Lee Camp: What’s the difference between ‘Villain’ Assange & ‘Intrepid’ Woodward? https://www.rt.com/op-ed/501709-lee-camp-assange-woodward/

Hillary Clinton Email Archive

Back to the Search

• View email
• View original PDF
• Share document

H: FYI. SID

From: Huma Abedin To: h <hdr22@clintonemail.com> Date: 2010-11-18 03:00 Subject: H: FYI. SID UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06131634 Date: 11/03/2016 From: Hume Abedin RELEASE IN PART B6 Sent: 11/18/2010 12:07:36 AM +00:00 NEAR To: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com> DUPLICATE Subject: Re: H: fyi. Sid Ok Original Message From: H To: Huma Abedin Sent: W ed Nov 17 19:04:18 2010 Subject: Fw: H: fyi. Sid Pls print for me. Original Message From: sbwhoeop To: H Sent: W ed Nov 17 18:10:42 2010 Subject: H: fyi. Sid <http://b.scorecardresearch.com /p?c1=28, ,c2=6723616& c3=8,,c4=8,,c5=politics&c6=&c15=&cj= 1> Heard about this yesterday. Also Pelosi told Democracy Alliance, “W hen I go to the W hite House I feel like Fm dealing with the junior senator from Illinois.” Messina was a serious bust there this morning. Goulsbee debated Trumka (W hy21212) and was drubbed. Europe memo to follow… Sid Sam Stein <http://www.huffingtonpost.com /t he-news/reporting/sam -stein> UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06131634 Date: 11/03/2016 stein@huffingtonpost.com 1 HuffPost Reporting Become a Fan <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/u sers/becomeFan.php?of=hp blogger Sam%2 OStein> Get Email Alerts from this Reporter <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/u sers/logini> <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2 010/11/17/george-s oros-obama n 785022.html?view=pr int#> <http://s.huffpost.com/images/b1ank.gif&gt; George Soros Tells Progressive Donors Obama Might Not Be The Best Investment <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2 010/11/17/george-so ros-obama n 785022.html> First Posted: 11-17-10 04:10 PM I Updated: 11-17-10 04:34 PM <http://i.huffpost.com/gen/220111/thumbs/s-OBAMA-S OROS-large.jpg> WASHINGTON — At a private meeting on Tuesday afternoon, George Soros, a longtime supporter of progressive causes, voiced blunt criticism of the Obama administration, going so far as to suggest that Democratic donors direct their support somewhere other than the president. The Hungarian-American financier was speaking to a small side gathering of donors who had convened in Washington D.C. for the annual gathering of the Democracy Alliance — a formal community of well-funded, progressive-minded individuals and activists. According to multiple sources with knowledge of his remarks, Soros told those in attendance that he is “used to fighting losing battles but doesn’t like to lose without fighting.” “We have just lost this election, we need to draw a line,” he said, according to several Democratic sources. “And if this president can’t do what we need, it is time to start looking somewhere else.” Michael Vachon, an adviser to Soros, did not dispute the comment, though he stressed that there was no transcript of a private gathering to check. Vachon also clarified that the longtime progressive giver was not referring to a primary challenge to the president. “Mr. Soros fully supports the president as the leader of the Democratic Party,” said Vachon. “He was not suggesting that we seek another candidate for 2012. His comments were made in a private, informal conversation that was about the need for UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06131634 Date: 11/03/2016 progressives to be more forceful in promoting their agenda. He was stressing the importance of being heard by elected officials.” Dissatisfaction with the Obama administration was not limited to Soros’s private gathering with donors. On Wednesday morning, Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina received several tough questions during his address to the Democracy Alliance. According to a source in the room, he was pressed multiple times as to why the administration has declined to be more combative with Republicans, both in communication and legislative strategy. Another source in the room said the exchange was not entirely contentious as people were simply expressing frustration about the fact that “we just came out of an election where the right wing and the Republicans distorted what was going on.” Requests for comment from the White House were not returned, though a Democratic operative sympathetic to the administration said that Soros’s dissatisfaction with the White House was “hardly news.” Sources who relayed that and other exchanges insisted on anonymity, citing the strict rules against talking to the press that come with being part of the gathering. The tone nevertheless was said to be notably different this year than in past years. In 2008, representatives for Obama were received relatively warmly when they pitched the need to shepherd funds to the presidential campaign. Other progressive institutions were left — somewhat bitterly — looking for scraps. But, by and large, the donor base felt their investment had been wise, with Democrats regaining control of the White House and padding their majorities in Congress. This year, following a drubbing in the 2010 elections and some stalling on major legislative items, the dynamics were notably different. As one attendee put it: “It was a sober atmosphere… people are looking for answers but they are not unwilling to do the work. I I While Soros’s comment gave some attendees the impression that he’d cheer a primary challenge to the president, the point, sources say, was different. Rather, it is time to shuffle funds into a progressive infrastructure that will take on the tasks that the president can’t or won’t take on. “People are determined to help build a progressive infrastructure and make sure it is there not just in the months ahead but one that will last in the long term,” said Anna Burger, the retired treasury secretary of SEIU. “Instead of being pushed over by this election it has empowered people to stand up in a bigger way.” “There was frustration,” said one Democratic operative who attended the meetings. The main concern was about messaging. I think they are frustrated that the president isn’t being more direct. But I did not get the sense that anyone’s commitment to the progressive movement was wavering… The general consensus is that support has to move beyond being about one person and more about a movement. I don’t know if we’ve moved beyond there.” One of those “movement” ventures is an outside-government arm to match conservatives in the 2012 elections. For several weeks, discussions have been led by Media Matters for America founder David Brock about the need to create a group that will run advertisements, conduct opposition research and perform rapid response functions. Those talks continued this past week, though disputes have begun to emerge about the most effective role for such a group. As one activist who is involved with the Democracy Alliance noted: “There are a handful of funders committed to the idea of taking on corporate interests in politics… I think the [Supreme Court’s] Citizens United decision [allowing unlimited corporate donations in campaigns] intellectually caused a shift to want to deal with corporate money. The election results split the partners in the Democracy Alliance, not down the middle, between those who say let’s fight back and those who say we have to change the rules.” UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06131634 Date: 11/03/2016 Get HuffPost Politics On Twitter <http://twitter.co m/HuffPostPol> and Facebook <http://www.facebook.c om/HuffPostPolitics> ! Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hill/sig nup.htm l> ! Know som ething we don’t? E- mail us at huffpolitics@ huffingtonpost.com <http://s0.2m dn.net/2717285/2-S tr U S 300×250 std t dr 15.gif> Loading twitter module… <http://s.huffpost.com /im ages/I oader.gif> PR_RIM_PAGER_TX_FLAG: false PR_RIM_MSG_REF_ID: 881951106 PR_RIM_MSG_FOLDERID: -5 PR_RIM_DELETED_BY_DEVICE: true PR_RIM_MSG_ON_DEVICE_3_6: true PR_RIM_MSG_STATUS: 1

Back to the Search

• View email
• View original PDF
• Share document

UNREST IN ALBANIA

From: Hillary Clinton To: Jake Sullivan Date: 2011-01-24 10:13 Subject: UNREST IN ALBANIA UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05786294 Date: 10/30/2015 RELEASE IN PART B5,B6 From: H <hrod17@clintonemail.com > Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 5:13 PM To: ‘sullivanjj@state.gov’ Subject: Re: Unrest in Albania Ok. How do you think press conf went? Original Message From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov> To: H Sent: Mon Jan 24 16:39:46 2011 Subject: Fw: Unrest in Albania Fyi Original Message From: Gordon, Philip H To: Verma, Richard R; Sullivan, Jacob J; Abedin, Huma; Burns, William J Sent: Mon Jan 24 16:23:01 2011 Subject: RE: Unrest in Albania This email is UNCLASSIFIED Original Message—- From: Verma, Richard R Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 5:41 AM To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Abedin, Huma; Gordon, Philip H; Burns, William J Subject: FW: Unrest in Albania Below message is from George Soros for the Secretary. Understand his organization was sending through other channels as well. Original Message—– From: Jonas Rolett [mailto: Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2011 1:39 PM To: Verma, Richard R Subject: Re: Unrest in Albania Rich, Here’s the text of the message. I’m available to talk at any time. Thanks, UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05786294 Date: 10/30/2015 Jonas Dear Hillary, A serious situation has arisen in Albania which needs urgent attention at senior levels of the US government. You may know that an opposition demonstration in Tirana on Friday resulted in the deaths of three people and the destruction of property. There are serious concerns about further unrest connected to a counter-demonstration to be organized by the governing party on Wednesday and a follow-up event by the opposition two days later to memorialize the victims. The prospect of tens of thousands of people entering the streets in an already inflamed political environment bodes ill for the return of public order and the country’s fragile democratic process. I believe two things need to be done urgently: 1. Bring the full weight of the international community to bear on Prime Minister Berisha and opposition leader Edi Rama to forestall further public demonstrations and to tone down public pronouncements. 2. Appoint a senior European official as a mediator. While I am concerned about the rhetoric being used by both sides, I am particularly worried about the actions of the Prime Minister. There is videotape of National Guard members firing on demonstrators from the roof of the Prime Ministry. The Prosecutor (appointed by the Democratic Party) has issued arrest warrants for the individuals in question. The Prime Minister had previously accused the opposition of intentionally murdering these activists as a provocation. After the tape came out deputies from his party accused the Prosecutor of planning a coup d’etat in collaboration with the opposition, a charge Mr. Berisha repeated today. No arrests have been made as of this writing. The demonstration resulted from opposition protests over the conduct of parliamentary elections in 2009. The political environment has deteriorated ever since and is now approaching levels of 1997, when similar issues caused the country to slide into anarchy and violence. There are signs that Edi Rama’s control of his own people is slipping, which may lead to further violence. The US and the EU must work in complete harmony over this, but given Albania’s European aspirations the EU must take the lead. That is why I suggest appointing a mediator such as Carl Bildt. Martti Ahtisaari or Miroslav Lajcak, all of whom have strong connections to the Balkans. My foundation in Tirana is monitoring the situation closely and can provide independent analysis of the crisis. Thank you, George Soros

Be sure to click here to see Q drop #4750 https://qanon.pub/

Click here to go to Q Drops. https://qanon.pub/

Q Post #4751

Q !!Hs1Jq13jV6 ID: 4f0773 No.10758338 
Sep 23 2020 14:12:51 (EST) NEWAll_in_the_Family_Graphic_3_e1546668891617.jpg

SYSTEM OF CONTROL.
Q

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEWednesday, September 23, 2020

The Justice Department Unveils Proposed Section 230 Legislation on Behalf of the Administration

Today, on behalf of the Trump Administration, the Department of Justice sent draft legislation to Congress to reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.  The draft legislative text implements reforms that the Department of Justice deemed necessary in its June Recommendations and follows a yearlong review of the outdated statute.  The legislation also executes President Trump’s directive from the Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship.  

“For too long Section 230 has provided a shield for online platforms to operate with impunity,” said Attorney General William P. Barr.  “Ensuring that the internet is a safe, but also vibrant, open and competitive environment is vitally important to America.  We therefore urge Congress to make these necessary reforms to Section 230 and begin to hold online platforms accountable both when they unlawfully censor speech and when they knowingly facilitate criminal activity online.”

“The Department’s proposal is an important step in reforming Section 230 to further its original goal: providing liability protection to encourage good behavior online,” said Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen.  “The proposal makes clear that, when interactive computer services willfully distribute illegal material or moderate content in bad faith, Section 230 should not shield them from the consequences of their actions.”

The Department of Justice is grateful to all the experts, victims’ groups, academics, businesses, and other stakeholders that have and continue to engage closely with the department during this process.  The draft legislation reflects important and helpful feedback received thus far.  The department is also grateful to our colleagues in Congress for their support on Section 230 reform and looks forward to continued engagement moving forward. 

The Department of Justice’s draft legislation focuses on two areas of reform, both of which are, at minimum, necessary to recalibrate the outdated immunity of Section 230.

Promoting Transparency and Open Discourse

First, the draft legislation has a series of reforms to promote transparency and open discourse and ensure that platforms are fairer to the public when removing lawful speech from their services.

The current interpretations of Section 230 have enabled online platforms to hide behind the immunity to censor lawful speech in bad faith and is inconsistent with their own terms of service.  To remedy this, the department’s legislative proposal revises and clarifies the existing language of Section 230 and replaces vague terms that may be used to shield arbitrary content moderation decisions with more concrete language that gives greater guidance to platforms, users, and courts. 

The legislative proposal also adds language to the definition of “information content provider” to clarify when platforms should be responsible for speech that they affirmatively and substantively contribute to or modify.

Addressing Illicit Activity Online

The second category of amendments is aimed at incentivizing platforms to address the growing amount of illicit content online, while preserving the core of Section 230’s immunity for defamation claims. 

Section 230 immunity is meant to incentivize and protect online Good Samaritans.  Platforms that purposely solicit and facilitate harmful criminal activity — in effect, online Bad Samaritans — should not receive the benefit of this immunity.  Nor should a platform receive blanket immunity for continuing to host known criminal content on its services, despite repeated pleas from victims to take action. 

The department also proposes to more clearly carve out federal civil enforcement actions from Section 230.  Although federal criminal prosecutions have always been outside the scope of Section 230 immunity, online crime is a serious and growing problem, and there is no justification for blocking the federal government from civil enforcement on behalf of American citizens.

Finally, the department proposes carving out certain categories of civil claims that are far outside Section 230’s core objective, including offenses involving child sexual abuse, terrorism, and cyberstalking.  These amendments, working together, will be critical first steps in enabling victims to seek redress for the most serious of online crimes.

The Justice Department’s proposals are available here.Topic(s): AntitrustComponent(s): Office of the Attorney GeneralOffice of the Deputy Attorney GeneralPress Release Number: 20-986Updated September 23, 2020

https://legalinsurrection.com/2020/09/video-woman-driver-crashes-car-while-flipping-the-bird-at-trump-supporters/?fbclid=IwAR1qjgbeAFjcP3c3LJAN6paF9CkLBIusdbhDO4-ZoVWyzjdmocr2mDJVaQQ

As part of this Climate Week in New York intended to influence the US elections against Trump, they have created a clock to countdown the time remaining before we all die and it is too late to reverse climate change as if there is anything we could do to actually alter cycles that have existed…

Climate Clock Elected in NYC To Further Propaganda — Armstrong Economics

MlLIT4RY lNSlD3R B0MBSH3LL! Trump WILL INV0KE lnsurrecti0n Act, 4rticle 88 To Stop TWO C0up Att3mpts

From 0017 🙂

We have to become very familiar with the actual law so that when we hear our friends, co-workers, or the media clowns parroting certain opinions/stories, then we can spot the rhetoric aimed against us and actually intended to help the other side.

It has become big business, these days, to act as a paid influencer, I’m talking especially about the talking heads in TV or even the on line gizmos, that the so many of our dear loved ones and siblings keep watching.

Note how the stories are written to look like, they are good for,………wait for it………who? Them or Us? Be sure to watch out for all the “do gooders” in our lives, they usually don’t think further than their noses, that they keep sticking into everybody else’s business.

Notice how often President Trump says something, does something or even tweets something and tons of so called experts crawl out of wood work to claim that he is braking the law somehow. These people are quick to blabber some stuff from the Constitution, while full well knowing, that as necessary for their goals, they will be following the magical lawyering done by the good Esquires using their, wide open for all to see but still secret, Admiralty law, thereby screwing us again.

So far, in last 4 years, I have seen the President always being the one who actually follows the law. I don’t claim to be the smartest cookie in the bunch, but I have compared many stories by the “right wing” and “left wing” writers. Our side is always something that is good for all the people. The other side is always strongly stating that it is for the people but upon further investigation, there is always something that in it, that is not so. It is good for some mysterious character behind the proverbial curtain.