22 July 2019

Hack iwannabeamalenurse.blogspot/m14hackersworld.blogspot

       22 July 2019, TANGUSKA, Russia - Preliminary information as yet unconfirmed by the Ninth Amendment Tanguska Station Array suggests that iwannabeamalenurse.blogspot and/or m14hackersworld.blogspot the latter believed possibly hosted at Google IP address may have been identified as associated with allegedly criminal activity including but not limited to computer crime(s) including in an apparent warning from a presumably French site which states that:

"Vérifiez m14hackersworld.blogspot.in site est une arnaque ou un site Web sécurisé. m14hackersworld.blogspot.in détecter si elle est une arnaque, frauduleuse ou est infectés par des malwares, le phishing, la fraude et l'activité de spam si vous avez"

       The Editorial Bard of the Ninth Amendment cannot and does not provide legal advice in any U.S. state or territory which must be provided only by properly licensed legal counsel but advises those concerned about the above sites or those associated with them that perhaps Alphabet Google if it indeed hosts the site(s) may have legal counsel properly licensed to provide or recommend properly licensed legal counsel to advise those concerned about the legality and possible prosecution including criminal prosecution of those associated with these or other sites for any wrongdoing including as appropriate under state law or the United States Code without limitation.

Copyright Martin P. 2019 All World Rights Expressly Reserved

20 July 2019

Joint Chiefs No "Stupid" Moves Says Trump Pick +2 Delayed / Out Sex Harass?

Trump’s nominee for top military job says he won’t be ‘intimidated into making stupid decisions’

Gen. Mark Milley speaks at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on July 11, 2019. (Andrew Harnik/AP)

President Trump’s nominee to become the next top U.S. military officer promised lawmakers on Thursday that, if confirmed, he would not be cowed by the White House as he provides advice on national security matters. 
Gen. Mark Milley, who serves as Army chief of staff, appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee at a moment when Trump’s moves to pull the Pentagon into his border wall plans, Independence Day festivities and other initiatives have generated concerns about the erosion of the military’s nonpartisan tradition.
If confirmed, Milley would replace Marine Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr. as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the fall. 
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) asked Milley if he would challenge the president, who since taking office has questioned decades-old defense alliances and adopted positions that have caused discomfort within the military’s highest ranks. 
In response to the general’s vow to remain independent, King said: “I believe that. But I think it’s very important to emphasize that the Oval Office is an intimidating place, and the president of the United States is the most powerful leader in the free world. To be willing to say, ‘Mr. President, you’re wrong about this’ . . . if it’s something that she or he doesn’t want to hear is just, there is no more important responsibility in your career.” 
Milley replied that Dunford and “most of us” have seen a lot of combat.
“Arlington is full of our comrades, and we understand absolutely full well the hazards of our chosen profession,” Milley said, referring to the national cemetery a few miles away in Virginia where many U.S. service members are buried. 
“We know what this is about, and we will not be intimidated into making stupid decisions,” he said. “We will give our best military advice and not keep the consequences to ourselves.”
Milley, a gruff infantry officer educated at Princeton, became the Army’s top officer in August 2015 after serving in Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries. His nomination by Trump in December, which came surprisingly early, defied the recommendation of then-Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, who had recommended the Air Force’s top officer, Gen. David L. Goldfein.
It’s not clear how Trump, who appears to have gained confidence in his instincts on foreign policy as his presidency has gone on, would take to being challenged by Milley. Mattis, who during his initial period as Pentagon chief steered defense policy back toward traditional positions, resigned in December over Trump’s treatment of key allies. 
Milley would take on new responsibilities for an institution experiencing intense leadership upheaval.
This week, officials unveiled a plan for installing the Defense Department’s third acting secretary this year, as federal personnel rules require acting defense secretary Mark Esper — who has been serving as Milley’s civilian counterpart leading the Army since 2017 — to step aside while the Armed Services Committee considers whether to confirm him for the top Pentagon job. . . . .


Copyright 2019 Martin P. All World Rights Expressly Reserved (no claim to The Washington Post content)

17 July 2019

GOP Justice John Paul Stevens Dies 99 S.Ct Top Liberal Said Kavanaugh Unfit

CreditYoichi Okamoto/Science Sourc

CreditJeff Roberson/Associated Press

". . . He also made forays into public debates. In 2018 he wrote an opinion piece, after a school shooting, calling for the repeal of the Second Amendment. Later that year he declared in a speech that Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh was unqualified for the Supreme Court because of his partisan language during a Senate hearing on his fitness for the court over an accusation he sexually assaulted a girl during high school. . . ."

from "Supreme Court Justice, John Paul Stevens, Who Led Liberal Wing, Dies At 99" by Linda Greenhouse, The New York Times, 16 July 2016


16 July 2019

John Paul Stevens, a moderate Republican and former antitrust lawyer from Chicago who evolved into a savvy and sometimes passionate leader of the Supreme Court’s liberal wing and became the third-longest-serving justice on the court before he retired in 2010, died July 16 at a hospital in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. He was 99.
The cause was complications from a stroke he suffered Monday, according to an announcement from the Supreme Court. The only justices who served longer were William O. Douglas, whom Justice Stevens replaced in 1975, and Stephen J. Field, a nominee of President Abraham Lincoln who served for much of the late 19th century.
During his 35-year tenure, Justice Stevens left his stamp on nearly every area of the law, writing the court’s opinions in landmark cases on government regulation, the death penalty, criminal law, intellectual property and civil liberties.
He also spoke for the court when it held presidents accountable under the law, writing the 1997 decision that required President Bill Clinton to face Paula Jones’s sexual harassment suit, and the 2006 opinion that barred President George W. Bush from holding military trials for prisoners at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba without congressional authorization.
But it was in his frequent dissenting opinions that Justice Stevens set forth a view of the law that seemed increasingly — but not automatically — liberal as the years went by and as the court shifted to the right.

Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., on May 9, 2019. (Scott McIntyre/for The Washington Post)
A strong proponent of federal power, Justice Stevens sharply criticized the limitations Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and his fellow conservatives put on Congress’s power to define and remedy violations of federal law by the states.
In Bush v. Gore, the 2000 election case that helped George W. Bush win the presidency, Justice Stevens lamented in dissent that the five justices who backed Bush would “lend credence to the most cynical appraisal of the work of judges throughout the land.”.  .  .  .
"John Paul Stevens, Longtime Leader Of Supreme Court's Liberal Wing, Dies at 99" by Charles Lane, The Washington Post, 16 July 2019

Copyright 2019 Martin P. All World Rights Expressly Reserved (no claim to The New York Times content nor The Washington Post content)

08 July 2019

Fed Spies FBI ICE Face Recognition No Consent Search Driver License Photos

FBI, ICE find state driver’s license photos are a gold mine for facial-recognition searches

A cache of records shared with The Washington Post reveals that agents are scanning hundreds of millions of Americans’ faces without their knowledge or consent.

A surveillance camera in San Francisco, which recently banned police from using facial-recognition software. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
Agents with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Immigration and Customs Enforcement have turned state driver’s license databases into a facial-recognition gold mine, scanning through hundreds of millions of Americans’ photos without their knowledge or consent, newly released documents show.
Thousands of facial-recognition requests, internal documents and emails over the past five years, obtained through public-records requests by Georgetown Law researchers and provided to The Washington Post, reveal that federal investigators have turned state Department of Motor Vehicles databases into the bedrock of an unprecedented surveillance infrastructure.
Police have long had access to fingerprints, DNA and other “biometric data” taken from criminal suspects. But the DMV records contain the photos of a vast majority of a state’s residents, most of whom have never been charged with a crime.
Neither Congress nor state legislatures have authorized the development of such a system, and growing numbers of Democratic and Republican lawmakers are criticizing the technology as a dangerous, pervasive and error-prone surveillance tool.
“Law enforcement’s access of state databases,” particularly DMV databases, is “often done in the shadows with no consent,” House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) said in a statement to The Post.
Rep. Jim Jordan (Ohio), the House Oversight Committee’s ranking Republican, seemed particularly incensed during a hearing into the technology last month at the use of driver’s license photos in federal facial-recognition searches without the approval of state legislators or individual license holders.
“They’ve just given access to that to the FBI,” he said. “No individual signed off on that when they renewed their driver’s license, got their driver’s licenses. They didn’t sign any waiver saying, ‘Oh, it’s okay to turn my information, my photo, over to the FBI.’ No elected officials voted for that to happen.”
Despite those doubts, federal investigators have turned facial recognition into a routine investigative tool. Since 2011, the FBI has logged more than 390,000 facial-recognition searches of federal and local databases, including state DMV databases, the Government Accountability Office said last month, and the records show that federal investigators have forged daily working relationships with DMV officials. In Utah, FBI and ICE agents logged more than 1,000 facial-recognition searches between 2015 and 2017, the records show. Names and other details are hidden, though dozens of the searches are marked as having returned a “possible match.”
San Francisco and Somerville, Mass., have banned their police and public agencies from using facial-recognition software, citing concerns about governmental overreach and a breach of public trust, and the subject is being hotly debated in Washington. On Wednesday, officials with the Transportation Security Administration, Customs and Border Protection and the Secret Service are expected to testify at a hearing of the House Committee on Homeland Security about their agencies’ use of the technology.
The records show the technology already is tightly woven into the fabric of modern law enforcement. They detailed the regular use of facial recognition to track down suspects in low-level crimes, including cashing a stolen check and petty theft. And searches are often executed with nothing more formal than an email from a federal agent to a local contact, the records show.
“It’s really a surveillance-first, ask-permission-later system,” said Jake Laperruque, a senior counsel at the watchdog group Project on Government Oversight. “People think this is something coming way off in the future, but these [facial-recognition] searches are happening very frequently today. The FBI alone does 4,000 searches every month, and a lot of them go through state DMVs.”
The records also underscore the conflicts between the laws of some states and the federal push to find and deport undocumented immigrants. Though Utah, Vermont and Washington allow undocumented immigrants to obtain full driver’s licenses or more-limited permits known as driving privilege cards, ICE agents have run facial-recognition searches on those DMV databases.
More than a dozen states, including New York, as well as the District of Columbia, allow undocumented immigrants to drive legally with full licenses or driving privilege cards, as long as they submit proof of in-state residency and pass the states’ driving-proficiency tests.
Lawmakers in Florida, Texas and other states have introduced bills this year that would extend driving privileges to undocumented immigrants. Some of those states already allow the FBI to scan driver’s license photos, while others, such as Florida and New York, are negotiating with the FBI over access, according to the GAO.
“The state has told [undocumented immigrants], has encouraged them, to submit that information. To me, it’s an insane breach of trust to then turn around and allow ICE access to that,” said Clare Garvie, a senior associate with Georgetown Law’s Center on Privacy and Technology who led the research. . . .