From Elon Musk to Jeff Bezos, these 30 personalities defined the 2010s – CNET

This story is part of The 2010s: A Decade in Review, a series on the memes, people, products, movies and so much more that have influenced the 2010s.

The first decade of the 21st century introduced us to sweeping mobile and social revolutions largely driven by names like Jobs, Zuckerberg and Bezos. In the second decade that's now closing, things got a little more complicated. During those years, a new collection of faces have joined the earlier tech titans to continue moving us into the future. Here's CNET's list of the top technology innovators and all-around unavoidable personalities of the 2010s.

A person wears a Guy Fawkes mask, which today is a trademark and symbol for the online hacktivist group Anonymous. From 2012.

More a decentralized collective than a personality, Anonymous was the name claimed by the loose affiliation of hackers who brought "hacktivism" into the mainstream. During the first half of the decade, Anonymous launched attacks against targets like ISIS, the governments of the US and Tunisia, and corporations such as Sony and PayPal. The group's tactics included distributed denial-of-service attacks that overwhelm a target's website and knock it offline and compromising private databases to access and later leak confidential information, such as the personal details of members of the Ku Klux Klan.

In 2019, the group's prominence has faded somewhat -- last year it said it would debunk the QAnon conspiracy theory -- but concerns about hacking remain in the forefront, in part because one large collective of unknown activists put it there.

Julian Assange of WikiLeaks during a livestreamed press conference in 2017.

The founder of online portal WikiLeaks, Assange had a mission to reveal the secrets of the powerful. It made him an instant hero to many and a wanted man to others (in May the US government charged him with violating the Espionage Act). WikiLeaks started the decade by publishing documents obtained by whistleblower Chelsea Manning between 2010 and 2011, and it supported NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden after he sought refuge in Russia in 2013. To avoid extradition to Sweden on charges of rape -- the charges were dropped in 2017, but the case has since been reopened -- Assange took refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he remained for seven years.

Despite its founder being stuck in the same building for much of the decade, WikiLeaks still managed to play a role in the 2016 US presidential election by publishing leaked emails that were detrimental to Hillary Clinton and the next year releasing thousands of documents showing how the CIA can hack into phones. The Assange saga is far from over, though. In 2019 he was booted from the embassy by the Ecuadorian government and arrested by London police. He remains in British custody and could be extradited to the US.

Now playing: Watch this: Step inside Julian Assange's office

3:25

GM CEO Mary Barra says the self-driving technology can help relieve driver stress.

The General Motors CEO became the first woman to lead a major carmaker when she took over in 2014 and has been consistently ranked among the world's most powerful women over the past decade by Forbes and Fortune.

Her tenure has been marked by GM's push to keep up and even eclipse Tesla's efforts to bring electric and driverless cars into the mainstream. The Chevy Volt EV actually brought a sub-$40,000 EV to market ahead of Tesla's Model 3, and GM has also invested in ride-sharing technology to help ensure it stays relevant in the future.

Under Barra, GM is also one of just two global businesses to completely do away with its gender pay gap, according to a study by Equileap.

Bezos speaking at an Amazon press event in 2018.

Even after losing a quarter of his Amazon shares in his divorce settlementin April, Bezos remains the world's richest person, worth more than $107 billion as of this month, according to Forbes. Throughout the decade, he spread his money around,buying the Washington Post in 2013 and growing his company phenomenally. Amazon is now a vast empire that's not only become the world's warehouse, but that also encompasses the Amazon Web Services cloud computing platform, game streaming platform Twitch, a fleet of freight aircraft, music streaming,branded convenience stores, the Kindle e-reader, the Whole Foods Market grocery chain and a space startup meant to give Elon Musk and SpaceX some competition. Its Prime subscription service delivers goods in hours, and serves up a huge gallery of movies, TV programs and audiobooks.

Amazon also makes plenty of products of its own, including its Alexa-powered home assistants and Ring security system, both of which have forced the company torespond to privacy concerns over its increasing expansion into homes. And the company continues to face criticism over working conditions and pay for its employees.

Now playing: Watch this: Jeff Bezos reveals plans for the moon and beyond

3:33

danah boyd

She may not be a household name, but danah boyd (who prefers to spell her name with lowercase) has become a leading thinker and researcher on the effects of technology on society and our children. In her 2014 book It's Complicated, she argued that social media provides an important space for youth to express themselves and to engage with each other and with society.

She's also a principal researcher for Microsoft and has broadened her research to focus on the relationship between social inequality and technology through her research institute Data and Society. In awarding her its 2019 Pioneer award, the Electronic Frontier Foundation called boyd a "trailblazing technology scholar."

Richard Branson at a Virgin Mobile event.

The billionaire magnate is willing to try just about anything, it seems. Branson's Virgin brand has dabbled in everything from media to hotels to health care, and in the last decade it has also made some far-out bets. In recent years, Branson has invested in Elon Musk's futuristic hyperloop transport technology and is working on Virgin Orbit, which could launch satellites using a combination of rockets and a high-altitude launcher plane. In the coming months, Virgin Galactic mayfinally begin launching tourists (including Branson himself) into orbit using a similar approach from the New Mexico desert.

By 2040, there will be 1 million more young women of color with coding skills if Kimberly Bryant meets her ambitious goal. The electrical engineer and Vanderbilt grad founded Black Girls Code in 2011 with the goal of reaching 1 million girls by midcentury. That could transform places like Silicon Valley, where only 2% of women working in tech are people of color, according to a 2018 report from the Kapor Center. Bryant's work has been widely recognized -- by the White House, the Smithsonian and others -- helping to bring in funding for the mission and increasing the chances that the next Steve Jobs is a woman of color.

Mark Cuban at CNET's Next Big Thing panel at CES 2013

During the 2010s, Cuban became much more than just one of the billionaires from the original dot-com boom of the late 1990s. He completed his crossover to become a major figure in the worlds of sports, entertainment and even politics.

Cuban's riches can be traced to successful exits from old, old-school internet properties like Broadcast.com, but he's since leveraged those early moves into a career as an NBA franchise owner, a TV personality (most notably on Shark Tank) and an investor in dozens of companies including Dropbox, Magnolia Pictures and Alyssa's Cookies. He was even floated as a potential presidential candidate in 2016 and 2020, but says he won't run without his family's permission.

Tim Cook at WWDC 2019.

It was a difficult job to take the mantle after Steve Jobs died in 2011, but Cook has maintained Apple's dominance over the past several years. Cook may not be the showman of his predecessor, but the brand is as far-reaching as ever. The iPhone still rules the mobile roost alongside Android, and under his guidance the company has launched forays into areas like the Apple Watch, content production, Apple Arcade and even finance with the Apple Card.

While it might be a stretch to call Cook a gay icon (he came out in a 2014 essay), he's certainly one of the most powerful LGBTQ people in the world, and his worldview has informed his drive to make Apple more ethical, diverse and values-driven, according to author Leander Kahney.

A pre-beard Dorsey.

Assuming the role of Twitter's CEO in 2015, Dorsey's been the face of one of the most highly trafficked and often toxic online platforms. Over the past decade, Twitter helped give rise to revolution in the Middle East, including the ouster of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, and also gave us the platform that @RealDonaldTrump has used more effectively than any other American politician to rally support and spin news events. Twitter has also enabled floods of hate speech, fake news and misinformation. Though the company has tried to combat them with new rules and technology, it's only subject to more criticism when the regulations are unevenly enforced.

As he tries to guide Twitter's central role in reshaping global media, Dorsey's also CEO of payments company Square, giving him an outsized influence in how information and money move around the world now and in the coming years.

Jennifer Doudna

One of the key innovations of the 2010s goes by the unwieldy name CRISPR/Cas9, and Doudna is a pioneer in its use to edit DNA. This new tool holds the potential to revolutionize biology, medicine, agriculture and other fields.

Doudna's lab at the University of California, Berkeley has also spun off a for-profit venture to commercialize CRISPR applications, and Doudna has become a leader in the ongoing ethical discussions around the future of genetic engineering.

Susan Fowler at the Women Transforming Technology conference

The #MeToo movement swept through the tech world and other industries beginning in 2017, thanks in large part to Fowler's personal blog chronicling sexual harassment and abuse within Uber, where she worked as a software engineer. The fallout resulted in a shakeup of Uber's power structure and the demotion of founder and CEO Travis Kalanick. Fowler's memoir, Whisteblower, is due out in 2020, and she has a new role writing for the New York Times opinion section.

This power couple has taken the money that Bill made producing the software suites we all love to complain about and turned it into a philanthropic empire. The $50 billion Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has poured millions into global health and development efforts, as well as education in the US. Bill says the foundation played a major role in a drastic reduction of the child mortality rate, saving over 100 million lives. Bill has also stayed relevant through the reading lists he releases regularly, and Melinda debuted as an author herself with a book about empowering women around the world.

Elizabeth Holmes in a still from The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley.

Like Pixelon's Michael Fenne (real name: David Kim Stanley) almost two decades earlier, Holmes serves as a cautionary tale for what can go wrong when the hype becomes unmoored from reality in tech.

In the span of a few years, Holmes took Theranos and a never-quite-ready-for-primetime blood-testing technology from a subject of interest to one of investment, investigation and now, potentially Holmes' own incarceration as she faces charges of criminal fraud.

The decade began with Jobs' introduction of the iPad in January 2010, nearly two years before he died in October 2011. Apple, whose iPhone helped change the way we live, has continued to be one of the most iconic and valuable brands in the history of capitalism. His legacy has been a topic of near constant discussion since his passing, including treatments in multiple Hollywood movies and major books from the likes of Walter Isaacson and Jobs' daughter Lisa Nicole Brennan-Jobs.

John Legere

T-Mobile's CEO could be the most interesting person in the wireless industry. Over the past decade, he's masterfully played the role of underdog fighting against telecom giants like AT&T and Verizon. Nearly everything the exec does seems calculated to turn heads, whether it's lacing a press conference with profanity, launching barbs at the competition on social media or dressing in the company's trademark magenta. But Legere also produced results, greatly increasing T-Mobile's customer base over the years, revamping the carrier's customer service and bucking industry trends by keeping unlimited data plans. Despite it all, Legere's future going into 2020 is uncertain, with talk he might be replaced should a pending merger with rival Sprint finally go through.

Travis Kalanick exits federal court after taking the stand during the Waymo v. Uber trial over allegedly stolen driverless car trade secrets.

The Uber founder embodies the success-at-all-costs mentality that has driven many other Silicon Valley success stories. He led a ride-sharing revolution that quickly spread around the world and made Uber the prototypical startup "unicorn." But allegations of sexual harassment (brought by whistleblower and engineer Susan Fowler) and Kalanick's own abrasive leadership style would soon see him pushed out as the company's leader in June 2017, although he still retains a seat on the board.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk

Musk wants to save the planet with electric cars and solar panels, take us to Mars, connect our brains to computers and shoot us around the world in pressurized tubes at near the speed of sound with his hyperloop-creating Boring Company. Most of this visionary's big visions are still in progress, but his credibility comes from simultaneously disrupting both the automotive and commercial space industries over the past decade with the success of Tesla and SpaceX. The world tends to watch his every move, which he often gleefully shares on social media. Musk's tweets have brought him trouble, especially when they move Tesla's stock price and invite lawsuits and the ire of the SEC or appear to smear a diver trying to rescue a Thai soccer team trapped in a cave.

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella speaks at a company event.

This Indian immigrant with a degree in electrical engineering turned out to be the right man for the job of making Microsoft cool again. Or at least making it cooler. Since becoming CEO in 2014, Nadella has helped increase Microsoft's bottom line and make it a trillion-dollar company. He's overseen a transformation that has done away with the company's cutthroat reputation, both toward competitors and internally, though in 2014 he apologized after making controversial comments about women's pay in an interview. Nadella has also advanced forward-looking acquisitions in artificial intelligence, gaming and brand names like Github, LinkedIn and Mojang, creator of Minecraft.

Very few people seem to know who Nakamoto really is. The presumed pseudonym is attached to the person or persons responsible for the development of bitcoin, which launched a cryptocurrency revolution that started slowly in 2009 but picked up steam over the decade that followed.

A once-worthless digital currency, bitcoin has been valued at up to $20,000 per coin. It inspired the development of countless other cryptos and an entirely new industry around its underlying technology, blockchain. Although some have claimed to be the real Nakamoto and others have been falsely outed as the actual Satoshi, his true identity remains unclear.

Google CEO Sundar Pichai

Google has gone from "Don't be evil" to increasingly having to convince consumers and regulators that it isn't. When the company transformed into Alphabet in 2015 and the Google name was attached to its internet-focused subsidiary (including Android, YouTube and search), Pichai became the new face of Google as CEO. During his first four years, the Googleplex has continued to dominate everything from search to mobile operating systems to online cat videos, while making big moves with new hardware like Google Home and a fleet of Pixel devices. It hasn't been all sunshine, though. Pichai has also had to navigate the proliferation of hate speech and disinformation on YouTube, deal with walkouts over sexual harassment allegations directed at Google executives and confront criticism over a possible censored search service in China. That's to say nothing of the James Damore saga over the company's diversity policies. Still, Pichai and Google seem likely to remain on top for the foreseeable future.

Zoe Quinn.

Years before #MeToo, Gamergate gave us all a preview of the widespread bad behavior and abuse by people in positions of power that would soon be exposed across a number of industries. Quinn, along with fellow game developer Brianna Wu and culture critic Anita Sarkeesian, was among the first to be harassed and threatened by mobs of online trolls that would eventually coalesce around the #gamergate hashtag. It was an early warning sign of how bad things would become online.

Quinn, who uses they/them pronouns, turned their experience and insights into the 2017 book Crash Override: How Gamergate (Nearly) Destroyed My Life, and How We Can Win the Fight Against Online Hate. They have continued to be vocal about instances of abuse within the gaming industry while also churning out new comics (for both Marvel and DC) and collaborating on indie games.

IBM CEO Gini Rometty

CEO of IBM is another job title that doesn't seem as cool as it was 50 years ago. But since taking over in 2012, Rometty has moved the company from dinosaur status to focusing on the future. IBM today is invested deeply in nascent technologies like artificial intelligence, blockchain and quantum computing.

Sheryl Sandberg in 2015.

Sandberg was the fresh face Facebook often needed when Mark Zuckerberg spent too much time in the spotlight. While she deserves some credit for building Facebook up to the global force it is today, her 2013 business and leadership memoir Lean In made her a household name. Facebook and Sandberg have since received a healthy dose of criticism for the platform's myriad scandals, ranging from privacy concerns to the spread of misinformation, but they continue to stand their ground.

Former Instagram executive Adam Mosseri, flanked by Mike Krieger on the left and Kevin Systrom on the right.

As social media scandals increasingly give platforms like Facebook and Twitter a bad rep, Instagram seems to remain an almost-pristine place for all our best moments, no matter if they're earnest or fake AF, a la Fyre Festival. The disastrous music festival was promoted using Instagram and harnessed the power of its many "influencers" and the FOMO it engenders perhaps better than any other platform. Systrom and Krieger co-founded the photo-sharing site in 2010 and the service was snapped up by Facebook in 2012 for $1 billion. Systrom stayed on as CEO through 2018, growing the service to almost a billion registered users. While the platform has faced criticism over censorship in several countries and other practices like "shadowbanning" (in which posts are hidden from the view of others without it being apparent to the user), Instagram has remained relatively scandal-free compared to its parent company in recent years.

Peter Thiel in 2014.

Like Musk, Thiel made his first big pile of money from the sale of PayPal, which he co-founded, to eBay in 2002. The hits continued when he became Facebook's first outside investor in 2004 and went on to make early investments in Airbnb, LinkedIn, Yelp, Spotify and SpaceX, just to name a few.

Over the past decade, though, he's become better known for his political and social stances, particularly his growing disdain for Silicon Valley and his fervent support of President Trump. He also backed a lawsuit filed in 2012 over wrestler Hulk Hogan's sex tape that ultimately bankrupted gossip site Gawker, allegedly over a grudge he held against the site for a 2007 article outing him as gay. Thiel's Libertarian views have also inspired projects like the Seasteading Institute, which aims to create a society at sea, beyond the reach of any government.

Desktops are still alive and kicking, according to HP CEO Meg Whitman.

The former CEO behind the early growth of eBay is always doing something interesting. After losing a bid for governor of California in 2010, Whitman spent the first half of the decade leading and splitting up Hewlett-Packard into two businesses. After leaving HP in 2017, she turned her energies to new efforts focused on younger consumers than the typical HP customer. She's now CEO of upcoming short-form video service Quibi and an investor and board member at Los Angeles esports startup Immortals.

Mark Zuckerberg discusses Oculus at an event last month.

The decade opened with Jesse Eisenberg playing Zuck in the 2010 film The Social Network, and in recent years the Facebook founder probably would have been happy to have an actor continue to play him as CEO. As we've debated the power of Facebook and how much it knows about us, Zuckerberg has confronted multiple scandals and sat for hours of grilling by Congress over the proliferation of fake news on his platform. Through it all, Facebook has arguably been at the center of everything during the past 10 years, whether it's influencing the Brexit vote and the 2016 presidential election or the revelations that data research firm Cambridge Analytica had harvested the data of millions of Facebook users without their consent. Now presidential candidates talk of breaking up the social networking behemoth even as Zuckerberg hopes to move forward into the brave new world of VR with the help of companies like Oculus that it has swallowed over the past decade.

Originally published Oct. 10, 5 a.m. PT.

$699

CNET may get a commission from retail offers.

Read the original here:

From Elon Musk to Jeff Bezos, these 30 personalities defined the 2010s - CNET

Floating plastic island in San Francisco Bay could calm waves – Business Insider

A tiny fiberglass island is bobbing up and down in the San Francisco Bay right now.

From far away, it looks like a beluga whale poking through the water. Up close, it looks like a misshapen raft. In reality, it's a buoyant structure known as the "Float Lab," which is designed to foster a floating ecosystem.

The prototype was deployed in August by a team of designers at the California College of the Arts (CCA)'s Architectural Ecologies Lab. Their goal is to see if animals will attach to the island, thus expanding its size and creating a buffer against ocean currents. An entire network of islands, they predict, could help calm the bay's choppy waters and prevent future floods from ravaging the coast.

If the structure holds up, it could even provide a model for floating cities a design concept that's supported by the United Nations as a way to address rising sea levels.

Take a look at how prototype is faring in the water.

See more here:

Floating plastic island in San Francisco Bay could calm waves - Business Insider

Secret Court Rules That the FBI’s Backdoor Searches of Americans Violated the Fourth Amendment – EFF

But the Court Misses the Larger Problem: Section 702s Mass Surveillance is Inherently Unconstitutional

EFF has long maintained that it is impossible to conduct mass surveillance and still protect the privacy and constitutional rights of innocent Americans, much less the human rights of innocent people around the world.

This week, we were once again proven right. We learned new and disturbing information about the FBIs repeated and unjustified searches of Americans information contained in massive databases of communications collected using the governments Section 702 mass surveillance program.

A series of newly unsealed rulings from the federal district and appellate courts tasked with overseeing foreign surveillance show that the FBI has been unable to comply with even modest oversight rules Congress placed on backdoor searches of Americans by the FBI. Instead, the Bureau routinely abuses its ability to search through this NSA-collected information for purposes unrelated to Section 702s intended national security purposes.

The size of the problem is staggering. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) held that the FBI has conducted tens of thousands of unjustified queries of Section 702 data. The FISC found that the FBI created an unduly lax environment in which maximal use of these invasive searches was a routine and encouraged practice.

The court should have imposed a real constitutional solution: it should require the FBI to get a warrant before searching for peoples communications

But as is too often the case, the secret surveillance courts let the government off easy. Although the FISC initially ruled the FBIs backdoor search procedures violated the Fourth Amendment in practice, the ultimate impact of the ruling was quite limited. After the government appealed, the FISC allowed the FBI to continue to use backdoor searches to invade peoples privacyeven in investigations that may have nothing to do with national security or foreign intelligenceso long as it follows what the appeals court called a modest ministerial procedure. Basically, this means requiring FBI agents to document more clearly why they were searching the giant 702 databases for information about Americans.

Rather than simply requiring a bit more documentation, we believe the court should have imposed a real constitutional solution: it should require the FBI to get a warrant before searching for peoples communications.

Ultimately, these orders follow a predictable path. First, they demonstrate horrific and systemic constitutional abuses. Then, they respond with small administrative adjustments. They highlight how judges sitting on the secret surveillance courts seem to have forgotten their primary role of protecting innocent Americans from unconstitutional government actions. Instead, they become lost in a thicket of administrative procedures that are aimed at providing thin veil of privacy protection while allowing the real violations to continue.

Even when these judges are alerted to actual violations of the law, which have been occurring for more than a decade, they retreat from what should now be clear as day: Section 702 is itself unconstitutional. The law allows the government to sweep up peoples communications and records of communications and amass them in a database for later warrantless searching by the FBI. This can be done for reasons unrelated to national security, much less supported by probable cause.

No amount of ministerial adjustments can cure Section 702s Fourth Amendment problems, which is why EFF has been fighting to halt this mass surveillance for more than a decade.

These rulings arose from a routine operation of Section 702the FISCs annual review of the governments certifications, the high-level descriptions of its plans for conducting 702 surveillance. Unlike traditional FISA surveillance, the FISC does not review individualized, warrant-like applications under Section 702, and instead signs off on programmatic documents like targeting and minimization procedures. Unlike regular warrants, the individuals affected by the searches are never given notice, much less enabled to seek a remedy for misuse. Yet, even under this limited (and we believe insufficient) judicial review, the FISC has repeatedly found deficiencies in the intelligence communitys procedures, and this most recent certification was no different.

Specifically, among the problems the FISC noticed were problems with the FBIs backdoor search procedures. The court noted that in 2018, Congress directed the FBI to record every time it searched a database of communications collected under Section 702 for a term associated with a U.S. person, but that the Bureau was simply keeping a record of every time it ran such a search on all people. In addition, it was not making any record of why it was running these searches, meaning it could search for Americans communications without a lawful national security purpose. The court ordered the government to submit information, and also took the opportunity to appoint amici to counter the otherwise one-sided arguments by the government, a procedure given to the court as part of the 2015 USA Freedom Act (and which EFF had strongly advocated for).

As the FBI provided more information to the secret court, it became apparent just how flagrant the FBIs disregard for the statute was. The court found no justification for FBIs refusal to record queries of Americans identifiers, and that the agency was simply disobeying the will of Congress.

Even more disturbing was the FBIs misuse of backdoor searches, which is when the FBI looks through peoples communications collected under Section 702 without a warrant and often for domestic law enforcement purposes. Since the beginning of Section 702, the FBI has avoided quantifying its use of backdoor searches, but we have known that its queries dwarfed other agencies. In the October 2018 FISC opinion, we get a window into just how disparate the number of FBIs searches is. In 2017, the NSA, CIA and National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) collectively used approximately 7500 terms associated with U.S. persons to query content information acquired under Section 702. Meanwhile, the FBI ran 3.1 million queries against a single database alone. Even the FISC itself did not get a full accounting of the FBIs queries that year, or what percentage involved Americans identifiers, but the court noted that given the FBI's domestic focus it seems likely that a significant percentage of its queries involve U.S.-person query terms.

The court went on to explain that the laxand sometimes nonexistentoversight of these backdoor searches generated significant misuse. Examples reported by the government included tens of thousands of batch queries in which the FBI searched identifiers en masse on the basis that one of them would return foreign intelligence information. The court described a hypothetical involving suspicion that an employee of a government contractor was selling information about classified technology, in which the FBI would search identifiers belonging to all 100 of the contractors employees.

As the court observed, these compliance issues demonstrated fundamental misunderstandings about the statutory and administrative limits on use of Section 702 information, which is supposed to be reasonably likely to return foreign intelligence information. Worse, because the FBI did not document its agents justifications for running these queries, it appears entirely possible that further querying violations involving large numbers of U S.-person query terms have escaped the attention of overseers and have not been reported to the Court.

With the benefit of input from its appointed amici, the FISC initially saw these violations for what they were: a massive violation of Americans Fourth Amendment rights. Unfortunately, the court let the FBI off with a relatively minor modification of its backdoor search query procedures, and made no provision for those impacted by these violations to ever be formally notified, so that they could seek their own remedies. Instead, going forward, FBI personnel must document when they use U.S. person identifiers to run backdoor searchesas required by Congressand they must describe why these queries are likely to return foreign intelligence. Thats it.

Even as to this requirement which was already what the law required -- there are several exceptions and loopholes. This means that at least in some cases, the FBI can still trawl through massive databases of warrantlessly collected communications using Americans names, phone numbers, social security numbers and other information and then use the contents of the communications for investigations that have nothing to do with national security.

It is disturbing that in response to widespread unconstitutional abuses by the FBI, the courts charged with protecting peoples privacy and overseeing the governments surveillance programs required FBI officials to just do more paperwork. The fact that such a remedy was seen as appropriate underscores how abstract ordinary peoples privacyand the Fourth Amendments protectionshave become for both FISC judges and the appeals judges above them on the Foreign Intelligence Court of Review (FISCR).

But the fact that judges view protecting peoples privacy rights through the abstract lens of procedures is also the fault of Congress and the executive branch, who continue to push the fiction that mass surveillance programs operating Section 702 can be squared with the Fourth Amendment. They cannot be.

First, Section 702 allows widespread collection (seizure) of peoples Internet activities and communications without a warrant, and the subsequent use of that information (search) for general criminal purposes as well as national security purposes. Such untargeted surveillance and accompanying privacy invasions are anathema to our constitutional right to privacy and resembles a secret general warrant to search anyone, at any time.

The Founders did not fight a revolution to gain the right to government agency protocols

Second, rather than judges deciding in specific cases whether the government has probable cause to justify its surveillance of particular people or groups, the FISCs role under Section 702 is relegated to approving general procedures that the government says are designed to protect peoples privacy overall. Instead of serving as a neutral magistrate that protects individual privacy, the court is several steps removed from the actual people caught up in the governments mass surveillance. This allows judges to then decide peoples rights in the abstract and without ever having to notify the people involved, much less provide them with a remedy for violations. This likely leads the FISC to be more likely to view procedures and paperwork as sufficient to safeguard peoples Fourth Amendment rights. Its also why individual civil cases like our Jewel v. NSA case are so necessary.

As the Supreme Court stated in Riley v. California, the Founders did not fight a revolution to gain the right to government agency protocols. Yet such abstract agency protocols are precisely what the FISC endorses and applies here with regard to your constitutionally protected communications.

Third, because Section 702 allows the government to amass vast stores of peoples communications and explicitly authorizes the FBI to search it, it encourages the very privacy abuses the FISCs 2018 opinion details. These Fourth Amendment violations are significant and problematic. But because the FISC is so far removed from overseeing the FBIs access to the data, it does not consider the most basic protections required by the Constitution: requiring agents to get a warrant.

We hope that these latest revelations are a wake-up call for Congress to act and repeal Section 702 or, at minimum, to require the FBI to get individual warrants, approved by a court, before beginning their backdoor searches. And while we believe current law allows our civil litigation, Congress can also remove government roadblocks by providing clear, unequivocal notice, as well as an individual remedy for those injured by any FBI or NSA or CIA violations of this right. We also hope that the FISC itself will object to merely being an administrative oversight body, and instead push for more stringent protections for peoples privacy, and pay more attention to the inherent constitutional problems of Section 702.

But no matter what, EFF will continue to push its legal challenges to the governments mass surveillance program and will work to bring an end to unconstitutional mass surveillance.

See the rest here:

Secret Court Rules That the FBI's Backdoor Searches of Americans Violated the Fourth Amendment - EFF

ACLU Sues Worthington For Arrest That Left Man With Nearly $150K In Medical Bills – WCCO | CBS Minnesota

MINNEAPOLIS (WCCO) A lawsuit against a southern Minnesota city and its police department alleges that excessive force was used in an arrest earlier this year, leaving a man with several broken bones and nearly $150,000 in medical bills.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed the lawsuit Monday against the city of Worthington and its police department. The suit names the police chief, Troy Appel, officer Mark Riley, and Rileys friend, Evan Eggers, who was on a ride-along at the time of the arrest.

The victim is identified as Kelvin Francisco Rodriquez, an Iowa man who works in Worthington.

During the arrest on Jan. 12, he suffered four broken ribs and internal bleeding due to lacerations to his pancreas and liver, according to the ALCU. The lawsuit alleges that he told officers multiple times that he needed to go to a hospital but they refused to take him to one for several hours.

By the time Rodriquez got medical attention, he had to be airlifted to a hospital in South Dakota, where he was hospitalized for five days, incurring close to $150,000 in medical bills.

The lawsuit alleges that Rodriquezs Fourth Amendment rights were violated by the use of excessive force and his Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated by the delay in medical treatment.

Dashcam Video Of Kelvin Rodriquezs Arrest

In a statement released by the ACLU, Rodriquez says hes speaking about what happened to him because its happening to other people in the Worthington.

As a human being, I ask that the police be held accountable for not adequately doing their job and respecting me as a human being, he said. My wife and children saw me going in and out of life and death. I think it is fair to ask for justice.

According to the lawsuit, Rodriquezs arrest came after he noticed a squad car trailing him and, out of fear of how police treat minorities in Worthington, tried to avoid them by turning into a parking lot.

The squad car followed Rodriquez into the lot, where he quickly parked his car and started to run. But when the squad cars emergency lights flashed, he stopped and put his hands up. This can be seen in police dashcam video.

Riley ordered Rodriquez to get on the ground and put his hands behind his back. While out of view of the dashcam video, Riley places his knee and full body weight on Rodriquezs ribs, the lawsuit alleges. Rodriquez can be heard on the video moaning in pain.

The lawsuit is seeking damages to be paid to Rodriquez, although no specific dollar amount was listed.

This is the second time that the ACLU has sued Worthington and its police department over what it claimed was the use of excessive force. In 2016, Anthony Promvongsa was pulled over by a drug task force and punched and kneed while he was still seat-belted in his car.

That case ended with a $60,000 settlement for Promvongsa, and the city agreeing to a number of policy changes dealing with use of force.

Among the policy changes was a requirement for Worthington officers to document when they see officers using force. The lawsuit filed on behalf of Rodriquez accuses the police department of not following this and other policies related to use of force.

WCCO reached out to the Worthington Police Department for comment.

See the original post:

ACLU Sues Worthington For Arrest That Left Man With Nearly $150K In Medical Bills - WCCO | CBS Minnesota

Editorial: FBI caught breaking the rules | Editorials – Charleston Post Courier

A federal court rightly rebuked the FBI last year for breaking the law and violating the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches in its use of government records of communications collected without a court warrant.

Making the court finding revealed Tuesday all the more striking was that the violations were carried out under the Trump administration, which has made quite an issue about FBI surveillance of the Trump campaign in 2016. Indeed, FBI Director Christopher Wray argued, unsuccessfully, that complying with the law would put an unacceptable administrative burden on the agency.

The finding breathes life into the contention that there may be a culture within the FBI that verges on contempt for the law. If so, it must be thoroughly stamped out.

The Justice Department appealed the secret ruling of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to a special appeals panel and rightly lost, leading to the publication this week of the heavily censored 2018 court decision.

Although the Justice Department has agreed to abide by the courts order that it keep meticulous records of any request to extract information from a secret database of millions of telephone calls and other communications, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court decision raises serious questions about the agencys ability to monitor abuses.

The communications database is maintained by the National Security Agency, the nations collector of electronic communications for intelligence use. It is authorized by law, but the NSA was ordered in 2017 to purge millions of records collected in violation of the law and was only authorized to resume collection in 2018. The NSA is said to be reconsidering the usefulness of the bulk collection program, which sweeps up communications by foreign intelligence targets including those that might involve U.S. citizens and residents.

The collection process is known as upstream intelligence gathering. The use of the data by the CIA, FBI and other federal intelligence agencies is known as downstream intelligence work. The downstream exploitation of the data is supposed to be governed by the Fourth Amendment and require a court order before communications by U.S. citizens and residents can be queried by intelligence analysts.

The intelligence court found that the FBI was the only downstream data user not in compliance with a new law requiring detailed record-keeping. It cited examples of FBI abuse that included asking for data on all 57,000 FBI employees and contractors and the use of the database by one contractor employee to keep tabs on his relatives.

These examples may only be the tip of an iceberg of unauthorized snooping. The court found that the FBIs system for monitoring potential abuses of the communications database examined only a fraction of the occasions when the database was used by one of its employees or contractors.

Until better controls are put in place, the excessively large number of people and contractors entitled to query the database is bound to make it hard for the FBI to verify that it is complying with the law and the Constitution as directed by the intelligence court.

That should be an issue for Congress as it considers renewing a different surveillance authority known as Section 215 of the Patriot Act that expires at the end of December. It allows the government to obtain a secret court order requiring telephone companies to hand over any records or other tangible thing if deemed relevant to international terrorism or undefined clandestine intelligence activity.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has raised some serious red flags about the FBIs use and abuse of it surveillance authorities. Its important that the FBI follows the law and the Constitution.

See the article here:

Editorial: FBI caught breaking the rules | Editorials - Charleston Post Courier

The FISA Court’s 702 Opinions, Part I: A History of Non-Compliance Repeats Itself – Just Security

Last week, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence released three redacted opinions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (also known as the FISA Court) and the FISA Court of Review (FISCR). In the first opinion, the FISA Court held that the FBIs procedures for accessing Americans communications that are incidentally collected under Section 702 of FISA violated both the statute and the Fourth Amendment. The government appealed, and in the second opinion, the FISCR upheld the FISA Courts decision. The FBI was forced to revise its procedures to conform with the Courts ruling, and in the third opinion, the Court approved the revised procedures.

The government will no doubt try to sell this as an oversight success story. After all, the Department of Justices audits had detected instances of FBI non-compliance with legal requirements, and the Department reported those instances to the FISA Court. The Court solicited the assistance of amici and adopted their position in significant part. It ordered remedies that the FBI is now required to implement. And all of this became public because Congress in 2015 required the disclosure of significant FISA Court opinions. The system worked, right?

I see a very different story. This is now the fourth major FISA Court opinion on Section 702 in 10 years documenting substantial non-compliance with the rules meant to protect Americans privacy. The opinion, moreover, reveals that the FBI is conducting literally millions of backdoor searchesincluding so-called batch queries that rest on the same discredited legal theory used to justify the NSAs bulk collection of Americans phone records. Despite the enormous implications for Americans privacy and the governments dismal record, the remedy suggested by amici and imposed by the Court was just more record-keeping. And the government sat on the opinion for a year, hoping for an appellate victory that would help mitigate the PR damage from disclosure.

Background: Section 702s Troubled History

To put the Courts recent opinions in context, some background is necessary. Under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), passed in 2008, the National Security Agency (NSA), operating inside the United States, is authorized to collect communications of foreigners overseas for foreign intelligence purposes. No warrant is required for this collection because courts have held that foreigners have no Fourth Amendment rights. Instead, each year, the FISA Court must sign off on the procedures that govern the surveillance.

Although ostensibly targeted at foreigners, Section 702 surveillance inevitably sweeps in massive amounts of Americans communications. Recognizing the impact on Americans privacy, Congress required the NSA to minimize the sharing, retention, and use of this incidentally collected U.S. person data. But the government and the FISA Court have embraced an interpretation of minimize that is remarkably maximal. The NSA shares raw data with multiple other agenciesincluding the FBI and the CIAand all of them retain the data for a functional minimum of five years. Moreover, the FBI routinely combs through it looking for Americans communications to use in purely domestic cases, even in situations where the FBI lacks a factual predicate to open a full investigation.

In 2011, the government disclosed to the FISA Court that it had misrepresented the nature of its upstream collection activities under Section 702. (Upstream collection takes place as the communications are transiting over the Internet backbone; downstream collection acquires stored communications, usually from the servers of Internet Service Providers.) When conducting upstream surveillance, the government was acquiring, not just communications to or from the targets of surveillance, but communications that simply mentioned certain information about them (known as abouts collection). As a result, the government was acquiring packets of data containing multiple communications, some of which had nothing to do with the target. This included tens of thousands of wholly domestic communications.

The Court was not pleased to learn about this significant issue three years into the programs operation. It held that the governments handling of the data violated the Fourth Amendment, and it required the government to develop special rulesapproved by the Court in 2012for segregating, storing, retaining, and accessing communications obtained through upstream collection.

In 2015, the Court was under the impression that these rules were being followed. However, in approving Section 702 surveillance that year, it noted several incidents of non-compliance with other rules designed to protect Americans privacyincluding FBI violations of protections for attorney-client communications, a failure of access controls by the FBI, and the NSAs failure to purge certain improperly collected data. Once again, the Court expressed displeasure at being notified of infractions long after they occurred.

In 2016, the FISA Court learned that the NSA had been violating the rules established in 2012. Because those rules were designed to remedy a Fourth Amendment violation occurring since the start of the program, the NSAs non-compliance meant that its upstream collection activities had been operating unconstitutionally for eight years. Moreover, the government did not report this issue for several months after discovering it. Unable to bring itself into compliance, the NSA made the only decision it could: In the spring of 2017, it abandoned abouts collection, which was at the root of the problem.

When Section 702 came up for reauthorization in late 2017, civil liberties advocates pointed to this troubled history. They also pointed to a growing body of case law holding that searches of government databases can, in certain circumstances, constitute a separate Fourth Amendment event. They argued that government agencies should be required to obtain a warrant before searching Section 702-obtained data for the communications of Americans (a practice formally called U.S. person queries and informally dubbed backdoor searches). They also urged Congress to ban abouts collection, lest the government attempt to resume it.

Congress rejected these proposals. Although Congress did require the FBI to obtain the FISA Courts permission to conduct U.S. person queries in a tiny sliver of cases, it blessed the vast majority of these searches, which previously had no foundation in the text of Section 702. It simply required the FBI to develop querying procedures that the FISA Court would have to approve. It also required the FBI to keep records of each U.S. person query it conducted. With respect to abouts collection, Congress required the government to obtain FISA Court approval and to give Congress advance notice before resuming the practice.

The Courts October 2018 Ruling

In March 2018, the government submitted its annual certifications and procedures to the FISA Court for its approval. In a decision dated October 18, 2018, and released last week, the FISA Court held that the FBIs minimization procedures violated both the statute and the Fourth Amendment. The Courts opinion addresses three main practices by the FBI: downstream collection of certain communications; the FBIs failure to record USP queries; and the FBIs improper use of USP queries.

Downstream collection and abouts communications. Although this section of the opinion is highly redacted, it appears that the government is engaged in a new form of downstream collection that raised a flag for the FISA Court. The Court solicited amicis advice about whether the statutory preconditions for resuming abouts collection apply to downstream collection, and whether certain activities in the governments 2018 certifications involve the acquisition of abouts communications. Amici argued that the answer to both questions was yes; the governments answer was no in both cases. The Court split the baby, holding that the statutory requirements apply to any kind of abouts collection, but that no such collection would occur under the governments certifications.

The heavy redactions make it difficult to assess the significance of this part of the opinion. However, on its face, the definition of abouts collectionbasically, anything other than a communication to or from the targetshould not be difficult to apply. It is worrisome that the government and amici reached different conclusions about whether a certain form of collection merited the label abouts. The uncertainty strongly supports a suspicion civil liberties advocates have held for some time: that the selectors the government uses to identify the communications to be collected are not necessarily unique identifiers (such as email addresses), but can sweep in people other than the intended targets (as would, for instance, IP addresses).

The statutory requirement to count U.S. person queries. In its January 2018 reauthorization of Section 702, Congress ordered the government to adopt querying procedures that included a technical procedure whereby a record is kept of each United States person query term used for a query. Instead, in the querying procedures that the FBI submitted to the FISA Court, the Bureau announced that it intends to satisfy the record-keeping requirement by keeping a record of all queriesin other words, the FBI would lump together U.S. person queries and non-U.S. person queries, without distinguishing between them.

The government defended this approach with a weak argument that the statutory text was somehow ambiguous, and that both the legislative history and policy considerations weighed against requiring the FBI to document U.S. person queries. In a refrain often heard when an intelligence or law enforcement agency is asked to devote time or resources to safeguarding civil liberties, the government claimed that requiring the FBI to figure out whether a particular investigative subject was a U.S. person would divert resources from investigative work . . . to the detriment of public safety.

The FISA Court has historically yielded to such pleas, and on this occasion, the Court seemed sympathetic. Ultimately, however, the Court concluded that it had no choice. It stated: Regardless of how persuasive the FBIs considerations may be, the Court is not free to substitute its understanding of sound policyor, for that matter, the understanding of the Director of the FBIfor the clear command of the statute. The law, the Court held, was unambiguous in its directive to count U.S. person queries.

On appeal, the FISCR upheld the Courts ruling on this question. The FISCR, however, seemed somewhat less sympathetic to the governments position. Under the FBIs querying procedures, U.S. person query term is defined as a term that is reasonably likely to identify one or more specific United States persons. This definition does not require a high level of certainty. Moreover, the procedures provide for the application of default assumptions in cases where specific information is lacking. Under these circumstances, it is hard to argue with the FISCRs assessment that counting U.S. person queries is not a burdensome substantive requirement, and that it would simply mean adding one (largely ministerial) item to the checklist that FBI personnel most likely already work through when conducting queries for investigative purposes.

Somewhat oddly, the FISCR did not resolve the other major issue on appeal: whether the FBIs repeated violations of its own querying and minimization procedures rendered those rules unlawful and unconstitutional as implemented. Those violations, and the FISA Courts failure to require an adequate remedy for them, will be the subject of Part II of this post.

Read more here:

The FISA Court's 702 Opinions, Part I: A History of Non-Compliance Repeats Itself - Just Security

Is smell enough to justify search warrant? Bloomfield Township man appealing decision on marijuana case – The Oakland Press

Nearly a year after voters approved adult use of recreational marijuana, Oakland County resident Kevin John Carlson continues to fight a possession/intent to deliver case, which he believes stems from a search warrant that should never have been granted.

Carlson, 30, was charged in early 2018 after police searched his Bloomfield Township home and reportedly found marijuana and other evidence months prior to cannabis being legalized in Michigan. At the time Carlson was a registered marijuana patient and caregiver, legally allowed to have a certain amount of cannabis.

The magistrate who issued the search warrant based on police reportedly smelling marijuana outside the home was wrong to do so because it wasnt based on probable cause, Carlson claimed.

When police executed the search warrant, they reportedly found much more than the allowable amounts 155 pounds of marijuana in packages and jars, scales, $82,000 in cash and other evidence to pin the possession and drug delivery/manufacturing charges on Carlson. Yet Carlsons trial in Oakland County Circuit Court was put on hold last year while he appealed Judge Phyllis McMillens ruling there was no issue with the search warrant, and the evidence that turned up was admissible.

Carlsons claim that the smell alone wasnt sufficient for a search warrant recently got shot down by the Michigan Court of Appeals, who sided with McMillens decision not to quash the evidence.

The opinion, in part, states: the strong odor of marijuana that the officer smelled provided a substantial basis to infer a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime would be found inside the defendants home.

The court further found that the 2008 Michigan Medical Marihuana Act didnt shield Carlson from the search, stating the police were not obligated to determine, before obtaining a search warrant, the legality of the marijuana-related activities inside the defendants home and whether the defendants activities complied with the MMMA.

The opinion was signed by COA Judges Mark J. Cavanaugh, Jane M. Beckering and Michael F. Gadola.

However, Carlsons defense attorney Michael Komorn said the judges failed to address if current Michigan marijuana law can be applied retroactively and are wrong in not considering its relevancy, as well as the state reclassification of medical marijuana as a Schedule II drug permitted for some use. Carlsons case is next headed to the Michigan Supreme Court for consideration, which earlier had remanded it to the Court of Appeals.

This case is important for Fourth Amendment issues (regarding protection against unreasonable search and seizure) for constitutional reasons, Komorn said, and for the citizens of Michigan...just because somebody is doing something suspicious, thats not enough for probable cause.

Komorn also said with police often relying on smell in dealing with citizens and the law regarding marijuana and alcohol, for example how this case ultimately plays out will have pervasive impact.

People have a right to know what to expect...certainly, they should have a definite answer, he said.

It will likely be several months or more before the Supreme Court decides whether or not to take Carlson's case. That keeps it pending in Oakland County Circuit Court.

ALSO SEE:

A Pontiac man is headed to Oakland County Circuit Court on a dozen charges related to the murder of Eugene Bass, 42 of Lansing, whose body has

Authorities are seeking information from the public to help identify a prowler believed to be tied to several incidents in Rochester Hills and

A settlement has been reached between the state and a Walled Lake marijuana safety compliance facility whose license was suspended due to alle

Go here to read the rest:

Is smell enough to justify search warrant? Bloomfield Township man appealing decision on marijuana case - The Oakland Press

Former court reporter’s theft trial pushed back again – Kokomo Perspective

Its been more than four years since an investigation was launched into whether a former Howard Superior II employee illegally overcharged for work, allegedly accruing nearly $10,000 in illegal payments.

The case against former Howard Superior II court reporter Rachael Roberts has moved at a glacial pace since it began in the investigative stages in early 2015. Some time later, in May 2017, three level D felony charges of theft were filed for the alleged overbilling of transcription work, which by law is limited to a certain amount.

In total, investigators claimed Roberts overbilled by $9,476 for three transcriptions. As the case has dragged on after being assigned to a special prosecutor and languished in Boone Superior Court I after being reassigned to the court, yet another trial date has been pushed back in the case. The development came as Roberts defense attorney also moved to suppress evidence in the case.

Until just a few weeks ago, the case against Roberts finally was set to be heard before a jury in Boone County on Wednesday. That trial date represented the fourth for the case, and the date even had been emblazoned with no continuances in online records. That is before the court, according to court records, moved to cancel the trial due to concerns as to whether enough time [had] been allotted for this trial and to hear substantive pre-trial motions.

The case originally was scheduled to go to trial on April 18, 2018.

A partial reason for the delay may be due to a motion to suppress filed by Roberts attorney. In that motion her attorney claimed the former court reporters rights were violated by investigators.

According to the filing, on Feb. 13, 2015, police searched Roberts Russiaville home as well as her work premises in Superior II. Then investigators applied for a second warrant a few days later to search Roberts bank records. In the motion to suppress its argued that it does not appear that the warrant or subpoena was issued for a search of [Roberts] bank records and a return was not prepared for that warrant either.

The former court reporters attorney, in the filing, goes on to argue that the searches were warrantless, violating her Fourth Amendment rights. The filing states that police elicited statements from Roberts in violation of her Miranda and Fifth Amendment rights and that, because the warrants did not specifically list items to be searched for and seized, they were overly broad.

Furthermore, its claimed the warrants were not issued by a neutral and detached magistrate. This claim references Howard Superior I Judge William Menges, who issued the search warrants, and its argued that since he was a witness in the investigation, initiated the investigation in part, and also is related to Roberts, then that constitutes a violation of Roberts Fourth Amendment rights.

Together Howard County Auditor Martha Lake and Menges played a role in bringing the alleged overbillings to the attention of investigators. As such, Roberts defense counsel requested that all items seized, observations, and statements gathered during the execution of the search warrants be suppressed.

The court granted the motion to supress last week, but the courts decision could not be procured prior to deadline. The trial is set now for Feb. 24, 2020.

Read more here:

Former court reporter's theft trial pushed back again - Kokomo Perspective

My Family Story of Love, the Mob, and Government Surveillance – The Atlantic

On June 16, 1975, when I was 12 years old, my mother, Brenda, married Charles Chuckie OBrien, who a few weeks later would become a leading suspect in the notorious disappearance of Jimmy Hoffa, the former president of the Teamsters union.

To hear more feature stories, see our full list or get the Audm iPhone app.

Chuckie had known Hoffa since he was a boy, loved him like a father, and was his closest aide in the 1950s and 60s, when Hoffa was the nations best-known and most feared labor leader. Soon after Hoffa went missing, on July 30, 1975, the FBI zeroed in on Chuckie. Chuckie had been by Hoffas side during Attorney General Robert F. Kennedys long pursuit of Hoffa for Mob ties and union corruption, and in 1967 it was Chuckie who had accompanied Hoffa when his boss reported to federal marshals and began a nearly five-year prison term. But in late 1974, Chuckie and Hoffa had had a falling out, and a slew of circumstantial evidence connected Chuckie to the disappearance. The FBI quickly concluded that Chuckie had picked up Hoffa and driven him to his deatha theory that has currency to this day, at least in the public mind.

The government never proved Chuckies involvement, and Hoffas remains have never been found. But the Hoffa investigation enveloped Chuckie and eventually ruined his life. In the midst of this maelstrom, Chuckie and I grew close. He formally adopted me when I was 13, and found time despite his legal troubles to give me the love and attention I had never received from my biological father. I revered Chuckie in my teens. The wise guys I met through him were kind and, to my young eyes, upright gentlemen. And it was thrilling to be associated with the Teamsters union in an eratypified by C. W. McCalls hit song Convoy and the adventures of Burt Reynolds in Smokey and the Banditthat glorified trucker defiance of authority.

When I left home for college, I read for the first time books that confidently pinned Hoffas disappearance on Chuckie. I also came to understand that the Mafia was real and dangerous, and that Chuckie had a history of criminal acts ranging from theft to assault. By the time I went to law school, I had grown apprehensive about Chuckies potential impact on my life. In my mid-20s I broke with him, brutally and completely. This proved to be a good career move; otherwise, I never would have obtained the security clearances I later needed for several government jobs, which culminated in a 2003 appointment by George W. Bush to be the assistant attorney general in charge of the Justice Departments Office of Legal Counsel.

It was during that Justice Department stint, more than 15 years after I renounced Chuckie, that I reconsidered some of the things he had told me in my teens about executive-branch abuses and concealments. That reconsideration would eventually lead me to seek his forgiveness and then, after years of conversations and research, to conclude that he was innocent in Hoffas disappearance. What led me down this improbable path was my work on Stellarwind, President Bushs post-9/11 anti-terrorist program of warrantless surveillance activities inside the United States, conducted by the National Security Agency, which swept up vast amounts of information about innocent Americans.

In my youth, Chuckie had spewed bile about Bobby Kennedys surveillance abuses against him, Hoffa, and their friends in organized crime. They can break every law there is, but they got backup, Chuckie would say, referring to the governments tendency to skirt the law in secret even as it enforced the law against others, and to justify its actions by claiming executive authority.

For decades, I had dismissed Chuckies assessment as uninformed and self-serving. But while working on Stellarwind, I discovered that he had been right. Executive-branch lawyers had approved the program in secret even though it was difficult to square with congressional restrictions on government surveillance. Such backup, I came to realize, was a crucial element in a recurrent pattern in the history of government surveillance: The executive branch, responsible for security, employs the latest technology against an enemy within, and in the process, it often quietly bends or breaks the law; after scandalous revelations, it secures new legislation to put the surveillance practices on a sounder legal footing; finally, a new normal is established before the cycle begins anew.

I did not know much about the history of government surveillance, or the governments accompanying abuse of the law, when I began work on Stellarwind. Much of that history, especially about the Justice Departments accommodating role, is still not widely understood.

Since the invention of the telephone and the miniature microphone, the government has used these technologies in criminal and national-security investigations to listen in on private communications without the targets knowledge. The governments appetite for the valuable information it gathers from wires, bugs, and other forms of electronic surveillance has always been insatiable. Congress and the courts have intermittently imposed legal restrictions to check the obvious threat to privacy this appetite poses. But under pressure to find and defeat various subversive forces in American society, real or imagined, the executive branch has always found secret work-arounds.

Among the early targets, I came to learn, were Nazi spies inside the United States. On December 11, 1939, three months after Hitler invaded Poland, the Supreme Court ruled that a federal statute barred the government from using evidence gleaned from wiretaps in court. Attorney General Robert Jackson quickly announced a ban on wiretapping. But President Franklin D. Roosevelt overruled Jackson after FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover complained that the ban made it too hard to meet the growing menace of spies and saboteurs on American soil. FDR acknowledged in a secret memorandum that government wiretapping is almost bound to lead to abuse of civil rights. But he concluded, unconvincingly, that the Supreme Court never intended any dictum to apply to grave matters involving the defense of the nation. Jackson acquiesced, and government wiretapping continued.

Henceforward, whenever a legal obstacle to electronic surveillance arose, Hoover would complain to his Justice Department or White House superiors about the dangers of going dark. Given the urgency of finding and defeating the enemy, these officials tended to interpret away the limits on lawful executive actiona task made easier by the fact that decisions usually were arrived at in secret, beyond judicial scrutiny.

Hoovers next need for backup concerned a different threat to national security (communism) and a different technology (microphone bugs). In the course of its investigations, the FBI often broke into homes or offices to plant bugs. In a 1954 opinion, Robert Jackson, by then a Supreme Court justice, made clear that this practice flagrantly violated the Fourth Amendments prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures. But Hoover wrote to the attorney general at the time, Herbert Brownell Jr., to emphasize the stakes for national security should bugs be barred. Brownell then secretly authorized the FBI to resume bugging spies, saboteurs, and other subversive persons, even if that meant physical invasion of homes and offices, because considerations of internal security and the national safety are paramount.

Hoover wasnt done. In the late 50s, he wanted to extend microphone surveillance to meet a different threat from a different kind of enemy within: not foreign subversion but the domestic criminal activities of gangsters. Bugging possible foreign agents was already a legal stretch. Bugging the Mob was an even bigger stretch, because breaking in to plant bugs on suspected domestic criminals goes to the core of what the Fourth Amendment prohibits. Hoovers FBI went there anyway, based on a preposterous interpretation of Brownells questionable secret ruling. The next attorney general, William Rogers, knew what the FBI was doing and went along with it. The bugging remained hidden from the public.

Rogerss successor, Robert F. Kennedy, continued this dont ask, dont tell approach to the use of bugs as part of the campaign against organized crime. He pushed the FBI to confront the Mob more aggressively, and he eagerly consumed the fruits of Hoovers surveillance. When the bugging was finally revealed, in the mid-60s, Kennedy denied knowledge of any illegality. A great deal of evidence suggests that he was not being candid. And as the journalist Victor Navasky has noted, To the extent that Kennedy was ignorant of the FBIs bugging practices, it was an administrative failure so flagrant that Kennedy is morally chargeable with the consequences of his ignorance.

The FBI made secret recordings from the hundreds of microphones it installed during the Kennedy years. Unbeknownst to Chuckie, the FBI frequently picked him up on two of them. In early 1961, the bureau placed one of the bugs in the office of the Detroit Mafia capo Anthony Giacalone, with whom Chuckie had been close since he was a boy. It later placed a bug in the apartment of Sylvia Pagano, Chuckies mother, in Detroits riverfront Gold Coast neighborhood.

The FBI was interested in Giacalone because of his criminal activities and because he had done business with Hoffa for decades. It was interested in Pagano because she worked with Giacalone and was close to Hoffa. Pagano had introduced Hoffa to the Detroit crime family, and to Chuckie, in the early 40s. She had enormous influence with Hoffa, including as a go-between for many of the loans to the Mafia by the Teamsters pension fund in the 50s and 60s. She was also close to Hoffas wife, Josephine, as was Giacalone.

A few months after the FBI installed the Giacalone bug, the Supreme Court reiterated that such surveillance was beyond the pale. But the FBIconfident in its backup from the topignored the Courts decision. For three years, the bugs swept up the full range of conversationnot just about criminal activity but also about sex, family and health matters, political and religious opinions, and personal secrets. FBI agents transcribed the conversations with few redactions. They often summarized the transcripts in memorandums that misleadingly attributed the information to an informant and urged care in dissemination. These documents were kept in a secret file called June that was unknown to the public and little known within the bureau.

I have read thousands of pages of the June transcripts and memorandums from the Giacalone and Pagano bugs. The FBI gave the documents to the House Select Committee on Assassinations for its 197679 investigation into the Mobs possible involvement in the killing of John F. Kennedy. Many of them are available today through the Mary Ferrell Foundation, which has a repository of documents related to JFKs assassination. To read the June transcripts is to descend into an intimate, vulgar, gossipy, and sordid realm of unguarded conversations that took place under an assumption of privacy. Chuckie had always spoken of Jimmy and Josephine Hoffas relationship to each other, and to his mother and Giacalone, as one of mutual love and friendship. But the conversations picked up by the bugs reveal a darker reality.

To give one example: The bugs expose Josephine Hoffas mental-health challenges and ghastly struggles with addiction. Hoffa was perpetually on the road during this periodunion business, criminal trialsand was callously indifferent to his wifes condition. Pagano was given responsibility for trying to control Josephines alcoholism, but she grew bitter as Josephine became more and more difficult to manage. To fight her desperate loneliness, Josephine had a fiery affair with a low-level Detroit mobster. Just after it ended, Giacalone plotted with his brother, Vito, to rob the safe in Hoffas Washington, D.C., apartmentHoffa was away on trial, in Tennesseewhile Vito and Josephine zoop it up. That plot failed when Giacalone could not get into the safe. But he succeeded a few months later in robbing Hoffas Miami Beach apartment while Pagano and a drunken Josephine were out to dinner.

These are but a few scraps of the information about Hoffas circle that the FBI gleaned from the thousands of hours of June recordings. The agents learned much, much more, because Josephine, Pagano, and Giacalone spent a lot of time togetheroften with Chuckiein the bugged rooms. They also communicated almost daily with Hoffa, usually through Chuckie, and often discussed, with the FBI listening in, what Hoffa was saying, thinking, and doing. Hundreds of other organized-crime figures and associates in Detroit and around the country involuntarily disclosed similarly intimate information to the FBI via illegal bugs in their homes and offices.

The bugs used on mobsters in the late 1950s and early 60s are a mostly forgotten slice of decades of surveillance abuses. Reform finally came after the FBIs practices leaked to the press in the mid-60s. The first element of reform was the Justice Departments acknowledgment of the bureaus bugging and wiretapping, and its pledge to the Supreme Court to review pending cases for reliance on illegal surveillance.

My stepfather was an improbable beneficiary. Chuckie had been convicted in 1965 of stealing goods from a U.S. Customs warehouse in Detroit. But in 1967, after thenSolicitor General Thurgood Marshall revealed that the FBI had overheard Chuckie talking to his lawyer about his case in Giacalones officea possible violation of his constitutional right to counselthe Supreme Court vacated his conviction and ordered a new trial, assuring Chuckie a tiny place in the annals of jurisprudence.

Later that year, the Court dramatically expanded Fourth Amendment protections against electronic wiretapping. Then, in 1968, Congress passed new legislation on the use of wiretaps and bugs. Authorization now required probable cause of a crime, a judicial warrant, and other procedures, and it criminalized electronic interception in violation of these rules. It put real constraints on investigations. But it also allowed the government, for the first time, to use information gained from electronic surveillance as evidence in federal trials. Congress thus legitimized what had been legally dubious surveillance practices, and on balance empowered the executive branch. The Justice Department would later use this lawful means of surveillance as its main tool to diminish the Mobs power.

This transformation of American surveillance law was followed, in 1975, by a comprehensive vetting of U.S. intelligence practices by a Senate select committee chaired by Senator Frank Church. The Church Committees final report exposed decades of electronic-surveillance abuses by the government, along with extensive evidence of illegal break-ins, mail opening, subversion campaigns, drug testing, and free-speech violations. Governmental officialsincluding those whose principal duty is to enforce the lawhave violated or ignored the law over long periods of time and have advocated and defended their right to break the law, the committee concluded. In other words, the violators had backup.

The courts and Congress still had work to do after 1975. One outstanding issue was whether the president could continue to order electronic surveillance without judicial approval in national-security cases, as FDR had done in 1940. Congress addressed that issue in the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), a landmark law that required electronic surveillance of suspected foreign agents to be authorized by a special court. This was the law that I would confront a quarter century later, when I began poring over cases and documents related to Stellarwind.

Stellarwind fit a familiar pattern. After 9/11, government officials faced a deadly new foe they feared they could not find and stop using traditional tools. Al-Qaeda had been empowered by technological developments, especially ones that enabled the growth of various new forms of global communications. But these and other innovations also empowered the U.S. intelligence community to surveil in new, more robust waysespecially because it had what thenCIA Director Michael Hayden described in 2006 as a tremendous home field advantage in intercepting global communications. In October 2001, President Bush authorized the NSA to collect targeted international telephone and email conversations of citizens and noncitizens, as well as vast amounts of telephone and email metadata. Government lawyers signed off on the program in secret, even though the collections lacked the judicial approval that FISA seemed to require.

When I arrived at the Justice Department, in October 2003, Stellarwind had been examined and reapproved by the Office of Legal Counsel every six weeks or so for two years. I inherited the responsibility of examining its legality at regular intervals. While I was doing so, I thought often about Chuckieespecially when I stumbled onto the 1967 decision that had vacated his criminal conviction.

While I was working one early-December afternoon, Jim Baker, a career government lawyer and surveillance-law expert, came by to help. Baker had not been involved in the initial approval of Stellarwind, in 2001, and when hed found out about it, he wasnt pleased.

Take a look at this, Baker said, handing me a piece of paper with scribbled signatures. It was a one-page memorandum, dated October 10, 1963, in which Attorney General Robert Kennedy had approved electronic surveillance of Martin Luther King Jr.surveillance that yielded information the FBI would use to try to destroy Kings marriage and pressure him to abandon the civil-rights movement. At the time, I was astonished to learn that Kennedy had authorized the surveillance, without a warrant and without limit, and that he had done so based on a factually unsupported link between King and communism.

From July/August 2002: The FBI and Martin Luther King

This is why we have FISA, Baker explained, jabbing his finger at the document. He saw the King surveillance as a cautionary tale about the dangers of government corner-cutting. If they think FISA is cumbersome or too slow, we can get rid of it, he said.

I didnt want to go back to those days. But I also didnt cherish the idea of upending an intelligence program that the president had deemed vital and that the Justice Department had approved since 2001, especially given that the government at the time feared another attack. After much agonizing, I concluded in March 2004 that prior Stellarwind approvals rested on a flawed understanding of how the program worked and what the law required. After a complex analysis, I disapproved the parts of the program for which I found no plausible legal support, but I upheld the parts I thought could be supported by plausible arguments.

My decision against parts of the program provoked a now-famous constitutional clash between the Justice Department and the White Housea clash that played out in part at the foot of thenAttorney General John Ashcrofts bed in the intensive-care unit at George Washington University Hospital. President Bush initially decided to continue Stellarwind despite the Justice Departments objections. But in the face of threatened resignations by thenDeputy Attorney General James Comey and thenFBI Director Robert Mueller, among others (myself included), he changed his mind and accepted the departments proposed narrowing of the program.

I was later praised by some for the steps I took in revising Stellarwind, and for standing up to the White House. Others criticized the parts of my legal opinion that approved portions of the program. With 15 years of hindsight, I dont think I would do anything differently, given the context back then. But the critics had a point, especially regarding my reliance on the presidents war and national-security powers to skirt the statutory requirements in FISA. My argument traced its pedigree to Roosevelts overruling of Jackson so that Hoover could continue looking for German spies. In fact, my opinion explicitly cited the Roosevelt precedent.

Chuckies complaints about illegal government surveillance and Justice Department double standards turned out to be valid, and they haunted me as I did my work. Especially because the person providing backup for a secret surveillance program was now me.

Amy Zegart: In the deepfake era, counterterrorism is harder

My work on Stellarwind focused on how the program operated and what the law required. I barely considered the harms of undisciplined government surveillance beyond its possible illegality. But a decade later, talking with Chuckie about the Hoffa case, I did.

A lead suspect in Hoffas disappearance in addition to Chuckie was Anthony Giacalone. Hoffa believed he was meeting his old friend for lunch in suburban Detroit on the day he disappeared, and the FBI suspected that Giacalone masterminded the crime to prevent Hoffa from reassuming control over the Teamsters union, which the Mob had infiltrated ever more deeply in the late 1960s, while Hoffa was in prison. The government could never prove its case. So it convicted the suspects (including Giacalone and Chuckie) of crimes unrelated to the disappearance, hoping to pressure them into talking. It used leaks and misinformation toward that same end.

One government leak emerged a year after Hoffa disappeared. On August 1, 1976, the Detroit News launched a three-day front-page series based on information gleaned from the Giacalone and Pagano bugs. The stories described a supposed Detroit Mafia plot to murder Hoffa in the early 60s; they explained the Detroit familys inner workings; and they included information about Josephine Hoffas alcoholism and the Giacalones plot to rob Hoffas Washington safe. The News never mentioned that the bugs had been illegal and a gross invasion of privacy, and it never paused to note that publication of this material compounded the problem. The Hoffa story was too big, the Mafia too unsympathetic, and the details too spicy. No one was going to complain about what the newspaper had done.

Years later, I sought Chuckies forgiveness for my two-decade rupture, and he accepted me back into his life without qualification, rancor, or drama. Our subsequent conversations led me to question the still-prevalent conventional wisdom that he had had a hand in killing Hoffa. Chuckies supposed betrayal of Hoffa destroyed his reputation and, more devastating to him, stained his honor. In my own investigations, I learned that the circumstantial case against Chuckie was full of holes, that the government had not disclosed evidence that cast doubt on his guilt and implicated others, and that FBI agents and government lawyers who had long worked the case had concluded that he was innocent. Indeed, in July 2013 the government was on the verge of giving Chuckie a letter of exoneration, only to renege in order to avoid political heat.

The Detroit bugs came up one afternoon in 2015 when Chuckie and I were discussing the Hoffa disappearance at his home in Florida, where he lives today with my mother. He was sitting uncomfortably in a recliner at age 82, wearing a medical boot to protect his diabetes-damaged left foot. When I asked him about the 1976 Detroit News feature, Chuckie gave me his usual rejoinder to bad news from the government. The FBI made all that bullshit up, he said. They can write down anything they want for the papers.

This claim was often sound, since the government had, I discovered, leaked a lot of false and misleading information about Chuckie over the years, especially early in the investigation of the Hoffa disappearance. But the newspaper stories contained accurate information, if illegitimately gained. He knew it, and I knew it too: I possessed the transcripts on which the stories were based, and many more.

I had long worried that showing Chuckie the June transcripts would upset him, because they painted him and his heroesHoffa, Giacalone, and his motherin a dishonorable light. They would also vividly remind him of one of the worst periods of his life, when he was for the first time trapped between what he described as his labor side (loyalty to Hoffa) and his Sicilian side (loyalty to the Mob).

In deciding whether to tell Chuckie that I possessed the June transcripts, I imagined how my beliefs about family and friends, and their relationships with one another and with me, would change if I encountered years of secret recordings of their unguarded conversations. I also tried to imagine how painful it would be to read my own unwary conversations, which would not always comport with my sentimentalized sense of self and of others. And I tried to contemplate how painful it would be to read and discuss ugly truths so many years after events in my life had played out.

In thinking about this, I came to appreciate more fully the evils inherent in the governments buggingthe original surveillance, the archival permanence, and the periodic revelation of the content. It wasnt just the chilling effect on Chuckies freedom of thought, belief, and speechan effect that stretched back decades, to the 1950s, when he first began to suspect that he was under surveillance. It was also, more painfully, the violence against his intimate spaces and relationships, and the annihilation of the stories he told himself and the world about these spaces and relationships, and thus of his power to define and shape his life.

We tend not to take these types of harm seriously when we consider bugs planted to gather evidence against Mob figures. We tend to think such people dont deserve privacy, because they belong to an organization whose mission is to violently defy the legal system. Even the Church Committee, which railed against the abuse of government surveillance, barely mentioned the massive surveillance program against the Mob, although that program was more clearly illegal than most of the other activities the committee condemned.

But the privacy harms are the same whether the target is guilty or innocent, bad or good. The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution accepts reasonable intrusions on private spaces in the name of law enforcement and national security. Yet harms remain present, a trade-off even for lawful government surveillance, which the Detroit bugs were not.

My qualms did not prevent me, that afternoon in Florida, from telling Chuckie that I had the transcripts on which the leaks were based. He asked to see them. I gave him one that showed that his mother had plotted with Giacalone to rob Hoffa.

Chuckie read with a blank expression for two minutes. Then he winced as if he had broken a tooth, and threw the papers across the room. I dont want to read this shit, he said, and I dont want to talk about it.

I was not surprised by this reaction. Chuckie was confronting evidence that shattered his constructed worldview. Practically everyone on the tapes viewed the powerful Hoffa in crass transactional terms. They wanted a loan, or help with a legal problem, or his money, or more of his time. Or they wanted to push him aside, or take advantage of him, or even knock him off. Hoffa was often treated with disrespect or disdain.

But not by Chuckie. In the thousands of pages of transcripts I read, no one displayed more affection for Hoffa than Chuckie did. In 1963, just after Hoffa was indicted on charges that would eventually send him to prison, Chuckie complained angrily to his mother that some members of the Teamsters executive board were jockeying to force Hoffa out. They dont care about Hoffa; they dont care if Hoffa lives or dies, Chuckie lamented to his mother in her apartment, at 6:04 p.m. on Thursday, June 13, 1963, as FBI agent Gerald R. McVittie illegally listened in.

Despite the secrecy of illegal government surveillance in the early 1960s, rumors of government snooping abounded at the time and sparked feverish concern about Big Brother. Newspapers and magazines were filled with stories about miniature microphone devices, radio transmitters, and other examples of what Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart described in 1961 as frightening paraphernalia which the vaunted marvels of an electronic age may visit upon human society.

In this milieu, Jimmy Hoffa believed that the FBI tapped his phone, opened his mail, and beamed electronic listening devices on him from half a mile away, aided by invisible powder they had rubbed onto his clothes, as Ralph and Estelle James recounted in their 1965 book about Hoffa. Whether the government illegally surveilled Hoffa himself (as opposed to just his associates) remains a contested historical question. But until the day he went to jail, in March 1967, Hoffa never stopped speaking publicly about the dangers of surveillance.

In the early 1960s, the paranoid Hoffa asked Chuckie to buy thousands of copies of George Orwells 1984 and distribute them to union locals around the country. Some of these poor guys, the only thing they knew was how to drive a truck or work at a warehouse, Chuckie told me. They didnt have the knowledge of the electronic shit. Mr. Hoffa wanted them to read that book and said that this is whats going to happen to not only us but to everybodyand exactly what hes predicted has happened.

Chuckie is basically right about Hoffas prediction. But there are several differences between today and the era in which Chuckie was secretly surveilled.

First, todays threats to privacy come not only from the government but also from the private sectorfrom Facebook, Google, Amazon, and the hundreds of other platforms, apps, and aggregators to which we daily turn over our most intimate secrets.

Second, the governments surveillance power has grown unfathomably since the 1960s. The frightening paraphernalia from six decades ago are toys compared with the redoubtable tools that allow the government to watch and record our movements and communications, and that enable it to store almost limitless amounts of data on its own or to piggyback on the masses of data that we volunteer to private firms.

And third, Congress has ratified and legitimated what were once legally tenuous surveillance techniques. It did so after the executive branch convinced legislators that the techniques were necessary for law enforcement and national security, but it imposed various legal constraints on their use. Congress had taken such steps in the late 1960s for domestic criminal investigations. It did basically the same for foreign threats, broadly conceived, first in the FISA law of 1978; then again in 2008, following public revelations about Stellarwind. Congress acted a few times when Barack Obama was presidentincluding after the intense controversy sparked by the thenNSA contractor Edward Snowdens 2013 leak of thousands of highly classified government documents about secret surveillance practicesand acted most recently in January 2018, a year into Donald Trumps presidency.

Jack Goldsmith: The cost of Trumps attacks on the FBI

The result of these developments is yet another new normal in which the government is constrained in certain respects but citizens are far more exposed to lawful government surveillance than before. This latest new normal, like earlier ones, will not prove stable. Technology develops apace. Sensors will soon be placed on practically everything. Facial-recognition and other biometric-identification techniques, along with drone and satellite surveillance, will become commonplace and extraordinarily discerning. Data-mining and pattern-detection tools, enhanced by artificial intelligence, will grow ever more powerful.

If history is a guide, the government will perceive a security advantage in using these and other tools in new ways to watch us and to predict and preempt our behavior. It will sometimes deploy the tools in secret, despite legal impediments, in order to prevent calamities threatened by new foes, many of whom will themselves be empowered by technological change. We will be outraged by the seeming excess when we find out. But the outrage will dissipate. Except in the most extreme cases of abuse or fecklessness, Congress will legalize the surveillance practice on the condition, mainly, of new procedural restraints. And we will adjust to our more naked selves.

This is a depressing conclusion for many, but it is an inevitable one. The executive branch does what it thinks it must, including conduct robust surveillance, to meet our demands for safety. The technology of surveillance races ahead of the law of surveillance, which tries to catch up in spurts, and often does an admirable job of curtailing old abuses. But the law cannot eliminate ever-growing threats, and security is elemental. And so the cycle recurs.

This essay is adapted from Jack Goldsmiths new book, In Hoffas Shadow: A Stepfather, a Disappearance in Detroit, and My Search for the Truth. It appears in the November 2019 print edition with the headline Jimmy Hoffa, My Stepfather, and Me.

Read the original here:

My Family Story of Love, the Mob, and Government Surveillance - The Atlantic

Best of the Decade: TV Shows with real world implications – Mashable

Look, we're never going to knock mindless entertainment, especially with all the *everything* going on.

But we also want to celebrate the stories we watched this decade that moved the needle out in the real world. Whether they be fictional series or narrative-based docu-series, the shows we chose just a few highlights, not all-encompassing are products of strategic work by writers and creators that illuminated some of our world's most pressing sociopolitical and environmental issues.

Below, eight vital shows that stuck with us and went above and beyond to utilize their platforms to give voices to the voiceless, remedy lapses in societal judgement, and tell vital stories, and, ideally, inspired their audiences to go out and do more.

Women protesting the Trump administration's immigration policies don 'Handmaid's Tale' garb.

Image: Kevin Hagen/Getty Images

Author of The Handmaid's Tale Margaret Atwood's assessment of her 1985 novel rings true: the story that captivated readers and audiences alike is "about now." Taking wardrobe cues from the Republic of Gilead in the not-so-distant future, women donned red cloaks and bonnets at protests all across the U.S., Ireland, Argentina, United Kingdom, Croatia, and Poland to make a harrowing statement about reproductive and abortion rights and gender inequality.

The first protest populated by handmaid lookalikes occurred in Texas: in March 2017 after Hulu staged a demonstration based on the then-upcoming show, members of NARAL Pro-Choice Texas sent women in the frocks to the Texas Senate in protest of a bill that would further restrict abortion access in the state. Two-and-a-half years later, the red cloak and white bonnet look has become a staple component in protests surrounding women's rights across the globe.

The real Central Park Five (Kevin Richardson, Antron Mccray, Raymond Santana Jr., Korey Wise, and Yusef Salaam) were instrumental in Durvernay's adaptation of their story.

Image: Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images

Twenty years after the landmark Central Park Jogger case, Ava Duvernay's dramatic miniseries told the stories of the Central Park Five, five teenage boys who were indicted and wrongly incarcerated one of whom was tried and punished as an adult (Korey Wise, portrayed by Jharrel Jerome).

In the years following the case, its prosecutor, Elizabeth Lederer (played by Vera Farmiga) remained the senior trial counsel at the New York County District Attorney's Office, and eventually became a part-time lecturer at Columbia Law School; Linda Fairstein (Felicity Huffman), who oversaw prosecution of the case, was head of the Manhattan District Attorney's Office's sex crimes unit and rose to fame as an esteemed crime novelist. Fairstein's work at the District Attorney's Office is credited for inspiring Law & Order: SVU.

Linda Fairstein poses with 'Death Dance,' one of her many crime novels.

Image: Amy Sussman/Getty Images

After the miniseries resurfaced the case and its mishandling at the hands of the two women, both faced immense backlash. Although Lederer's teaching position had already been protested by Columbia's Black Law Students Association, it took the public's reaction to When The See Us to provoke her resignation.

Fairstein's fate took a different route: she was dropped by her book publisher, Glamour Magazine effectively rescinded Fairstein's 1993 Woman of the Year award, and #CancelLindaFairstein trended on Twitter, and petitions called for her titles to be pulled from bookseller's repertories. Further, Fairstein resigned from the boards of Safe Horizon and Joyful Heart Foundation and that of Vassar College.

When Poussey was killed at the hands of one of Litchfield's correctional officers during OITNB's fourth season, fans were heartbroken. Samira Wiley's portrayal of the fun-loving, empathetic, optimistic, big-hearted character brought a silver lining to the narrative (intentionally) set in such a bleak and finite environment. Thus, the fictional Poussey Washington fund featured on OITNB's final season delivered bittersweet closure as Taystee used her late friend's namesake to help women formerly incarcerated make transition to life outside prison.

Seemingly in a parallel effort to allow the show to live on past its series finale, OITNB unveiled the (real life) Poussey Washington Fund, which supports eight non-profit organizations that focus on issues presented throughout the show's seven seasons.

The amount of real world change that Oliver's Last Week Tonight has enacted could be a standalone piece (and it is).

In one of his most memorable takedowns, Oliver exposed the FCC for attempting to not comply with net neutrality. The episode caused the agency to adopt net neutrality norms, and their servers crashed due to messages from outraged Last Week Tonight viewers. The impact that the host has had on global politics and governance is likely thanks to his accessible, approachable style and comprehensive reporting.

Steven Avery's history with the Manitowoc County Justice Department in Wisconsin is fraught with falsified accusations and coerced confessions, both of which are exposed on the hit Netflix docu-series, Making A Murderer.

After the show's first installment (which premiered in 2015), fans outraged by Avery and his nephew Brendan Dassey's cruel fate appealed to the Obama administration in order to obtain a presidential pardon for the pair who were in custody in 2016. The White House responded by explaining that Avery and Dassey's cases were within the purview of the state of Wisconsin, not that of the federal branch. Therefore, Avery and Dassey would need to be pardoned by local officials.

But fans didn't stop after a plea to the top executive: in addition to the White House petition, another petition in Avery's honor on Change.org received over 500,000 signatures.

The current fates of Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey are unclear, though both of the accused are still crusading to prove their innocence. Avery is continuing to appeal his own conviction, while Dassey's legal team has asked that Wisconsin Governor Tom Evers grant him clemency, among other updates on the still-unfolding case.

The murder case surrounding the 1969 disappearance and death of Cathy Cesnik went cold in 1992. Twenty-five years later, The Keepers enlightened viewers about the alleged sexual abuse that haunted the halls of Archbishop Keough High School primarily at the hands of Father Joseph A. Maskell. As described in the series, many involved with the case believe that Cesnik had knowledge of the sexual abuse and was killed by Maskell (or, those associated with him) in order to silence her.

In a preemptive response to the claims unearthed by the docu-series, the State of Maryland extended the statute of limitations for victims of childhood sexual abuse, meaning women who were abused in high school that wanted to sue Maskell (or any related entities) could do so until they were 38 years old, rather than 25. This move from the State was meaningful: a 1995 suit filed against Maskell by two of the women he abused was thrown out because it had surpassed said statute of limitations.

Once the docu-series aired, the impassioned viewer response provoked the Baltimore police department to re-open the case. It all began with a form on the department's website (which is still active) that provided an avenue for survivors of sexual abuse related to the incidents detailed on The Keepers to report. Taking power into their own hands, the show's audience created a petition urging a grand jury to investigate the Archdiocese of Baltimore, as those associated are said to hold countless documents pertaining to the sexual abuse claims against Maskell.

Blue Planet II's finale tackled the harmful effects of human overuse of plastic. The response from viewership was a mix of outrage, surprise, and incentive; all of which took the forms of tangible efforts to cut down on plastic waste and pollution.

As described by Attenborough in his laud of the Blue Planet II audience crusaders, viewers cleaned beaches and modified their lifestyles pertaining to plastic use, local organizations worked to reduce their plastic footprint, and companies in Britain joined in on an initiative to reduce plastic pollution. Outside the U.K., Attenborough informs that China has spearheaded its own Blue Planet campaign against single-use plastic overuse.

What's more, outside research confirmed Attenborough's message: 88% of people who watched Blue Planet II's finale changed their behavior when it came to single-use plastics. Additionally, 60% of people reportedly choose reusable water bottles and coffee cups as a result of the knowledge they gleaned from the mini-series. Finally, Waitrose, the supermarket company that conducted the aforementioned research, reported an 800% increase in customers inquiring about plastic use in products and stores nationwide.

Produced, shot, and released amidst a world of "fake news" accusations and conflicting narratives surrounding immigration laws and practices, Netflix's Living Undocumented provides an unabashed look at the harsh realities of those living without legal status in the United States.

One of the most jarring revelations from the docu-series is the encounter between immigration attorney Andrea Martinez and two unrelenting ICE agents, all of which was caught on camera. As shown in the clip above, while working on deportation cases related to Luis Diaz, attorneys Andrea Martinez and Megan Galicia escorted their client into an ICE facility in Kansas, MO to reunite his son, Noah, with mother (and Luis's girlfriend) Kenia. Diaz transported Noah to the facility because both Kenia and Noah were to be deported to Honduras. After attempting to enter the facility with Diaz, two ICE agents forcefully pushed Martinez, causing her to fall onto the concrete and break her foot.

Later on, viewers see Martinez being wheeled out of the ICE facility, presumably after she requested medical assistance on behalf of her foot. The episode during which both clips appear is aptly titled "The World is Watching," and the series was shot throughout 2018.

After the docu-series's premiere in October, 2019, Martinez is demanding justice for the way she was treated: represented by the ACLU, Martinez filed a lawsuit suing the U.S. government for "excessive force" and "unlawful search and seizure" in violation of her Fourth Amendment rights.

As for the two ICE agents depicted in the episode (who have been identified as Everett Chase and Ronnet Sasse), Martinez is suing for assault, battery, false arrest, false imprisonment and negligent infliction of emotional distress. The lawsuit is being filed to the U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri.

After the docu-series wrapped, Martinez has continued to advocate for immigration reform in a multitude of ways. She's still represents immigrants living in the U.S., in addition to reporting on and sharing immigration-related news via her Twitter account, and hosting a podcast titled Immigration Matters with her aforementioned legal partner, Megan Galicia.

Link:

Best of the Decade: TV Shows with real world implications - Mashable

Friday, October 11, 2019: Quid pro quo and the Golden Rule, Trump abandons our Kurdish allies, addressing an existential threat – Bangor Daily News

Quid pro quo

This phrase from the Roman Empire, can effectively translate as, If you scratch my back, then I will scratch yours. Romans believed if they wanted the gods to grant a favor, then first the Roman would favor the gods. If a leader considers himself a god (narcissist) then it would be natural to expect a favor from a mere mortal before granting a request. From theology to a widespread social norm in the empire, Quid pro quo sewed the seeds for the collapse of the great Roman civilization that ruled the world.

Our president has shown his words and actions to be self-serving, asking for favors and for the most part giving much less than what he received. Those unwilling to give what he wants are abased.

The practice of viewing everyone as having a priceless and equal value by virtue of being alive and unique in all the world appears foreign to our president. This ignorance harms himself and his relationships with others, while he gives more importance to himself than others.

The alternative is to honor our equality, and practice the Golden Rule, asking others to do the same for their own good, to insure all will be accepted unconditionally, with reverence given to free will, and a shared interest to work together for the benefit of all. Why live any other way?

The Golden Rule has been a cornerstone of world religions for 6,000 years. Our Founding Fathers declared independence from England, recognizing the self-evident truth that all men are created equal.

What do we do, but declare independence?

Tom GaffneyStockton Springs

Protecting our young people who risk their lives to defend our country does not seem to be considered by President Donald Trump when he makes foreign policy decisions by tweet.

Brett McGurk, working under Presidents Bush, Obama and Trump until last year, organized a coalition of 80 countries and two dozen contributors who gave money and fighters to defeat ISIS and now continue in stabilizing northern Syria. One of the most loyal partners were Kurdish fighters who died in great numbers defeating ISIS with the dedicated young men and women in the United States military. Thousands ISIS fighters are still in the area and in detention ( 12,000) and are ready to fight again as well as thousands of ISIS wives and children.

Turkey and Iraq want to squash the Kurdish people, who desperately want statehood.

Working with Russia, Turkeys President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has in one conversation by phone convinced Trump to abandon our military and our allies. McGurk and his boss, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, quit the Trump administration last year in protest.

The [White House] statement tonight on Syria after Trump spoke with Erdogan demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of anything happening on the ground, McGurk said Monday on Twitter.

Our young people who join the U.S. military need a commander in chief who understands the situation on the ground and will act to protect them and their partners and the security of the United States of America.

Carole BealBar Harbor

Climate change is an existential threat. Maine is one of the fastest-warming states in the nation, and scientists have made it clear that we need to stop emitting carbon into the atmosphere by the middle of this century in order to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.

Maine is stepping up to that challenge. The state recently set ambitious targets to get to 100 percent renewable energy by 2050, and is taking bold action to boost solar generation, electric vehicles, and efficient heat pumps. Transitioning to a clean energy future will create new jobs, strengthen our communities, and protect public health.

But we need comparable bold action from Washington. We need our elected officials to support a transition to a 100 percent clean energy economy and set a nation-wide goal for carbon neutrality by 2050 and theres a bill, the 100% Clean Economy Act of 2019, underway in Congress that would do just that. This legislation would build on progress made at the local level that is already spurring clean energy development and creating more green jobs that drive our economy. As a champion of the environment and small businesses, Rep. Jared Golden should support this legislation.

Ethan TremblayWinterport

Read more:

Friday, October 11, 2019: Quid pro quo and the Golden Rule, Trump abandons our Kurdish allies, addressing an existential threat - Bangor Daily News

Charlize Theron Kids Are Being Taught the Golden Rule By Mom – Closer Weekly

Actress Charlize Theron has her own way of raising her kids! When she attended ELLEs Women in Hollywood Celebration on Monday, October 14, she revealed all the best lessons that she tries to teach her kids as they get older.

You know, I think a big thing for me is kindness and knowing we live by our religion, which is do unto others the way you want to be done to you, she told Closer Weekly and other reporters at the star-studded event at the Four Seasons in Beverly Hills. So were big on respect and thinking of others before we think of ourselves.

Charlize, 44, is a proud parent to her two adorable kids Jackson, 7, and August, 4. In an April 2019 interview with The Daily Mail, theMonster star opened up about her oldest child being transgender and how she dealt with that.

[My kids] were born who they are and exactly where in the world both of them get to find themselves as they grow up, and who they want to be, is not for me to decide, Charlize said. My job as a parent is to celebrate them and to love them and to make sure that they have everything they need in order to be what they want to be. And I will do everything in my power for my kids to have that right and to be protected within that.

Charlize learned everything that she knows from her own mother, Gerda Jacoba Aletta Maritz, and she hopes to carry on Gerdas lessons with her two kids. The last thing the Oscar winner wants is for Jackson and August to not have the ability to open up and express themselves.

I grew up in a country where people lived with half-truths and lies and whispers and nobody said anything outright, and I was raised very specifically not to be like that, Charlize explained. I was taught by my mom that you have to speak up; you have to be able to know that, when this life is over, youll have lived the truth youre comfortable with, and that nothing negative can come from that.

Charlizes kids are so lucky to have this lovely woman as their mom!

Go here to read the rest:

Charlize Theron Kids Are Being Taught the Golden Rule By Mom - Closer Weekly

Conservationist reminds us: Aldo Leopold still relevant today – University of Wisconsin-Madison

Aldo Leopold and his wife, Estella, in 1943. Leopold treasured time outside with students, colleagues and his family. UW-Madison Digital Archive

MADISON Noted conservation biologist and longtime University of WisconsinMadison professor Stanley Temple is often asked how he remains hopeful despite rising threats to biodiversity.

Temples answer is rooted the life and writings of Aldo Leopold, who was the worlds first professor of wildlife management at UWMadison, and is best known for his 1949 book, A Sand County Almanac.

Leopold developed a land ethic as a philosophical basis for decisions that affect Earth and life on the planet. Leopold offered a golden rule to inform every interaction with nature: A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.

A Sand County Almanac, Temple says, remains one of the most influential environmental books of all time, helping to kickstart environmentalism of the late 1960s.

From 1976 to 2008, Temple held the same professorship in the Department of Forest and Wildlife Ecology that Leopold held from 1933 until his death in 1948.

Now, as a professor emeritus and senior fellow at the Aldo Leopold Foundation, Temple gives dozens of Leopold talks each year around the state and beyond.

Like Leopold, Temple has observed the timing of seasonal events like the flowering of plants and migration of animals a field called phenology. Leopold had a lifelong passion for recording seasonal events in the natural world and interpreting their meaning, Temple adds. He once wrote, Keeping records enhances the pleasure of the search and the chance of finding order and meaning in the events.

Decades later, this meticulous record of flowering dates from 1937-1940 helped Aldo Leopolds daughter to document the ecological effect of climate change. Photo courtesy of Leopold Archives

In 1996, Temple helped Leopolds daughter Nina Leopold Bradley comb through Leopolds records to show that many birds were arriving earlier, and many plants are blooming earlier, than they did six decades previously. Temples talks on phenology have been of special interest because of what Leopolds records reveal about response to climate change.

As Leopold moved from his early career doing field work for the U.S. Forest Service to becoming the worlds first professor of wildlife management in 1933, he was blossoming from conservation practitioner to conservation philosopher, Temple explains.

Aldo Leopold working in the Apache National Forest in Arizona, about 1910. UW-Madison Digital Archive

As a scientist with a poetic pen, Leopold focused on the broad implications of the growing public disconnect with nature. He concluded that education about environmental damage alone would not change peoples behavior. Instead, Temple says, ecological knowledge had to be coupled with what Leopold called an ecological conscience, a moral compass guiding us in how to live on planet Earth without spoiling it.

Ecology, Leopold wrote, is the science of biotic communities, and the ecological conscience is therefore the ethics of community life. An ecological conscience is an affair of the mind as well as the heart.

Throughout my career, Temple says, I have been inspired by Leopolds wisdom, which allowed me to remain hopeful, in spite of the odds.

Temple gives a range of talks on Leopold covering, for example, natural soundscapes and what Leopold called The oldest task in human history how to live on a piece of land without spoiling it.

My goals in these talks, Temple says, is help people gain both ecological knowledge and an ecological conscience so they can remain hopeful in a wounded world.

Details: The Badger Talk on Aldo Leopold and Conservation on Private Lands will be at 10 a.m. Oct. 19 at Johnson Creek Public Library, 125 Lincoln St, Johnson Creek. Itsfree and open to the public.

Share via Facebook

Share via Twitter

Share via Linked In

Share via Email

Link:

Conservationist reminds us: Aldo Leopold still relevant today - University of Wisconsin-Madison

Worthington Industries to Host Investor Day in NYC – Yahoo Finance

COLUMBUS, Ohio, Oct. 16, 2019 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Worthington Industries, Inc. (WOR) today announced that it will host an Investor Day event in New York, N.Y. on Nov. 13, 2019. Presentations by the Companys executive management team will provide an overview of the Companys operations, financial performance and long-term growth strategy.

The event will begin at 9:30 a.m. ET and end at approximately 12:30 p.m. ET. A live and archived webcast of the event will be available on the Investor Relations section of the Companys website atwww.WorthingtonIndustries.com.

Due to limited capacity, in-person attendance will be by invitation only. To request an invitation, please contactAllison.Dune@WorthingtonIndustries.com.

About Worthington Industries Worthington Industries is a leading global diversified metals manufacturing company with 2019 fiscal year net sales of $3.8 billion. Headquartered in Columbus, Ohio, Worthington is North Americas premier value-added steel processor, providing customers with wide ranging capabilities, products and services for a variety of markets including automotive, construction and agriculture; a global leader in manufacturing pressure cylinders for propane, refrigerant and industrial gasses and cryogenic applications, water well tanks for commercial and residential uses, CNG and LNG storage, transportation and alternative fuel tanks, oil & gas equipment, and consumer products for camping, grilling, hand torch solutions and helium balloon kits; and a manufacturer of operator cabs for heavy mobile industrial equipment; laser welded blanks for light weighting applications; automotive racking solutions; and through joint ventures, complete ceiling grid solutions; automotive tooling and stampings; and steel framing for commercial construction. Worthington employs approximately11,000 people and operates 71 facilities in 7 countries.

Founded in 1955, the Company operates under a long-standing corporate philosophy rooted in the golden rule. Earning money for its shareholders is the first corporate goal. This philosophy serves as the basis for an unwavering commitment to the customer, supplier, and shareholder, and as the Companys foundation for one of the strongest employee-employer partnerships in American industry.

Safe Harbor StatementThe company wishes to take advantage of the Safe Harbor provisions included in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 ("the Act"). Statements by the company which are not historical information constitute "forward looking statements" within the meaning of the Act. All forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties which could cause actual results to differ from those projected. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially include risks described from time to time in the company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Contacts:SONYAL.HIGGINBOTHAMVP, CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS AND BRAND MANAGEMENT614.438.7391|sonya.higginbotham@worthingtonindustries.com

MARCUS A. ROGIERTREASURER AND INVESTOR RELATIONS OFFICER614.840.4663 | marcus.rogier@worthingtonindustries.com

200OldWilsonBridgeRd.|Columbus,Ohio43085WorthingtonIndustries.com

Read more:

Worthington Industries to Host Investor Day in NYC - Yahoo Finance

Social skills educator to speak at Western Oakland County Parenting Education Fair – Spinal Column Online

By Spinal Column Staff | on October 16, 2019

Brooks Gibbs

Brooks Gibbs, an award-winning social skills educator and popular youth speaker, will give the keynote speech at the Western Oakland County Parenting Fair Saturday, November 2 at Walled Lake Northern High School.

The event runs from 7:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. Its geared to parents, guardians, educators, teachers, administrators and childcare workers.

Gibbs has presented 2,500 speeches, teaches youth how to be emotionally resilient and encourages them to live by the Golden Rule. He has a number of viral videos.

He said, Im going to teach you how to really raise an emotionally healthy child who is emotionally resilient and kind. We can empower our kids not to get upset by the mean actions of others. Ive got massive content Im excited to deliver back in my hometown.

Gibbs also wants to be sure the educational process continues after this event. He added, I will give my full Raise them Strong online program absolutely free ($50 value) to everyone who registers so you can learn more at home and also share content made just for your children.

Offerings also include two separate tracks and three rounds of breakout sessions by a dozen-plus presenters.

This event is hosted in partnership with the PTAs and staff from Bloomfield Hills Schools, Farmington Public Schools, Oakland County Community College, the Oakland County Youth Assistance, Oakland Schools, Novi Schools, Walled Lake Schools and West Bloomfield Schools.

Pre-registration is encouraged, tickets are $15 online or $25 at the door.

For more information on sponsorship donations, program details, or to register, visit http://www.wlcsd.org/parentingfair.

Follow this link:

Social skills educator to speak at Western Oakland County Parenting Education Fair - Spinal Column Online

What every Japan v Scotland outcome does for the RWC – and who the All Blacks get – TVNZ

With Typhoon Hagibis causing chaos at the Rugby World Cup, it can be fairly easy to lose track of how the knockout stages of this year's tournament are shaping up - and what the All Blacks' path to a potential third-consecutive title will look like.

World Rugby announced yesterday that two matches have been cancelled - England v France and Italy v New Zealand - and, despite Sergio Parisse's complaints, they have little effect on Pool B and C.

Your playlist will load after this ad

Saturday's match against Italy has been abandoned due to Typhoon Hagibis. Source: 1 NEWS

Pool D is also effectively set in stone with Wales and Australia making it through unless Wales suffers a massive upset to Uruguay on Sunday.

But it's a different Sunday fixture - Scotland v Japan - that has the potential to cause as much havoc as Hagibis with all its possible outcomes, and with the All Blacks facing the second seed from that wild Pool A plenty of attention needs to be paid to it.

So let's break down how that one Test in Yokohama will shape this year's quarter-finals.

Please note, these upcoming outcomes are going on the assumption Ireland beat Samoa in Saturday's only match. If they lose, then Japan has to win in order for Joe Schmidt's men to make it through as the second seed or else Scotland will win the group and Japan will be second.

Before all this begins, there's a little known rule that needs to be addressed that could play a huge role in the shaping of Pool A.

Official Rugby World Cup law states that shold two teams be tied in a group at the end of the pool phase, the winner of the match between those two sides shall be ranked higher.

Keep that in mind going forward.

To best understand how Pool A could look, it's best to understand how it looks currently:

Pool A heading into the final weekend of pool play at the 2019 RWC. Source: The Front Row

Japan sit on top with 14 points on three wins and no losses with two bonus points.

Ireland are second with 11 points on two wins and one loss with three bonus points.

Scotland are third with 10 points on two wins and one loss with two bonus points.

Teams earn four points for a win and can earn bonus points for either scoring four tries in a match or losing by less than seven points.

With Ireland heavy favourites to beat Samoa on Saturday, they are expected to earn a bonus point win and move to 16 points overall - two clear of Japan and an unreachable six points ahead of Scotland.

With that in mind, lets look at how the Pool could finish off looking under different circumstances.

All Blacks play: Scotland [most of the time]

Your playlist will load after this ad

The 61-0 victory in Shizuoka sees Scotland stay in the mix to advance. Source: Spark Sport RWC

Funnily enough, there is a world in which Scotland win on Sunday and are still knocked out by Japan.

That'll happen if Scotland fail to secure the four-try bonus point while Japan secures a bonus point for losing by seven or less, which is completely possible if the game boils down to a low-scoring, tightly-fought contest in wet conditions.

If that happens, Japan will finish second one point behind Ireland but one point ahead of Scotland, setting them up for a clash with the All Blacks.

There's also the unlikely world in which Scotland earns that bonus point but Japan earn two of their own by, once again, losing by seven or less but scoring four tries as they do so.

Should that result somehow come to fruition, Japan will be tied with Ireland on sixteen points and thanks to the golden rule will go through as the top seed, sending Ireland to play the All Blacks.

Outside those two results however, a victorious Scotland will march on to the quarter-finals and knock out the Brave Blossoms for a second-straight World Cup, but will then have to face the All Blacks themselves.

Your playlist will load after this ad

A win against Scotland on Saturday would see Japan make the quarter-finals for the first time in history. Source: 1 NEWS

Things are a lot simpler if Japan go undefeated in pool play.

Japan will finish top of Pool A, Ireland will be second and Scotland will go home. The score doesn't matter and neither do any bonus points.

Your playlist will load after this ad

The 1 NEWS team in Japan explains what today's bombshell means for New Zealand's chance at a three-peat. Source: 1 NEWS

If Scotland's threats don't work and World Rugby cancels the game to protect everyone from Typhoon Hagibis, Japan and Scotland will both take two points from the fixture.

This would see Scotland knocked out but Japan would move to 16 points and be tied with Ireland.

That would mean that, once again, the golden rule comes in to play and because of their upset win earlier in the tournament, the Brave Blossoms would send Ireland to play the All Blacks while they host South Africa.

Go here to read the rest:

What every Japan v Scotland outcome does for the RWC - and who the All Blacks get - TVNZ

The St. Louis Blues arent visiting the White House for a political rally, its just a work trip – The Globe and Mail

It turns out Oskar Sundqvist is a great admirer of Palladian and neoclassical architecture. Who knew?

Patrick Smith/Getty Images

On Tuesday, the Stanley Cup champion St. Louis Blues will visit the White House. Per tradition, they will in all likelihood give U.S. President Donald Trump a monogrammed sweater. Theyll shake hands, take photos and Trump will start off saying something about hockey and probably end up starting a war in Greenland.

A lot of people are angry at the Blues for agreeing to this long-standing U.S. sports tradition because it involves Trump. Apparently, the players ought either to decline the invitation or show up wearing black masks. Any exposure to Trump makes them suspect as possible enemies of the resistance. Time to start taking down names, comrades.

Famously, NBA players are no longer expected to go to the White House. They are free to refuse because their league commissioner hates Trump, their executives hate Trump, their coaches hate Trump and their owners (pretend to) hate Trump.

Story continues below advertisement

This isnt exactly a bold stand. Its a business posture. The NBA has discovered that opposition to the sitting U.S. executive tends to burnish their standing with paying customers.

Also, Trump unlike, say, China isnt showering the NBA with hundred-dollar bills from a leaf blower. Hence, the notable difference in tone when it comes to one strong man versus another.

Still, NBA players often make a bit of a deal announcing they will not set one foot in the White House while Trump remains in office, always to great cheers. These are occasionally the same players who dont know anything about China, wont take questions about China and couldnt find China on a map, all while they are in China.

Guys who are nowhere near winning an NBA title and thus in no danger of an invite over for quarter-pounders and mind-numbing chitchat make these pledges as it regards the White House. Its become a sort of oath of loyalty in the NBA.

NHL players dont get the same advantage.

In the case of St. Louis, its principal owner, Tom Stillman, is a noted supporter of the Republican party. The golden rule applies just as much in sports as it does in your line of work the person who has the gold makes the rules.

If your employer instructs you, as a function of your work duties, to visit a place or person you do not agree with, you are left with a few options. You can refuse and take the consequences. You can take a principled stand and quit. You can register your displeasure and go under protest. You can keep your mouth shut and hold your nose.

Story continues below advertisement

Story continues below advertisement

Whats a little harder to do is say, Im not going, and I demand that you like it. In fact, I demand your public support for me while Im voicing my lack of such for you.

The St. Louis Blues, as with every other NHL winner during Trumps term, are choosing the road of diplomacy.

Whatever your view on politics is, its your own personal thing, Blues goalie Jake Allen told The St. Louis Post-Dispatch. But just the experience of going and seeing [the White House], not many people get that chance. Its going to be pretty neat.

Well, anybody can arrange to tour the White House. All it takes is a little foresight and an internet connection. But you see what Allen is trying to do here.

Its a special house, said Blues forward Oskar Sundqvist. Its something youre going to remember for the rest of your life. How it looks in there. How cool it is there.

Who knew? The St. Louis Blues are professional sports greatest admirers of Palladian and neoclassical architecture.

Story continues below advertisement

What? The president lives there, too? Amazing. They hadnt heard that.

You can see these poor guys twisting themselves in knots in their attempt not to offend either side of Americas political divide. Theyre not visiting the head of state. Theyre going to take pictures of some really great furniture.

We seem to have forgotten one of the unavoidable compromises of life. Over the course of yours, you will occasionally have to consort with people you dont like. Thats part of what work is learning to co-exist with people who arent your best buddies. Every one of us has had a co-worker we despise. And every one of us who has remained sane through our professional lives has figured out a way to work with or around that person.

A sports team does not visit the White House (or any other house of government) for a political rally. They go there because its a work trip.

Physical proximity to power does not equal endorsement of it. Endorsement equals endorsement.

Taking a picture with someone does not mean you agree with everything or anything they think. Its just good manners. If you feel the record needs to be set straight afterward, you are very free to explain your own take on things.

Story continues below advertisement

Lots of people will listen. There has never been a moment in which the polity is more willing to hang on the political thoughts of men whove never studied deeply nor live anywhere close to what most of us consider the real world.

If you make two or five or 20 million bucks a year, I dont require a lecture from you on how I ought to conduct my affairs. What I need from you is a loan.

In this one instance, hockey players are the voice of reason on todays profound cultural and political matters. They dont want to speak to them because they realize they have nothing useful to say. Theyre hockey players. They want to play hockey, not puzzle out in public the political implications of unrest in Hong Kong on stability in Asia, or the wisdom of impeachment.

The key word there is public. Im sure many of these guys have (like just about all the rest of us, muddy and semi-informed) thoughts on the matter. But for the same reason you would not like having your family arguments over the dinner table broadcast on live TV, they dont want theirs.

I dont urgently require the thoughts of NHL (or NBA or NFL or professional jai alai) players on politics, any more than I do some random stranger on the streetcar. I need the players thoughts much less, actually. That random stranger is far more likely to share in my issues and concerns. Weve completely lost sight of that disconnect.

Expecting famous people to be insightful just because they are famous isnt the solution to Americas current White House problem. Its what got Americans into the problem in the first place.

Here is the original post:

The St. Louis Blues arent visiting the White House for a political rally, its just a work trip - The Globe and Mail

Manic Street Preachers tease release of The Holy Bible live film – NME Live

Prepare for 'Be Pure Be Vigilant Behave'

Manic Street Preachers have announced details of the cinematic release of their acclaimed 20th anniversary tour of seminal album The Holy Bible.

Shot during the bands long-time collaborator and BAFTA-winning director Kieran Evans, Be Pure Be Vigilant Behave first premiered in Cardiff in 2016 as part of Swn Festival. Evans never-before-seen directors cut will be shown in cinemas throughout the UK. All profits from the screenings will be donated to charity.

Check out an exclusive clip of Faster fromBe Pure Be Vigilant Behave below, along with a full list of screenings.

The full list of screening is below. Visit each cinemas websites for tickets and information.

NOVEMBER1 Picturehouse, Exeter2 FACT, Liverpool3 Watershed, Bristol5 Hackney Picturehouse, London18 Broadway Cinema, Nottingham20 Pontio, Bangor21 Chapter, Cardiff26 Aberystwyth Arts Centre27 Duke of Yorks, Brighton29 Cameo, Edinburgh30 GFT, GlasgowDECEMBER2 Showroom Workstation, Sheffield

The whole point of the movie was to make an anti-concert film, Evans previously told NME. We were moaning about cranes and all that festival footage. One night a couple of years ago we were talking about how much we loved old Sex Pistols concerts. Theres a brilliant compilation of punk films on Sky Atlantic at the moment all about that old Tony Wilson show,So It Goes. Hed film Buzzcocks gigs but only send two or three cameras. Because they had longer takes and would just cut what they had, it felt so much more exciting than having say 20 cameras where nothing is left to chance. We wanted to leave something to chance with this.

The whole premise was me with a low-end, lo-fi camera, shooting one member of the band each night, going round them each gig from a different angle and shooting the audience. That was it the golden rule. There wasnt an intention to release anything, it was more about a document of the tour, but then a friend of mine edited some stuff together and we realised we had something.

He added: [Bassist, Nicky] Wire phoned me today and said he still had a headache from watching the film. I didnt know whether to be chuffed or worried.

Meanwhile, Manic Street Preachers recently went on tour alongside the Welsh rugby team in Japan where they invited the squads Jamie Roberts on stage to perform.

Speaking about his thoughts on the Manics next album, bassist Nicky Wire last year told NME:I just think musically, James [Dean Bradfield, frontman] is bursting with electricity. You can feel it in him. Hes got that desire to start up again. He was talking to me about ideas on how to make things more expansive.

Ive some words on the go, but theres no coherent message. Ive just been listening to This Is My Truth a lot. Its such a deep and heavy album for a record that was so big. It just makes you realise that you can push the limits and have success.

Manics last album was 2018s acclaimed Resistance Is Futile.

Read this article:

Manic Street Preachers tease release of The Holy Bible live film - NME Live

Liberty Health Sciences Appoints George Gremse To The Board Of Directors – PRNewswire

TORONTO, Oct. 16, 2019 /PRNewswire/ - Liberty Health Sciences Inc. (CSE: LHS) (OTCQX: LHSIF) http://www.libertyhealthsciences.com("Liberty" or the "Company"), a provider of high quality cannabis, announced today that George Gremse has been appointed to the Board of Directors, effective immediately, replacing retiring board member Jeremy Straub. Gremse will serve as Liberty's Chair of the Audit Committee.

"On behalf of Liberty, we would like to thank Jeremy for his continuous support and invaluable guidance during his tenure as Board of Director and Chair of the Audit Committee, and we wish him much success in all of his future endeavors," said Victor Mancebo, Interim Chief Executive Officer of Liberty. "We are excited to welcome George to the Liberty Health Sciences Board of Director who will take over as Chair of the Audit Committee. George complements our board of directors' skills and experience and I am confident he will provide valuable perspectives as we continue to enhance value for all of our shareholders. He comes to us with an abundance of high-level corporate experience and possess exemplary financial acumen."

Gremse has held senior management positions in both Fortune 500 companies and startups. He is a past member of the Board of Directors at MetroBroward Economic Development Corporation and President of Jolizmo Consulting and Investments, Inc. His career encompasses significant strategic and tactical operational experience within start-ups, mergers and roll ups in Florida, across North America, and internationally. His business experience has provided him the opportunities to develop strong skills in P&L management, enterprise strategies, acquisition management, and franchise development and management.

Gremse served in South America in the Peace Corps and holds a B.S. from Cornell University and an MBA from Baruch College of the City University of New York. He currently resides in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

About Liberty Health Sciences Inc.Liberty is the cannabis provider committed to providing a high-quality cannabis experience based on our genuine care for all cannabis users and a focus on operational excellence from seed to sale. For more information, please visit: http://www.libertyhealthsciences.com.

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS: This press release contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable securities laws. Any statements that are contained in this news release that are not statements of historical fact may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are often identified by terms such as "may", "should", "anticipate", "expect", "believe", "plan", "intend" or the negative of these terms and similar expressions. Forward-looking statements in this news release include, but are not limited to, statements regarding the expected closing date and the sale of the specified assets in Florida and Ohio. There is no certainty that the transactions will be completed by the anticipated closing date or at all. Forward-looking statements necessarily involve known and unknown risks, including, without limitation, risks associated with general economic conditions; adverse industry events; marketing costs; loss of markets; future legislative and regulatory developments involving medical marijuana; inability to access sufficient capital from internal and external sources, and/or inability to access sufficient capital on favorable terms; the medical marijuana industry in the United States generally, income tax and regulatory matters; the ability of Liberty to implement its business strategies; competition; crop failure; currency and interest rate fluctuations and other risks. Readers are cautioned that the foregoing list is not exhaustive. Readers are further cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements as there can be no assurance that the plans, intentions or expectations upon which they are placed will occur. Such information, although considered reasonable by management at the time of preparation, may prove to be incorrect and actual results may differ materially from those anticipated. Forward-looking statements contained in this news release are expressly qualified by this cautionary statement.

SOURCE Liberty Health Sciences Inc.

http://www.libertyhealthsciences.com/

Here is the original post:

Liberty Health Sciences Appoints George Gremse To The Board Of Directors - PRNewswire

ZOM Senior Living, in a venture with Liberty Senior Living and funds managed by Ares Management Corporation’s Real Estate Group, announces…

WELLINGTON, Fla.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--ZOM Senior Living, Liberty Senior Living, and funds managed by an affiliate of Ares Management Corporation (NYSE: ARES), have recently closed on construction financing for the development of a 46-acre lakefront parcel, adjacent to The Mall at Wellington Green. The expansive site is in Western Palm Beach County, one of the most affluent regions in the U.S. Construction of Phase 1 is expected to begin immediately and will include 283 premier independent living, assisted living and memory care units. The centerpiece of the community is a two-story, 65,000-square-foot clubhouse and amenity building, replete with multiple dining venues, indoor and outdoor swimming pools, membership-grade spa, salon and wellness center, billiards and cards room, and a theater, to name a few. The Class A senior living rental community will offer luxury rental housing in a variety of formats, including single-story villas (with attached garages), three-story garden flats, and residences within a six-story building, attached directly to the main amenity building. At full build-out, the project is anticipated to include 424 units.

We are excited to partner with Liberty Healthcare and Ares Management on this, our first ZOM Senior Living rental community, said Greg West, CEO of ZOM Living. We formed ZOM Senior Living to capitalize on this growing segment of the renter pool, and we plan to offer the same thoughtfully designed living spaces, amenities, and broad array of services to our senior residents, as we provide in our traditional market rate rental communities. We join forces with a seasoned senior housing operating partner, which perfectly complements ZOMs experience in luxury multifamily housing.

Liberty Senior Living is a subsidiary of North Carolina-based Liberty Healthcare, a 144-year old family-owned company with a wealth of experience delivering healthcare and residential services in the growing senior housing segment.

This is our first project in Florida and we are excited to partner with ZOM, said Will Purvis, Chief Development Officer of Liberty Healthcare. The large size of the Wellington site gives us the opportunity to create a unique resort style seniors community, in close proximity to well-established retail shops and dining venues. We have the ability to create a number of different residential formats and levels of healthcare services, and to maintain significant green space for the enjoyment of all of our residents.

Ares has a long track record of developing core-quality real estate in major U.S. markets, said Andrew Holm, Partner in the Ares Real Estate Group. With top tier management, unrivaled amenities, high-quality and varied housing options, and a great location in Palm Beach County, this project is a prime example of what we look for in a development opportunity. We look forward to building upon a strong relationship with ZOM and Liberty, who have designed a great property.

This project represents a huge milestone for our entre into the senior living space, said Brett Gelsomino, Vice President of ZOM Senior Living. Wellington Bay is our first senior living project to break ground, within our growing national pipeline. We have enjoyed working with the Village of Wellington and their staff. We look forward to getting underway, and contributing positively to the community by providing high-quality housing for our senior citizens.

LS3P Architects (Wilmington) and MSA Architects (Miami) provided project design and architectural services, and RD Jones provided interior design services. Balfour Beatty and Kaufman Lynn are providing construction services. Construction financing was co-arranged by SunTrust Bank and PNC Bank, NA, with Comerica Bank as a participating lender.

About ZOM Living

ZOM Living is one of the most highly regarded luxury multifamily developers in the United States, and has joint ventured or directly developed nearly 20,000 apartment units nationwide, with an aggregate value of over $4 Billion. Throughout its 42-year history, ZOM has garnered more than 160 industry awards for project design and development expertise, including the prestigious National Multifamily Development Firm of the Year award and garnering two national Pillar Awards from the (NAHB) National Association of Home Builders, for Best Low-Rise Project (Baldwin Harbor/Orlando) and Best High-Rise (Monarc at Met3/Miami).

ZOM Living is headquartered in Orlando and has regional development offices in South Florida, Dallas, Washington D.C., Chicago and Raleigh. ZOM has 6,000 units currently under construction or in design/predevelopment throughout the U.S., with a total capitalization of $1.6 Billion. For more information on ZOMs business activities and development portfolio, visit http://www.zomliving.com.

About Liberty Senior Living

The Liberty Group is a family-owned and operated company with a strong commitment to Caring with Excellence. Since 1875, the McNeill family has developed and operated health care services in the Southeast. Liberty Senior Living oversees all Independent Living and Assisted Living operations outside of their skilled nursing facilities. Based in Wilmington, North Carolina, Liberty is currently developing new projects in Cary (Raleigh), and in Charlotte, North Carolina, and in Mt. Pleasant (Charleston), South Carolina. For more information, visit http://www.libertyseniorliving.com

About Ares Management Corporation

Ares Management Corporation (NYSE: ARES) is leading global alternative investment manager operating three integrated businesses across Credit, Private Equity and Real Estate. Ares Managements investment groups collaborate to deliver innovative investment solutions and consistent and attractive investment returns for fund investors throughout market cycles. Ares Managements global platform had $142 billion of assets under management as of June 30, 2019 and employs more than 1,000 employees in over 20 offices across four continents. Please visit http://www.aresmgmt.com for additional information.

Ares Real Estate Group manages comprehensive public and private equity and debt strategies, with approximately $11.9 billion of assets under management as of June 30, 2019.

More:

ZOM Senior Living, in a venture with Liberty Senior Living and funds managed by Ares Management Corporation's Real Estate Group, announces...