Daily Archives: March 21, 2021

CFTC Opens Inquiry into Binance, One of the Worlds Largest Cryptocurrency Exchanges – JD Supra

Posted: March 21, 2021 at 5:34 pm

Matt Stankiewicz, Managing Counsel at The Volkov Law Group, joins us for a post looking into the CFTCs recent inquiry into Binance.

On Friday March 12, Bloomberg News reported that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has opened an inquiry into Binance Holdings Ltd. (Binance) to investigate allegations that the exchange allowed US citizens to trade in cryptocurrency derivatives, without properly registering with the CFTC. It is important to note that this is merely an inquiry at this point, and that Binance has not been formally accused of any wrongdoing and may not face an enforcement action. However, where there is smoke, there may be fire.

This inquiry appears to have some parallels with the CFTCs investigation of BitMEX, though it does not yet appear to rise to the same level. For example, Binance has taken steps to wall off US citizens from its derivatives trading platform. When the exchange first launched, Binance pooled all of its customers onto a single exchange headquartered outside of the US. Roughly two years ago, the exchange took measures to segregate US customers and force them to a US-based platform, headquartered in San Francisco, which restricted certain coin offerings and financial instruments, such as derivatives and options trading.

To enforce this, the first line of defense in their compliance is to restrict access based on a users IP address. If a user attempts to log into the main Binance.com exchange with an IP address from a US location, the site prevents access and directs users to create an account on the Binance.us platform instead. However, as many compliance professionals are dealing with now across the internet, simply restricting IP addresses is not enough. There are a variety of tools, such as VPNs or the TOR browser, that can very easily circumvent these controls. This inquiry, depending on the outcome, could begin to provide guidance on this compliance challenge associated with operating a virtual-based exchange.

Further, Binance does indeed maintain a KYC program, in stark contrast to BitMEX. Users to either exchange, whether the US-based platform or the foreign one, must undergo a KYC review before they are able to withdraw a certain level of funds. At this point, unverified users who have not undergone a KYC review are restricted to withdrawing no more than two Bitcoin per day. As I write this post, the price of a single Bitcoin is hovering just over $57,000. That means, restricting accounts to withdrawals of two Bitcoin per day allows unverified users to transfer over $110,000 per day off the exchange. These restrictions were very likely created at a time when Bitcoins price was much lower. At this point, a $110,000 daily withdrawal limit may not be quite as strong a barrier as it needs to be.

Many exchanges take a similar approach, that they can provide limited services prior to conducting a KYC review, though do so at their own risk. US-based exchanges, in particular, can be extremely susceptible to money laundering and sanctions risks with such a high threshold. The CFTC will now review Binances overall KYC program to determine whether the program is effective and that the platform is doing all it can to ensure US citizens are not trading on the unlicensed platform.

Binance has always held a mixed reputation in the industry, especially with regards to its compliance efforts. Further, an article from Forbes late last year cited a leaked document and an internal whistleblower to suggest that Binance may have been taking measures to aid US customers in circumventing its own internal controls, to help funnel these customers and their associated revenues to the main Binance exchange. This information may form the basis of the CFTCs inquiry and could certainly be damning for Binance.

While the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) receives a lot of attention in the crypto industry, and has pursued several high-profile enforcement actions, in reality it is the CFTC that oversees much of the space. Many cryptocurrencies, if not most, are considered commodities for regulatory purposes within the US, which falls under the ambit of the CFTC. The CFTC has consistently stated that Bitcoin and Ether specifically, the two largest and most popular cryptocurrencies by far, are indeed considered commodities and regulated as such.

A derivative is a type of financial product that has a value based on an underlying asset. At a high level, entities can use these products as a risk hedge or to speculate on future price changes of that underlying asset. These types of financial instruments are not problematic per se, and the CFTC has actually expressed a willingness to foster development in the virtual assets industry, though with an eye towards mitigating risks. However, derivatives are highly regulated by the CFTC and require registration with the Commission and implementation of compliance safeguards. Binance itself has processed nearly $59 billion in derivatives, nearly double the amount of its nearest competitor. The CFTC has yet to make any public statements regarding the inquiry into Binance.

Follow this link:
CFTC Opens Inquiry into Binance, One of the Worlds Largest Cryptocurrency Exchanges - JD Supra

Posted in Tor Browser | Comments Off on CFTC Opens Inquiry into Binance, One of the Worlds Largest Cryptocurrency Exchanges – JD Supra

Mozilla is trying to figure out if the Firefox Compact mode removal is a good idea – Ghacks Technology News

Posted: at 5:34 pm

@IronHeart

>You do realize though that others can take the open source code of Chromium and create their own fork of it, right?

As of now yes, but listen carefully. Brave is an irrelevant common peasant in googles kingdom of control, chromium forks like Brave and vivaldi are not a threat to googles browser share and influence as of now. If however Brave/Vivaldi does get more popular and grabs more market share, then expect google to

(A) Pull the plug on chromium open source project and not maintain it any more to destroy the competition.

(B) Use a different engine and make it propietrary to destroy the competition.

Brave is putting itself into a bad predicament by applying a band aid to a broken product and putting all its eggs into the one basket. If they were serious about a real threat to google browser share, then Brave should have made their own engine.

They are not smart enough to make their own engine like mozilla did. Brave could have used gecko but it would seem brave is hanging on to mommy google because it knows chromium has the biggest market share and it will be fast and flashy and has more web compatibility than gecko. Brave only care about the potential for bitcoin profits, not preservation of gecko a real alternative to the increasing google/chromium browser monopoly.

Little does brave know that if it gets more popular, it will be on googles radar.

Google have already limited chromium forks from using certain API features from chrome, that it is a sign of things to come. They dont like the competition.

> Braves Tor windows are a gimmick, there is a reason why Tor Browser exists.

The whole brave browser is a gimmick unless you are a noob looking to escape the privacy invading google chrome/edge/opera/unhardened FF.

To people who actually know how to configure gecko and harden it, brave is a poor substitute not to mention its objectionable ad integration practices, people dont care if its opt in or not, its the principle of having it there is whats bothersome, because it could easily be open to abuse, privacy wise.

> This has nothing to do with Chromium, it was a bug introduced by Brave Software. If it really were a deep problem of Chromium, how did they fix it?

The privacy bug resided in the internal ad blocker component of Brave, thats V3 manifest for you, things break by trying to apply a band aid to chromium.

> I am prefering it over other options because there hasnt been an intentional breach of privacy with this browser yet

The failed tor windows was a breach of privacy, saying its a gimmick is no excuse, many users would have trusted in it not knowing it had a bug. It should not have happened. Its a stain on braves record, to deny it is futile.

> Yeah, but Mozilla is not Google-free

Well, having to constantly accept google chromium scraps like a peasant and having to apply a band aid to chromium is not exactly google free either. 🙁

Read the original post:
Mozilla is trying to figure out if the Firefox Compact mode removal is a good idea - Ghacks Technology News

Posted in Tor Browser | Comments Off on Mozilla is trying to figure out if the Firefox Compact mode removal is a good idea – Ghacks Technology News

Avast researchers reveal the OnionCrypter – PC World Australia – PC World

Posted: at 5:34 pm

Todays malware is a lot like a car. Both cars and malware are made up of many components that enable them to run. Cars have different parts such as engines, tires, and steering wheels; malware has loaders, payloads, and command modules.

Recently, researchers at Avast Threat Labs spent time looking at a specific part that malware authors use to make their cars. Its called a crypter, which is a tool used to hide malicious parts of code using encryption in an effort to appear as harmless and more difficult to read. Malware authors use this technique to hide their malicious code from researchers, antivirus and security software.

From a malware authors point of view, a crypter is an important tool to counter protections against malware. From a researcher point of view, though, being able to identify a crypter helps to better and more quickly identify new malware when that malware has this component in it.

The digital security and privacy products companys researchers looked into a specific crypter that its calling OnionCrypter. It chose the name because this particular crypter uses multiple techniques to make it harder for researchers, antivirus, and security software to read the information that it protects.

Put simply, the information is hidden within the layers of the onion of its encryption. OnionCrypter is unusual because of the way it uses multiple layers to hide its information. Its important to note that the name reflects the many layers this crypter uses, and its in no way related to the Tor browser or network.

Avast has found that OnionCrypter has been used by more than 30 different malware families since 2016. This includes some of the best known-most prevalent families such as Ursnif, Lokibot, Zeus, AgentTesla, and Smokeloader among others. In the last three years, the company has protected almost 400,000 users around the world from malware protected by this crypter. Its widespread use and length of time in use make it a key malware infrastructure component.

One of the goals of malware authors is to keep their creation undetected by antivirus software. One possible solution for this is a crypter which encrypts a program so it looks like meaningless data. It creates an envelope for this encrypted program also called a stub. This stub looks like an innocent program, it may also perform some tasks which are not harmful at all but its primary task is to decrypt a payload and run it.

Error: Please check your email address.

Tags malware

Original post:
Avast researchers reveal the OnionCrypter - PC World Australia - PC World

Posted in Tor Browser | Comments Off on Avast researchers reveal the OnionCrypter – PC World Australia – PC World

Ambani Bomb Threat: Terrorist Tehseen Akhtar To Be Questioned In Tihar Today; NIA Probing Sachin Vazes Alibi – Swarajya

Posted: at 5:34 pm

Today, Indian Mujahideen terrorist Tehseen Akhtar lodged in Tihar jail will be questioned by a team of officers from the Delhi polices special cell in connection to the Ambani bomb threat case.

Akhtar, former chief of the banned radical Islamist organisation, was questioned for over seven hours on Saturday (13 March). Reportedly, he was evasive and gave misleading answers.

Akhtar was convicted in the 2013 Hyderabad blasts case and has also been named in the 2011 Mumbai blasts, and 2010 Varanasi blasts, among other cases.

On 11 March, Delhi police had recovered the SIM card and cell phone used to threaten Ambani from Akhtars barracks in Tihar jail.

The SIM and cell phone were used to create the Jaish-ul-Hind Telegram account which claimed the responsibility for the explosive-laden SUV and demanded cryptocurrency.

The user of the mobile phone was using an app to generate virtual numbers and then using those to make a Telegram account. He was also using a TOR browser to mask his IP address on the internet.

Meanwhile, after the dramatic arrest of Mumbai police encounter specialist Sachin Vaze, NIA is probing if Vaze was present at the spot near Ambanis house where the explosive-laden Scorpio was abandoned on the night of the incident.

NIA also suspects that the man in the PPE kit near the car as seen in the CCTV footage might be Vaze, and is verifying his alibis.

Also read: The Sachin Vaze Story: A Timeline Of Ambani Bomb Threat Case That Can Shake Up Maharashtras Politics

See the original post here:
Ambani Bomb Threat: Terrorist Tehseen Akhtar To Be Questioned In Tihar Today; NIA Probing Sachin Vazes Alibi - Swarajya

Posted in Tor Browser | Comments Off on Ambani Bomb Threat: Terrorist Tehseen Akhtar To Be Questioned In Tihar Today; NIA Probing Sachin Vazes Alibi – Swarajya

Bill would protect juveniles’ Fifth Amendment rights | Serving Carson City for over 150 years – Nevada Appeal

Posted: at 5:33 pm

The view outside the Nevada Legislature on Sunday, Aug. 2, 2020.

Assemblywoman Lisa Krasner, R-Reno, joined by public defenders across the state, called on lawmakers to pass legislation designed to make sure juveniles younger than 18 dont waive their Fifth Amendment rights without first talking to a parent, guardian or an attorney.Kendra Bertschy of the Washoe County Public Defenders Office said more than 40 percent of juveniles waive those rights without understanding the consequences. AB251 would require police with a juvenile in custody get them in contact with a parent, guardian or attorney before asking any questions.But Chuck Callaway, representing the sheriffs and police, said if officers cant question juveniles, officers will just arrest everyone. The Nevada DAs Association also came out against AB251 as did several juvenile officers.Bertschy responded saying she was disappointed that law enforcement thinks their only option is arresting everyone.Krasner said the bill would also seal a juveniles arrest record at age 18 to give them a clean slate as they become adults under the law. She said a series of misdemeanors on juveniles records can impact their ability to get a job, go to college and other things.Serious crimes in a juvenile record, including sex offenses, would not be sealed.Alex Ortiz of Clark Countys financial office said he has no problem with the policy in the legislation but is concerned about its potential cost. He said the county would have to open, staff and run another juvenile housing unit at a cost of $2 million a year.The committee took no action on the bill with Krasner saying she would work with stakeholders to resolve some of their issues while still trying to protect juvenile suspects from themselves when taken into custody.

See the original post here:
Bill would protect juveniles' Fifth Amendment rights | Serving Carson City for over 150 years - Nevada Appeal

Posted in Fifth Amendment | Comments Off on Bill would protect juveniles’ Fifth Amendment rights | Serving Carson City for over 150 years – Nevada Appeal

SCOTUS to Decide Whether There Is a Fundamental Right to Kick People Off Your Property – Law & Crime

Posted: at 5:33 pm

The Supreme Court of the United States will hear oral arguments Monday in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, a case about the union rights of farmworkers. It could impact the future of anti-discrimination law and much more.

The plaintiffs in the case are two California fruit producers who are suing over a 1975 state regulation that allows union organizers to have temporary access to an agricultural employers property during non-work hours. The laws rationale is to support workers right to unionize by allowing workers access to their workplace premises for after-hours meetings.

California law requires agricultural businesses to allow labor organizers onto their property three times a day for 120 days each year. The state contends that the regulation is necessary in the specific context of farming: farmworkers tend to be inaccessible to union organizers through other channels, and farm properties lack parking lots or public areas that other workers typically use for gathering. From Californias brief:

[Farmworkers] are highly migratory, moving to follow the harvest every few weeks or months; they often live in temporary housing, sometimes on their employers property; they frequently lack access to modern telecommunications technology; many speak only indigenous languages; and many are illiterate even in their native language. The Boards regulation authorizes a limited number of organizers to access the property of agricultural employers, for brief periods, during non-work hours, solely for the purpose of discussing organizing with employees, and only after notifying the Board and the employer.

Cedar Point Nursery and Fowler Packing Company sued to have the law invalidated, and their argument is based on land use. They say that the law allowing union organizers to meet with workers on their property is an easement that amounts to a per se taking something that would require compensation under the Fifth Amendment.

The after-hours union meetings dont disrupt the employers businesses, and the state of California isnt actually taking the property so to make a Fifth-Amendment argument, the plaintiffs needed to frame their loss as interference with a guarantee that is constitutionally protected. They chose the right to exclude unwanted persons. In other words, the California unionizing regulation deprives the owners of their inherent property right to kick people off their land.

A panel of the Ninth Circuit sided with California, as did the district court. The panel said that because the regulation didnot amount to a physical taking because it did notallow random members of the public to unpredictably traverse their property 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.The panel also ruled that the statute wasnt a regulatory taking because the only property right affected was the right to exclude and thats simply not enough.

Now, SCOTUS will decide whether the Fifth Amendment protects a right to exclude on par with other inherent property rights. If the justices side with the landowners and agree that the regulation amounts to a taking, it would mean the regulation cannot continue to operate without California paying compensation for its taking of the land. Thats novel in itself, but theres far more drama to be had outside the arena of farming and unionizing.

The fruit-producer plaintiffs argue that the right to exclude should take its rightful place among the most sacred of protected interests: fundamental rights.

When a right is fundamental, any law abridging that right triggers the highest level of constitutional scrutiny. Accordingly, a state regulation that interferes with a fundamental right must be narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling state interest in order to pass constitutional muster. In short, state regulations fail almost always fail this test, because the right being protected has been deemed basically untouchable. (Other fundamental rights include the right to marry, the right to privacy, freedom of religion, and freedom of assembly.)

In an email to Law&Crime,Pacific Legal Foundation attorney Wen Fa, who represents the petitioner fruit sellers in the litigation, explained his clients position in the case:

The Constitution prohibits government from requiring you to allow unwanted strangers into your property. The California regulation here is unconstitutional because it forces property owners to allow unwanted union activists onto their property, and violates the property owners fundamental right to exclude trespassers.

However, Aaron Tang, a constitutional law professor and former clerk to Justice Sonia Sotomayor, warned in a Washington Post piece Thursday that as devastating as a ruling for the plaintiffs would be in the context of unions, its real danger lies outside far outside the context of employment law.

Tang writes:

The disputethreatenshavoc just as great outside the union context. Considerstate lawsthat permit child protection inspectors to make unannounced home visits. Now suppose a homeowner suspected of abuse or neglect wants to keep the inspector out. Under the challengers logic, such individuals would have a Fifth Amendment right to do so unless the government paid the suspected abuser to access the property. The same problem would ensnarenursing home visitsandfood safety inspections.

Indeed, we have seen anti-discrimination ordinances challenged on the grounds that they interfere with First Amendment rights; a ruling that the right to exclude is fundamental would mean an entirely separate basis for bringing legal challenges, rooted in property law (a legal landscape far less politically-charged than religious freedom). The cases potential for broad impact is underscored by the more than 30 amicus briefs submitted to the Court by interested yet uninvolved parties.

As for the justices, their position in the case poses some intriguing questions. The Court decided a landmark union case in 2018; it ruled that an employee who is not a member of a union could not be forced to pay union fees for the collective bargaining done on his behalf. In that case, conservative justice Samuel Alitopenned a decision joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch. JusticesSotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer dissented.

A conservative majority might similarly side against the pro-union ordinance in the Cedar Point litigation. However, if decided on Fifth Amendment grounds, such a decision threatens to create just the kind of chaos the conservative justices usually endeavor to avoid.

Oral arguments in the case are scheduled for at 10:00 a.m. on Monday, March 22, 2021.

[Photo by Samuel Corum/Getty Images]

Have a tip we should know? [emailprotected]

Read the rest here:
SCOTUS to Decide Whether There Is a Fundamental Right to Kick People Off Your Property - Law & Crime

Posted in Fifth Amendment | Comments Off on SCOTUS to Decide Whether There Is a Fundamental Right to Kick People Off Your Property – Law & Crime

What sold, and for how much, in Marion County – Ocala

Posted: at 5:30 pm

Warranty deed transfers in excess of $60,000 as recorded at the Marion County Clerk of the Circuit Courts office from Feb. 8-12:

Alderbrook. D R Horton Inc. to Kiritkumar Jani: $227,990.

Avalon Condos. Ashcroft Properties Inc. to Aaliyah Decoursey: $162,000.

Avalon Condos. Ashcroft Properties Inc. to Robert F. Welch III: $168,000.

Avondale. David Otzel to Mike Kakande: $349,500.

Avonlea. Avonlea LLC to Kenneth Padgett: $220,000.

New track, research milestone: Business news for Ocala/Marion County for March 15

Belleview Heights Estates. Larry Allen Ducat to Michael Smithson: $145,900.

Belleview Manor. Rex Lanctot to Jennifer Garbutt: $100,000.

Belleview Ridge Estates. Charles Riley to Brianne Flory: $60,000.

Belmar Estates. John Hessey to Carl Edge: $154,000.

Belmont Oaks. Elizabeth Hoop to Sharon Lynn Sprenger Trust: $252,400.

Boulder Hill. Howell Bates to David Rosado Rodriguez: $188,000.

Brighton Condo. Ingrid Duarte to Iride Morales: $160,000.

Brookhaven. D R Horton Inc. to Felipe Albino: $268,920.

More: SR 200 corridor to get another traffic light, this time at Southwest 80th Street

Caldwells Addition to Ocala. James Michael & Rebecca A. Broadbent Revocable Trust to Mannie Massengale: $190,000.

Caldwells Addition to Ocala. Jonathan Walker to Nicholas Master: $232,500.

Candler Hills West, Newcastle. On Top of The World Communities LLC to Patricia Giacalone: $399,655.

Cherrywood Estates. Donna Cochrane to David Wilson: $172,500.

Citrus County. Craig Zacke to Monte Kewley: $175,000.

Cobblestone. Kevin Russell to Charissa Felgemacher: $375,000.

Cobblestone North. D R Horton Inc. to Steven Joseph Defilippo Sr.: $194,990.

Cobblestone North. D R Horton Inc. to Dorothy Catherine Richards: $214,990.

Cobblestone North. D R Horton Inc. to Sean Theodore Kaplan: $215,495.

Cobblestone North. Philip Lopiano to Brent Nichols: $262,500.

Confidential. PAP Holdings LLC to Terri Rosado: $113,500.

Confidential. John Chiguina to Richard Zimmerman: $245,000.

Country Hill Farms. Bruce Ettenger to Ralph Sutter: $650,000.

Crescent Ridge. Marilyn Blane to Bobby Ross: $221,000.

Crestwood. A Frame West Coast LLC to Joshua Brown: $295,000.

More business news: Marion County restaurant inspections for the week of March 1-6

Darby Downs of Ocala. David Whisanant to Betty Sasina: $125,000.

Derby Downs Condo. Davy Campbell to Christine Bass: $71,000.

Druid Hills. Thomas Morgan to Lucio Vasquez: $232,200.

Fairways at Silver Springs Shores Condo. Peggy Nelson to Marsha Vezina: $85,900.

Florida Highlands. Louis Rockwell to Toni Anne Angelo: $85,000.

Florida Tung Oil Groves Inc. Development. Keith Smith to Yahaira Waters: $135,000.

Galloway & Sands Subdivision. McBride Holdings LLC to Deb3 LLC: $432,990.

Golf View Villas Condo. Sharlene Pickard to Joseph Robinson: $144,000.

Greystone Hills. D R Horton Inc. to Andres Eduardo Mistage: $234,490.

Greystone Hills. D R Horton Inc. to Steven Elijah Cassell III: $260,420.

Greystone Hills. Rolling Hills Development Inc. to D R Horton Inc.: $494,494.

More: Development in Ocala: New VA clinic under construction, national dental chain coming to town

Hendersons Yellow Bluff. Angelique Louise Ditman to Darcie Clifford: $137,542.

Hillsdale. Dh Homes LLC to Ken Geist: $80,000.

Hunterdon Hamlet. Omar Jawad to Diego Ormedilla: $477,500.

JB Ranch Subdivision. JB Ranch Partners LLC to D R Horton Inc.: $220,000.

JB Ranch Subdivision. D R Horton Inc. to James Frederick Bandoli Jr.: $232,325.

Kingsland Country Estates. Eileen Kastanas to Kathleen Kelso: $335,000.

Kingsland Country Estates, Forest Glenn. Clayton Properties Group Inc. to Andrea Ceceila Miller Smith: $264,505.

Kingsland Country Estates, Forest Glenn. Clayton Properties Group Inc. to Travis Joseph Watson: $286,359.

Kingsland Country Estates, Whispering Pines. Marco Polo Builders Inc. to Richard Waters: $322,000.

Lake Diamond North. D R Horton Inc. to Sasika Suchithra Mesthrige: $219,990.

Lake Diamond North. MR4 LLC to D R Horton Inc.: $342,000.

Lake Tropicana Ranchettes. Geri Roberts to Justin Matthew Jones: $95,000.

Lake View Village. Daniel Sharpe to Preston Boyd Kirkpatrick: $297,500.

Lake Weir Gardens. United Florida Investments LLC to Samuel Byron Green: $174,000.

Lake Weir Heights. Maryann Rose Mansur to Tony Haglund: $85,000.

Lake Weir Meadows. Fowler Bros. Holdings LLC to Sunset Harbor Acres LLC: $341,300.

Laurels at Bellechase. Sarojini Pericherla Living Trust to Rajasekhar Ventrapragada: $180,000.

Leeward Air Ranch. KAL Holdings 1 D LLC to Jeffrey Roberts: $65,000.

Longleaf Ridge. On Top of The World Communities LLC to Bruce Tighe: $223,681.

Longleaf Ridge. On Top of The World Communities LLC to Jane Hall: $336,030.

Lynnewoods. Majesta Morissette to Michael Turpak: $66,200.

More: Causes: Upcoming fundraisers in Ocala/Marion County for March 15, 2021

Marion County. Dawn Marie Bernir to Gioconda Lopez Mena Luwins Mena: $62,500.

Marion County. Runa Zurbel to Vernon Nevoraski: $68,000.

Marion County. Betty A. Roberson Revocable Trust to Jax Home Ventures Inc.: $71,500.

Marion County. Mg Land Development LLC to Jason Gould: $77,900.

Marion County. Jax Home Ventures Inc. to Mejia Investments LLC: $80,000.

Marion County. Barbara Maguire to Jerry Rodgers: $85,000.

Marion County. Steven Weitlauf Trust to Andrew Perico: $124,000.

Marion County. Frances D. Bliss Living Revocable Trust to 37 SE Chinica Drive LLC: $126,000.

Marion County. Iva Meadows to Kelly George: $130,000.

Marion County. Safe IRA Homes LLC Trust to Sarah Rupert: $168,000.

Marion County. Jen Homes LLC to Joanna Fernandez: $178,000.

Marion County. Timothy Logan Thompson to Wendy Dee Lambert: $228,000.

Marion County. Joseph Watkins to Lavon Tindell: $235,000.

Marion County. Maria Class to Nichole Montanez Class Montanez: $270,000.

Marion County. Angela Benejam to John Hoctel: $275,000.

Marion County. Susan Garrett to Debra Lynn Bailey: $285,000.

Marion County. Kharabsheh Suleiman to Domenick Galatolo: $295,000.

Marion County. Kyle Andrew Migetz to Kristen Clifford: $345,000.

Marion County. Travis Daniel Lang to Adam Dean: $399,764.

Marion County. Windemere Farm LLC to Kevin Lyons: $425,000.

Marion County. Mark Raney to 1500 SW 59th Street LLC: $850,000.

Marion County. HHS Property Investments LLC to Watermark Infrastructure LLC: $1,475,000.

Marion Landing. Pamela Lasell to Maureen Amengual: $90,000.

Marion Oaks. Charles Berk to Southern Impression Homes LLC: $72,000.

Marion Oaks. Unity Development Investments LLC to BBG Poinciana LLC: $74,900.

Marion Oaks. BIL Investment Properties LLC to A Plus Homes Inc.: $102,400.

Marion Oaks. Linda Bryan to Warshi Property Services LLC: $140,000.

Marion Oaks. Harold McNally to Ana Rosa Mulero Nieves: $146,000.

Marion Oaks. Red Brick Developments Inc. to Nelson Gonzalez Diaz: $147,999.

Marion Oaks. Worldwide Alliance LLC to Mirna Acevedo: $154,000.

Marion Oaks. Drc24 LLC to Carl Jeffrey Lacey: $156,900.

Marion Oaks. Worldwide Alliance LLC to Valerie Kim Bosler: $159,900.

Marion Oaks. Worldwide Alliance LLC to Valerie Kim Bosler: $159,900.

Marion Oaks. Group Capital 3 LLC to Odvin Duvert: $162,000.

More here:

What sold, and for how much, in Marion County - Ocala

Posted in Marie Byrd Land | Comments Off on What sold, and for how much, in Marion County – Ocala

Biden: It Will Be ‘Tough’ To Pull US Troops Out Of Middle East By May Deadline – The Federalist

Posted: at 5:29 pm

In an interview that aired Wednesday with ABC News George Stephanopoulos on Good Morning America, President Joe Biden stated that it would be tough to withdraw U.S troops currently stationed in Afghanistan by the scheduled deadline of May 1.

Im in the process of making that decision now as to when theyll leave. The fact is, that was not a very solidly negotiated deal that the president, the former president, worked out, Biden said. So were in consultation with our allies as well as the government, and that decisions its in process now.

Last year, then-President Donald Trump negotiated with the Taliban to yank U.S. military forces from Afghanistan and Iraq. The Afghan government agreed to release as many as 5,000 Taliban prisoners in a trade for 1,000 Afghan prisoners held hostage by the Taliban. The historic peace deal came after nearly two decades of war in Afghanistan.

Out of the troops that have not yet been withdrawn, 3,500 remain. According to The New York Times, more than 1,000 Special Operations forces remain in Afghanistan, of this number. The peace agreement has not yet been authorized by the Afghan government.

I dont think a lot longer, Biden told Stephanopoulos on the length of sustaining troops in the middle east. [It] could happen, but it is tough, he added on making the May 1 deadline that Trump put in place.

To date, 3,500 troops stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan is the lowest number since the conflict initiated. Bidens decision comes just a month after he put a freeze on Trumps decision to withdraw troops from Germany in July. About 11,900 troops were relocated to the U.S. or other parts of Europe.

We dont want to be the suckers anymore, Trump said to reporters in July. The United States has been taken advantage of for 25 years, both on trade and on the military. Were protecting Germany, so were reducing the force because theyre not paying the bills. Its very simple. Theyre delinquent. So were reducing the force. Now if they start paying their bills I would think about it.

Bidens interview aired a day prior to a meeting in Moscow between leaders from Russia, China, the United States, Pakistan, top Afghan officials, and opposition leaders, as well as Taliban representatives. The Taliban continues to deny that al-Qaida terrorists are responsible for the attacks on Sep. 11, 2001.

This week, Secretary of State Antony Blinken urged Afghan President Ashraf Ghani to display urgent leadership in talks to craft a peace plan with the Taliban.

In reaction to Bidens indeterminate stance on the withdrawal of troops, a spokesperson for the Taliban said that there would be consequences if Trumps agreement was not abided by. The threat is a warning to resume attacks on U.S forces.

More:

Biden: It Will Be 'Tough' To Pull US Troops Out Of Middle East By May Deadline - The Federalist

Posted in Federalist | Comments Off on Biden: It Will Be ‘Tough’ To Pull US Troops Out Of Middle East By May Deadline – The Federalist

‘Justice League’ Is Zack Snyder’s Trimphant Return To Big Heroes – The Federalist

Posted: at 5:29 pm

If you are like mehandsome and coolyou love a great action movie. You love the superhero archetype because the character development, if done properly, can reveal what is best about us as a species. You love watching attractive people with amazing physiques do impossible things in impractical clothesunless your name is Martin Scorsese, who famously hates the genre.

People who cant get past the dazzle of science fiction plot devices just dont have the creativity to achieve suspension of disbelief. They have lost their childlike sense of wonder for the wonderful.

If you love your sense of wonder, you likely love Wonder Woman. If you love the supernatural, you love Superman. If you love oceanic, robotic, and fast action, you love Aquaman, Cyborg, and The Flash. If you love all of these characters and their flaws in one film, you are a true fan and your name might be Zack Snyder.

If you are wondering if this film came out in 2017, you are mostly right. Snyder had a family tragedy that cut short his ability to finish this film, and Joss Whedon was tapped to complete it. Snyder had set up his own vision for the DC cinematic universe in 2013 with Man of Steel, which I thoroughly enjoyed.

This would have been an Avengers-esque team-up to launch more films and a vehicle to introduce new characters to the screen. Whedon basically came in and crapped all over that vision and delivered a disjointed, half-baked CGI, dryly performed, and meandering film that was only mildly enjoyable.

Snyder fixes all of that. The Snydercut was demanded by the fans, who made it happen, and the payoff is worth it. In a way, the fans were Snyders own Justice League who brought him back like Superman to vanquish Whedons evil spawn.

There is character development, beautiful cinematography, better banter, and more emotional sinew in the performances. The score is better, the colorization is better, Snyders desaturated and almost film noir grit really works to cement this fantasy into reality and to blend the CGI with the live action.

Speaking of CGI, it is light years ahead of the 2017 version. The bad guys look better, scarier, and more threatening. Steppenwolf is given a character arc that comics fans will recognize. Even though he seems more threatening (spoilers ahead) he is heralding an even greater evil to comea really well done Darkseid.

Darkseid-Thanos comparisons will be made, and I like the Darkseid CGI treatment better than Thanoss. He seems more tangible and real. For the record, he also came first as a character.

We are treated to battles from time past. A Green Lantern makes an appearance alongside the old Greek gods, Amazonians, Atlanteans, and early men. This backstory was important to set up the struggle to get our heroes to unite.

A fractured Earth led to distrust between the peoples, and that reflects in the main characters. The idea of uniting to defeat a common foe should resonate today. In addition to new and better battles, we also get to see new and revamped characters in Martian Manhunter and Jared Letos Joker, who seems more menacing and developed in this film, although his frames are few.

All of the characters seem more deftly acted. Was that better editing, alternate takes, or reshoots? The world may never know. Superman looks cool in his back in black super-suit and his return seemed even scarier than in the 17 version, even though the scenes seemed very close to the same.

The slow-motion scenes will seem superfluous to some, but to me they really drove home the idea of how fast the action was and how insanely fast The Flash is. In fact, his power is expanded from the first film, as is his heroism.

The score is more epic and tender, and the pop music in the soundtrack gives us well-timed emotional connection. Batman totally fell in love with guns!

This was a great film; not without flaws, but Im comfortable calling it great. It is worth viewing maybe even twice. That brings me to some of the flaws.

Four hours. Four hours in 4:3 aspect ratio! If you have an older plasma widescreen or even LED, it could burn black bars into the sides of your screen (just kidding, but if it happens I want to hear about it). To me, this was the worst choice Snyder made. It made the film seem less expansive.

I mostly ignored it once the film was going for a bit, but I have the good fortune of viewing on a 120-inch 4K Dolby Atmos projection system with audio to match. I imagine this film was envisioned for IMAX screens, which are giant 4:3. The sidebars would have annoyed me more had I been watching on the 75-inch downstairs.

Some of the pacing seemed slownot painfully slow, just slowenough to make you think a 3.5-hour version might be just as good. Thats all I have for flaws, but those may prove too massive for some to overcome. Now, back to the good.

The fact that this film was available to stream and to view in theaters was really great. I think this COVID model will stay long after we have burned our masks.

I cant think of another filmmaker who was ever given a chance to recover his or her vision. It is an extraordinary occasion and well worth the effort. As I mentioned earlier, the fandom that made this happenthey demanded it and thus ensured a return on the investment. It gave them some ownership, and the fandom should take a bow.

This film is an example of what movie-making should and can be when producers and execs arent given too much control over content. When you have a master visual storyteller like Snyder, you turn him loose.

One cant help but wonder if the results would have been better had they just shelved it until he had gotten past his tragedy in the first place. We wouldnt be watching this film with the bad taste of the first still in our mouths. Still, I am thankful for this palate-cleanser.

Watch this film, make lots of popcorn, and plan to pause for bathroom breaks at the chapter slates. Oh, and if you talk about this movie with your fanboy friends, make sure you know the names of all the characters, no matter how small, or prepare to be nerdured.

If you are friends with Mr. Scorsese, just pretend you hated it.

Chris Loesch is the owner of creative concept company Intuation Studios.

Read the original:

'Justice League' Is Zack Snyder's Trimphant Return To Big Heroes - The Federalist

Posted in Federalist | Comments Off on ‘Justice League’ Is Zack Snyder’s Trimphant Return To Big Heroes – The Federalist

Californians Gather More Than 2 Million Signatures To Recall Gavin Newsom – The Federalist

Posted: at 5:29 pm

More than 2 million signatures were submitted to California state election officials Wednesday on the final day to reach the 1,495,709 needed to secure a recall for Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom on the calendar this year.

The state will now conduct a monthlong review to validate the signatures. If valid, a recall election expected to be scheduled for sometime between August and December.

Were gonna take this extremely seriously were gonna get ready and fight like hell, Newsom senior strategist Sean Clegg told Politico Wednesday, labeling the referendum on Newsoms leadership a partisan Republican recall with a capital R.

Anne Dunsmore, however, who runs the recall committee, RescueCalifornia.org, told The Federalist that more than a third of the signatures are independent and Democratic voters. Dunsmore emphazied the bipartisan nature of the movement triggered in large part by the governors aggressive and hypocritical lockdowns. Fifty-eight percent of those who signed the petition were women, Dunsmore said.

On Tuesday, Newsom complained the recall effort was motivated by racism, a routine accusation foisted by Democrats on any criticism from political opponents.

Look at the petition, look at the actual reasons they themselves listed. It has to do with immigration. The browning of California, Newsom told reporters.

Dunsmore called Newsoms comments an insult to the two million people who signed the petition with a very strong showing from people that were no party preference and Democrats.

Newsom said on the ABCs The View Tuesday that he is worried about the effort to remove him from office.

Of course Im worried about it, Newsom told the daytime panel. The nature of these things, the up or down question, the zero-sum nature of the question is challenging so were taking it seriously.

The recall ballot gives voters a yes-or-not vote on whether Newsom stays in office, followed by a list of candidates competing for Newsoms replacement if Californians vote in favor of removal.

While five recall attempts on Newsom failed in the past, the sixth effort picked up momentum in December, about a month after the governor was caught enjoying indoor dining at a three-star Michelin restaurant in Napa Valleys wine country. Photos of the scene showed Newsom, who had just prohibited gatherings of more than three households before the Thanksgiving holiday, at a dinner party with a dozen others with no masks, and no social distancing.

Newsom tightened statewide restrictions after he apologized for getting caught.

Californians have been subject to some of the harshest lockdowns in the country provoking an exodus to business-friendlier states such as Texas and Arizona. Families have also fled the state in search of better education for their children as many California schools remain closed despite overwhelming evidence that in-person instruction is safe.

A new poll out Monday shows more than 58 percent of California voters believe its time for someone new in the 2022 election. Only 42 percent said they would vote to keep Newsom in office in an upcoming recall.

While Newsoms lockdowns, implemented with little transparency, have fueled the governors recall movement, California Republican Congressman Darrell Issa told The Federalist Newsoms problems stem far beyond aggressive COVID-19 restrictions.

Rolling blackouts caused by insensitivity to the transition from fuel, Issa said, gripped the state last year with an energy crisis which has left Californians relying on imported power from other states at peak periods.

Issa, the wealthiest member in Congress who bankrolled the states last recall in 2003 when voters replaced incumbent Democrat Gray Davis with Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, told The Federalist the stakes are higher in this years contest than they were nearly 20 years ago.

Weve got to turn around the direction of the state in a much more meaningful way, Issa said, who cited the states fleeing population putting California on track to lose a congressional seat for the first time in its history.

Issa said he is committed to supporting the effort however he can, though he wont be running as a candidate himself.

While no prominent Democrats have come forward to challenge Newsom in the recall, several Republicans have already declared their candidacies including former San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer and former Republican Congressman Doug Ose.

Former President Donald Trumps former Director of National Intelligence, Ric Grenell, has also hinted at a run but has not yet announced any decision.

Read more:

Californians Gather More Than 2 Million Signatures To Recall Gavin Newsom - The Federalist

Posted in Federalist | Comments Off on Californians Gather More Than 2 Million Signatures To Recall Gavin Newsom – The Federalist