Here A Leak, There a Leak

Since Trump and his Boyz arrived in DC there have been leaks upon leaks….and this has the president just furious with the establishment according to him anyone leaking info to the press is not showing proper loyalty to hum, the president……

Now the Ag Sessions has issued a statement saying that there will be a DoJ investigation into all the leaks that Trump has been whining about for months.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions will reportedly make an announcement about several criminal leak investigations within days.

Officials told The Washington Post about the forthcoming news from the Justice Department. The investigations will be centered around news reports containing sensitive material about intelligence, the report said.

The news comes as newly-appointed White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci publicly decried leaks coming from within the West Wing in his first week on the job and vowed to fire staffers who continue talking to reporters.

The impending announcement also comes as Trump grows publicly unhappy with Sessions, last week criticized the attorney general for recusing himself from the Russia investigation.

Source: Sessions planning to announce leak investigations: report | TheHill

Here is a thought……could Sessions be trying to repair his image with the president by ordering these investigations……since Trump has been whining about the leaks for months.

And another thought……Sessions is not long for the admin position…..so could he be announcing this in a shot at Trump….since some of the “leaks” that made the news came from the mouth of Trump.  A parting shot at a man that he stood behind  thru thick and thin.

Any thoughts here?

Rudy To The Rescue

Everybody is waiting on bated breath to see how the struggle of the AG will turn out……more than that they are waiting to see if Mueller can be fired or will he be fired……

Sessions is probably not long for the Trump admin…….it is only a matter of time….

When he, Sessions, is given his walking papers who will be the magic man that will be tapped to do the dirty deed for Trump….fire Mueller?

Many many people are being floated as possible replacements…..but the one I like is a long time Trump boot licker….Sir Rudy of Gotham……

First, President Trump told the New York Times that he regretted making Jeff Sessions his attorney general because of Sessions’ decision to recuse himself from the Russian investigation. On Monday, Trump piled on, referring to Sessions as “beleaguered” in a tweet. “So why aren’t the Committees and investigators, and of course our beleaguered A.G., looking into Crooked Hillarys crimes & Russia relations?” he wrote. The insult is “remarkable,” observes a post by Andrew Prokop at Vox, and it might suggest that Trump is signaling he wants Sessions to resign so he doesn’t have to fire him. Amid all this palace intrigue, meanwhile, comes a report from the respected Mike Allen at Axios that Trump is considering replacing Sessions with Rudy Giuliani.

The report, based on anonymous West Wing sources, says Trump has been floating the idea among his inner circle. But Allen adds that the president often “muses about possible personnel moves that he never makes, sometimes just to gauge the listener’s reaction.” At New York, Benjamin Hart notes that Sessions was not only one of Trump’s earliest backers but has been one of his most aggressive advocates in terms ofpolicy while in office. He seems to have failed the loyalty test, however, something that Giuliani routinely aces. So might the former New York City mayor truly end up running the Justice Department? “Stranger things have happened,” writes Hart.

Any thoughts on this situation?

Speak up.

Closing Thought–07Jul17

Censorship Makes A Comeback!

Every generation has had its bout with censorship in one form or another.  Mine?  It was books like Lolita, Story of “O” and other such baudy books.  My daughters generation had books, record albums, movies…this type of censorship has been with us for ever…..someone always thinks that they want to save society by banning things that they find offensive.

THis type of invasion has been missing for awhile but it has found a new breeding ground….Florida.

Nosy Floridians now have another outlet for their moral outrage. Now anybody in the US state can formally complain about books used in public schools, and schools are required to hear them out.

Last week governor Rick Scott signed a bill that allows any Florida resident to formally challenge new or old materials, like books and movies, available in public schools. In drafting the bill, lawmakers specifically added language that expanded the complaint process to include anyone, not just parents.

Original law:

Each district school board must adopt a policy regarding a parent’s objection to his or her child’s use of a specific instructional material, which clearly describes a process to handle all objections and provides for resolution.

New law, with new language highlighted:

Each district school board must adopt a policy regarding an a parent’s objection by a parent or a resident of the county to the his or her child’s use of a specific instructional material, which clearly describes a process to handle all objections and provides for resolution.

Source: The sizzle of romance isn’t sustainable—but science can help you build a happy relationship that lasts — Quartz

Not a fan of censorship……all it does is make the item more desirable….this is just someone wanting to impose their “morality” on everybody….not in my house!

Gotta go…..will return tomorrow with more stuff…..hope to see you then…..chuq

Closing Thought–29Jun17

Protect my ‘Net!

For a couple of years now there has been a debate about net neutrality and why it is important.

We also have had those that say who cares.

We all should care about our internet access……and here is why….

Next month, Amazon, Netflix, and dozens of other companies and organizations will host a “day of action” aimed at saving net neutrality as we know it. The Federal Communications Commission, meanwhile, is on the verge of revoking its own authority to enforce net neutrality rules, and the country’s biggest telecommunications companies are cheering along. The future of the internet is on the line here, but it’s easy to be cynical about the conflict: What does it matter which set of giant corporations controls the internet?

Under the current net neutrality rules, broadband providers like Comcast and Charter, and wireless providers like AT&T and Verizon, can’t block or slow down your access to lawful content, nor can they create so-called “fast lanes” for content providers who are willing to pay extra. In other words, your internet provider can’t slow your Amazon Prime Video stream to a crawl so you’ll keep your Comcast cable plan, and your mobile carrier can’t stop you from using Microsoft’s Skype instead of your own Verizon cell phone minutes.

Source: Why Net Neutrality Matters | WIRED

Me?  I am old and probably does not matter much…but my granddaughter will be effected if these toads have their way.

TTFN–time for me to have a nap after all I’m old and we need our rest, right?

See ya tomorrow…chuq

Closing Thought–28Jun17

The Lawsuit Lotto!

Seems everybody wants to sue somebody sometime…….I guess it is easier than looking for a real job…..

Even VP candidates are not above using a lawsuit to gain fame and fortune…..

Sarah Palin “took a stand” this week against the New York Times in a lawsuit claiming defamation. CNNMoney reports that the former Alaska governor filed her complaint, which seeks upward of $75,000 in damages, against the Times on Tuesday for an editorial it published right after the shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise earlier this month. In the op-ed touching on the viciousness of the current political climate, the Times editorial board had pointed a finger at Palin and cited her as a force of “political incitement” before the 2011 Gabby Giffords shooting in Arizona, claiming that an ad from Palin’s PAC had positioned “Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized [crosshairs],” per the lawsuit.

Two days later, the paper added what the New York Post deems an “embarrassing correction”—that no definitive tie had arisen between “political rhetoric” and the Giffords attack, and that the PAC ad had shown electoral districts, not actual Democrats, under the crosshairs. The NYT Opinion account also tweeted a mea culpa for getting “an important fact wrong.” The Times itself reports on Palin’s suit, which says the paper “violated the law and its own policies” and “knowingly, intentionally, willfully, wantonly and maliciously” published the piece to hurt the “devoted wife, mother, and grandmother,” or at the very least exhibited “blatant disregard” for possible harm. The Times says through a rep it will “vigorously” fight the complaint, which it notes it hasn’t reviewed yet. (Erik Wemple writes for the Washington Post that he thinks Palin has a solid case.)

Like I said….easier than actually finding a real job.

Time to be off like a dirty shirt….tomorrow is another day…..and more stuff….chuq

Hate Speech vs. Free Speech

After the last shooting, the one that claimed a Congressman (since there are so many I wanted to clarify which shooting) there has been much written about the aftermath…all the hate filled post and Tweets.

Rabid conservs attack libs as the cause of the horrible attack and then it is the Libs turn to attack conservs and along the same lines…..all in all it is hate speech disguised as “news”.

That leads us to the debate on “free speech”.

Whenever someone mentions how destructive hate speech can be there will inevitably bring about some person harping on the first amendment…..and how trying to control hate speech will inevitably lead to the end of our republic.

I have tried to take on this topic in the past…..

Source: That Thing Called “Free Speech” – In Saner Thought

I recently read a piece of this subject written by a law professor……..

Since its inception as America’s founding political document, there have been 27 amendments to the United States Constitution. Even the most adept scholars can rarely name and define each one. Many amendments are obscure and deal with legal nuances like changes in representation and how to handle US citizens who come into a foreign title of nobility. While these constitutional adjustments rarely get public attention, the First Amendment continues to spark controversy across a wide swath of the US population. What is free speech? What does the Constitution protect? What is the difference between hate speech and free speech? With the recent attention on the safe space movement on college campuses, it’s increasingly important to understand the legal parameters of the First Amendment.

………

The wording of the First Amendment is relatively straightforward. At the core, Americans receive protections to exercise their religious beliefs freely, with specific prohibitions against the government passing laws to restrict religious practice. In addition, free speech is protected as well as a free press, with no restriction on citizens assembling peaceably. The confusion comes when people don’t understand what each of those things means, or when broader interpretations are applied to legal definitions that are, in reality, more narrow.

Source: Hate Speech vs. Free Speech: A Critical Analysis by Constitutional Law Expert Sujit Choudhry

We could solve this problem with a little civility toward each other and refuse to repeat words from the haters (people that live to hate)……there is no dishonor in being civil with each other.

Who Will Save The Internet?

Gee while everyone is laser focused on the Trump thing there was something more important that rhetoric of the day….but few seem to notice…..they were too busy calling anyone that does not agree with them all the insulting garbage they could throw.

Thanx to Trump and his minions we may be losing our internet neutrality….if that is the case who will save us and our internet…..

Tomorrow, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will vote to initiate a process to repeal the strong net neutrality rules that have been in place since 2015.

These rules protect the internet as an open, decentralized, and level playing field, free from content discrimination. They ensure that you—not your internet service provider (usually your cable or phone company)—control what you can access online.

Source: An open letter to everyone who uses the internet | TechCrunch

Again who will save our internet?

Three years ago, as the Federal Communications Commission pondered what to do about net neutrality, Last Week Tonight host John Oliver sprang into action, offering an impassioned plea to his viewers to flood the agency’s inbox with messages in defense of a free and open Internet. By the next day, the otherwise dull F.C.C. was at the center of a media firestorm as its Web site crashed under a sudden surge of traffic.

Now, with net neutrality in greater danger than ever, Oliver is hoping for a reprise of his 2014 success. Earlier in May, he urged viewers to go to his own Web site, “gofccyourself.com,” which simplifies the commenting process for leaving messages for the F.C.C. “Every Internet group needs to come together like you successfully did three years ago,” the comedian said this month on his show. “Every subculture must join as one. Gamers, YouTube celebrities, Instagram models, and even Tom from MySpace, if you’re still alive. We need all of you.”

Source: The Battle to Save the Internet from Trump Begins | Vanity Fair

Glad to see someone is stepping up and doing the right thing.