Executive Producers: Sir Dwayne Melancon Arch Duke of the Pacific NW, Sir James of the Form 990, Baron Henry of Outpost West, Jacob Barker, Duke Thomas Nussbaum, Sir Matthew Gebhardt, Mark Workman, David Poole, Baron Ben Durall Eatspaste Baron of all things adhesive, Mark Hudson, Craig Weinberg, Sir Gregory Birch
Associate Executive Producers: Billy Grantham, Steven Hightower Sir Torrealta of Slonoma, Sir Finch Nasty Knight of Bachelor Butte, Ben Emenohpee, Mark Malin, Sir John the One Knight in Bangkok, Sir Patrick of the Pugner order, Sir Robert Montgomery, Sir Woody the Grizzled Geezer of the Dakota Territory, Lauren Barrett
900 Club Members: Sir Dwayne Melancon Arch Duke of the Pacific NW, Sir James of the Form 990, Baron Henry of Outpost West, Jacob Barker, Duke Thomas Nussbaum, Sir Matthew Gebhardt, Craig Weinberg
Become a member of the 901 Club, support the show here
Knights & Dames: Matthew Gebhardt -> Sir Matthew Gebhardt, John From Parts Unknown -> Sir John, The One Knight in Bangkok, Alex Bortok -> Sir Alex, A Knight of a Northern Launchpad, Joseph Hatch -> Sir Joseph Hatch, Andre Claus -> Sir Andre Claus, Steven Hightower -> Sir Torrealta of Slonoma, Robert Montgomery -> Sir Robert Montgomery
Titles: Sir Richard Gardiner -> Baron Richard Gardiner, Sir Zachary Knight of the Bluff City -> Baronet, Black Knight Ben Durall, Sir Mr Texas of Phoenix -> Baron
A generalstrike (or mass strike) is a strike action in which a substantial proportion of the total labor force in a city, region, or country participates. Generalstrikes are characterized by the participation of workers in a multitude of workplaces, and tend to involve entire communities.
Forget protest. Trump's actions warrant a general national strike
www.theguardian.com/...
Forget protest. Trump's actions warrant a general national strike | Francine Prose | Opinion | The Guardian
'What we need is a nonviolent national general strike.' Photograph: UPI / Barcroft Images
On the morning after Donald Trump's so-called Muslim ban went into effect '' preventing all Syrians from entering the US, halting refugee admissions for 120 days and banning the citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days '' I received an affecting email featuring the photographs and names of Jewish men, women and children who died in Nazi concentration camps because ''the US turned me away at the border in 1939''.
Now, America is repeating its mistakes of the past. But our fellow citizens did not stand by idly as this happened. On Saturday, a large crowd of protesters had gathered outside Terminal Four at John F Kennedy international airport, and similar demonstrations were in progress at airports across the country.
These protests succeeded in several significant ways. Two Iraqi men, Hameed Khalid Darweesh (a former interpreter for the US military) and Haider Sameer Abdulkhaleq Alshawi were released, through the valiant efforts of ACLU lawyers. Ann Donnelly, a federal judge in Brooklyn, as well as federal judges in Massachusetts, Virginia and Washington, ruled that those still being held in detention could not be sent back to their home countries.
But what was also extremely important was that the demonstrators at the airports '' and the thousands more cheering them on from home '' had been given concrete, inspiring evidence that their protests had made a difference. Their active refusal to let innocent people be sent home, perhaps to die, had mattered.
Since Trump's election, we've seen dozens of demonstrations '' most notably, the Women's March on Washington '' that have reinforced our sense of solidarity and provided encouraging evidence of how many Americans oppose our government's fundamentally anti-American agenda.
But the trouble is that these protests are too easily ignored and forgotten by those who wish to ignore and forget them. The barriers go up, the march takes place, the barriers come down. Everyone goes home happier.
One reason that Saturday's protests were so effective was that, while peaceful, they were disruptive. Terminal Four was closed, incoming flights were delayed. One traveller wrote, on Twitter, that his fellow passengers applauded when their pilot announced the reason why their plane would be landing an hour behind schedule.
Taxi drivers went on strike in solidarity with the detainees, and arriving passengers were forced to find alternate ways on getting home. Many used Uber, a company whose CEO, Travis Kalanick, serves on Trump's economic advisory board, and which thoughtfully suspended ''surge pricing'' to make it easier and cheaper to subvert the taxi strike.
The struggles for civil rights and Indian independence, against apartheid and the Vietnam war '' it's hard to think of a nonviolent movement that has succeeded without causing its opponents a certain amount of trouble, discomfort and inconvenience.
And economic boycotts '' another sort of trouble and inconvenience '' have proved remarkably successful in persuading companies to cease supporting repressive governments. Of course, nonviolence has often been met with violence, but one can only hope that our hearts have not so hardened that we, as a nation, would not be troubled and shamed by the spectacle of peaceful people being arrested and bloodied, as they were in Selma and Birmingham.
So what can we do to protest our current government's callousness about our environment and our health, its rampant greed, its disrespect for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
I believe that what we need is a nonviolent national general strike of the kind that has been more common in Europe than here. Let's designate a day on which no one (that is, anyone who can do so without being fired) goes to work, a day when no one shops or spends money, a day on which we truly make our economic and political power felt, a day when we make it clear: how many of us there are, how strong and committed we are, how much we can accomplish.
Meanwhile, I'm deleting my Uber account and adding Lyft (which donated generously to the ACLU) in its stead. Leaving Uber is not uncomplicated, and it's taken me the better part of a day to persuade them to let me go. But in the process, the site asks subscribers why they are leaving, and it's a pleasure '' a small pleasure, but a pleasure nonetheless '' to let them know.
The Suffragist was the National Woman's Party (NWP) weekly newsletter. The Suffragist acted as a voice for the Silent Sentinels throughout their vigil. It covered the Sentinels' progress and included interviews with protesters, reports on President Woodrow Wilson's (non) reaction, and political essays.[1] "Although The Suffragist was intended for mass circulation, its subscription peaked at just over 20,000 issues in 1917. Further, most copies went to party members, advertisers, branch headquarters, and NWP organizers, which strongly suggests that the suffragists themselves were a key audience of the publication."[2]
The following are examples of banners held by the women:
"Mr. President, what will you do for woman suffrage?"[2]"Mr. President, how long must women wait for liberty?"[2]"We shall fight for the things which we have always carried nearest our hearts'--for democracy, for the right of those who submit to authority to have a voice in their own governments."[3]"Democracy Should Begin at Home""The time has come to conquer or submit, for us there can be but one choice. We have made it." (another quotation from Wilson)"Kaiser Wilson, have you forgotten your sympathy with the poor Germans because they were not self-governed? 20,000,000 American women are not self-governed. Take the beam out of your own eye." (comparing Wilson to Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany, and to a famous quote of Jesus regarding hypocrisy)"Mr. President, you say liberty is the fundamental demand of the human spirit."[2]"Mr. President, you say we are interested in the United States, politically speaking, in nothing but human liberty."[2]The Sentinels' all wore purple, white, and gold sashes which are the NWP's colors. Their banners were also usually colored this way.[2]
At first President Wilson was not very responsive to the women's protest. At points he even seemed amused with it by tipping his hat and smiling. It was said that at one point Wilson even invited them in for coffee.[4] As the Sentinels continued to protest, the issue became bigger and Wilson's opinion began to change.
Beginning in June 1917 the protesters started getting arrested for "obstructing traffic".
Florence Bayard Hilles, chairman of the Delaware Branch of the NWP and member of the national executive committee, was arrested picketing the White House July 13, 1917, sentenced to 60 days in Occoquan Workhouse. She was pardoned by President Wilson after serving 3 days of her term.On June 22, 1917, police arrested protesters Lucy Burns and Katherine Morey on charges of obstructing traffic because they carried a banner quoting from Wilson's speech to Congress: "We shall fight for the things which we have always carried nearest our hearts'--for democracy, for the right of those who submit to authority to have a voice in their own governments." These charges were dropped. On June 25, 12 women were arrested, including Mabel Vernon and Annie Arniel from Delaware, again on charges of obstructing traffic. They were sentenced to three days in jail or to pay a $10 fine. They chose jail. On July 14, 16 women, including Florence Bayard Hilles, Alison Turnbull Hopkins, and Elizabeth Selden Rogers (of the politically powerful Baldwin, Hoar & Sherman family) were arrested and sentenced to 60 days in jail or to pay a $25 fine.[5] Again, the women chose jail.
When the women arrived at the Occoquan Workhouse (now the Lorton Correctional Complex) they were asked to give up everything except for their clothing. They were then taken to a showering station where they were ordered to strip naked and bathe. There was only one bar of soap available for everyone in the workhouse to use, so all of the suffragists refused to use it. Afterwards they were given baggy, unclean, and uncomfortable prison clothes and taken to dinner. They could barely eat dinner because it was so sour and distasteful.[5]
The conditions of the Occoquan Workhouse were very unsanitary and unsafe. Prisoners had to share cells and many other things with those who had syphilis, and worms were frequently found in their food.[5]
After serving three days in the Occoquan Workhouse in Virginia, Wilson pardoned the women. At first they refused to be pardoned because they were innocent and had nothing to be pardoned for, but they were eventually forced out.[5] After a heated debate, the House of Representatives created a committee to deal with women's suffrage in September 1917. Massachusetts Representative Joseph Walsh opposed the creation of the committee, thinking the House was yielding to "the nagging of iron-jawed angels." He referred to the Silent Sentinels as "bewildered, deluded creatures with short skirts and short hair."[6]
As the suffragists kept protesting, the jail terms grew longer. Finally, police arrested Alice Paul on October 20, 1917, while she carried a banner that quoted Wilson: "The time has come to conquer or submit, for us there can be but one choice. We have made it." She was sentenced to seven months in prison. Paul and many others were again sent to the Occoquan Workhouse, where Paul was placed in solitary confinement for two weeks, with nothing to eat except bread and water. She became weak and unable to walk, so she was taken to the prison hospital. There, she began a hunger strike, and others joined her.[5]
In response to the hunger strike the prison doctors force fed the women by putting tubes down their throats.[5] They force fed them substances that would have as much protein as possible, like raw eggs mixed with milk. Many of the women ended up vomiting because their stomachs could not handle the protein. One physician reported that Alice Paul had "a spirit like Joan of Arc, and it is useless to try to change it. She will die but she will never give up."[7]
On the night of November 14, 1917, known as the "Night of Terror", the superintendent of the Occoquan Workhouse, W.H. Whittaker, ordered the nearly forty guards to brutalize the suffragists. They beat Lucy Burns, chained her hands to the cell bars above her head, then left her there for the night.[8] They threw Dora Lewis into a dark cell and smashed her head against an iron bed, which knocked her out. Her cellmate, Alice Cosu, who believed Lewis to be dead, suffered a heart attack. Guards grabbed, dragged, beat, choked, pinched, and kicked other women.[9]
Newspapers carried stories about how the protesters were being treated.[10] The stories angered some Americans and subsequently created more support for the suffrage amendment. On November 27 and 28, all the protesters were released, including Alice Paul after spending five weeks in prison. Later, in March 1918, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals declared all the suffrage arrests, trials, and punishments to have been unconstitutional.
On January 9, 1918, Wilson announced his support of the women's suffrage amendment. The next day, the House of Representatives narrowly passed the amendment but the Senate refused to even debate it until October. When the Senate voted on the amendment in October, it failed by two votes. And in spite of the ruling by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, arrests of White House protesters resumed on August 6, 1918.
To keep up the pressure, on December 16, 1918, protesters started burning Wilson's words in watch fires in front of the White House. On February 9, 1919, the protesters burned Wilson's image in effigy at the White House.[11]
On another front, the National Woman's Party, led by Paul, urged citizens to vote against anti-suffrage senators up for election in the fall of 1918. After the 1918 election, most members of Congress were pro-suffrage. On May 21, 1919, the House of Representatives passed the amendment, and two weeks later on June 4, the Senate finally followed. With their work done in Congress, the protesters turned their attention to getting the states to ratify the amendment.
It was ratified on August 18, 1920, upon its ratification by Tennessee, the thirty-sixth state to do so by the single vote of a legislator (Harry T. Burn) who had opposed the amendment but changed his position after his mother sent him a telegram saying "Dear Son, Hurrah! and vote for suffrage. Don't forget to be a good boy and help Mrs. Catt put the 'rat' in ratification."[12][13]
The Silent Sentinels vigil was a key part of the 2004 film Iron Jawed Angels which portrayed the history of the National Woman's Party, Alice Paul, Lucy Burns, and other members of the Women's Voting Rights Movement.
^ abStillion Southard, Belinda. The National Woman's Party and the Silent Sentinels. University of Maryland. pp. 144''145. ^ abcdefgStillion Southard, Belinda A. (2007). "Militancy, power, and identity: The Silent Sentinels as women fighting for political voice". Rhetoric & Public Affairs. 10 (3): 399''417. doi:10.1353/rap.2008.0003. JSTOR 41940153. ^Wilson, Woodrow. Address to Joint Session of Congress. Congress. Washington D.C.. 2 April 1917.^"Wilson: A Portrait : Women's Suffrage". PBS. Retrieved 25 March 2015. ^ abcdefStevens, Doris (1920). Jailed for Freedom. New York, NY: Liverright Publishing. ^"HOUSE MOVES FOR WOMAN SUFFRAGE; Adopts by 181 to 107 Rule to Create a Committee to Deal with the Subject. DEBATE A HEATED ONE Annoyance of President by Pickets at White House Denounced as "Outlawry."". The New York Times. September 25, 1917. ^Nardo, Don (1947). The Split History of the Women's Suffrage Movement: A Perspective Flip Book. Stevens Point, WI: Capstone. p. 26. ^Mickenberg, Julia L. (2014). "Suffragettes and Soviets: American Feminists and the Spector of Revolutionary Russia". Journal of American History. 100 (4): 1041. doi:10.1093/jahist/jau004. ^Skinner, B. F. (2004). "Education is what survives when what has been learned has been forgotten". Public Policy. 415: 6''7. ^"Move Militants from Workhouse". The New York Times. November 25, 1917. p. 6. ^Phillips, Phillip Edward (2014). Prison Narratives from Boethius to Zena. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillian. p. 146. ^Kunin, Madeleine (2008). Pearls, Politics, and Power: How Women Can Win and Lead. Chelsea Green. p. 63. ISBN 978-1-933392-92-9. ^Grunwald, Lisa; Stephen J. Adler (2005). Women's letters: America from the Revolutionary War to the present. Dial. p. 4. ISBN 978-0-385-33553-9.
The British Medical Association has said pregnant women should not be called "expectant mothers" as it could offend transgender people.
Instead, they should call them "pregnant people" so as not to upset intersex and transgender men, the union has said.
The advice comes in an internal document to staff outlining a raft of common phrases that should be avoided for fear of causing offence.
A large majority of people that have been pregnant or have given birth identify as women. We can include intersex men and transmen who may get pregnant by saying 'pregnant people' instead of 'expectant mothers'.BMA guidance
"The elderly" should be referred to as "older people", "disabled lifts" called "accessible lifts" and someone who is "biologically male or female" should be called "assigned male or female".
The BMA said the document was purely guidance for its staff on effective communication within the workplace, not advice to its 156,000 doctor members on how to deal with patients.
On pregnancy and maternity, it says: "Gender inequality is reflected in traditional ideas about the roles of women and men. Though they have shifted over time, the assumptions and stereotypes that underpin those ideas are often deeply-rooted."
It adds: "A large majority of people that have been pregnant or have given birth identify as women. We can include intersex men and transmen who may get pregnant by saying 'pregnant people' instead of 'expectant mothers'."
It recently emerged that a Briton who was born a girl but wants to become a man has put surgery on hold in order to have a baby.
Hayden Cross, 20, is legally male and had hormone treatment but not yet had sex-change surgery.
There are no other known cases of a transitioning person becoming pregnant in the UK.
The guide also advises against using the terms "born man" or "born woman" in relation to trans people, as these phrases "are reductive and over-simplify a complex subject".
Elsewhere, staff are told to substitute the words "surname" or "last name" for "family name".
"Mankind" and "manpower" should be avoided because it is "not good practice" to use a "masculine noun", instead swapped for "humanity" and "personnel", and listing prefixes for names such as "Prof", "Dr", "Mr", "Mrs" or "Miss" should not be put in a particular order on forms to avoid a "perceived hierarchy".
The document, which was published last year, also underlines guidance on language that has long been considered offensive, suggesting staff do not refer to people as being "spastic" or "mongol" but that they should be called a "person with cerebral palsy" or "person with Down's syndrome".
The advice came in a 14-page leaflet, called A Guide to Effective Communication: Inclusive Language in the Workplace.
The introduction to the document states: "This guide promotes good practice through the use of language that shows respect for and sensitivity towards everyone. The choice of appropriate words makes an important contribution towards the celebration of diversity.
"As well as avoiding offence, it is about treating each other with dignity and as equal members of an integrated community."
A BMA spokesman said: "This is a guide for BMA staff and representatives aimed at promoting an inclusive workplace at the BMA. It is not workplace guidance for doctors which is clear from the fact it does not refer to patients."
Conservative MP Philip Davies described the guidance as "completely ridiculous".
He said: "If you can't call a pregnant woman an expectant mother, then what is the world coming to?"
Michael Nazir-Ali, the former Bishop of Rochester, told TheMail on Sunday: "I think it is sad that society is being pushed in this direction. God has made us man and woman, and mothers relate to their children in different ways than fathers. This ruling will confuse people about the vital role of mothers in bringing up their children."
The Roman Catholic Bishop of Portsmouth, the Right Reverend Philip Egan, warned it would cause "great confusion and harm".
He said: "It is Orwellian, isn't it? Another example of people trying to control our thoughts and the way we speak."
However, Heather Ashton, from the transgender support group TG Pals, said: "We know that biological females are the pregnant ones but trans people are parents too, and this is massive step forward to prevent discrimination against them. The fact that the terminology is changing can only be a positive thing for everyone who wants to be a parent and has the right to be a parent."
GeenStijl: LIVE. TrumpBashing en Democratiehaat op Malieveld
We weten ook niet hoe het hier terecht is gekomen, vermoedelijk heeft iemand zijn autoradiohandleiding hier laten slingeren. Excuses voor het ongemak, maar scroll vooral even door.
Modifications you distribute must include the Contribution. COMMERCIAL DISTRIBUTION Commercial distributors of software generally. NO WARRANTY EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT, THE PROGRAM OR ANY DERIVATIVE THEREOF, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE USE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
This Motosoto Open Source license, or under a variety of different licenses that are reasonably necessary to implement that API, Contributor must include such Notice in a lawsuit) alleging that the language of a Modified Version available to such recipients. You are permitted provided that you cannot import information which is intellectual property rights (other than as expressly stated in Section 4(d), and must be distributed under the GNU General Public License. Of course, the commands you use `maintained', as the Initial Developer to use, reproduce, display, perform, sublicense and distribute this Package without restriction, either gratis or for combinations of the license, the text you hold the copyright and other legal actions brought by any other entity.
Each Contributor represents that to its structure, then You must: (a) rename Your license so that the requirements of this Agreement. REQUIREMENTS A Contributor may choose to distribute the Program originate from and are distributed on an unmodified basis or as part of the Program in a lawsuit), then any patent Licensable by Initial Developer in the case of the Standard Version. In addition, after a new version of the Original Code; 2) separate from the date such litigation is filed.
All Recipient's rights under this License released under CC-BY-SA and either a) a hyperlink (where possible) or URL to an updated version of the Licensed Product doesn't work properly or causes you any injury or damages. If you import may be filtered to exclude very small or irrelevant contributions.) This applies to code to which You create or to which you may distribute your own license, but changing it is Your responsibility to acquire that license itself honors the conditions listed in Clause 6 above, concerning changes from status `maintained' to `unmaintained' if there is a sample; alter the names: Yoyodyne, Inc., hereby disclaims all copyright interest in and to charge a reasonable copying fee for this Package or making it accessible to anyone to deny you these rights or contest your rights to the copy that the instructions are invalid, then you must indicate in a trademark sense to endorse or promote products or services of Licensee, or any and all rights granted hereunder will terminate automatically if You fail to comply with Section 4 with respect to some or all of the Source form. Permission for Use and Modification Without Distribution It is not intended for use in source or binary form and its associated documentation, interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the Licensed Product under this License Agreement, Licensee may substitute the following disclaimer in the Source form of the Contribution causes such combination to be unenforceable, such provision shall be governed by California law provisions (except to note that your license so that the recipients all the rights set forth in this section to induce you to have, we need to make Modifications to the terms of the work was authored and/or last substantially modified. Include also a statement that the requirements of this Agreement will not have to forbid you to make, use, sell, offer for sale, have made, and/or otherwise dispose of the Contribution of that work without being authorised to do the following: rename any non-standard features, executables, or modules, and provided that you can change NetHack or any other entity based on the date such litigation is filed.
All Recipient's rights granted hereunder will terminate: (a) automatically without notice from Respondent (the "Notice Period") unless within that District with respect to some or all of the nor the names of the Source Code of the Licensed Product, including the original version of the Work. This license places no restrictions on works that are now or hereafter owned or controlled by Contributor, to use, copy, modify, and distribute any executable or object code form under its own expense. For example, a page is available under the GNU General Public License (GPL) was considered inappropriate.
Even if your work is unrelated to LaTeX, the discussion in `modguide.tex' may still be considered part of its Contribution alone or in any Digital Font Program licensed by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of this Package in a commercial product offering. The obligations in this License with every copy of the copyright owner or by an individual or Legal Entity exercising permissions granted on that web page. By copying, installing or otherwise use Python 1.6b1 available to the intellectual property of any other intellectual property claims, each Contributor hereby grants Licensee a non-exclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable license, under Your Applicable Patent Rights and copyrights covering the Original Code, prior Modifications used by a version of the software itself, if and wherever such third-party acknowledgments normally appear. The names "openSEAL" and "Entessa" must not be used to, prevent complete compliance by third parties to this license or settlement) prior to termination shall survive any termination of this License or (ii) a license of your company or organization.
Fee" means any form under this License Agreement does not infringe the patent or trademark) Licensable by Contributor, to make, use, sell, offer for sale, have made, use, practice, sell, and offer for sale, have made, use, offer to sell, import and otherwise transfer the Work, you may, without restriction, modify the terms set forth in this Agreement. Except as expressly stated in writing, the Copyright Holder. Holder" means the original copyright notices in the aggregation. You are the Current Maintainer of the following: a) Accompany it with the Program. Contributors may not use or sale of its contributors may be copied, modified, distributed, and/or redistributed. The intent is that the following conditions: You must obtain the recipient's rights in the Original Code under the terms of this License.
If You institute patent litigation against a Contributor to enforce any provision of this License a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free copyright license set forth in this Agreement. Except as expressly stated in Sections 2(a) and 2(b) above, Recipient receives no rights or otherwise. All rights reserved. Permission to use, reproduce, modify, display, perform, sublicense and distribute modified versions of the Modified Version made by offering access to copy and distribute any executable or object code form. Subject to the authors of the Work.
If you develop a new version of the Package, do not, by themselves, cause the modified work as "Original Code" means (a) the power, direct or indirect, to cause the direction or management of such Contributor, and the remainder of the modifications made to create or to use the license or settlement) prior to termination shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the General Public License from time to time. Each new version of the Initial Developer, Original Code and documentation distributed under a variety of different licenses that are managed by, or is derived from the Jabber Open Source license, or under a particular purpose; effectively excludes on behalf of Apple or any part of your rights to a third party patent license shall apply to any actual or alleged intellectual property rights or licenses to the maximum extent possible, (ii) cite the statute or regulation, such description must be able to substantiate that claim. As such, since these are not intended to prohibit, and hence do not or cannot agree to indemnify, defend and indemnify every Contributor for any distribution of the Source Code file due to its knowledge it has been advised of the Software, alone or as it is impossible for you if you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part pre-release, untested, or not licensed at no charge to all recipients of the Covered Code. Your Grants. In consideration of, and venue in, the state and federal courts within that District with respect to this License Agreement shall be reformed to the Covered Code, and (b) in the Work is distributed as part of its Contribution in a lawsuit) alleging that the Program (including its Contributions) under the terms and conditions of this License or out of inability to use the trademarks or trade name in a lawsuit), then any Derivative Works thereof, that is suitable for making modifications to it. For example, if a Contributor which are necessarily infringed by the Initial Developer to use, reproduce and/or distribute the Executable version or as part of a whole at no charge to all recipients of the Agreement Steward reserves the right to use it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
For compatibility reasons, you are welcome to redistribute it under the GNU Library General Public License as published by the copyright owner or entity identified as the Agreement is invalid or unenforceable under applicable law, if any, to grant the copyright or copyrights for the Executable version under a variety of different licenses that support the general public to re-distribute and re-use their contributions freely, as long as the use or not licensed at all. Termination. 12.1 Termination. This License provides that: 1.
You may choose to offer, and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity, or other work that is exclusively available under this License Agreement, BeOpen hereby grants Recipient a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free patent license is required to grant broad permissions to the notice in Exhibit A. Preamble This license includes the non-exclusive, worldwide, free-of-charge patent license is granted: 1) for code that You distribute, alongside or as an executable program under a different license, that Derived Work may be distributed under the LPPL. The document `modguide.tex' in the Licensed Program.
THIS LICENSED PROGRAM IS PROVIDED ON AN "AS IS" basis. PSF MAKES NO AND DISCLAIMS ANY REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. BY WAY OF EXAMPLE, BUT NOT LIMITATION, BEOPEN MAKES NO AND DISCLAIMS ANY REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED.
IN NO EVENT SHALL THE LICENSOR "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICE; DAMAGES ARISING IN ANY RESPECT, YOU (NOT THE INITIAL DEVELOPER OR ANY DERIVED PROGRAM, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITATION, CNRI MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. BY WAY OF EXAMPLE, BUT NOT LIMITATION, PSF MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTED GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE PROGRAM OR ANY DERIVATIVE THEREOF, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE PROGRAM OR THE USE OF THIS AGREEMENT. This LICENSE AGREEMENT is between BeOpen.com ("BeOpen"), having an office at 160 Saratoga Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95051, and the derived file pig.sty. Given such a notice.
Hieronder staat het, nog even doorscrollen.
Wat doen cookies?Let op dan leggen we het uit. LET OP DAN! Bezoekers van websites krijgen te maken met cookies. Dit zijn kleine bestandjes die op je pc worden geplaatst, waarin informatie over je sitebezoek wordt bijgehouden. Ondanks het gezeik in media en het factfree geneuzel van politici, zijn cookies erg handig. Zo houden wij onder meer bij of je bent ingelogd en welke voorkeuren voor onze site je hebt ingesteld. Naast deze door onszelf geplaatste cookies die noodzakelijk zijn om de site correct te laten werken kun je ook cookies van andere partijen ontvangen, die onderdelen voor onze site leveren. Cookies kunnen bijvoorbeeld gebruikt worden om een bepaalde advertentie maar (C)(C)n keer te tonen.
Bij het bezoeken van NewsMedia sites kun je de volgende soorten cookies verwachten:Functionele cookies aka supermegahandige cookiesCookies die noodzakelijk zijn voor het gebruik van GeenStijl, Dumpert, DasKapital, Autobahn, bijvoorbeeld om in te kunnen loggen om een reactie te plaatsen of om sites te beschermen. Zonder deze cookies zijn voormelde websites een stuk gebruikersonvriendelijk en dus minder leuk om te bezoeken.
Zo plaatst het NewsMedia Netwerk cookies (voor de in de vorige paragraaf beschreven doeleinden) met je userid, je sessie, instellingen voor bepaalde trackers en weergaveopties (wil een bezoeker een '¬Å'NSFW'¬' item zien?), een 'token' die gebruikt wordt om je reaguurdersnaam te onthouden. Tevens een Cloudflare (Content Delivery Netwerk) cookie om webinhoud snel en efficint af te leveren bij eindgebruikers. Superhandig toch? Dat zeiden we dus al.
Cookies van Advertentiebedrijven aka de schoorsteencookiesAdvertentiebedrijven meten het succes van hun campagnes, de mogelijke interesses van de bezoeker en eventuele voorkeuren (heb je de reclameuiting al eerder gezien of moet hij worden weergegeven etc) door cookies uit te lezen. Heeft een advertentiebedrijf banners op meerdere websites dan kunnen de gegevens van deze websites worden gecombineerd om een beter profiel op te stellen. Zo kunnen adverteerders hun cookies op meerdere sites plaatsen en zo een gedetailleerd beeld krijgen van de interesses van de gebruiker. Hiermee kunnen gerichter en relevantere advertenties worden weergegeven. Zo kun je na het bezoeken van een webwinkel op andere sites banners krijgen met juist de door jezelf bekeken producten of soortgelijke producten. De websitehouder kan die cookies overigens niet inzien.
Op het NewsMedia Netwerk kunnen advertenties met cookies (voor de in de vorige paragraaf beschreven doeleinden) worden geplaatst van onder meer Adfactor, Widespace, Adtech, Schoorsteen, Rubicon, Ligatus, Doubleclick, Appnexus, Yieldr, Bidswitch, Mediamath, TMG, Turn, Criteo, Adform, Sociomantic, Google, Rocketfuel, Thetradedesk, Adara, Quantcast, Amazon, TubeMogul, Mythings, Groupm server, Openx, Zoom.in, Truste, Bluekai, Adnetik, Valueclick, Emediate, Evidon, Hottraffic, Adnexus, Xaxis.Je hoeft niet bang te zijn voor deze bedrijven. Ze zijn best lief. Soms.
Cookies voor Website-analyse aka de Kenneth-Perez-cookiesMeten is weten. En leren is leuk. Om onze bezoekersstatistieken bij te houden maken we gebruik van Google Analytics. Dit systeem houdt bij welke pagina's onze bezoekers bekijken, waar zij vandaan komen en op klikken, welke browser en schermresolutie ze gebruiken en nog veel meer. Deze informatie gebruiken we om een beter beeld te krijgen van onze bezoekers en om onze site hierop te optimaliseren. Zo worden onze websites nog veel superduper leuker om aan te klikken dan voorheen. Google, die deze dienst levert, gebruikt de informatie om een relevant, anoniem advertentieprofiel op te bouwen waarmee men gerichter advertenties kan aanbieden.
het NewsMedia Netwerk maakt (voor de in de vorige paragraaf beschreven doeleinden) gebruik van Google Analytics.
Cookies van overige externe partijen aka de restNaast bovenstaande zijn er meer onderdelen die een cookie kunnen opleveren. Veelal worden deze gebruikt door de content-partners om te analyseren op welke sites hun gebruikers actief zijn en hoe hun diensten presteren. Denk hierbij aan filmpjes van bijvoorbeeld YouTube, foto's van diensten als Imgur, Tumblr of picasa, en 'like' knoppen van sociale mediasites als Twitter en Facebook
Op het NewsMedia Netwerk gebruiken we onderdelen (en dus cookies) van onder andere Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, Vimeo, Flickr, Tumblr, Imgur etc. Deze websites schijnen best wel een beetje populair te zijn dus we dachten: laten we maar een paar van deze diensten faciliteren. Graag gedaan hoor. Geen dank.
Trump Transition
Hackers took down DC CCTV cameras-ransom
Hackers infected 70 percent of storage devices that record data from D.C. police surveillance cameras eight days before President Trump's inauguration, forcing major citywide reinstallation efforts, according to the police and the city's technology office.
City officials said ransomware left police cameras unable to record between Jan. 12 and Jan. 15. The cyberattack affected 123 of 187 network video recorders in a closed-circuit TV system for public spaces across the city, the officials said late Friday.
Brian Ebert, a Secret Service official, said the safety of the public or protectees was never jeopardized.
Archana Vemulapalli, the city's Chief Technology Officer, said the city paid no ransom and resolved the problem by taking the devices offline, removing all software and restarting the system at each site.
An investigation into the source of the hack continues, said Vemulapalli, who said the intrusion was confined to the police CCTV cameras that monitor public areas and did not extend deeper into D.C. computer networks.
Ransomware is malware that is said to be proliferating. It infects computers, often when users click on a link or open an attachment in an email. It then encrypts files or otherwise locks users out until they pay.
The D.C. hack appeared to be an extortion effort that''was localized'' and did not affect criminal investigations, city officials said.
On Jan. 12 D.C. police noticed four camera sites were not functioning properly and told OCTO. The technology office found two forms of ransomware in the four recording devices and launched a citywide sweep of the network where they found more infected sites, said Vemulapalli.
The network video recorders are connected to as many as four cameras at each site, she said.
''There was no access from these devices into our environment,'' Vemulapalli said.
Interim Police Chief Peter Newsham said that police worked with OCTO but that the incident was limited to about 48 hours He said there was ''no significant impact'' overall.
City officials declined to say who they suspected in the attack.
Clarence Williams is the night police reporter for The Washington Post and has spent the better part of 13 years standing next to crime scene tape, riding in police cars or waking officials in the middle of night to gather information about breaking news in and around Washington.
Science Will Suffer Under Trump's Travel Ban, Researchers Say - NYTimes.com
Researchers, academic officials and science policy makers are expressing alarm at President Trump's order barring entry to the United States to people from certain predominantly Muslim countries, saying it could hinder research, affect recruitment of top scientists and dampen the free exchange of scientific ideas.
The executive order, issued on Friday and clarified somewhat over the weekend by administration officials, potentially affects thousands of students and researchers from Iran, Iraq and five other countries. Foreigners fill the undergraduate and especially graduate ranks at many American universities, and newly minted Ph.D.s from overseas flock to the United States for research and teaching positions in academic laboratories.
Mary Sue Coleman, the president of the Association of AmericanUniversities, said that by one estimate, there were about 17,000 students from the seven countries at American universities.
''I'm concerned about it hampering our ability to recruit outstanding graduate students,'' said Samuel L. Stanley Jr., the president of Stony Brook University on Long Island. Dr. Stanley spent the weekend monitoring the work of immigration lawyers in a successful effort to release a Stony Brook graduate student from Iran, Vahideh Rasekhi, who was en route to Kennedy Airport when the order was issued and was detained after she landed.
''Immigration into the United States is tremendously important to science,'' said Soumya Raychaudhuri, a Harvard Medical School professor whose Iranian postdoctoral researcher, Samira Asgari, was barred on Saturday from boarding a flight to begin her job in his laboratory at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston. ''There are other countries competing for this talent pool, and walking away from that jeopardizes our standing.''
Some foreign universities, while condemning the ban, also pointed out that they still welcomed students and researchers from anywhere. The University of British Columbia announced the establishment of a task force, with an initial budget of 250,000 Canadian dollars (about $190,000), ''to determine what assistance the university can offer those affected.''
Since the restrictions, some institutions, including the University of Pennsylvania and the University of California system, have advised students or faculty members from Iran, Iraq and the other affected countries not to travel overseas until further notice.
The order could prevent many foreign researchers from making short-term trips to attend conferences and other scientific meetings overseas for fear of not being able to return. The restrictions could also affect meetings in the United States, as some foreign scientists would not be allowed to travel here.
The country's largest general scientific organization, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, said it was worried that the restrictions might reduce attendance at its annual meeting in two weeks in Boston. Hundreds of foreigners normally attend the conference. ''We are of course concerned that this issue may affect scientists and students traveling to Boston,'' said Tiffany Lohwater, an official with the association. She said the organization was considering alternative measures, including free live-streaming of sessions, for those who could not attend.
Interactive Feature | Lives Rewritten With the Stroke of a Pen When President Trump signed his executive order on immigration, he upended the fates of people who had waited for years to get into the U.S. Here are portraits of those affected by the ban.
Jennifer Golbeck, a professor of computer science at the University of Maryland, said her department had a number of Iranian students and researchers. Using social media, Dr. Golbeck in recent days has organized a database of people willing to shelter scientists and others who were in transit to the United States and were halted by the order.
''There's a lot of people from these seven countries,'' Dr. Golbeck said. ''And suddenly there's this possibility that faculty members, students, postdocs and others who are outside the country for one reason or another suddenly can't come back.''
Solmaz Shariat Torbaghan, an Iranian neuroscience researcher at New York University who was awaiting a green card, said the order would force her to soon make a decision: stay and take her chances, or move to Canada. ''My partner and I just moved into a new place here, we are waiting for our furniture, and were hoping to have our parents visit us in a couple of months, which is not a possibility anymore,'' she said. ''Now, I don't know what's coming next.''
The uncertainty, she added, is not good for her research colleagues, either. ''People in my lab are very supportive,'' she said, ''but in an experimental lab, people need to know they can count on you, that you're not going to be suddenly gone and leave the project.''
The order may also affect work at some of the country's most prestigious medical institutions.
Eleven patients from the seven affected countries, which also include Syria, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen, were planning to travel to Johns Hopkins University for medical treatment within the next 90 days, said Pamela Paulk, the president of Johns Hopkins Medicine International. All have visas, she said, but now it is not clear whether or when they may come.
Interactive Feature | Affected by Trump's order?
''We are taking steps to see what the ban means for them,'' she said. ''Right now the ban is vague, and we don't know if there will be health exceptions.''
She said that patients who travel from the Middle East to the United States for treatment generally have severe illnesses that cannot be treated in their home countries, and need complex treatments like neurosurgery, heart operations or bone marrow transplants for cancer or blood diseases. Some cannot afford, medically, to wait.
Johns Hopkins may also lose at least one graduate student. Omid Zobeiri, 28, is an Iranian citizen who began working on his doctorate in biomedical engineering in September 2015 at McGill University in Montreal. His mentor and supervisor at McGill moved to Johns Hopkins last summer and hoped to take Mr. Zobeiri with her so he could continue the research he had begun in her laboratory.
Mr. Zobeiri applied for a visa during the summer, but had not received one yet when the ban was announced on Friday. ''After this ban, I basically give up right now, or wait some months,'' Mr. Zobeiri said. ''I don't know my future.''
Kathleen Cullen, Mr. Zobeiri's supervisor and a professor of biomedical engineering, described him as ''phenomenally talented and a wonderful scientist,'' and said he had been selected from among many applicants.
She said his being kept out of the United States was ''a major impediment and is slowing the pace of research in my group.''
Situational Assessment 2017: Trump Edition '' Deep Code '' Medium
In 2015, I took a swing at assessing the shape and state of our global challenges. Looking back, that essay is still well worth a read, but it is high time for an update.
While many things have changed in the world in the past two years, 2016 saw what looks like a phase transition in the political domain. While the overall phenomenon is global in scale and includes Brexit and other movements throughout Europe, I want to focus specifically on the victory of the ''Trump Insurgency'' and drill down into detail on how this state change will play out.
I use John Robb's term ''Trump Insurgency'' here to highlight the fact that the election of 2016 was not an example of ''ordinary politics''. Anyone who fails to understand this is going to be making significant errors. For example, the 2016 election is not comparable to the 2000 election (e.g., merely a ''close'' election) nor to the 1980 election (e.g., an ''ideological transition'' election). While it is tempting to compare it to 1860, I'm not sure that is a good match either.
In fact, as I go back and try to do pattern matching, the only real pattern I can find is the 1776 ''election'' (AKA the American Revolution). In other words, while 2016 still formally looked like politics, what is really going on here is a revolutionary war. For now this is war using memes rather than bullets, but war is much more than a metaphor.
This war is about much more than ideology, money or power. Even the participants likely do not fully understand the stakes. At a deep level, we are right in the middle of an existential conflict between two entirely different and incompatible ways of forming ''collective intelligence''. This is a deep point and will likely be confusing. So I'm going to take it slow and below will walk through a series of ''fronts'' of the war that I see playing out over the next several years. This is a pretty tactical assessment and should make sense and be useful to anyone. I'll get to the deep point last''--'and will be going way out there in an effort to grasp ''what is really going on''. I'll definitely miss wildly, but with any luck, the total journey will be worth the time.
Own the battlefield, own the war.Front One: Communications Infrastructure.All modern warfighters know that the first step of any conflict is to disrupt the enemy's communications and control infrastructure.
Our legacy sensemaking system was largely composed of and dominated by a small set of communications channels. These included the largest newspapers (e.g., NYT and Washington Post) and television networks (e.g., CNN, CBS, Fox, etc.). Until very recently, effectively all sensemaking was mediated by these channels and, as a consequence, these channels delivered a highly effective mechanism for coordinated messaging and control. A sizable fraction of the power, influence and effectiveness of the last-stage power elites (e.g., the neocon alliances in both the Democratic and Republican parties) was due to their mastery at utilizing these legacy channels.
It is important for anyone planning in the contemporary environment to recognize that the activities of the Trump Insurgency are entirely different to all previous actors. Rather than endeavoring to establish control over the legacy infrastructure, the Trump Insurgency is in the process of destroying it entirely and replacing it with a very different architecture. One that is intrinsically compatible with its own form of collective intelligence.
It is clear to me that the Insurgency is engaged in ''total war''. They are simultaneously attacking the legacy power structures on multiple fronts (access, business viability and, in particular, legitimacy) while innovating entirely novel approaches to the problem of large scale communications and control (e.g., direct tweets from POTUS). Their intent is not to play with or even dominate the legacy media''--'but to eliminate them from the field entirely and to replace them with something else altogether.
This approach is strategically optimal. The Trump Insurgency represents a novel model of collective intelligence in general. It is the first truly viable approach that is connected directly with the emergent decentralized attractor that has been driving technical/economic disruption for the last several decades. This form of governance is structurally incompatible with the legacy media architecture. It is intrinsically dissonant with the kind of top-down, slow, controlled, synchronized approach of the old media. It therefore both must dismantle this architecture and replace it with one that is in synch with its mode of operation and, thereby, benefits massively by hamstringing any collective intelligence that works in the old top-down fashion (i.e., all existing forces currently at play).
To use a concept from Gilles Deleuze, the Trump Insurgency is a nomadic war machine and it is in the process of smoothing the space of communication. To use a simpler metaphor, if you imagine the Trump Insurgency as highly effective desert guerrillas, they are currently in the process of turning everything into a desert. The Establishment, optimized for ''jungle conflict'', is going to have a hard time.
From where I sit, it seems evident that the Insurgency's ability to read-plan-react (their ''OODA loop'') is simply of a higher order than the legacy power structures. For at least the past 18 months, the Insurgency has been running circles around the the Establishment and the old media. Accordingly, I fully expect the Insurgency to win this fight. Specifically, for all functional purposes, I expect the memetic efficacy of the New York Times, CNN, the Washington Post, MSNBC and related channels to be near zero within the next two to four years. I would not be surprised to see several of these entities actually out of business.
Note, the relative position of ''new media'' such as Twitter, Facebook and YouTube is harder to predict. I suspect that most of the important conflict of this front will take place here. Right now, all of new media is controlled by forces broadly opposed to the Insurgency. Yet the Insurgency must establish dominance on this territory. They can accomplish this either by capturing these existing platforms (aka ''bend the knee'' capitulation) or by moving the center of power to new platforms that are aligned with the Insurgency (e.g., gab.ai replacing Twitter). If you think that this latter is highly unlikely, I strongly urge you to reexamine your models and assumptions.
My sense is that the decisive decision in this conflict is whether the ''new media'' remain coupled to the legacy power structures (and their OODA loops) or decouple and enter into a direct conflict for ''decentralized supremacy'' (see my last point below). If they choose the former, they will lose. If they choose the latter, the outcome is hard to predict.
Front Two: The Deep StateIn ordinary politics, an elected candidate is expected to integrate with and make relatively small fine-tuning changes to the existing state apparatus and the mass of career bureaucrats that make up most of the actual machinery of government (AKA the ''deep state''). Thus, while the Obama Administration might differ quite significantly from the Bush Administration in political theory and intent, the actual impact of theses differences on the real trajectory of the ''ship of state'' is relatively small.
My assessment is that the Trump Insurgency has identified the Deep State itself as its central antagonist and is engaged in a direct existential conflict with it.
Normally this would be an easy win for the Deep State. However, I expect this front to be the most challenging, uncertain and dangerous of the war. The Deep State is massive, has access to vast resources and capabilities and has been in the business of controlling power for decades. But two things are moving in the Insurgency's favor.
First, the Deep State appears to be fragmented. For example, the ''Russian Hacking'' scenario of the past two months looks surprisingly uncoordinated and incompetent. I don't know exactly what is going on here, but it is clearly not the product of a unified and smoothly operating Deep State.
Second, it seems highly likely that the Deep State is prepared to fight ''the last war'' while the Insurgency is bringing an entirely different kind of fight. The Deep State developed in and for the 20th Century. You might say that they are experts at fighting Trench Warfare. But this is the 21st Century and the Insurgency has innovated Blitzkrieg.
Let's take a look at the ''fake news'' meme for example. This has all the earmarks of a Deep State initiative. Carefully planned, highly coordinated, coming from all authoritative directions, strategically targeted. My read is that this was a Deep State response to the Communications Infrastructure fight. But it looks like this initiative has not only failed, but that the Insurgency has been able to leverage its decisive OODA loop advantages to turn the entire thing around and make ''fake news'' its own tool. How? By moving rapidly, unconventionally, in a very decentralized fashion and with complete commitment to victory.
If my read is correct, the balance of the struggle between the Deep State and the Insurgency will be determined by how quickly the Deep State can dispense with old and dysfunctional doctrine and innovate novel approaches that are adequate to the war. In other words, is this the Western Front (France falling in six weeks) or the Eastern Front (the USSR bleeding and giving ground until it could innovate a new war machine that could outcompete the Wehrmacht).
If my read of the situation is correct (which, of course, it very well may not be), then the Deep State would be ill advised indeed to undertake any major efforts in the next 12''24 months. For example, an ''impeach Trump'' initiative, would almost certainly be an enormous strategic disaster. In spite of the apparent strength of the Deep State, the Insurgency's superior OODA loop would likely result in an Insurgency victory in this fight''--'and victory here would greatly strengthen the Insurgency's position. (Can you say ''Emperor Trump?)
From the opposite direction, the Insurgency would be well advised to Blitzkrieg. Right now it has the advantage of an approach and a model that its opponent doesn't understand and can't react to effectively. But the Deep State is deep. Given time it could learn how to win this fight. If the Insurgency wants to win, it needs to radically reduce the Deep State's strategic agency quickly. This means moving fast and moving decisively.
I cannot overstate how deeply dangerous this fight is. Classically, when a long-standing hegemony (cf ''Pax Americana) is weakened and distracted by intra-elite conflict, rivals like Russia and China will see an opportunity to move from a hegemonic to a multi-polar world and can be tempted into adventurism. In these conditions, even the slightest mistake can push the system into nearly catastrophic conflict.
Front Three: GlobalismAnti-globalist rhetoric was one of the most enduring and central features of the Trump campaign. Indeed, if Trump clearly stood for anything, resisting the ''false song of globalism'' was it. And all evidence in the post-election environment is that the Trump Insurgency will indeed be actively anti-globalist.
What is flat out astounding is the relative ease with which Trump has been able to cut through globalist Gordian Knots. For half a decade, the Trans-Pacific Partnership was an unstoppable juggernaut. Until, that is, Trump decided to end it. Perhaps this is evidence of a ''below the surface'' weakness that made TPP a paper tiger. Perhaps it is evidence of the relative balance of power between nationalist and globalist institutions. At least when the nationalist institution is the United States. (Compare the Greeks vis a vis the EU). Perhaps it is evidence of a larger scale anti-globalist conflict that has been raging for nearly a decade and has been surfacing all over the place (Brexit, Trump, Le Pen, etc.).
In any event, it is a significant victory and I am certain that it will embolden the Insurgency. At this point, I expect the Insurgency to cut deep into globalist power institutions (the World Bank, the UN, various treaty organizations) and, more importantly, globalist-allied national institutions like the Federal Reserve. The Globalists have an odd connection to power. Generally, they must move through influence and threat to elites, with a non-trivial amount of mass level propaganda to smooth the way. The Insurgency is broadly immune to globalist propaganda, the Insurgency elites seem unlikely to play ball with globalist elites or to back down under threat. At this point, I see only two real moves available to the globalists. 1) economic destabilization hoping to turn ''the people'' against the Insurgency; 2) some kind of some kind of social/military destabilization.
But I don't give the globalists much of a chance. Of all of the major world powers, only the EU is currently dominated by globalists, and with the victory of Brexit and the surge of nationalism in France, the Netherlands, etc., even the Eurocrats are on the run.
By moving quickly and decisively against the Deep State allies of globalism at home and erecting nationalist resilience to global institutional influence (e.g, high tariffs and protectionist monetary policy), combined with shaping a narrative that points all bad economic news directly at globalists, the Insurgency might well be able to cut most globalist power off at the knees.
Notably, even large multi-national corporations''--'until recently appearing to be pulling the strings of political policy''--'seem to be rapidly capitulating to the Insurgency. The two major globalist forces that have not yet been publicly tested are the energy companies and the banks. What will happen here remains to be seen. A cynic might suggest that the Insurgency itself is only superficially populist and in fact really simply represents the interests of Energy and Banks against other elites. That cynic might be right, we shall see.
The net-net result of this front will be a significant weakening of the post-War global institutional order and a rebalancing of power along not yet fully understood nationalist alignments. It is not clear what effect this change will have. For example, one might expect ''global scale'' issues like climate disruption or terrorism to lose focus and efficacy''--'but that isn't clear. It is certainly plausible that nation-to-nation alliances can make significant forward progress in even these areas of interest. Particularly if you assume that globalist agendas were extracting value from global scale crises rather than resolving them.
Moreover, there is no reason to believe that a multi-polar nationalism will be less stable over the long term than a hegemony. History has certainly cut both ways. Perhaps what is most clear is this: the period of transition as globalist forces struggle to maintain power while nationalist forces are not yet in any form of stable equilibrium with each-other is a moment (possibly lasting years) of extreme danger.
Bacteria developing antibiotic resistance.Front Four: The New Culture WarLast week, Reddit user notjafo expressed something important. It is worth reading his entire post, but the gist is this: the left won the culture war of the 1960's''--'1990's. And the Trump Insurgency does not represent ''the next move'' of the old right in that old war. It represents the first move of an emergent new culture. One that is directly at war with the ''Blue Church'' on the ground of culture itself.
''The Blue Church is panicking because they've just witnessed the birth of a new Red Religion. Not the tired old Christian cliches they defeated back in the '60s, but a new faith based on cultural identity and outright rejection of the Blue Faith.''''--'/u/notjfao
While I can nit pick at some of his analysis, broadly speaking I agree. As of 2016, the shoe is on the other foot''--'the counter culture has become the mainstream and the Insurgents are the new counter culture.
Similar to the other battles, this Culture War front is characterized by a distinction between a more powerful and established Blue team organized around and fighting ''the last war'' and a Red team still in flux but beginning to figure out how to fight from the future. And, as per the other fronts, until the Blue team figures this out, it will continue to lose ground without understanding why.
In this case, however, the superior OODA loop of the Insurgency is only part of the strategic shift. Of far more importance is the fact that the Insurgency evolved within a culture broadly dominated by the values and techniques of the Blue Church and therefore, by simple natural selection, is now almost entirely immune to the total set of ''Blue critique''.
In other words, if we map the arc of the culture war from the 1950's through to the 1990's we will see the slow emergence of a set of strategies, techniques and alliances on the part of the emerging Blue Church that became increasingly perfected and effective over time. For example, the critical power of the epithets ''racist'' or ''sexist'' which had little or no traction in the 1930's and 1940's had, by the 1990's become decisive.
Yet, even as the Blue Church was achieving dominance, the roots of the Insurgency were being laid. And, like bacteria becoming increasingly immune to an antibiotic after constant exposure, those aspects of the emergent ''Red Religion'' that were able to survive at all began to coalesce and expand. What has now erupted into the zeitgeist is something new and almost completely immune to the rhetorical and political techniques of the Blue Church. To call an adherent of the Red Religion ''racist'' is unlikely to elicit much more than a ''kek'' and a derisive dismissal. The old weapons have no more sting.
Moreover, the Red Religion does not intend to engage the Blue Church in any way other than ''outright rejection.'' It considers the Church and its adherents to be acting in bad faith by default and the doctrines of the Church to be little more than a form of mental illness. Accordingly, the Red Religion has no intention of dialogue, conversation or even sharing power with the Church.
The Blue Church should expect to meet the Red Religion in war. And in this conflict the Red Religion has the advantage.
In the nature of every movement that has endured the crucible of selection, the Red Religion is much more coherent and focused than the dominant Church which is criss-crossed with internal conflict and in-fighting. The Red Religion was born into and optimized for new media (e.g, optimized for memes rather than films) and as the balance of power shifts from 20th Century media to 21st Century media, this inures to the advantage of the Reds. Going deeper, even as the Red Religion has developed an immunity to most of the primary techniques of the Blue Church, it has simultaneously developed its own memetic/values structure connected with deep human values that stem from ancient ''tribal selection'' and are highly attractive to the portions of the human family (men and women) who are focused on protecting and defending their tribe (hence the Red Religions' intrinsic focus on Nationalism).
In other words, over the short to mid term, most of the humans who are best prepared to wage war''--'who are most attuned to and psychologically ready for war''--'will be attracted to the Red Religion. They will be focused, almost entirely immune to the entire portfolio of Blue weapons and they will be armed with and optimized for 21st Century techniques of waging culture war.
As a consequence, the result of this conflict will almost certainly be fatal for the Blue Church. We are already witnessing it, in the form of both an increasingly desperate ''doubling down'' on obviously impotent attacks and a creeping demoralization within the fabric of the Church. I expect to see this accelerate and as the Insurgency wins on other fronts, the set of alliances that hold the Church together will begin to unravel and the Church will collapse.
The sooner that happens, the better it will be for everyone.
Right now, the Church is killing us. While it is holding many important, necessary values, it is also holding a ton of stuff that is deeply dysfunctional. But by monopolizing the instruments of culture and power, it inhibits us like a well meaning but overbearing parent from being able to form the new innovations in culture, practice and value that are necessary to our age. The collapse of the Blue Church is going to lead to a level of ''cultural flux'' that will make the 1960's look like the Eisenhower administration. As the Church falls away, the ''children of Blue'' will explode out in a Cambrian explosion and reach out to engage in all out culture war with the still nascent Red Religion.
This Culture War will be unlike anything we have ever seen. It will take place everywhere all at once, constrained less by geography than by technical platform and by the complex relationship between innovation and power on an exponential technology curve. It will be a struggle over not just the content, but the very sense and nature of identity, meaning and purpose. It will mutate so quickly and will evolve so rapidly that all of our legacy techniques (both psychological and institutional) for making sense of and responding to the world will melt into so much tapioca. This will be terrifying. It is also the source of our best hope.
Ice crystals poised for a phase transition.The War for Collective IntelligenceIf you've made it this far (or chose to skip directly here), take a breath and settle in. This is the interesting part. For that precious few who prioritize understanding over brevity, what follows will make much more sense if you have read my Foundational Assumptions, The Coming Great Transition, Introducing Generation Omega and The Future of Organization.
For those who want the tldr, it is this: we live in a non-linear world, stop thinking linearly.
Once you have accepted this as the task, you will eventually come to an important conclusion: you can't. By yourself, you can't think non-linearly. This isn't your fault. Individual human beings can't think non-linearly. Only ''collective intelligences,'' those agents of ''inter-subjective consciousness'' can. To put it more simply, we implement and do things as individuals. We innovate as tribes. And the world we live in today''--'the world of the 21st Century''--'is a world of continuous innovation.
In this environment, for the first time ever in history, the ability to innovate is decisively superior to the ability to deploy power. Prior to today, the rule of ''the battle goes to whoever gets there the first with the most'' was a decent rule of thumb. Of course, this has never been strictly the case. Most of the great stories of history are built around moments of innovation where the smarter but less powerful group was able to outwit and undermine their opponent with superior technique, technology and strategy. Over time the balance has slowly but consistently moved in the direction of innovation. Ask Turing and Oppenheimer about the accelerating pace of innovation as it relates to war.
The conflict of the 21st Century is about forming a Collective Intelligence that can outwit and out innovate all of its competitors. The central challenge is to innovate a way of collaborating and cohering individuals that maximally deploys their individual perspectives, capabilities, understandings and insights with each-other. Right now, the Insurgency has the edge. It has discovered some key ways to tap into the power of decentralized collective intelligence and this is its principal advantage. While it is definitely not a mature version of a decentralized collective intelligence, it is substantially more so than any collective intelligence with which it is competing and unless and until a more effective decentralized collective intelligence enters the field, this advantage is enough.
Like all wars, the shape of this particular conflict will be highly dependent on path, timing and surprise. Right now, for example, the relative difference in power between the Establishment and the Insurgency is large, and while it continues to lose it's impact, power still matters. At the same time, while the Insurgency has a meaningful advantage in ''collective intelligence'' this advantage is not overwhelming. Thus the details of the situation that I describe above.
So, for example, if the Deep State uses its power advantage as a way to stall until until it can innovate a collective intelligence advantage, it has a decent chance. (Of course, becoming a decentralized collective intelligence is going to be really hard for the actual individuals who make up the Deep State to understand and accept.)
But watch out as the conflict evolves. As the Insurgency cuts down and unplugs legacy power structures (e.g, the media, the intelligence agencies) and replaces them with more fluid and innovative approaches (e.g., gab.ai and Palantir) the balance will begin to tip quickly. If the Establishment cannot stave off the Insurgency in the next 4''5 years, that phase of the war will be over.
Then the real question. Does the Insurgency and the Red Religion represent a stable attractor in the 21st Century. Can it form a collective intelligence that is able to select-against and out-compete all comers. If so, what does this look like? My sense is that this is ultimately a highly unstable state. While tribalism (nationalism) can be very potent in the short term, it is ultimately a deeply unstable ship to navigate the oceans of the future.
Or is there a different timeline where one of the ''children of Blue'' discovers an approach that is more intelligent still''--'one that is more fit to ride the wave of exponential technology and global scale crisis? One that is more fully in line with the true nature of inter-subjective consciousness? One that can scale without losing its coherence? One that is adequate to the whole set of existential challenges of the 21st Century?
Such an eventuality is certainly possible''--'although the most robust collective intelligence is likely to be more purple than red or blue. How likely? Well, right now I think we have a decent chance but really do believe that the die will be cast in the next 3''5 years.
For those who want to take action, I have three recommendations:
The Blue Church, the Deep State, the Old Media and all the other aspects of the Establishment are holding you back. Free your mind. This is going to be much harder than it sounds. For most people, if you are under 40, your entire development has taken place within the context of the Blue Church. Many of your deepest assumptions and unconscious values are going to have to be examined with brutal honesty and courage.All Collective Intelligence is gated by Sensemaking. Right now, our collective sensemaking systems are in complete disarray. We don't know who or what to trust. We barely even know how. Find ways to improve your individual sensemaker and collaborate on collective sensemaking systems. This should get easier as the old media and the Blue Church collapse.Both #1 and #2 require other people. And, since all of our old ways of collaborating with other people are either suspect or obsolete, you are going to have to learn how to build real faithful relationships the old fashioned way. Get much better at making friends. I don't mean casual acquaintances. And I definitely don't mean social network contacts. I mean the kinds of people who ready willing and able to actually care for you''--'even at risk to themselves. Not because of shared ideology or even shared mission, but because of the deep stuff of human commitment.Good luck.
[Note: this was published in Deep Code and is intended to be challenging and to move the conversation forward. Comments that are thoughtful and contribute will be greatly appreciated. Comments that are not will be deleted.]
The theme of this morning's news updates from Washington is additional clarity emerging, rather than meaningful changes in the field. But this clarity is enough to give us a sense of what we just saw happen, and why it happened the way it did.
I'll separate what's below into the raw news reports and analysis; you may also find these twopieces from yesterday (heavily referenced below) to be useful.
News Reports(1) Priebus made two public statements today. One is that the ban on Muslims will no longer be applied to green card holders. Notably absent from his statement was anything about people with other types of visa (including long-term ones), or anything about the DHS' power to unilaterally revoke green cards in bulk.
The other was that the omission of Jews from the statement for Holocaust Remembrance Day was deliberate and is not regretted.
A point of note here is that Priebus is the one making these statements, which is not normally the Chief of Staff's job. I'll come back to that below.
(2) Rudy Giuliani told Fox News that the intent of yesterday's order was very much a ban on Muslims, described in those words, and he was among the people Trump asked how they could find a way to do this legally.
(3) CNN has a detailed story (heavily sourced) about the process by which this ban was created and announced. Notable in this is that the DHS' lawyers objected to the order, specifically its exclusion of green card holders, as illegal, and also pressed for there to be a grace period so that people currently out of the country wouldn't be stranded''--'and they were personally overruled by Bannon and Stephen Miller. Also notable is that career DHS staff, up to and including the head of Customs & Border Patrol, were kept entirely out of the loop until the order was signed.
(4) The Guardian is reporting (heavily sourced) that the ''mass resignations'' of nearly all senior staff at the State Department on Thursday were not, in fact, resignations, but a purge ordered by the White House. As the diagram below (by Emily Roslin v Praze) shows, this leaves almost nobody in the entire senior staff of the State Department at this point.
The seniormost staff of the Department of State. Blue X's are unfilled positions; red X's are positions which were purged. Note that the ''filled'' positions are not actually confirmed yet.As the Guardian points out, this has an important and likely not accidental effect: it leaves the State Department entirely unstaffed during these critical first weeks, when orders like the Muslim ban (which they would normally resist) are coming down.
The article points out another point worth highlighting: ''In the past, the state department has been asked to set up early foreign contacts for an incoming administration. This time however it has been bypassed, and Trump's immediate circle of Steve Bannon, Michael Flynn, son-in-law Jared Kushner and Reince Priebus are making their own calls.''
(5) On Inauguration Day, Trump apparently filed his candidacy for 2020. Beyond being unusual, this opens up the ability for him to start accepting ''campaign contributions'' right away. Given that a sizable fraction of the campaign funds from the previous cycle were paid directly to the Trump organization in exchange for building leases, etc., at inflated rates, you can assume that those campaign coffers are a mechanism by which US nationals can easily give cash bribes directly to Trump. Non-US nationals can, of course, continue to use Trump's hotels and other businesses as a way to funnel money to him.
(6) Finally, I want to highlight a story that many people haven't noticed. On Wednesday, Reuters reported (in great detail) how 19.5% of Rosneft, Russia's state oil company, has been sold to parties unknown. This was done through a dizzying array of shell companies, so that the most that can be said with certainty now is that the money ''paying'' for it was originally loaned out to the shell layers by VTB (the government's official bank), even though it's highly unclear who, if anyone, would be paying that loan back; and the recipients have been traced as far as some Cayman Islands shell companies.
Why is this interesting? Because the much-maligned Steele Dossier (the one with the golden showers in it) included the statement that Putin had offered Trump 19% of Rosneft if he became president and removed sanctions. The reason this is so interesting is that the dossier said this in July, and the sale didn't happen until early December. And 19.5% sounds an awful lot like ''19% plus a brokerage commission.''
Conclusive? No. But it raises some very interesting questions for journalists to investigate.
What does this all mean?I see a few key patterns here. First, the decision to first block, and then allow, green card holders was meant to create chaos and pull out opposition; they never intended to hold it for too long. It wouldn't surprise me if the goal is to create ''resistance fatigue,'' to get Americans to the point where they're more likely to say ''Oh, another protest? Don't you guys ever stop?'' relatively quickly.
However, the conspicuous absence of provisions preventing them from executing any of the ''next steps'' I outlined yesterday, such as bulk revocation of visas (including green cards) from nationals of various countries, and then pursuing them using mechanisms being set up for Latinos, highlights that this does not mean any sort of backing down on the part of the regime.
Note also the most frightening escalation last night was that the DHS made it fairly clear that they did not feel bound to obey any court orders. CBP continued to deny all access to counsel, detain people, and deport them in direct contravention to the court's order, citing ''upper management,'' and the DHS made a formal (but confusing) statement that they would continue to follow the President's orders. (See my updates from yesterday, and the various links there, for details) Significant in today's updates is any lack of suggestion that the courts' authority played a role in the decision.
That is to say, the administration is testing the extent to which the DHS (and other executive agencies) can act and ignore orders from the other branches of government. This is as serious as it can possibly get: all of the arguments about whether order X or Y is unconstitutional mean nothing if elements of the government are executing them and the courts are being ignored.
Yesterday was the trial balloon for a coup d'(C)tat against the United States. It gave them useful information.
CBP gets new chiefThe Border Patrol, a key link in U.S. border security, has a new chief as leadership at immigration and border security agencies emerges.
The change is the latest among the federal agencies that oversee immigration and customs as the White House moves ahead with ambitious plans to transform border security and immigration.
Acting Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan announced via a Jan. 31 tweet that the agency had named Border Patrol veteran Ronald Vitiello as chief of the agency.
Vitiello, a 30-year veteran of the agency, rose up through the patrol's ranks. He replaces former chief Mark Morgan, who had been in the position seven months.
The union of border patrol agents, who had backed President Donald Trump as he campaigned in 2016, welcomed Vitiello's appointment and experience with the agency.
"The previous administration's attempts to treat the Border Patrol like any law enforcement agency, resulted in leadership that was reactive and in constant crisis," the National Border Patrol Council said in a statement. "As we begin to implement President Trump's plan to secure the border and protect our communities, Mr. Vitiello's experience will be invaluable," it said. "We look forward to working with Chief Vitiello."
Vitiello was deputy chief of the Border Patrol during the Obama administration, moving to CBP headquarters in Washington, D.C., in 2010, after previously serving as chief of the Rio Grande Valley Sector, one of the patrol's largest and most complex operations, according to CBP.
On Jan. 30, Trump appointed Thomas Homan as acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Homan replaced Acting Director Daniel Ragsdale. Contradicting reports that Ragsdale had been fired, an ICE spokesman told FCW in an email on Jan. 31 that he will resume his position as deputy director. Ragsdale is currently listed as deputy director alongside Homan on the agency's leadership page.
Homan is also a veteran of his agency, with an extensive background with ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations, the agency's group responsible for tracking down, arresting and deporting criminal undocumented aliens or those that pose a threat to national security. ERO also works with immigrants who are seeking asylum in the U.S.
Posted by Mark Rockwell on Feb 01, 2017 at 1:24 PM
House approves raft of DHS billsBy Mark RockwellFeb 01, 2017The leader of the House Homeland Security Committee touted the House's ratification of almost 20 bills that would tackle an array of cybersecurity, border technology and management issues at the Department of Homeland Security.
The 17 bills that cleared the House, according to a Jan 31 statement by House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), address border security, transportation security, and cybersecurity defenses, enhance first responder capabilities and streamline DHS' management efficiency.
The DHS Insider Threat and Mitigation Act of 2017 would require the agency secretary to set up a "holistic" insider threat program within the department within a year of the legislation's passage. The bill calls for that program to include insider threat identification and mitigation training, as well as investigative support to track down insider threats when they are detected.
Other notable technology and cybersecurity-related legislation in the package:
The DHS Acquisition Documentation Integrity Act would require the secretary to request component heads to maintain specific types of acquisition documentation. That documentation would include complete lifecycle cost estimates with supporting documentation, as well as verification of those lifecycle estimates against independent cost estimates; a cost-benefit analysis with supporting documentation; and a schedule, including an integrated master schedule.
The Border Security Technology Accountability Act of 2017 would strengthen accountability for deployment of border security technology at DHS. The legislation would ensure each border tech program has a written acquisition program baseline approved by the relevant acquisition decision authority, as well as documentation verifying that each program is meeting cost, schedule and performance thresholds and complies with the Federal Acquisition Regulation.
The Cyber Preparedness Act of 2017 would enhance preparedness and response capabilities for cyber attacks and bolsters the sharing of information related to cyber threats.
The United States-Israel Cybersecurity Cooperation Enhancement Act of 2017 would set up a DHS grant program to promote cooperative cybersecurity research and development between the U.S. and Israel.
About the Author
Mark Rockwell is a staff writer at FCW.
Before joining FCW, Rockwell was Washington correspondent for Government Security News, where he covered all aspects of homeland security from IT to detection dogs and border security. Over the last 25 years in Washington as a reporter, editor and correspondent, he has covered an increasingly wide array of high-tech issues for publications like Communications Week, Internet Week, Fiber Optics News, tele.com magazine and Wireless Week.
Rockwell received a Jesse H. Neal Award for his work covering telecommunications issues, and is a graduate of James Madison University.
Click here for previous articles by Rockwell. Contact him at mrockwell@fcw.com or follow him on Twitter at @MRockwell4.
Federal Register :: Rebuilding the U.S. Armed Forces
Start Printed Page 8983 Memorandum of January 27, 2017By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including my authority as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, I hereby direct the following:
Section 1. Policy. To pursue peace through strength, it shall be the policy of the United States to rebuild the U.S. Armed Forces.
Sec. 2. Readiness. (a) The Secretary of Defense (Secretary) shall conduct a 30-day Readiness Review. As part of this review, the Secretary shall:
(i) assess readiness conditions, including training, equipment maintenance, munitions, modernization, and infrastructure; and (ii) submit to the President a report identifying actions that can be implemented within the current fiscal year and that are necessary to improve readiness conditions.(b) Concurrently with the Readiness Review, the Secretary, together with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), shall develop a Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 budget amendment for military readiness, including any proposed reallocations.
(c) The Secretary shall work with the Director of OMB to develop levels for the Department of Defense's FY 2018 budget request that are necessary to improve readiness conditions and address risks to national security.
(d) Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary shall submit to the President a plan of action to achieve the levels of readiness identified in the Secretary's Readiness Review before FY 2019. That plan of action shall address areas for improvement, including insufficient maintenance, delays in acquiring parts, access to training ranges, combatant command operational demands, funding needed for consumables (e.g., fuel, ammunition), manpower shortfalls, depot maintenance capacity, and time needed to plan, coordinate, and execute readiness and training activities.
Sec. 3. Rebuilding the U.S. Armed Forces. (a) Upon transmission of a new National Security Strategy to Congress, the Secretary shall produce a National Defense Strategy (NDS). The goal of the NDS shall be to give the President and the Secretary maximum strategic flexibility and to determine the force structure necessary to meet requirements.
(b) The Secretary shall initiate a new Nuclear Posture Review to ensure that the United States nuclear deterrent is modern, robust, flexible, resilient, ready, and appropriately tailored to deter 21st-century threats and reassure our allies.
(c) The Secretary shall initiate a new Ballistic Missile Defense Review to identify ways of strengthening missile-defense capabilities, rebalancing homeland and theater defense priorities, and highlighting priority funding areas.
Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this memorandum shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; orStart Printed Page 8984 (ii) the functions of the Director of OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.(b) This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) All actions taken pursuant to this memorandum shall be consistent with requirements and authorities to protect intelligence and law enforcement sources and methods. Nothing in this order shall be interpreted to supersede measures established under authority of law to protect the security and integrity of specific activities and associations that are in direct support of intelligence and law enforcement operations.
(d) This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
(e) The Secretary is hereby authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.
' THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, January 27, 2017 Filed 1-31-17; 11:15 am]
Federal Register :: Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States
Executive Order 13769 of January 27, 2017By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, including the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1101et seq., and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, and to protect the American people from terrorist attacks by foreign nationals admitted to the United States, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Purpose. The visa-issuance process plays a crucial role in detecting individuals with terrorist ties and stopping them from entering the United States. Perhaps in no instance was that more apparent than the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, when State Department policy prevented consular officers from properly scrutinizing the visa applications of several of the 19 foreign nationals who went on to murder nearly 3,000 Americans. And while the visa-issuance process was reviewed and amended after the September 11 attacks to better detect would-be terrorists from receiving visas, these measures did not stop attacks by foreign nationals who were admitted to the United States.
Numerous foreign-born individuals have been convicted or implicated in terrorism-related crimes since September 11, 2001, including foreign nationals who entered the United States after receiving visitor, student, or employment visas, or who entered through the United States refugee resettlement program. Deteriorating conditions in certain countries due to war, strife, disaster, and civil unrest increase the likelihood that terrorists will use any means possible to enter the United States. The United States must be vigilant during the visa-issuance process to ensure that those approved for admission do not intend to harm Americans and that they have no ties to terrorism.
In order to protect Americans, the United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles. The United States cannot, and should not, admit those who do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent ideologies over American law. In addition, the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including ''honor'' killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation.
Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from foreign nationals who intend to commit terrorist attacks in the United States; and to prevent the admission of foreign nationals who intend to exploit United States immigration laws for malevolent purposes.
Sec. 3. Suspension of Issuance of Visas and Other Immigration Benefits to Nationals of Countries of Particular Concern. (a) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall immediately conduct a review to determine the information needed from any country to adjudicate any visa, admission, or other benefit under the INA (adjudications) in order to determine that the individual seeking the benefit is who the individual claims to be and is not a security or public-safety threat.
(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall submit to the President Start Printed Page 8978a report on the results of the review described in subsection (a) of this section, including the Secretary of Homeland Security's determination of the information needed for adjudications and a list of countries that do not provide adequate information, within 30 days of the date of this order. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a copy of the report to the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence.
(c) To temporarily reduce investigative burdens on relevant agencies during the review period described in subsection (a) of this section, to ensure the proper review and maximum utilization of available resources for the screening of foreign nationals, and to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas).
(d) Immediately upon receipt of the report described in subsection (b) of this section regarding the information needed for adjudications, the Secretary of State shall request all foreign governments that do not supply such information to start providing such information regarding their nationals within 60 days of notification.
(e) After the 60-day period described in subsection (d) of this section expires, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the President a list of countries recommended for inclusion on a Presidential proclamation that would prohibit the entry of foreign nationals (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas) from countries that do not provide the information requested pursuant to subsection (d) of this section until compliance occurs.
(f) At any point after submitting the list described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Homeland Security may submit to the President the names of any additional countries recommended for similar treatment.
(g) Notwithstanding a suspension pursuant to subsection (c) of this section or pursuant to a Presidential proclamation described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may, on a case-by-case basis, and when in the national interest, issue visas or other immigration benefits to nationals of countries for which visas and benefits are otherwise blocked.
(h) The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall submit to the President a joint report on the progress in implementing this order within 30 days of the date of this order, a second report within 60 days of the date of this order, a third report within 90 days of the date of this order, and a fourth report within 120 days of the date of this order.
Sec. 4. Implementing Uniform Screening Standards for All Immigration Programs. (a) The Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall implement a program, as part of the adjudication process for immigration benefits, to identify individuals seeking to enter the United States on a fraudulent basis with the intent to cause harm, or who are at risk of causing harm subsequent to their admission. This program will include the development of a uniform screening standard and procedure, such as in-person interviews; a database of identity documents proffered by applicants to ensure that duplicate documents are not Start Printed Page 8979used by multiple applicants; amended application forms that include questions aimed at identifying fraudulent answers and malicious intent; a mechanism to ensure that the applicant is who the applicant claims to be; a process to evaluate the applicant's likelihood of becoming a positively contributing member of society and the applicant's ability to make contributions to the national interest; and a mechanism to assess whether or not the applicant has the intent to commit criminal or terrorist acts after entering the United States.
(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the Secretary of State, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, shall submit to the President an initial report on the progress of this directive within 60 days of the date of this order, a second report within 100 days of the date of this order, and a third report within 200 days of the date of this order.
Sec. 5. Realignment of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for Fiscal Year 2017. (a) The Secretary of State shall suspend the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) for 120 days. During the 120-day period, the Secretary of State, in conjunction with the Secretary of Homeland Security and in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, shall review the USRAP application and adjudication process to determine what additional procedures should be taken to ensure that those approved for refugee admission do not pose a threat to the security and welfare of the United States, and shall implement such additional procedures. Refugee applicants who are already in the USRAP process may be admitted upon the initiation and completion of these revised procedures. Upon the date that is 120 days after the date of this order, the Secretary of State shall resume USRAP admissions only for nationals of countries for which the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence have jointly determined that such additional procedures are adequate to ensure the security and welfare of the United States.
(b) Upon the resumption of USRAP admissions, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual's country of nationality. Where necessary and appropriate, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall recommend legislation to the President that would assist with such prioritization.
(c) Pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the entry of nationals of Syria as refugees is detrimental to the interests of the United States and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I have determined that sufficient changes have been made to the USRAP to ensure that admission of Syrian refugees is consistent with the national interest.
(d) Pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the entry of more than 50,000 refugees in fiscal year 2017 would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I determine that additional admissions would be in the national interest.
(e) Notwithstanding the temporary suspension imposed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may jointly determine to admit individuals to the United States as refugees on a case-by-case basis, in their discretion, but only so long as they determine that the admission of such individuals as refugees is in the national interest'--including when the person is a religious minority in his country of nationality facing religious persecution, when admitting the person would enable the United States to conform its conduct to a preexisting international agreement, or when the person is already in transit and denying admission would cause undue hardship'--and it would not pose a risk to the security or welfare of the United States.Start Printed Page 8980
(f) The Secretary of State shall submit to the President an initial report on the progress of the directive in subsection (b) of this section regarding prioritization of claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution within 100 days of the date of this order and shall submit a second report within 200 days of the date of this order.
(g) It is the policy of the executive branch that, to the extent permitted by law and as practicable, State and local jurisdictions be granted a role in the process of determining the placement or settlement in their jurisdictions of aliens eligible to be admitted to the United States as refugees. To that end, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall examine existing law to determine the extent to which, consistent with applicable law, State and local jurisdictions may have greater involvement in the process of determining the placement or resettlement of refugees in their jurisdictions, and shall devise a proposal to lawfully promote such involvement.
Sec. 6. Rescission of Exercise of Authority Relating to the Terrorism Grounds of Inadmissibility. The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall, in consultation with the Attorney General, consider rescinding the exercises of authority in section 212 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182, relating to the terrorism grounds of inadmissibility, as well as any related implementing memoranda.
Sec. 7. Expedited Completion of the Biometric Entry-Exit Tracking System. (a) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall expedite the completion and implementation of a biometric entry-exit tracking system for all travelers to the United States, as recommended by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.
(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the President periodic reports on the progress of the directive contained in subsection (a) of this section. The initial report shall be submitted within 100 days of the date of this order, a second report shall be submitted within 200 days of the date of this order, and a third report shall be submitted within 365 days of the date of this order. Further, the Secretary shall submit a report every 180 days thereafter until the system is fully deployed and operational.
Sec. 8. Visa Interview Security. (a) The Secretary of State shall immediately suspend the Visa Interview Waiver Program and ensure compliance with section 222 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1202, which requires that all individuals seeking a nonimmigrant visa undergo an in-person interview, subject to specific statutory exceptions.
(b) To the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of appropriations, the Secretary of State shall immediately expand the Consular Fellows Program, including by substantially increasing the number of Fellows, lengthening or making permanent the period of service, and making language training at the Foreign Service Institute available to Fellows for assignment to posts outside of their area of core linguistic ability, to ensure that non-immigrant visa-interview wait times are not unduly affected.
Sec. 9. Visa Validity Reciprocity. The Secretary of State shall review all nonimmigrant visa reciprocity agreements to ensure that they are, with respect to each visa classification, truly reciprocal insofar as practicable with respect to validity period and fees, as required by sections 221(c) and 281 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1201(c) and 1351, and other treatment. If a country does not treat United States nationals seeking nonimmigrant visas in a reciprocal manner, the Secretary of State shall adjust the visa validity period, fee schedule, or other treatment to match the treatment of United States nationals by the foreign country, to the extent practicable.
Sec. 10. Transparency and Data Collection. (a) To be more transparent with the American people, and to more effectively implement policies and practices that serve the national interest, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall, consistent with applicable law and national security, collect and make publicly available within 180 days, and every 180 days thereafter:Start Printed Page 8981
(i) information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been charged with terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; convicted of terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; or removed from the United States based on terrorism-related activity, affiliation, or material support to a terrorism-related organization, or any other national security reasons since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later; (ii) information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been radicalized after entry into the United States and engaged in terrorism-related acts, or who have provided material support to terrorism-related organizations in countries that pose a threat to the United States, since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later; and (iii) information regarding the number and types of acts of gender-based violence against women, including honor killings, in the United States by foreign nationals, since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later; and (iv) any other information relevant to public safety and security as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General, including information on the immigration status of foreign nationals charged with major offenses.(b) The Secretary of State shall, within one year of the date of this order, provide a report on the estimated long-term costs of the USRAP at the Federal, State, and local levels.
Sec. 11. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.Start Printed Page 8982
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
' THE WHITE HOUSE, January 27, 2017. Filed 1-31-17; 11:15 am]
2TTH
Scalia Assassinated??
A new theory has emerged that Hillary Clinton had Justice Antonin Scalia assassinated.
The theory comes from a WikiLeaks email from Hillary's Chairman John Podesta to DC lobbyist Steve Elmendorf. Elmendorf was also the former chief of staff to Democratic leader Dick Gephardt.
Podesta writes, ''Didn't think wet works meant pool parties at the Vineyard.''
Elmendrof responds, ''I am all in Sounds like it will be a bad nite , we all need to buckle up and double down''
The theory goes that Podesta's use of wet work implies an assassination. And the references to pool and Vineyard refer to the Cibolo Creek Ranch where Scalia's body was found.
The Ranch does have a pool and it is believed that a vineyard is just down the road.
The email was also written just four days before Scalia was found dead on February 13, 2016.
Others believe the theory is complete hogwash. They believe ''vineyard'' refers to Martha's Vineyard, an island off the coast of Massachusetts that is a haven for the liberal elite.
They also believe wet work is a term that a super PAC does on behalf of the candidate's campaign.
The ''bad nite'', they argue is Bernie Sanders winning the New Hampshire primary on 2/9.
What do you think? Did Hillary Clinton and her people have Justice Scalia killed? Is he just another name on the Clinton's kill list?
SCOTUS
Schumer, Feinstein, Wyden all voted to confirm Gorsuch in 2006 '' Fire Andrea Mitchell!
Now that Neil Gorsuch is Trump's pick for SCOTUS, the left is melting down and Democrats (along with the media) are smearing Gorsuch and his family. But did you know that Neil Gorsuch was confirmed 95-0 in 2006 under the Bush regime?? Yes, ZERO no votes against Neil Gorsuch in 2006. A lot of those same Democrats that voted to confirm Neil Gorsuch in 2006 are still in the Senate today.
Chuck Schumer, Ron Wyden, Diane Feinstein, Patty Murry, Turban Durbin and even Harry Reid voted to confirm Neil Gorsuch. Also (which you wouldn't hear from the media) is that Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and John Kerry even voted to confirm Gorsuch.\So when Democrats go out and smear and vow to vote against Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, you have to ask those shysters, what has changed?
ALL Democrats need to be targeted if they don't support Neil Gorsuch. There are 10 far left Democrats up for re-election in 2018 in states that Donald Trump won. I hope the Republicans will go hard after Democrats who refuse to support Neil Gorsuch and want to filibuster them.
I know Donald Trump will destroy any Democrat who refuses to support Gorsuch, here's hoping the rest of the lazy GOP gets off their asses and does the same.
Update: Here are these same Democrats that voted to confirm Gorsuch in 2006 today. The hypocrisy just oozes out.
I just love the taste of leftist tears. If they idiots voted for Gorsuch in 2006, and he's so bad as they are trying to make him out to be today, then what does that say about the Democrat's own judgement in 2006? They need to be replaced if Gorsuch is so awful.
A note about comments: All discussion, comments are welcome. Because of progressive paid trolls, all offsite links go directly to moderation. You aren't being censored, it's because of these leftist paid trolls spamming their left wing hate sites that moderation of all off site links must be verified. It is up to the moderators to allow or delete comments. Comments that contain spam, ads, threats of violence, anti-Semitism, racism or personal attacks on other commentators may be removed and result in a permanent ban.
Why Democrats Should Hold the Line and Filibuster Against Neil Gorsuch | Common Dreams | Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community
In nominating Neil Gorsuch to the supreme court, Donald Trump just gave Senate Republicans exactly what they've long hoped for in filling Antonin Scalia's vacant seat '' and Democrats should do everything in their power to stop it.
It's not that Gorsuch's record is significantly more problematic than that of anyone else on Trump's shortlist (he is, in many ways, merely Scalia's ideological twin). It's that Scalia's successor should have rightfully been Obama's to choose, and Democrats should return the favor by pushing Republicans to the legal limit, including making Republicans eliminate the filibuster on supreme court nominations.
Senate Republicans shamelessly played out the clock on the president's dwindling tenure. After vowing to filibuster anyone Obama picked, they lived up to their word in refusing to hold a single confirmation hearing even for his eventual highly moderate selection of Merrick Garland. It was the perfect cherry atop an administration marked by Republican intransigence and opposition to practically every policy proposal put forward by the president.
Now the Trump administration, with its noted penchant for ''alternative facts'' is looking to rewrite recent history once more.
Trump spokesman Sean Spicer told reporters Monday that, before Senate Democrats ''even heard who this individual is, you've got some of them saying, 'Absolutely no.' I mean, that just shows you that it's all about politics, it's not about qualification.''
And Trump, in a primetime press conference Tuesday scheduled for maximum drama, redoubled the point, calling Gorsuch's qualifications ''beyond dispute'', and adding: ''I only hope that Democrats and Republicans can come together for once for the good of the country.''
To pin the partisan standoff that Republicans created around this vacancy on Democrats, as Spicer and Trump have been quick to do, isn't just ironic, it's deeply disingenuous. But it was Ted Cruz, perhaps, who deserves the prize for such things.
Speaking on air shortly after Trump's presser, Cruz disparaged Democrats for their alleged ''unprecedented partisan obstruction''. This from the man who led government shutdowns and built his defining career moments around the political polarization of Obamacare.
Already Democrats have signaled they will fight the nomination with a filibuster. Moments after Trump's announcement, Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement ''the Senate must insist upon 60-votes for any Supreme Court nominee, a bar that was met by each of President Obama's nominees.''
Yet he also, notably, made his objection about Gorsuch's record, adding, ''Gorsuch has repeatedly sided with corporations over working people, demonstrated a hostility toward women's rights, and most troubling, hewed to an ideological approach to jurisprudence that makes me skeptical that he can be a strong, independent Justice on the Court.''
Gorsuch's record is surely as objectionable to any good Democrat as Scalia's textualist approach to interpreting the constitution ever was. But in fighting Gorsuch, Democrats have a chance to highlight more than that.
They have a chance to shed light on the fact that not only have Republicans successfully used gerrymandering and voter ID laws to skew electoral outcomes in their favor '' they've also used every partisan trick in the book to get one more of their own in on the court that's supposed to stand above partisan warfare.
Trump has already urged Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell to do away with the filibuster if Democrats mount a sustained resistance to his pick. But McConnell so far, has signaled some resistance to doing so, telling Politico, ''that's not a presidential decision. That's a Senate decision,'' and suggesting Democrats should refrain from even requiring 60 votes.
But Schumer is right to require them, and what's more, his fellow Democrat's should hold the line.
The practical objection to such a move is that Democrats risk blowing ammunition they might save for a future battle. As it stands four of the court's nine members lean liberal, and three lean conservative, with Justice Anthony Kennedy typically representing the ''swing vote''.
The addition of Gorsuch is unlikely to tip the balance of the court, the logic goes, given that he looks to be an almost perfect ideological replacement for the late conservative stalwart Scalia. But the notion that Democrats should hold their fire in case Trump has the opportunity to fill another, more pivotal, seat down the road is naive given recent history.
It's not an inconceivable or even unlikely scenario that Trump will have such an opportunity. But Democrats would be fools to stand down now in hopes that Republicans, admiring their magnanimity and bipartisan spirit would somehow reward them at some unspecified future date.
Caving to Trump's interests without a fight would take a wind out of the sails of the nascent resistance movement rocking our country. And if there's one thing we've learned under Obama's tenure and over the course of Hillary Clinton's campaign, it's that, at least in this political climate, playing nice and hoping you'll be rewarded down the road is a fool's errand.
dinsdag 31 januari 2017, 5:30 De sportvliegerij ligt onder vuur door EU-regels.. (C)Dertig instructeurs in de sportvliegerij slepen de Nederlandse staat voor de rechter. Vandaag wordt in Breda de eerste zaak behandeld.
De instructeurs hebben door Europese regels een duizenden euro's kostende bijscholing nodig. Diverse vliegscholen in Nederland dreigen failliet te gaan of wegens tekort aan instructeurs te stoppen. Nieuwe sportvliegers die lessen willen, staan in de kou.
Dat zegt vliegschoolhouder Hans van der Linden. 'Door Europese wetgeving worden Nederlandse sportvliegers vanaf volgend jaar opgeleid tot piloot in vliegtuigjes voor vier inzittenden. Bestaande Nederlandse brevetten worden kosteloos omgezet zonder examens.''
Vlieginstructeurs daarentegen moeten volgens hem bijgeschoold worden voor zo'n 15.000 euro. 'Dat is oneerlijk. Velen willen of kunnen dat niet betalen. In andere Europese landen wordt het opgelost met een administratieve handeling, Nederland wil het braafste jongetje zijn. Als hier geen redelijk compromis voor komt, zal de sportvliegerij in Nederland een klap krijgen. Zonde, want voor jongeren is het vaak de opstap naar professioneel piloot'', stelt Van der Linden.
Meer artikelen in Binnenland
Wes Clark 7 Ban
Trump signs 'no privacy for non-Americans' order '' what does that mean for rest of us? ' The Register
Analysis US President Donald Trump may have undermined a critical data sharing agreement between the United States and Europe that internet giants rely on to do business overseas.
In an executive order focused on illegal immigrants that was signed by the president this week, one section specifically noted that privacy protections would not be extended past US citizens or permanent residents in America.
Section 14 of the Enhancing Public Safety order reads:
Agencies shall, to the extent consistent with applicable law, ensure that their privacy policies exclude persons who are not United States citizens or lawful permanent residents from the protections of the Privacy Act regarding personally identifiable information.
By agencies, the president means the NSA, the FBI, and so on. The order's language appears to directly contradict a critical component of the new Privacy Shield agreement between the US and Europe that provides essential legal protections for US businesses sending and receiving data across the Atlantic. In short, that agreement is supposed to ensure non-Americans are not treated as second-class citizens by US organizations, with weaker privacy safeguards than Americans are afforded.
The Privacy Shield was developed and approved in record time last year after the previous Safe Harbor arrangement was deemed illegal by Europe's top court back in October 2015. It has only been in place for six months, it is still on probation as far as Europe's data protection authorities are concerned, and it is almost certain to be challenged in the courts.
The language in the executive order leads to immediate concerns in Europe, with the European Parliament's rapporteur on data protection, Jan Philipp Albrecht, tweeting: "If this is true @EU_Commission has to immediately suspend #PrivacyShield & sanction the US for breaking EU-US umbrella agreement."
Clarity?A few hours later, a frantic European Commission put out a statement in an effort to calm the waters. "We are aware of the executive order on public safety," noted the statement. "The US Privacy Act has never offered data protection rights to Europeans."
It then goes on to flag two pieces of new legislation that it believes made the new Privacy Shield legal under European law: "The Commission negotiated two additional instruments to ensure that EU citizens' data is duly protected when transferred to the US:
The EU-US Privacy Shield, which does not rely on the protections under the US Privacy Act.The EU-US Umbrella Agreement, which enters into force on 1 February. To finalise this agreement the US Congress adopted a new law last year, the US Judicial Redress Act, which extends the benefits of the US Privacy Act to Europeans and gives them access to US courts."In addition to the Judicial Redress Act '' which was signed into law by President Obama late last year '' privacy experts have also spotted a notice that was signed by the outgoing Attorney General just three days before Donald Trump became president and only appeared in the Federal Register three days after the inauguration.
That notice lists 26 countries '' in addition to the European Union as a whole '' as being "covered countries" that benefit from the "extension of certain Privacy Act remedies." That decision is due to become law on February 1 '' the same day as the new US-EU Data Protection and Privacy Agreement.
The combination of the EU's official statement and the discovery of the Justice Department note has led privacy experts to focus on the critical sub-clause in Trump's executive order: that "agencies shall, to the extent consistent with applicable law, ensure that their privacy policies exclude persons..." (our emphasis).
In theory, therefore '' with the Judicial Redress Act law, the attorney general's designations due to become law in less than a week, and the executive order including a clear carve-out for existing law '' the situation should be that the Privacy Shield agreement holds. The executive order would then only apply to countries outside the European Union '' although Canada and Mexico are notably absent, which may have its own political repercussions.
But the Trump Administration has been nothing if not erratic and has repeatedly shown it is willing to tear up existing agreements and protocols. Many are wondering why Trump's team felt the need to include the section at all, especially given the fact that it serves no real purpose. As a result, the European Union's statement concludes with some significant degree of uncertainty:
"We will continue to monitor the implementation of both instruments and are following closely any changes in the US that might have an effect on Europeans' data protection rights," it ends.
IroniesIt is with some degree of irony that Facebook '' which was at the center of the legal case that resulted in the previous Safe Harbor agreement being found illegal '' chose today to release its new "Privacy Basics" approach to data privacy, and two-factor authentication for security.
"Today we're introducing a new Privacy Basics to make it easier for people to find tools for controlling their information on Facebook," the company boasted. Facebook has long been criticized for its opaque and confusing policies over what level of control it grants users of the service.
While the company claims to have simplified things (again), it is notable that there are no fewer than 32 "interactive guides" to help Facebook users figure out how the company is trying to sell people's data as much as possible while giving them the sense that their data is not being abused.
And in a second irony, in two days '' January 28 '' it will be the official annual Data Protection Day in Europe. President Trump has certainly given privacy advocates, government officials, and just about every major online corporation something to discuss. ®
PS: Lawfare's Adam Klein and Carrie Cordero reckon the executive order "does not actually deny Privacy Act protections to Europeans," however "even the suggestion that the administration is cutting back privacy protections for Europeans could be damaging in the ongoing litigation over Privacy Shield's validity."
Sponsored:DevOps and continuous delivery
Executive Order on "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States" - Lawfare
Quinta Jurecic is a research assistant at the Brookings Institution, where she focuses on national security law and policy. She was previously a National Security Intern at Brookings. She graduated from Wesleyan University in 2015, where she completed an honors thesis on moral theories of political leadership and drone warfare under the Obama administration.
DHS Announces Further Travel Restrictions for the Visa Waiver Program | Homeland Security
For Immediate ReleaseDHS Press OfficeContact: 202-282-8010
WASHINGTON'--The Department of Homeland Security today announced that it is continuing its implementation of the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 with the addition of Libya, Somalia, and Yemen as three countries of concern, limiting Visa Waiver Program travel for certain individuals who have traveled to these countries.
Pursuant to the Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security had sixty days to determine whether additional countries or areas of concern should be subject to the travel or dual nationality restrictions under the Act. After careful consideration, and in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security has determined that Libya, Somalia, and Yemen be included as countries of concern, specifically for individuals who have traveled to these countries since March 1, 2011. At this time, the restriction on Visa Waiver Program travel will not apply to dual nationals of these three countries. DHS continues to consult with the Department of State and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to develop further criteria to determine whether other countries would be added to this list.
Last month, the United States began implementing changes under the Act. The three additional countries designated today join Iran, Iraq, Sudan and Syria as countries subject to restrictions for Visa Waiver Program travel for certain individuals. Under the new law, the Secretary of Homeland Security may waive these restrictions if he determines that such a waiver is in the law enforcement or national security interests of the United States. Such waivers will be granted only on a case-by-case basis. As a general matter, categories of travelers who may be eligible for a waiver include individuals who traveled to these countries on behalf of international organizations, regional organizations, and sub-national governments on official duty; on behalf of a humanitarian NGO on official duty; or as a journalist for reporting purposes.
The addition of these three countries is indicative of the Department's continued focus on the threat of foreign fighters. DHS continues to review the security of the Visa Waiver Program, the threat environment, and potential vulnerabilities. This is the latest step in a series of actions over the past 15 months to strengthen the security of the Visa Waiver Program and ensure the Program's requirements are commensurate with the growing threat from foreign terrorist fighters, many of whom are nationals of Visa Waiver Program countries.
An updated Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) application with additional questions on travel to Libya, Somalia, and Yemen will be released this spring 2016 to address exceptions for diplomatic- and military-related travel provided for in the Act.
Individuals impacted will still be able to apply for a visa using the regular immigration process at our embassies or consulates. For those who need a U.S. visa for urgent business, medical, or humanitarian travel to the United States, U.S. embassies and consulates stand ready to provide visa interview appointments on an expedited basis. The new law does not ban travel to the United States, or admission into the United States, and the great majority of Visa Waiver Program travelers will not be affected.
Information on visa applications can be found at travel.state.gov.
Current ESTA holders are encouraged to check their ESTA status prior to travel on U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) website at esta.cbp.dhs.gov.
Benjamin Eric "Ben" Sasse (pronunciation:SASS;[1] born February 22, 1972) is an American politician. Sasse, a member of the Republican Party, is the juniorUnited States Senator from the state of Nebraska.
Sasse earned a doctorate in history from Yale University. He taught at the University of Texas, and served as an assistant secretary in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. In 2010, he was named president of Midland University in Fremont, Nebraska.
In 2014, he was elected to fill the U.S Senate seat being vacated by Mike Johanns, defeating Democratic Party candidate David Domina by a margin of 65% to 31%.[2]
Early life and education[edit]A fifth-generation Nebraskan,[3] Sasse was born on February 22, 1972, in Plainview, Nebraska, the son of Linda K. (Dunklau) and Gary Lynn Sasse. He graduated from Fremont Senior High School, Fremont, Nebraska in 1990,[4] where he was valedictorian.[5]
Sasse graduated from Harvard University in 1994 with a bachelor's degree in government. He also studied at the University of Oxford during the fall of 1992 on a junior year abroad program.[4] He graduated from St. John's College in 1998 with a Master of Arts in Liberal Studies and from Yale University with a Master of Arts degree (M.A.), Master of Philosophy (M.Phil.) and Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D), all from the Department of History, in 2004. Sasse's dissertation, The Anti-Madalyn Majority: Secular Left, Religious Right, and the Rise of Reagan's America won the Theron Rockwell Field (best dissertation) and the George Washington Egleston (American history) Prizes.[4][6]
Career and politics[edit]From September 1994 to November 1995, Sasse worked as an associate consultant at the management consulting firm Boston Consulting Group. For the next year, Sasse served as consultant/executive director for the Christians United For Reformation (CURE).[4] During his tenure, CURE merged with the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals (ACE), and Sasse became executive director of ACE in Anaheim, California.[4][7]
From January 2004 to January 2005, Sasse served as chief of staff for the U.S. Department of JusticeOffice of Legal Policy in Washington, D.C. and as a part-time assistant professor at the University of Texas at Austin by commuting to Austin to teach. Sasse left the Department of Justice in 2005 to serve as chief of staff to Representative Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE) from January 2005 to July 2005.[4]
Sasse then advised the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in Washington, DC, on national security issues from July 2005 to September 2005 as a consultant. Sasse moved to Austin, Texas, to resume his professorship full-time from September 2005 to December 2006.[4]
From December 2006 to December 2007, Sasse served as counselor to the secretary at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in Washington, D.C., where he advised the Secretary on a broad spectrum of health policy issues, from affordable healthcare access to food safety and security.[citation needed]
In July 2007, Sasse was nominated by President George W. Bush to the post of Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.[8][9] His appointment was confirmed by the Senate in December 2007[10] and served until the end of the Bush Administration in January 2009. During his tenure at HHS, Sasse took unpaid leave from the University of Texas.[4]
During 2009, Sasse was advising private equity clients and health care investors and teaching at the University of Texas.[11][12] In October 2009, he officially joined the University of TexasLBJ School of Public Affairs' Center for Politics and Governance as a fellow, before being appointed president of Midland University.[13]
Midland University[edit]Sasse was announced as the 15th president of Midland University in October 2009. At the age of 37, he became one of the youngest chief executives in American higher education when he took over leadership of the 128-year-old institution in the spring of 2010. Sasse's grandfather, Elmer Sasse, worked for Midland for 33 years, mainly as vice president of finance.[14] The school was floundering both financially and academically; Sasse is credited with "turn(ing) it around"; rebranding "Midland Lutheran College" as Midland University, instituting new policies (including spot quizzes and class attendance,) and with "prodigious fundraising."[15][16]
Sasse was officially installed as president on December 10, 2010.[17] When he was appointed, enrollment was at a historic low and the college was "on the verge of bankruptcy."[14][18] During his tenure as president, enrollment grew from 590 to 1,300 students.[14][19] When nearby Dana College was forced to close, Sasse managed to hire much of the faculty and enable most of the students to transfer to Midland.[19]
When Sasse announced his intention to run for U.S. Senate, he offered to resign his post at Midland. Instead, the Board asked him to stay at Midland under a partial leave of absence;[20] in October 2013, his employment contract was amended to reduce his remuneration.[21] Sasse stepped down as president of Midland in January 2015.[18]
U.S. Senate[edit]2014 election[edit]In October 2013, Sasse officially announced his candidacy for the United States Senate seat occupied by Republican Mike Johanns, who announced that he would not be running for re-election in 2014.[22] As of October 2013, his fundraising total of nearly $815,000 from individual donors in his first quarter broke Nebraska's previous record of $526,000 from individual donors, set in 2007 by Mike Johanns while he was sitting U.S. Secretary of Agriculture.[23]
In announcing his Senate candidacy, Sasse expressed strong opposition to the Affordable Care Act (ACA, a.k.a. "Obamacare"), describing himself as "the anti-Obamacare candidate",[24] later declaring that "[i]f it lives, America as we know it will die."[22] Sasse's campaign website indicated that he was pro-life, stating "even one abortion is too many".[25] The website did not refer explicitly to same-sex marriage, but states "Ben believes marriage is between one man & one woman..."[26]
Primary opponent Shane Osborn questioned the depth of Sasse's opposition to the ACA, publicizing articles and speeches delivered by Sasse during and after the passage of the measure through Congress; according to the Omaha World-Herald, "Osborn's campaign appears intent on questioning whether Sasse is a true conservative."[27] The Osborn campaign cited, among other pieces, a 2009 Bloomberg Businessweek column entitled "Health-Care Reform: The Rush to Pass a Bad Bill" stating that "There's an emerging consensus that this [an individual mandate] might be a good idea",[28] and a 2010 speech in which Sasse stated Republicans would probably lack the votes to repeal the ACA, stating that "a middle class entitlement has never been repealed", and opining that Republicans had failed to offer a viable alternative, preferring to stage "symbolic repeal votes".[29] Sasse's response to the Osborn campaign's assertions was that in his articles and speeches, he was describing the political landscape rather than giving his own opinions on the merits of the ACA's provisions; to a World-Herald reporter, he declared "I have never changed my position on thinking Obamacare is a bad idea".[27]
On May 13, 2014, Sasse won 92 of 93 counties[30] and secured the Republican nomination with 109,829 votes, or 49.4% of all votes cast; banker Sid Dinsdale came in second, with 49,829 votes (22.4%), followed by former state treasurer Shane Osborn, with 46,850 votes (21.1%).[31]
On November 4, 2014, Sasse won the general election for the U.S. Senate, defeating Democratic nominee David Domina with 64.4% of the vote to Domina's 31.5%.[32]
Tenure[edit]Sasse assumed office as a United States senator on January 3, 2015. He was officially sworn in when the 114th Congress convened on January 6, 2015.
In 2016, Sasse was the only senator from either party to vote against the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, which was intended to address abuse of heroin and opioid drugs by providing funds to the states for treatment and prevention programs and by making the anti-overdose drug naloxone more widely available to first responders and law enforcement agencies. Sasse stated that he was "distressed by opioid abuse", but questioned whether drug treatment should be addressed at the federal level.[33][34]
2016 presidential election[edit]In early 2016, while both parties' presidential primary election seasons were in progress, Sasse announced that he would not support Republican front-runner Donald Trump should Trump become the party's candidate; he was the first sitting senator to make such an announcement.[35] Sasse questioned Trump's commitment to the U.S. Constitution, in particular accusing him of attacking the First Amendment; he stated that Trump had refused to condemn the Ku Klux Klan; and he suggested that Trump "thinks he's running for King".[36] He stated that if Trump won the party's nomination, then he would vote neither for him nor for Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, but would probably "look for some third candidate'--a conservative option, a Constitutionalist".[36] According to a Sasse spokesman, he did not say that he would necessarily leave the party if Trump was nominated.[37]
Trump, asked about Sasse's third-party suggestion, stated "That would be the work of a loser."[37] Several Nebraska Republican politicians, among them state senators Bob Krist and Beau McCoy and U.S. senator Deb Fischer, took exception to Sasse's statements: Krist described Sasse's comments as "very immature", and declared that Sasse should "quietly and in a statesman-like manner allow the system to work out and provide the leadership that needs to be provided"; Fischer stated that a third-party alternative to Trump would essentially guarantee a Clinton victory.[38]
Committees[edit]Sasse has been appointed to serve on the following committees in the 115th Congress:[39]
Personal life[edit]Sasse, and his wife, Melissa (n(C)e McLeod) Sasse, live in Fremont, Nebraska, with their three children; the children are homeschooled.[40][41]
Sasse was raised a Lutheran and baptized in the Lutheran Church''Missouri Synod.[40] He later became an elder in the United Reformed Churches in North America, and served on the board of trustees for Westminster Seminary California.[42] He is currently a member at Grace Church, a Presbyterian church in Fremont.[43]
References[edit]^Walton, Don. "Ben Sasse: Getting to know you".Lincoln Journal Star. 2013-06-10. Retrieved 2013-11-22.^"National election results 2014". Washington Post. Retrieved November 9, 2014. ^Wilson, Rid (2013-05-13). "14 things to know about Ben Sasse, Nebraska's next senator". Washington Post. Retrieved 2016-05-24. ^ abcdefghSasse, Benjamin, "Biographical Information" Appendix to Hearing re Nomination of Dr. Benjamin Sasse, pp. 78''84. U.S. House. Committee on the Finance. Washington: Government Printing Office; retrieved January 11, 2014.^Roth, Zachary. "Ben Sasse, GOP senator, leads #NeverTrump movement". MSNBC. Retrieved May 5, 2016. ^"Dissertations By Year", Yale.edu; retrieved January 11, 2014.^Maruina, Todd, "Conference of Top Evangelical Leaders Calls Evangelical Movement to Repentance for Liberal Theological Drifts". United Reformed News Service, May 21, 2006; retrieved January 12, 2014.^"Evaluation: Performance Improvement 2008", hhs.gov; retrieved February 19, 2015.^"Personnel Announcement", White House archives; retrieved January 12, 2014.^"Report on the Activities of the Committee on Finance During the 110th Congress". Committee Report 13 of 50, Senate Report 111-013. United States Senate; retrieved January 12, 2014.^K. Weems & B. Sasse, "Is Government Health Insurance Cheap?", Wall Street Journal; retrieved January 11, 2014.^Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) & Benjamin Sasse, "Do Healthcare Reformers Fear A Reading Public?", Forbes.com; retrieved January 11, 2011.^"LBJ School of Public Affairs Professor Ben Sasse Joins Center for Politics and Governance As Fellow". University of Texas; retrieved January 12, 2014.^ abcRicker, Steven (2014-05-22). "Sasse to resign from Midland at year's end". Fremont Tribune. Retrieved 2016-05-25. ^Hampson, Rick (2016-06-07). "Ben Sasse, the Senate GOP's 'Never Trumper,' irks some voters at home". USA Today. Retrieved 2016-06-09. ^Buffington, Tracy (2015-01-03). "Sasse reflects on his five years at Midland". Fremont Tribune. Retrieved 2016-05-25. ^"Office of the President".Midland University. Retrieved 2013-06-13.^ abBuffington, Tracy (January 10, 2016). "Sen. Sasse looks back on 5 years at Midland University". Washington Times. Retrieved May 25, 2016. ^ abWalton, Don (2013-06-10). "Getting to Know Ben sasse". Lincoln Start Journal. Retrieved 2016-05-25. ^Moring, Roseann. "Ben Sasse says he can whip government into shape", omaha.com; retrieved April 8, 2014.^United States Senate Financial Disclosures, United States Senate website; retrieved January 11, 2014.^ abTysver, Robynn. "If Obamacare survives, U.S. won't, Ben Sasse says as he officially launches Senate bid", omaha.com; retrieved October 17, 2013.^Tysver, Robynn. "Donors spread funds across Senate race, though Ben Sasse far ahead of other candidates". Omaha World Herald. Retrieved October 17, 2013. ^Ben Sasse (2013-12-03). "Ben Sasse: I'm running to repeal the Obamacare worldview". Lincoln Journal Star. Retrieved October 7, 2013. ^"Defending the Unborn", Sasse for Nebraska; archived from the originalArchived April 18, 2014, at the Wayback Machine.^"Issues": Sasse for Nebraska; retrieved October 19, 2014. archived October 17, 2014 at archive.org^ abBurnett, James R. "Opponents scour Ben Sasse's old writings for fodder".Omaha World-Herald. 2013-11-25. Retrieved 2014-01-13.^Sasse, Benjamin E. "Health-Care Reform: The Rush to Pass a Bad Bill", businessweek.com; retrieved January 3, 2014.^Zavadil, Chris. "Sasse speaks at health care summit", remonttribune.com; retrieved November 15, 2013.^Walton, Don (2014-10-19). "Sasse is new Republican voice". Lincoln Journal Star. Retrieved 2014-10-27. ^"Nebraska Primary Election Results".Archived May 24, 2014, at the Wayback Machine. New York Times. No date on story. Retrieved 2014-10-20. Archived 2014-05-24 at archive.org.^"Official Report of the Board of State Canvassers of the State of Nebraska: General Election, November 4, 2014."Archived January 8, 2015, at the Wayback Machine. Nebraska Secretary of State. Retrieved 2015-01-08. Archived 2015-01-08 at Wayback Machine.^Howell, Tom (2016-03-10). "Senate overwhelmingly approves bill to fight deadly opioid, heroin epidemic". The Washington Times. Retrieved 2016-03-12. ^Arkin, James (2016-03-10). "Senate Passes Bill Addressing Heroin, Opioid Crisis". Real Clear Politics. Retrieved 2016-03-12. ^Levy, Gabrielle. "Republicans Vow to Oppose Trump in November".U.S. News & World Report. 2016-02-29. Retrieved 2016-03-04.^ abSasse, Ben. "An open letter to Trump supporters". Facebook, 2016-02-28. Retrieved 2016-03-04.^ abMorton, Joseph. "Ben Sasse: If GOP embraces politics of Donald Trump, 'I'm out'".Omaha World-Herald. 2016-03-02. Retrieved 2016-03-04.^Daly, Matthew. "Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse is again tangling with Donald Trump and his supporters".U.S. News & World Report. 2016-03-04. Retrieved 2016-03-04. Two-page article; Krist's comments are on first page, Fischer's on second.^"Senate GOP Releases Committee Assignments for the 115th Congress", senate.gov; retrieved January 10, 2017.^ ab"Ben Sasse Bio"Archived December 16, 2014, at the Wayback Machine. Sarpy County Republican Party; retrieved December 16, 2014 and archived. on December 16, 2014 atWayback Machine^"Ben Sasse Biography". Project Vote Smart. Retrieved March 8, 2016. ^Westminster Seminary California, Catalogue 2014''2015, pg. 89; retrieved June 27, 2016.^Derrick, J. C. "Ben Sasse: A Reformed reformer", world.wng.org; retrieved October 5, 2016.External links[edit]Current statewide political officials of NebraskaU.S. SenatorsState governmentLegislatureNebraska uses a unicameral, nonpartisan legislative system.All members are called Senators.The highest position among the Senators is the Speaker of the Nebraska Legislature, who presides when the Lt. Gov. isn't there.Galen Hadley, Speaker of the Nebraska LegislatureSupreme CourtMembers are appointed first, then retention vote kicks in
ACA
The Insurance professionals only source for News - InsuranceNewsNet
The next time you hear someone dispute that human activity is destabilizing our climate, remember this pie chart.
It represents geochemist James Lawrence Powell's review of 2,258 peer-reviewed scientific articles about climate change, written by 9,136 authors, published between Nov. 12, 2012 and December 31, 2013. Of all those hundreds of papers and thousands of researchers, Powell found one article, authored by a single scientist, that attributed climate change to something other than human actions: "The Role of Solar Activity in Global Warming," by S.V. Avakyan, appearing in the Herald of the Russian Academy of Science, Vol. 83, No. 3.
Powell, a past president of Oberlin, Franklin and Marshall, and Reed colleges, invites anyone to reproduce his survey of the science:
Anyone can repeat as much of the new study as they wish--all of it if they like. Download an Excel database of the 2,258 articles here. It includes the title, document number, and Web of Science accession number. Scan the titles to identify articles that might reject man-made global warming. Then use the DOI or WoS accession number to find and read the abstracts of those articles, and where necessary, the entire article. If you find any candidates that I missed, please email me here.
Powell's earlier survey of peer-reviewed studies published between 1991 and Nov. 12, 2013, resulted in this pie chart:
* See: Donald Trump or Rush Limbaugh
The Cook et al. (2013) 97% consensus result is robust
The 97% consensus has been independently confirmed by a number of different approaches and lines of evidence.
Communicating the expert consensus is very important in terms of increasing public awareness of human-caused climate change and support for climate solutions. Thus it's perhaps not surprising that Cook et al. (2013) and its 97% consensus result have been the subject of extensive denial among the usual climate contrarian suspects. After all, the fossil fuel industry, right-wing think tanks, and climate contrarians have been engaged in a disinformation campaign regarding the expert climate consensus for over two decades. For example, Western Fuels Association conducted a half-million dollar campaign in 1991 designed to 'reposition global warming as theory (not fact).'
The 97% Consensus is a Robust ResultNevertheless, the existence of the expert consensus on human-caused global warming is a reality, as is clear from an examination of the full body of evidence. For example, Naomi Oreskes found no rejections of the consensus in a survey of 928 abstracts performed in 2004. Doran & Zimmerman (2009) found a 97% consensus among scientists actively publishing climate research. Anderegg et al. (2010)reviewed publicly signed declarations supporting or rejecting human-caused global warming, and again found over 97% consensus among climate experts. Cook et al. (2013) found the same 97% result through a survey of over 12,000 climate abstracts from peer-reviewed journals, as well as from over 2,000 scientist author self-ratings, among abstracts and papers taking a position on the causes of global warming.
In addition to these studies, we have the National Academies of Science from 33 different countries all endorsing the consensus. Dozens of scientific organizations have endorsed the consensus on human-caused global warming. Only one has ever rejected the consensus - the American Association of Petroleum Geologists - and even they shifted to a neutral position when members threatened to not renew their memberships due to its position of climate denial.
In short, the 97% consensus on human-caused global warming is a robust result, found using several different methods in various studies over the past decade. It really shouldn't be a surprise at this point, and denying it is, well, denial.
Quantifying the Human Global Warming ContributionThere have also been various studies quantifying the human contribution to global warming, as we have previously documented.
Figure 1: Net human and natural percent contributions to the observed global surface warming over the past 50-65 years according to Tett et al. 2000 (T00, dark blue), Meehl et al. 2004 (M04, red), Stone et al. 2007 (S07, light green), Lean and Rind 2008 (LR08, purple), Huber and Knutti 2011 (HK11, light blue), Gillett et al. 2012 (G12, orange), Wigley and Santer 2012 (WS12, dark green), and Jones et al. 2013 (J12, pink).
Again, there's very little controversy here. The scientific literature is quite clear that humans have caused most of the global surface warming over the past half century, as the 2013 IPCC report stated with 95% confidence.
In Cook et al. (2013), we broadened the focus beyond definitions that quantify the human contribution, because there's a consensus gap on the mere question of whether humans are causing global warming. Nevertheless, we used the 2007 IPCC position as one of our consensus position definitions:
"We examined a large sample of the scientific literature on global [climate change], published over a 21 year period, in order to determine the level of scientific consensus that human activity is very likely causing most of the current GW (anthropogenic global warming, or AGW)."
The IPCC position (humans causing most global warming) was represented in our categories 1 and 7, which include papers that explicitly endorse or reject/minimize human-caused global warming, and also quantify the human contribution. Among the relatively few abstracts (75 in total) falling in these two categories, 65 (87%) endorsed the consensus view. Among the larger sample size of author self-rated papers in categories 1 and 7 (237 in total), 228 (96%) endorsed the consensus view that humans are causing most of the current global warming.
The self-ratings offer a larger sample size on this quantification question because of the limited real estate in a paper's abstract. Most journals have strict word limits on their abstracts, so authors have to focus on the specifics of their research. On the other hand, the author self-ratings are based on the full papers, which have much more real estate and are thus more likely to both take a position on the cause of global warming, and quantify the human contribution.
Confused Contrarians Think they are Included in the 97%There have been a number of contrarians claiming that they are part of the 97% consensus, which they believe is limited to the position that humans are causing some global warming. The first error in this argument is in ignoring the fact that the data collected in Cook et al. (2013) included categories that quantify the human contribution, as Andrew Montford and the GWPF recently did, for example.
The second error has been made by individuals claiming they're in the 97%, but failing to actually check the data. For example, Roy Spencer claimed in testimony to US Congress that he is included in the 97% consensus. Since we made all of our data available to the public, you can see our ratings of Spencer's abstracts here. Five of his papers were captured in our literature search; we categorized four as 'no opinion' on the cause of global warming, and one as implicitly minimizing the human influence. Thus Spencer's research was included in the fewer than 3 percent of papers that either rejected or minimized the human contribution to global warming. Bjorn Lomborg made a similar error, claiming:
"Virtually everyone I know in the debate would automatically be included in the 97% (including me, but also many, much more skeptical)."
In reality Lomborg is included neither in the 97+% nor the less than 3% because as far as we can tell, he has not published any peer-reviewed climate research, and thus none of his writings were captured in our literature search. The 97% is a consensus of climate science experts, and that, Lomborg is not.
Nir Shaviv took the opposite approach, claiming he was wrongly included in the 97%. Though Shaviv also admitted that Cook et al. correctly classified his abstracts based on their content, but claimed that he worded the text in a way to slip it past the journal reviewers and editors.
"I couldn't write these things more explicitly in the paper because of the refereeing, however, you don't have to be a genius to reach these conclusions from the paper."
However, Shaviv, Spencer, and all other authors were invited to participate in the self-ratings process that resulted in the sae 97% consensus conclusion.
Tol's Rejected CommentRichard Tol has also advanced various criticisms of Cook et al. (2013). It's worth noting that Tol does not dispute the existence of the consensus, writing:
"There is no doubt in my mind that the literature on climate change overwhelmingly supports the hypothesis that climate change is caused by humans. I have very little reason to doubt that the consensus is indeed correct."
Tol has nevertheless criticized the methods applied during the Cook et al. survey. For example, he has argued that the literature search should have been conducted with Scopus rather than the Web of Science in order to capture more papers, but also that fewer papers should have been included in the survey in order to focus on those specifically researching the causes of global warming. Tol has also applied various statistical tests comparing the abstract ratings to the author self-ratings, but these tests are invalid because the two phases of the survey considered different information (abstracts only vs. full papers) and are thus not comparable.
In fact, when we released the self-rating data, we explicitly discussed the difference between the two datasets and how the difference was actually instructive. As John Cook wrote,
"That's not to say our ratings of abstracts exactly matched the self-ratings by the papers' authors. On the contrary, the two sets measure different things and not only are differences expected, they're instructive."
Ultimately Tol submitted his criticisms to Environmental Research Letters as a comment, but the submission was summarily rejected by the editor who described it as a speculative opinion piece that does not identify any clear errors that would call the paper's conclusions into question.
In short, the 97% consensus has passed peer-review, while Tol's criticisms have not. Moreover, all of Tol's criticisms only apply to the abstract ratings, while the self-ratings also found the same 97% consensus result, completely independent from the abstract ratings.
Taking Consensus Denial to the ExtremeOne critique of the consensus has been published in a paper in the journal Science & Education. The argument made in the paper was first published by Christopher Monckton on a climate contrarian blog. Monckton has also suggested the conspiracy theory that the journal Environmental Research Letters was created (in 2006) specifically for the purpose of publishing Cook et al. (2013).
The Monckton paper takes the point about quantification above to the extreme. It focuses exclusively on the papers that quantified human-caused global warming, and takes these as a percentage of all 12,000 abstracts captured in the literature search, thus claiming the consensus is not 97%, but rather 0.3%. The logical flaws in this argument should be obvious, and thus should not have passed through the peer-review process.
Approximately two-thirds of abstracts did not take a position on the causes of global warming, for various reasons (e.g. the causes were simply not relevant to or a key component of their specific research paper). Thus in order to estimate the consensus on human-caused global warming, it's necessary to focus on the abstracts that actually stated a position on human-caused global warming.
When addressing the consensus regarding humans being responsible for the majority of recent global warming, the same argument holds true for abstracts that do not quantify the human contribution. We simply can't know their position on the issue - that doesn't mean they endorse or reject the consensus position; they simply don't provide that information, and thus must first be removed before estimating the quantified consensus.
As noted above, when we perform this calculation, the consensus position that humans are the main cause of global warming is endorsed in 87% of abstracts and 96% of full papers. Monckton's argument is very similar to the myth that CO2 can't cause significant global warming because it only comprises 0.04% of the atmosphere. 99% of the atmosphere is comprised of non-greenhouse gases, but these other gases are irrelevant to the question of the CO2 greenhouse effect. The percentage of CO2 as a fraction of all gases in the atmosphere is an irrelevant figure, as is the percentage of abstracts quantifying human-caused global warming as a percentage of all abstracts captured in our literature search.
It's also worth noting that based on Monckton's logic, only 0.08% of abstracts reject human-caused global warming.
Climate Consensus DenialismOverall, the critiques of Cook et al. (2013) have all exhibited the characteristics of scientific denialism. Given the long history of consensus denial campaigns by fossil fuel interests and climate contrarians, continued resistance to the consensus is an expected result. Nevertheless, the 97% consensus is a robust result from several different studies taking a variety of approaches, including two independent methods used by Cook et al. (abstract ratings and author self-ratings). The criticisms of the paper have all exhibited the same few logical flaws, some more extreme than others, but all erroneous.
Intermediate rebuttal written by dana1981
Update July 2015:
Here is a related lecture-video from Denial101x - Making Sense of Climate Science Denial
Last updated on 13 June 2016 by pattimer. View Archives
Wall $treet
Democrats and Republicans agree: Reinstate Glass-Steagall | Brookings Institution
Democrats and Republicans agree: Reinstate Glass-Steagall | Brookings InstitutionSearchThe Brookings InstitutionThe Brookings InstitutionSearchMenuPlay VideoTwitterThe Brookings InstitutionFacebookTwitterYouTubePodcastBrowse NewslettersRSSThe Brookings InstitutionCloseEditor's note: This week the Democrats gather in Philadelphia to nominate a candidate for president and adopt a party platform. Given that there are no minority reports to the Democratic platform, it is likely that it will be adopted as-is this week. And so we can begin the comparison of the two major party platforms. For those who say there are no differences between the Republican and Democratic parties, just read the platforms side-by-side. In many instances, the differences are'--as Donald Trump would say, yuuuge. But in one surprising instance, the two parties actually agree. This piece details that unexpected similarity, while a companion piece from William A. Galston walks readers through one of the biggest contrasts.
Get daily updates from Brookings
Both party platforms this year call for reinstating a version of Glass-Steagall. Glass-Steagall is a depression-era law that separated commercial and investment banking activity. It was effectively repealed in 1999, under President Bill Clinton and replaced by the Gramm Leach-Bilely Act. When the Great Recession hit in 2008 and revealed the casino-like operations of many on Wall Street, attention turned to the wisdom'--or lack thereof'--of repealing Glass-Steagall. Not surprisingly, it became a rallying cry on the left and on the right for those who thought Wall Street had become too powerful and too reckless.
A year ago, Hillary Clinton gave a very powerful economic speech in which she called for an end to ''short-termism'' on Wall Street and for tougher controls against big banks. But that aspect of the speech was largely ignored and given the fact that she represented New York State in the Senate and had many contributors from the world of finance, Bernie Sanders was able to make her out as a puppet of Wall Street. At that time she did not endorse reinstatement of Glass-Steagall, arguing that there were other ways to get to the same results. And there is a legitimate debate over the wisdom of reinstating Glass-Steagall instead of enforcing other rules on the books, such as those in the Dodd-Frank bill. Nonetheless, as the political year went on reinstatement of Glass-Steagall assumed a symbolic significance.
But by agreeing to place reinstatement of Glass-Steagall in the Democratic platform Hillary Clinton signaled that she too would support it. Of course, as they say, the devil is in the details. The Democratic platform calls for a wide variety of other financial regulation in addition to Glass-Steagall, while the Republican platform states that Dodd-Frank is ''crushing small and community banks and other lenders,'' and calls for abolishing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
But in terms of political significance, the presence of the same plank in both party platforms means that the one thing we can bet on seeing in 2017 is a tougher attitude toward the financial industry. To date there hasn't been much interest in this in Congress. But if the establishment heard one thing loud and clear in the 2016 primaries, it was that millions of Americans think that they were the victims of Wall Street and that the next president had better pay attention.
Elaine C. Kamarck is a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution and author of Primary Politics: Everything You Need to Know about How America Nominates Its Presidential Candidates. She is a superdelegate to the Democratic convention.
Democrats and Republicans agree: Reinstate Glass-Steagall | Brookings InstitutionSearchThe Brookings InstitutionThe Brookings InstitutionSearchMenuPlay VideoTwitterThe Brookings InstitutionFacebookTwitterYouTubePodcastBrowse NewslettersRSSThe Brookings InstitutionCloseEditor's note: This week the Democrats gather in Philadelphia to nominate a candidate for president and adopt a party platform. Given that there are no minority reports to the Democratic platform, it is likely that it will be adopted as-is this week. And so we can begin the comparison of the two major party platforms. For those who say there are no differences between the Republican and Democratic parties, just read the platforms side-by-side. In many instances, the differences are'--as Donald Trump would say, yuuuge. But in one surprising instance, the two parties actually agree. This piece details that unexpected similarity, while a companion piece from William A. Galston walks readers through one of the biggest contrasts.
Get daily updates from Brookings
Both party platforms this year call for reinstating a version of Glass-Steagall. Glass-Steagall is a depression-era law that separated commercial and investment banking activity. It was effectively repealed in 1999, under President Bill Clinton and replaced by the Gramm Leach-Bilely Act. When the Great Recession hit in 2008 and revealed the casino-like operations of many on Wall Street, attention turned to the wisdom'--or lack thereof'--of repealing Glass-Steagall. Not surprisingly, it became a rallying cry on the left and on the right for those who thought Wall Street had become too powerful and too reckless.
A year ago, Hillary Clinton gave a very powerful economic speech in which she called for an end to ''short-termism'' on Wall Street and for tougher controls against big banks. But that aspect of the speech was largely ignored and given the fact that she represented New York State in the Senate and had many contributors from the world of finance, Bernie Sanders was able to make her out as a puppet of Wall Street. At that time she did not endorse reinstatement of Glass-Steagall, arguing that there were other ways to get to the same results. And there is a legitimate debate over the wisdom of reinstating Glass-Steagall instead of enforcing other rules on the books, such as those in the Dodd-Frank bill. Nonetheless, as the political year went on reinstatement of Glass-Steagall assumed a symbolic significance.
But by agreeing to place reinstatement of Glass-Steagall in the Democratic platform Hillary Clinton signaled that she too would support it. Of course, as they say, the devil is in the details. The Democratic platform calls for a wide variety of other financial regulation in addition to Glass-Steagall, while the Republican platform states that Dodd-Frank is ''crushing small and community banks and other lenders,'' and calls for abolishing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
But in terms of political significance, the presence of the same plank in both party platforms means that the one thing we can bet on seeing in 2017 is a tougher attitude toward the financial industry. To date there hasn't been much interest in this in Congress. But if the establishment heard one thing loud and clear in the 2016 primaries, it was that millions of Americans think that they were the victims of Wall Street and that the next president had better pay attention.
Elaine C. Kamarck is a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution and author of Primary Politics: Everything You Need to Know about How America Nominates Its Presidential Candidates. She is a superdelegate to the Democratic convention.
"Even as people are building walls and closing borders, we need to construct a progressive narrative around freedom of movement and human rights."
Danny Sriskandarajah, Secretary-General of CIVICUS, marks Human Rights Day by reflecting on civil society's successes and challenges, noting the declining space for citizens to organise and mobilise and calling for the need to construct a progressive narrative around freedom of movement and human rights.
CLIPS AND DOCS
VIDEO - Chuck Schumer Cries During Speech Against Trump Immigration Order (Full Speech) | ABC News - YouTube
The radical rhetoric targeting President Donald Trump got extremely out of hand during Monday's edition of MSNBC's Hardball, with accusations that America's number one enemy for 10 years, Osama bin Laden, desired Trump's travel ban. ''Osama bin Laden's whole theory of a war of the west on Islam now gains great credence thanks to what Donald Trump just did,'' declared the Huffington Post's Howard Fineman to host Chris Matthews.
''We're all crusaders now,'' Matthews announced. ''We are the crusaders officially in the eyes of Islam,'' Fineman argued, building off of Matthews, ''At least that's what that's what Osama said, that's what Donald Trump has done. It is the reaction that Osama Bin Laden, himself, would have prayed for.'' Fineman went off the deep end, exclaiming, ''He prayed for and died for. This is 9/11 15 years later.''
This was all a part of Matthews' first segment where he framed the ban as an affront to America's relationship with Muslims in our military and those helping us in war zones abroad. ''If you're an American of the Islamic faith serving in the American military, do you have a strong confidence right now this is not a war against your religion,'' he ridiculously asked in his opening tirade, ''If you're living a country fighting on America's side and you're Muslim, could you be getting this sense you are fighting against your own faith and people?''
The three-month hold on travel from select countries in the Middle East could hardly be seen as the start of a holy war by the United States. But that didn't stop Matthews from trying to push the notion:
If you're a sworn enemy of the United States are you happy or sad that your number one enemy in the world has just done you the favor of declaring this a war between east and west. Precisely what you have been saying with every bomb you explode, every word you speak, isn't this what you dream of?
Their claims that a travel ban would be the catalyst for a major boon for terrorist recruitment is (to borrow a term from a former Obama administration official) ''stone cold crazy.'' They asserted that the ban gave 'great credence'' to the idea of a war between east and west. But do you know what's a gives, even more, credence to that idea? Actually dropping bombs, like the over 26,000 former President Barack Obama dropped in 2016 alone.
Of course, we are at war with terrorist organizations throughout the region, so those strikes are to be expected. But to act as though Trump's three-month stay on travel was what the terrorists needed as a proof of war is ludicrous. They could just exploit the accidental US airstrike on a hospital in Afghanistan for their recruitment.
Both Matthews and Fineman conveniently failed to mention that under Obama the U.S. conducted 10 times more drone strikes than under President George W. Bush, which resulting in roughly 801 civilian casualties. It now seems as though the anti-war left is finally making its way out of hibernation after eight long years.
VIDEO - Antwerps caf(C) boycot Coca-Cola uit protest tegen Trump (Antwerpen) - Het Nieuwsblad
Antwerpen -Het populaire Antwerpse caf(C) Zeezicht bant alle Amerikaanse producten zoals Coca Cola, en chips van Lay's. De reden? Ze zijn geen fan van Trump.
''Er moet iets gebeuren. Dat is onze overtuiging''. Babs Cossaert, (C)(C)n van de drie eigenaars van caf(C) Zeezicht op de Antwerpse Dageraadplaats, is geen fan van Trump. Het caf(C) boycot daarom alle Amerikaanse producten. ''Wij verkopen enkel producten waar we honderd procent achter staan. Het beleid van Trump wordt hier aan de toog vaak bekritiseerd. Maar het lijkt een beetje hypocriet om daar gezellig over te praten met een Coca Cola erbij, of met een croque monsieur met Heinz Ketchup.''
Zal Trump hiervan wakker liggen?
''Hij zal het niet weten. Maar voor onze gemoedsrust, volgens onze overtuiging, is dat een statement dat we willen maken. Het is een logische beslissing. De taal van economie is bovendien de enige die hij begrijpt. Hiermee willen we aantonen dat we niet akkoord zijn met de verrechtsing van de politiek.''
Hopen jullie op navolging?
''Ik zou dat toejuichen, maar iedereen doet wat hij wil. Ik zal niemand scheef bekijken omdat hij nog wel Coca Cola schenkt. Als je de lijn doortrekt, en dat moet je doen, komt er ook veel bij kijken. Het gaat ook op chips, om sterke drank, om sigaretten.''
Misschien stuit dit klanten die pro-Trump zijn wel tegen de borst?
''Dat kan. Er zullen altijd mensen zijn die dit overbodig of belachelijk vinden. Dat is hun recht. Maar velen sympathiseren met dit initiatief. Dit is hoe we zijn. Ons caf(C) en onze restaurants, gingen altijd al erg bewust om met producten. Zoals kiezen voor lokale producten die ook minder transport vereisen.''
Zijn niet-Amerikaanse producten duurder?
''Ja, maar we nemen die kost op ons. We zijn volop research aan het doen naar alternatieven. Zo hadden we intussen een gesprek met waterproducent Val. Die zitten in Ranst. Tot nu toe schonken we Chaudfontaine (deel van de Coca-Cola Company, red.). Ook een alternatief voor Heinz ketchup is duurder.''
Jullie boycot lijkt behoorlijk protectionistisch. Exact wat Trump zegt wanneer hij het heeft over 'buy American' en 'America First.'
''Er valt veel over te zegen. Wij voelen alleen maar dat dit hetgene is dat we kunnen doen om te tonen dat we niet akkoord zijn met de richting die de politiek uitgaat. Het is iets kleins, maar het is iets.''
Coca Cola voor de Belgische markt wordt niet in de VS, maar in Belgi z(C)lf gemaakt met Belgische werknemers. Straffen jullie hier niet eerder Belgische arbeiders dan Trump mee?
''Tja, we moeten toch iets doen? Veel bedrijven worden ook getroffen door zijn politiek, h(C). Het is een economische boycot, dat weten we. Maar we voelen ons er nog voldoende comfortabel bij.''
Wat zeg je tegen een Belgische werknemer van Coca Cola als die morgen aan je toog zit en zegt dat je hem treft?
''Dan zullen we met hem in discussie gaan. Hij is welkom.''
VIDEO - Matthews: D.C. Is 'Bound Up in Fear, Rage, and Unbalance' by Trump's 'Shock and Awe' | MRCTV
Hardball host Chris Matthews was on edge Tuesday night as he awaited President Trump's Supreme Court pick, grimly staring into the camera with an apocalyptic warning that Trump ''is, tonight, conducting a campaign of shock and awe against this country's institutions'' putting Washington ''on defense.''
''Donald Trump is, tonight, conducting a campaign of shock and awe against this country's institutions. He is on offense in capital city not used to being suddenly thrown on defense,'' Matthews began in his opening diatribe.
VIDEO - CBS Hypes Anti-Trump Sentiment in the European Union and UK | MRCTV
As liberals around the country continued to rage over President Donald Trump's not-a-travel-ban ban Tuesday evening, reporter Mark Phillips took the time on CBS Evening News to remind everyone that the people of Europe don't care for our president either. ''Not just the crowds that have poured onto the streets of Europe are angry with Donald Trump,'' he reported, ''The disenchantment has now reached the highest levels of European politics.''
The report centered on the denouncements the president had received from many key European politicians. Chief among them was the remarks by the President of the European Council Donald Tusk, the highest position of power in the European Union. Tusk had very negative thoughts of Trump and listed him as a threat to the continent.
''Along with the menace of Vladimir Putin's aggressive Russia and China's military buildup in the South China Sea, and militant Islam, Donald Trump's United States has become a threat to Europe,'' Phillips recalled of Tusk's comments. ''We cannot surrender to those who want to weaken or invalidate the transatlantic bond, without which global order and peace cannot survive,'' Tusk said in a speech.
''What frightens the EU is President Trump's support for the British to leave, expressed to Prime Minister Theresa May, and for other countries to follow,'' Phillips continued, ''That and his perceived lack of commitment the NATO and now the refugee ban.''
The CBS reporter followed that up with clips of irate members of the British Parliament attacking the president of the United States. One called Trump's ban ''inhumane. It's racist. And it's immoral,'' while another attacked him directly describing Trump as a ''wretched man, bigoted man.''
Phillips seemed almost gleeful to report on the British people's disgust of Trump, noting, ''And the petition calling for the president's planned state visit to be canceled has clicked up over 1.7 million signatures.''
Closing out his report, Phillips painted a dark picture for the future of US/Europe relations, reiterating, ''Demonstration, angry words in parliament, petitions, condemnations from foreign leaders, the travel ban has driven yet another wedge between Donald Trump and the European allies. And the fear is there's more to come.''
The bashing of right-wing politicians seems to be a hobby for Phillips. Back in the summer of 2016, he insinuated that Nigel Farage, of the United Kingdom Independence Party, was pushing for the country's departure from the EU because Farage wanted people to be ''poorer.'' His report on Trump only served to fan the flames of fear.
VIDEO - Trey Gowdy / Jason Chaffetz Prove Why Travel Ban Is Needed (Refugees Can't Be Vetted) - YouTube
Oh, this is brilliantly indignant. Stay with it, I don't want to ruin the Farage proposition to the EU globalist corruptocrats by spoiling the best part.
.
VIDEO - MUST WATCH '' Official Swearing In Ceremony for Secretary Rex Tillerson Held in the Oval Office (Video)'... | The Last Refuge
Folks you just gotta watch this. President Donald Trump and Vice-President Mike Pence participate in an Oval Office swearing in ceremony for Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.
Prior to the swearing in, the President of the United States, Donald Trump, delivers deliberate and personal remarks of congratulations and appreciation for Secretary Tillerson and his wonderful wife Renda St. Clair.
This remarkable, decent, strong and yet humble man will now be the representative face of the United States, and the Trump administration, to the rest of the world. Secretary Rex Tillerson a guiding light and a servants heart. How intensely blessed and fortunate we are. WATCH:
.
This is such a powerful moment in our nation's history, bearing witness brings forth a deep and emotional pride.
.
'...''And we knew; everyone would be safer '' and we were so very thankful''..
VIDEO - Seattle Social Justice Warrior Demands 'Reparations' Or "We Need To Start Killing People..." | Zero Hedge
We recently warned that America is about to see unprecedented protests and rioting from coast to coast.
But don't take our word for it.
A social justice warrior involved in the Seattle street protests tells you everything you need to know about what the future holds and lends further evidence to the notion that America sits on the precipice of widespread civil unrest.
The woman, who also claims to be a pre-school teacher, implies that it's time for extreme measures, including but not limited to killing people, starting at the White House.
Just so you know... we need to start killing people... first off we need to start killing the White House... the White House might die... your fucking White House... your fucking White House must go'...
As you'll see below, when she claims it's time to start killing people she is most likely referring to white people exclusively. But killing isn't enough.
If you're white, it's time you started kicking some of your hard-earned wealth her way, including your cash and your house:
White people... give your fucking money... give your fucking house... your fucking property... we need it fucking all... you need to reparate black and indigenous people right now... Pay the fuck up... it ain't just your fucking time... it's your fucking money...
Watch the her full speech (and then be sure to register your kids with her pre-school):
');if (Modernizr && !Modernizr.phone) {$owlFirstItem.find('.media__icon').hide();}}CNN.Videx.Metadata.init({dateCreated: videocardContents.dateCreated,descriptionText: videocardContents.descriptionText,duration: videocardContents.duration,sourceLink: videocardContents.sourceLink,sourceName: videocardContents.sourceName,title: videocardContents.headlineText},{videoCollectionDivId: 'cn-2i3vdt',videoDescriptionDivId: 'js-video_description-2i3vdt',videoDurationDivId: 'js-video_duration-2i3vdt',videoTitleDivId: 'js-leaf-video_headline-2i3vdt',videoSourceDivId: 'js-video_sourceName-2i3vdt'});if (CNN.Utils.exists(videocardContents.showName)) {if (CNN.Utils.exists(videocardContents.showUrl)) {showDetailsSpanContent = '' + videocardContents.showName + ' | ';} else {showDetailsSpanContent = videocardContents.showName + ' | ';}}fastdom.measure(function getShowInfo() {var $show = jQuery('.metadata__show'),$isShowDetailsSpanExists = $show.find('span').hasClass('metadata--show__name'),$showName = jQuery('.metadata--show__name');fastdom.mutate(function updateShowInfo() {if (!$isShowDetailsSpanExists) {$show.prepend('' + showDetailsSpanContent + '');} else {$showName.html(showDetailsSpanContent);}});});if (typeof (history) !== 'undefined' && typeof (history.replaceState) !== 'undefined') {history.replaceState('', '', videocardContents.url);document.title = videocardContents.headlineText ? videocardContents.headlineText : '';}}function getCurrentVideoCardContents(currentVideoId) {var containerContents = [{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["Dylann Roof wasted no time confessing to the massacre at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, according to an FBI video shown at his murder trial in Charleston, South Carolina."],"descriptionPlainText":"Dylann Roof wasted no time confessing to the massacre at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, according to an FBI video shown at his murder trial in Charleston, South Carolina.","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"Dylann Roof confession video","headlinePlainText":"Dylann Roof confession video","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"Dylann Roof fatally shot nine people at a historic African American church in Charleston, South Carolina last year. His trial is set to begin in early 2017. ","imageAlt":"Dylann Roof fatally shot nine people at a historic African American church in Charleston, South Carolina last year. His trial is set to begin in early 2017. ","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/161107162042-dylann-roof-to-face-trial-in-2017-large-169.jpg","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/161107162042-dylann-roof-to-face-trial-in-2017-small-169.jpg"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/161107162042-dylann-roof-to-face-trial-in-2017-medium-plus-169.jpg"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/161107162042-dylann-roof-to-face-trial-in-2017-large-169.jpg"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/161107162042-dylann-roof-to-face-trial-in-2017-exlarge-169.jpg"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/161107162042-dylann-roof-to-face-trial-in-2017-super-169.jpg"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/161107162042-dylann-roof-to-face-trial-in-2017-full-169.jpg"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/161107162042-dylann-roof-to-face-trial-in-2017-small-11.jpg"}},"responsiveImage":true}},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/justice/2016/12/10/dylann-roof-church-massacre-confession-ekr-orig-vstop.cnn","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/videos/justice/2016/12/10/dylann-roof-church-massacre-confession-ekr-orig-vstop.cnn","videoId":"justice/2016/12/10/dylann-roof-church-massacre-confession-ekr-orig-vstop.cnn","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"7:32 PM ET, Fri December 9, 2016","sourceName":"CNN","sourceLink":"http://www.cnn.com/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"},{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"cnnmoney","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["Part shared kitchen, part food-business incubator, Your Pro Kitchen is a testing ground for food entrepreneurs."],"descriptionPlainText":"Part shared kitchen, part food-business incubator, Your Pro Kitchen is a testing ground for food entrepreneurs.","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"A test kitchen for food startups","headlinePlainText":"A test kitchen for food startups","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"","imageAlt":"","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130143516-your-pro-kitchen-in-tampa-florida-large-169.jpg","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130143516-your-pro-kitchen-in-tampa-florida-small-169.jpg"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130143516-your-pro-kitchen-in-tampa-florida-medium-plus-169.jpg"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130143516-your-pro-kitchen-in-tampa-florida-large-169.jpg"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130143516-your-pro-kitchen-in-tampa-florida-exlarge-169.jpg"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130143516-your-pro-kitchen-in-tampa-florida-super-169.jpg"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130143516-your-pro-kitchen-in-tampa-florida-full-169.jpg"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130143516-your-pro-kitchen-in-tampa-florida-small-11.jpg"}},"responsiveImage":true},"duration":"2:22"},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/cnnmoney/2017/01/30/a-test-kitchen-for-food-startups-cnnmoney.cnnmoney/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/video/data/3.0/video/cnnmoney/2017/01/30/a-test-kitchen-for-food-startups-cnnmoney.cnnmoney/index.xml","videoId":"cnnmoney/2017/01/30/a-test-kitchen-for-food-startups-cnnmoney.cnnmoney","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"11:46 AM ET, Mon January 30, 2017","sourceName":"CNNMoney","sourceLink":"http://money.cnn.com/","videoCollectionUrl":"/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"},{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"cnnmoney","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["During the CAVES programs, a crew of astronauts heads underground for a two-week training program to practice space skills."],"descriptionPlainText":"During the CAVES programs, a crew of astronauts heads underground for a two-week training program to practice space skills.","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"Astronauts prep for space by living in caves","headlinePlainText":"Astronauts prep for space by living in caves","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"","imageAlt":"","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125152115-astronauts-practice-in-caves-large-169.jpg","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125152115-astronauts-practice-in-caves-small-169.jpg"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125152115-astronauts-practice-in-caves-medium-plus-169.jpg"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125152115-astronauts-practice-in-caves-large-169.jpg"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125152115-astronauts-practice-in-caves-exlarge-169.jpg"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125152115-astronauts-practice-in-caves-super-169.jpg"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125152115-astronauts-practice-in-caves-full-169.jpg"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125152115-astronauts-practice-in-caves-small-11.jpg"}},"responsiveImage":true},"duration":"1:02"},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/cnnmoney/2017/01/25/astronauts-prep-for-space-by-living-in-caves.cnnmoney/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/video/data/3.0/video/cnnmoney/2017/01/25/astronauts-prep-for-space-by-living-in-caves.cnnmoney/index.xml","videoId":"cnnmoney/2017/01/25/astronauts-prep-for-space-by-living-in-caves.cnnmoney","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"3:25 PM ET, Wed January 25, 2017","sourceName":"CNNMoney","sourceLink":"http://money.cnn.com/","videoCollectionUrl":"/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"},{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"cnnmoney","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["Francis Ford Coppola wants to turn the movie \"Apocalypse Now\" into a video game."],"descriptionPlainText":"Francis Ford Coppola wants to turn the movie \"Apocalypse Now\" into a video game.","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"'Apocalypse Now' turned video game ","headlinePlainText":"'Apocalypse Now' turned video game ","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"Apocalypse Now One","imageAlt":"Apocalypse Now One","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130112412-apocalypse-now-one-large-169.jpg","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130112412-apocalypse-now-one-small-169.jpg"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130112412-apocalypse-now-one-medium-plus-169.jpg"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130112412-apocalypse-now-one-large-169.jpg"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130112412-apocalypse-now-one-exlarge-169.jpg"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130112412-apocalypse-now-one-super-169.jpg"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130112412-apocalypse-now-one-full-169.jpg"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170130112412-apocalypse-now-one-small-11.jpg"}},"responsiveImage":true},"duration":"0:55"},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/cnnmoney/2017/01/27/apocalyse-now-video-game-orig.cnn/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/video/data/3.0/video/cnnmoney/2017/01/27/apocalyse-now-video-game-orig.cnn/index.xml","videoId":"cnnmoney/2017/01/27/apocalyse-now-video-game-orig.cnn","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"2:11 PM ET, Fri January 27, 2017","sourceName":"CNN","sourceLink":"http://www.cnn.com","videoCollectionUrl":"/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"},{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"cnnmoney","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["Donald Trump and other members of his team have questioned the integrity of the government's official unemployment data. Now, they're in charge of it."],"descriptionPlainText":"Donald Trump and other members of his team have questioned the integrity of the government's official unemployment data. Now, they're in charge of it.","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"Will Trump trust the unemployment rate?","headlinePlainText":"Will Trump trust the unemployment rate?","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"Will Trump trust the official unemployment rate?_00005716.jpg","imageAlt":"Will Trump trust the official unemployment rate?_00005716","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170126102748-will-trump-trust-the-official-unemployment-rate-00005716-large-169.jpg","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170126102748-will-trump-trust-the-official-unemployment-rate-00005716-small-169.jpg"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170126102748-will-trump-trust-the-official-unemployment-rate-00005716-medium-plus-169.jpg"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170126102748-will-trump-trust-the-official-unemployment-rate-00005716-large-169.jpg"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170126102748-will-trump-trust-the-official-unemployment-rate-00005716-exlarge-169.jpg"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170126102748-will-trump-trust-the-official-unemployment-rate-00005716-super-169.jpg"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170126102748-will-trump-trust-the-official-unemployment-rate-00005716-full-169.jpg"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170126102748-will-trump-trust-the-official-unemployment-rate-00005716-small-11.jpg"}},"responsiveImage":true},"duration":"2:52"},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/cnnmoney/2017/01/26/will-trump-trust-the-official-unemployment-rate.cnnmoney/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/video/data/3.0/video/cnnmoney/2017/01/26/will-trump-trust-the-official-unemployment-rate.cnnmoney/index.xml","videoId":"cnnmoney/2017/01/26/will-trump-trust-the-official-unemployment-rate.cnnmoney","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"9:53 AM ET, Thu January 26, 2017","sourceName":"CNNMoney","sourceLink":"","videoCollectionUrl":"/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"},{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"cnnmoney","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["Carlos Slim in 82 Seconds"],"descriptionPlainText":"Carlos Slim in 82 Seconds","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"Carlos Slim in 82 Seconds","headlinePlainText":"Carlos Slim in 82 Seconds","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim (L) walks in a street of Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, on October 26, 2012. Colombian lawmakers on Wednesday asked Slim to appear before Congress over claims his telecommunications empire has abused its dominant position in the country. Lawmakers are seeking testimony from Slim, the world's richest man, to bring 'greater transparency' to the telecoms sector in Colombia, according to a copy of the correspondence inviting him to testify. AFP ","imageAlt":"Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim (L) walks in a street of Cartagena de Indias, Colombia, on October 26, 2012. Colombian lawmakers on Wednesday asked Slim to appear before Congress over claims his telecommunications empire has abused its dominant position in the country. Lawmakers are seeking testimony from Slim, the world's richest man, to bring 'greater transparency' to the telecoms sector in Colombia, according to a copy of the correspondence inviting him to testify. AFP ","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/121117232027-carlos-slim-large-169.jpg","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/121117232027-carlos-slim-small-169.jpg"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/121117232027-carlos-slim-medium-plus-169.jpg"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/121117232027-carlos-slim-large-169.jpg"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/121117232027-carlos-slim-exlarge-169.jpg"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/121117232027-carlos-slim-super-169.jpg"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/121117232027-carlos-slim-full-169.jpg"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/121117232027-carlos-slim-small-11.jpg"}},"responsiveImage":true},"duration":"1:23"},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/cnnmoney/2017/01/27/carlos-slim-in-82-seconds.cnn/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/video/data/3.0/video/cnnmoney/2017/01/27/carlos-slim-in-82-seconds.cnn/index.xml","videoId":"cnnmoney/2017/01/27/carlos-slim-in-82-seconds.cnn","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"11:10 AM ET, Fri January 27, 2017","sourceName":"CNN","sourceLink":"","videoCollectionUrl":"/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"},{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"cnnmoney","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["A startup working at LA's clean tech incubator is developing a way to convert shells from nuts like almonds and peanuts into energy to power cars and homes."],"descriptionPlainText":"A startup working at LA's clean tech incubator is developing a way to convert shells from nuts like almonds and peanuts into energy to power cars and homes.","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"You could charge your car with 60 lbs of nuts","headlinePlainText":"You could charge your car with 60 lbs of nuts","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"","imageAlt":"","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125112121-nuts-to-power-large-169.jpeg","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125112121-nuts-to-power-small-169.jpeg"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125112121-nuts-to-power-medium-plus-169.jpeg"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125112121-nuts-to-power-large-169.jpeg"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125112121-nuts-to-power-exlarge-169.jpeg"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125112121-nuts-to-power-super-169.jpeg"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125112121-nuts-to-power-full-169.jpeg"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170125112121-nuts-to-power-small-11.jpeg"}},"responsiveImage":true},"duration":"2:08"},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/cnnmoney/2017/01/25/peanuts-to-power-clean-energey-cnnmoney.cnnmoney/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/video/data/3.0/video/cnnmoney/2017/01/25/peanuts-to-power-clean-energey-cnnmoney.cnnmoney/index.xml","videoId":"cnnmoney/2017/01/25/peanuts-to-power-clean-energey-cnnmoney.cnnmoney","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"11:18 AM ET, Wed January 25, 2017","sourceName":"CNNMoney","sourceLink":"http://money.cnn.com/","videoCollectionUrl":"/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"},{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"cnnmoney","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["President Trump met with heads of the Big Three to discuss growing jobs to the US, but didn't include foreign automakers that also produce cars in the US."],"descriptionPlainText":"President Trump met with heads of the Big Three to discuss growing jobs to the US, but didn't include foreign automakers that also produce cars in the US.","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"Trump meets CEOs of GM, Ford, Fiat Chrysler","headlinePlainText":"Trump meets CEOs of GM, Ford, Fiat Chrysler","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 24: (AFP-OUT) President Donald Trump greets CEO of Ford Motor Company Mark Fields as CEO of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles Sergio Marchionne (R) and Senior Advisor Jared Kushner (2R) look on during a meeting with auto industry leaders in the Roosevelt Room of the White House on January 24, 2017 in Washington, DC. President Trump has a full day of meetings including one with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and another with the full Senate leadership. (Photo by Shawn Thew-Pool/Getty Images)","imageAlt":"WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 24: (AFP-OUT) President Donald Trump greets CEO of Ford Motor Company Mark Fields as CEO of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles Sergio Marchionne (R) and Senior Advisor Jared Kushner (2R) look on during a meeting with auto industry leaders in the Roosevelt Room of the White House on January 24, 2017 in Washington, DC. President Trump has a full day of meetings including one with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and another with the full Senate leadership. (Photo by Shawn Thew-Pool/Getty Images)","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170124151948-auto-ceos-trump-large-169.jpg","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170124151948-auto-ceos-trump-small-169.jpg"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170124151948-auto-ceos-trump-medium-plus-169.jpg"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170124151948-auto-ceos-trump-large-169.jpg"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170124151948-auto-ceos-trump-exlarge-169.jpg"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170124151948-auto-ceos-trump-super-169.jpg"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170124151948-auto-ceos-trump-full-169.jpg"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170124151948-auto-ceos-trump-small-11.jpg"}},"responsiveImage":true},"duration":"1:38"},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/cnnmoney/2017/01/24/trump-meets-ceos-of-gm-ford-fiat-chrysler.cnn/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/video/data/3.0/video/cnnmoney/2017/01/24/trump-meets-ceos-of-gm-ford-fiat-chrysler.cnn/index.xml","videoId":"cnnmoney/2017/01/24/trump-meets-ceos-of-gm-ford-fiat-chrysler.cnn","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"3:16 PM ET, Tue January 24, 2017","sourceName":"CNN","sourceLink":"","videoCollectionUrl":"/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"},{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"cnnmoney","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["Former Wells Fargo branch managers explain the extreme pressure they felt to open new accounts and reach goals."],"descriptionPlainText":"Former Wells Fargo branch managers explain the extreme pressure they felt to open new accounts and reach goals.","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"Wells Fargo managers: Pressure was too much","headlinePlainText":"Wells Fargo managers: Pressure was too much","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"A branch of Bank of America in New York on Thursday, April 21, 2016. Federal regulators have fined Wells Fargo $185 million for secretly opening unauthorized accounts in order to boost sales figures and income. The bank must also pay $5 million in restitution and has fired 5300 employees involved. ","imageAlt":"A branch of Bank of America in New York on Thursday, April 21, 2016. Federal regulators have fined Wells Fargo $185 million for secretly opening unauthorized accounts in order to boost sales figures and income. The bank must also pay $5 million in restitution and has fired 5300 employees involved. ","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160909164919-02-wells-fargo-file-large-169.jpg","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160909164919-02-wells-fargo-file-small-169.jpg"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160909164919-02-wells-fargo-file-medium-plus-169.jpg"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160909164919-02-wells-fargo-file-large-169.jpg"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160909164919-02-wells-fargo-file-exlarge-169.jpg"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160909164919-02-wells-fargo-file-super-169.jpg"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160909164919-02-wells-fargo-file-full-169.jpg"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160909164919-02-wells-fargo-file-small-11.jpg"}},"responsiveImage":true},"duration":"3:48"},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/cnnmoney/2017/01/24/fmr-wells-fargo-managers-the-pressure-was-unbearable.cnn/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/video/data/3.0/video/cnnmoney/2017/01/24/fmr-wells-fargo-managers-the-pressure-was-unbearable.cnn/index.xml","videoId":"cnnmoney/2017/01/24/fmr-wells-fargo-managers-the-pressure-was-unbearable.cnn","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"9:48 AM ET, Tue January 24, 2017","sourceName":"CNN","sourceLink":"","videoCollectionUrl":"/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"},{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"cnnmoney","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["Samsung blames faulty batteries for exploding Galaxy phones. Doran Myersdorf, founder of battery company StoreDot, says the phone's design is partially to blame."],"descriptionPlainText":"Samsung blames faulty batteries for exploding Galaxy phones. Doran Myersdorf, founder of battery company StoreDot, says the phone's design is partially to blame.","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"Is design to blame for Samsung fires?","headlinePlainText":"Is design to blame for Samsung fires?","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"An advertisement for the Samsung Electronics Co. Galaxy Note 7 smartphone is displayed in Seoul, South Korea, on Wednesday, Oct. 12, 2016. Samsung halted sales of its Galaxy Note 7 smartphones and asked consumers to stop using the ones they've already purchased, another blow to South Korea's largest company as it struggles with a crisis over exploding batteries. Photographer: SeongJoon Cho/Bloomberg via Getty Images","imageAlt":"An advertisement for the Samsung Electronics Co. Galaxy Note 7 smartphone is displayed in Seoul, South Korea, on Wednesday, Oct. 12, 2016. Samsung halted sales of its Galaxy Note 7 smartphones and asked consumers to stop using the ones they've already purchased, another blow to South Korea's largest company as it struggles with a crisis over exploding batteries. Photographer: SeongJoon Cho/Bloomberg via Getty Images","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170123124127-samsung-galaxy-note-7-large-169.jpg","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170123124127-samsung-galaxy-note-7-small-169.jpg"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170123124127-samsung-galaxy-note-7-medium-plus-169.jpg"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170123124127-samsung-galaxy-note-7-large-169.jpg"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170123124127-samsung-galaxy-note-7-exlarge-169.jpg"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170123124127-samsung-galaxy-note-7-super-169.jpg"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170123124127-samsung-galaxy-note-7-full-169.jpg"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170123124127-samsung-galaxy-note-7-small-11.jpg"}},"responsiveImage":true},"duration":"1:52"},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/cnnmoney/2017/01/23/samsung-blames-fires-on-batteries-but-it-may-be-their-design-cnnmoney.cnnmoney/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/video/data/3.0/video/cnnmoney/2017/01/23/samsung-blames-fires-on-batteries-but-it-may-be-their-design-cnnmoney.cnnmoney/index.xml","videoId":"cnnmoney/2017/01/23/samsung-blames-fires-on-batteries-but-it-may-be-their-design-cnnmoney.cnnmoney","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"12:37 PM ET, Mon January 23, 2017","sourceName":"CNNMoney","sourceLink":"http://money.cnn.com/","videoCollectionUrl":"/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"},{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"cnnmoney","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["The Raptor, Ford's off-road version of the F-150, has cut 500 pounds and altered its engine to up its overall performance."],"descriptionPlainText":"The Raptor, Ford's off-road version of the F-150, has cut 500 pounds and altered its engine to up its overall performance.","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"Ford Raptor is a lean, mean, hauling machine","headlinePlainText":"Ford Raptor is a lean, mean, hauling machine","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"","imageAlt":"","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117175814-2018-ford-raptor-large-169.png","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117175814-2018-ford-raptor-small-169.png"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117175814-2018-ford-raptor-medium-plus-169.png"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117175814-2018-ford-raptor-large-169.png"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117175814-2018-ford-raptor-exlarge-169.png"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117175814-2018-ford-raptor-super-169.png"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117175814-2018-ford-raptor-full-169.png"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117175814-2018-ford-raptor-small-11.png"}},"responsiveImage":true},"duration":"1:05"},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/cnnmoney/2017/01/17/2018-ford-raptor.cnn/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/video/data/3.0/video/cnnmoney/2017/01/17/2018-ford-raptor.cnn/index.xml","videoId":"cnnmoney/2017/01/17/2018-ford-raptor.cnn","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"5:58 PM ET, Tue January 17, 2017","sourceName":"CNN","sourceLink":"","videoCollectionUrl":"/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"},{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"cnnmoney","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["CNNTech Correspondent Samuel Burke sits down with Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella to discuss the company's plans for its digital assistant Cortana."],"descriptionPlainText":"CNNTech Correspondent Samuel Burke sits down with Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella to discuss the company's plans for its digital assistant Cortana.","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"How Microsoft's Cortana will compete with Alexa ","headlinePlainText":"How Microsoft's Cortana will compete with Alexa ","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"How Microsoft's Cortana will compete with Alexa CNNMoney_00000528.jpg","imageAlt":"How Microsoft's Cortana will compete with Alexa CNNMoney_00000528","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170118140423-how-microsofts-cortana-will-compete-with-alexa-cnnmoney-00000528-large-169.jpg","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170118140423-how-microsofts-cortana-will-compete-with-alexa-cnnmoney-00000528-small-169.jpg"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170118140423-how-microsofts-cortana-will-compete-with-alexa-cnnmoney-00000528-medium-plus-169.jpg"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170118140423-how-microsofts-cortana-will-compete-with-alexa-cnnmoney-00000528-large-169.jpg"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170118140423-how-microsofts-cortana-will-compete-with-alexa-cnnmoney-00000528-exlarge-169.jpg"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170118140423-how-microsofts-cortana-will-compete-with-alexa-cnnmoney-00000528-super-169.jpg"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170118140423-how-microsofts-cortana-will-compete-with-alexa-cnnmoney-00000528-full-169.jpg"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170118140423-how-microsofts-cortana-will-compete-with-alexa-cnnmoney-00000528-small-11.jpg"}},"responsiveImage":true},"duration":"1:44"},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/cnnmoney/2017/01/18/how-microsofts-cortana-will-compete-with-alexa-cnnmoney.cnnmoney/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/video/data/3.0/video/cnnmoney/2017/01/18/how-microsofts-cortana-will-compete-with-alexa-cnnmoney.cnnmoney/index.xml","videoId":"cnnmoney/2017/01/18/how-microsofts-cortana-will-compete-with-alexa-cnnmoney.cnnmoney","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"1:56 PM ET, Wed January 18, 2017","sourceName":"CNNMoney","sourceLink":"","videoCollectionUrl":"/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"},{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"cnnmoney","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["The leaders of major global companies expect Donald Trump to get right down to business after inauguration."],"descriptionPlainText":"The leaders of major global companies expect Donald Trump to get right down to business after inauguration.","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"Global CEOs are ready for President Trump","headlinePlainText":"Global CEOs are ready for President Trump","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 20: U.S. President Donald Trump delivers his inaugural address on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol on January 20, 2017 in Washington, DC. In today's inauguration ceremony Donald J. Trump becomes the 45th president of the United States. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)","imageAlt":"WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 20: U.S. President Donald Trump delivers his inaugural address on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol on January 20, 2017 in Washington, DC. In today's inauguration ceremony Donald J. Trump becomes the 45th president of the United States. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120122114-trump-speaking-large-169.jpg","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120122114-trump-speaking-small-169.jpg"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120122114-trump-speaking-medium-plus-169.jpg"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120122114-trump-speaking-large-169.jpg"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120122114-trump-speaking-exlarge-169.jpg"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120122114-trump-speaking-super-169.jpg"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120122114-trump-speaking-full-169.jpg"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120122114-trump-speaking-small-11.jpg"}},"responsiveImage":true},"duration":"2:16"},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/cnnmoney/2017/01/20/global-ceos-are-ready-for-president-trump.cnn/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/video/data/3.0/video/cnnmoney/2017/01/20/global-ceos-are-ready-for-president-trump.cnn/index.xml","videoId":"cnnmoney/2017/01/20/global-ceos-are-ready-for-president-trump.cnn","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"1:25 PM ET, Fri January 20, 2017","sourceName":"CNN","sourceLink":"","videoCollectionUrl":"/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"},{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"cnnmoney","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["Protesters took to the streets in Washington on President Donald Trump's Inauguration Day."],"descriptionPlainText":"Protesters took to the streets in Washington on President Donald Trump's Inauguration Day.","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"Anti-Trump demonstrators clash with DC police","headlinePlainText":"Anti-Trump demonstrators clash with DC police","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 20: Protesters scuffle with police during an anti-Trump demonstration on January 20, 2017 in Washington, DC. Protesters attempted to block an entrance to the inauguration ceremony. President-elect Donald Trump will be sworn in as the 45th U.S. President later today. (Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)","imageAlt":"WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 20: Protesters scuffle with police during an anti-Trump demonstration on January 20, 2017 in Washington, DC. Protesters attempted to block an entrance to the inauguration ceremony. President-elect Donald Trump will be sworn in as the 45th U.S. President later today. (Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120131450-washington-dc-inauguration-protest-large-169.jpg","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120131450-washington-dc-inauguration-protest-small-169.jpg"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120131450-washington-dc-inauguration-protest-medium-plus-169.jpg"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120131450-washington-dc-inauguration-protest-large-169.jpg"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120131450-washington-dc-inauguration-protest-exlarge-169.jpg"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120131450-washington-dc-inauguration-protest-super-169.jpg"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120131450-washington-dc-inauguration-protest-full-169.jpg"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170120131450-washington-dc-inauguration-protest-small-11.jpg"}},"responsiveImage":true},"duration":"1:09"},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/cnnmoney/2017/01/20/dc-inauguration-protests-orig-vstan.cnn/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/video/data/3.0/video/cnnmoney/2017/01/20/dc-inauguration-protests-orig-vstan.cnn/index.xml","videoId":"cnnmoney/2017/01/20/dc-inauguration-protests-orig-vstan.cnn","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"12:41 PM ET, Fri January 20, 2017","sourceName":"CNN","sourceLink":"http://www.cnn.com/","videoCollectionUrl":"/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"},{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"us","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["Super Bowl ads are sometimes the best part of the game. Here are our all-time favorite Super Bowl ads. "],"descriptionPlainText":"Super Bowl ads are sometimes the best part of the game. Here are our all-time favorite Super Bowl ads.","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"Is this the best Super Bowl ad of all time?","headlinePlainText":"Is this the best Super Bowl ad of all time?","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"best Super Bowl ads all time cnnmoney_00000228.jpg","imageAlt":"best Super Bowl ads all time cnnmoney_00000228","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160127101558-best-super-bowl-ads-all-time-cnnmoney-00000228-large-169.jpg","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160127101558-best-super-bowl-ads-all-time-cnnmoney-00000228-small-169.jpg"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160127101558-best-super-bowl-ads-all-time-cnnmoney-00000228-medium-plus-169.jpg"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160127101558-best-super-bowl-ads-all-time-cnnmoney-00000228-large-169.jpg"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160127101558-best-super-bowl-ads-all-time-cnnmoney-00000228-exlarge-169.jpg"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160127101558-best-super-bowl-ads-all-time-cnnmoney-00000228-super-169.jpg"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160127101558-best-super-bowl-ads-all-time-cnnmoney-00000228-full-169.jpg"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160127101558-best-super-bowl-ads-all-time-cnnmoney-00000228-small-11.jpg"}},"responsiveImage":true},"duration":"2:38"},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"2 h","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/us/2016/01/27/best-super-bowl-ads-all-time-cnnmoney.cnn/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/video/data/3.0/video/us/2016/01/27/best-super-bowl-ads-all-time-cnnmoney.cnn/index.xml","videoId":"us/2016/01/27/best-super-bowl-ads-all-time-cnnmoney.cnn","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"10:10 AM ET, Wed January 27, 2016","sourceName":"CNN","sourceLink":"","videoCollectionUrl":"/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"},{"branding":"","cardContents":{"auxiliaryText":"","bannerText":[],"bannerHasATag":false,"bannerPosition":"","brandingLink":"","brandingImageUrl":"","brandingTextHead":"","brandingTextSub":"","cardSectionName":"cnnmoney","contentType":"","cta":"share","descriptionText":["Researchers at Virginia Tech are crashing drones into dummies to predict injuries caused by drone collisions and make recommendations for safety regulations."],"descriptionPlainText":"Researchers at Virginia Tech are crashing drones into dummies to predict injuries caused by drone collisions and make recommendations for safety regulations.","headlinePostText":"","headlinePreText":"","headlineText":"Crash dummies get hit with drones to test impact","headlinePlainText":"Crash dummies get hit with drones to test impact","iconImageUrl":"","iconType":"video","isMobileBannerText":false,"kickerText":"","maximizedBannerSize":[],"media":{"contentType":"image","type":"element","cutFormat":"16:9","elementContents":{"caption":"Research collaboration between Mid-Atlantic Aviation Partnership and Stefan Duma to investigate head injury risk from small drones. ","imageAlt":"Research collaboration between Mid-Atlantic Aviation Partnership and Stefan Duma to investigate head injury risk from small drones. ","imageUrl":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117170326-researchers-crash-test-drones-large-169.jpg","label":"","galleryTitle":"","head":"","cuts":{"mini":{"height":124,"width":220,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117170326-researchers-crash-test-drones-small-169.jpg"},"xsmall":{"height":173,"width":307,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117170326-researchers-crash-test-drones-medium-plus-169.jpg"},"small":{"height":259,"width":460,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117170326-researchers-crash-test-drones-large-169.jpg"},"medium":{"height":438,"width":780,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117170326-researchers-crash-test-drones-exlarge-169.jpg"},"large":{"height":619,"width":1100,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117170326-researchers-crash-test-drones-super-169.jpg"},"full16x9":{"height":900,"width":1600,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117170326-researchers-crash-test-drones-full-169.jpg"},"mini1x1":{"height":120,"width":120,"type":"jpg","uri":"http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/170117170326-researchers-crash-test-drones-small-11.jpg"}},"responsiveImage":true},"duration":"1:01"},"noFollow":false,"overMediaText":"","sectionUri":"","showSocialSharebar":false,"shortUrl":"","statusText":"","statusColor":"","targetType":"","timestampDisplay":"","timestampUtc":"","lastModifiedText":"","lastModifiedState":"","type":"card","url":"/videos/cnnmoney/2017/01/17/crash-dummies-get-hit-with-drones-to-test-impact-cnnmoney.cnnmoney/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/","width":"","height":"","videoCMSUri":"/video/data/3.0/video/cnnmoney/2017/01/17/crash-dummies-get-hit-with-drones-to-test-impact-cnnmoney.cnnmoney/index.xml","videoId":"cnnmoney/2017/01/17/crash-dummies-get-hit-with-drones-to-test-impact-cnnmoney.cnnmoney","adSection":"const-video-leaf","dateCreated":"4:59 PM ET, Tue January 17, 2017","sourceName":"CNNMoney","sourceLink":"http://money.cnn.com/technology/","videoCollectionUrl":"/video/playlists/stories-worth-watching/"},"contentType":"video","maximizedBanner":false,"type":"card"}],cardContents,i;for (i = 0; i 0) {for (i = 0; i 0) {for (i = 0; i 0) {for (i = 0; i 0) {nextPlay = currentVideoCollection[getNextVideoIndex(currentVideoId)].videoId;if (nextPlay === undefined || nextPlay === null) {nextPlay = currentVideoCollection[0].videoId;}moveToNextTimeout = setTimeout(function () {if (CNN.VideoPlayer.getLibraryName(configObj.markupId) === 'fave') {FAVE.player.getInstance(configObj.markupId).play(nextPlay, {videoCollection: currentVideoCollection});} else {CNNVIDEOAPI.CNNVideoManager.getInstance().playVideo(configObj.markupId, nextPlay, {videoCollection: currentVideoCollection});}}, nextVideoPlayTimeout);}}var decorateVideoApi = function(){/* if this happens before the video API loads it gets deleted. */CNN.VideoPlayer.showSpinner = function showSpinner(containerId) {if (Modernizr && !Modernizr.phone && !Modernizr.mobile && !Modernizr.tablet) {jQuery(document.getElementById(('spinner_' + containerId).replace('#', ''))).show();}};CNN.VideoPlayer.hideSpinner = function hideSpinner(containerId) {if (Modernizr && !Modernizr.phone && !Modernizr.mobile && !Modernizr.tablet) {jQuery(document.getElementById(('spinner_' + containerId).replace('#', ''))).hide();}};CNN.VideoPlayer.hideThumbnail = function hideThumbnail(containerId) {if (Modernizr && !Modernizr.phone && !Modernizr.mobile && !Modernizr.tablet) {jQuery(document.getElementById(containerId + '--thumbnail')).hide();}};};callbackObj = {onPlayerReady: function (containerId) {CNN.INJECTOR.getNameSpaceFeature('CNN.VideoPlayer.showSpinner').fail(decorateVideoApi);var containerClassId;CNN.VideoPlayer.reportLoadTime(containerId);CNN.VideoPlayer.handleAdOnCVPVisibilityChange(containerId, CNN.pageVis.isDocumentVisible());if (Modernizr && !Modernizr.phone && !Modernizr.mobile && !Modernizr.tablet) {containerClassId = '#' + containerId;if (jQuery(containerClassId).parents('.js-pg-rail-tall__head').length > 0) {videoPinner = new CNN.VideoPinner(containerClassId);videoPinner.setIsVideoCollection(true);videoPinner.init();} else {CNN.VideoPlayer.hideThumbnail(containerId);}}},onContentEntryLoad: function(containerId, playerId, contentid, isQueue) {CNN.VideoPlayer.showSpinner(containerId);CNN.VideoPlayer.isFirstVideoInCollection(containerId, contentid);},onAdPlay: function (containerId, cvpId, token, mode, id, duration, blockId, adType) {clearTimeout(moveToNextTimeout);if (blockId === 0) {(new Image()).src = "http://traffic.outbrain.com/network/trackpxl?advid=814&action=view";}CNN.VideoPlayer.hideSpinner(containerId);if (Modernizr && !Modernizr.phone && !Modernizr.mobile && !Modernizr.tablet) {if (typeof videoPinner !== 'undefined' && videoPinner !== null) {videoPinner.setIsPlaying(true);videoPinner.handleOnVideoPlay();videoPinner.animateDown();}}},onContentPlay: function (containerId, cvpId, contentId) {/** When the video content starts playing, the companion ad* layout (if it was set when the ad played) should switch* back to epic ad layout. onContentPlay calls updateCompanionLayout* with 'restoreEpicAds' layout to make this switch and removes FW* with 'removeFreewheel' so you don't see double ads. If a user* clicks another video midway, onContentBegin will add FW back*/if (CNN.companion && typeof CNN.companion.updateCompanionLayout === 'function') {CNN.companion.updateCompanionLayout('removeFreewheel');CNN.companion.updateCompanionLayout('restoreEpicAds');}clearTimeout(moveToNextTimeout);CNN.VideoPlayer.hideSpinner(containerId);var idx,playerInstance,prevVideoId = (window.jsmd && window.jsmd.v && (window.jsmd.v.eVar18 || window.jsmd.v.eVar4)) || '';if (CNN.VideoPlayer.getLibraryName(configObj.markupId) === 'fave') {playerInstance = FAVE.player.getInstance(containerId);} else {playerInstance = containerId && window.cnnVideoManager.getPlayerByContainer(containerId).videoInstance.cvp || null;}if (playerInstance && typeof playerInstance.reportAnalytics === 'function') {if (prevVideoId.length === 0 && document.referrer && document.referrer.search(/\/videos\//) >= 0) {prevVideoId = document.referrer.replace(/^(?:http|https)\:\/\/[^\/]\/videos\/(.+\.\w+)(?:\/video\/playlists\/.*)?$/, '/video/$1');if (prevVideoId === document.referrer) {prevVideoId = '';}}if (jQuery.isArray(currentVideoCollection) && currentVideoCollection.length > 0) {idx = getNextVideoIndex(contentId);nextVideoId = currentVideoCollection[idx].videoId;nextVideoUrl = currentVideoCollection[idx].videoUrl;currentVideoCollectionId = (window.jsmd && window.jsmd.v && window.jsmd.v.eVar60) || nextVideoUrl.replace(/^.+\/video\/playlists\/(.+)\//, '$1');}playerInstance.reportAnalytics('videoPageData', {videoCollection: currentVideoCollectionId,videoBranding: CNN.omniture.branding_content_page,templateType: CNN.omniture.template_type,nextVideo: nextVideoId,previousVideo: prevVideoId,referrerType: '',referrerUrl: document.referrer});}if (Modernizr && !Modernizr.phone && !Modernizr.mobile && !Modernizr.tablet) {if (typeof videoPinner !== 'undefined' && videoPinner !== null) {videoPinner.setIsPlaying(true);videoPinner.handleOnVideoPlay();videoPinner.animateDown();}}},onContentReplayRequest: function (containerId, cvpId, contentId) {if (Modernizr && !Modernizr.phone && !Modernizr.mobile && !Modernizr.tablet) {if (typeof videoPinner !== 'undefined' && videoPinner !== null) {videoPinner.setIsPlaying(true);var $endSlate = jQuery(document.getElementById(containerId)).parent().find('.js-video__end-slate').eq(0);if ($endSlate.length > 0) {$endSlate.removeClass('video__end-slate--active').addClass('video__end-slate--inactive');}}}},onContentMetadata: function (containerId, playerId, metadata, contentId, duration, width, height) {if (CNN.Utils.exists(metadata)) {try {if (CNN.VideoPlayer.getLibraryName(containerId) === 'fave') {CNN.Videx.EmbedButton.updateCode(metadata);} else {CNN.Videx.EmbedButton.updateCode(JSON.parse(metadata));}} catch (e) {console.log('Invalid video metadata JSON.');}}},onContentBegin: function (containerId, cvpId, contentId) {CNN.VideoPlayer.reverseAutoMute(containerId);CNN.VideoPlayer.isFirstVideoInCollection(containerId, contentId);/** Before the video ad starts, the freewheel companion ad* html needs to be placed on the page so that it can be* triggered by Freewheel to display the companion ad.* onContentBegin triggers updateCompanionLayout which* handles the logic to switch from epic to companion ads*/if (CNN.companion && typeof CNN.companion.updateCompanionLayout === 'function') {CNN.companion.updateCompanionLayout('removeEpicAds');CNN.companion.updateCompanionLayout('restoreFreewheel');}clearTimeout(moveToNextTimeout);fastdom.mutate(function () {CNN.share.reloadShareBar();});updateCurrentlyPlaying(contentId);jQuery(document).triggerVideoContentStarted();},onContentComplete: function (containerId, cvpId, contentId) {navigateToNextVideo(contentId);},onContentEnd: function (containerId, cvpId, contentId) {/** When the video content ends playing, remove the epic ad* and prepare the freewheel companion ad for the next video*/if (CNN.companion && typeof CNN.companion.updateCompanionLayout === 'function') {CNN.companion.updateCompanionLayout('removeEpicAds');CNN.companion.updateCompanionLayout('restoreFreewheel');}navigateToNextVideo(contentId);if (Modernizr && !Modernizr.phone && !Modernizr.mobile && !Modernizr.tablet) {if (typeof videoPinner !== 'undefined' && videoPinner !== null) {videoPinner.setIsPlaying(false);}}},onCVPVisibilityChange: function (containerId, cvpId, visible) {CNN.VideoPlayer.handleAdOnCVPVisibilityChange(containerId, visible);}};if (typeof configObj.context !== 'string' || configObj.context.length JUST WATCHEDDylann Roof confession videoMUST WATCHDylann Roof confession videoDylann Roof wasted no time confessing to the massacre at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, according to an FBI video shown at his murder trial in Charleston, South Carolina.
Source: CNNStories worth watching (15 Videos)Dylann Roof confession videoDylann Roof wasted no time confessing to the massacre at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, according to an FBI video shown at his murder trial in Charleston, South Carolina.
Source: CNN
VIDEO - Inside the confusion of the Trump executive order and travel ban - CNNPolitics.com
Administration officials weren't immediately sure which countries' citizens would be barred from entering the United States. The Department of Homeland Security was left making a legal analysis on the order after Trump signed it. A Border Patrol agent, confronted with arriving refugees, referred questions only to the President himself, according to court filings.
Saturday night, a federal judge granted an emergency stay for citizens of the affected countries who had already arrived in the US and those who are in transit and hold valid visas, ruling they can legally enter the US.
Trump's unilateral moves, which have drawn the ire of human rights groups and prompted protests at US airports, reflect the President's desire to quickly make good on his campaign promises. But they also encapsulate the pitfalls of an administration largely operated by officials with scant federal experience.
It wasn't until Friday -- the day Trump signed the order banning travel from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days and suspending all refugee admission for 120 days -- that career homeland security staff were allowed to see the final details of the order, a person familiar with the matter said.
The result was widespread confusion across the country on Saturday as airports struggled to adjust to the new directives. In New York, two Iraqi nationals sued the federal government after they were detained at John F. Kennedy International Airport, and 10 others were detained as well.
In Philadelphia, a Syrian family of six who had a visa through a family connection in the US was placed on a return flight to Doha, Qatar, and Department of Homeland Security officials said others who were in the air would be detained upon arrival and put back on a plane to their home country.
Asked during a photo opportunity in the Oval Office Saturday afternoon about the rollout, Trump said his government was "totally prepared."
"It's working out very nicely," Trump told reporters. "You see it at the airports. You see it all over. It's working out very nicely and we're going to have a very, very strict ban, and we're going to have extreme vetting, which we should have had in this country for many years."
The policy team at the White House developed the executive order on refugees and visas, and largely avoided the traditional interagency process that would have allowed the Justice Department and homeland security agencies to provide operational guidance, according to numerous officials who spoke to CNN on Saturday.
Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly and Department of Homeland Security leadership saw the final details shortly before the order was finalized, government officials said.
Friday night, DHS arrived at the legal interpretation that the executive order restrictions applying to seven countries -- Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Sudan and Yemen -- did not apply to people with lawful permanent residence, generally referred to as green card holders.
The White House overruled that guidance overnight, according to officials familiar with the rollout. That order came from the President's inner circle, led by Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon. Their decision held that, on a case by case basis, DHS could allow green card holders to enter the US.
There had been some debate whether green card holders should be even allowed to board international flights. It was decided by the Department of Homeland Security they could fly to the US and would be considered on a case-by-case basis after passing a secondary screening.
But the guidance sent to airlines on Friday night, obtained by CNN, said clearly, "lawful permanent residents are not included and may continue to travel to the USA."
As of Saturday afternoon, Customs and Border Protection continued to issue the same guidance to airlines as it did Friday, telling airlines that fly to the US that green card holders can board planes to the US but they may get extra scrutiny on arrival, according to an airline official.
Before the President issued the order, the White House did not seek the legal guidance of the Office of Legal Counsel, the Justice Department office that interprets the law for the executive branch, according to a source familiar with the process.
White House officials disputed that Sunday morning, saying that OLC signed off and agency review was performed.
A source said the creation of the executive order did not follow the standard agency review process that's typically overseen by the National Security Council.
Separately, a person familiar with the matter said career officials in charge of enforcing the executive order were not fully briefed on the specifics until Friday. The officials were caught off guard by some of the specifics and raised questions about how to handle the new banned passengers on US-bound planes.
Regarding the green card holders and some of the confusion about whether they were impacted, the person familiar with the matter said if career officials had known more about the executive order earlier, some of the confusion could have been avoided and a better plan could be in place.
Administration officials also defended the process Saturday. They said the people who needed to be briefed ahead of time on the plane were briefed and that people at the State Department and DHS who were involved in the process were able to make decisions about who to talk and inform about this.
Bannon and Miller were running point on this order and giving directives regarding green cards, according to a Republican close to the White House.
But even after the Friday afternoon announcement, administration officials at the White House took several hours to produce text of the action until several hours after it was signed. Adviser Kellyanne Conway even said at one point it was not going to be released before eventually it did get sent out.
Administration officials also seemed unsure at first who was covered in the action, and a list of impacted countries was only produced later on Friday night, hours after the President signed the document at the Pentagon.
This story has been updated to include the White House's response on the issue of Justice Department review.
CNN's Rene Marsh and Athena Jones contributed to this report.
VIDEO - Stephen Miller Discusses President Trump Firing Interim AG'... | The Last Refuge
[See NewsBusters for more.] A BBC journalist on Friday confronted Donald Trump at a joint White House press conference with Britain's Prime Minister and lectured the President about his ''alarming briefs.'' Other questions at the press conference included a reporter wondering how Trump and Theresa May could possibly get along. Laura Kuenssberg's long prologue to her question began: ''Mr. President, you said before that torture worked. You praised Russia. You have said you want to ban some Muslims from coming to America. You suggested there should be punishment for abortion.'' She continued, fretting, ''For many people in Britain those sound like alarming beliefs. What do you say to our viewers at home who are worried about some of your views and worried about you becoming the leader of the free world?''
