Search This Blog

Translate

Blog Archive

Middleboro Review 2

NEW CONTENT MOVED TO MIDDLEBORO REVIEW 2

Toyota

Since the Dilly, Dally, Delay & Stall Law Firms are adding their billable hours, the Toyota U.S.A. and Route 44 Toyota posts have been separated here:

Route 44 Toyota Sold Me A Lemon



Showing posts with label Edward Snowden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Edward Snowden. Show all posts

Thursday, January 23, 2020

Andy Borowitz | Susan Collins Takes Hours to Decide on Lunch Before Ordering Exactly What Mitch McConnell Is Having





Reader Supported News
23 January 20

What folks are not understanding about donating to RSN vs a candidate is that we won’t have a complete picture of any of the candidates WITHOUT RSN! Please donate ... every $ counts.
Martha, RSN Reader-Supporter


If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts
CA 95611



Reader Supported News
22 January 20
It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News


Andy Borowitz | Susan Collins Takes Hours to Decide on Lunch Before Ordering Exactly What Mitch McConnell Is Having
Sen. Susan Collins. (photo: Melina Mara/Getty)
Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker
Borowitz writes: "On the first day of the impeachment trial in the United States Senate, Senator Susan Collins, a Republican of Maine, spent hours trying to decide what she would have for lunch before ultimately ordering exactly what Senator Mitch McConnell was having."
READ MORE

Journalist Glenn Greenwald. (photo: Leo Correa/AP)
Journalist Glenn Greenwald. (photo: Leo Correa/AP)

Edward Snowden Says Greenwald Charges Are 'Existential Threat' to Journalism in Brazil
Michael Safi, Guardian UK
Safi writes: "Press and internet freedom advocates - including Edward Snowden - have criticized a decision by Brazilian federal prosecutors to charge the journalist Glenn Greenwald with cybercrimes as a blatant abuse of power and an existential threat to investigative reporting in the country."
EXCERPTS:
The leaked messages formed the basis for several stories published on Intercept Brazil, which Greenwald co-founded, and exposed what appeared to be collusion between then judge Sérgio Moro and prosecutors.
The prosecutors’ investigation resulted in the jailing of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Brazil’s highest-polling presidential candidate at the time, and the subsequent presidential election was won by the far-right Jair Bolsanaro, who appointed Moro as his justice minister.
Snowden, who leaked files to Greenwald and others that became a Pulitzer prize-winning series of Guardian stories exposing illegal spying by US intelligence agencies, said the reporter’s arrest was an “absolute red alert”.
“This is unbelievably naked retaliation for revealing extreme corruption at the highest levels of Bolsanaro’s administration, and an existential threat to investigative journalism in Brazil,” he said on Twitter.
Lula, who was released from prison in November to appeal against his conviction, also voiced support for Greenwald. “All my solidarity to journalist @ggreenwald who was a victim of another blatant abuse of authority against freedom of press and democracy,” the former president tweeted.
The Electronic Frontiers Foundation, an internet freedom group, said it was dismayed to learn of the charges. “Computer crime laws should never be used to criminalise legitimate journalistic practice,” it said. “Prosecutors must not apply them without considering the chilling effects on the free press, and the risk of politicised prosecutions.”
The American Civil Liberties Union said Donald Trump’s attacks on the press in the US had softened the ground for the prosecution of American journalists abroad. “The United States must immediately condemn this outrageous assault on the freedom of the press,” the group said in a statement.
“These sham charges are a sickening escalation of the Bolsonaro administration’s authoritarian attacks on press freedom and the rule of law. They cannot be allowed to stand.”

Jeff Bezos and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in 2016. (photo: Bandar Algaloud/Getty)
Jeff Bezos and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in 2016. (photo: Bandar Algaloud/Getty)


UN Ties Phone Hacking of Bezos to Washington Post's Coverage of Saudi Arabia
Marc Fisher, The Washington Post
Fisher writes: "United Nations human rights investigators have concluded that an account belonging to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman sent an infected video to Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, triggering a massive extraction of data from the billionaire's cell phone."

EXCERPT:
The 2018 hack of Bezos’s phone took place five months before Khashoggi, a Saudi dissident who was under contract with The Post’s editorial department to write opinion columns, was murdered at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. Five Saudi nationals were sentenced to death last month in connection with the Khashoggi killing after a secret trial in Saudi Arabia.
According to the report, Bezos and Mohammed exchanged phone numbers at a dinner in Los Angeles about a month before the hack. The dinner took place the day after The Post published a column by Khashoggi that blasted the prince’s regime, saying that “replacing old tactics of intolerance with new ways of repression is not the answer.”
Four weeks later, on May 1, 2018, the prince sent the billionaire entrepreneur a WhatsApp message containing a video that, according to a person familiar with the investigation, was a promotional piece about economic success in Saudi Arabia. Inside the video file, the forensic report concludes, was malicious code that allowed the sender to extract information from the phone.
The report says that “within hours of receipt of the MP4 video file from the Crown Prince’s account, massive and (for Bezos’ phone) unprecedented exfiltration of data from the phone began.” The flow of data out of Bezos’s phone jumped suddenly by 29,156 percent and the “spiking then continued undetected over some months,” according to the investigation.
The infecting technology did not require Bezos to click on the video, but rather instantly created a channel for remote extraction of data from the phone, according to the person familiar with the investigation.

Students in a private school. (photo: Shutterstock)
Students in a private school. (photo: Shutterstock)



Upcoming Supreme Court Ruling Could Starve Public Schools - in Favor of Religious Ones
Alice Herman, In These Times
Herman writes: "Through voucher programs and tax relief for private school donors, more than 20 states are already redirecting public funds into private education."
READ MORE

Immigration detention center. (photo: Reuters)
Immigration detention center. (photo: Reuters)

Immigrant Detention Centers Really Are Inhumane. This Trial Will Prove It
Raúl Grijalva, AZ Central
Grijalva writes: "Under President Trump's orders, the Department of Homeland Security is expanding a detention system that routinely deprives people of due process, basic human rights and human dignity."
EXCERPT:
No medical care, hygiene, edible food
Dozens have died in immigration custody on this administration’s watch, already four people in this fiscal year alone. Thousands more are subjected to inhumane conditions on a daily basis, including in Tucson.
Last week, several of those individuals subjected to degrading detention conditions in southern Arizona took the government to trial. In the Doe v. Wolf case, individuals detained by the Border Patrol in Arizona spoke about their experiences of sleeping on cold concrete floors, being denied adequate medical care and access to basic hygiene facilities to clean themselves, and being fed inedible food.
The conditions we’re seeing in Border Patrol facilities in Arizona, Texas, California and other parts of the country are exacerbated by an immigration backlog that this administration created through its counterproductive immigration policies, which criminalize immigrants instead of giving them an opportunity to seek the protection they so desperately need.
This administration doesn’t want to make our system work better, it wants to make the system so intolerable that it deters people from coming altogether.
These horrible conditions are intentional
Criminalizing immigrants has led agencies to detain them for longer periods of time in facilities that aren’t equipped to handle the quantity of people. As a result, asylum seekers and other migrants have been forced to endure inhumane, and even deadly, conditions, despite already making the trek thousands of miles to the U.S. border from their country of origin.
We’ve heard the same recycled excuses from Customs and Border Patrol about what’s led to these conditions. Instead of accountability, the Trump administration’s punitive and inhumane policies have made the situation worse. Under Trump, agencies such as the Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement operate without any transparency and oversight.

Terry Jones in London in 2012. (photo: Graeme Robertson/Guardian UK)
Terry Jones in London in 2012. (photo: Graeme Robertson/Guardian UK)

Terry Jones, Life of Brian Director and Monty Python Founder, Dies Aged 77
Andrew Pulver, Guardian UK
Pulver writes: "Terry Jones, founder member of Monty Python and director of three of Python's celebrated feature films, has died aged 77, his family have announced."
READ MORE


Malaysian environment minister Yeo Bee Yin (front 2nd L) and officials inspect a container containing plastic waste shipment on Jan. 20, 2020 before sending back to the countries of origin. (photo: Getty)
Malaysian environment minister Yeo Bee Yin (front 2nd L) and officials inspect a container containing plastic waste shipment on Jan. 20, 2020 before sending back to the countries of origin. (photo: Getty)

Malaysia Sends Plastic Waste Back to 13 Wealthy Countries, Says It Won't Be 'the Rubbish Dump of the World'
Jordan Davidson, EcoWatch
Davidson writes: "The Southeast Asian country Malaysia has sent 150 shipping containers packed with plastic waste back to 13 wealthy countries, putting the world on notice that it will not be the world's garbage dump."
The countries receiving their trash back include the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Canada.
The government will seek to ensure that "Malaysia does not become the garbage dump of the world," Yeo said in a lengthy Facebook post, as CNN reported.
The UK was responsible for 42 of those containers. Malaysia's Environment Minister Yeo Bee Yin insisted that she is taking steps to make sure her country does not become a dumping ground for wealthy countries, as the BBC reported.
The UK government said it was working with Malaysian authorities to take back the waste.
"We continue to work with the shipping lines and Malaysian authorities to ensure all waste is brought back as soon as possible," said an Environment Agency spokesman in the UK to the BBC. The spokesman added that the Environment Agency is "working hard to stop illegal waste exports from leaving our shores in the first place."
Since China banned the import of plastic waste in 2018, shipments of plastic waste have been rerouted to Southeast Asian countries, including Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines and Malaysia. However, Malaysia and other developing countries are standing up to unwanted, imported garbage, as the AP reported.
In addition to the 150 containers that Malaysia sent back to their country of origin, Malaysia expects to send back another 110 containers by the middle of the year, according to Yeo, as the AP reported.
Yeo added that so far success in sending back trash has removed a total of 4,120 tons of waste from Malaysian ports. Authorities there have stepped up enforcement at key ports to block smuggling of waste and closed more than 200 illegal plastic recycling factories, as the AP reported.
While the UK received back 42 containers, that number was one shy of France's 43 containers of illegal plastic waste sent back. Otherwise, 17 went to the U.S., 11 to Canada, 10 to Spain and the rest to Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore, Portugal, China, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Lithuania, the Environment Ministry said, according to the AP.
"If people want to see us as the rubbish dump of the world, you dream on," Yeo told reporters during inspection at a port in northern Penang state, as the AP reported.
From the 110 containers that Malaysia will return in the middle of the year, Yeo said 60 are from the U.S. Canada also has 15 more containers, Japan 14, the UK 9 and Belgium 8, as the AP reported.
Malaysia is the latest in a string of countries that have returned waste to Western countries in the last year. The Philippines and Indonesia returned waste in 2019, as the BBC reported. Waste from Canada sent to the Philippines caused a domestic row between the two countries.
Last year, Yeo also singled out British people for their ignorance about where their plastic waste goes.
"What the citizens of the UK believe they send for recycling is actually dumped in our country," she said, as the BBC reported.
A recent Greenpeace report found that plastic waste exported from the U.S. to Malaysia more than doubled in the first seven months of 2018 compared to 2017, as CNN reported.








Thursday, December 19, 2019

RSN: William Boardman | Republicans Defend Trump With "Four Facts" That Are Fake




Reader Supported News
19 December 19

“Can’t you make do with less.” Another astonishing reader comment. WE ARE MAKING DO WITH LESS! And it hasn’t been working. That’s the point.
We have been slashing the budget wherever possible for 2 years now. Enough.
Now we fight back.
Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News


If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts
CA 95611



Reader Supported News
19 December 19
It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!

RSN: William Boardman | Republicans Defend Trump With "Four Facts" That Are Fake
Sen. Mitch McConnell. (photo: J. Scott Applewhite/AP)
William Boardman, Reader Supported News
Boardman writes: "Again and again during the House impeachment hearings we heard one Republican after another assert 'four facts' in Trump's defense. The phrasing varied, but the assertions remained substantively unchanged."

  The phrasing varied, but the assertions remained substantively unchanged. Here they are in capsule form as expressed by Rep. Jim Jordan on Fox News in response to the interviewer’s comment about the hearings that “You did not engage each other so nothing was done.” Jordan’s reply is like a spousal batterer (“she just won’t listen!”):
I get that but again, they won't accept the facts. Four facts have never changed, they will never change. They've always been there. We have the transcript. There was no quid pro quo on the transcript. We have the two guys who were on the call. President Trump, President Zelensky, both have said no pressure, no pushing, no linkage of an investigation to the security assistance money. We have the fact Ukraine didn't even know aid was paused at the time of the call and most importantly Ukraine took no action, i.e., never made any announcement of investigation into anybody let alone the Bidens to get the aid released. Those facts have always been there but they don't care….
Yes, we have “the transcript.” It is not a verbatim transcript, it is a composite transcript compiled from the notes of an unknown number of notetakers who listened to the 30-minute phone call as it happened on July 25, 2019. In the words of the White House: “The text in this document records the notes and recollections of Situation Room Officers and NSC policy staff assigned to listen and memorialize the conversation in written form as the conversation takes place.” There is no assurance that this is a complete or fully accurate transcript, but it is five pages long, single-spaced and is the best record we have of this phone call between two presidents. No one knows whether a verbatim transcript exists. So what does this composite transcript show about the Republicans’ alleged “four facts”?
#1 “There was no quid pro quo on the transcript.”
The phrase “quid pro quo” has no inherent value. A quid pro quo can be good in one circumstance or bad in another. The phrase means, literally, “something for something,” an exchange of items of value made freely or under duress. A quid pro quo can exist in a variety forms from proposal to completed deal. The transcript shows that on July 25, both presidents were considering a variety of quid pro quo arrangements without formally settling on any specific tradeoff.
  • President Zelensky is the first to ask for a quid, that the US bring pressure to bear on the European Union to enforce sanctions against the Russian Federation. The US is on record supporting those sanctions. President Trump never addresses the ask (page 2).

  • President Zelensky promptly asks for a second quid (page 2): “I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps. Specifically we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.” This is a core issue. Javelins are anti-tank weapons that are already available for use to check a possible Russian tank attack in the Donbass, where Russian-backed separatists are fighting Ukrainian forces in what is essentially a civil war. Both presidents here know that the Javelins are part of the $391 million aid package that has been approved by all the interested agencies of the US, only to be held back by the White House. Trump knows this. Zelensky may or may not know about the hold, he surely knows the aid has not arrived and here he is gently inquiring about it. (He doesn’t say what Rudy Giuliani told his aide in a recent conversation (page 3).)

  • President Trump does not respond to requests about sanctions or Javelins. His immediate response is an ask of his own, or a quo (page 3): “I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine….” Trump’s references to Crowdstrike and Robert Mueller make clear that he’s asking for an investigation of alleged Ukrainian interference in the 2016 US election. This allegation is actually Russian disinformation.

  • President Trump asks again for this investigation (page 3): “I would like to have the Attorney General [William Barr] call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it.”

  • President Trump asks a third time for this investigation (page 3): “Whatever you can do, it's very important that you do it if that's possible.”

  • President Zelinsky immediately accepts Trump’s request, apparently unconditionally, but without specificity (page 3): “Yes it is very important for me and everything that you just mentioned earlier.” After more general expressions of mutual friendship and “strategic partnership,” Zelensky concludes with an apparent confirmation of a tacit quid pro quo: “… in addition to that investigation, I guarantee as the President of Ukraine that all the investigations will be done openly and candidly. That I can assure you.” 

  • President Trump says “good,” seeming to approve the quid pro quo as presently framed. Then he immediately moves to a new ask, another quo. In muddy fashion, Trump asks for some sort of an investigation that involves Yuriy Lutsenko, former Ukrainian prosecutor from May 2016 to August 2019. [In 2010, Lutsenko had been convicted of corruption, sentenced to 4 years in prison, and he was later pardoned in 2013. During 2018-2019, Lutsenko was instrumental in sharing information with Rudy Giuliani and helping to get US Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch removed on April 25, four days after Zelensky was elected president].  

  • President Trump, in the same passage, asks for an investigation into the Bidens, another quo (page 4): “The other thing, There's a lot of talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it...” [Trump is referring to events in 2015 when Biden, acting with the backing of the US, EU, IMF and others in the international community, pressured Ukraine to fire prosecutor Viktor Shokin. In 2016 Lutsenko succeeded Shokin. Both prosecutors looked into Burisma, Hunter Biden’s employer. Neither prosecutor brought a case against Burisma. Lutsenko now says there was no case to be brought. Currently, the Trump campaign is running an ad that falsifies these events.] The only current relevance of Trump’s interest is Burisma is that it potentially hurts a possible future opponent, Joe Biden.

  • President Zelensky again responds with apparent acceptance of Trump’s request (page 4): “I understand and I'm knowledgeable about the situation…. the next prosecutor general will be 100% my person, my candidate, who will be approved by the parliament and will start as a new prosecutor in September. He or she will look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue.” Zelensky makes a promise asked for by Trump. He says he knows what’s going on and implies that he expects a quid pro quo. He refers to a company that Trump has not mentioned in this conversation. And Zelensky promises his prosecutor will do what Zelensky asks. That is the bald face of corruption. If Trump cares a whit about corruption, this is where he interjects something about the rule of law. In reality, he is promising that his own prosecutor will be colluding in this plan to get at the Bidens.

  •  President Zelensky makes one more ask (page 5): “I also want to thank you for your invitation to visit the United States, specifically Washington DC. On the other hand, I also want to ensure you that we will be very serious about the case and will work on the investigation.” Zelensky outlines a specific quid pro quo without calling it that.

  • President Trump responds by repeating the quid pro quo in different words: “Well, thank you very much and I appreciate that. I will tell Rudy [Giuliani] and Attorney General Barr to call. Thank you. Whenever you would like to come to the White House, feel free to call. Give us a date and we'll work that out. I look forward to seeing you.” On the face of it, the two presidents have reached an initial agreement on a quid pro quo, with the expectation of more to follow. 
#2. “We have the two guys who were on the call. President Trump, President Zelensky, both have said no pressure, no pushing, no linkage of an investigation to the security assistance money.” 
This is a profoundly dishonest Republican talking point, riddled with irrelevance.
President Zelenksy and Ukraine desperately need US support to become and remain a free and independent democratic nation. ANY exchange with the US is inherently full of pressure for any Ukrainian president. The power imbalance is huge and continuing. The US is in a position to make offers that Ukraine can’t refuse.  
President Zelinsky is not going to say publicly that he felt pressured. That would be madness and against his national interest.
President Trump is not going to say he pressured Ukraine because he doesn’t have to admit an obvious reality and he’s comfortable lying.
There is no specific linkage investigation and the aid money, but there is an implicit linkage. When Zelinsky raises the aid issue, Trump’s silence speaks volumes, and adds to the pressure.
There is a very specific linkage of an investigation and a White House visit. The White House visit is more important to Zelensky than most foreign presidents. Not only does Zelensky need to bolster his presidential credibility in any way he can, Ukraine need the US to show the Russians that it will be a reliable ally for Ukraine. For Ukraine, this is close to life and death.
The Republican talking point is disgusting in its distortion of reality and in its implied willingness to discard an actual reformer in Ukraine in defense of a corrupt destroyer in the US.  
The reality for Ukraine is worse than Republicans or Trump ever admit. That reality includes the presence of the Russian military along the entire eastern border of Ukraine as well as active Russian involvement on the side of the separatists in eastern Ukraine, the Donbass region, since 2014. (Crimea is another constant issue for Ukraine.) The Russian involvement in the Donbass may not rise to the technical definition of war, but the combat has been intense enough to kill more than 13,000 people.
Zelensky is acutely aware of the Donbass, and resolving it has been one of his highest priorities. That’s why he needs US support, as a check on Russia. That’s why he needs Javelin missiles, as a check on Russian tanks coming into Ukraine. When Trump withholds military aid, including Javelins, he sends a signal that not only pressures Ukraine, but that also reassures Putin, reinforcing Trump’s image as pro-Russian. Zelensky’s vulnerability and Zelensky’s limited maneuverability are apparent to anyone who examines his situation. For Republicans to act as if that situation does not exist is quintessential bad faith and tantamount to lying at an existential level.
#3. “We have the fact Ukraine didn't even know aid was paused at the time of the call….”
This is, at best, a disputed “fact” of limited relevance. At Trump’s request, the Office of Management and Budget had put a hold on $391 million in aid by July 3. By July 25, Zelensky was surely aware that the aid had not been delivered and, assuming basic competence, his government had at least made discreet inquiries as to when it might be expected.
As of July 3, the hold on Ukraine aid was a secret to most of the relevant US officials, including those who had approved its being sent. By mid-July, knowledge of the hold had spread, to the concern of members of State, Defense, NSC, and other agencies. One OMB official feared that the hold violated the Impoundment Control Act.
The OMB didn’t put the hold in writing until after the July 25 phone call.
According to news reports, Ukraine officials learned of the hold on their aid package in mid-July, and had been making inquiries by July 25.
During the July 25 call, President Zelensky raised the issue obliquely and got no answer. Raising a stink about not receiving a gift hardly seems like an effective  diplomatic approach if the goal is to get the full $391 million.
#4. “… and most importantly Ukraine took no action, i.e., never made any announcement of investigation into anybody let alone the Bidens to get the aid released.”
Insofar as this is “most important,” it’s a clear measure of how bankrupt the Republican defense of Trump has become.
The critical timeframe is from July 25 to September 11, when the aid was released. During those seven weeks, Trump officials put increasing pressure on Zelenksy to announce the Biden investigation. They even wrote out the statement they wanted him to make. Eventually, Zelensky agreed to go on CNN to make the announcement, and a date was scheduled in September. 
But on August 28, Politico broke the story. On September 9, the House announced an investigation. On September 11, the White House released the aid. At some point, Zelensky cancelled his CNN appearance.
The only reason Zelensky didn’t deliver on the quid pro quo demanded by Trump was that Trump’s impeachable chicanery was exposed.
The Republicans’ defense of Trump, their ritual recital of “four facts” that are fake, is an unsupportable sham. But for them it doesn’t really matter. They’ve managed to muddy the waters to Trump’s benefit. And the Senate – the jury in any impeachment trial – is already coordinating with the defendant on his acquittal, the Constitution be damned.



William Boardman has been writing for Reader Supported News since 2012. A collection of his essays, EXCEPTIONAL: American Exceptionalism Takes Its Toll, was published in September 2019 and is available from Yorkland Publishing of Toronto. He is a former Vermont assistant judge.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

READ MORE

The Democratic-led House of Representatives charged President Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. (photo: Erin Schaff/The New York Times)
The Democratic-led House of Representatives charged President Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. (photo: Erin Schaff/The New York Times)

Donald Trump Is Now the Third President To Be Impeached in US History
Paul McLeod, Addy Baird and Kadia Goba, BuzzFeed News
Excerpt: "Donald Trump has become the third president in US history to be impeached after the House of Representatives voted Wednesday on two charges against him - abuse of power and obstruction of Congress."
READ MORE

A storefront of Sunshine Health and Life Advisors, a Florida insurance enrollment company, in Miami in November 2016. (photo: Angel Valetin/The New York Times)
A storefront of Sunshine Health and Life Advisors, a Florida insurance enrollment company, in Miami in November 2016. (photo: Angel Valetin/The New York Times)

Obamacare Insurance Mandate Is Struck Down by Federal Appeals Court
Abby Goodnough, The New York Times
Goodnough writes: "A federal appeals court on Wednesday struck down a central provision of the Affordable Care Act, ruling that the requirement that people have health insurance was unconstitutional."
READ MORE

Sen. Bernie Sanders. (photo: Sopa)
Sen. Bernie Sanders. (photo: Sopa)

New Report From Bernie Sanders Details Declining Living Standards for Millennials
Jameelah Nasheed, Teen Vogue
Nasheed writes: "Stories of the American Dream have been told for generations - not just in the United States, but worldwide. Economic mobility is such a core part of the story America tells about itself: People whose families have lived here for generations and immigrant families are taught to believe that in this country, anyone, regardless of their background, can 'pull themselves up by their bootstraps' to obtain and build wealth."
READ MORE

Edward Snowden's book 'Permanent Record.' (photo: Getty)
Edward Snowden's book 'Permanent Record.' (photo: Getty)

Judge Rules in Favor of US Effort to Take Edward Snowden's Book Money
Jonathan Drew, Associated Press
Drew writes: "Former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden violated secrecy agreements with the U.S. government that allow it to claim proceeds from a memoir he published earlier this year, a judge ruled Tuesday."
READ MORE


A soldier of the United Nations peacekeeping mission formerly deployed in Haiti, known as Minustah, patrolling in Port-au-Prince in 2010. (photo: Damon Winter/New York Times)
A soldier of the United Nations peacekeeping mission formerly deployed in Haiti, known as Minustah, patrolling in Port-au-Prince in 2010. (photo: Damon Winter/New York Times)

UN Peacekeepers Father, Then Abandoned, Hundreds of Children in Haiti, Report Says
Elian Peltier, The New York Times
Peltier writes: "United Nations peacekeepers in Haiti fathered and left behind hundreds of children, researchers found in a newly released academic study, leaving mothers struggling with stigma, poverty and single parenthood after the men departed the country."
READ MORE


Around 4,700 slaughterhouses discharge polluted water into waterways including the Chesapeake Bay, the country's largest estuary. (photo: Mark Wilson/Getty)
Around 4,700 slaughterhouses discharge polluted water into waterways including the Chesapeake Bay, the country's largest estuary. (photo: Mark Wilson/Getty)

EPA Sued for Allowing Slaughterhouses to Pollute Waterways
Nina Lakhani, Guardian UK
Lakhani writes: "A coalition of conservation and community groups representing millions of people is suing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for refusing to update national water pollution standards for slaughterhouses."

excerpt:
More than eight billion chickens, 100 million pigs and 30 million cattle are processed each year in more than 5,000 slaughterhouses in America. Around 4,700 of these slaughterhouses discharge polluted water into waterways including the Chesapeake Bay, the country’s largest estuary.
“[Current] EPA standards are either weak and outdated or nonexistent,” said Sylvia Lam, a lawyer with the not-for-profit Environmental Integrity Project, which filed the lawsuit on Wednesday.
“Cleaner plants have already installed technology to lessen the pollution they send into their local rivers and streams. By not updating these nationwide standards, EPA is rewarding dirty slaughterhouses at the expense of the public.”
The Clean Water Act requires the EPA to set industry-wide water pollution standards for slaughterhouses and to review those standards each year to decide whether updates are necessary in order to keep pace with advances in pollution-control technology.
In October 2019, the EPA announced it would not revise the federal water pollution standards for slaughterhouses that directly discharge processed wastewater into waterways. The EPA last revised these standards 15 years ago and more than a third of these slaughterhouses operate under guidelines that date back to the 1970s.

Update My Monthly Donation