QAnon Among Others in the FBI Report

The FBI for the first time has identified fringe conspiracy theories as a domestic terrorist threat, according to a previously unpublicized document obtained by Yahoo News. (Read the document below.)

The FBI intelligence bulletin from the bureau’s Phoenix field office, dated May 30, 2019, describes “conspiracy theory-driven domestic extremists,” as a growing threat, and notes that it is the first such report to do so. It lists a number of arrests, including some that haven’t been publicized, related to violent incidents motivated by fringe beliefs.

The document specifically mentions QAnon, a shadowy network that believes in a deep state conspiracy against President Trump, and Pizzagate, the theory that a pedophile ring including Clinton associates was being run out of the basement of a Washington, D.C., pizza restaurant (which didn’t actually have a basement).

“The FBI assesses these conspiracy theories very likely will emerge, spread, and evolve in the modern information marketplace, occasionally driving both groups and individual extremists to carry out criminal or violent acts,” the document states. It also goes on to say the FBI believes conspiracy theory-driven extremists are likely to increase during the 2020 presidential election cycle.

The FBI said another factor driving the intensity of this threat is “the uncovering of real conspiracies or cover-ups involving illegal, harmful, or unconstitutional activities by government officials or leading political figures.” The FBI does not specify which political leaders or which cover-ups it was referring to.

President Trump is mentioned by name briefly in the latest FBI document, which notes that the origins of QAnon is the conspiratorial belief that “Q,” allegedly a government official, “posts classified information online to reveal a covert effort, led by President Trump, to dismantle a conspiracy involving ‘deep state’ actors and global elites allegedly engaged in an international child sex trafficking ring.”

This recent intelligence bulletin comes as the FBI is facing pressure to explain who it considers an extremist, and how the government prosecutes domestic terrorists. In recent weeks the FBI director has addressed domestic terrorism multiple times but did not publicly mention this new conspiracy theorist threat.

Christopher Wray, Trump’s FBI Director Pick, Is the Anti ...

The FBI is already under fire for its approach to domestic extremism. In a contentious hearing last week before the Senate Judiciary Committee, FBI Director Christopher Wray faced criticism from Democrats who said the bureau was not focusing enough on white supremacist violence. “The term ‘white supremacist,’ ‘white nationalist’ is not included in your statement to the committee when you talk about threats to America,” Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said. “There is a reference to racism, which I think probably was meant to include that, but nothing more specific.”
***

FBI Conspiracy Theory Redacted by Kelli R. Grant on Scribd


Wray told lawmakers the FBI had done away with separate categories for black identity extremists and white supremacists, and said the bureau was instead now focusing on “racially motivated” violence. But he added, “I will say that a majority of the domestic terrorism cases that we’ve investigated are motivated by some version of what you might call white supremacist violence.”

The FBI had faced mounting criticism for the term “black identity extremists,” after its use was revealed by Foreign Policy magazine in 2017. Critics pointed out that the term was an FBI invention based solely on race, since no group or even any specific individuals actually identify as black identity extremists.

In May, Michael C. McGarrity, the FBI’s assistant director of the counterterrorism division, told Congress the bureau now “classifies domestic terrorism threats into four main categories: racially motivated violent extremism, anti-government/anti-authority extremism, animal rights/environmental extremism, and abortion extremism,” a term the bureau uses to classify both pro-choice and anti-abortion extremists.

The new focus on conspiracy theorists appears to fall under the broader category of anti-government extremism. “This is the first FBI product examining the threat from conspiracy theory-driven domestic extremists and provides a baseline for future intelligence products,” the document states.

The new category is different in that it focuses not on racial motivations, but on violence based specifically on beliefs that, in the words of the FBI document, “attempt to explain events or circumstances as the result of a group of actors working in secret to benefit themselves at the expense of others” and are “usually at odds with official or prevailing explanations of events.”

The FBI acknowledges conspiracy theory-driven violence is not new, but says it’s gotten worse with advances in technology combined with an increasingly partisan political landscape in the lead-up to the 2020 presidential election. “The advent of the Internet and social media has enabled promoters of conspiracy theories to produce and share greater volumes of material via online platforms that larger audiences of consumers can quickly and easily access,” the document says.

The bulletin says it is intended to provide guidance and “inform discussions within law enforcement as they relate to potentially harmful conspiracy theories and domestic extremism.”

The FBI Phoenix field office referred Yahoo News to the bureau’s national press office, which provided a written statement.

“While our standard practice is to not comment on specific intelligence products, the FBI routinely shares information with our law enforcement partners in order to assist in protecting the communities they serve,” the FBI said.

In its statement, the FBI also said it can “never initiate an investigation based solely on First Amendment protected activity. As with all of our investigations, the FBI can never monitor a website or a social media platform without probable cause.”

The Department of Homeland Security, which has also been involved in monitoring domestic extremism, did not return or acknowledge emails and phone requests for comment.

While not all conspiracy theories are deadly, those identified in the FBI’s 15-page report led to either attempted or successfully carried-out violent attacks. For example, the Pizzagate conspiracy led a 28-year-old man to invade a Washington, D.C., restaurant to rescue the children he believed were being kept there, and fire an assault-style weapon inside.

The FBI document also cites an unnamed California man who was arrested on Dec. 19, 2018, after being found with what appeared to be bomb-making materials in his car. The man allegedly was planning “blow up a satanic temple monument” in the Capitol rotunda in Springfield, Ill., to “make Americans aware of Pizzagate and the New World Order, who were dismantling society,” the document says.

Historian David Garrow, the author of a Pulitzer Prize-winning biography of Martin Luther King Jr. who has worked extensively with FBI archives, raised doubts to Yahoo News about the memo. He says the FBI’s default assumption is that violence is motivated by ideological beliefs rather than mental illness. “The guy who shot up the pizza place in D.C.: Do we think of him as a right-wing activist, or insane?” Garrow asked.

Garrow was similarly critical of the FBI’s use of the term “black identity extremists” and related attempts to ascribe incidents like the 2016 shooting of six police officers in Baton Rouge, La., to black radicalism. He said the shooter, Gavin Long, had a history of mental health problems. “The bureau’s presumption — the mindset — is to see ideological motives where most of the rest of us see individual nuttiness,” he said.

Identifying conspiracy theories as a threat could be a political lightning rod, since President Trump has been accused of promulgating some of them, with his frequent references to a deep state and his praise in 2015 for Alex Jones, who runs the conspiracy site InfoWars. While the FBI intelligence bulletin does not mention Jones or InfoWars by name, it does mention some of the conspiracy theories frequently associated with the far-right radio host, in particular the concept of the New World Order.

Jones claimed the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, in which 26 children were killed, was a hoax, a false flag operation intended as a pretext for the government to seize or outlaw firearms. The families of a number of victims have sued Jones for defamation, saying his conspiracy-mongering contributed to death threats and online abuse they have received.

While Trump has never endorsed Sandy Hook denialism, he was almost up until the 2016 election the most high-profile promoter of the birther conspiracy that claimed former President Barack Obama was not born in the United States. He later dropped his claim, and deflected criticism by pointing the finger at Hillary Clinton. He said her campaign had given birth to the conspiracy, and Trump “finished it.”

There is no evidence that Clinton started the birther conspiracy.

Joe Uscinski, an associate professor of political science at the University of Miami, whose work on conspiracy theories is cited in the intelligence bulletin, said there’s no data suggesting conspiracy theories are any more widespread now than in the past. “There is absolutely no evidence that people are more conspiratorial now,” says Uscinski, after Yahoo News described the bulletin to him. “They may be, but there is not strong evidence showing this.”

It’s not that people are becoming more conspiratorial, says Uscinski, but conspiracies are simply getting more media attention.

“We are looking back at the past with very rosy hindsight to forget our beliefs, pre-internet, in JFK [assassination] conspiracy theories and Red scares. My gosh, we have conspiracy theories about the king [of England] written into the Declaration of Independence,” he said, referencing claims that the king was planning to establish tyranny over the American colonies.

It’s not that conspiracy theorists are growing in number, Uscinski argues, but that media coverage of those conspiracies has grown. “For most of the last 50 years, 60 to 80 percent of the country believe in some form of JFK conspiracy theory,” he said. “They’re obviously not all extremist.”

Conspiracy theories, including Russia’s role in creating and promoting them, attracted widespread attention during the 2016 presidential election when they crossed over from Internet chat groups to mainstream news coverage. Yahoo News’s “Conspiracyland” podcast recently revealed that Russia’s foreign intelligence service was the origin of a hoax report that tied the murder of Seth Rich, a Democratic National Committee staffer, to Hillary Clinton.

Washington police believe that Rich was killed in a botched robbery, and there is no proof that his murder had any political connections.

Among the violent conspiracy theories cited in the May FBI document is one involving a man who thought Transportation Security Administration agents were part of a New World Order. Another focused on the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), a government-funded facility in Alaska that has been linked to everything from death beams to mind control. The two men arrested in connection with HAARP were “stockpiling weapons, ammunition and other tactical gear in preparation to attack” the facility, believing it was being used “to control the weather and prevent humans from talking to God.”

Nate Snyder, who served as a Department of Homeland Security counterterrorism official during the Obama administration, said that the FBI appears to be applying the same radicalization analysis it employs against foreign terrorism, like the Islamic State group, which has recruited followers in the United States.

“The domestic violent extremists cited in the bulletin are using the same playbook that groups like ISIS and al-Qaida have used to inspire, recruit and carry out attacks,” said Snyder, after reviewing a copy of the bulletin provided by Yahoo News. “You put out a bulletin and say this is the content they’re looking at — and it’s some guy saying he’s a religious cleric or philosopher — and then you look at the content, videos on YouTube, etc., that they are pushing and show how people in the U.S. might be radicalized by that content.”

Though the FBI document focuses on ideological motivations, FBI Director Wray, in his testimony last week, asserted that the FBI is concerned only with violence, not people’s beliefs. The FBI doesn’t “investigate ideology, no matter how repugnant,” he told lawmakers. “We investigate violence. And any extremist ideology, when it turns to violence, we are all over it. … In the first three quarters of this year, we’ve had more domestic terrorism arrests than the prior year, and it’s about the same number of arrests as we have on the international terrorism side.”

Yet the proliferation of the extremist categories concerns Michael German, a former FBI agent and now a fellow with the Brennan Center for Justice’s Liberty & National Security program. “It’s part of the radicalization theory the FBI has promoted despite empirical studies that show it’s bogus,” he said.

German says this new category is a continuing part of FBI overreach. “They like the radicalization theory because it justifies mass surveillance,” he said. “If we know everyone who will do harm is coming from this particular community, mass surveillance is important. We keep broadening the number of communities we include in extremist categories.”

For Garrow, the historian, the FBI’s expansive definition has its roots in bureau paranoia that dates back decades. “I think it’s their starting point,” he said. “This goes all the way back to the Hoover era without question. They see ideology as a central motivating factor in human life, and they don’t see mental health issues as a major factor.”

Yet trying to label a specific belief system as prone to violence is problematic, he said.

“I don’t think most of us would do a good job in predicting what sort of wacky information could lead someone to violence, or not lead anyone to violence,” Garrow said. “Pizzagate would be a great example of that.”

 

Tlaib’s Campaign Donor has Been Dead for 10 Years

Dinesh D’Souza was sentenced for a a felony count that was hardly as bad as what you are about to know. He also paid a $30,000 fine.

Just this week, President Trump gave a speech in Jamestown on the 400th anniversary of the first meeting of elected legislators in America. What was hardly covered is his speech was interrupted by a Virginia legislator named Ibraheem Samirah.

ImageImage

Virginia Lawmaker Connected to Anti-Semitic Groups ...

As reported:

Democratic freshman representative Rashida Tlaib (Mich.) received a generous donation during the second quarter in the name of a man who died more than 10 years ago, a review of campaign and online records shows.

Tlaib’s campaign committee, Rashida Tlaib for Congress, hauled in donations of at least $2,000 from dozens of individuals between April 1 and June 30. One of those contributions was from George S. Farah Sr., a Michigan businessman, real estate developer, and community leader who made his way from Palestine to the United States in the mid-1950s. Farah passed away on Feb. 1, 2009, from heart failure, according to a Michigan Live article published at the time of his death.

On June 22, Tlaib’s campaign received a $2,500 donation in his name, Federal Election Commission filings show. A search of public records, which also state that he is deceased, provides an address identical to the one written on the contribution to Tlaib’s campaign committee. Grand Blanc Township property records also show that the residence located at that address is registered in Farah’s name along with that of his widow.

Tlaib is the sole federal politician to receive a donation in Farah’s name for the 2020 election cycle. In the past, Rep. Dan Kildee (D., Mich.) has also received contributions from Farah following his passing. Kildee, who first ran for the House of Representatives during the 2012 election cycle, was given $1,400 in total contributions in Farah’s name between 2011 and 2017. The two Democratic Michigan representatives are the only federal politicians who received money in Farah’s name for the past 10 years.

Federal law prohibits making campaign contributions in the name of another individual.

“It is illegal to make a campaign contribution in the name of another person and a campaign must ensure all donor information is reported accurately,” said Kendra Arnold, executive director of the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust. “The requirement of accurate disclosure of campaign contributors is important to inform voters of the source of campaign funds, prevent corruption, and ensure individuals are contributing within the legal limits.”

Tlaib’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment before publication. A spokesman for Rep. Kildee’s campaign, however, did.

“Gisele Farah is the sole beneficiary of a trust in her late husband’s name, George S. Farah Sr., who passed away in 2009,” the Kildee campaign spokesman said. “Since his death, Gisele Farah, as the sole beneficiary in control of the trust, has contributed to the campaign with funds from her trust. Our campaign’s records have been amended to clarify that the campaign contributions were from Gisele Farah and should be designated under her name.”

Inquiries sent to West Second Street Associates, a real estate investment and development company founded by Farah and run by members of the Farah family, were not returned.

Donations in the names of deceased individuals have occurred in the past. Between Jan. 2009 and Aug. 2013, 32 contributions totaling $586,000 from people marked as “deceased” in campaign records made their way to political candidates and parties, according to a 2013 report from USA Today.

In some circumstances, individuals make political candidates and committees part of their estates. If, for example, a trust is set up before someone’s death, that individual can leave specific instructions for where they would like the funds to go.

George S. Farah Sr. did not appear to give donations to any federal politicians prior to passing, based on a search of records.

UPDATE 2:40 P.M.: After publication, a spokesperson for the Rashida Tlaib campaign returned the following statement, strikingly similar to the comment received from the campaign of Rep. Kildee prior to publication:

“Gisele Farah is the sole beneficiary of a trust in her late husband’s name, George S. Farah Sr., who as you noted passed away in 2009. Gisele Farah, as the sole beneficiary in control of the trust, contributed to our campaign with funds from her trust. We will amend our campaign records and filings to clarify that the campaign contribution was from Gisele Farah and should be designated under her name.”

 

 

Is the U.S. Prepared for Foreign Interference of 2020 Elections

The Democrats continue to declare the Russians helped Donald Trump win the presidency and that now President Trump has done nothing to prevent Russian interference of the 2020 elections.

DHS is worried about our elections, and it's asking ...

But we need to look at some real facts.

  1. DHS launched several programs to aid the U.S. security of the nation’s elections systems. Beginning in 2017, a National Infrastructure Protection Plan was launched which began the real partnership with Federal, State and local governments including private sector entities. The sharing of timely and actionable threats, cybersecurity assistance including sensors all at no charge to election officials. Scanning, risk assessment and analysis along with training are all part of the Protection Plan, including conference calls scheduled as needed. What is most interesting is this program was initiated by a Presidential Policy Directive #21 signed by then President Obama in 2013.
  2. As ODNI Dan Coats has tendered his resignation effective in mid-August, many have said he has no accomplishment. This agency is merely an intelligence coordinator of many agencies and is bureaucratic but Coats did create a position that is dedicated to election security efforts and is headed by Shelby Pierson who has a deep resume in intelligence and was a crisis manager for election security in the 2018 elections. He has briefed the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee several times so for any Democrat to declare that the Trump administration has done nothing is false.
  3. DHS has a resource library including a checklist that is available for free for any election officials that can be accessed as new threats or conditions arise. This library includes HTTPS encryption techniques, incident response, ransomware best practices and securing voter registration data. Additionally, email authentication techniques are available, layering credentialed access logins, security baselines, monitoring intrusions and brute force attack attempts are shared with all participating partners.

All of these efforts are positive steps against foreign interference, however fake news and rogue actors are crafty, resourceful and well financed. The United States is not the only country that is a victim of foreign intrusions.

Foreign spy services that are utilizing information operations in order to influence US elections reportedly include —aside from Russia— Israel, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Venezuela and China.

The majority of foreign information operations take place on social-media platforms such as YouTube, Twitter, Instagram and Facebook. But there are also campaigns to influence more traditional American media, for instance by tricking newspapers into publishing letters to the editor that are in fact authored by foreign intelligence operatives. Analysts from FireEye, Graphika and other cybersecurity and network-analysis firms told The Postthat some information operations are difficult to detect, because the presence of a state security service is not always apparent. However, the messages that are communicated in tweets, Facebook postings, online videos, etc., tend to echo —often word for word— the rhetoric of foreign governments, and promote their geopolitical objectives. As can be expected, these objectives vary. Thus, Russian, Israeli and Saudi information operations tend to express strong political support for US President Donald Trump, arguably because these governments see his potential re-election as a development that would further their national interest. In contrast, Iranian information operations tend to lambast Trump for his negative stance on the Iranian nuclear deal and for his support for Saudi Arabia’s intervention in the Yemeni Civil War.

Stanley McChrystal has called for a nonpartisan, non-governmental Fair Digital Election Commission to protect the integrity of our elections by detecting, exposing, evaluating and remediating the impact of disinformation. Well we already have one where non-government cyber experts are collaborating with government officials and issuing attributions to the cyber actors as well as recommendations.

Fake news and false news influence voter’s attitudes. So one must ask where in Silicon Valley and the tech giants? We already know that Instagram, Facebook, Google, YouTube and Twitter are censoring so voters must be diligent in research and cautious themselves regarding the spread of fake news and validating stories beyond just reading the headlines.

Last year, 2018:

A new study by three MIT scholars has found that false news spreads more rapidly on the social network Twitter than real news does — and by a substantial margin.

“We found that falsehood diffuses significantly farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than the truth, in all categories of information, and in many cases by an order of magnitude,” says Sinan Aral, a professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management and co-author of a new paper detailing the findings.

“These findings shed new light on fundamental aspects of our online communication ecosystem,” says Deb Roy, an associate professor of media arts and sciences at the MIT Media Lab and director of the Media Lab’s Laboratory for Social Machines (LSM), who is also a co-author of the study. Roy adds that the researchers were “somewhere between surprised and stunned” at the different trajectories of true and false news on Twitter.

Moreover, the scholars found, the spread of false information is essentially not due to bots that are programmed to disseminate inaccurate stories. Instead, false news speeds faster around Twitter due to people retweeting inaccurate news items.

“When we removed all of the bots in our dataset, [the] differences between the spread of false and true news stood,”says Soroush Vosoughi, a co-author of the new paper and a postdoc at LSM whose PhD research helped give rise to the current study.

The study provides a variety of ways of quantifying this phenomenon: For instance,  false news stories are 70 percent more likely to be retweeted than true stories are. It also takes true stories about six times as long to reach 1,500 people as it does for false stories to reach the same number of people. When it comes to Twitter’s “cascades,” or unbroken retweet chains, falsehoods reach a cascade depth of 10 about 20 times faster than facts. And falsehoods are retweeted by unique users more broadly than true statements at every depth of cascade.

The paper, “The Spread of True and False News Online,” is published today in Science.

 

 

DoJ Anti-Trust Case Advancing v. Social Tech Companies

The Department of Justice is preparing to open a broad probe into whether Amazon, Facebook, and other big tech companies are illegally harming their competitors, the department said in a press release on

The investigation is the latest antitrust probe looking into “Big Tech” and is separate from the potential investigations into Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Alphabet that are reportedly being brought up against them by the DOJ and FTC.

Watch the FAANG stocks.

What are FAANG Stocks?

Facebook (FB), Amazon (AMZN), Apple (AAPL), Netflix (NFLX), and Alphabet (GOOG) are the five technology giants trading publicly in the market. Investors grouped these companies into one acronym to capture the collective impact that these companies have on the markets.

The Big FAANG Theory: 5 Reasons To Stop Dancing With Your Favorite Big 5 | Seeking Alpha

***

In the case of Big Tech and Anti-Trust, the issue is to protect competition and ensure benefits to the consumer. There are at least 3 Anti-Trust laws under consideration for the Department of Justice to pursue a case or cases against big tech.

  • The Sherman Antitrust Act
  • The Clayton Act
  • The Federal Trade Commission Act

The Sherman Antitrust Act since 1890 stands to protect a free market economy and outlaws contracts, combinations or price fixing. In short, it is a crime to monopolize.

The Clayton Act is a civil statue that prohibits mergers or acquisition that harm competition.

The Federal Trade Commission Act prohibits unfair interstate methods of commerce that include false testimony to Federal agencies, mail or wire fraud and obstruction of justice.

These Acts in composition prevent corporate cartel action in a free market system. Previous cases have included telecom companies like AT&T, Proctor and Gamble and Roche Holding, a Swiss pharmaceutical company.

The DoJ has been reviewing all things big tech for a while so just a simple review has already happened. Digital platforms are not responsive to consumer demands when it comes to privacy, access to small business and entrepreneurs and retail operations.

Congress has proposed regulation and even Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg admitted he was open to oversight or regulation in congressional testimony. So far, big tech has not addressed the concerns of users including possible corruption, censor algorithms or slanted search results.

Users have lost trust but have little choices for other platforms that offer better free enterprise usage. Is this now a discussion and investigation on consumer welfare and protection? Yes. This comes down to an congested intersection of corporations, terms of use, subjective results, narrow competition ranges and innovation all under the guise of power and money.

There is market domination and the little guy is sideline or bought out causing harm to innovation and user expectations.

The Hypocrisy of Kamala Harris for all to See

During a question session in the senate of AG Bill Barr regarding the Mueller report, Kamala Harris asked if Barr personally reviewed all the underlined evidence. Kamala charges that Barr did not take his duties seriously and is unprofessional.

Okay, so how about these two cases for example and did Kamala herself look at all the underlying evidence or just go for a easy plea deal or allow the statue of limitations to run out or was it all a coverup tactic?

In 2016:

California’s Attorney General, Kamala Harris, raised eyebrows in the law enforcement community when she allowed the statute of limitations to expire for prosecuting alleged crimes committed by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and top managers at Southern California Edison (SCE) involving the ratepayer-funded bailout of SCE’s failed SONGS nuclear facility.
Get the full 18-page criminal affidavit here.
Just one month after the media widely reported her failure to prosecute activities that may implicate Governor Jerry Brown, Harris received a coveted endorsement from Brown in her election bid to replace United States Senator Barbara Boxer.
Critics believe Brown’s endorsement of Harris weeks after her failure to prosecute may have been a quid-pro-quo for allowing the statute of limitations to expire on the suspected unlawful activities of Jerry Brown and his political appointees at the Public Utilities Commission.
Yesterday, Harris’ failure to prosecute prompted congresswoman Loretta Sanchez to issue a blistering press release accusing Harris of political cronyism.
The Sanchez press release calls on the Federal Department of Justice to intervene by initiating an independent investigation.
It also accuses Harris of “Burying her head in the sand” along with the millions of pounds of high-level nuclear waste that are slated for a beachfront burial at San Onofre State Beach Park in June of 2017.
Why the case is important to Jerry Brown

Governor Brown’s office has been implicated as a participant in the unlawful bailout of Southern California Edison at ratepayer expense.

According to a Public Records Act request by utility fraud investigators at the San Diego Law firm of Aguirre & Severson LLP , Jerry Brown’s office either sent or received at least 65 emails to the CPUC’s current president, Michael Picker. All of the emails involve details behind a secretly negotiated bailout of SONGS, which resulted in a deal that forced Southern California utility customers to pay an average of $1,600.00 each for the cost of the failed power plant.

https://s.hdnux.com/photos/53/75/26/11523502/3/920x1240.jpg

The next case involving former Mayor of San Diego, Ed Filner. He resigned but not before Kamala helped him out in a big way.

At least 20 women with evidence and formal complaints against Mayor Filner came forward in 2013 on accusations of sexual misconduct and sexual harassment. While he should have faced at least 5 years in prison, Harris worked a plea deal with Filner to sentence him with 3 months of house arrest, 3 years probation and only a partial loss of his mayoral pension. Filner apologized in a video statement and declared he was seeking professional help for his behavior. Did Harris looked at the underlying evidence of the 20 women herself?

Obviously there was truly a there there as the City of San Diego had to pay $250,000 to settle just one sexual harassment lawsuit brought by Filner’s former communications director, Irene McCormack. Great huh, the man does something like this and the city pays the freight on the case and not Filner?

Even more bold, Filner asked the city of San Diego to pay his legal bills, but at least the City rejected that.

Hey Kamala what is your response to all of this?

Oh, one more item. During judicial confirmation hearings in the Senate, Harris often displayed her disdain for religion, especially Catholicism. Oh, there is history to that by the way. In California, there were 6 charity hospitals operated by the Daughters of Charity. The Catholic Mission hospitals took in patients regardless of their ability to pay. Due to growing debt, the Daughters of Charity wanted to sell the operation to Prime Health Care as they promised to keep all 6 hospitals open for at least 5 years and would assume the pension costs and retire other debts. Enter the unions like SEIU and the closing of a system that helped out communities. A private equity firm out of New York took over. All about the benjamins…..