considered irrelevant to our conversation,” Fischer wrote to Reuters. -Reuters

As a related aside, the recently immune Tony Podesta was paid $170,000 over a 6-month period ending September 2016 to lobby against sanctions handed down by the Obama administration over the 2014 annexation of Crimea, a relationship SunTrust bank would sever ties with Podesta over. 

The meetings between Butina and the Obama-era officials were documented by the Center for the National Interest in a report seen by Reuters, which outlined its Russia-related activites between 2013 and 2015. It describes the meetings as helping bring together "leading figures from the financial institutions of the United States and Russia."

Butina, 29, was jailed on Wednesday without bail until she stands trial after Department of Justice argued that she has ties to Russian intelligence and is a flight risk. She has pleaded not guilty to charges that she acted as a foreign agent for Russia. 

"Advance the interests"

The top Russian official mentioned in Butina's indictment matches Torshin, who she traveled with to attend the meetings and serve as his interpreter at various D.C. events. Torshin and Butina are said to have conspired to "advance the interests of the Russian Federation." 

The Treasury Department in April imposed sanctions on Torshin and a number of other Russian businessmen and government officials in Putin’s inner circle.

The think tank hosted Trump at an event at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington in April 2016 also attended by Sergei Kislyak, Russia’s ambassador to Washington at the time. Two months earlier, the group’s Russian-born CEO, Dimitri Simes, traveled to Moscow, where he met with Putin and other Russian officials, the organization’s records showed.

The April visit came about a year after Obama’s administration imposed sanctions on Russia for its annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea region. -Reuters

Butina is accused of trying to infiltrate the NRA, while also trying to arrange meetings between then-candidate Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to the DOJ filing. She and Torshin are also accused of participating in a private "off the record" discussion at the Center for the National Interest concerning the “Russian financial situation and its impact on Russian politics,” according to people familiar with the meeting and the think tank’s report - an event moderated by former AIG CEO Maurice "Hank" Greenberg. 

Among the think tank’s board members is David Keene, a former NRA president and former chairman of the American Conservative Union. Keene has previously been photographed alongside Butina at events.

Paul Saunders, the think tank’s executive director, said Torshin spoke at an April 2015 event about the Russian banking system and Butina attended. Saunders said people at the organization cannot recall details of Torshin’s presentation. -Reuters

“We were unaware of any charges or suspicions of illegal or inappropriate conduct or of any connections to Russian intelligence services,” Saunders said in an email.


 

***

According to the charges, investigators found a handwritten note in her apartment that included details about a job offer from the FSB, and allegations that she was in contact with senior Russian intelligence officials.

  • HANDWRITTEN NOTES UNCOVERED BY FBI IN BUTINA'S APARTMENT ASKED 'HOW TO RESPOND TO FSB OFFER OF EMPLOYMENT?'

Because, apparently unlike every other spy agency in the world, the GRU is the only one known to recruit idiots and to advise its agent to specifically leave incriminating evidence in handwritten notes behind so it can be conveniently discovered by, well, anyone.

Perhaps unsurprisingly given the immense resources at her disposal, Butina has been considered "an extreme flight risk" and prosecutors have asked the judge that she be held through trial.

To help facilitate her cover, Butina had a "personal relationship" with an unnamed 56-year-old American citizen with whom she lived. The individual was identified only as "Person 1".

And despite this, Butina also offered sex to an unnamed official in a "special interest organization" that she wished to join. The filing also alleges that Alexander Torshin,  a Russian who has had personal contact with members of the Trump family, was Butina's boss.

Reports of her arrest were initially met with incredulity and confusion while the press largely continued to focus on President Trump's performance at the Helsinki summit. But this new information is extremely titillating.

And now, we know that Butina operated at much higher levels within D.C. than previously known. 

25 Jul 22:05

How Obama years were 8-year hacking nightmare

by -NO AUTHOR-
President Obama (White House photo)

President Obama (White House photo)

WASHINGTON – When President Trump asked why the Obama administration didn’t do anything to stop Russian hacking in the lead-up to the 2016 election, he bluntly raised a question many of the key players behind the “collusion illusion” would rather Americans just plain forgot or never learned.

Not only did the largest hacks of government databases and infrastructure take place on Barack Obama’s watch, but even the nation’s top intelligence and national security officials were themselves hacked – in some cases even by rank amateurs – in one case, by a teenager.

Everyone, of course, remembers how Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s insecure, protocol-breaking private email server was compromised. But she was hardly alone among top Obama officials – like CIA Director John Brennan, who was hacked by a 15-year-old kid from the United Kingdom. And, of course, while the federal government was warning the private sector to take cybersecurity seriously, the U.S. Office of Personnel management suffered the biggest hack in history in which the personal data of some 21.5 million employees, military service people and former federal government staffers was compromised.

If indeed Russia actually conducted dirty cyber tricks, as alleged, it happened on Obama’s watch. It happened before the election. Obama’s national security officials watched it and did nothing.

Interestingly, there is no special counsel investigating that kind of “collusion” by omission. There are no congressional hearings on it. And there is no media concern.

In fact, the Obama’s eight years represented a hacking nightmare, a cybersecurity scandal and some of the loudest anti-Trump voices were not only responsible, but victims because of their own negligence for violating their own rules and protocols.

Let’s review what received little media attention in the U.S. at the time or since.

In September 2016, U.S. authorities arrested two North Carolina members of the “Crackas With Attitude” group involved in hacking CIA Director Brennan’s personal email account and leaking sensitive files including a top-secret application for a security clearance, as well as other senior officials at the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI. The hackers leaked the personal details of 31,000 government agents belonging to nearly 20,000 FBI agents; 9,000 Department of Homeland Security officers and some Department of Justice staffers. The attacks took place in October 2015. “In some instances, members of the conspiracy uploaded private information that they obtained from victims’ personal accounts to public websites, made harassing phone calls to victims and their families and defaced victims’ social media accounts,” the government announced at the time. According to the FBI officials, between October 2015 to February 2016, the hacking group used social engineering in order to trick the victims into revealing their account number, password and other details.

In January 2016, a hackers associated with the same group accessed personal email and phone accounts belonging to the director of National Intelligence, James Clapper. The group also broke into the AOL email of the FBI Deputy Director Mark Giuliano. They also broke into Clapper’s and his wife’s emails, home phone and internet connection. While in control of Clapper’s FIOS connection, they said they redirected all calls to his number to the Free the Palestine movement.

How did the CIA director, the director of National Intelligence, officials of DHS and the 31,000 FBI agents get hacked?

It gets worse. For CIA Director Brennan, who recently called President Trump’s meeting with Russian leader Vladimir Putin “treasonous,” it was the second time his personal email account was hacked. The first time was by a 15-year-old British hacker, a story that received virtually no media coverage in the U.S. The teenager, Kane Gamble, was sentenced to serve two years at a youth detention center. UK authorities arrested him in early 2016, and he pleaded guilty to 10 hacking charges in October 2017. In addition to sentencing the now-18-year-old to two years in prison, the judge also ordered his computers to be seized. Kane also impersonated his victims and called internet and phone providers’ customer support hotlines to get confidential info and to reset their targets’ passwords. Kane stole 40 attachments from Brennan’s email, some of which were published by Wikileaks.

When the CIA director and his boss, the director of National Intelligence, along with 21,000 FBI agents are hacked, one of them by a 15-year-old boy, it makes you wonder how much credibility the intelligence community has in their certainty about Russia leaking hacked documents from Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee. As President Trump tweeted: “Julian Assange said ‘a 14 year old could have hacked Podesta’ – why was DNC so careless?”

Office of Personnel Management Director Katherine Archuleta resigned in July 2015, a day after revealing the largest government data breach in American history. She got the job directing all human resources management for the federal government – from recruitment, hiring, development and support – after serving in Obama’s re-election campaign in 2008. The attack has been attributed to the Chinese government. But, once again, there were no consequences – other than Archuleta’s resignation. Ironically, the next year she got a job partnering with nation pollsters to assess the views and opinions of Latino voters through her company – Latina Data Project.

“This erodes confidence going forward that the federal government will be able to protect federal employees,” said Democratic Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland after the devastating attack. The National Treasury Employees Union, which has sued over the breach, said the government’s offer of three years of fraud monitoring was woefully inadequate.

The union “continues to be outraged that so many of our members have had their personal information compromised due to these breaches,” union president Colleen Kelley said. “We will continue to pursue our lawsuit to provide lifetime credit monitoring and identity theft protection.”

An OPM statement noted that for anyone who underwent a background investigation in 2000 or later, “it is highly likely that the individual is impacted by this cyber breach.”

Indeed, it gets worse still. Even Barack Obama’s Twitter account and campaign emails were hacked in 2013 by an outfit that called itself the Syrian Electronic Army.

His organization, Obama for America, downplayed the damage, saying “Only the links within our tweets had been hacked. At no point did they have access to the twitter handle,” an official said. The group decided to beef up security as a result – going to Google’s two-step authentication.

Only after Obama had left office did NBC News break the story of China’s cyber spies accessing the private emails of “many” top Obama administration officials. The email grab – first codenamed “Dancing Panda” by U.S. officials, and then “Legion Amethyst” –- was detected in April 2010, according to a top secret NSA briefing from 2014. The hack was so widespread, it forced Google to acknowledge that the private Gmail accounts of some American officials had been comprised in 2011, and the recent NSA briefing made it clear that several email accounts from various providers were also compromised. The attacks began around the same time Hillary Clinton’s private email server was compromised.

In August 2015, the news broke that China successfully broke into more federal government databases. Just days after the reported spear-phishing attack on the Pentagon’s joint staff email system, which exposed some 4,000 civilian and military employees and was attributed to Russia, NBC News reported that a separate set of Chinese hack attacks targeted the personal emails of “all top national security and trade officials.” These attacks – among the more than 600 hacks attributed by officials to hackers working for the Chinese government – sought personal email info from top administration officials and began in 2010.

“The U.S. government has proven itself incompetent when it comes to protecting its data,” said Evan Greer of advocacy group Fight for the Future. “Information sharing bills like Cisa would make us even more vulnerable by dramatically expanding the amount of private data the U.S. government keeps in its databases and the number of government and law enforcement agencies who would house that data.”

There were other successful cyberattacks during Obama’s eight years – including the White House, the U.S. Postal Service, the State Department, the FDIC and even the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association.

A pattern of downplaying cyberattacks developed through most of the Obama years. So, it shouldn’t be a surprise that, once again, in the fall of 2016, when the intelligence agencies detected what they claim was Russian hacking connected to the presidential election, that the administration said nothing and did nothing. Both Democrats and Republicans took issue with Jeh Johnson, the former secretary of DHS, when he explained: “One of the candidates, as you recall, was predicting that the election was going to be ‘rigged’ in some way. We were concerned that by making the statement we might, in and of itself, be challenging the integrity of the election process itself.”

Of course, Jeh Johnson knows something about hacking. Not only was it his job to protect Americans from cyberattacks during his time directing DHS. He was also another victim of that 15-year-old kid from England.

22 Jul 18:10

Syrian 'White Helmets' flee to Jordan with Israeli, Western help

Hundreds of Syrian "White Helmet" rescue workers and their families fled advancing government forces and slipped over the border into Jordan overnight with the help of Israeli soldiers and Western powers, officials said.
22 Jul 18:10

LAPD officer fired bullet that killed Trader Joe's employee during weekend standoff, chief says - Los Angeles Times


Los Angeles Times

LAPD officer fired bullet that killed Trader Joe's employee during weekend standoff, chief says
Los Angeles Times
The Los Angeles Police Department announced Tuesday that one of its officers fired the bullet that struck and killed a Trader Joe's employee in the frantic moments they exchanged gunfire with a suspect in an attempted murder case over the weekend.
Trader Joe's employee was killed by officer's bullet, LAPD saysCNN
Chief: Police bullet killed Trader Joe's employee during LA gun battleCBS News
Silver Lake Trader Joe's manager was killed by police gunfire amid standoff shootoutKABC-TV
New York Post -NBC 7 San Diego -Fox News
all 2,834 news articles »
22 Jul 18:10

Officer in Washington state fatally struck by police vehicle during chase, another officer critically injured - New York Daily News


New York Daily News

Officer in Washington state fatally struck by police vehicle during chase, another officer critically injured
New York Daily News
A law enforcement officer in Washington state was killed early Sunday when he was hit by a police vehicle during a pursuit of a suspect, according to authorities. The Kent officer who was killed was fatally struck by a patrol vehicle while putting ...
Washington police officer killed after being struck by patrol vehicle during pursuit, officials sayFox News
Kent police officer killed during chase, apparently by another officer, WSP saysKOMO News
Kent Police Officer killed during pursuit of suspect, another officer critically injuredQ13 FOX

all 25 news articles »
22 Jul 18:10

Hillary in 'housecoat' at NYC event

by -NO AUTHOR-

(GATEWAY PUNDIT) — Twice-failed presidential hopeful, Hillary Clinton spoke at Ozyfest, a two-day festival in Central Park, on Saturday and she looked terrible.

Hillary donned a mumu-style top that nearly touched the floor and white pants. Her hair was disheveled and she had very prominent bags under her eyes.

To think this woman almost became the 45th president of the U.S.

22 Jul 18:10

Art Gallery Owner Discovers Storage Locker Full Of ‘Junk’ Actually Has Expensive Paintings

by Gabrielle Okun
'What are the odds'
22 Jul 18:10

Customers hit with 'vomit fraud'...


Customers hit with 'vomit fraud'...


(Second column, 30th story, link)


22 Jul 18:09

NOPD searching for teen reported missing from CBD

by Tiffany Baptiste
The New Orleans Police Department is asking for the public's help locating a missing teen. 
22 Jul 18:09

3-year-old British boy hospitalized after suspected acid attack

A 3-year-old boy was hospitalized after sustaining injuries from a suspected acid attack in a store in England on Saturday afternoon, police said.
22 Jul 18:09

Minnesota Vikings offensive line coach Tony Sparano dies

Tony Sparano, the Minnesota Vikings offensive line coach and former head coach of the Miami Dolphins, has died. He was 56.
22 Jul 18:09

How Obama years were 8-year hacking nightmare

by -NO AUTHOR-
President Obama (White House photo)

President Obama (White House photo)

WASHINGTON – When President Trump asked why the Obama administration didn’t do anything to stop Russian hacking in the lead-up to the 2016 election, he bluntly raised a question many of the key players behind the “collusion illusion” would rather Americans just plain forgot or never learned.

Not only did the largest hacks of government databases and infrastructure take place on Barack Obama’s watch, but even the nation’s top intelligence and national security officials were themselves hacked – in some cases even by rank amateurs – in one case, by a teenager.

Everyone, of course, remembers how Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s insecure, protocol-breaking private email server was compromised. But she was hardly alone among top Obama officials – like CIA Director John Brennan, who was hacked by a 15-year-old kid from the United Kingdom. And, of course, while the federal government was warning the private sector to take cybersecurity seriously, the U.S. Office of Personnel management suffered the biggest hack in history in which the personal data of some 21.5 million employees, military service people and former federal government staffers was compromised.

If indeed Russia actually conducted dirty cyber tricks, as alleged, it happened on Obama’s watch. It happened before the election. Obama’s national security officials watched it and did nothing.

Interestingly, there is no special counsel investigating that kind of “collusion” by omission. There are no congressional hearings on it. And there is no media concern.

In fact, the Obama’s eight years represented a hacking nightmare, a cybersecurity scandal and some of the loudest anti-Trump voices were not only responsible, but victims because of their own negligence for violating their own rules and protocols.

Let’s review what received little media attention in the U.S. at the time or since.

In September 2016, U.S. authorities arrested two North Carolina members of the “Crackas With Attitude” group involved in hacking CIA Director Brennan’s personal email account and leaking sensitive files including a top-secret application for a security clearance, as well as other senior officials at the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI. The hackers leaked the personal details of 31,000 government agents belonging to nearly 20,000 FBI agents; 9,000 Department of Homeland Security officers and some Department of Justice staffers. The attacks took place in October 2015. “In some instances, members of the conspiracy uploaded private information that they obtained from victims’ personal accounts to public websites, made harassing phone calls to victims and their families and defaced victims’ social media accounts,” the government announced at the time. According to the FBI officials, between October 2015 to February 2016, the hacking group used social engineering in order to trick the victims into revealing their account number, password and other details.

In January 2016, a hackers associated with the same group accessed personal email and phone accounts belonging to the director of National Intelligence, James Clapper. The group also broke into the AOL email of the FBI Deputy Director Mark Giuliano. They also broke into Clapper’s and his wife’s emails, home phone and internet connection. While in control of Clapper’s FIOS connection, they said they redirected all calls to his number to the Free the Palestine movement.

How did the CIA director, the director of National Intelligence, officials of DHS and the 31,000 FBI agents get hacked?

It gets worse. For CIA Director Brennan, who recently called President Trump’s meeting with Russian leader Vladimir Putin “treasonous,” it was the second time his personal email account was hacked. The first time was by a 15-year-old British hacker, a story that received virtually no media coverage in the U.S. The teenager, Kane Gamble, was sentenced to serve two years at a youth detention center. UK authorities arrested him in early 2016, and he pleaded guilty to 10 hacking charges in October 2017. In addition to sentencing the now-18-year-old to two years in prison, the judge also ordered his computers to be seized. Kane also impersonated his victims and called internet and phone providers’ customer support hotlines to get confidential info and to reset their targets’ passwords. Kane stole 40 attachments from Brennan’s email, some of which were published by Wikileaks.

When the CIA director and his boss, the director of National Intelligence, along with 21,000 FBI agents are hacked, one of them by a 15-year-old boy, it makes you wonder how much credibility the intelligence community has in their certainty about Russia leaking hacked documents from Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee. As President Trump tweeted: “Julian Assange said ‘a 14 year old could have hacked Podesta’ – why was DNC so careless?”

Office of Personnel Management Director Katherine Archuleta resigned in July 2015, a day after revealing the largest government data breach in American history. She got the job directing all human resources management for the federal government – from recruitment, hiring, development and support – after serving in Obama’s re-election campaign in 2008. The attack has been attributed to the Chinese government. But, once again, there were no consequences – other than Archuleta’s resignation. Ironically, the next year she got a job partnering with nation pollsters to assess the views and opinions of Latino voters through her company – Latina Data Project.

“This erodes confidence going forward that the federal government will be able to protect federal employees,” said Democratic Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland after the devastating attack. The National Treasury Employees Union, which has sued over the breach, said the government’s offer of three years of fraud monitoring was woefully inadequate.

The union “continues to be outraged that so many of our members have had their personal information compromised due to these breaches,” union president Colleen Kelley said. “We will continue to pursue our lawsuit to provide lifetime credit monitoring and identity theft protection.”

An OPM statement noted that for anyone who underwent a background investigation in 2000 or later, “it is highly likely that the individual is impacted by this cyber breach.”

Indeed, it gets worse still. Even Barack Obama’s Twitter account and campaign emails were hacked in 2013 by an outfit that called itself the Syrian Electronic Army.

His organization, Obama for America, downplayed the damage, saying “Only the links within our tweets had been hacked. At no point did they have access to the twitter handle,” an official said. The group decided to beef up security as a result – going to Google’s two-step authentication.

Only after Obama had left office did NBC News break the story of China’s cyber spies accessing the private emails of “many” top Obama administration officials. The email grab – first codenamed “Dancing Panda” by U.S. officials, and then “Legion Amethyst” –- was detected in April 2010, according to a top secret NSA briefing from 2014. The hack was so widespread, it forced Google to acknowledge that the private Gmail accounts of some American officials had been comprised in 2011, and the recent NSA briefing made it clear that several email accounts from various providers were also compromised. The attacks began around the same time Hillary Clinton’s private email server was compromised.

In August 2015, the news broke that China successfully broke into more federal government databases. Just days after the reported spear-phishing attack on the Pentagon’s joint staff email system, which exposed some 4,000 civilian and military employees and was attributed to Russia, NBC News reported that a separate set of Chinese hack attacks targeted the personal emails of “all top national security and trade officials.” These attacks – among the more than 600 hacks attributed by officials to hackers working for the Chinese government – sought personal email info from top administration officials and began in 2010.

“The U.S. government has proven itself incompetent when it comes to protecting its data,” said Evan Greer of advocacy group Fight for the Future. “Information sharing bills like Cisa would make us even more vulnerable by dramatically expanding the amount of private data the U.S. government keeps in its databases and the number of government and law enforcement agencies who would house that data.”

There were other successful cyberattacks during Obama’s eight years – including the White House, the U.S. Postal Service, the State Department, the FDIC and even the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association.

A pattern of downplaying cyberattacks developed through most of the Obama years. So, it shouldn’t be a surprise that, once again, in the fall of 2016, when the intelligence agencies detected what they claim was Russian hacking connected to the presidential election, that the administration said nothing and did nothing. Both Democrats and Republicans took issue with Jeh Johnson, the former secretary of DHS, when he explained: “One of the candidates, as you recall, was predicting that the election was going to be ‘rigged’ in some way. We were concerned that by making the statement we might, in and of itself, be challenging the integrity of the election process itself.”

Of course, Jeh Johnson knows something about hacking. Not only was it his job to protect Americans from cyberattacks during his time directing DHS. He was also another victim of that 15-year-old kid from England.

22 Jul 18:09

NOPD: Man wanted for stabbing boyfriend with bottle during argument

by Tiffany Baptiste
New Orleans Police are searching for a man accused of stabbing his boyfriend with a bottle Saturday night. 
22 Jul 18:09

Woman arrested after stabbing man in the back multiple times

by Tiffany Baptiste
The New Orleans Police Department has arrested a woman they say stabbed a man in the back multiple times in front of a residence in the Milan neighborhood. 
22 Jul 18:08

The French village that is so rich the local will pay no taxes...


The French village that is so rich the local will pay no taxes...


(Third column, 18th story, link)