.

ad test

Showing posts with label Bureaucracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bureaucracy. Show all posts

Sunday, November 19, 2017

Oh Snap

Ron Wyden is calling for ads to be blocked from all government systems, because of their role in serving up malware:
A US Senator trying to eradicate the Internet scourge known as malvertising is proposing that all federal agencies block ads delivered to worker computers unless advertisers can ensure their networks are free of content that contains malicious code.

In a letter sent today, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden asked White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Rob Joyce to begin discussions with advertising industry officials to ensure ads displayed on websites can't be used to infect US government computers. If, after 180 days, Joyce isn't "completely confident" the industry has curbed the problem, Wyden asked that Joyce direct the US Department of Homeland Security to issue a directive "requiring federal agencies to block the delivery to employees' computers of all Internet ads containing executable code."

"Malware is increasingly delivered through code embedded in seemingly innocuous advertisements online," Wyden wrote. "Individuals do not even need to click on ads to get infected: this malicious software, including ransomware, is delivered without any interaction by the user."
You have to figure that there is a LOT of people who surf the web during their lunch hour, and if ads are blocked, internet firms will take a major hit.

Thursday, October 19, 2017

Live in Obedient Fear, Citizen!

Someone leaked the ICE asset forfeiuture guide to The Intercept, and it is a truly chilling:
An internal handbook obtained by The Intercept provides a rare view into the extensive asset seizure operations of ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations, an office that trains its agents to meticulously appraise the value of property before taking it.

HSI’s 71-page “Asset Forfeiture Handbook,” dated June 30, 2010, underscores the role seizures play in “helping to fund future law enforcement actions” and covering costs “that HSI would otherwise be unable to fund.” It thus offers an unprecedented window into ICE’s wide-ranging asset forfeiture operations and the premium the agency places on seizing valuable property. Forfeiture proceeds can bolster ICE’s partnerships with local police departments, which are now the subject of heightened debate given the Trump administration’s hard-line immigration agenda.
 We need to change the rules on asset forfeiture, because we have cops engaging in shakedowns

Tuesday, October 3, 2017

Yeah, This is Senior Investors Plotting an Exit Strategy



Uber’s board of directors voted on Tuesday for governance changes that will reshape the balance of power at the ride-hailing service, paving the way for a stock sale to the Japanese conglomerate SoftBank and for the company to go public by 2019.

The 11-member board met for less than four hours to approve some of the terms from a proposal put forward last week by Dara Khosrowshahi, Uber’s new chief executive, and Goldman Sachs, the investment bank that is an investor in the privately held company.

As a result, the clout of certain Uber shareholders — including, most significantly, its former chief executive, Travis Kalanick, who is a board member — will be reduced, according to people briefed on the deliberations, who asked to remain anonymous because the conversations were confidential. Other proposed measures, including one that would have posed hurdles to Mr. Kalanick’s returning as chief executive, were dropped before the meeting.

Still, the board approved enough changes for Uber to move forward on an investment from SoftBank. SoftBank has held discussions to buy a significant chunk of Uber’s stock, but the deal was contingent on changing the company’s governance structure so that some of its early investors would have an incentive to sell. In addition, directors approved a resolution for Uber to go public by 2019, the people briefed on the meeting said, setting up what could be one of the largest technology stock offerings in years.
These are a group of people looking to find some rubes so that they can cash out.

You have been warned.

Monday, September 25, 2017

Not a Surprise

The EU spent €360,000.00 on a study of the effects of piracy on sales of media, and found that there was no evidence of an effect, so they buried the report in a deep hole in Brussels until an MEP demanded its release:

One of the problems in the debate about the impact of unauthorized downloads on the copyright industry is the paucity of large-scale, rigorous data. That makes it easy for the industry to demand government policies that are not supported by any evidence they are needed or will work. In 2014, the European Commission tried to address that situation by putting out a tender for the following research:
to devise a viable methodology and to subsequently implement it in view of measuring the extent to which unauthorised online consumption of copyrighted materials (music, audiovisual, books and video games) displaces sales of online and offline legal content, gathering comparable systematic data on perceptions, and actual and potential behaviour of consumers in the EU.
The contract was awarded to Ecorys, a "research and consultancy company" based in the Netherlands that has written many similar reports in the past. The value of the contract was a princely €369,871 -- over $400,000. Given that hefty figure, and the fact that this was public money, you might expect the European Commission to have published the results as soon as it received them, which was in May 2015. And yet strangely, it kept them to itself. In order to find out what happened to it, a Freedom of Information (FOI) request was submitted by the Pirate Party MEP, Julia Reda. It's worth reading the to and fro of emails between Reda and the European Commission to get an idea of how unhelpful the latter were on this request. The European Commission has now released the report, with the risible claim that this move has nothing to do with Reda's FOI request, and that it was about to publish it anyway.

………

The European Commission was quite happy to publish partial results that fitted with its agenda, but tried to bury most of its research that showed industry calls for legislation to "tackle" unauthorized downloads were superfluous because there was no evidence of harm. This is typical of the biased and one-sided approach taken by the European Commission in its copyright policy, shown most clearly in its dogged support for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement -- and of the tilted playing field that those striving for fair copyright laws must still contend with on a regular basis. Sadly, it's too much to hope that the European Commission's own evidence, gathered at considerable cost to EU taxpayers, will now lead it to take a more rational approach to copyright enforcement, and cause it to drop the harmful and demonstrably unnecessary upload filter it is currently pushing for.
The study actually showed that illegal downloads BOOSTED legal sales of games, books, and music.

You can see MEP Reda's comments on this whole perfect storm hypocrisy here .

Tuesday, August 1, 2017

I Hate Dealing With the DMV

I really, really, really hate this, with an enduring passion.

Sunday, July 30, 2017

But of Course


Of course, the office has been irrelevant for a while, see Iraq-Bush, Libya-Obama, Yemen-House of Saud, etc., but it's a bit of a bummer anyway:
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is reportedly considering closing the Office of Global Criminal Justice, a tiny agency with a meager budget of $3 million a year, located within the State Department.

According to its website, the office “advises the Secretary of State . . . on issues related to war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide.” It “also coordinates U.S. Government positions relating to the international and hybrid courts currently prosecuting persons responsible for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity—not only for such crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, and Cambodia—but also in Kenya, Libya, Côte d’Ivoire, Guatemala, and elsewhere in the world.”

Furthermore, it deploys “a range of diplomatic, legal, economic, military, and intelligence tools to help expose the truth, judge those responsible, protect and assist victims, enable reconciliation, deter atrocities, and build the rule of law.”

The New York Times reported that human rights advocates saw the proposal as an example of “the Trump administration’s indifference to human rights outside North Korea, Iran and Cuba.” Human rights activists also said that shutting the Office “would hamper efforts to publicize atrocities and bring war criminals to justice.” Newsweek reported, however, that the Obama administration also reportedly considered downgrading the office and merging it with another agency.
Let's be clear:  If we consider the House of Saud to be an essential ally, any war crimes office is necessarily a joke.

Saturday, July 22, 2017

EU Patents Are Even More F%$#Ed up Than Ours

The EU has been moving toward a single patent court, but the European Patent Office, and in particular its President, Benoit Battistelli, is so profoundly screwed up that the constitutional court of Germany has ruled a European Patent Court to be illegal:
The freeze on long-held plans to approve a single patent court for Europe is a result of the actions of the president of the European Patent Office, according to German media reports.

The Unitary Patent Court (UPC) has been in progress since 2012, but last month Germany's constitutional court unexpectedly ordered a halt to legislation ratifying it. The German government's approval is essential for the court to move forward.

Beyond the fact that an unnamed individual had filed a complaint with the court arguing that the UPC broke German law, little was known about the argument itself and why the court had taken it so seriously.

Now details have emerged and the reason for the freeze appears to be controversial changes pushed through EPO president Benoit Battistelli, largely in order to enhance his own office's power.

The complaint argues that changes made to the EPO's Boards of Appeal have effectively undermined its independence, meaning that there are now insufficient checks and balances within the system to adhere to German law.

Those changes were forced through by Battistelli after the Boards of Appeal stood up to him by refusing to remove a judge he had fired over allegations of leaking embarrassing documents and posting anonymous criticism of Battistelli and his team.

………

As a result of this refusal to capitulate to Battistelli's demands, EPO management then drew up a raft of reforms that undercut the Boards of Appeal authority.

Among other things, these limited the power of the Board of Appeal's president over budget and staffing, and gave Battistelli as EPO President the right to decide who is appointed (or reappointed) in that role. Any reappointment would be subject to a "performance evaluation" carried out by the president.

Among other smaller changes, the independent boards would also no longer be able to adopt their own rules of procedure – they would be decided by, you've guessed it, the EPO President.

………

Now, however, it appears that Battistelli may finally face serious consequences, with his forced changes on the organization standing in the way of a major strategic goal of the EPO: the creation of a unitary patent court.

If the German constitutional court does decide that the Battistelli-forced changes to the Boards of Appeal undermine its independence to the extent that it contravenes German law, then Europe will either have to drop its five-year plan or demand that the EPO reverse the changes and remove the powers of the presidency that Battistelli has fought so hard to introduce.
Battistelli wiretapped his staff in an attempt to fine people who was leaking uncomplimentary information about him and retaliated against whistleblowers.

The EU being what it is, of course, he remains in office until the end of his term, because there are effectively no adults in charge.

This Is What Comes from Mixing Ambien and Alcohol


Like Keith Moon, and not in a good way
The increasingly erratic Elon Musk is now claiming that he got verbal governmental approval to construct a Hyperloop transit system from Washington, DC and New York City.

Rather unsurprisingly all manner of public officials over the proposed route have no recollection of any such discussion:
Elon Musk does not have government approval to build a Hyperloop tunnel from New York City to Washington DC.

The Tesla executive took to Twitter this morning to tantalize his legion of fans and the tech press with the “news” that he had “just received verbal govt approval for The Boring Company to build an underground NY-Phil-Balt-DC Hyperloop. NY-DC in 29 mins … City center to city center in each case, with up to a dozen or more entry/exit elevators in each city.”

Lest any billionaires need to brush up on civics 101: the US system of government does not operate on “verbal government approvals”.

Musk walked back his claim about 90 minutes later, tweeting: “Still a lot of work needed to receive formal approval, but am optimistic that will occur rapidly”.

A lot of work is needed to receive formal approval, indeed.

Musk was received with typical credulity by the tech press, and considerable consternation by various government agencies. Several spokespeople who answered the phones at relevant city, state and federal government bodies laughed upon hearing of the claim that an interstate transit project with a significant street-level footprint in four of the east coast’s largest cities could be approved verbally.
Gee, you think?

I'm not sure if Musk has gone over the edge because of drug abuse, Ambien and alcohol is addictive and dangerous, or if it's because he has become convinced of his own epic awesomeness from sycophants and the, "Typical credulity by the tech press," but Elon Musk is well into delusional, and seems to be heading to Bond villain territory.

I'm kind of surprised.  Of all the PayPal mafia, I would have figured that would be vampire Peter Thiel would go over the edge first.

Saturday, July 1, 2017

This is a Grammatically Correct Use of the Term Irony

Donald Trump has commissioned vote fraud commission to prove that he actually won the popular vote in 2016. (Yes, this is Narcissistic insanity)

He has appointed prominent figures in the voter suppression movement including Kansas Secretary of State Kris Korbach and Hans "Der novotenführer" von Spakovsky, whose primary goal has been to keep blacks and Hispanics from voting, primarily through purging them from voter rolls.

This commission is a clear attempt to go national with the voter purges in an attempt to gain partisan political advantage, and, in an attempt to go national programs to disenfranchise minorities.

Basically, the commission will manufacture data, and then manufacture outrage, and use this to jump start national legislation to suppress minority voting.

This is clear to anyone with two brain cells to rub together, so when the commission requested complete voter registration data from the states and the District of Columbia, over half of the states election officials have told the commission to go pound sand.

It turns out that, due to vagaries in state election law, one of the Secretaries of State that is telling Kris Korbach to go pound sand, is Kansas Secretary of State Kris Korbach:

Kris Kobach, the co-chair of Donald Trump’s glorious Find The Five Million Illegals Who Voted For Hillary Commission, has been running into a bit of pushback to his letter asking all 50 states to submit detailed voter information to be used in a great big study that would supposedly root out all the voter fraud. At least 25 states have said they won’t or can’t comply — or will not submit all the data Kobach requested, either because they’re restricted by state law, or they don’t trust the commission, which is expected to skew the data to support Republican claims of massive voter fraud, and to recommend restrictions on voting rights.

Among the states that won’t be giving the “Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity” all the data Kris Kobach wants is Kansas, where Secretary of State Kris Kobach explained that under state law, he can’t release the last four digits of voters’ Social Security numbers. The state will release all other information requested in the letter, like voters’ names, addresses, dates of birth, voting history, party affiliation, and felony criminal history. Kobach explained,

 “If the commission decides that they would like to receive Social Security numbers to a secure site in order to remove false positives, then we would have to double check and make sure Kansas law permits,” Kobach said.
“I know for a fact that this information would be secured and maintained confidentially,” he added in response to security concerns.
He happens to personally know the commission’s co-chair, after all, and he trusts Kris Kobach not to pull any funny stuff.

Several other states, however, know exactly who Kris Kobach is, and have decided not to play along with Kobach, like Virginia, where Gov. Terry McAulliffe issued a statement saying
This entire commission is based on the specious and false notion that there was widespread voter fraud last November […] At best this commission was set up as a pretext to validate Donald Trump’s alternative election facts, and at worst is a tool to commit large-scale voter suppression.
Mississippi Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann, a Republican, was a bit more blunt. His statement not only said Mississippi wouldn’t comply with the request for voter records, he also told Kobach that while he hadn’t yet received the letter, based on the copies he’d seen, his reply to the commission would be “They can go jump in the Gulf of Mexico and Mississippi is a great state to launch from.”
(emphasis mine)

I think there is a method to Republican madness here: They want to institute nationwide voter suppression, and they are using Trumps ego to push this whole effort along.

Unlike prior Republican Presidents, who had the hubris to believe that they could pick the lock of the minority vote, Trump is personally hurt by the 2.8+ million voter deficit, and really believes that this was from widespread voter fraud.

As such, Trump is the perfect patient zero for the plague of voter suppression.

Sunday, June 25, 2017

More IP Shenanigans

The Department of Defense is planning to grant the pharma giant Sanofi an exclusive license to manufacture and market a vaccine for the Zika virus that the US Army has developed:

………

It concerns something really exciting and important: a vaccine that shows great promise against the devastating Zika virus, which can cause microcephaly, blindness, deafness, and calcification of the brain in children whose mothers were infected during their pregnancy. If effective, such a vaccine could be a tremendous boon not just for developing countries, but for Western ones too, since the Zika virus has already begun to spread in the US, and Europe. The vaccine was developed at the Walter Reed Army Institute for Research, and the Department of the Army funded its development. Great news, you might think: the US public paid for it, so it's only right that it should have low-cost access to it. Moreover, as an act of compassion -- and to burnish its international image -- the US could allow other countries to produce it cheaply too. But an article in The Nation reports that the US Army has other ideas:

the Army is planning to grant exclusive rights to this potentially groundbreaking medicine -- along with as much as $173 million in funding from the Department of Health and Human Services -- to the French pharmaceutical corporation Sanofi Pasteur. Sanofi manufactures a number of vaccines, but it's also faced repeated allegations of overcharges and fraud. Should the vaccine prove effective, Sanofi would be free to charge whatever it wants for it in the United States. Ultimately, the vaccine could end up being unaffordable for those most vulnerable to Zika, and for cash-strapped states.
The Knowledge Ecology Institute (KEI), led by Jamie Love, made a reasonable suggestion to ensure that those most at need would have access to the drug at a reasonable price. KEI asked that, if Sanofi does get an exclusive deal, it should be obliged to make the vaccine available at an affordable price. The Army said it lacked the ability to enforce price controls, but it would ask those nice people at Sanofi to commit to affordable pricing on a voluntary basis. According to The Nation, those nice people at Sanofi refused. Speaking of nice people at Sanofi, the article notes the following:
………


When there is an entire Web page dedicated to listing Sanofi's problems going back to 2009, you really have to wonder why the US Army is so keen to give the company a monopoly on this promising new treatment. The usual argument for the sky-high prices of drugs is that firms must be rewarded for taking on the financial risk of drug development, otherwise they won't proceed, and the world would be the poorer. Except, of course, in this case that risk was entirely borne by the US public, which paid for the early stage development of the vaccine with their taxes. So Sanofi risked nothing, but now looks likely to reap the benefits by being allowed to price the vaccine out of the reach of the people who most need it. You might think there ought to be a law against this kind of behavior. It turns out that there is:

KEI's Jamie Love pointed out that under the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, it is already illegal to grant exclusive rights to a federally owned invention unless the license holder agrees to make it available at reasonable pricing. But that provision has rarely, if ever, been enforced.
Now would be a really great time to start enforcing that law.
Indeed.

I'm inclined to believe that Bayh Dole is a bad law, and it has been made far worse through the rather lackadaisical attitude toward applying any sort of public benefit to technologies that were developed at public expense.

It would be nice if  the law's march in rights, which allow for compulsory licensing, had been applied even once.

Wednesday, May 24, 2017

Oh Snap!

It appears that everyone's favorite racist nut-job, Attorney General Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, lied on his security clearance forms:

Attorney General Jeff Sessions did not reveal meetings with Russian officials when he applied for his security clearance to serve as the nation’s highest-ranking law enforcement official.

Sessions came under fire earlier this year for not disclosing to the Senate Judiciary Committee during his confirmation hearing that, as the senator from Alabama, he met twice with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the presidential election when he was also serving as an adviser to the president. In March, Sessions recused himself from investigations related to the 2016 presidential campaign after The Washington Post reported the two meetings.

That same information was omitted from Sessions’s security clearance form, which is known as an SF-86, as first reported Wednesday night by CNN.

………

The security clearance form requires anyone applying for a security clearance to list “any contact” that he or his family had with a foreign government or its representatives over the past seven years.
His spokesmen are claiming that the FBI told him that he didn't have to list the contacts, which is not what the law says.

There does appear to be an exception for contacts at foreign conferences as a part of government business, but none of Sessions fall under that exception:
………

A legal expert who regularly assists officials in filling out the form disagrees with the Justice Department's explanation, suggesting that Sessions should have disclosed the meetings.

"My interpretation is that a member of Congress would still have to reveal the appropriate foreign government contacts notwithstanding it was on official business," said Mark Zaid, a Washington attorney who specializes in national security law.
Zaid added that in a similar circumstance he advised a member of Congress to list all foreign contacts -- including those made during official US government business.

To obtain a security clearance, a federal official is not required to list the meetings if they were part of a foreign conference he or she attended while conducting government business. Sessions' meetings, however, do not appear to be tied to foreign conferences.
Jeff Sessions has been a cancer on the American political scene for decades.

One hopes that he won't weasel out of this.

Tuesday, May 2, 2017

Schadenfreude, Sweet Schadenfreude

Jim DeMint was just fired by the Heritage foundation:

The board of the Heritage Foundation on Tuesday ousted president Jim DeMint after days of turmoil and internal debate, blaming him for management and communication problems that have roiled the venerable conservative think tank.

Thomas A. Saunders III, chairman of the Heritage Foundation’s Board of Trustees, said in a statement that the 22-member board unanimously requested and received the resignation of DeMint, the firebrand former senator from South Carolina. Heritage founder Ed Feulner will serve in his place until a permanent successor is chosen.

“After a comprehensive and independent review of the entire Heritage organization, the board determined there were significant and worsening management issues that led to a breakdown of internal communications and cooperation,” Saunders said. “While the organization has seen many successes, Jim DeMint and a handful of his closest advisers failed to resolve these problems.”

In his own statement, DeMint called the critique “puzzling,” saying the board had praised his work for the past four years and approved annual performance bonuses for the entire management team.

He said he was proud of his work at Heritage, citing accomplishments such as the think tank’s role in helping lead President Trump’s transition team.

………

But board trustee Bill Walton said the issue was not “Needham versus DeMint.”

“It’s boring old management stuff,” said Walton, saying that excessive bureaucracy prevented papers from getting approved rapidly and scholars from getting permission to attend meetings. “We think we can make it leaner and more effective.”
I wish that there was a way for both of them to lose.

A friend of mine was fired by Heritage because she got cancer, so I am even less disposed to give them the benefit of the doubt than I would be otherwise.

I am sure that personalities were a part of this, but I think that a lot of this is that DeMint and his minions had no interest in managing a facsimile of a serious academic institution, since Conservatism of DeMint's ilk is generally opposed to ideas, and thinking, in general.

Monday, April 17, 2017

Conservadem Policies in a Nutshell

Andrew Cuomo unveiled a "free" tuition program recently, and rather unsurprisingly, on closer examination, it turns out to be mindlessly punitive and difficult to use:

………

The Fine Print
Interestingly, coverage of Cuomo’s plan was by no means uncritical, suggesting that he may not get the tailwind for 2020 that he expects. (For early negative reactions, see here and here.) From my perspective, Cuomo’s plan has one critical flaw:
Cuomo’s “Tuition-Free College” Plan is not a universal benefit
That is, Excelsior is not a left program providing universal concrete material benefits to everyone, especially the working class. So it’s not a program from the left. Rather, it’s a typical liberal program, directed only at the “deserving,” hedged about with complexity, and targeting the (so-called) middle class, and not the working class. More specifically, Cuomo’s plan:
  1. Is means-tested
  2. Does not cover fees
  3. Covers full-time students only
  4. Has a residency requirement
  5. Has clawbacks
  6. Has a “crapshoot” clause
Let’s consider each of these points in turn.
Let's go through these one at a time:
  1. Means testing creates a situation where popular support is limited, and allows for a the program to be killed by gradually tightening the clause.   Additionally, as Lamberth Strether notes, "Third, means-testing and gatekeeping generally are in essence a jobs guarantee for the professional class, and one can’t help but think that’s a key consideration for the Democrat establishment, since that’s their base."
  2. Fees, not just room and board, and constitute as much as ⅔ of the cost of school, and as shown by a number of state schools, most notably my alma mater UMass, it drives schools to move costs from tuition and fees.  Additionally, this program applies to the last dollar, so a dollar in something like Pell grants must be applied to tuition, and not to fees or living expenses, or text books. (If you get a $1000 grant or scholarship, the amount that you get under the New York program is cut by $1000).
  3. The full time requirement means that it's impossible for poor students to take advantage of the the program, since they need to pay something north of 20 grand in fees.
  4. While handling tens of thousands of dollars in fees, you have to earn 15 credits a semester or pay the grant back, which makes it impossible to work your way through school.
  5. The residency requirement is not one that people normally think of, which requires that you be a state resident to benefit (thought it does that too), but rather that if you live or work outside of the state for Five Years After Graduation you have to pay back the grant.
  6. The crapshoot function says that the program shall be terminated if  the lotto under performs in any given year year, and schools are allowed to arbitrarily redefine the conditions to qualify.
This is a classic Blue Dog/DLC/New Dem program:  It adds complexity, it does not provide the benefits promised, it contains an unneeded bureaucracy, adds a dose of humiliation, and sets up conditions that convince people who want the benefit that government does not work.

If it were any more half assed, you would think that it came from Bill Clinton's White House.

The primary purpose of this grant is to boost Andrew Cuomo's prospects for a 2020 Presidential run.

Thursday, April 13, 2017

Pull All of His Security Detail, and Let Market Forces Rule

Scott Pruit, environment hating wingnut and current head of the Environmental Protection Agency, is requesting a round the clock security detail in his next budget.

It appears that in addition to being a corrupt stooge of the energy industry, he's also an abject coward:

The administrator of the US Environmental Protection Agency, historically, has had some measure of government-funded personal security detail. Agents routinely picked Gina McCarthy from the airport, for example, or accompanied her on site visits during her time as EPA administrator from July 2013 to Jan 2017. But Scott Pruitt, the new EPA chief, wishes to be guarded 24/7.

………

The Times calls it a first for an EPA chief, and notes that the 10 additional agents would more than double the agency’s current security staff, which has hovered between six and eight agents in recent years. Similarly, security detail for education secretary Betsy DeVos has reached unprecedented levels: Typically, the secretary of education is guarded by about six agents from within the Department of Education. Since her contentious confirmation, DeVos has been under the protection of the US Marshals Service, costing $8 million over eight months.

What security menace is Pruitt guarding against? According to Myron Ebell, who led Trump’s EPA transition team but is no longer employed by the administration, Pruitt is at risk from his own employees—and “the left.”
Seriously, the wingnuts spend their days soiling their pants in abject terror.

Monday, March 6, 2017

Well, This is Profoundly Disturbing

Khizr Khan, the parent of a soldier killed in Iraq who was killed in Iraq, has canceled a speech in Toronto because he has been told that limitations have or will be placed on his travel:

The father of a U.S. soldier killed in Iraq has cancelled a speech planned for Toronto on Tuesday, with the event organizer suggesting Khizr Khan was concerned about travelling outside the United States.

In an email to ticket holders on Monday, organizer Bob Ramsay said Khan was “notified that his travel privilege (sic) are being reviewed” Sunday evening.

“This turn of events is not just of deep concern to me, but to all my fellow Americans who cherish our freedom to travel abroad,” Khan said, according to Ramsay’s statement.

“I have not been given any reason as to why.”

It’s not clear what “review” Khan was referring to. While the Trump administration continues to try to implement a travel ban for citizens from six Muslim-majority countries and deport illegal immigrants, neither initiative would apply to Khan, who became a U.S. citizen in 1986.
Actually, US citizens were forbidden from entering the US under Barack Obama, so this is not only something that could be done, it is something that has been done by the FBI in an attempt to coerce testimony or service as an informant.

This was done by putting people on the no-fly list, but given the complete embrace of bigotry and lawlessness recently demonstrated by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (it used to be called the INS), Mr. Khan would likely encounter extreme harassment if he were to attempt to re-enter on a land crossing.

I think that the INS is the only federal bureaucracy that is ecstatic about Trump being in the White House, and I'm thinking that it's 50-50 that this was the brain child of some minor functionary in la migra, rather than someone in the Trump administration.

The past few weeks have indicated that it is an organization that is rotten to the core, so I hope that someone is keeping notes for the next administration. 

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Good

Bernie Sanders won't be giving his list to the DNC.

Seeing as how Tom Perez has made it clear that the pillaging of the party by overpaid and under-performing consultants will continue, it is best to keep them as far away from that list as is humanly possible.

Thursday, February 23, 2017

Awkward!


Tell me where the bad man touched you
At CPAC, Reince Preibus and Stephen Bannon were on a panel, and it's pretty clear that Priebus loathes Bannon:
During a discussion with Reince Priebus and Steve Bannon at the conservative conference CPAC, Bannon reached over at one point to touch Priebus’ leg. Priebus quickly brushed it away.

………
This is f%$#ed up and sh%$.

I expect to see the first tell all from a former staffer to be announced by a publisher before the year is out.

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Least Surprising News of the Day

A study has concluded that poisoning the largely black population of Flint, Michigan was an artifact of systemic racism:

A government-appointed civil rights commission in Michigan says systemic racism helped to cause the Flint water crisis, according to a report released Friday.

The 129-page report does not claim there were any specific violations of state civil rights laws, but says "historical, structural and systemic racism combined with implicit bias" played a role in the problems, which still linger in the city's drinking water almost three years later. 


"The presence of racial bias in the Flint water crisis isn't much of a surprise to those of us who live here, but the Michigan Civil Rights Commission's affirmation that the emergency manager law disproportionately hurts communities of color is an important reminder of just how bad the policy is," state Sen. Jim Ananich, a Democrat from Flint, said. 


It was an emergency manager, appointed by Gov. Rick Snyder, who had the cash-strapped city's water supply changed from Lake Huron to the Flint River in 2014 -- a decision reversed more than a year later amid reports of corroded pipes and elevated blood lead levels.


The report, which was released after a year-long investigation that followed three public hearings and took testimony from more than 150 residents and officials, says: "The people of Flint have been subjected to unprecedented harm and hardship, much of it caused by structural and systemic discrimination and racism that have corroded your city, your institutions, and your water pipes, for generations."
In related news water is wet ……… Well most places anyway.

In Flint, the water is brown and lumpy.

Wednesday, January 11, 2017

This ……… And President Mike Pence

Glenn Greenwald has a very good point here: As loathsome as Donald Trump is, there is no cause to cheer an effort by the US State Security Apparatus to engage what can only be called a soft coup against him:

In January, 1961, Dwight Eisenhower delivered his farewell address after serving two terms as U.S. president; the five-star general chose to warn Americans of this specific threat to democracy: “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” That warning was issued prior to the decade long escalation of the Vietnam War, three more decades of Cold War mania, and the post-9/11 era, all of which radically expanded that unelected faction’s power even further.

This is the faction that is now engaged in open warfare against the duly elected and already widely disliked president-elect, Donald Trump. They are using classic Cold War dirty tactics and the defining ingredients of what has until recently been denounced as “Fake News.”

Their most valuable instrument is the U.S. media, much of which reflexively reveres, serves, believes, and sides with hidden intelligence officials. And Democrats, still reeling from their unexpected and traumatic election loss as well as a systemic collapse of their party, seemingly divorced further and further from reason with each passing day, are willing — eager — to embrace any claim, cheer any tactic, align with any villain, regardless of how unsupported, tawdry and damaging those behaviors might be.

The serious dangers posed by a Trump presidency are numerous and manifest. There are a wide array of legitimate and effective tactics for combatting those threats: from bipartisan congressional coalitions and constitutional legal challenges to citizen uprisings and sustained and aggressive civil disobedience. All of those strategies have periodically proven themselves effective in times of political crisis or authoritarian overreach.

But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy allies to unilaterally subvert the U.S. election and impose its own policy dictates on the elected president is both warped and self-destructive. Empowering the very entities that have produced the most shameful atrocities and systemic deceit over the last six decades is desperation of the worst kind. Demanding that evidence-free, anonymous assertions be instantly venerated as Truth — despite emanating from the very precincts designed to propagandize and lie — is an assault on journalism, democracy, and basic human rationality. And casually branding domestic adversaries who refuse to go along as traitors and disloyal foreign operatives is morally bankrupt and certain to backfire on those doing it.
If the US state security apparatus is behind this, it is indicates a part of our bureaucracy is out of control and a clear and present danger to both our democracy and out civil rights.

There is, however, another possibility, which Greenwald obliquely alludes to:
There is a real danger here that this maneuver can harshly backfire, to the great benefit of Trump and to the great detriment of those who want to oppose him. If any of the significant claims in this “dossier” turn out to be provably false — such as Cohen’s trip to Prague — many people will conclude, with Trump’s encouragement, that large media outlets (CNN and BuzzFeed) and anti-Trump factions inside the government (CIA) are deploying “Fake News” to destroy him. In the eyes of many people, that will forever discredit — render impotent — future journalistic exposés that are based on actual, corroborated wrongdoing.
This is pretty clearly what Karl Rove did to CBS with GW Bush's going AWOL from his responsibilities at the Air National Guard.

He floated out the story, Rather got fired, and Shrub's draft dodging was permanently removed as a viable news story.

You create a story, it blows up, and then you point out a few seemingly-minor-but-obvious-in-retrospect-flaws, and you discredit any reporting in that vein for the next few years. (As an historical aside, Karl Rove once bugged his own campaign offices to get control of the news cycle in a campaign, so this is very much in the bag of tricks of both Republican campaign operatives and the GRU.)

I'm kind of hoping it's the latter, because if it is the former, we are very close to a 7 Days in May scenario.

Wednesday, December 28, 2016

Why Independent and Powerful Inspector Generals Are Essential to the Functioning of All Democracies, Part MMMMMMMDCCXXXIV


Blah, blah, blah!

xxx


xx


xx


xxx


xx

Case in point, the US Air Force revoking a revoking clearance to retaliate against whistleblower:
It appears some Air Force brass wish their subordinates would fly a little farther under the radar, especially when airing their office’s dirty laundry.

In 2011, an Air Force whistleblower had his security clearance revoked after pestering his supervisor about fraud and waste within the agency, according to a Defense Department Inspector General report. The Inspector General’s investigation concluded in December that his supervisor retaliated against the civilian employee for disclosing the infractions.

The heavily redacted report, which MuckRock requested following on an announcement in the January newsletter of the Department of Defense Inspector General, found that the supervisor accused the whistleblower of being a mentally unstable drug abuser in addition to revoking his security clearance for the offense of reporting that colleagues were allowed to leave work hours early and lie on their time cards.

The Air Force civilian employee — referred to as “Complainant” throughout the heavily redacted report — began notifying his superiors of the timecard abuse in January 2010, according to the report.

………

Even though that complaint circumvented the Air Force chain of command, it was considered a protected communication under the Military Whistleblower Protection Act, which safeguards communications from service members reporting violations of laws or regulations.

But less than two weeks after the complainant went to the Inspector General, his supervisor — an Air Force lieutenant colonel, per the January newsletter — revoked access to classified information and areas.

Even though that complaint circumvented the Air Force chain of command, it was considered a protected communication under the Military Whistleblower Protection Act, which safeguards communications from service members reporting violations of laws or regulations.

But less than two weeks after the complainant went to the Inspector General, his supervisor — an Air Force lieutenant colonel, per the January newsletter — revoked access to classified information and areas.

………

A year the reprisal claim was filed, however, the Inspector General concluded that the supervisor “could not provide any evidence to support these allegations,” and that the clearance revocation was reprisal.

The IG investigation concluded by recommending that the Air Force restore the whistleblower’s clearance, as well as “Consider taking appropriate corrective action against [redacted supervisor’s name].”
This sort of behavior is typical of any sort of hierarchical institution, and it is why it is essential to have some sort of independent agency which can investigate allegations of wrongdoing.