Twitter announces 'trust and safety' panel to police content

Washington Examiner | By RUDY TAKALA | 2/9/16 5:28 PM

Twitter on Tuesday announced the formation of a new “Trust and Safety Council,” which will work to develop policies censoring speech on the site. The group will be comprised of more than 40 organizations from 13 regions around the world.

“With hundreds of millions of tweets sent per day, the volume of content on Twitter is massive, which makes it extraordinarily complex to strike the right balance between fighting abuse and speaking truth to power,” Twitter said in a statement.

"It requires a multi-layered approach where each of our 320 million users has a part to play, as do the community of experts working for safety and free expression,” the statement added.

The announcement is the latest by Twitter in a string of moves aimed at improving its public image. Both the Obama administration and members of Congress have been calling on social media sites, and particularly Twitter, to do more to assist in the fight against terrorism. A California woman filed suit against Twitter in December, claiming that propaganda spread by the Islamic State on the site contributed to her husband’s shooting death in Jordan.

The latest move will contribute to combating violent speech on the site, but will likely expand Twitter’s effort to police content far beyond that as well. Groups involved with the council include the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, Feminist Frequency, European Schoolnet, and the International League against Racism and Anti-Semitism.

Twitter said it intended for the group to be comprised of “safety advocates, academics and researchers focused on minors, media literacy, digital citizenship, and efforts around greater compassion and empathy on the Internet,” and that it would provide input on the site’s “safety products, policies, and programs.”

“In developing the Council, we are taking a global and inclusive approach so that we can hear a diversity of voices,” Twitter explained. “As we develop products, policies, and programs, our Trust and Safety Council will help us tap into the expertise and input of organizations at the intersection of these issues more efficiently and quickly.”

Last week, the site also announced that it had silently removed as many as 125,000 accounts belonging to members of the Islamic State since the middle of 2015. And in December, Twitter amended its terms of service to more expressly prohibit abusive language.

Government Employees Spent Almost $1 Million in Taxpayer Money at Casinos

Daily Signal - FEBRUARY 9, 2016

IMAGE CREDITS: WIKI COMMONS.

The federal government is no stranger to waste—some examples are egregious. From July 2013 through June 2014, over 4,000 transactions, worth just short of $1 million, were conducted at casinos using the Department of Defense’s government travel cards.

Furthermore, nine hundred transactions, totaling $96,576, were made at “adult entertainment establishments.” As of May, 2015, only 41 percent of such actions went punished, with possible punishments including a “letter of reprimand.”

Originally adopted in 1998, the Travel and Transportation Reform Act sought to simplify the process of paying for the travel of federal employees by mandating usage of travel cards. These credit cards, managed by individual government agencies, have repeatedly proven to be a primary source of bureaucratic fraud against the American taxpayer.

Five short years after travel card implementation, reports of widespread misuse began to surface. Examples include unauthorized first-class trips to Hawaii funded by the Department of State and tens of thousands of dollars in “training” at golf and tennis resorts using funds meant to assist victims of Hurricane Katrina.

According to the Project on Government Oversight, a non-profit and non-partisan organization intent on exposing government misconduct, over $600,000 in funding allocated to Hurricane Katrina relief efforts was “considered unauthorized, lost, or stolen” through the abuse of government purchase cards.

Furthermore, the Internal Revenue Service has also reported instances of their government-issued credit cards being used to purchase everything from diet pills to alcohol and pornography.

Congress attempted to reform the clearly broken system in 2012, with the Government Charge Card Abuse Prevention Act of 2012, but this did little to actually quell such abuses. This legislation attempted to integrate control measures such as preventing double-reimbursement, requiring semi-annual reports and annual audits, and instituting outlined penalties for violating parties.

Unfortunately, it proved ineffective. The act’s policies did not implement systems capable of catching all (or even a majority of) fraud and were oftentimes poorly enforced.

These failures became apparent almost immediately after the act’s implementation. A recent report by the Department of Defense painted a fuller picture of particularly egregious abuse.

A second attempt at reform is currently underway.

In December, the Senate passed a bill with bipartisan support mandating the establishment of an Office of Federal Charge Card Analytics and Review. Intent on providing both analytical tools and human-driven oversight, Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., has called the bill “commonsense legislation.”

This abuse also raises the larger question of overall fiscal responsibility. With our nation’s debt at an all-time high, repeated abuse of taxpayer dollars demonstrates that agency budgets are not as lean as they could (and should) be.

Congress should not shy away from enforcing the discretionary cap reductions imposed by sequestration to reduce federal agency budgets. One blunt tool to encourage better internal controls by agencies of their travel cards is to increase the motivation of bureaucrats to better monitor how dollars are spent by tightening their budgets.

Taxpayers who’ve had to tighten their belts deserve no less from their government.

Obama Urges Congress to Approve TPP ‘This Year’; Leading Presidential Candidates Oppose It

CNS News | By Patrick Goodenough | February 4, 2016 | 4:17 AM EST

After trade ministers from the U.S. and 11 other countries on either side of the Pacific on Thursday signed one of the biggest trade deals in history, President Obama called on Republicans and Democrats to approve it “this year.”

Obama said in a statement he would “continue working with Democrats and Republicans in Congress to enact it [the Trans-Pacific Partnership] into law as soon as possible so our economy can immediately start benefiting from the tens of billions of dollars in new export opportunities.”

“We should get TPP done this year and give more American workers the shot at success they deserve and help more American businesses compete and win around the world,” he said.

Obama clearly has the November election in mind: Leading candidates in both parties oppose the TPP while the deal has supporters and critics on both sides of the aisle in Congress.

America’s 11 partners in the TPP, which has been under negotiation for five years, are Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. All 12 countries must now ratify it.

At the signing ceremony in Auckland, New Zealand, U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman expressed confidence that Congress would approve the deal.

“We are working with members of Congress, working with the leadership of Congress, educating everybody as to what’s in the agreement, addressing their questions and concerns,” he said.

“And I’m confident that at the end of the day, because of the strong benefits to the U.S. economy – which have been estimated to be over $130 billion a year in GDP growth, as well as more than $350 billion in additional exports – that members of Congress will see the benefits for their constituents and we’ll have the necessary bipartisan support to be approved,” Froman said.


Democratic primary frontrunner Hillary Clinton moved from backing the TPP while secretary of state – saying in 2012 that it set “the gold standard in trade agreements” – to rejecting it last July.

Her socialist opponent, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, pledged last October to “lead the effort to defeat” the TPP.

Republican frontrunner Donald Trump has called the TPP “a horrible deal,”charging during a Fox Business Network debate last November that it was “designed for China to come in, as they always do, through the back door and totally take advantage of everyone.”

(Sen. Rand Paul accused Trump of mistakenly saying China was a TPP member although Trump did not exactly do so; TPP critics have warned that China may later join the original 12 members. Nonetheless, Politifact ratedTrump’s statement untrue.)

Among the other GOP candidates, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush has been most supportive of the trade deal.

Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida voted last June in favor of Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), giving the president “fast track” authority to negotiate agreements like the TPP. Later in the year he declared himself “generally very much in favor of free trade” but said he would need to understand the details of the TPP “before we can commit to voting for something. But generally, it’s very positive.”

Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas voted against the TPA. After not taking a position in favor or against the TPP for months, he said in Iowa in November that he would vote against the trade pact.

Among others in the GOP pack, the TPP has the support of neurosurgeonBen Carson (“with reservations”) and of Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who has called it “critical.”

Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina last June voiced skepticism about the TPP, and also cited concerns that China could join later.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is on the record as saying he generally believes in free trade but that he has “real concerns about this president’s ability to negotiate anything that represents a great deal for America.”

THE TRUTH BEHIND FEDERAL LAND GRABS

David Knight & Kit Daniels | Infowars - FEBRUARY 3, 2016

IMAGE CREDIT: PUBLIC DOMAIN

Is the federal government so desperate to monopolize land that it’s literally burning down the forests they are supposed to manage?

Infowars interviewed Oregon logger Tad Houpt, with the Grant Co. Forest Commission, who had organized the meeting where Ammon Bundy, LaVoy Finicum and others were going to speak to 400 people and the Grant Co. Sheriff before Finicum was killed by the FBI and the other speakers were arrested.

“This last summer we had the biggest fire we’ve ever had here, 110,000 acres,” Houpt said. “I was one of the people who got burned out; close to 50 homes burnt.”

He believes this happened because the forests managed by the U.S. Forest Service are “a disaster.”

Houpt also mentioned there were “about 2 tons [per acre] of light fuels [dead trees & other organic matter] on the ground are known to be acceptable and the live trees will withstand the fire,” but he added that “some areas of the federally managed lands exceed 500 tons per acre of fuel on the ground,” i.e. 250 times the safe limit.

“I’m telling you this is intentional,” he said. “If a jet liner crashes there’s an immediate investigation into what caused that jet liner’s crash.”

“These fires are happening all over the western U.S. and there’s no investigation, they don’t even want to talk about what’s causing them and it’s their policies [that] are 100% causing these fires.”

And perpetuating the fire dangers and the resulting economic hardships are the BLM’s arbitrary rules, such as the ban on cutting trees greater than 21 inches in diameter — even if a tree is burned and dead.

Instead of providing lumber and livelihood for loggers, dead trees greater than 21 inches in diameter will be allowed to remain, increasing the fuel on the ground and the danger and intensity of future fires.

This is all part of Agenda 21, which is intended to force people out of rural areas and into large cities where they can be easily taxed and controlled.

Signed in 1992 by President George H.W. Bush and later phased in by President Bill Clinton, the United Nations Agenda 21 Sustainable Development program is based on communitarianism, which calls for government to eventually take control of all land use without leaving any decision making in the hands of private property owners.

“It is assumed that people are not good stewards of their land and the government will do a better job if they are in control,” Agenda 21 expert Rosa Koire wrote, who is a Californian Democrat and the author of Behind The Green Mask: U.N. Agenda 21. “Individual rights in general are to give way to the needs of communities as determined by the governing body.”

And if you already live in an urban area, you may already be familiar with some key aspects of Agenda 21:

– The accelerated implementation of toll roads, especially toll roads that discourage driving by increasing prices for traveling alone or for driving in “congested” areas

– The development of expensive and inefficient public rail systems in cities in order to increase centralized government control while also reducing the use of private transportation

– Utilities monitored by “Smart Meters” which can be controlled remotely by public utility companies

– The purposeful lack of easy freeway access in cities so residents remain close to their neighborhoods

Another good example of how Agenda 21 is currently being implemented is to look at the mass construction of “mixed use” condos which feature retail stores on the ground floor with several residential floors above.

These buildings are designed to restrict people from traveling by placing businesses within walking distance – and, interestingly, medieval serfs were likewise not able to travel long distances.

And, despite being fiction, the megacities in the comic series Judge Dredd feature many planned aspects of Agenda 21, a scary scenario even if real cities never completely match these fictional counterparts.

The overall intent of Agenda 21 is to expand government power at the expense of individual liberties by moving the population out of rural areas and packing them into major cities where they are more dependent on city infrastructure controlled by the government.

While Agenda 21 proponents constantly harp that the program is “voluntary,” it is a moot point when so many cities are already implementing Agenda 21 which clearly benefits the government at the expense of its citizens.

“The plan is to restrict your choices, limit your funds, narrow your freedoms and take away your voice,” Koire added.

Why Bernie Sanders Has to Raise Taxes on the Middle Class

Daniel Bier | The Foundation for Economic Education | FEBRUARY 3, 2016

IMAGE CREDITS: WIKIMEDIA COMMONS.

Willie Sutton was one of the most infamous bank robbers in American history. Over three decades, the dashing criminal robbed a hundred banks, escaped three prisons, and made off with millions. Today, he is best known for Sutton’s Law: Asked by a reporter why he robbed banks, Sutton allegedly quipped, “Because that’s where the money is.”

Sutton’s Law explains something unusual about Bernie Sander’s tax plan: it calls for massive tax hikes across the board. Why raise taxes on the middle class? Because that’s where the money is.

The problem all politicians face is that voters love to get stuff, but they hate to pay for it. The traditional solution that center-left politicians pitch is the idea that the poor and middle class will get the benefits, and the rich will pay for it.

This is approximately how things work in the United States. The top 1 percent of taxpayers earn 19 percent of total income and pay 38 percent of federal income taxes. The bottom 50 percent earn 12 percent and pay 3 percent. This chart from the Heritage Foundation shows net taxes paid and benefits received, per person, by household income group:

But Sanders’ proposals (free college, free health care, jobs programs, more Social Security, etc.) are way too heavy for the rich alone to carry, and he knows it. To his credit, his campaign has released a plan to pay for each of these myriad handouts. Vox’s Dylan Matthews has totaled up all the tax increases Sanders has proposed so far, and the picture is simply staggering.

Every household earning below $250,000 will face a tax hike of nearly 9 percent. Past that, rates explode, up to a top rate of 77 percent on incomes over $10 million.

Paying for Free

Sanders argues that most people’s average income tax rate won’t change, but this is only true if you exclude the two major taxes meant to pay for his health care program: a 2.2 percent “premium” tax and 6.2 percent payroll tax, imposed on incomes across the board. These taxes account for majority of the new revenue Sanders is counting on.

But it gets worse: his single-payer health care plan will cost 80 percent more than he claims. Analysis by the left-leaning scholar Kenneth Thorpe (who supports single payer) concludes that Sanders’ proposal will cost $1.1 trillion more each year than he claims. The trillion dollar discrepancy results from some questionable assumptions in Sanders’ numbers. For instance:

Sanders assumes $324 billion more per year in prescription drug savings than Thorpe does. Thorpe argues that this is wildly implausible.
“In 2014 private health plans paid a TOTAL of $132 billion on prescription drugs and nationally we spent $305 billion,” he writes in an email. “With their savings drug spending nationally would be negative.”

So unless pharmaceutical companies start paying you to take their drugs, the Sanders administration will need to increase taxes even more.

Analysis by the Tax Foundation finds that his proposed tax hikes already total $13.6 trillion over the next ten years. However, “the plan would [only] end up collecting $9.8 trillion over the next decade when accounting for decreased economic output.”

And the consequences will be truly devastating. Because of the taxes on labor and capital, GDP will be reduced 9.5 percent. Six million jobs will be lost. On average, after-tax incomes will be reduced by more than 18 percent.

Incomes for the bottom 50 percent will be reduced by more than 14 percent, and incomes for the top 1 percent will be reduced nearly 25 percent. Inequality warriors might cheer, but if you want to actually raise revenue, crushing the incomes of the people who pay almost 40 percent of all taxes isn’t the way to go.

These are just the effects of the $1 trillion tax hike he has planned — and he probably needs to double that to pay for single payer. Where will he find it? He’ll go where European welfare states go.

Being Like Scandinavia

Sanders is a great admirer of Scandinavian countries, such as Denmark, Sweden, and Norway, and many of his proposals are modeled on their systems. But to pay for their generous welfare benefits, they tax, and tax, and tax.

Denmark, Norway, and Sweden all capture between 20-26 percent of GDP from income and payroll taxes. By contrast, the United States collects only 15 percent.

Scandinavia’s tax rates themselves are not that much higher than the United States’. Denmark’s top rate is 30 percent higher, Sweden’s is 18 percent higher, and Norway’s is actually 16 percent lower — and yet Norway’s income tax raises 30 percent more revenue than the United States.

The answer lies in how progressive the US tax system is, in the thresholds at which people are hit by the top tax rates. The Tax Foundation explains,

Scandinavian income taxes raise a lot of revenue because they are actually rather flat. In other words, they tax most people at these high rates, not just high-income taxpayers.
The top marginal tax rate of 60 percent in Denmark applies to all income over 1.2 times the average income in Denmark. From the American perspective, this means that all income over $60,000 (1.2 times the average income of about $50,000 in the United States) would be taxed at 60 percent. …
Compare this to the United States. The top marginal tax rate of 46.8 percent (state average and federal combined rates) kicks in at 8.5 times the average U.S. income (around $400,000). Comparatively, few taxpayers in the United States face the top marginal rate.

The reason European states can pay for giant welfare programs is not because they just tax the rich more — it’s because they also scoop up a ton of middle class income. The reason why the United States can’t right now is its long-standing political arrangement to keep taxes high on the rich so they can be low on the poor and middle.

Where the Money Is – And Isn’t

As shown by the Laffer Curve, there is a point at which increasing tax rates actually reduces tax revenue, by discouraging work, hurting the economy, and encouraging tax avoidance.

Bernie’s plan already hammers the rich: households earning over $250,000 (the top 3 percent) would face marginal rates of 62-77 percent — meaning the IRS would take two-thirds to three-quarters of each additional dollar earned. His proposed capital gains taxes are so high that they are likely well past the point of positive returns. The US corporate tax rate of 40 percent is already the highest in the world, and even Sanders hasn’t proposed increasing it.

The only way to solve his revenue problem is to raise rates on the middle and upper-middle classes, or flatten the structure to make the top rates start kicking in much lower. You can see why a “progressive” isn’t keen on making more regressive taxes part of his platform, but the money has to come from somewhere.

The bottom fifty percent don’t pay much income tax now (only $34 billion), but they also don’t earn enough to fill the gap. Making their taxes proportionate to income would only raise $107 billion, without even considering how the higher rates would reduce employment and income.

The top 5 percent are pretty well wrung dry by Sanders’ plan, and their incomes are going to be reduced by 20-25 percent anyway. It’s hard to imagine that there’s much more blood to be had from that stone.

But households between the 50th and the 95th percentile (incomes between $37,000 to $180,000 a year) earn about 54 percent of total income — a share would likely go up, given the larger income reductions expected for top earners. Currently, this group pays only 38 percent of total income taxes, and, despite the 9 percent tax hike, they’re comparatively spared by the original tax plan. Their incomes are now the lowest hanging fruit on the tax tree.

As they go to the polls this year, the middle class should remember Sutton’s Law.

The Fed Wants to Stress Test Rates Less Than Zero in 2016

Bloomberg | Rich Miller | February 2, 2016 — 11:21 AM EST


As interest rates turn negative around the world, the Federal Reserve is asking banks to consider the possibility of the same happening in the U.S.

In its annual stress test for 2016, the Fed said it will assess the resilience of big banks to a number of possible situations, including one where the rate on the three-month U.S. Treasury bill stays below zero for a prolonged period.

"The severely adverse scenario is characterized by a severe global recession, accompanied by a period of heightened corporate financial stress and negative yields for short-term U.S. Treasury securities," the central bank said in announcing the stress tests last week.

In that particular simulation, the unemployment rate doubles to 10 percent, the same level it reached in the aftermath of the last financial crisis.

Three-month bill rates have slipped slightly below zero several times in recent years, including in September after the Fed delayed rate liftoff amid global financial market turmoil, touching a low of minus 0.05 percent on Oct. 2.

But in the stress test, banks would have to handle three-month bill rates entering negative territory in the second quarter of 2016, and then falling to negative 0.5 percent and holding there through the first quarter of 2019.

Not a Forecast

"This scenario does not represent a forecast of the Federal Reserve," the central bank said. It also assumes "that the adjustment to negative short-term rates proceeds with no additional financial market disruptions."

Fed officials have made clear that they are a long way from contemplating a reduction in rates below zero in their benchmark overnight policy rate. Some, though, have suggested they’d be more open to such a move than in the past should the economy deteriorate significantly.

The central bank left its target range for the federal funds rate unchanged at 0.25 percent to 0.5 percent last week after raising it in December for the first time since 2006.

U.S. policy makers decided against pushing rates below zero during the financial crisis partly because of concern it could lead to dangerous dislocations in the money markets.

European Experience

Since then, the European Central Bank and the central banks of Switzerland, Sweden and Denmark have nudged some official lending rates negative without such repercussions, and Fed officials have publicly taken note.

The Bank of Japan became the latest monetary authority push rates into negative territory last week in an effort to spur lagging growth and increase too-low inflation.

Former Fed official Roberto Perli cautioned against drawing conclusions about future Fed actions from the inclusion of negative U.S. rates in the stress test scenario.

"It doesn’t signal anything" about future monetary policy, said Perli, a partner at Cornerstone Macro LLC in Washington.

Nevertheless, it is "another sign that the Fed would not be entirely adverse" to reducing its target rate below zero should economic conditions warrant, he said.

Bill Dudley

New York Fed President William Dudley said last month that policy makers were "not thinking at all seriously of moving to negative interest rates.

"But I suppose if the economy were to unexpectedly weaken dramatically, and we decided that we needed to use a full array of monetary policy tools to provide stimulus, it’s something that we would contemplate as a potential action," he said on Jan. 15.

Fed Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer said Monday that foreign central banks that had resorted to negative interest rates to stimulate their economies had been more successful than he anticipated.

“It’s working more than I can say I expected in 2012,” he told the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. "Everybody is looking at how this works," he added.

New Technologies Give Government Ample Means to Track Suspects, Study Finds

NY Times | By DAVID E. SANGER | JAN. 31, 2016

The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, and other Justice Department officials have said moves by technology firms to encrypt data have choked off critical ways to monitor suspects. Credit: Kevin hagen for The New York Times

WASHINGTON — For more than two years the F.B.I. and intelligence agencies have warned that encrypted communications are creating a “going dark” crisis that will keep them from tracking terrorists and kidnappers.

Now, a study in which current and former intelligence officials participated concludes that the warning is wildly overblown, and that a raft of new technologies — like television sets with microphones and web-connected cars — are creating ample opportunities for the government to track suspects, many of them worrying.

“ ‘Going dark’ does not aptly describe the long-term landscape for government surveillance,” concludes the study, to be published Monday by the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard.

The study argues that the phrase ignores the flood of new technologies “being packed with sensors and wireless connectivity” that are expected to become the subject of court orders and subpoenas, and are already the target of the National Security Agency as it places “implants” into networks around the world to monitor communications abroad.

The products, ranging from “toasters to bedsheets, light bulbs, cameras, toothbrushes, door locks, cars, watches and other wearables,” will give the government increasing opportunities to track suspects and in many cases reconstruct communications and meetings.

The study, titled, “Don’t Panic: Making Progress on the ‘Going Dark’ Debate,” is among the sharpest counterpoints yet to the contentions of James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director, and other Justice Department officials, mostly by arguing that they have defined the issue too narrowly.

Over the past year, they have repeatedly told Congress that the move byApple to automatically encrypt data on its iPhone, and similar steps by Google and Microsoft, are choking off critical abilities to track suspects, even with a court order.

President Obama, however, concluded last fall that any effort to legislate a government “back door” into encrypted communications would probably create a pathway for hackers — including those working for foreign governments like Russia, China and Iran — to gain access as well, and create a precedent for authoritarian governments demanding similar access.

Most Republican candidates for president have demanded that technology companies create a way for investigators to unlock encrypted communications, and on the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton has taken a tough line on Silicon Valley companies, urging them to join the fight against the Islamic State.

Apple’s chief executive, Timothy D. Cook, has led the charge on the other side. He recently told a group of White House officials seeking technology companies’ voluntary help to counter the Islamic State that the government’s efforts to get the keys to encrypted communications would be a boon for hackers and put legitimate business transactions, financial data and personal communications at greater risk.

The Harvard study, funded by the Hewlett Foundation, was unusual because it involved technical experts, civil libertarians and officials who are, or have been, on the forefront of counterterrorism. Larry Kramer, the former dean of Stanford Law School, who heads the foundation, noted Friday that until now “the policy debate has been impeded by gaps in trust — chasms, really — between academia, civil society, the private sector and the intelligence community” that have impeded the evolution of a “safe, open and resilient Internet.”

Among the chief authors of the report is Matthew G. Olsen, who was a director of the National Counterterrorism Center under Mr. Obama and a general counsel of the National Security Agency.

Two current senior officials of the N.S.A. — John DeLong, the head of the agency’s Commercial Solutions Center, and Anne Neuberger, the agency’s chief risk officer — are described in the report as “core members” of the group, but did not sign the report because they could not act on behalf of the agency or the United States government in endorsing its conclusions, government officials said.

“Encryption is a real problem, and the F.B.I. and intelligence agencies are right to raise it,” Mr. Olsen said Sunday. But he noted that in their testimony officials had not described the other technological breaks that are falling their way, nor had they highlighted cases in which they were able to exploit mistakes made by suspects in applying encryption to their messages.

Jonathan Zittrain, a professor of law and computer science at Harvard who convened the group, said in an interview that the goal was “to have a discussion among people with very different points of view” that would move “the state of the debate beyond its well-known bumper stickers. We managed to do that in part by thinking of a larger picture, specifically in the unexpected ways that surveillance might be attempted.”

He noted that in the current stalemate there was little discussion of the “ever-expanding ‘Internet of things,’ where telemetry from teakettles, televisions and light bulbs might prove surprisingly, and worryingly, amenable to subpoena from governments around the world.”

Those technologies are already being exploited: The government frequently seeks location data from devices like cellphones and EZ Passes to track suspects.

The study notes that such opportunities are expanding rapidly. A Samsung “smart” television contains a microphone meant to relay back to Samsung voice instructions to the TV — “I want to see the last three ‘Star Wars’ movies” — and a Hello, Barbie brought out by Mattel last year records children’s conversations with the doll, processes them over the Internet and sends back a response.

The history of technology shows that what is invented for convenience can soon become a target of surveillance. “Law enforcement or intelligence agencies may start to seek orders compelling Samsung, Google, Mattel, Nest or vendors of other networked devices to push an update or flip a digital switch to intercept the ambient communications of a target,” the report said.

These communications, too, may one day be encrypted. But Google’s business model depends on picking out key words from emails to tailor advertisements for specific users of Gmail, the popular email service. Apple users routinely back up the contents of their phones to iCloud — a service that is not encrypted and now is almost a routine target for investigators or intelligence agencies. So are the tracking and mapping systems for cars that rely on transmitted global positioning data.

“I think what this report shows is that the world today is like living in a big field that is more illuminated than ever before,” said Joseph Nye, a Harvard government professor and former head of the National Intelligence Council. “There will be dark spots — there always will be. But it’s easy to forget that there is far more data available to governments now than ever before.”

Official: Some Clinton emails 'too damaging' to release

By Catherine Herridge, Pamela K. Browne | Published January 29, 2016 | FoxNews.com

EXCLUSIVE: The intelligence community has now deemed some of Hillary Clinton’s emails “too damaging" to national security to release under any circumstances, according to a U.S. government official close to the ongoing review. A second source, who was not authorized to speak on the record, backed up the finding. 

The decision to withhold the documents in full, and not provide even a partial release with redactions, further undercuts claims by the State Department and the Clinton campaign that none of the intelligence in the emails was classified when it hit Clinton's personal server.

Fox News is told the emails include intelligence from "special access programs," or SAP, which is considered beyond “Top Secret.” A Jan. 14 letter, first reported by Fox News, from intelligence community Inspector General Charles McCullough III notified senior intelligence and foreign relations committee leaders that "several dozen emails containing classified information” were determined to be “at the CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET, AND TOP SECRET/SAP levels."

The State Department is trying to finish its review and public release of thousands of Clinton emails, as the Democratic presidential primary contests get underway in early February.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, there is an exemption that allows for highly sensitive, and in this case classified, material to be withheld in full -- which means nothing would be released in these cases, not even heavily redacted versions, which has been standard practice with the 1,340 such emails made public so far by the State Department.

According to the Justice Department FOIA website, exemption “B3” allows a carve-out for both the CIA and NSA to withhold "operational files." Similar provisions also apply to other agencies.

Fox News reported Friday that at least one Clinton email contained information identified as "HCS-O," which is the code for intelligence from human spying.

One source, not authorized to speak on the record, suggested the intelligence agencies are operating on the assumption there are more copies of the Clinton emails out there, and even releasing a partial email would provide enough clues to trace back to the original – which could allow the identification of “special access programs” intelligence.

There was no comment to Fox News from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General, or the agency involved. Fox News has chosen not to identify the agency that provided sworn declarations that intelligence beyond Top Secret was found in the Clinton emails.

Reached for comment by Fox News, a State Department official did not dispute that some emails will never be made public.

“We continue to process the next set of former Secretary Clinton’s emails for release under the FOIA process and will have more to say about it later,” the official said. “As always, we take seriously our responsibilities to protect sensitive information.”

The State Department was scheduled to release more Clinton emails Friday, while asking a D.C. federal court for an extension.

FBI investigators looking into the emails are focused on the criminal code pertaining to “gross negligence” in the handling and storage of classified information, and “public corruption.”

“The documents alone in and of themselves set forth a set of compelling, articulable facts that statutes relating to espionage have been violated,” a former senior federal law enforcement officer said. The source said the ongoing investigation along the corruption track “also stems from her tenure of secretary. These charges would be inseparable from the other charges in as much as there is potential for significant overlap and correlation."

Based on federal regulations, once classified information is spilled onto a personal computer or device, as was the case with Clinton and her aides, the hardware is now considered classified at the highest classification level of the materials received.

While criticized by the Clinton campaign, McCullough, an Obama administration appointee, was relaying the conclusion of two intelligence agencies in his letter to Congress that the information was classified when it hit Clinton’s server -- and not his own judgment.

Joseph E. Schmitz, a former inspector general of the Department of Defense, called the attacks on McCullough a “shoot the watchdog” tactic by Clinton’s campaign.

The developments, taken together, show Clinton finding herself once again at the epicenter of a controversy over incomplete records.

During her time as the first female partner at the Rose Law firm in Arkansas during the mid-1980s, she was known as one of the “three amigos” and close with partners Webb Hubbell and Vince Foster. Hubbell ended up a convicted felon for his role in the failure of the corrupt Madison Guaranty, a savings and loan which cost taxpayers more than $65 million. Hubbell embezzled more than a half-million dollars from the firm.

Foster killed himself in Washington, D.C., in July 1993. As Clinton’s partner in the Rose Law firm, he had followed the Clintons into the White House where he served as the Clintons’ personal lawyer and a White House deputy counsel.

Clinton’s missing Rose Law billing records for her work for Guaranty during the mid-1980s were the subject of three intense federal investigations over two years. Those records, in the form of a computerized printout of her work performed on behalf of Guaranty, were discovered under mysterious circumstances in the Book Room of the private White House living quarters.

The discovery of those records was announced during a blizzard in January 1996 by attorney David Kendall, who still represents Hillary Clinton. After Clinton testified before a grand jury, prosecutors concluded there was insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt she committed perjury or obstruction of justice.

Despite Clinton’s recent public statements about not knowing how the technology works, at least one email suggests she directed a subordinate to work around the rules. In a June 2011 email to aide Jake Sullivan, she instructed him to take what appeared to be classified talking points, and "turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure."

A State Department spokesman could not say whether such a fax was sent.



Catherine Herridge is an award-winning Chief Intelligence correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC) based in Washington, D.C. She covers intelligence, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Herridge joined FNC in 1996 as a London-based correspondent.

Cracks in America's economy are growing

CNN Money | by Patrick Gillespie @CNNMoney | January 29, 2016: 5:12 AM ET

America's economy hit the brakes during the holidays.

Some recent economic data even raises fears that we might be heading towards a possible U.S. recession in 2016. Big banks like Morgan Stanley (MS) estimate there's a 20% chance of recession this year.

On Friday, the government will release data that show how the U.S. economy fared in the last three months of the year. Many experts forecast that the U.S. economy barely grew -- about 1% or less -- between October and December of 2015 compared to a year ago.

Even the Federal Reserve admitted Wednesday that the economy "slowed" at the end of last year.

On Thursday, the bad news continued. A key sign of confidence is orders for new products and equipment -- known as "durable goods" -- placed by companies to power their business. Orders for durable goods fell 5% between November and December, according to the Commerce Department. That was a lot below expectations that orders would be flat.

It shows that some companies are delaying or deciding not to purchase any new piece of equipment they need.

The news on durable goods caused Barclays (BCS) to lower its GDP forecast to 0.4% on Thursday. Capital Economics, a research firm, admitted the new data posed risks "firmly to the downside" for its estimate of 1%.

Related: Apple CEO: 'extreme conditions' in global slowdown

Here are 3 more warning signs that the U.S. economy is heading in the wrong direction:

1. Americans are not spending much

U.S. economic growth depends on shoppers. Consumer spending makes up two-thirds of the nation's economic engine. Yet they're sending mixed signals: U.S. retail sales declined a bit in December and they were negative or flat seven times last year.

Consumer confidence has wavered too. It peaked at 98% in January 2015 but has since drifted down in general. Consumer confidence is currently 93%. While it's a lot better than what it was just a few years ago, any downward movement is still a cause for concern.

2. U.S. manufacturing already in recession

American factories are suffering from the global economic slowdown. Manufacturing makes up 10% of the U.S. economy, according to Morgan Stanley.

The key ISM manufacturing index has declined for six straight months, and its been negative -- below 50% -- for the last two months.

The strong dollar is making products manufactured in the U.S. more expensive overseas, lowering demand for American made goods. The slowdown in emerging market economies isn't helping trade either.

Related: U.S. economy: recession fears are growing

3. Corporate America is hurting

Earnings season isn't over yet but one thing is clear: American companies are making less money than a year ago. Put together, when America's biggest companies -- and employers -- suffer, the economy follows suit.

The S&P 500 -- the benchmark for U.S. stocks -- is down 7% so far in January. Apple, the nation's biggest company by market size, just announced record profits with a gloomy outlook ahead. It believes iPhone sales will decline in the first quarter of this year for the first time in 13 years.

Apple CEO Tim Cook expressed serious caution about the global economy. When a major American CEO raises the warning flag that's not good for the U.S. economy.

"We're seeing extreme conditions unlike anything we have experienced before just about everywhere we look," Cook said Tuesday.

Fed’s December hike was a major mistake, former Bank of England official says

Greg Robb | MarketWatch - JANUARY 28, 2016

IMAGE CREDITS: IMF / FLICKR.

Weak data, such as Thursday’s durable-goods-orders report, signal that the Federal Reserve made “a major macro mistake” raising interest rates in December, said Danny Blanchflower, a Dartmouth College economist.

See: Durable-goods-orders decline could mean economy shrank in fourth quarter.

In December, not only did the Fed raise rates for the first time in nine years, but they signaled there would be four more hikes this year.


Now, “there’s a 50/50 chance the next move is a cut...as with all the other rate hikes since 2009 this one will have to be reversed,” Blanchflower, who leans dovish, said in an interview.

Traders who bet on rate hikes using fed funds futures contracts are now wagering that the Fed will next hike rates in September, according to CME FedWatch.

“The Fed has seriously lost credibility. No one believes them,” Blanchflower added.

The Fed’s ‘classic” mistake has been to underestimate the negative spillovers from the slowing of China, the worlds number-two economy, he said.

The Dartmouth economist, who was a former member of the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee, said the situation reminded him of 2008 when the U.K. thought it could avoid the subprime housing slowdown in the U.S. economy.

Blanchflower cited new figures in a Bloomberg article pointing to a steep slowdown in global trade.

In addition, the U.S. central bank doesn’t yet grasp that the decline in oil prices is not a positive supply shock but a signal of weak global demand, he said.

In its dovish policy statement released Wednesday, the Fed took out any reference to the balance of risks facing the economy, after saying in December that the risks were balanced.

“That’s a big admission of a mistake,” Blanchflower said.

See: The Fed says sorry for its rate-hike forecast

In its statement, the Fed said it “is closely monitoring global economic and financial developments and is assessing their implications for the labor market and inflation, and for the balance of risks to the outlook.”

Economic indicators are now pointing in the direction of a recession, Blanchflower said.

Hundreds of DHS badges, guns, cell phones lost or stolen since 2012

By Adam Shaw | Published January 27, 2016 | Fox News

Feb. 20, 2014: A U.S. Customs and Border Protection arm patch and badge is seen at Los Angeles International Airport, California. (Reuters)

Hundreds of badges, credentials, cell phones and guns belonging to Department of Homeland Security employees have been lost or stolen in recent years -- raising serious security concerns about the potential damage these missing items could do in the wrong hands.

Inventory reports, obtained by the news site Complete Colorado and shared with FoxNews.com, show that over 1,300 badges, 165 firearms and 589 cell phones were lost or stolen over the span of 31 months between 2012 and 2015.

The majority of the credentials belonged to employees of Customs and Border Protection (CBP), while others belonged to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) employees.

The lost or stolen guns also mostly belonged to CBP employees, though others were cited as belonging to TSA and ICE workers. The agencies all fall under DHS.

The missing badges and guns suggest a shocking lack of security from federal law enforcement officers and represent a significant security risk, experts say.

“It’s scary that you’d have that number of credentials out there that someone could manipulate,” Tim Miller, a retired Secret Service special agent, told FoxNews.com.

While Miller said the phones are likely to have enough protocols in place to prevent them from being used for nefarious purposes, the badges and credentials are an entirely different matter and could allow access to sensitive areas such as cargo.

“The thing that’s particularly concerning is that if you get real credentials, it’s very easy to manipulate them, and you’ve got someone else’s picture on what law enforcement would see as valid," Miller said. "Then you factor in terrorism, it’s a significant concern that people would run around with authentic credentials and be able to access areas they wouldn’t otherwise be able to access.”

When reached for comment, DHS did not dispute the inventory report data -- which Complete Colorado, a Colorado-based online news site, had obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request. The reporter who obtained the data also works with Denver-based free-market think tank the Independence Institute.

In a statement to FoxNews.com, a DHS spokesman said they strive to be “good stewards of government resources” and have improved oversight and reduced the number of lost or stolen items over the past few years.

“If a credential holder loses or has their credentials stolen, the holder must report the incident to their supervisor and credential issuance office immediately,” spokesman Justin Greenberg said. “Once the incident has been reported, this information is entered into appropriate DHS and law enforcement databases, which disables use of the lost or stolen item.”

He also noted that DHS encrypts all mobile devices, laptops and tablets.

Miller said officials need to be doing more, considering the sheer number of guns and badges that have been lost or stolen.

Lawmakers also have expressed concern about the safety of DHS property in the past. In December, the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee approved legislation that would tighten screening of TSA workers, review security protocols and increase fines and enforcement requirements related to missing credentials.

The legislation was put forward after members of the committee wrote to TSA officials in March expressing concern about reports of unaccounted TSA badges, and the reported use of badges to bypass security checkpoints.

“Officials entrusted with protecting the American public cannot consider the loss of sensitive items normal or routine," Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., chairman of the committee, told FoxNews.com.

"When the Commerce Committee looked at lost and missing airport security credentials, we discovered that existing rules weren’t being effectively enforced. Mistakes happen, but if we don’t work to eliminate them and insist on accountability, then we’re left with unacceptable risk,” Thune said.

Fed Back-Pedals Hawkishness, Hints At Policy Error: "Monitoring Global Developments", Admits "Growth Slowed Last Year"

Zero Hedge | by Tyler Durden on 01/27/2016 14:01

Surging bonds and bullion and slumping stocks was not what Janet had in mind so she had some 'splaining to do. Hopes for a "passive hawkish" note appear to be met as confirmation of dismal data dependence offers just enough dovishness for the stock bulls and just enough hawkishness for economy bulls.
*FED REPEATS ECONOMY EXPECTED TO WARRANT ONLY GRADUAL RATE RISES
*FED ASSESSING GLOBAL DEVELOPMENTS FOR ITS BALANCE-OF-RISK VIEW
*FED CLOSELY MONITORING GLOBAL ECONOMIC, FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENTS

Treading a fine line between losing all credibility and exposing their total devotion to the stock market, it appears The Fed is maintaining its delusion that everything will be fine as they unwind the largest and most experimental monetary policy of all time, and yet for the first time we get proof that the Fed admits it made an error by hiking into a slowing economy: "labor market conditions improved further even as economic growth slowed late last year.

Pre-Fed: S&P Futs 1901.75, 10Y 2.04%, Gold $1115, WTI $31.95, EUR1.0875

Before the statement hit, rate odds this year were as follows:





Since the last meeting - and the historic rate hike - things have not panned out for The Fed...





Nanex explains the liquidity situation right before the statement:





Further headlines:
FOMC: REMOVES 'REASONABLY CONFIDENT' RE 2% MED-TERM INFL
*FED: MKT-BASED INFLATION COMPENSATION MEASURES DECLINED FURTHER
*FED: SURVEY-BASED INFLATION EXPECTATION MEASURES LITTLE CHANGED

Except that is a total lie..




*FED SAYS INVENTORY INVESTMENT HAS SLOWED

Here's why!!



* * *

Full Redline Statement below:



There was some verbal "normalization" in the statement, which at 558 words had the fewest words since the July statement:



* * *

Even Steve Liesman knows it's over...





... Bringing us to the many faces of Yellen:

DHS WANTS BETTER SOCIAL MEDIA SCREENING TECHNOLOGY

Nextgov | By Mohana Ravindranath | January 26, 2016

IMAGE CREDITS: Pixelkult

The Department of Homeland Security wants businesses to present their cutting-edge social media analytics services next month -- especially technology that could enhance criminal investigations, traveler screenings and situational awareness.

In a new request for information, DHS said it is looking for open source analytics tools that can make internal operations more efficient and reduce costs through "advanced analytic automation,” across the department, all while using “privacy, civil rights and civil liberties-protecting analytic methods.”

Respondents have until Feb. 9 to submit descriptions of their analytics capabilities, including geospatial processing, foreign and spoken language processing, and keyword, image and video analysis, among other elements.

DHS plans to ask 30 “exemplars of social media analytics capabilities in the market place” to present technology that could help analysts find patterns “in the context of homeland security investigative, screening and/or homeland security mission related situation awareness missions.”

Those groups will be asked to present on Feb. 26, the RFI said.

The solicitation also asked respondents to describe the way they “protect the privacy, civil rights and civil liberties of individuals involved in open source and social media communications,” including factors such as data removal methods, “role based access to information, user audit, system logging, policy enforcing mechanisms, encryption, etc.”

The announcement comes weeks after federal social media screening policies came under fire, especially in light of the San Bernardino shootings, when it was widely reported that one of the shooters had posted public pro-ISIS messages on Facebook. (Federal Bureau of Investigation director James Comey subsequently said those were private, direct communications.)

DHS policies in particular were criticized last month when Congress blasted the department for not examining immigrants' social media accounts closely and routinely when granting visas, The Hill reported.

DHS officials said they do occasionally look at social media accounts, according to The Hill. But a DHS memo obtained by MSNBC last month found that the department had rejected a policy to screen foreign visa applicants’ social media accounts in 2011, after a year of revisions.

According to a spokesperson, DHS does not comment on open solicitations and declined Nextgov's request for comment.

Oregon stand-off militiaman killed in shootout with the FBI: Traffic stop turns into deadly gunfight, ending with militia's spokesman dead and leader Ammon Bundy arrested along with seven others

Daily Mail | By DAILYMAIL.COM REPORTER and ASSOCIATED PRESS and REUTERS | PUBLISHED: 21:10 EST, 26 January 2016

Oregon militia spokesman LaVoy Finicum has been shot dead after a traffic stop escalated into a shoot-out that saw Ryan Bundy wounded and eight leaders of the occupation movement arrested.
The group's leader Ammon Bundy was among the militiamen arrested during the encounter on Tuesday afternoon as they drove to attend a community meeting in the neighboring town.

It is the climax of a tense stand-off between federal agents and the activists more than three weeks after they took over a government building in Burns, Oregon, to protest two ranchers being jailed.

According to local media, shots were fired within minutes of the traffic stop, killing Finicum and wounding 43-year-old Ryan Bundy.

It is not clear who opened fire first.

Ammon Bundy, Ryan Bundy, and three other leaders of the occupation - Ryan Payne, 32; Brian Cavalier, 44, and Shawna Cox, 59 - were charged with conspiracy to impede federal officers,Oregon Live reports.

Officials would not confirm the identity of the militiaman shot dead. However, Finicum's daughter Arianna Finicum Brown, 26, confirmed her father's death to The Oregonian, saying 'he would never ever want to hurt somebody, but he does believe in defending freedom and he knew the risks involved.'

Nevada state Rep Michele Fiore told the paper Ammon Bundy called his wife from the back of the police vehicle after his arrest and told her that Finicum was cooperating with the authorities when he was shot. However, other sources said that he resisted arrest.

In an interview with MSNBC three weeks ago, Finicum declared that he would rather die than face arrest.

'There are things more important than your life and freedom is one of them,' he said at the time. 'I'm prepared to defend freedom.'

He sounded a similar note when speaking to CNN earlier this month.

'I'm just not going to prison,' Finicum said. 'Look at the stars. There's no way I'm going to sit in a concrete cell where I can't see the stars and roll out my bedroll on the ground.

'I want to be able to get up in the morning and throw my saddle on my horse and go check on my cows. It's OK. I've lived a good life. God's been gracious to me.'

Finicum, a Mormon rancher from Arizona, was a father of 11 and grandfather of 19 who was married to his wife, Jeanette, for 23 years.

His daughter Challice Finch told NBC News after the deadly standoff that her father and his fellow protesters were 'all committed to not firing on federal agents.'

Speaking to The Oregonian on the eve of his death, LaVoy Finicum noted that law enforcement officials 'have become more hardened' as of late.

'They're doing all the things that show they want to take some kinetic action against us, and we're saying, "Why be so unfriendly?"' the militia spokesman told the paper.

WHO WAS LAVOY FINICUM?

LaVoy Finicum, 55, of northern Arizona, has been the right-hand man to the occupation's leader Ammon Bundy since the stand-off began on January 2.
Acting as spokesman for the group, he gave numerous press conferences to communicate their position.

At one point he personally climbed up a pole to dismantle surveillance cameras in an apparent show of defiance against the government.
But he has not always held such a strong anti-government stance.
Last year, he told the St George News that he complied with federal land controls until Cliven Bundy's stand-off in Nevada in 2014.

The episode, he said, struck a chord with him.

He joined the Bundys and 'did a lot of soul-searching' until he 'realized that Cliven Bundy was standing on a very strong constitutional principle—and yet, here I was continuing to pay a grazing fee to the BLM.'
Finicum's wife of 23 years recently arrived in Oregon, traveling up from Arizona, to celebrate his 56th birthday.

Beyond life as a militiaman and rancher, Finicum was a father of 11 and grandfather of 23 who also found time to write a novel, Only By Blood And Suffering, about a time when guns are no more, cars have stopped working, the market has imploded, and the Chinese control everything.
Joseph O'Shaughnessy, 45, and Peter Santilli, 50, were arrested in Burns soon after the traffic stop and shoot-out.

An eighth group member, Jon Ritzheimer, 32, was arrested in Peoria, Arizona, after turning himself in to the police department, Fox reported.

All of those arrested face federal charges of conspiracy to use force, intimidation or threats to impede federal officers from discharging their duties, the FBI said.

The hospital where Ryan Bundy and LaVoy Finicum were taken, St Charles Medical Center, was placed on lockdown in the wake of the shootout.

Some 25 miles of Highway 395 was shut down in both directions following the incident, a dispatcher for the state department of transportation said.

It was unclear how many people remained in the buildings at the refuge in the wake of the shootout. Late Tuesday night there was no obvious police presence there and Oregon Gov. Kate Brown asked for 'patience as officials continue pursuit of a swift and peaceful resolution.'

Brand Thornton, one of Bundy's supporters, said he left the refuge Monday and wasn't sure what those remaining would do.

'The entire leadership is gone,' he told The Associated Press in a telephone interview. 'I wouldn't blame any of them for leaving.'

Thornton called the arrests 'a dirty trick' by law enforcement.

According to Oregon Live, the leaders had been en route to John Day - 70 miles from Burns - to appear as guest speakers at a meeting with hundreds of local residents.

The crowd was informed the group would not be able to make it to the event after the dramatic traffic stop.

Frustrated local and state officials have been increasingly urging the FBI to do something to resolve the situation.

Bundy and his group have held frequent news conferences at the site, traveled to meet with sympathizers and others to espouse their views and some even attended a community meeting last week, where local residents shouted at them to leave.

Federal authorities have taken a hands-off approach so far and say they want a peaceful resolution.

Bundy has been in contact with an FBI negotiator and local law enforcement.

On Friday, Bundy went to the Burns Municipal Airport, where the FBI has set up a staging area, and met briefly with a federal agent.

Bundy left because the agent wouldn't talk with him in front of the media. Sieges by federal authorities in the early 1990s led to deadly standoffs in at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, and Waco, Texas.

The group took over the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge on January 2 after a peaceful protest in nearby Burns, Oregon, over the conviction of two local ranchers on arson charges.

Dwight Hammond, 73, and his son Steven Hammond, 46, said they lit fires on federal land in 2001 and 2006 to reduce the growth of invasive plants and protect their property from wildfires.

The two were convicted three years ago and served time — the father three months, the son one year.

But in October, a federal judge in Oregon ruled their terms were too short under U.S. law and ordered them back to prison for about four years each. Among the demands by the Bundy group is for the Hammonds to be released.

The alleged arrests on Tuesday come after an Army veteran was arrested for a DUI while he was heading to join the militia occupying federal land in Oregon.

Joseph Arthur Stetson, 54, was caught on camera threatening to kill cops on Monday as he was driving to the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

Americans hate the U.S. government more than ever

CBS | By AIMEE PICCHI MONEYWATCH | January 26, 2016, 12:01 AM

A handful of industries are those "love to hate" types of businesses, such as cable-television companies and Internet service providers.

The federal government has joined the ranks of the bottom-of-the-barrel industries, according to a new survey from the American Customer Satisfaction Index. Americans' satisfaction level in dealing with federal agencies --everything from Treasury to Homeland Security -- has fallen for a third consecutive year, reaching an eight-year low.

The declines represent some backsliding for the U.S. government, given that satisfaction saw some improvement in 2011 and 2012, which may have been the result of spending in the wake of the recession. While the comparison with private enterprise isn't apples to apples given the nature of government services, the findings have some implications for bureaucrats.

"Satisfaction is linked to broader goals in the political system that it wants to maximize, like confidence and trust," said Forrest Morgeson, director of research at the ACSI. "It's much more difficult to govern if the entire population dislikes you."

Although satisfaction is down for the federal government as a whole, the research found that consumers have vastly different views of specific agencies. The department that received the highest score was the Department of the Interior, which received a ranking of 75 points. That could reflect Americans' positive feelings toward national parks, which many visit while on vacation, Morgeson noted.

The lowest-ranked department may not be much of a surprise to taxpayers: Treasury, which received a score of just 55 points, or 20 points below the Department of the Interior. Treasury, as a reminder, oversees the IRS.

"If you think about the most contacted government agency, it'll be the IRS," Morgeson said. "If you think about what the IRS does, which is take money from citizens, you'll have low satisfaction."

Despite the overall lower score for the government, there were some signs of improvement in citizens' experiences, with the feds earning improved scores in customer service and information, which means many citizens believe agencies are delivering information in a clearer way than a year ago.

The government report is based on surveys with more than 2,000 people who were surveyed late last year.

© 2016 CBS Interactive Inc.. All Rights Reserved.

Canada will sign TPP trade deal Feb. 4, but ratification not certain

CBC News | By Andy Blatchford, The Canadian Press | Jan 25, 2016 11:33 AM ET

International Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland says Canada will sign on to the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal at a ceremony in New Zealand on Feb. 4. But as for ratifying the deal, Freeland said that will still be a matter for Parliament. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)

The federal government has confirmed that it intends to sign the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal at a meeting next week in New Zealand.

But when it comes to ratification of the 12-country treaty, the Liberals are still perched squarely atop the fence.

"Just as it is too soon to endorse the TPP, it is also too soon to close the door," International Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland wrote Monday in an open letter posted on her department's website.

"Signing does not equal ratifying.... Signing is simply a technical step in the process, allowing the TPP text to be tabled in Parliament for consideration and debate before any final decision is made."

Only a majority vote in the House of Commons would ensure that Canada seals the deal, she added. She has also requested a thorough, transparent study of the agreement by parliamentary committee.

In recent weeks, Freeland has conducted public consultations on the wide-ranging accord, which — if ratified — would also set new international rules for sectors beyond trade. Those other areas include intellectual property, which worries some experts.

"It is clear that many feel the TPP presents significant opportunities, while others have concerns," Freeland wrote.

"Many Canadians still have not made up their minds and many more still have questions."

The minister has already indicated the massive accord, which includes major economies such as the United States and Japan, cannot be renegotiated.
2-year ratification deadline

Freeland said each country has up to two years to consider ratification before making a final decision. She pointed out that by signing the deal Canada will keep its status as a potential full partner in the agreement.

Trade ministers from the TPP's partner countries have been invited to sign the deal on Feb. 4 in Auckland.

The former Conservative government announced an agreement-in-principle on the pact in October during the federal election campaign.

At the time, then-prime minister Stephen Harper hailed the TPP as a deal that would give Canada access to a massive market of nearly 800 million people.

Harper warned Canada couldn't afford to pass up on the agreement, a deal that came under heavy criticism in part because the talks took place in secrecy.

The treaty can take effect if it's ratified by half the participating countries representing 85 per cent of the proposed trade zone's economy.

It remains unclear, however, whether U.S. lawmakers will ratify the accord.
'Western Canada is hurting'

On Monday, Conservative Leader Rona Ambrose urged the government to support the TPP to help Canada's limping economy.

"Right now when Western Canada is hurting... the Trans-Pacific Partnership offers huge opportunities, particularly in the business services sector and the agricultural sector," Ambrose said in Ottawa.

In a recent interview with The Canadian Press, Freeland recalled hearing people on both sides of the TPP debate express their views during her cross-Canada consultations.

For example, she said she heard from groups representing farmers in Alberta and the Port of Vancouver that were very strongly in favour of TPP, a deal that would open up new foreign markets for many Canadian firms.

On the other hand, Freeland also heard concerns from Canadian and U.S. academics at a recent event at the University of Toronto. Several trade experts who addressed the conference criticized the TPP's provisions on intellectual property and warned they would be harmful for Canada.

Freeland has said Canada must remain deeply connected to the global economy, particularly since the country boasts just the 11th-biggest economy in the world.

"We are strongly in favour of free trade," she said in the interview. "Having said that, we're not the government that negotiated the TPP."

DAVOS DEPRESSION: SOROS PREDICTS DEVASTATING DEFLATION, REPEAT OF 2008

The Dollar Vigilante | JANUARY 23, 2016 | JEFF BERWICK 

In Davos, billionaires plot ways to consolidate power under one government, but in Acapulco Mexico, late in February, we will meet together to discuss how to create seven billion separate governments!

That’s what anarchy is all about, the ability of each individual to be in charge of his or her own life without predetermined restraints. If you injure someone or damage something, you’re responsible. Otherwise, society has no claims on you, certainly none enforced by the power of the state. There is no state ….

That’s much different than Davos where hundreds of seriously wealthy control freaks are meeting together to figure out how to promote global government that will have a claim on each and every one of us. Don’t do what they tell you to do and you are fined, jailed or worse. That’s “civilization” – Davos style.

When they are not gathered together in fancy restaurants quaffing expensive wines and eating fine food, the old men (mostly men) of Davos are “brainstorming” new ways to confuse and frighten us.

The idea is that we are to be afflicted with worse and worse disasters and as a result, convinced to turn to them – the Davos conclave – for salvation and hope.

And this is surely the reason for Davos attendee and billionaire George Soros’s pronouncements regarding the world economy, which made news recently for the extent of their alarmism.

Soros and another Davos attendee, William White are warning we are on the cusp of collapse. You’d think they just discovered yesterday that bad things were about to happen.

Earlier this week we wrote about White, the former chief economist of the Bank for International Settlements, who labeled 2016 a debt Jubilee year and basically predicted the shattering of the world economy. You can read what we wrote here.

Now comes billionaire Soros claiming that “the world is running into something it doesn’t know how to handle.” His statements hit the wires around the world and resulted in a BusinessInsider post profiling Soros’ “bearishness” with some choice quotes.

“We are repeating [2008],” Soros said during the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in an interview with Bloomberg TV. The root cause of the crisis is different this time, however. In 2008, it was the subprime crisis in America. This time, it is China and the deflationary forces it is transmitting to the rest of the world.
There’s the same old bogeyman that they like to roll out. This time it is “China,” which we have recently explained is not the culprit for this coming mess… and “deflationary forces”.

They purposefully try to confuse people with inflation/deflation. They want people to think the symptoms of inflation (rising prices) is inflation itself… and it happens inexplicably! Inflation is the increase in the money supply (aka. money printing). This causes prices to rise. But the root-problem isn’t rising prices; the root-problem is the increase in the money supply by the central banks.

And, it’s the same for deflation. When markets are blown up to bubble-like levels by money printing and then begin to fall, they call that “deflation” and say that is the problem. It’s not. The problem is that the increase in the money supply will eventually create a bubble, which will eventually collapse.

But you will NEVER hear that from the old men muttering to each other in Davos. They don’t want you to know that THEIR actions create the market crashes that they are now grimly warning us about.

He goes on to add in another red herring, oil!

The issue is that China’s problems are being passed on to the rest of the world. “It’s one of the sources of deflation,” Soros said. “You’ve got basically three major root causes. One is China, the other is oil and raw material prices, and the third is competitive devaluation,” he added. “You have all three.”

As we also explained earlier this week, the price of energy getting cheaper could not possibly destroy an economy. How could it?

At Davos, they want to point the blame at everyone but the true culprit: themselves. They are the true financial terrorists. And what is the answer they will present to save the world? You guessed it, print more money!

European stocks rebounded this week after the European Central Bank essentially said that is what they would do. And, next week, the Federal Reserve meets to decide on how to manipulate the price of money (interest). If they also become “dovish” – which is a funny word to describe manipulating interest rates lower and counterfeiting money – we could see a short-term rebound in the markets… but it won’t last.

This system is in collapse, and quite likely a planned collapse, to cause worldwide chaos in order for the elites to garner more power and control as a dumbed down and impoverished populace (dumbed down by government public education and impoverished by governments and central banks) clamor for someone to do something.

The truth of the matter is that the people of the world need to wake-up to this con game and stop supporting governments and central banks and move their assets into gold, silver and bitcoin.

At Anarchapulco and its sister conference. the TDV Internationalization and Investment Summit, we’ll be discussing these issues. We won’t waste our time with scare tactics and how to figure out ways to rule the world. We’ll discuss ways to DEFEND ourselves from the tactics being plotted at Davos and elsewhere.

We’ll write about what we discover in our TDV newsletter (subscribe today here) and we’ll try to spread the word through videos and radio interviews.

The path for humanity is clear… and it won’t be long until enough people figure out what is going on and rid the world of these heinous governments and central banks. But, most people will likely go through the pain of the collapse before they recognize the problem.

We plan to be one step ahead of them and not only recognize the problem but protect our assets and profit from the collapse.

Call Anarchapulco the “Anti-Davos” Conference.


Anarcho-Capitalist. Libertarian. Freedom fighter against mankind’s two biggest enemies, the State and the Central Banks. Jeff Berwick is the founder of The Dollar Vigilante, CEO of TDV Media & Services and host of the popular video podcast, Anarchast. Jeff is a prominent speaker at many of the world’s freedom, investment and gold conferences including his own,Anarchapulco, as well as regularly in the media including CNBC, CNN and Fox Business.