Daily Archives: May 11, 2017

Former NSA director says this White House can’t handle the truth – PRI

Posted: May 11, 2017 at 12:32 pm

On Monday, it was revealed that former President Barack Obama warned then-President-elect Donald Trump not to hire Gen. Michael Flynn. That was two days after the November presidential election. Despite the warning, President Trump selected Flynn as national security adviser. Flynn was later fired for lying to Vice President Mike Pence about his discussions with the Russian ambassador to the United States.

During a hearing on Capitol Hill on Monday, former acting Attorney General Sally Yates also revealed that Flynn was vulnerable to foreign blackmail and that she issued a separate warning about him to the Trump administration. Yates testified alongside James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence.

Retired four-star Gen. Michael Hayden served Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bushand Barack Obama in top intelligence posts, including as the director of the National Security Agency, the director of the CIA, and the deputy director of national intelligence. Though Hayden believes Flynn is tactically brilliant and praises his distinguished career within the Pentagon, he argues that he was not the right person to serve as Trumps national security adviser.

I think Mike coming into the national scene was very unfamiliar turf for him, and I dont think he was a very good fit for the job that the president selected him for, Hayden says.

This was a perfect storm, he later adds. Gen. Flynn coming out of government a bit angry, feeling a bit disrespected, passionate about some things, and working for a president who had those same attitudes they kind of fed off of one another. Hence, my reasoning, back before all this, I thought Mike was an ill fit for the job. What President Trump needs is someone to calm him down, not someone to accelerate him. I fear as if weve got this convergence, and it just headed to a very dark place.

According to Hayden, during an early Trump transition meeting on national security, Flynn was specifically told to be careful when it came to discussions with the Russians.

There were already these kinds of signs, I think, that folks more familiar with how this stuff works were a bit ill at ease with what they saw happening, Hayden says.

Overall, Hayden believes that the testimony given by Clapper and Yates was solid.

You saw two career government professionals testifying yesterday, says Hayden. Ive got to tell you, the only safe haven for a government professional in issues like this is the truth. And I knew, when I saw the lineup for this hearing, one, this was not going to be a happy day for the White House, who have tried to spin all of this in every possible direction. And number two, this wasnt going to settle things down this was going to excite this issue.

After the Trump administration was warned about Flynn, there should have been a tectonic shift inside the West Wing of the White House, Hayden says.

[Monday], we learned [the warnings] happened not once but twice in personal meetings, and [there was] an additional phone call, says Hayden. The tone of the conversation was intensely serious, and that this is a big deal.

After Yates warned the Trump administration, it took officials 18 days to fire Flynn, something Hayden attributes to chaos and incompetence within the White House. On Monday, officials within the administration backtracked, saying that former President Obama did warn President Trump, but that Trump thought his predecessor was joking.

This White House has a strained relationship with the truth, and they find themselves unable just simply to admit facts that seem obvious to the rest of us, says Hayden. Ten days ago, you had the president of the United States still questioning whether or not the Russians were the ones who actually did all this stuff.

This story originally aired on The Takeaway.

Read more from the original source:
Former NSA director says this White House can't handle the truth - PRI

Posted in NSA | Comments Off on Former NSA director says this White House can’t handle the truth – PRI

Rabbi accused of raping student ordered to testify at trial – Santa Cruz Sentinel

Posted: at 12:32 pm

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) A rabbi accused of repeatedly raping and molesting a teenage boy has been ordered to testify at a civil trial after invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination during a deposition.

Jury selection for Rabbi Daniel Greer's trial in federal court in Hartford is scheduled to start Wednesday. Jurors could begin hearing evidence later in the day or Thursday.

Greer, 76, remains the principal at the Yeshiva of New Haven school. A former student at the Jewish boarding school, Eliyahu "Eli" Mirlis, now 29, is suing Greer and the school on allegations of sexual assault, infliction of emotional distress and other claims.

Mirlis, who attended the school from 2001 to 2005, also alleges in the lawsuit that Greer sexually abused at least one other male student. The Associated Press generally does not name people who allege sexual assault, but Mirlis wanted to come forward, his lawyer said.

Advertisement

Greer has denied the allegations and has not been criminally charged. New Haven police say they're looking into a sexual assault complaint filed by Mirlis' lawyer, Antonio Ponvert III.

Greer and his lawyers, David Grudberg and William Ward, did not return phone and email messages seeking comment.

According to court documents, Greer invoked his right against self-incrimination at a deposition last year. His lawyers asked a judge to bar Mirlis from calling Greer to the witness stand, but the request was denied.

"Parading Mr. Greer before the jury to repeatedly invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege will only serve to paint him as 'a criminal who has probably eluded justice' in the eyes of the finders of fact, which will cause significant and irreparable prejudice in this case," Grudberg and Ward wrote in a motion filed last month, adding that Greer also would invoke his Fifth Amendment right if called to testify.

Although Judge Michael P. Shea denied the request this month, he said Greer's lawyers could object to specific questions to prevent Greer from having to repeatedly take the Fifth on the stand.

Ward has questioned why Mirlis came forward with the allegations years later and did not take the matter before a rabbinical arbitration court. He said the allegations have damaged Greer, his family and the good reputation he spent years building in the community.

Greer is a graduate of Princeton and Yale Law School who has testified before the state legislature several times on a variety of issues, including opposing same-sex unions in 2002 before the state approved same-sex marriage. He also is a former member of the New Haven police commissioners' board and a past chairman of the New Haven Redevelopment Agency.

He also led efforts to improve New Haven's Edgewood neighborhood.

Greer's daughter was among a group of Orthodox Jewish students who sued Yale University in the late 1990s, claiming the school's requirement that they live in coed dorms violated their constitutional rights. A federal judge disagreed and dismissed the lawsuit.

The rest is here:
Rabbi accused of raping student ordered to testify at trial - Santa Cruz Sentinel

Posted in Fifth Amendment | Comments Off on Rabbi accused of raping student ordered to testify at trial – Santa Cruz Sentinel

New Haven Rabbi Accused Of Sexual Abuse To Testify At Trial – WNPR News

Posted: at 12:32 pm

A prominent New Haven rabbi whos been accused of sexually assaulting a teenage boy has been ordered to testify at a civil trial. Jury selection for Rabbi Daniel Greer is set to begin Wednesday in federal court in Hartford.

A lawsuit filed last year accuses Greer, 76, of repeatedly raping and molesting a student who attended the Yeshiva of New Haven school. During that time, Greer was the rabbi, dean, and director.

The former student, now 29, is suing Greer and the school on allegations of sexual assault, infliction of emotional distress, and other claims.

The lawsuit also alleges that Greer sexually abused at least one other student.

Greer has denied the allegations and has not been criminally charged.

The rabbi invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination during a deposition in the lawsuit. But a judge recently rejected his request not to testify.

Greer has been a respected member of the New Haven community. He served on multiple city boards, and played an active role in the revitalization of declining city neighborhoods. He was also a strong proponent of sexual morality.

View original post here:
New Haven Rabbi Accused Of Sexual Abuse To Testify At Trial - WNPR News

Posted in Fifth Amendment | Comments Off on New Haven Rabbi Accused Of Sexual Abuse To Testify At Trial – WNPR News

The Fourth Amendment in the Digital Age – Constitution Daily (blog)

Posted: at 12:31 pm

In this excerpt from our new Digital Privacy initiative, Jim Harper from the Competitive Enterprise Institute critiques current Fourth Amendment doctrine and calls on courts to adopt a new approach that hews closely to the Fourth Amendments text.

You can read the full text of Harpers white paper at our special section, A Twenty-First Century Framework for Digital Privacy, at https://constitutioncenter.org/digital-privacy

Stare decisis is the valued judicial practice of extracting the underlying principle from precedent, the ratio decidendi, and applying it to present cases. But what happens to the principle behind a prescient dissentthe ratio dissensi, if you willwhen a majoritys decision later proves wrong? Almost ninety years ago, an understated Supreme Court Justice left crumbs of insight in a dissent that may help solve the riddle of applying the Fourth Amendment, particularly to modern communications and data. His thinking can help construct a more complete, reliable, and truly juridical method for administering the Fourth Amendment. Advocates and courts should look to his prescient ratio dissensi.

Pity Justice Butler. Next to contemporaries such as Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Louis D. Brandeis, and Benjamin Cardozo, Pierce Butler occupies second-tier status in historys assessment of Supreme Court justices. A conservative Democrat put forward by a Republican president, Butler was a controversial nominee for the Court. One of his Minnesota home-state senators opposed him, as did progressive lion Robert LaFollette, Sr., a Republican from Wisconsin. The opposite end of the ideological spectrum did Butler no favors: the Ku Klux Klan opposed his nomination because he was a Catholic.

Justice Butler wrote more than 300 opinions in his sixteen years of Supreme Court service, but few stand out today. He is best remembered as one of the four horsemen who lost their constitutional stand against President Franklin Delano Roosevelts expansive New Deal programs. But time has vindicated some of Justice Butlers work on the Court, including notable dissents.

Butler alone rejected Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.s now notorious reasoning in Buck v. Bell, for example. Allowing forced sterilization of a woman, Holmes wrote coldly for the majority: Three generations of imbeciles are enough. The Nazis use of eugenics the next decade cast more than a little pall over the practice, and Skinner v. Oklahoma effectively ended forced sterilization in 1942. Score one for the conscience of Justice Butler.

Likewise, in Palko v. Connecticut, Butler alone disagreed with Justice Cardozos ruling that the Constitutions protection against double jeopardy did not apply to the states. The Court reversed itself on this question three decades later. Score another.

Butler was a legal technician, and his areas of focus were not what generally capture public and scholarly attention. His approach to opinion writing stressed simplicity and minimalism, according to a history by David R. Stras, now a Minnesota Supreme Court justice himself, and it was rare indeed when he used rhetorical flourishes to argue a point. So it is not surprising that Justice Butlers dissent in Olmstead v. United States has remained obscure behind the fanfare of his brother Louis Brandeiss dissent. But time may yet vindicate Justice Butlers reasoning, especially given its usefulness for applying the Fourth Amendment to the digital world.

Olmstead, of course, was the 1928 case in which the Court found that a Fourth Amendment search had not occurred when government agents wiretapped the telephones of suspected bootleggers. Justice Brandeis, co-author of a Harvard Law Review article called The Right to Privacy forty years earlier, inveighed against the ruling using powerful and persuasive language. The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness, he wrote:

They recognized the significance of mans spiritual nature, of his feelings, and of his intellect. They knew that only a part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations. They conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alonethe most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men.

Posterity has favored Brandeiss passion. Commentators and scholars today still quote and muse over his formulation of the right to be let alone. They explore how that notion might be implemented to preserve the values that the Framers held dear.

But Brandeiss words did not found a sustaining rationale for Fourth Amendment protection. The proof is in the eating of the pudding: Modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence is a muddle, and it is sorely challenged by advances in information technology. This is particularly poignant because Brandeis foresaw the surveillance capabilities enabled by todays information and communications technologies. Ways may someday be developed, he wrote, by which the Government, without removing papers from secret drawers, can reproduce them in court, and by which it will be enabled to expose to a jury the most intimate occurrences of the home.

The case that reversed Olmstead, of course, was Katz v. United States. In Katz, thirty-nine years later, Justice Harlan shared his sense of how the Constitution controls government access to private communications in his solo concurrence: My understanding, he wrote, is that there is a twofold requirement, first that a person have exhibited an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy and, second, that the expectation be one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable.

Since then, courts have analyzed whether defendants have had a reasonable expectation of privacy in information or things. Under Justice Harlans concurrence, if not the Katz majoritys rationale, the defeat of a reasonable expectation of privacy signals a constitutional search generally requiring a warrant.

That doctrine has not worked. Courts rarely follow the full analysis Justice Harlans formulation suggests. They rarely inquire into a defendants actual (subjective) expectation of privacy, for example, or how it was exhibited. The second half of the test requires judges to use their own views on privacy as a proxy for objectivity, though they are neither public opinion researchers nor sociologists. Against litigants importuning about privacy, courts after Katz have found as often as not that the Fourth Amendment does not protect the security of sensitive and revealing information.

In Smith v. Maryland, for example, one of the leading communications privacy cases, the Supreme Court found that placement of a pen register on a suspects phone line without a warrant did not violate the Fourth Amendment. [W]e doubt that people in general entertain any actual expectation of privacy in the numbers they dial, Justice Blackmun wrote. Walking through the influences that would suppress expectations of privacy in phone-dialing, and none that would support it, he said, It is too much to believe that telephone subscribers, under these circumstances, harbor any general expectation that the numbers they dial will remain secret.

A Court without Justice Brandeiss passion for privacy is evidently quite free to undercut it. So in United States v. Karo, government agents had arranged with an informant to surreptitiously install a radio beeper in a container. They used the presence of the beeper in the container over a period of several days to locate it at three different residences and in the driveway of a fourth, to locate the container in a pair of self-service storage facilities, and also to locate it in transitall the while unable to suffer the inconvenience of getting a warrant. The Court did not examine whether all this warrantless beeper-tracking was reasonable. It gave the once-over to Karos expectation of privacy and found his (presumed) feelings unreasonable.

More recently, the reasonable expectation of privacy test produced a ruling that government agents examination of a stopped vehicle with a drug-sniffing dog is not a Fourth Amendment search. It is hard to think of a word better than search for such highly focused analysis of whether certain particulates exist in the air. Some cases certainly have maintained the protection the people have from inquisitive government agents, but the right to be let alone has not fared all that well when privacy and expectations thereof have been the locus of the Courts decision-making.

If Justice Brandeiss passion did not lay the groundwork for sound administration of a strong Fourth Amendment right, perhaps Justice Butlers Olmstead dissent could. His challenge to the majority decision eschewed feelings, instead examining the legal status of telephone conversations:

The contracts between telephone companies and users contemplate the private use of the facilities employed in the service. The communications belong to the parties between whom they pass. During their transmission, the exclusive use of the wire belongs to the persons served by it. Wiretapping involves interference with the wire while being used. Tapping the wires and listening in by the officers literally constituted a search for evidence.

The communications belong to the parties between whom they pass. It is a fascinatingand very differentway of thinking about what happened in Olmstead. Justice Butler would have protected Olmsteads calls from warrantless wiretapping not because it is part of human essence to have communications remain private, as Justice Brandeis said, but because peoples conversations are not the governments to listen to.

Justice Butlers formulation holds the seeds of an alternative way to administer the Fourth Amendment. It is technical and value-free, but it offers the hope of better Fourth Amendment administration because it is more susceptible to sound application than current Fourth Amendment doctrine. Its use would provide consistent and reliable protection for Americans liberties and a stable rule for law enforcement in a time of technological change.

Courts in Fourth Amendment cases should decline to invoke doctrine that requires them to make broad social pronouncements. Rather, they should apply the text of the Amendment and general legal principles as literally as possible to the facts of cases. That is not always easy, and it requires new and deeper analysis of what it means to search and to seize. It also requires fuller awareness of property and contract rights as they apply to communications and data. But it is a more methodical judicial exercise than applying reasonable expectations doctrine, and it would achieve the current Courts goal of preserving that degree of privacy against government that existed when the Fourth Amendment was adopted.Applying the law to the facts is the better way to administer the Fourth Amendment.

Read more at: https://constitutioncenter.org/digital-privacy/The-Fourth-Amendment-in-the-Digital-Age

Filed Under:

See original here:
The Fourth Amendment in the Digital Age - Constitution Daily (blog)

Posted in Fourth Amendment | Comments Off on The Fourth Amendment in the Digital Age – Constitution Daily (blog)

2nd amendment, hunting and fishing highlight Trump Jr.’s visit to Montana – Billings Gazette

Posted: at 12:31 pm

EAST HELENA The Republican candidate for Montanas empty U.S. House seat took the opportunity to again voice his support for the Second Amendment on Thursday while standing next to President Donald J. Trumps son, who emphasized his love for hunting and fishing on his second trip to the state in less than a month.

Greg Gianforte, a Bozeman technology entrepreneur who lost a bid for governor last fall in his first foray into Montana politics, spoke with Donald Trump Jr. at the Kleffner Ranch in East Helena, the first of rallies statewide in Butte, Sidney and Great Falls.

Are we going to have somebody whos going to defend our way of life against federal overreach and and work with President Trump or are we going to have someone who falls in lockstep with Nancy Pelosi? Gianforte asked a crowd of about 300.

Gianforte is facing Democrat Rob Quist, a musician from Creston, and Libertarian Mark Wicks, an Inverness rancher, in a special election May 25. Montanas lone U.S. House seat is empty after Trump appointed Ryan Zinke Secretary of the Interior.

Both Trump Jr. and Gianforte encouraged people to return their ballots, which went out at the start of the month. The election, which will be on a Thursday, could hinge on voter turnout. Turnout for special elections is typically low and Republicans are concerned about Democratic momentum sparked by frustration with Trumps election last November.

In January about 10,000 participated in the Womens March in Helena, many holding signs objecting to Trump. Quists events around the state have brought in large crowds, even in more rural and Republican areas.

Youd better be voting because the other side is voting, Trump Jr. said. Theyre going crazy, theyre raising money from the coasts. Stay vigilant, stay active, vote before May 25.

Montana's Republican Attorney General Tim Fox also spoke, as did Chris Cox, executive director of the National Rifle Association.

Near the end of Trump Jr.'s speech, a protester interrupted to ask about the presidents returns. Trump has not released his tax returns, something that has historically been done by presidential candidates and because an issue both during and after the election.

The man, Mark Girdler from Helena, was quickly escorted out of the barn where the rally was held. It was unclear if he was removed by supporters or volunteers.

At the end of April, several hundred turned out for rallies with Trump Jr. in Kalispell, Hamilton, Billings and Bozeman. Quist's campaign has said former presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders, who bested Clinton in the June primary, will visit the state on behalf of Quist, though a date has not been announced.

Diane Mercier and Tracie Olson, both of Helena, came to the event Thursday in East Helena even though theyd both already cast their ballots for Gianforte. Mercier said she voted for Gianforte because of his conservative and Christian views.

I like his family values. And also because he is a businessman and knows all about how to build a business and create jobs.

Mercier said she is a lifelong conservative, but both she and Olson said they vote more on the candidate and issues rather than along party lines.

I look at the people at the issues, Olson said.

Both women were frustrated with advertising on each side of the campaign, saying television spots have turned negative instead of focusing on issues.

I do not like how theyre trying to make themselves look better, Olson said.

Mercier said shed rather see them talk about the issues than if somebody did or didnt pay loans. Thats good to know, but I want to hear more about the issues. Montana media has run several stories about Quist's 16-year trail of debt and financial troubles.

Several at the event said they dont know where to look for to find news that is accurate. Mercier said she looks to conservative news outlets and media, while Olson said she does not trust those.

When asked if Gianfortes efforts this election to align himself with Trump have swayed their opinions, the women paused.

Donald Trump as a person, hes brash. I do not like him as a person that you see on TV, Mercier said. But I really feel strongly there needs to be a shakeup in Washington, D.C., and hes trying to do what needs to be done.

She said she Congress has stood in the way of what Trump is trying to do.

Marie Bomar, also of Helena, was more supportive of Trumps presidency so far.

Hes certainly shaken up the world.

Helena resident Del Lonnquist said he feels like the Washington press and Washington elite Democrats are Carterizing Trump, saying at the start of former president Jimmy Carter's term in the White House the Washington press corps tried to paint him as a peanut farmer from Georgia and the same is happening now.

He couldnt tell his story, Lonnquist said. Of course he didnt have Twitter.

Follow along here for live coverage. If you can't see the feed,click here.

Visit link:
2nd amendment, hunting and fishing highlight Trump Jr.'s visit to Montana - Billings Gazette

Posted in Second Amendment | Comments Off on 2nd amendment, hunting and fishing highlight Trump Jr.’s visit to Montana – Billings Gazette

WILLIAMS: Living the First Amendment is hard work – Evening News and Tribune

Posted: at 12:31 pm

The Bill of Rights surely ranks as one of the most difficult documents for us, as Americans, to contend with.

Theres enough in that list of 10 rights to make each of us a little uncomfortable, depending on your political persuasion.

Me? I get hung up on the Second Amendment. I dislike guns and I have seen how much damage they can unleash on families and communities. Just ask the parents at Sandy Hook.

But its there and like it or not we, as a community, have to follow the law as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court no matter how wrong-headed we think the opinion is. If I respect the Constitution, I respect the rule of law.

Then theres the Fourth Amendment protection against unlawful searches of your property and person. It provides great protection for me and my family if the police come pounding on my door and want to search my house without a warrant.

But it also means that even if my neighbor is the nastiest drug dealer in the city, the police cannot crash through their door without cause or a warrant. And if the police dont play by the rules? The evidence might get tossed out of court and that nasty drug dealer goes free.

Then theres the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, which led to the high court establishing the Miranda warning. You hear that in every TV cop show and again, if the police dont read defendants their rights at the time of arrest, a criminals statement just might get thrown out of court, even if it means a guilty person goes free.

Uncomfortable. But the law.

Perhaps the most vexing of all the amendments in the Bill of Rights is the first one you know, the one about free speech, a free press, freedom to worship or not, and the right to assemble.

I personally hope to never have to listen to the likes of white supremacist Richard Spencer talking about making white privilege great again as he did recently at Auburn University in Alabama. But as long as he wasnt inciting violence yes, there are restrictions that can be placed on speech he had a right to speak.

It should have been the same with Ann Coulter in Berkeley, Calif., where her speech was stopped because of a threat of violence. Whether you agree with her is beside the point. She and her followers have a right to free speech just as those who disagree with her have a right to protest peacefully.

That pesky First Amendment.

Indianas legislators showed this past legislative session that while they may love First Amendment protections for themselves, when it comes to high school journalists not so much. After pressure from principals, superintendents and the Department of Education, they refused to extend First Amendment protections to high school journalists and their advisers.

Order and control trumped the First Amendment.

Whats most disheartening about the failure of this piece of legislation is the way it undermines a real opportunity for students to learn from first-hand experience how the Constitution works.

What better civics education is there than to learn about our constitutionally protected freedoms than by living them?

Will there be mistakes? Yes, of course. Thats the price of a free press. And just as there are limits on speech there are limits on the press you deliberately print falsehoods and you can get sued.

Should that fear of students running amuck with their pens and notebooks override the chance to let them live the values we claim to extol in the Constitution? No, it shouldnt.

Some of our lawmakers would be much more comfortable allowing guns in school for protection, of course than would want a free and open student press.

Yes, the First Amendment is pesky and hard. And just because something is hard doesnt mean we quash it. Thats not how our democracy works.

Janet Williams is editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students. She can be reached at jwilliams4@franklincollege.edu.

Read the original post:
WILLIAMS: Living the First Amendment is hard work - Evening News and Tribune

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on WILLIAMS: Living the First Amendment is hard work – Evening News and Tribune

Department Of Labor’s Fiduciary Rule Is Vulnerable On First Amendment Grounds – Forbes

Posted: at 12:31 pm


Forbes
Department Of Labor's Fiduciary Rule Is Vulnerable On First Amendment Grounds
Forbes
Promulgated in April 2016, the Department of Labor's (DOL) highly controversial Fiduciary Rule drastically expands the universe of retirement investment advisors and employees who are deemed to be fiduciaries under federal law. Abandoning 40 years of ...
Fiduciary Rule Violates First Amendment, Law Firm ArguesBloomberg BNA
2nd Voice Weighs in on 1st Amendment Challenge to Fiduciary RuleNational Association of Plan Advisors (subscription) (blog)

all 8 news articles »

Read more here:
Department Of Labor's Fiduciary Rule Is Vulnerable On First Amendment Grounds - Forbes

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on Department Of Labor’s Fiduciary Rule Is Vulnerable On First Amendment Grounds – Forbes

Arresting a Reporter for Asking Questions Is an Unacceptable Assault on the First Amendment – ACLU (blog)

Posted: at 12:31 pm

A reporter in West Virginia was arrested Tuesday night for literally doing his job.

Dan Heyman, a veteran reporter with Public News Service, was covering a visit to the state capitol by Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price and senior Trump advisor Kellyanne Conway. As they walked through the building, Heyman pressed the two on whether domestic violence would be considered a preexisting condition under the American Health Care Act passed by the House last week.

Suddenly, he was pulled aside by Capitol police, handcuffed, and hauled off to jail. He was charged with a misdemeanor for willful disruption of governmental processes and only released when his employer posted a $5,000 bond. He is still awaiting a preliminary hearing.

At some point I think they decided I was just too persistent in asking this question and trying to do my job, and they arrested me, Heyman said after he was released.

A criminal complaint alleges that Heyman was causing a disturbance by yelling questions. What it doesnt note was that Heyman was actually targeted for reporting on matters critical to the public interest not in a closed meeting or the inside of a working office, but in the hallways of a government building.

The law under which Heyman was charged can carry a fine of up to $100 and a jail sentence of up to six months.

At a time of eroding trust in our government institutions, an independent free press is more critical than ever to ensure that the people running our country are held to account. This makes Heymans arrest all the more distressing.

What happened in West Virginia didnt happen in a vacuum. The president has been attempting to undermine the press on a regular basis and resists transparency at every turn. He has smeared the media as the enemy of the people. On the campaign trail, he revoked the credentials of some of the most prestigious news outlets in the country because he didnt like their coverage. Reporters have been the victims of physical violence and the target of mockery. Others have been arrested and charged with felonies for covering protests.

Against this backdrop, it should come as no surprise that a reporter was arrested for trying to ask a question to a member of Trumps cabinet. But it can never be accepted as normal.

In the 1971 Supreme Court ruling on the famous Pentagon Papers case, Justice Hugo Black wrote, The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. Indeed, when our public representatives whether the Trump administration or the West Virginia Capitol police forget that they work for us, we need journalists to remind them. Without a free press, public officials have a much easier time evading accountability, shielding misconduct, and pushing through dangerous policies without public scrutiny. Even Thomas Jefferson, who had a quarrelsome relationship with the press, knew that our liberty depends on the freedom of the press.

We need journalists to be able to challenge and question public officials, loudly and persistently. For the government to stand in the way is a frontal assault on the First Amendment and the functioning of our democracy. Those who dont want transparency in the literal halls of government have no business putting themselves in the political spotlight.

If our elected officials insist on continuing to violate one of our countrys core values, we will see them in court in defense of Dan Heyman and of any other journalist serving the publics right to know.

Link:
Arresting a Reporter for Asking Questions Is an Unacceptable Assault on the First Amendment - ACLU (blog)

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on Arresting a Reporter for Asking Questions Is an Unacceptable Assault on the First Amendment – ACLU (blog)

Liberal Fascism Attacks Robert Mercer’s First Amendment Rights – American Spectator

Posted: at 12:31 pm

You cant make this stuff up.

Now comes the news featured in this headline from CNN (among a number of other places):

Trump supporter Robert Mercer sued by employee who says he was fired for speaking out on politics

Sounds bad, yes? There is yet another thug-like Trump supporter acting out in full totalitarian mode to silence dissent from just another good American with a different opinion on Donald Trump.

Sounds bad and it is bad. But a look into this situation reveals the story is not only bad but worse than bad because it is exactly the reverse. It is the story of liberal fascism on the march. It is about the attempt to silence a Trump supporter this one by happenstance a most prominent Trump supporter. But make no mistake, the underlying story is the same kind of story Trump supporters all over America have long since gotten used to. If, that is, they havent experienced some version of it themselves.

Here are the bare bones of the story as reported by CNN and many other outlets. The CNN version says this:

Robert Mercer, one of President Trumps top financial supporters, is being sued by a former employee of his investment firm who says he was fired for complaining publicly about Mercers political views.

The suit was filed in federal court in Philadelphia on Friday by David Magerman, who was a research scientist at Renaissance Technologies, a hedge fund where Mercer is the co-CEO. Magermans suit said he designed algorithms used in the firms investment decisions.

Philly.com, the website for thePhiladelphia Inquirerand thePhiladelphia Daily News(Magerman lives in suburban Philadelphia), reports, According to Magermans lawsuit, he called Mercer in January about Mercers support for Trump.

Which is to say, this controversy began when Magerman picked up the phone to deliberately confront Mercer about the latters political views. They disagreed. There would be a second call, this one at a later date from Mercer to Magerman.

Over at theWall Street Journal, there was this gem of a story replete with an interview of Mr. Magerman. This story is mentioned in the lawsuit. The headline and subheadline read:

You Have to Stop, Renaissance Executive Tells Boss About Trump Support

At some companies, a divisive presidential campaign has led to disharmony in the workplace

The WSJ story says, in part, this:

David Magerman says he was in his home office in suburban Philadelphia earlier this month when the phone rang. His boss, hedge-fund billionaire Robert Mercer, was on the line.

I hear youre going around saying Im a white supremacist, Mr. Mercer said. Thats ridiculous.

In the prior weeks, Mr. Magerman, a registered Democrat who calls himself a centrist, had complained to colleagues about Mr. Mercers role as a prominent booster of Donald Trumps presidential campaign.

Now word of Mr. Magermans criticism had reached Mr. Mercer, co-chief executive of Renaissance Technologies LLC, one of the worlds most successful hedge funds.

Those werent my exact words, Mr. Magerman said he told Mr. Mercer, stammering and then explaining his concerns about Mr. Trumps policy positions, rhetoric and cabinet choices. If what youre doing is harming the country then you have to stop.

Mr. Mercer declined to comment through a spokesman. In a statement, Renaissances chairman and founder, Jim Simons, who has been a prominent financial backer of Democrats, said, I have worked closely with Bob Mercer since he joined our firm almost 25 years ago. While our politics differ dramatically, I have always thought him to be of impeccable character.

A presidential campaign that divided much of the country also has created tensions within companies. Some senior employees, accustomed to settling grievances behind closed doors, are rebelling in unusually public ways, the polarization playing out for the world to see.

Historically, some leaders of Renaissance, which is based on Long Island, N.Y., have leaned Democratic, including Mr. Simons, who donated to Hillary Clintons 2016 presidential campaign.

Some Renaissance executives chafed at the unwanted publicity brought to the firm by Mr. Mercers activities during the presidential race, according to people close to the matter. In addition to providing crucial financial help when Mr. Trumps candidacy was lagging, Mr. Mercer and his daughter Rebekah advised the campaign, suggesting the installation of two Mercer family confidantes,Steve BannonandKellyanne Conway, atop the campaign. Those two now hold senior White House positions.

Until now, however, nobody within the tight-lipped hedge fund has gone public with a grievance.

His views show contempt for the social safety netthat he doesnt need, but many Americans do,said Mr. Magerman, 48 years old, during an interview with The Wall Street Journal at the Dairy Caf, a kosher restaurant he owns in Bala Cynwyd, Pa.Now hes using themoney I helped him make to implement his worldview by supporting Mr. Trump and encouraging that government be shrunk down to the size of a pinhead.

Mr. Magerman, a 20-year Renaissance veteran who helped design the funds trading systems, says he is speaking only for himself, and that there is no sign of a broad insurrection at the firm.

Mr. Magerman makes millions of dollars a year, drives a Tesla and says he gives more than $10 million in charity annually. A research scientist, he is one of 100 partners at the firm, but he isnt one of Renaissances most senior executives.

Id like to think Im speaking out in a way that wont risk my job, but its very possible they could fire me, he said.My wifeisnt comfortable with me jeopardizing my job, but she realizes its my prerogative and agrees with my sentiments.

He has concluded thatevery new piece of code he developed for Renaissance helped Mr. Mercer make more money and gave him greater ability to influence the country.

To try to counteract his bosss activities, Mr. Magerman says he has been in touch with local Democratic leaders and plans to make major contributions to the party. He says hecalled Planned Parenthood to offer his assistance and contacted Jared Kushner, Mr. Trumps son-in-law and White House adviser, to voice his concerns about Ms. Conway and Mr. Bannon. He says he failed to reach Mr. Kushner.

Note well. There is zero wrong with Magerman working with local Democratic leaders and making major contributions to his party or supporting Planned Parenthood. Those are Magermans First Amendment rights. He can voice all the concerns he wants about Steve Bannon and Kellyanne Conway both of whom I know and who have been wildly and deliberately misrepresented by opponents exercising their own First Amendment rights. (One wonders if Magerman has ever read this account of the real Steve Bannon as here in theHollywood Reporterby Bannons liberal business partner.)

Theres more oh so much more in other news stories. Including here at Bloomberg, again at the WSJ, and here at Philly.com.

ThePhilly.comstory says among other things that Magerman sent a memo to other senior Renaissance officials, stating that Mercer and his politically active daughter Rebekah, in their blatant support for the Trump candidacy, presidency and agenda, has cast a taint on all Renaissance employees, and that he and other employees should respond publicly.

Stop. Full stop.

Lets be plain here. David Magerman is no victim. He was the employee and clearly a highly paid and valued employee of a well-to-do American company. And out of the blue he sought to clearly and deliberately confront his boss, Robert Mercer, for Mr. Mercers use of his, Mercers, First Amendment rights to free speech.

Take note of the heart of Magermans complaint. What does the attitude behind this Magerman statement communicate?Philly.com reports that Magerman sent a memo that said of Mercer and daughter Rebekah that their blatant support for the Trump candidacy, presidency and agenda, has cast a taint on all Renaissance employees.

Hello? Excuse me? Note well that Mr. Magerman is a resident of my own Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. And Mr. Magermans fellow Pennsylvanians voted for Donald Trump. Have all of us who share the Commonwealth with Magerman cast a taint on all of Pennsylvania? Clearly, in Magermans view, the answer is yes.

Recall this statement during the campaign from Mr. Magermans favorite candidate? The excerpt comes fromTimemagazine, which reported Hillary Clinton now-famously saying as follows:

You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trumps supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?

[Laughter/applause]

The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people now how 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks they are irredeemable.

Magermans actions in suing Mercer over Mercers free speech are the very epitome of that snotty, arrogant, elitist holier-than-thou attitude on vivid display not just in Clintons speech (and the laughing, applauding of liberals in her audience) but in all of American liberalism.

It is rich beyond words that Magerman takes issue with Mercer on civil rights, apparently blissfully ignorant that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were needed as do-overs in the first place because Magermans own party aka The Party of Race spent 100 years after the Civil War defying one constitutional amendment and civil rights law after another all passed by Republicans over repeated Democratic opposition. That includes, as noted here years ago,the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments (ending slavery, giving the ex-slaves due process and the right to vote), not to mention the Civil Rights Acts of 1866, 1870, 1871, and 1875. Mr. Magermans party has uniquely positioned itself not unlike the fireman who arrives to save the burning house yet is in fact the arsonist who set it on fire in the first place. Worse, the culture of racism so freely exhibited in Magermans party has not only not been cleansed and eradicated, the party to this day with Magermans apparent support depends on the politics of skin-color judging, repeatedly dividing Americans by race for political gain. Exactly as it has always done when it was supporting slavery, segregation, and writing all those Jim Crow laws.

Lets be clear here. By all the public accounts of this incident, it is Magerman who went out of his way to confront Mercer over the latters support for Donald Trump. Thus setting all the rest in motion. There is no record of Mercer deliberately seeking out Magerman to intimidate him into not supporting Hillary Clinton.

Why is any of this important? In short, who cares about a court fight between a billionaire and an employee?

Everybody should care. Because Robert Mercer is the momentary stand-in for all Americans who care about free speech. The other week it was Ann Coulter at Berkeley where Ms. Coulters physical safety and that of anyone wishing to hear her was literally threatened if she went ahead with her plans to give a speech. Up there at Middlebury College in Vermont it was conservative Charles Murray who was forcibly denied his speech and then physically attacked. Murray wrote this of his experience over here at Fox:

We walked out the door and into the middle of a mob. I have read that they numbered about twenty. It seemed like a lot more than that to me, maybe fifty or so, but I was not in a position to get a good count. I registered that several of them were wearing ski masks. That was disquieting.

What would have happened after that I dont know, but I do recall thinking that being on the ground was a really bad idea, and I should try really hard to avoid that. Unlike Allison (Professor Allison Stanger of the Political Science Department), I wasnt actually hurt at all.

I had expected that they would shout expletives at us but no more. So I was nonplussed when I realized that a big man with a sign was standing right in front of us and wasnt going to let us pass. I instinctively thought, well go around him. But that wasnt possible. Wed just get blocked by the others who were joining him. So we walked straight into him, one of our security guys pushed him aside, and thats the way it went from then on: Allison and Bill (Bill Burger, Vice President for Communications at Middlebury) each holding one of my elbows, the three of us plowing ahead, the security guys clearing our way, and lots of pushing and shoving from all sides.

I didnt see it happen, but someone grabbed Allisons hair just as someone else shoved her from another direction, damaging muscles, tendons, and fascia in her neck. I was stumbling because of the shoving. If it hadnt been for Allison and Bill keeping hold of me and the security guards pulling people off me, I would have been pushed to the ground. That much is sure. What would have happened after that I dont know, but I do recall thinking that being on the ground was a really bad idea, and I should try really hard to avoid that. Unlike Allison, I wasnt actually hurt at all.

The three of us got to the car, with the security guards keeping protesters away while we closed and locked the doors. Then we found that the evening wasnt over. So many protesters surrounded the car, banging on the sides and the windows and rocking the car, climbing onto the hood, that Bill had to inch forward lest he run over them. At the time, I wouldnt have objected. Bill must have a longer time horizon than I do.

Extricating ourselves took a few blocks and several minutes. When we had done so and were finally satisfied that no cars were tailing us, we drove to the dinner venue. Allison and I went in and started chatting with the gathered students and faculty members. Suddenly Bill reappeared and said abruptly, Were leaving. Now. The protesters had discovered where the dinner was being held and were on their way. So it was the three of us in the car again.

Across the country there has been one incident after another in which a Trump supporter or a conservative has been targeted for silence sometimes with violence.

Make no mistake. David Magerman is represented in various stories some about this episode and some not as a civic-minded professional who makes a point of giving money for charitable purposes. Good for him. But this episode is disgraceful. Not to mention typical of the left-wing mindset, something Sean Hannity has taken to referring to as Liberal Fascism (borrowing from Jonah Goldbergs book of the same name).

Magermans lawsuit, according to one of these reports, says that Mercer attempted to silence Magerman and prevent him from speaking out on political issues. The fact is that, based on all these news reports, there is zero evidence Mercer sought out Magerman about Magermans political views. It is precisely and exactly the opposite. Note well this sentence from one of the Bloomberg stories. It says that:

The dispute started on Jan. 16 when Magerman called Mercer and asked to have a conversation about his support of Trump, according to the complaint.

Exactly. Just as those thugs at Berkeley and Middlebury sought out confrontations over the political views of Coulter and Murray, so too, in typical left-wing style, Magerman sought out Mercer for a (nonviolent in this case) confrontation. Why? Because in the style of liberal fascism and its contempt for fellow Americans as deplorables and irredeemables, Magerman had decided Mercers blatant support for the Trump candidacy, presidency and agenda, has cast a taint on all Renaissance employees.

Never, but of course, does it cross Magermans mind that just maybe there are those who might think it is Magermans actions and the resulting lawsuit that is casting a taint on all Renaissance employees. Does he really believe a majority of his own fellow Pennsylvanians whoagreewith Mercer and voted accordingly for Donald Trump in November are tainted? Does Magerman even consider that it is possible just possible that a lot of Americans will learn of this lawsuit and see Robert Mercer as a hero for being unafraid to stand up for his beliefs when Trump supporters of all descriptions are being contemptuously vilified by their opponents when not fired from a job or subjected to harassment? Clearly, no.

So what do we have here?

What we have, based on all these news accounts, is a liberal employee who took umbrage at his bosss political views. Not content to support his own candidate and exercise his own First Amendment rights, he took it upon himself to ever so not-subtly try to intimidate his boss into silence. And then got fired for doing so.

Recall what Magerman himself says he told Mercer? This? If what youre doing is harming the country then you have to stop.

What Magerman and all these self-righteous and arrogant anti-Trump cultists with such contempt for their fellow Americans are doing is exactly harming the country and rest assured they have zero intention of stopping.

They have no obligation to support the President indeed they are well within their own First Amendment rights to oppose the President or anyone else. But they have no right to try and intimidate the rest of us into silence. In fact? Mercers support of the controversial President Trump reminds of an earlier Americans support for another controversial president. That would be Lincoln supporter and abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison. Threatened repeatedly for his outspoken views on ending slavery on one occasion he was saved from a lynching by the Boston police Garrison famously said this of his abolition beliefs and his right to free speech:

I am in earnest. I will not equivocate. I will not excuse. I will not retreat a single inch. And I will be heard!

This is no ordinary lawsuit. This is, plain and simple, a battle about free speech. Robert Mercer is Ann Coulter is Charles Murray is you and me and eventually, even though he doesnt recognize it David Magerman himself.

Liberal fascism has taken Robert Mercer to court. Robert Mercer is fighting back. In the style of Lincoln supporter Garrison, Mercer will not retreat a single inch and he will be heard.

Good for him. And good for the all the rest of us, too.

Continued here:
Liberal Fascism Attacks Robert Mercer's First Amendment Rights - American Spectator

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on Liberal Fascism Attacks Robert Mercer’s First Amendment Rights – American Spectator

Your Essential List of 7 Productivity Hacks and Time Management Tips – Business 2 Community

Posted: at 12:30 pm

If youve built your small business into something substantial, youre likely still running it as asmall business. Thats both good and bad.

Its good in that you are preserving your personal touch. You probably have many customers who trust you personally, and who like that you still make 90% of the decisions.

Heres the bad.

If you are still operating like a small business in the sense that you are still touching nearly everything that needs to get done, you are both limiting your growth and robbing yourself of a well-deserved work life balance.

Now, its time to reward yourself and your stakeholders by taking things to the next level with the following productivity hacks and time management tips to help set you apart from the rest of the pack and increase your business growth.

#1 Build and document your Systems And processes

Without systems and Fortune 500 business processes to benefit your business, you wont be able to embrace the art of selling. Youll be way too overwhelmed.

Only a few activities will cause you more frustration in business than repeatedly spending your valuable time (and, by extension, money) undertaking a task or project that hasnt been properly documented. Yes, you may know what youre doing 9 times out of 10, but what happens when your business grows a bit more and you seek to delegate that task or project? Where is that document or image you need to attach every time? Where is that canned email response you always cut and paste? Where do you keep track of your prospecting outreach, automated social media posts, incoming vendor emails, contact info for potential clients and current clients, supply lists and ordering information?

Obviously, its crucial to have familiarity with your business systems and processes in order to identify your needs, plan strategically for the long term, and not lose your mind. Knowing your systems and processes intimately will give you a much needed sense of control, increase your productivity, and give you a heightened feeling of accomplishment. These psychological aspects of developing a system (or process) cannot be overstated.

They dramatically reduce stress. But more importantly, knowing and documenting those systems and processes is really where the money is at.

This podcast episode discusses key insights on how you can create systems to help maximize and focus your business efforts.

If you dont already have systems in place that youve mastered, thats okay. You can put a basic system or process in place for any task or project.

If you already have systems in place, all the better! And if youve written a training manual or internal document that details a process, you are truly a rock star!

The growth mindset was discovered by psychologist and Stanford professor Carol Dweck, Ph.D. who defines mindset as a self-perception (I am a great speaker; I am a bad dancer) that is either fixed or focused on growth.

Fixed mindsets perceive failure as inevitable, since they believe being good at something is defined by an inherent trait or ability. Essentially, they think that nothing can be effectively trained for or learned if someone isnt predisposed to the skill or knowledge. This mindset is naturally limiting, and arguably disastrous.

Conversely, those with a growth mindset believe that their most basic abilities can be developed through dedication and hard work brains and talent are just the starting point. This view creates a love of learning and a resilience that is essential for great accomplishment, writes Carol. In this way, language is huge when it comes to growth. On a personal (internal) level, what we tell ourselves has a defining impact on our performance and success.

Which is why the emerging field of positive psychology has become invested in increasing peoples productivity through the use of language motivators. For instance, saying to yourself I have to is far less motivating than saying I get to.

Its important to realize that fixed mindsets damage our ability to acquire new skills, and are scientifically proven to negatively affect our ability to succeed at personal relationships, professional success, and many other dimensions of life. In light of this, why would you ever embrace any mindset other than a growth mindset?

Developing a growth mindset is a surefire way to double your productivity and work toward sustainable business growth.

Even with all the alerts, pings, instant messaging apps, phone calls, texts, social media exchanges, and meetings, email inbox issues are still considered one of the most challenging of all business-related distractions.

So, its no surprise that email is hurting productivity in the workplace.

According to Jocelyn Glei, workers are:

In Gleis mind, our addiction to our email inbox really comes down to our desire to complete short tasks that will give us a completion-induced dopamine hit. This desire for a feel good reward pre-disposes us to repeat behaviors that are, at their very root, counterproductive.

The solution: understand your habit type.

Glei has found that there are two types of email openers, Reactors and Batchers. Reactors constantly move back-and-forth between emails and other tasks all day long. They are the switchers; the multitaskers (more on multitasking below). Batchers, on the other hand, deliberately limit the amount of daily time they spend checking emails.

Guess which type is better?

With all the research proving that multitasking is for dummies, its really no surprise that the people who check their emails in batches Batchers are significantly more productive, happy, and less stressed than their more reactive counterparts, the ill-fated Reactors.

Batchers are the true champions of email best practices and productivity in the workplace.

When multitasking, mental sharpness is measurably reduced.

Dr. Glenn Wilson, a psychiatrist at Kings College London University, conducted 80 clinical trials that monitored the IQ of workers throughout the day. Dr. Wilson found the IQ of those who tried to multitask fell by 10 points, which is equal to missing a whole nights sleep and more than double the 4 point fall seen after smoking marijuana.

The research suggests that we are in danger of being caught up in a 24-hour always on society,

David Smith, Head of Customer Support Americas at Hewlett Packard

Research and common sense suggest that multitasking leads to lost productivity and concentration, which increases exponentially in accordance with the complexity of the task involved. All of this impacts your businessand gives your competitors a leg up, which is why its imperative to train your focus solely on top business priorities. Having your priorities straight will increase your productivity and give you a competitive advantage.

Many productivity enthusiasts advocate for literally writing down your top 3 must accomplish tasks every day. By doing this, you will streamline your attention and reduce the temptation for distraction. When you have your 3 prioritized tasks, go a step further and schedule blocks of time to accomplish those tasks. Even better, write down and prepare yourself for those 3 tasks the night before:

Webcast, May 29th: 5 Growth Hacks To Double Your Revenue Using Social Data

A major benefit of preparing your daily list the night before is that this exercise lets you sleep more soundly. Once you have written down everything you have to do on your list, it clears your mind and enables you to sleep deeply. This will help you increase productivity throughout the next work day.

Brian Tracy, Chairman and CEO at Brian Tracy International

What happens when you cant help but get distracted by ringing phones, urgent instant messages, and employees asking for your help? Hire a virtual assistant (more on hiring a virtual administrative assistant below) to keep everyone and everything at bay while they also take care of your low priority tasks so you can focus your attention only on what will add value to your position and your business.

Our brains just arent awesome at multitasking.

#5 make meetings matter

We all spend so much time in meetings that its pretty much an epidemic in business.

If youre a manager, chances are you spend upwards of 35% of your time in meetings. If youre in the C-suite, youre spending 50% or more of your time in meetings. Yetthis time is nothing but lost opportunity unless you can maximize the productivity and output of each meeting.

How can you keep meetings productive and on track?

Make sure you have a plan for the meeting. This is key. Once you have your plan, send it out as an agenda to all attendees in either a calendar invite or an email. This will keep you focused, which will help keep everyone else focused, too. In addition, before the meeting begins, ask everyone to put their phones in airplane mode to minimize distractions. As you sum up the meeting, provide crystal clear next steps so everyone involved will know who is supposed to do what. A good rule of thumb is to spend half the meeting presenting the material and half in discussion.

Whats the ideal meeting length?

Routine meetings should be kept to a half hour, but 15 minutes is typically all thats needed if you stay focused, minimize distractions during the meeting, and keep all discussion (questions, comments, etc) until the end. If someone tries to derail the meeting by bringing up irrelevant topics or hijacking your agenda, politely rein them in by saying, Great thoughts, but right now we need to stay on track with the current meetings agenda. We can discuss your points at a later time. Ill connect with you after this meeting to schedule a follow-up meeting.

A crucial takeaway here is to only take part in a meeting if there is both a straightforward purpose and agenda in addition to clear-cut start and finish times.

A word of advice

These days, many professionals work remotedly. This makes video conferencing software a must have resource for businesses that leverage remote workers.

Since a virtual administrative assistant is a remote worker, our team at Prialto uses remote video conferencing tools (Jitsi, Skype, and Zoom) to hold the majority of our meetings with clients, vendors, and each other. These tools are great for giving instructions, asking questions, and responding to issues in real-time. These tools also provide an ideal way to build and nurture relationships by allowing us to telecommute in order to gain that crucial face-to-face time across time zones.

Dont have remote workers on your team? Not leveraging a virtual administrative assistant to handle your ongoing, repeatable tasks? No a problem.

You can build relationships with prospective and current clients as well as vendors and partners by using video conferencing software to meet with them.

#6 optimize your health

Youve heard this before, so I wont go on and on about the importance of taking regular 15 minute breaks throughout your workday, getting consistent exercise, eating well (limit sugar and processed foods, at minimum), drink plenty of water, and shoot for a full nights sleep as the norm.

#7 delegate and outsource

Outsourcing has its pros and cons depending on what is outsourced and the terms you set for your providers on the front end. Some tasks or functions are ideal for outsourcing to other companies or freelancers while some jobs are better kept closer to home. In any case, proper planning and collaboration can help you provide an optimal system that is a mix of outsourced and in-house efforts.

Youll know youre successful when your company can take on the inevitability of forward movement without you.

Eric Taussig, Prialto CEO and Founder

The takeaway here is to delegate as many of your tasks as possible. When you delegate to your team, you empower them with a sense of ownership that will increase both your productivity and theirs.

Delegating is often a challenge for high performing executives and business founders. They are so used to touching every aspect of their tasks and processes that it can prove very difficult for them to hand over the keys.

But this is a massive handicap for them and their business, since delegating is the best way for executives and founders to maximize their ability to effectively handle multiple demands on their limited time. After all, highly productive professionals are very discerning when it comes to how they spend their energy and time.

The best practice for delegating is to take on only those tasks that no one else but you can do. Everything else should be delegated. So ask yourself: Does this task need to be accomplished? If no, throw out the task. If yes, decide if the task is crucial for you to accomplish or if someone else can own the task.

When you hire a virtual assistant there are numerous cost and time savings to take advantage of that will increase your productivity exponentially, since the best virtual assistant services will make sure your virtual administrative assistant only adds to your businesss success and growth.

You really dont need to do everything yourself. Hire a virtual assistant to free up your time for the tasks that you and you alone can do.

CONCLUSION

The above productivity hacks and time management tips are huge time savers with the potential to be even bigger moneymakers. The trick is to put them into practice.

Start small by picking one hack or tip from the above list. Tackle that hack or tip in a very focused way. After youve mastered it, move on to the next hack or tip and dominate that one, too.

Deena is the Marketing Manager at Prialto, a Portland-based business that provides managed, dedicated virtual assistants to executives, entrepreneurs, and companies of all sizes. Prialto's services are curated and managed from our Headquarters in Portland, Oregon with creative insights from our global staff in Asia and Central America. Ourglobal telecommuting Viewfullprofile

The rest is here:
Your Essential List of 7 Productivity Hacks and Time Management Tips - Business 2 Community

Posted in Jitsi | Comments Off on Your Essential List of 7 Productivity Hacks and Time Management Tips – Business 2 Community