Categories
Archives
Please donate any amount you can to help us try to recover legal costs in defending liberty and the right of free speech !

Author Archive

Obama Named in Racketeering Lawsuit

Obama7

This could get really interesting.
Check it out:

It is high time that someone brought charges against the Obama administration in the context of what the Obama administration is – a criminal enterprise.

Attorney Larry Klayman, fresh off a preliminary court ruling that the National Security Agency’s spying on Americans likely is unconstitutional, now has named President Obama and others in a racketeering complaint.

Klayman, founder of Freedom Watch and a columnist for WorldNetDaily, alleges the president and others laundered U.S. taxpayer money that was spent on Hamas rockets fired against Israel.

The civil lawsuit, filed in federal court in Washington falls under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, alleges criminal acts by Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon.

Seeking $1.5 billion in compensatory damages as well as punitive damages, it accuses the global figures of “laundering U.S. dollars” to Hamas, which is officially designated by the U.S. government as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.
“This money has been foreseeably used to buy rockets and construct tunnels to attack Israel and terrorize and kill American and dual American-Israeli citizens who reside or are located in Israel,” Klayman said in a statement.

“The nation and the world have increasingly come to see that Obama views himself primarily as a Muslim and acts accordingly in favoring Islamic interests over Judeo-Christian ones, and the complaint lays out Obama’s history in documented detail,” he said.

Klayman said Obama’s actions “were calculated to harm the nation of Israel.”

“His facilitating and ordering financial and other material aid to Hamas, along with his equally anti-Israel Secretaries of State Kerry and Clinton, and the U.N. Secretary General, is just the latest deadly chapter in what amounts to criminal activity which has logically resulted in harm and death to Jews and Christians and threatens the continued existence of Israel,” he said.

“That is why he and the other defendants were sued under RICO and other relevant laws,” said Klayman.

The White House media office declined to respond by telephone to a request from WND for comment, instructing a reporter to send an email. There was no immediately response to the email inquiry.

The case, No. 14-1484, alleges the defendants conspired to send hundreds of millions of dollars to Hamas “under the false pretext that this financial support will be used for humanitarian purposes.”

Attorney Larry Klayman, fresh off a preliminary court ruling that the National Security Agency’s spying on Americans likely is unconstitutional, now has named President Obama and others in a racketeering complaint.

Klayman, founder of Freedom Watch and a columnist for WND, alleges the president and others laundered U.S. taxpayer money that was spent on Hamas rockets fired against Israel.

The civil lawsuit, filed in federal court in Washington falls under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, alleges criminal acts by Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon.

Seeking $1.5 billion in compensatory damages as well as punitive damages, it accuses the global figures of “laundering U.S. dollars” to Hamas, which is officially designated by the U.S. government as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

“This money has been foreseeably used to buy rockets and construct tunnels to attack Israel and terrorize and kill American and dual American-Israeli citizens who reside or are located in Israel,” Klayman said in a statement.

“The nation and the world have increasingly come to see that Obama views himself primarily as a Muslim and acts accordingly in favoring Islamic interests over Judeo-Christian ones, and the complaint lays out Obama’s history in documented detail,” he said.

Klayman said Obama’s actions “were calculated to harm the nation of Israel.”

“His facilitating and ordering financial and other material aid to Hamas, along with his equally anti-Israel Secretaries of State Kerry and Clinton, and the U.N. Secretary General, is just the latest deadly chapter in what amounts to criminal activity which has logically resulted in harm and death to Jews and Christians and threatens the continued existence of Israel,” he said.

“That is why he and the other defendants were sued under RICO and other relevant laws,” said Klayman.

The White House media office declined to respond by telephone to a request from WND for comment, instructing a reporter to send an email. There was no immediately response to the email inquiry.

The case, No. 14-1484, alleges the defendants conspired to send hundreds of millions of dollars to Hamas “under the false pretext that this financial support will be used for humanitarian purposes.”

“However,” the complaint states, “as recently reported by Voice of America and the New York Times, the recent killing of the chief Hamas financial officer by the IDF confirmed that these U.S. dollars, only some of which [were] found in his bombed out car, [have] predictably fallen into the hands of Hamas’ terrorist wing, which controls and was elected by Gazans to govern over them.”

Klayman’s recent case against the NSA challenged its program of spying on Americans. Two privacy-rights heavyweights, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, recently filed friend-of-the-court briefs in support of Klayman’s arguments.

The case has been advanced to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Help Larry Klayman with his class-action suit against Obama’s use of the NSA to violate Americans’ rights

Klayman sued the NSA over the collection of telephone metadata from Verizon customers that was detailed in documents released by intelligence-document leaker Edward Snowden. In December 2013, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon issued a preliminary ruling that the program was likely unconstitutional, and the case is currently on appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

His newest complaint, with himself and a number of John Does as plaintiffs, is a civil action and seeks damages from the defendants “for violating plaintiffs’ and decedents’ rights, for engaging in racketeering and other prohibited activities, for engaging in international terrorism, for harboring and concealing terrorists, for providing material support to terrorists and terrorist groups, for directly and proximately causing the deaths of plaintiffs’ decedents, and for directly and proximately causing mental anguish, severe emotional distress, emotional pain and suffering, and the loss of society, earnings, companionship, comfort, protection, care, attention, advice, counsel or guidance, plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and their sons, plaintiffs’ decedents, have experienced and will experience in the future.”

It alleges fraud, money-laundering, mail fraud, wire fraud, conversion and corruption.

The complaint notes Klayman recently was in Israel when it was attacked by Hamas.

Klayman, it says, “was subject to terroristic threats, fear, intimidation and blackmail from Hamas, aimed at coercing him from the exercise of his legal rights in violation of the Hobbs Act by Hamas seeking to deny his freedom of travel and public advocacy and business activities in Israel and other activities in Israel by threats and intimidation aimed at coercing him as a person engaged in public advocacy and business activities in and with Israel to leave Israel and disengage with Israel.”

Other “John Doe” plaintiffs also were in Israel at the time of the attacks, the complaint states.

It explains that, according to the law, a person “knowingly finances terrorism when fully aware of facts that would inform an alert person of average intelligence that the probable results of their actions will be to provide funding to a terrorist organization.”

“One may not naively turn a blind eye, not even a president of the United States,” the complaint states.

It says considerable amounts of charity money, public assistance, international assistance and humanitarian aid is motivated toward ending the violence in the Holy Land, but it “gets diverted to the corrupt enterprise, and becomes money that – fell off a truck into the hands of the criminals actually causing the violence and their enablers.”

The complaint says all of the defendants know or have reason to know that “funds and material support provided to Gaza under Hamas’s rule are actually used entirely or in the most part to finance the acts of terrorism, violence, murder, attempted murder, kidnapping, assault, injury, physical attacks, and other criminal activity by Hamas.’

The complaint says the defendants known Hamas uses building materials for home-made rockets and underground bunkers.

The complaint also notes Obama knows Hamas is officially designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by State Department and uses resources it receives for terrorist attacks, including the $900 million the Obama administration sent to Gaza in 2009.

It even accuses Obama of “siding with” militants known as “ISIS or ISIL, signaling to the people of Israel and Jews and Christians that Hamas’ crimes against Israel and Jews and Christians are tacitly supported and approved of by the president of the United States.”

The case also names Malik Obama, a half-brother of the president who runs the Barack Obama Foundation. The case alleges the organization raises money for the Muslim Brotherhood.

“Two leaked classified documents show Egyptian security forces have been monitoring Malik Obama’s activities and they also implicate President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton in the aiding and abetting of terrorists.”

Klayman explained the documents were entered as evidence in the criminal trials of former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi and other top Muslim Brotherhood leaders.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/08/obama-named-in-rico-lawsuit/#cIDXP1yyupJuB0df.99

GOP, It’s Time To Bring Down The Hammer On Obama Corruption!

by Ben Crystalcorruption1
Barring a late-season push, the Democrats are heading into this fall’s midterm elections looking at a near total loss. President Barack Obama is dragging down his party’s image like a battleship anchor lashed to a rowboat.
Direct assaults on Americans’ individual liberties, once laughed off as “phony” by the Democratic ownership, have clung to the headlines like a particularly virulent fungus, mostly because Obama and his minions have a bad habit of doubling down when they get caught lying. But most importantly, the Democrats’ willful refusal to acknowledge that they’re not the only ones whose opinions count has infuriated Americans to no end. Yet the Republicans appear to be doing everything they can to keep the Dems in the game. At this point, as the country reels from yet another race-infused nightmare made infinitely worse by the machinations of Obama and his ilk, the only reason the Democrats are still in the midterm electoral fight is GOP hesitation to deliver the knockout blow.
Obviously, the biggest violator of the public trust is Obama himself. His scandal-plagued regime’s tendency to launch vicious attacks on his perceived enemies not only has produced the still-unresolved Obamacare fraud debacle, the Benghazi nightmare, the NSA domestic spying scandal, the outrageous use of the IRS as a political weapon and a foreign policy as confused as it is impotent; but it also has produced a presidency that is every bit as detached and isolated from the people it purportedly serves as the Hollywood bobbleheads are from the shmoes who buy tickets to sit through their dreck. Nonetheless, beyond the efforts of dedicated public servants like Congressmen Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) and Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the Republicans have made almost no effort to return justice to the fore. Instead, they’re suing the president.
Oh, how I loathe the idea of suing Obama. When dealing with a self-styled despot of such low character, a mere lawsuit just seems too small. The guy didn’t back over the mailbox; he backed over the entire U.S. Constitution. The image of House Speaker John Boehner and the rest of his blue-suited lawyer buddies sitting in the hallway of some courthouse waiting for some slip-and-fall case to finish up so they can play the lawsuit lottery strikes me as positively surreal. Moreover, seeing Boehner and his lieutenants filing into a courtroom like disgraced former Senator John Edwards and his ambulance-chaser choir is just plain funny.
Better remedies for a rogue executive exist, up to and including impeachment. However, as long as sociopaths like Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid are allowed to wander the halls of the Capitol with impunity, impeachment will flatline worse than Michael Moore in a CrossFit competition. Plus, impeachment would let far too many people off the hook.
I say it’s high time Congress goes old school on the White House. I’m talking Richard Nixon-era action — “Dirty” Harry Callahan interrogating a suspect or John Shaft going upside some sucka’s head! The president of the United States and a number of his accomplices represent a clear and present danger to the lives, the liberties and the pursuits of happiness of every American — even the ones who voted for him. When Nixon’s administration got caught trying to cover up its criminal activities, people went to prison. Obama and his henchmen have been caught trying to cover up a criminal empire, and not one of them has had their ticket punched for a stay in the big house.
Instead of some endless, special prosecutor-filled, mind-numbingly debated impeachment hearings, let’s see Congress drag every one of the Obama minions who got caught flouting the law onto the mat for a full-on, prison-yard beatdown.
Bring Attorney General Eric Holder back and punish him for his role in — and lies about — Operation Fast and Furious, which resulted in a significantly higher number of deaths than the Ferguson, Missouri, incident, albeit with fewer Jesse Jackson fundraising speeches.
Duckwalk back IRS stooges John Koskinen and Lois Lerner for their offensively cavalier — and incredibly stupid — attempts to whitewash what is a growing firestorm over the IRS harassment of innocent Americans.
Frog-march back former Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius for violations of the Hatch Act, not to mention Obamacare’s trillion-dollar excesses.
Pinch former ambassador and current National Security Adviser Susan Rice — and even squirrely little mouthpieces like former White House press secretary Jay Carney and his successor, Josh Earnest — and bring them up to Capitol Hill in handcuffs.
Hell, go all in. Get a warrant and make President Executive Orders himself do a perp walk. Unlike Obama — who overstepped his bounds in his executive orders on immigration, Obamacare (the post-passage changes for which he’s being sued) and so-called “global warming” — Congress actually does have the power to issue arrest warrants.
The Democrats would scream bloody murder. They would pivot from their usual yammering about racism, sexism and any other “-ism” they can dream up to screech like howler monkeys at the affront to the dignity of the office of the presidency. They’d accuse anyone and everyone they could of undermining the executive. They’d shriek about Congress overstepping its bounds. And — of course — they’d play the race card.
And here’s how the Republicans should respond: “So?”
The affront to the dignity of the office of the presidency presented by criminal charges would be nothing compared to the affront presented by Obama’s six-year house party. When the executive deliberately and illegally undermines Congress — as it has with Obamacare, the immigration ploys and upcoming U.N. “name and shame” global warming sham — I didn’t hear of too many Democrats wringing their hands over the offenses. And the old tack of smearing your opponents as “racist” is just plain sad.
Would all the arrests result in convictions? Probably not. Some of them might not even hold up in court. Neither did Obama’s attempt to force taxpayers to fund abortions, but the victims of that end run around the 1st Amendment still had to fight all the way to the Supreme Court just to beat it back. And again, I say: “So?”
If the Republicans start playing hardball, who will they send running for the hills? The Democrats are already conditioned to reflexively hate anyone of whom and anything of which their fuehrers don’t approve, so they’re not likely to swing back. Meanwhile, the conservative base would be energized, and the fence-sitters would finally hear a better campaign slogan than this: “Vote GOP! We’re Slightly Less Appalling!”
To the Republicans: Heed the wisdom of the ages, “Go big or go home.” And to the Democrats: Heed the other wisdom of the ages, “Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time.

FOOD STAMP FRAUD RUNS WILDLY OUT OF CONTROL

accept_ebt
Fraud in plain view: Food stamps sold online for art, housing,…
Food stamp recipients were selling their benefits online in exchange for money, housing or…
Repeat after me: there is no such thing as big, honest government. Corruption is intrinsic to every Big Government endeavor. Sometimes it’s officials lining their own pockets, or sluicing millions of taxpayer dollars to their cronies. Sometimes it’s administrative “overhead” so bloated that it’s indistinguishable from the way a parasite feeds on its host organism. And sometimes it’s just good old-fashioned abuse by the recipients of government lollipops.

The Washington Times reports on the staggering levels of fraud in our titanic food stamp program, which has grown faster than just about any productive industry over the past six years:
Repeat after me: there is no such thing as big, honest government. Corruption is intrinsic to every Big Government endeavor. Sometimes it’s officials lining their own pockets, or sluicing millions of taxpayer dollars to their cronies. Sometimes it’s administrative “overhead” so bloated that it’s indistinguishable from the way a parasite feeds on its host organism. And sometimes it’s just good old-fashioned abuse by the recipients of government lollipops.

The Washington Times reports on the staggering levels of fraud in our titanic food stamp program, which has grown faster than just about any productive industry over the past six years:Food stamp recipients were selling their benefits online in exchange for money, housing or even art, according to a report federal investigators released Thursday that showed states manage to catch just a fraction of potential fraud in the sprawling program.

Use of the food stamps, now officially known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, has skyrocketed under President Obama, reaching 47 million recipients at a cost of $76 billion last year. But states recovered just $74 million in fraudulent payments the previous year, according to the Government Accountability Office.

GAO investigators reviewed records from 11 states and found they lacked sufficient staff and tools to catch fraud in the ballooning program.

“Such rapid program growth can increase the potential for fraud unless appropriate agency controls are in place to help minimize these risks,” the investigators said in their report.

I would change that to say “such rapid program growth will inevitably increase the potential for fraud.” This report explicitly argues that the number of beneficiaries grew so rapidly that overwhelmed officials couldn’t possibly ensure the benefits were being dispensed properly. For example, Massachusetts had 37 investigators patrolling half a million residents of Food Stamp Nation.

Of course, it did not even briefly occur to anyone that the money spigot should be shut off until proper controls were in place. Who cares if the taxpaying suckers of the American middle class get ripped off? It’s not as if the billions ($3 billion per year, to be exact) lost to corruption in this program were going to compromise any other part of the Big Government agenda. The Leviathan State does not need to miss a meal because it drops too many crumbs from its flabby jaws as it feeds. Worst case scenario: print more money, run up the deficit, and then lecture the suckers about the urgent need to pay higher taxes in the name of “deficit reduction.”

It doesn’t sound like a great deal of manpower would have been needed to detect food-stamp fraud. Much of it was painfully obvious:

In one online posting from Jacksonville, Florida, someone was asking for $100 cash in exchange for $228 in food stamps. One ad from Raleigh, North Carolina, offered 10 days of cooking and cleaning services in exchange for food stamps. A Charlotte, North Carolina, poster said he would trade food stamps for beer, and a Houston ad proposed exchanging food stamps for a catalytic converter.

Then there was the Worcester, Massachusetts, advertisement proposing up to $3,000 in electronic benefit food stamp transfers in exchange for art.

[...] “Interesting proposal: I am looking for a place to sleep. [I]f you can help me out (Oh I MAY have some cash to contribute as well as food stamps ),” one post read.

The USDA’s fraud controls are ridiculously weak. The GAO found far more violations with half an hour per day of manual searches than the USDA’s automatic systems could detect. But that’s no surprise, as Cato Institute budget analyst Nicole Kaeding pointed out, because the system is essentially rigged to penalize state agencies for preventing food stamp fraud:

“Food stamp benefits are paid for by the federal government. If the state stops it before it starts, by say denying a claim, it does not receive money from the federal government, nor does it save the state any money. But states do bear a cost for investigation and administration,” Ms. Kaeding said. “If the state catches the fraud after it occurs, it keeps 35 percent of the overpayment. That incentive structure is backwards.”

State officials acknowledged that fraud-related incentive is focused on collecting overpayments, even though the GAO found that preventive measures stymie fraud more effectively by barring ineligible people from receiving benefits that may not be recovered.

Ms. Kaeding said states and the federal government continue to blame each other as the problem gets worse.

“As more levels of government are involved, each level of government can blame the other. USDA can say it is the responsibility of the states and states can say they don’t run the food stamp program. The more governments that are involved, the less they are accountable.”

There is no such thing as big, honest government. Tired of getting ripped off? Then you need to burn this system to the ground. You’ll never reform it in any meaningful sense, because strands of corruption are part of the welfare state’s DNA. So is blame-shifting

Obama fails History 101

obama bewildered
President Obama doesn’t know much about history.

In his therapeutic 2009 Cairo speech, Obama outlined all sorts of Islamic intellectual and technological pedigrees, several of which were undeserved. He exaggerated Muslim contributions to printing and medicine, for example, and was flat-out wrong about the catalysts for the European Renaissance and Enlightenment.

He also believes history follows some predetermined course, as if things always get better on their own. Obama often praises those he pronounces to be on the “right side of history.” He also chastises others for being on the “wrong side of history” — as if evil is vanished and the good thrives on autopilot.

When in 2009 millions of Iranians took to the streets to protest the thuggish theocracy, they wanted immediate U.S. support. Instead, Obama belatedly offered them banalities suggesting that in the end, they would end up “on the right side of history.” Iranian reformers may indeed end up there, but it will not be because of some righteous inanimate force of history, or the prognostications of Barack Obama.

Obama often parrots Martin Luther King Jr.’s phrase about the arc of the moral universe bending toward justice. But King used that metaphor as an incentive to act, not as reassurance that matters will follow an inevitably positive course.

Another of Obama’s historical refrains is his frequent sermon about behavior that doesn’t belong in the 21st century. At various times he has lectured that the barbarous aggression of Vladimir Putin or ISIS has no place in our century and will “ultimately fail” — as if we are all now sophisticates of an age that has at last transcended retrograde brutality and savagery.

In Obama’s hazy sense of the end of history, things always must get better in the manner that updated models of iPhones and iPads are glitzier than the last. In fact, history is morally cyclical. Even technological progress is ethically neutral. It is a way either to bring more good things to more people or to facilitate evil all that much more quickly and effectively.

In the viciously modern 20th century — when more lives may have been lost to war than in all prior centuries combined — some 6 million Jews were put to death through high technology in a way well beyond the savagery of Attila the Hun or Tamerlane. Beheading in the Islamic world is as common in the 21st century as it was in the eighth century — and as it will probably be in the 22nd. The carnage of the Somme and Dresden trumped anything that the Greeks, Romans, Franks, Turks or Venetians could have imagined.

What explains Obama’s confusion?A lack of knowledge of basic history explains a lot. Obama or his speechwriters have often seemed confused about the liberation of Auschwitz, “Polish death camps” the political history of Texas, or the linguistic relationship between Austria and Germany. Obama reassured us during the Bowe Bergdahl affair that George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt all similarly got American prisoners back when their wars ended — except that none of them were in office when the Revolutionary War, Civil War or World War II officially ended.

Contrary to Obama’s assertion, President Rutherford B. Hayes never dismissed the potential of the telephone. Obama once praised the city of Cordoba as part of a proud Islamic tradition of tolerance during the brutal Spanish Inquisition — forgetting that by the beginning of the Inquisition an almost exclusively Christian Cordoba had few Muslims left.

A Pollyannaish belief in historical predetermination seems to substitute for action. If Obama believes that evil should be absent in the 21st century, or that the arc of the moral universe must always bend toward justice, or that being on the wrong side of history has consequences, then he may think inanimate forces can take care of things as we need merely watch.

In truth, history is messier. Unfortunately, only force will stop seventh-century monsters like ISIS from killing thousands more innocents. Obama may think that reminding Putin that he is now in the 21st century will so embarrass the dictator that he will back off from Ukraine. But the brutish Putin may think that not being labeled a 21st-century civilized sophisticate is a compliment.

In 1935, French Foreign Minister Pierre Laval warned Josef Stalin that the Pope would admonish him to go easy on Catholics — as if such moral lectures worked in the supposedly civilized 20th century. Stalin quickly disabused Laval of that naiveté. “The Pope?” Stalin asked, “How many divisions has he got?”

There is little evidence that human nature has changed over the centuries, despite massive government efforts to make us think and act nicer. What drives Putin, Boko Haram or ISIS are the same age-old passions, fears and sense of honor that over the centuries also moved Genghis Khan, the Sudanese Mahdists and the Barbary pirates.

Obama’s naive belief in predetermined history — especially when his facts are often wrong — is a poor substitute for concrete moral action.

Heil Obama – Federal Government to Track Politically “Misleading Ideas” and “Hate Speech” on Twitter

Posted by: Barry Secrest

Refocus Notes:

Monitoring hate speech–To be administered by college academians….Hey! What could go wrong?

This impetus is all about eradicating any ideas which do not conform to those currently in power…..as tried many times in the past, one particular example is just below.
n5ram1MUIV0
Washington Free Beacon

BY: Elizabeth Harrington

The federal government is spending nearly $1 million to create an online database that will track “misinformation” and hate speech on Twitter.

The National Science Foundation is financing the creation of a web service that will monitor “suspicious memes” and what it considers “false and misleading ideas,” with a major focus on political activity online.

The “Truthy” database, created by researchers at Indiana University, is designed to “detect political smears, astroturfing, misinformation, and other social pollution.”

The university has received $919,917 so far for the project.

“The project stands to benefit both the research community and the public significantly,” the grant states. “Our data will be made available via [application programming interfaces] APIs and include information on meme propagation networks, statistical data, and relevant user and content features.”

“The open-source platform we develop will be made publicly available and will be extensible to ever more research areas as a greater preponderance of human activities are replicated online,” it continues. “Additionally, we will create a web service open to the public for monitoring trends, bursts, and suspicious memes.”

“This service could mitigate the diffusion of false and misleading ideas, detect hate speech and subversive propaganda, and assist in the preservation of open debate,” the grant said.

“Truthy,” which gets its name from Stephen Colbert, will catalog how information is spread on Twitter, including political campaigns.

“While the vast majority of memes arise in a perfectly organic manner, driven by the complex mechanisms of life on the Web, some are engineered by the shady machinery of high-profile congressional campaigns,” according to the website….
“Truthy” claims to be non-partisan. However, the project’s lead investigator Filippo Menczer proclaims his support for numerous progressive advocacy groups, including President Barack Obama’s Organizing for Action, Moveon.org, Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, Amnesty International, and True Majority.

Menczer, a professor of informatics and computer science at Indiana University, links to each of the organizations on his personal page from his bio at the Center for Complex Networks and Systems Research.

The government-funded researchers hope that the public will use their tool in the future to report on other Twitter users.

“Truthy uses a sophisticated combination of text and data mining, social network analysis, and complex networks models,” the website adds. “To train our algorithms, we leverage crowdsourcing: we rely on users like you to flag injections of forged grass-roots activity. Therefore, click on the Truthy button when you see a suspicious meme!”

The project also seeks to discover why certain Internet memes go viral and others do not. Funding is not expected to expire until June 30, 2015.

Obama pushes for UN climate agreement without Congress

KingO
Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images

Joe Newby
Spokane Conservative Examiner

It seems Barack Obama is no longer content with foisting executive actions on American citizens. On Tuesday, the New York Times said the president now wants to bypass Congress with a sweeping international agreement on climate change forcing nations to cut their emissions.

To sidestep the Constitutional requirement that the president must get two-thirds majority of the Senate to enter into a legally-binding treaty, negotiators are crafting a “politically binding” deal that would “name and shame” countries into cutting emissions. The Times said the deal would likely face stiff objections from Republicans and from poor countries. Negotiators, however, say it’s the only realistic path to their ultimate goal.

“If you want a deal that includes all the major emitters, including the U.S., you cannot realistically pursue a legally binding treaty at this time,” explained Paul Bledsoe, a former Clinton climate change official now working with the Obama administration. Instead of crafting a new agreement, The Hill explained, the administration wants to essentially update a pre-existing 1992 treaty with “fresh voluntary pledges.” Such a deal, The Hill added, would not require Senate ratification.

“Unfortunately, this would be just another of many examples of the Obama administration’s tendency to abide by laws that it likes and to disregard laws it doesn’t like — and to ignore the elected representatives of the people when they don’t agree,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. The Times said the agreement will infuriate Republicans who argue that Obama is abusing his executive authority while bypassing Congress.

Foreign officials also said they understand the difficulty of achieving such a sweeping agreement without Senate approval. Laurence Tubiana, the French ambassador for climate change to the United Nations, said there’s a “strong understanding of the difficulties of the U.S. situation, and a willingness to work with the U.S. to get out of this impasse.”

If the deal goes through, countries would be legally obligated to enact policies addressing domestic climate change. They would voluntarily specify emissions cuts and the amount of money channeled to poorer countries.

UN delegates will discuss the proposal at a meeting next month in New York. They hope to draft the agreement in December while meeting in Lima, Peru.

Please donate any amount you can to help us try to recover legal costs in defending liberty and the right of free speech !