At first I thought this was a joke.  The Soros owned LA DA, George Gascon, has spent every day in office protecting criminals from going to jail—and getting criminals sent to jail before he became DA, let out of prison.  He wants the streets crowded with criminals, knowing they will create more victims.

Now, the problem is so bad, HIS workers have become crime victims.  They can not use the bus or train system since those are loaded with criminals, disease and dirt.  So he is using tax dollars for shuttles, trying to protect his workers from the criminals he loves.  This is not a joke,  HE IS.

New Shuttle Service For LA DA’s Office Employees Sparks Criticism In Los Angeles

Critics point out that failed policies by DA George Gascon, high crime rates led to ironic solution

By Evan Symon, California Globe,   3/17/23  

A new shuttle program for worker’s in the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office unveiled this week has drawn growing criticism. The shuttle was put in place following a growing number of criminal incidents against workers in the Civic Center area and DA George Gascon’s weak on crime policies that have led to a rise in crime in Los Angeles.

Since being elected in November 2020, DA Gascon’s policies, which have included cash bail being removed for many crimes and the end of enhanced sentences, have brought considerable criticism. Similar to the effect of recalled San Francisco DA Chesa Boudin, Gascon’s soft on crime approach brought on a spike in crime in LA County. In the city of Los Angeles alone, crime went up 11.6% between 2021 and 2022. Meanwhile, other cities that removed Progressive DA’ and their policies, such as San Francisco, have seen crime figures grind to a halt, and in some categories, begin to improve.

The high crime in LA attributed to Gascon’s policies led to an ironic new program this week in Los Angeles. The Employee Secure Transport and Escort Program (E-STEP) program, which offers secure shuttle service for Civic Center employees, was put into place following a series of security and criminal incidents that took place between employees and the members of the public. Set up by the DA’s Bureau of Investigation, the program will continue until a more permanent solution is found.

“Security incidents involving aggressive confrontations initiated by members of the public have occurred to our employees assigned in the Civic Center area, while walking between their vehicles or transportation area and the office,” said a press release on Thursday.

Stops for the shuttle will include the Hall of Justice, Union Station, and Chinatown, with vehicles to, temporarily, consist of large minivans.

Critics of Gascon addressed the flaws in Gascon’s policies, which led to such a program to be created in the first place, as well pointing out that many other LA citizens would not be afforded the same protection.

“It is unprecedented in the 173-year history of the LA District Attorney’s Office that employees need to be escorted to and from their cars to protect them from random violent attacks,” noted DA’s office prosecutor and 2024 challenger to Gascon John McKinney on Thursday. “While I applaud George Gascon for taking measures to ensure the safety of DA staff, I blame his policies that have contributed to the need for such extraordinary measures. My thoughts also go out to the millions of Los Angelenos who have to travel about the County of Los Angeles without the same protection.”

A staffer in LA City Hall “Marco,” added, “I hope Gascon really looks into what he has exactly done. Everyone knows that all these things he has done as DA has led to the worsening crime situation. He put his own employees at risk, and he’s putting the people of LA County at risk. No competent person does that.”

“All I’m thinking of now is where is my protection, you know? We get accosted on the street too. Where is our shuttle service? Or better yet, where is the justice? All of my white, Asian, black, and fellow Latino co-workers are worried.”

As of Thursday, Gascon himself has yet to comment about the new shuttle service directly.

CBS has joined the chorus of giving tax dollars away.  In this case, $5 million to any black that can make their way to San Fran.  Of course the city does not have any money—it is running a deficit.  Literally, CBS has declared itself a proponent of Socialism and a hater fo the productive.  In the end, should any part of this theft of tax dollars occur, business will join the flood of jobs and families fleeing San Fran—and then who is going to advertise on CBS?  The pimps, the illegals and the drug dealers?

““And in this country, a major city considers whether to pay millions in reparations to some of its black citizens,” boasted fill-in co-host Michelle Miller in a tease. Miller, who co-hosts CBS Mornings Saturday, is married to far-left activist Marc Morial of the National Urban League, so she’s naturally on board.

Fill-in What to Watch host Jamie Wax kicked off the block by reporting that San Francisco held a hearing Tuesday for “residents added their voices to” the “proposal to give $5 million to every eligible black person” as it “appears to be gaining support.”

CBS and the supporters of this wealth transfer are like the Germans that backed the Naziis, hoping they would be saved.  In the end, all of Germany was gone—the same will happen to San Fran.

CBS Cheers SF Reparations Proposal to Give Black Residents $5 Million, Guaranteed Incomes

Curtis Houck, Newsbusters,  3/15/23    

Amid the litany of weather reports and coverage of a U.S. drone being downed in the Black Sea after colliding with a Russian jet and recent woke banks going under, Wednesday’s CBS Mornings made it interesting when they spent a few minutes fawning over San Francisco moving closer to offering $5 million, guaranteed incomes of $97,000, and homes for the price of $1 to Black residents as reparations.

This was despite the fact that, as they admitted, a Hoover Institution estimate found it could cost San Franciscans of other races (and presumably those in poverty) $600,000 in new taxes. Talk about a case of mass racial arson. But for the far-left CBS, such a move would be fantastic.

“And in this country, a major city considers whether to pay millions in reparations to some of its black citizens,” boasted fill-in co-host Michelle Miller in a tease. Miller, who co-hosts CBS Mornings Saturday, is married to far-left activist Marc Morial of the National Urban League, so she’s naturally on board.

Fill-in What to Watch host Jamie Wax kicked off the block by reporting that San Francisco held a hearing Tuesday for “residents added their voices to” the “proposal to give $5 million to every eligible black person” as it “appears to be gaining support.”

After a soundbite from one Black resident in support of the payout, Wax shared more of the details:

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors voiced enthusiastic support for more than 100 recommendations made by a city-appointed rep reparations committee. Others include guaranteeing annual incomes of at least $97,000 and homes in San Francisco for $1 a family. The committee submits a final report in June. It has not analyzed the cost of the proposals, but the conservative Hoover Institution says San Frranciscans of other races would have to pay $600,000 per family. A complicated issue.

Miller replied the “question who pays is really at the heart of it” with fill-in co-host Adriana Diaz being astonished that the city was thinking of paying out such a large sum.

Socialist co-host Tony Dokoupil was also all-in:

I always quote Heather McGee on this, who says history has a way of ending up in your bank account and she’s 100 percent right. You know, there’s a reason why black families have one-tenth of the wealth generally speaking than white families. 

He added that while “it’s good that, locally, they’re thinking about this,” the real issue of racism in America wasn’t “because of San Francisco policies” but rather “federal policy and actions by the government on behalf of all citizens.”

Miller agreed, citing “real estate and banking institutions” as “pervasive” in their racism. This led Dokoupil to call for national reparations: “But really, it’s a national — it’s a national issue. We do need national leaders to step up.”

Wax also concurred and remarked that “[i]t’ll be interesting to see how this plays out and if it becomes a model for anywhere else.”

Before moving to another topic, Diaz cited Evanston, Illinois as having actually enacted reparations with “some citizens” having received “$25,000 each.”

Exit question: Which of them will volunteer to do a story interviewing non-Black residents if they are forced into paying hundreds of thousands of dollars many of them don’t have or have basic government services cut in the name of solving racism?

CBS’s support for the possibility of forcing poor, non-black residents to pay reparations for their ancestors allegedly being racist suppressors was made possible thanks to advertisers such as Ashley HomeStore, Claritin, and Consumer Cellular. Follow the links to see their contact information at the MRC’s Conservatives Fight Back page.

To see the relevant transcript from March 15, click “expand.”

CBS Mornings
March 15, 2023
7:35 a.m. Eastern [TEASE]

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Coming Up; San Francisco Reparations Plan]

MICHELLE MILLER: And in this country, a major city considers whether to pay millions in reparations to some of its black citizens.

(….)

7:48 a.m. Eastern

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: What to Watch; San Francisco Reparations Proposal]

JAMIE WAX: Look, alright, we’re going to start in San Francisco. A reparations proposal to give $5 million to every eligible black person appears to be gaining support. At a city hearing yesterday, residents added their voices to the debate. 

BLACK SAN FRANCISCO RESIDENT: It is time for you to do the right thing and provide us with the reparations, make us whole, make us important in your lives. Black lives matter. You have an opportunity to demonstrate this today.

WAX: The San Francisco Board of Supervisors voiced enthusiastic support for more than 100 recommendations made by a city-appointed rep reparations committee. Others include guaranteeing annual incomes of at least $97,000 and homes in San Francisco for $1 a family. The committee submits a final report in June. It has not analyzed the cost of the proposals, but the conservative Hoover Institution says San Frranciscans of other races would have to pay $600,000 per family. A complicated issue.

MILLER: A question who pays is really at the heart of it.

ADRIANA DIAZ: But they’re really considering $5 million —

MILLER: Yeah.

DIAZ: — per black person? 

WAX: That’s —

DIAZ: That’s —

WAX: — that’s the proposal.

MILLER: That’s a lot of money.

TONY DOKOUPIL: $97k per year and then —

DIAZ: Wow.

DOKOUPIL: — housing for $1 a family. I mean, I always quote Heather McGee on this, who says history has a way of ending up in your bank account and she’s 100% right. You know, there’s a reason why black families have one-tenth of the wealth generally speaking than white families. But it’s not because of San Francisco policies. It’s because of federal policy and actions by the government on behalf of all citizens, so it’s good that, locally, they’re thinking about this. [TO DIAZ] And you’ve covered this locally.

DIAZ: Yeah.

MILLER: And real estate and banking institutions. It’s — it’s pervasive throughout —

DIAZ: Absolutely.

MILLER: — outside —

DOKOUPIL: But really, it’s a national — it’s a national issue. We do need national leaders to step up.

WAX: For sure. It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out and if it becomes a model for anywhere else.

DIAZ: Well, Evanston, Illinois, was the first city in the city to pass reparations.

MILLER: Mmhmm.

DIAZ: Some citizens got $25,000 each.

WAX: That’s a big difference between what San Francisco —

MILLER: Yeah, a lot [inaudible].

DIAZ: Huge difference.

 Expand

We have a lack of water, homelessness, failed government schools, massive crime waves, an invasion from Mexico.  Yet some Sacramento Democrats want to use your tax dollars to make sure rapists and murderers from other countries are not deported—as if we do not have enough violent criminals in California.

“Each year the state sets aside about $45 million for grants to nonprofits that provide defense and other legal services to low-income immigrants and their families. So far, the program called One California has paid for legal representation for more than 1,000 Californians facing detention, deportation or family separation, state officials say.   

The money also provides outreach, education services and “affirmative immigration relief,” which is when an immigrant applies for asylum directly to immigration authorities while not involved in deportation proceedings.”

Any wonder illegal aliens love California—we even pay to stop their deportation, so they can commit crimes in California.

California bill would fund deportation defense for all immigrants, including those with felonies

BY WENDY FRY, CalMatters,  3/16/23   

IN SUMMARY

The state already pays some legal bills in immigration court – but not for those with serious or violent felony records. If they can’t afford a lawyer, they face deportation alone. Assembly member Reggie Jones-Sawyer says that’s not due process.

In California, when the federal government tries to deport someone the funds for that person’s legal defense may come from an unlikely source: the state budget. 

Each year the state sets aside about $45 million for grants to nonprofits that provide defense and other legal services to low-income immigrants and their families. So far, the program called One California has paid for legal representation for more than 1,000 Californians facing detention, deportation or family separation, state officials say.   

The money also provides outreach, education services and “affirmative immigration relief,” which is when an immigrant applies for asylum directly to immigration authorities while not involved in deportation proceedings.

Not everyone can access these legal reserves. Immigrants who have been convicted of serious or violent felonies are excluded from accessing state funds for legal representation during removal proceedings.   

Assemblymember Reggie Jones-Sawyer, a Democrat from Los Angeles, wants to remove that barrier to legal support. In February he introduced a bill that would expand the One California program by excising its exclusions for immigrants convicted of serious or violent felonies. 

Serious and violent felonies cover a wide variety of crimes, ranging from robbery to murder.

Jones-Sawyer views this as a civil rights issue, saying immigrants should have the same rights to representation and due process as everyone else. 

“The Rep for All Immigrants Act ensures racial justice and true equitable access to crucial immigration services for all – not some,” he said. 

One California

In 2016 then-state Sen. Ben Hueso, a Democrat from San Diego, introduced a similar bill, called the Due Process for All Act. It was part of a legislative package answering President Donald Trump’s anti-immigrant threats to deport millions of people. 

Hueso’s bill did not pass the Assembly, but it became part of a budget trailer bill. Since 2017, it has been part of the One California program. 

The legal assistance is one of the ways the California Legislature has attempted to stand against anti-immigration policies. Other measures have expanded eligibility for state-run health insurance and the state’s earned-income tax credit to more undocumented immigrants. 

In many states, immigrants facing deportation are generally not provided free legal counsel in federal immigration courts, not even children. 

Opponents of Jones-Sawyer’s bill question using funds for this purpose while California faces a $22.5 billion budget deficit, though it’s unknown how much expanding the services would cost. 

Advocates say putting up barriers to legal services for individuals convicted of serious crimes creates a two-tiered system of justice, where only certain people get due process. 

“This bill will ensure immigrant Californians can access high-quality, comprehensive services, relief and protections, allowing them to continue their lives with dignity and fairness,” said Shiu-Ming Cheer, deputy director of programs at the California Immigrant Policy Center, a co-sponsor of the law.

The bill would pay for legal representation, investigative services, interpreters and translations, expert witness services, and supportive and rehabilitative services to people facing removal from the United States.

Uneven odds

Legal representation is among the most important factors determining whether an immigrant in federal removal proceedings gets to stay in the country or not. Yet the majority of people facing deportation do not have legal representation, data shows. 

In fiscal year 2022, 58.3% of Californians facing deportation  — 50,982 people  — did not have legal representation, according to TRAC, a nonpartisan immigration database. That same year, 76.7% of people who lost a removal case in California and were ordered deported lacked legal representation.

By contrast, national statistics show that lawyers represented 94% of the people who won their cases in immigration courts. A comparable statistic was not available for California. 

Assemblymember Bill Essayli, a Republican from Riverside, said the people Jones-Sawyer’s bill is likely to help already had due process of law in criminal court. 

“Every person has a right to a defense in a criminal case,” he said. 

“The people we’re talking about in this bill have already been convicted of a serious felony, after being afforded their government-paid defense. I see no legal or rational basis for why the California taxpayer should then be financially responsible for defending the deportation proceeding of a convicted felon.”

Essayli added that the state doesn’t have funds for its other priorities.

“We are facing a budget deficit, and tax dollars must be prioritized for hardworking Californians struggling to make rent, buy groceries, and pay the electric bill. This bill does not do that,” he said. 

One California falls under the purview of the state Department of Social Services. That agency vets nonprofit organizations that apply and awards them contracts to provide attorneys for immigrants. The nonprofits must have experience representing immigrants in asylum, juvenile status, human trafficking and other criminal cases.

Some grants already are allocated for legal services for unaccompanied immigrant children who are transferred to the custody of the federal Office of Refugee Resettlement in California. 

Jones-Sawyer’s proposed bill also would expand how much cost information is available about One California. The Department of Social Services would provide the Legislature with an annual report and publish it on the department’s website. 

The bill was assigned to the Judiciary Committee, which began meeting March 12.  

Should Fox News allow Sen. Schumer to be interviewed and knowingly lie to the public?  Note that CNN has NO conservative news people or anchors—and interview almost no Republicans—Cheney, Romney and Kinzinger do not count as Republicans.

“The prospect of the establishment media’s precarious position was captured in a Tuesday article written by the Dispatch’s David Drucker in which he warned Republican lawmakers and candidates heading into the 2024 election cycle “could attempt to freeze out mainstream journalists,” paralyzing television networks’ content creation and crushing their claims of political neutrality.

Drucker warned the establishment media could be suffocated by conservatives because “many young GOP communications aides staffing campaigns who came of age in the past decade remain unaccustomed to working with mainstream journalists.”

I am not sure why this is an issue.  The mainstream media has already cut off conservatives.  And if they report on them, they are called racists, Nazis and worse.

Report: Conservatives, Republicans Could Cut Off Establishment Media in 2024 Cycle

WENDELL HUSEBØ, Breitbart,  3/16/23   

Conservatives and Republicans could, a new report suggests, cut off establishment media outlets’ access in the 2024 election cycle as GOP lawmakers and candidates look to alternative communication channels to tell their stories.

The prospect of the establishment media’s precarious position was captured in a Tuesday article written by the Dispatch’s David Drucker in which he warned Republican lawmakers and candidates heading into the 2024 election cycle “could attempt to freeze out mainstream journalists,” paralyzing television networks’ content creation and crushing their claims of political neutrality.

Drucker warned the establishment media could be suffocated by conservatives because “many young GOP communications aides staffing campaigns who came of age in the past decade remain unaccustomed to working with mainstream journalists.”

Public trust in national news media has plummeted in recent years. For instance, a February poll found 50 percent of Americans say the national media intend to mislead, misinform, and persuade the public. Only 35 percent say most news organizations could be relied upon.

Garrett Ventry, a GOP strategist who advises Republican House Conference Chair Elise Stefanik (R-NY), told Breitbart News that Republican lawmakers are turning to alternative strategies to communicate with Americans due to unfair coverage.

Just last week, Stefanik was targeted by a taxpayer-funded NPR affiliate. In a Breitbart News article, Stefanik’s office pushed back and called out the “sexist” network for “lying” to its readers.

“Republicans are smartly leveraging other avenues to get out their message instead of relying on the mainstream press,” Ventry said. “Trump started this smart strategy when he ran for President in 2016, engaging with conservative media to pump his message to millions of readers and voters.”

Some Republicans may be worried that if they do not participate in establishment media stories their media presence may be diminished — however distorted their views and positions might be presented to viewers and readers in those media outlets.

If Republicans refuse to work with establishment outlets, Vish Burra, the co-creator of Firebrand, told Breitbart News they could be forced to air or publish fairer content from alternative media just to get the GOP perspective in their products.

“Establishment media is a slave to the media cycle so one way or another, so long as a quote or footage of the subject exists on the matter an establishment journo is designated to cover, they will take that content anywhere they can get it and air it on their networks regardless of where that content originated from,” Burra said.

While some of these establishment media outlets could face further backlash from conservative lawmakers and candidates, many of them already face lagging revenue amid deteriorating ratings.

CNN, “a far-left propaganda outlet that spreads conspiracy theories and political violence,” according to Breitbart News’s John Nolte, has experienced a massive decline in ratings and profitability. In January, CNN’s ratings plunged to a nine-year low. MSNBC fared slightly better.

Newspapers are not doing much better. Last year, the Washington Post admitted it was on track to lose money in 2022. New York Times reported:

The organization is on track to lose money in 2022, after years of profitability, according to two people with knowledge of the company’s finances. The Post now has fewer than the three million paying digital subscribers that it had hailed internally near the end of 2020, according to several people at the organization. Digital ad revenue generated by The Post fell to roughly $70 million during the first half of the year, about 15 percent lower than in the first half of 2021, according to a recent internal financial document reviewed by The New York Times.

It appears Republican media consultants are realizing the establishment media’s reduced influence.

“I increasingly hear from my clients that they have no desire to speak to the New York Times, the Washington Post or CNN,” Brad Todd, a Republican strategist, told Drucker. “Their argument is: Our voters don’t care what they write, so why should we care what they write?”

Republican consultant Todd Harris also told Drucker that Republicans were previously forced to work with the establishment media, but that is not true anymore. “It used to be, you’d engage with the mainstream media because that’s what you’re supposed to do,” he said. “But now, there’s a risk-reward element. If you’re going to do it, there better be a payoff.”

In the heart of the Silicon Valley cybercrime is flourishing.  You would think this is the last place this could happen.  In fact, due to the WOKE attitude, this is the best place to hijack computer information from private firms and government agencies—government will pretend to stop it, but do nothing.

“Makstman, whose office was formed last year, said cities are uniquely vulnerable to cyberattacks due to the wide range of services they provide compared with private companies, making their infrastructure more varied, complex and harder to defend.

“We fly planes, we build roads, we operate the largest trauma center on the West Coast,” Makstman said. “There’s no organization that has so many services and so much business technology.”

Just an excuse for not doing their job.  “Don’t blame us, we have a lot to protect”.  In other words, we are just pretending to have cyber security.  Giving your information to a government agency is as good as posting it on social media.

San Francisco Battles Rising Cybercrime ‘Tsunami’ After Oakland Hit Hard

Written by Garrett Leahy, SF Standard,  3/16/23  

A ransomware attack and data leak that hobbled Oakland’s city services and exposed current and former city workers to possible credit card fraud has San Francisco on its toes.

“We are definitely at a higher alert now than we were before,” said Michael Makstman, head of San Francisco’s Office of Cybersecurity.

Makstman, whose office was formed last year, said cities are uniquely vulnerable to cyberattacks due to the wide range of services they provide compared with private companies, making their infrastructure more varied, complex and harder to defend.

“We fly planes, we build roads, we operate the largest trauma center on the West Coast,” Makstman said. “There’s no organization that has so many services and so much business technology.”

Makstman said that there has been a “tsunami” of cybercrime that has happened in the last few years, and estimates that San Francisco now faces 30% more cyberattacks than it did at the onset of Covid three years ago, and that the federal government has warned of the potential for increased attacks since the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Makstman said the cities of San Francisco and Oakland present lucrative opportunities for cyber criminals, especially from hostile nations or actors that have it in for the United States. He says they can make a big statement by hobbling a major U.S. city with complex cyber infrastructure, without warranting a major federal response that a physical terror attack would likely cause.

“We find ourselves in this squishy middle, where we’re an attractive target,” Makstman said. 

San Francisco faces hundreds of phishing attacks and attempts to access its network every day because city information such as worker emails are public, making it easy to mass-email malicious links to workers and have an unsuspecting person infect city systems with malware, according to Makstman. Malware is software that is designed to disrupt, damage or gain unauthorized access to a computer system.

“We face cyberattacks every day,” Makstman said. “If you put a computer out there, connected to the internet, within minutes, it will be compromised by a criminal organization. A lot of this stuff is automated. The cyber gangs are constantly scanning anything connected to the internet […] think of the scammers sending out phishing emails every day.”

When Makstman was asked for specifics on what the city was doing to battle cybercrime, he could not elaborate beyond saying that “technical adjustments” have been made.

“This is exactly what we wouldn’t want the bad guys to learn,” Makstman said.

Makstman said the city monitors the dark web to see if San Francisco or its vendors are being discussed by hacking groups or other bad actors to gauge the risk of an impending cyber attack. 

The so-called dark web is not something you can access without a bit of technical know-how—it’s usually accessed through the Tor Browser, or Onion Router, which essentially scrambles the user’s information so they cannot be tracked down easily by law enforcement or national security agencies.

“These people, they do talk to each other,” Makstman said.

Everybody’s Data for Sale?

The leak of Oakland city data is alarming, with city workers telling KTVU about suspicious credit card charges and others alleging they became victims of other forms of fraud after sensitive data was leaked and dumped online.

A tweet from an Oakland planner days after the city’s cyberattack.

The City of Oakland released a statement after the attacks on its website encouraging anyone who was a city employee after July 2010 to contact the city; the statement was last updated on March 8. Oakland was contacted for an update on the situation.

However, much of our data may already be out there on the dark web, according to cybersecurity experts.

“If you go through last year’s breaches, every phone network has been breached,” said cybersecurity analyst Dominic Alvieri. “Right there, you probably have about 90% of the population. All the big credit reporting agencies have been breached in the past few years, that takes us up to probably 97% [of the population. …] Everybody’s data, I hate to say it, but more or less it’s out there and accessible.”

Alvieri said that attacks like those experienced by Oakland are part of a rising wave of hacker groups such as Play Ransomware, which is the group that has claimed responsibility for the February attack against the city.

“It’s a fairly new group; they leak a lot of data,” said Alvieri.

Data can also be leaked from other accounts too, such as a streaming service or other subscription that collects your name, email, password and payment information according to Garrett Thompson, a counterintelligence specialist at Ohio-based cybersecurity firm, Binary Defense.

“If they happen to breach into Netflix, and you have a payment card on there, that would be a way that your payment information would be exposed,” Thompson said. “Also, if they have other info on you, they could reach out to you and extort you.”

Both Thompson and Alvieri said that the chances of private individuals facing a major attack are less likely, as attacks are often done to extort targets out of money by holding sensitive data hostage via encryption.

“With the larger groups, they tend to go after larger organizations with larger troves of data. But, as a drive-by tactic, individuals could become victims. They aren’t targeting people one-off, though,” Thompson said.

The number of cybercrime complaints has dropped nationally, but the potential financial loss has risen, according to the FBI. | Adobe Stock

The Federal Bureau of Investigation, which works with cities to investigate cyber attacks, said the Russian invasion of Ukraine prompted them to warn companies and governments about an increased risk of cyber attacks.

“The number of complaints slightly dropped, but the potential financial loss increased dramatically. Some of this may be attributed to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine,” the FBI’s San Francisco Field Office said in an email.

The FBI added that perpetrators of cybercrime can include countries, namely China, Russia, Iran and North Korea, as well as organized criminal groups, syndicates or people pursuing financial gain.

The Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency, was contacted for comment.

Stanford refuses to punish the Dean who instigated the riot against a Federal Judge, nor the law students that participated in the riot.  Worse, this should be reported as an ethics violations ot the Bar Association, but it won’t.  Stanford is training the next generation of Brownshirts

“Stanford administrators are hoping this public relations nightmare will blow over if everybody, particularly the Federalist Society students targeted by the activists, would be so kind as to shut up and take this one on the chin.

The administration aims to run the operation like any abusive parent would: Don’t say a word to anybody about how you got that bruise, or else!

Perhaps most outrageous is an email sent Tuesday from Federalist Society faculty adviser Michael McConnell—the lone conservative on the Stanford Law School faculty—to the student group’s members urging them, in their interactions with the press, “not to speak out of anger and not to exacerbate the already tense situation.”

When will the adults take back Stanford?  Until then, it is a war zone and those harmed not allowed to defend themselves.

At Stanford, Public Accountability for Thee But Not for Me

Washington Free Beacon Editors, 3/16/23   

The debate inside Stanford Law School, where activist students earlier this month shouted down federal circuit court judge Kyle Duncan at a Federalist Society event, has moved beyond whether those students should face any consequences for their outrageous conduct. The school has made clear they will not.

Now we debate the propriety of the conservative students on the receiving end of that vitriol expressing their displeasure with the school, and their classmates, in the press.

Stanford administrators are hoping this public relations nightmare will blow over if everybody, particularly the Federalist Society students targeted by the activists, would be so kind as to shut up and take this one on the chin.

The administration aims to run the operation like any abusive parent would: Don’t say a word to anybody about how you got that bruise, or else!

Perhaps most outrageous is an email sent Tuesday from Federalist Society faculty adviser Michael McConnell—the lone conservative on the Stanford Law School faculty—to the student group’s members urging them, in their interactions with the press, “not to speak out of anger and not to exacerbate the already tense situation.”

“Many in the media would like nothing better than to find sources and quotes that are inflammatory on one side or the other. This is not in your interest, and it is not in the long-term interest of the chapter at Stanford—nor of Stanford as an institution,” McConnell wrote. “In particular, I have heard that some outlets wish to obtain names and likenesses of protesting students. I suggest not cooperating with any such efforts.” With friends like these!

Why members of the school’s Federalist Society chapter should help cover up the misconduct of their peers and the administrators who collaborated with them is a mystery to us. But such a cover-up is surely not in the best interests of the institution or the legal system it ostensibly serves.

McConnell told us he stands by his guidance about press engagement, but did not respond to questions about what sorts of consequences might be appropriate for the mob that shut down the event.

The school’s chapter of the National Lawyers Guild—the organizing force behind the Maoist horde of would-be lawyers—papered the hallways prior to Judge Duncan’s arrival with the names and photographs of the Federalist Society’s board members.

Yet when Free Beacon reporter Aaron Sibarium quoted the group’s board members describing the protests as “Stanford Law School at its best,” and named those board members, we got a note from one of them, Lily Bou, demanding that we remove her name and those of her classmates. “You do not have our permission to reference or quote any portion of this email in a future piece.”

That’s not exactly how the First Amendment works.

We’ve gotten similar complaints about publishing images—pulled from social media—of Stanford Law School dean Jenny Martinez’s classroom, which protesters covered end to end in flyers after she issued an apology to Judge Duncan.

We received the following note from Mary Cate Hickman, who identified herself as a second-year law student and describes herself on LinkedIn as “passionate about social justice” and a graduate of the Sorbonne.

Hickman demanded that we “anonymize the face of the student in the red hoodie” because “California is a two-party consent state, and you have no right to publish this student’s identity/likeness/face without consent.”

California is a two-party consent state for the recording of oral communications, not photographs, and even that only pertains to situations in which there is a presumption of privacy—that is, not a law school classroom in which student activists are snapping photographs and posting them to Instagram. Hickman did not respond to a request for comment.

What’s eminently clear from the drama unfolding in Palo Alto is that while Stanford law students may be the vanguard of an anti-constitutional revolution, they don’t know much about the law. Where Stanford has failed to educate them in the limits of privacy and the rights of a free press, we will endeavor to fill the void with our continuing coverage of this ugly affair.

As policy the Democrat party is now favor the terrorists of the Middle East over the Israeli democracy.  At the same time, they need money from Jews to support the Palestinian terrorists.  Sadly, the Jewish donors are ignorant that their money is being used to support the killing of Jews in Israel.  Remember, Obama/Biden was the fitst American Administration to openly apologize to the terrorists and hate the State of Israel.  The demented Joe Biden has continued the support of middle east terrorists, by among other things, stopping us from drilling our own oil—helping make the terrorists around the world richer.

“Forty-nine percent of Democrats now say they sympathize more with Palestinians, compared to 38 percent who side with Israelis—a staggering 11-point swing since just last year.

The poll comes as far-left, anti-Israel lawmakers have worked to shift the Democratic Party’s support away from Israel over the past several years.

High-profile “Squad” members, including Reps. Ilhan Omar (Minn.), Rashida Tlaib (Mich.), and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) have accused Israel of “apartheid” and called for cutting off military support to the Jewish state.

Omar’s claim that U.S. politicians only back Israel because of donations—”It’s all about the Benjamins baby,” she wrote on Twitter in 2019—was widely denounced as anti-Semitic and led to Republicans removing her from the House Foreign Affairs Committee earlier this year. In 2021, House Democrats voted to block funding to Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system under pressure from far-left lawmakers.

Proof Democrats want to kill off Israel.  But, American Jews continue to support the middle east terrorists by donating to the Democrat Party.

Dems Favor Palestinians Over Israelis For First Time, Poll Shows

Poll comes as progressive lawmakers have worked to shift the Democratic Party’s support away from Israel

Alana Goodman, Washington Free Beacon,  3/16/23   

Democrats are for the first time more likely to favor the Palestinians over Israelis in the Middle East conflict, according to a new Gallup poll, reflecting the party leadership’s growing opposition to the Jewish state.

Forty-nine percent of Democrats now say they sympathize more with Palestinians, compared to 38 percent who side with Israelis—a staggering 11-point swing since just last year.

The poll comes as far-left, anti-Israel lawmakers have worked to shift the Democratic Party’s support away from Israel over the past several years.

High-profile “Squad” members, including Reps. Ilhan Omar (Minn.), Rashida Tlaib (Mich.), and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) have accused Israel of “apartheid” and called for cutting off military support to the Jewish state.

Omar’s claim that U.S. politicians only back Israel because of donations—”It’s all about the Benjamins baby,” she wrote on Twitter in 2019—was widely denounced as anti-Semitic and led to Republicans removing her from the House Foreign Affairs Committee earlier this year. In 2021, House Democrats voted to block funding to Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system under pressure from far-left lawmakers.

“This is an extremely troubling trend,” said Republican Jewish Coalition CEO Matt Brooks. “Many elected Democrats claim to be pro-Israel, but party activists and rank-and-file members are increasingly indifferent and even hostile to the Jewish state. It’s long past time for Democratic leaders to admit they have a problem that must be addressed to restore the historic bipartisan support for Israel.”

The Gallup poll shows a significant shift in Democrats’ views of Israel over the past two decades, a trend that has become more pronounced in recent years.

In 2001, 51 percent of Democrats sympathized more with Israelis compared with 16 percent who sympathized more with Palestinians. That gap narrowed to just a 5-point advantage for Israel in 2020, and a 2-point advantage last year.

Independents also expressed a 6-point increase in support for Palestinians since 2022, but they still sided more with Israel by 49 percent to 32 percent.

Republican views remained the same, according to the poll, with 78 percent backing Israel.

Want to see dead bodies?  You can go to the L.A. morgue or take a ride on the L.A. Metro.  This is part of the reason George Gascon is using tax dollars to shuttle his workers from a parking lot to the office, so they will not be among the criminals he has released or the dirt, disease and criminals Gascon loves.

“Drug use is rampant in the Metro system. Since January, 22 people have died on Metro buses and trains, mostly from suspected overdoses — more people than all of 2022. Serious crimes soared 24% last year compared with the previous.

“Horror.” That’s how one train operator recently described the scenes he sees daily. He declined to use his name because he was not authorized to talk to the media.

Earlier that day, as he drove the Red Line subway, he saw a man masturbating in his seat and several of what he calls sleepers, people who get high and nod off on the train.

The LA Metro is best called a horror show.  What your kids seeing this?  Think this is a pleasant way to go to work?  Would you use this rolling drug den?  No wonder ridership is down more than 40%.

Los Angeles Residents Avoiding the Metro – Site of 22 Drug Overdose Deaths Since January

By Mike LaChance, Gateway Pundit,  3/14/23  

In recent years, the New York subway has been in the news repeatedly. People don’t like to ride it anymore because it’s no longer safe.

In Los Angeles, the metro system doesn’t get as much attention in the news, but is apparently just as bad.

People are starting to avoid using the train system due to crime and also because it’s the site of multiple drug overdose deaths.

The LA Times reports:

L.A. riders bail on Metro trains amid ‘horror’ of deadly drug overdoses, crime

Drug use is rampant in the Metro system. Since January, 22 people have died on Metro buses and trains, mostly from suspected overdoses — more people than all of 2022. Serious crimes soared 24% last year compared with the previous.

“Horror.” That’s how one train operator recently described the scenes he sees daily. He declined to use his name because he was not authorized to talk to the media.

Earlier that day, as he drove the Red Line subway, he saw a man masturbating in his seat and several of what he calls sleepers, people who get high and nod off on the train.

“We don’t even see any businesspeople anymore. We don’t see anybody going to Universal. It’s just people who have no other choice [than] to ride the system, homeless people and drug users.”

Commuters have abandoned large swaths of the Metro train system. Even before the pandemic, ridership in the region was never as high as other big-city rail systems. For January, ridership on the Gold Line was 30% of the pre-pandemic levels, and the Red Line was 56% of them. The new $2.1-billion Crenshaw Line that officials tout as a bright spot with little crime had fewer than 2,100 average weekday boardings that month.

The Daily Caller has more on this:

The security chief for the transit agency previously said she’ll request that its board, which includes Democratic Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, expand the number of transit officers beyond the 200 already on the force, according to the LA Times. The board is also soon to decide on the issue of whether or not to extend their contracts with the Los Angeles Police Department, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and the Long Beach Police Department.

Some, however, are concerned by the efforts to increase policing. The transit authority allocated $122 million over the last year to add 300 unarmed “ambassadors” to help report crimes, according to the LA Times.

“What will harassment and jailing people who use drugs do to address drug use rates?” Alison Vu, a spokesperson for the ACT-LA, a social justice advocacy coalition that advocates against the agency’s contracts with law enforcement, said. “We’ve poured so much money into policing, without any measurable impact on care or safety for transit riders.”

The Metro clearly needs more policing, and naturally the left thinks this is a bad idea.

No learning of English—sex is taught instead.  No learning of history, hate America is taught along with racism and bullying.  No child is safe in many of our classrooms, they prefer “restorative justice”, which allows kids to bully and beat students and teachers, sell drugs on campus and bring weapons to schools.  Punishment?  Being told not to do it again.  Think you kids are safe as school?  Not a chance.

“We are seen as utterly barbaric, with fans of restorative justice suggesting that punishing a student for violent or other bad actions sets them on an unshakable path toward prison and abuse.

Proponents often point to schools that adopted the practice of restorative justice and saw a sharp decline in suspensions—Oakland Unified School District in California, for example. Although suspensions in Oakland Unified have decreased, the level of violence and total number of police incidents in the school district have not.”

Sending your child to a school with restorative justice is a priori evidence of child abuse.  Do something about it.

‘Restorative Justice’ Is Killing American Classrooms

Tony Kinnett, Daily Signal,  3/16/23     

As record numbers of fistfights are erupting amid a behavior crisis in the American public education system, more schools are attempting to use restorative justice—even though that process often makes behavioral problems worse.

Restorative justice is a remediation theory that suggests students respond better to affirmation-based conversations in which an adult de-escalates any problem situation by calmly discussing the students’ feelings about the problem until everyone agrees. 

Restorative justice relies on student investment and commitment to say, “I am willing to do this.”

We are seen as utterly barbaric, with fans of restorative justice suggesting that punishing a student for violent or other bad actions sets them on an unshakable path toward prison and abuse.

Proponents often point to schools that adopted the practice of restorative justice and saw a sharp decline in suspensions—Oakland Unified School District in California, for example. Although suspensions in Oakland Unified have decreased, the level of violence and total number of police incidents in the school district have not.

Few, if any, schools that have adopted restorative justice as a replacement for traditional discipline have seen a healthier school environment that is safer for teachers and students.

Unfortunately for those who seek the utopian, unicorn sunshine of  these practices, the majority of students don’t respond well to restorative justice. Hundreds of public school districts that use it are experiencing large numbers of physical fights and continual chaos that is more responsible for driving teachers out of the classroom than almost any other issue. 

Restorative justice fails thousands of classrooms a day in situations such as this recent one in Wisconsin described by Milwaukee English teacher Daniel Buck: 

A student gets into a violent fight in the classroom—students’ safety is threatened, and the teacher struggles to break up the fight before calling the office. The office may (or may not) send an administrator, counselor, or other office-staff member to the classroom, where the fighting students are taken into the hallway or the office for a brief discussion about their actions. 

Most often, the students are told to get along, sent back to class, and within five minutes nothing more has occurred than putting the safety of students at risk with both violent students back in their seats with no more than a polite ‘talking to.’ These students don’t buy into restorative practices. Why should they care?

Any adult who has spoken with a child after (or during) a fight knows that rational dialogue and feelings-centric relationship-building aren’t at the forefront of his mind. Why would a violent or disruptive student choose to engage in an “opportunity for equitable dialogue and participatory decision-making” when he can simply mumble at the floor and be sent from the office back to class without punishment regardless?

I have yet to see a single pair of high school students who just smashed each other’s faces into lockers and cement walls genuinely respond with an air of reconciliation to the questions, “What can you do to repair the harm?” or “Who else was affected by what you did?”

You’re far more likely to hear a screaming explanation of why the other student “needed his a– beat.”

At some point, we must consider what we’ve given up to gain far too little.

American classrooms have given up detentions, suspensions, and community service as methods of delivering justice in order to gain a never-ending cycle of violence; this teaches students that they may do whatever they wish with no observable risk.

We also forget the additional impact that this horrific policy has on innocent students and teachers who are just trying to engage in the learning process.

How are students supposed to focus on their education when desks are thrown aside by students who are pulling each other’s hair and screaming at the top of their lungs? How are teachers supposed to teach when students are throwing each other across the room without respite?

As the science and STEM coordinator for Indianapolis Public Schools, I watched my science teachers struggle under the weight of a failed system as their students beat each other to the point of senselessness day after day, without any administrative action other than “sharing their feelings.”

The National Education Association, the nation’s largest teachers union, continues to preach that the “school-to-prison pipeline” is solved by restorative justice. But it seems that students are more likely to be thrown in prison as a result of the practice. 

Students who are violent and disruptive without consequences one day will find that police departments don’t have restorative conversation circles. Crimes will be met with prison sentences.

As a teacher, I was told repeatedly in our “equity meetings” that the classical methods of justice were harmful and ineffective—yet charter and private schools that still practice these methods enjoy the privileges of safe hallways and classrooms, fewer police incidents, and a better environment for learning.

Restorative justice practices have driven many teachers I’ve spoken with to tears. Entire schools have locked their bathrooms during the day to prevent students from killing each other between classes. Instagram accounts celebrating hourly fights in large public schools spring up so often that social media platforms have trouble taking them down. 

The Justice Department announced March 6 that it would offer grants to teach university education departments about the supposed virtues of restorative justice, hoping to “educate, train, and build knowledge on restorative justice approaches, principles, and their application to criminal justice and community safety.”

Despite the record of classical discipline and justice in creating safe environments, despite the numerous examples we have of these methods working effectively, the Biden administration seems bent on pushing us ever close to the false dream of utopia. And our children will pay the price.

The mentally ill people, calling themselves WOKE—just another form of mental illness—have decided that to be clean, you are a racist.  This has to be a troll, the whole WOKE movement.  Just as the wearing of masks and social distancing were a troll, calling every from white paint to clean pantries, are a troll.

“Professor Jenna Drenten recently criticized a social media trend of users posting videos showing off different ways to organize pantries. Drenten wrote that these video creators, “predominantly white women,” have created “a new status symbol” to replace the old one of “nice houses,” “nice yards” and “nice neighborhoods.”

Drenten’s scholarly pursuits include papers on “Video Gaming as a Gendered Pursuit” and “More Gamer, Less Girl: Gendered Boundaries, Tokenism, and the Cultural Persistence of Masculine Dominance.”

Jenna is mentally ill, just look at the crazy papers she has written.  She is in the Twilight Zone and needs professional help before she accuses Martians of being racist.  She has to be a troll hoaxster—no one can be this stupid or mentally ill.

Clean pantries are ‘racist’ and ‘sexist’: Loyola marketing scholar

COLLEGE FIX STAFF,

‘Cleanliness’ has been used as a ‘cultural gatekeeping mechanism,’ professor says

Clean pantries and tidy houses have “racist,” “sexist” and “classist” roots according to a marketing professor at Loyola University-Chicago.

Professor Jenna Drenten recently criticized a social media trend of users posting videos showing off different ways to organize pantries. Drenten wrote that these video creators, “predominantly white women,” have created “a new status symbol” to replace the old one of “nice houses,” “nice yards” and “nice neighborhoods.”

Drenten’s scholarly pursuits include papers on “Video Gaming as a Gendered Pursuit” and “More Gamer, Less Girl: Gendered Boundaries, Tokenism, and the Cultural Persistence of Masculine Dominance.”

She wrote in Conversation:

Cleanliness has historically been used as a cultural gatekeeping mechanism to reinforce status distinctions based on a vague understanding of “niceness”: nice people, with nice yards, in nice houses, make for nice neighborhoods.

What lies beneath the surface of this anti-messiness, pro-niceness stance is a history of classist, racist and sexist social structures.

One reason that the videos promote sexism is that keeping food on the shelves “often falls to women in the household.”

This content, which she calls “pantry porn,” push an image onto women about what it means to be a good wife.

The marketing professor wrote:

Magazines like Good Housekeeping were once the brokers of idealized domestic work. Now online pantry porn sets the aspirational standard for becoming an ideal mom, ideal wife and ideal woman. This grew out of a shift toward an intensive mothering ideology that equates being a good mom with time-intensive, labor-intensive, financially expensive care work.

“Pantry porn, as a status symbol, relies on the promise of making daily domestic work easier,” she wrote.

“But if women are largely responsible for the work required to maintain the perfectly organized pantry, it’s critical to ask: easier for whom?”