2017-03-31

Top House Intel Democrat: Flynn's move to ask for immunity is 'grave and momentous'

Story by Yahoo News
Written by Allan Smith
Photo by Getty Images

Rep. Adam Schiff of California, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said Friday that ousted National Security Adviser Michael Flynn's reported ask for immunity from prosecution in exchange for his testimony was "a grave and momentous step" for the former top official in President Donald Trump's administration.

Schiff, whose committee is looking into Russian interference in the 2016 election, said it is far too early for any immunity requests to be considered.

"With respect to the offer by the attorney for Michael Flynn that he would be willing to testify before the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, but only in exchange for immunity, we should first acknowledge what a grave a momentous step it is for a former national security adviser to the president of the United States to ask for immunity from prosecution," Schiff said in a statement. "We will be discussing the matter with out counterparts on the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Department of Justice."

The California Democrat added that while Flynn's testimony is "of great interest to our committee," the members are "deeply mindful" of the DOJ's interests in the case. The FBI is also investigating, as Director James Comey said during a hearing last week before the committee, potential collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian officials surrounding the election.

"Additionally, as with any investigation — and particularly one that grows in severity and magnitude by the day — there is still much work and many more witnesses and documents to obtain before any immunity request from any witness can be considered," Schiff said.

As an example, Schiff said he is still waiting to receive documents on whether Flynn "properly reported any work he may have conducted on behalf of a foreign entity."

Late Thursday, The Wall Street Journal first reported that Flynn offered to testify before both intelligence committees and the FBI in exchange for a guarantee he would not be subjected to "unfair prosecution," as outlined in a statement from his lawyer. So far, of the entities have accepted his offer.

Flynn's request has put him under especially intense scrutiny, given his comments last year about the partial immunity that aides to then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton received regarding the former secretary of state's use of a private email server while she served. Flynn told NBC's Chuck Todd in September that "when you are given immunity, that means you have probably committed a crime."

Trump echoed similar sentiment during a Florida rally that same month when he said, "If you're not guilty of a crime, what do you need immunity for, right?"

In a Thursday statement, Flynn's lawyer, Robert Kelner, said the ousted national security adviser "certainly has a story to tell, and he very much wants to tell it, should the circumstances permit."

"Notwithstanding his life of national service, the media are awash with unfounded allegations, outrageous claims of treason, and vicious innuendo directed against him," Kelner wrote. "He is now the target of unsubstantiated public demands by members of Congress and other political critics that he be criminally investigated."

"No reasonable person, who has the benefit of advice from counsel, would submit to questioning in such a highly politicized, with hunt environment without assurances against unfair prosecution," he continued."

Trump voiced his opinion Friday morning, saying Flynn is right to seek immunity.

"Mike Flynn should ask for immunity in that this is a witch hunt (excuse for big election loss), by media & Dems, of historic proportion!" Trump tweeted.

Flynn was ousted in February after he misled Vice President Mike Pence about the nature of his communications with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak prior to Trump's inauguration.

Several other Trump associates or campaign officials, such as Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, and Carter Page, have volunteered to be interviewed by Schiff's committee.

2017-03-29

Russia's New Protest Generation - In Russia a new generation of discontented youth has come of age


Russian riot policemen detain a demonstrator during an opposition rally in central Moscow on March 26, 2017 [EPA/Maxim Shipenkov]

Story by Al-Jazeera
Written by Roman Dobrokhotov

Last Sunday mass demonstrations took place in almost 100 Russian cities. They were the biggest since the 2011-2012 protest wave, called the "snow revolution". But if the last time election fraud was what provoked the people's anger, this time it was an investigation into Russian PM Dmitry Medvedev's alleged corruption practices. The investigation was conducted by the Anti-Corruption Foundation headed by Alexey Navalny, a prominent Russian opposition figure who has announced his intention to run in the 2018 presidential elections.

Just a few months ago, no one would have believed that a corruption investigation could provoke mass protests across the country. Not expecting such a massive turnout, the authorities tried to stop the protesters from gathering. State media and law enforcement warned against going out into the streets, but this encouraged people even more to do so. As protesters started gathering, the police launched a massive crackdown campaign (more than 1,000 people were arrested in Moscow alone), which attracted even more attention.

In the demonstrations there was an unusually high number of youth - not only university but also high school students. Photos from the protests showed the brawny bodies of policemen towering over 14 to 15-year-olds. These children were born during the Putin era and despite their "patriotic upbringing" actively enforced in schools and in the media, they came out wanting change.

The internet generation

Just before the protests, the release of a recording of a high-school discussion between a teacher and students about the annexation of Crimea and anti-corruption protests caused a lot of controversy in Russia. The students in the recording were talking very confidently about these issues, while the teacher was responding with discomfort.


Russian police detain hundreds at anti-corruption demonstrations

The mobilisation of the youth could be explained partially by the fact that Navalny - in contrast to previous protest leaders - is the hero of the internet generation. He could publish his numerous investigations into government corruption not on traditional media outlets, but on social media and his blog. He has almost two million followers on Twitter. He would win any internet vote on any topic.

If you are a high-school or a university student, you just don't have a choice: You wouldn't vote for any of the people who headed their parties even before you were born and are still repeating the same slogans (this is applicable to all main "opposition" parties, too). In this sense, Navalny is Russia's Bernie Sanders, who started as an activist with the reputation of an uncompromising fighter, who does not want to integrate into the political establishment.

But Navalny is not the whole story. This generation is different from previous ones because it doesn't watch TV. Not necessarily for political reasons, but because it simply doesn't find it interesting.

In fact, there is a bit of a vicious circle in that: The youth watches TV less and less, while heads of TV channels continue to turn more and more towards the 60+ audience, pushing away the few young viewers they have. There is no spectacle more depressing than TV programming on a holiday: Botoxed variety stars of the Soviet era, bland jokes with orchestrated laughter, a gaudy carnival-style studio - all of this seems to be purposefully set up to repulse.

The political shows are no better: inviting the same guests who shout over each other, castigating Ukraine and the US State Department. From year to year the ratings of Russian TV channels are falling; they still might compete over housewife viewership, but they've lost for ever the youth audience.

For the Kremlin this is a big problem and they know that. Recently the Projector Paris Hilton, in which popular comedians discuss the latest news, came back on air. The show is indeed popular among the youth. Despite all the censorship and thoroughly vetted news stories that they are discussing, the show does go against the political establishment. Soon after the release of Navalny's investigation the show did a sketch on Medvedev on a different occasion from the documentary, but still Navalny and his followers immediately shared it on social media.

Lack of Propaganda Options

State TV channels are the main support lever of Vladimir Putin's power; they are even more important than the court and the parliament he controls. Literally a few weeks after Putin's first inauguration, Vladimir Gusinsky, the head of the biggest independent TV channel, was arrested (he was released after allegedly conceding to give up control over his channel). At that time regular internet users did not exceed 2 percent of the Russian population. Today 70 percent of Russians use the internet; among the youth, this percentage is closer to 100.

The Kremlin managed to take under its control the most popular news websites, but it never managed to turn the internet into a propaganda machine because the way the internet works is different from traditional media. TV presupposes passive reception of information: A housewife is cooking dinner as the news on Channel One runs in the background; the husband puts on football and at half-time he gets fed news about the "fascist junta" in Ukraine.

But online this doesn't work. There, users choose what to look at. Loyalist websites did not mention anything about Navalny's documentary, but it nevertherless went viral on social media and messenger apps. Some 150,000 were watching the live broadcast of the protests simultaneously, while news reports on what was going on brought independent news sites record traffic.

The very psychology of a person growing up in the internet era is different: S/he is used to being a subject, not an object and choosing what sources of information to consume from. There are, of course, negative aspects to that as well: Populists used the internet, too, to spread fake news and encourage Brexit and Trump's electoral popularity. But in Russia under authoritarian rule, this new culture of information consumption is the main challenge to the regime.

The many attempts of the Kremlin to create popular information alternatives for the youth have failed. Despite the vast amounts of finances which Yury Kovalchuk (who is rumoured to be close to Putin) is investing in online media, the Kremlin still doesn't have popular opinion leaders of its own. No need to explain why the attempts of some members of the presidential administration to create internet memes and try to make them popular have failed.

Russian propaganda like Russian cars and Russian football is only good when there is nothing else to compare it to. In Soviet times propaganda was even more unidirectional and bland, but there was nothing to compare it to - now there is.

Of course, this is by far not an existential threat to the Kremlin. It still retains control over various methods of repression, including internet censorship, firing the parents of youth who attended the protests, dismissing students from university, etc. Which of these will be applied and which of these will work is not yet clear. But what is clear is that the times, when political control necessitated only control over TV channels, are long gone and will never come back.

2017-03-28

2016 Radio Top Revenue Performers in the United States


2016 Radio Top Revenue Performers in the United States (BIA/Kelsey)

4 Self-made Millionaires on building wealth

Story by Yahoo
Written by Kathleen Elkins

The wealthiest people focus on earning.

"While world-class thinkers understand the importance of saving and investing , they direct their mental energy toward accumulating wealth through serving people and solving problems," writes self-made millionaire Steve Siebold in "How Rich People Think," which he wrote after studying millionaires for over 25 years.

Here are four strategies to build wealth from self-made millionaires who have done it.

1. Develop multiple streams of income

"You won't get rich without multiple flows of income," says self-made millionaire Grant Cardone , who was deep in debt before reaching seven figures . "That starts with the income you currently have. Increase that income and start adding multiple flows.

"You want what are called symbiotic flows. Do not just add disconnected flows. Instead, find other ways you can add income to the job you already have. My video guy does advertising for me — and after proving himself, he started making advertisements for those connected to me. He didn't start a doughnut shop."

2. Invest your money — every single day

In just five years, Grant of Millennial Moneywent from having $2.26 in his bank account to $1 million. On his blog, the 31-year-old self-made millionaire shares " the single most important hack " he's used to build wealth: "I break down ALL of my money goals into daily goals. I still deposit money every day into my investment accounts."

He started with the goal of setting aside $50 a day. At first, "some days it was only $5, but I rarely missed a day," Grant says. "Then I started trying to make as much money as possible every day so I could invest it. I stopped thinking long term and thought every day about making that $50 threshold."

His daily goal of $50 deposits soon became his daily minimum. He started setting aside "$70, then $80, then $100 dollars a day. … Then as my side hustles started really taking off I started depositing $500+ a day. ... Then I put $5,000 in a day, then $20,000, and the rest is history."

3. Pay yourself first

According to self-made millionaire and bestselling author David Bach, there's "one, proven, easy way to get rich," and that is topay yourself first . What that means is simple, Bach writes in "The Automatic Millionaire": "When you earn a dollar, the first person you pay is you."

Most people don't do this. "What most people do when they earn a dollar is pay everyone else first. They pay the landlord, the credit card company, the telephone company, the government ...," Bach writes. They pay themselves whatever is left over.

The key to paying yourself first is to make it automatic , meaning, to have money taken out of your paycheck and sent straight to your savings, retirement or investment account. After all, "you can't spend what you don't have in your pocket," Bach says.

4. Change your mindset about money

"Getting rich begins with the way you think and what you believe about making money," writes Siebold in "How Rich People Think."

The author continues: "The rich eventually figure out that training your mind to find solutions to difficult problems is the real secret to making money. The good news is this is possible for anyone who conditions their mind to think this way, and then transforms thought into action."

2017-03-27

Murdered Girl’s Parents file charges in ‘Organ Trafficking’ case


Carla Massiel Cabrera vanished in June 2015. Her body was found in August

Story by Dominican Today
12/06/16

Santo Domingo Este.- The Parents of Carla Massiel Cabrera, who vanished June 2015 and whose body was found in August, on Friday filed felony charges against Liliana Santana, whose late father owned the Clinica Integral, linked to alleged "Trafficking of Organs".

The complaint filed at Santo Domingo Province 3rd Instruction Court, Massiel’s Mother Diolandita Cabrera accuses Santana of Conspiracy, Kidnapping and Murder.

Santana’s lawyers vow to challenge Prosecutor Olga Diná Llaverías, whom they accuse of conducting an investigation without consulting Massiel’s family.

They said they are willing to take the case to the Supreme Court if Dina refuses to prosecute.

Co-Defendents

Already indicted in the case figure Juan Cabral Martínez and Dalvin José Trinidad Infante, who turned state evidence in plea bargaining.

Traffickers targeting Haiti's children, human organs, Prime Minister Jean-Max Bellerive says


Children recently orphaned by Haiti's earthquake could be targeted for organ trafficking, Haiti's Prime Minister Bellerive says

Story by CNN
Written by Tom Evans
Interview by CNN Reporter Christiane Amanpour
01/2710

Trafficking of children and human organs is occurring in the aftermath of the earthquake that devastated parts of Haiti, killed more than 150,000 people, and left many children orphans, Haitian Prime Minister Jean-Max Bellerive said Wednesday.

"There is organ trafficking for children and other persons also, because they need all types of organs," Bellerive said in an exclusive interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour.

He did not give specifics, but asked by Amanpour if there is trafficking of children, Bellerive said, "The reports I received say yes."

Haiti is trying to locate displaced children and register them so they can either be reunited with other family members or put up for adoption, Bellerive said.

But, he said, illegal child trafficking is "one of the biggest problems that we have."

Many groups appear to be legitimate, "but a lot of organizations -- they come and they say there were children on the streets. They're going to bring them to the [United] States," he said.

Bellerive said he's trying to work with embassies in Port-au-Prince to protect Haiti's children from traffickers.

"Any child that is leaving the country has to be validated by the embassy under a list that they give me, with all the reports," he said.

Speaking at his temporary headquarters in a police station near the Port-au-Prince Airport, Bellerive said the first thing Haitian officials seek to confirm is whether the children have adoption papers before they leave the country.

In Washington, the State Department said Wednesday it is moving cautiously on the issue of adoptions from Haiti.

"We want to be sure that when a child has been identified, that due diligence has been done to make sure that this is truly an orphan child and not a child that actually has family," said State Department Spokesman P.J. Crowley. "Sometimes if you push too hard, too fast there can be unintended consequences. So we are being very, very careful."

"We respect the sovereignty of Haiti and their right to control the departure of Haitian children. So we think the system that has been established is working effectively. I know there is a perception out there of 'cut through the red tape.' But there are very good reasons we want to make sure this process works well," Crowley said.

On the broader issue of Haitian children, Bellerive told Amanpour the government will reopen schools Monday in most of the country.

He said there were particular problems in Port-au-Prince.

"We cannot open one school and not the other. But some of the schools want to operate right now. They say if there are tents -- if there are facilities and we can help them -- they are willing to open very rapidly."

Bellerive also highlighted the critical importance of getting enough tents and shelters to Haiti before the rainy season begins in May. He said he didn't know where all the tents promised by aid agencies and governments are.

"We have reports that they've already sent 20,000 tents maybe, and 20,000 more are on the way. But yesterday, when we didn't see the tents and we didn't see any action to organize the shelters, the president himself asked to see the storage place and we only counted 3,500 tents."

Bellerive said President Rene Preval asked for 200,000 tents to house between 400,000 and 500,000 people. "We are very preoccupied about the consequences of all those people on the street, if it starts to rain."

The prime minister also rejected criticism from within Haiti and overseas that his government needs to be more visible to the Haitian people.

"We are in charge. Frankly I don't understand what that position is that we are not visible," he said. "I almost feel that I spend more time talking to radio, television, than I am working."

"I know it's part of my job and I have to communicate. But I really feel that I have spent too much time doing that."

Bellerive also said he does not believe it's necessary to relocate the capital to another part of Haiti.

"I have to wait for technical and scientific evaluation, but from what I've heard until now, Port-au-Prince will stay there."

"Tokyo is still there, Los Angeles is still there. We just have to prepare a better constructed Port-au-Prince, a safer Port-au-Prince," he said.

He also acknowledged the need for more transparency and new procedures to prevent corruption in Haiti. But he said 70 to 80 percent of the aid coming to the country right now does not go through the Haitian government.

Bellerive said about 90 percent of American aid, for example, goes through non-governmental organizations. "They are accountable to the American government, but not to the Haitian government," he said.

The prime minister told Amanpour that he does not believe people overseas are helping Haiti out of a moral obligation.

"I believe it's a more pragmatic responsibility," he said. "I believe Haiti could be an interesting market in the midterm. We are 10 million [people] here and it's a market."

2017-03-24

United States House of Representatives cancels ObamaCare Repeal Vote as GOP defections mount

Story by The Hill
Written by Scott Wong
Video by NBC and ABC

Republicans pulled their ObamaCare repeal bill from a scheduled Friday afternoon vote, abandoning a years-long effort as they acknowledged their legislation was headed toward an embarrassing defeat.

President Trump asked Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) to pull the measure a day after issuing an ultimatum that the House had to vote on it, a GOP aide said.

The stunning decision is a huge setback for Trump, Ryan and the GOP, which has promised for years to repeal ObamaCare.
"We are going to be living with ObamaCare for the foreseeable future," Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said at a news conference after he met with his conference and told them the party would be moving on.

The GOP bill that was debated on the floor Friday seemed doomed to failure. The Hill's Whip List said 36 Republicans would vote no, with many more possibly voting against the measure. The GOP could only afford 22 defections.

Republicans seemed stunned by what had happened.

Ryan acknowledged the disappointment, which he initially chalked up to "growing pains" for a party that for the first time in more than a decade controls the executive and legislative branches.


“I spoke to the President a little while ago and I told him the best thing I think to do was to pull this bill and he agreed with that. I will not sugar coat this, this is a disappointing day for us. Doing big things is hard," Ryan said.

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), the chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, declined to comment multiple times walking down a long hallway of reporters outside the GOP conference meeting.

Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.), a Freedom Caucus members, said Congress should keep trying, despite GOP leaders saying they are moving on.

"In our system, a constitutional republic, we try something, it might fail, we try again," Amash said. "The responsible thing is to keep working at this because it's an important issue for the American people."

But Trump, who failed to convince Freedom Caucus members to bend and warned Thursday that he would move on to other priorities if the bill was not passed, stuck to his word.

Speaking on the phone with The Washington Post's Robert Costa, Trump said that a plan to repeal and replace ObamaCare won't come up again in the near future.

"He's going to let things be on healthcare, the bill is not going to come again, at least in the near future," Costa said on MSNBC Friday afternoon after Trump called him share that Republicans had pulled the bill.


The GOP bill came under fire from conservatives in the House Freedom Caucus, who demanded a number of changes that were intended to lower premium costs. Trump and GOP leaders agreed to some of those changes, but that appeared to cost them the support of centrists.

One startling move came near midday Friday when House Appropriations Committee Chairman Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.) said publicly that he was likely to vote against the bill.

Rep. Barbara Comstock (R-Va.), who represents a district that chose Hillary Clinton for president, also came out against the bill on Friday.

The decision to pull the vote came after Ryan met with Trump at the White House.

Read more:
NBC News: http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/house-republicans-pull-health-care-bill-house-floor-n738281
BBC: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39387550
Al Jazeera: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/03/trump-asks-republicans-withdraw-healthcare-bill-170324194840115.html
RT: https://www.rt.com/usa/382234-house-ahca-bill-vote/
ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/ryan-pulls-gop-health-care-bill-call-trump/story?id=46346773&cid=clicksource_4380645_1_hero_headlines_bsq_hed

Trump, Koch brothers at odds over 'Trumpcare' vote

Story by Reuters
Written by James Oliphant, Emily Stephenson and Caren Bohan

Republicans considering whether or not to back U.S. President Donald Trump's healthcare reforms in a crucial House of Representatives vote this week face a painful choice.

If they vote against, they could face the wrath of a vengeful and combative president. If they vote for it, they risk retribution from the billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch and other powerful right-wing players whose money can be pivotal in re-election races.

As Trump faces the most formidable, high-stakes negotiation of his presidency, the fierce battle in the U.S. Congress over his plan to replace Obamacare is a test of whether Republicans will trust him with their political futures at the risk of alienating deep-pocketed conservative advocacy groups.

As Trump and leaders in the House round up support for the bill ahead of a planned Thursday vote, some groups are threatening to retaliate against those who do support it, including the Club for Growth, the Heritage Foundation's political arm, and Americans for Prosperity, which is part of the expansive political pressure network established by the Koch brothers.

All three groups are “keying” the vote, which means it will be a factor in determining whether the groups deem a lawmaker to be sufficiently conservative. That opens up the possibility that some Republicans who vote in favor of the bill could face a primary challenge in next year’s congressional elections and may not be able to count on help from the Kochs and others...

2017-03-22

Black workers in Los Angeles face a 'jobs crisis,' UCLA report says

Story by LA Times
Written by Natalie Kitroeff
Video: http://www.latimes.com/business/92851993-132.html

Black people living in Los Angeles County have been more likely than the rest of the population to remain unemployed or to drop out of the workforce altogether in the wake of the 2007-09 recession, according to a new report conducted by UCLA.

Black workers have lost blue-collar jobs at about the same rate as whites in the county, but seem to be less likely to find replacement work, according to the UCLA analysis.

Seventeen percent of black workers were unemployed on average from 2011 to 2014, compared with 9% of white workers, according to the report, published Tuesday in conjunction with the Los Angeles Black Worker Center.

A quarter of black workers who had a high school degree or less were unemployed, compared with 14% of white workers.

Education helped bridge that gap, but didn’t erase it. Nine percent of black workers with at least a bachelor’s degree were unemployed over that period, compared with 7% of white Angelenos.

“Los Angeles is in the throes of a Black jobs crisis,” the report says.


UCLA Report Shows Black Workers in Los Angeles County Facing ‘Jobs Crisis’ (Credit: KTLA-TV)

The lack of work is part of the reason many black residents have abandoned Los Angeles altogether, at a time when the county’s population boomed, the report says. The black population in the county plunged by 122,032 people from 1980 to 2014, according to the report. The county has gained around 2.5 million residents overall during that time.

In the meantime, black workers have flocked to the Inland Empire, which includes Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Those counties gained a combined 260,494 black residents from 1980 to 2014.

“Black workers are often the last hired and first fired,” says Lola Smallwood Cuevas, the founder of the Los Angeles Black Worker Center. “If we don’t address the crisis, we will have a city and a county where there are no black workers.”

Construction has offered a lot of new jobs to Angelenos over the last several decades, but those positions don’t seem to be going to black workers. There were 7,012 black workers in construction in 2014, 2,000 fewer than there were in 1980, according to census data analyzed by UCLA.

That 23% drop compares with an overall increase of 120,840 construction workers of all races during those 34 years, or 80%.

Those new jobs aren’t going to white workers, either. There were nearly 40,000 fewer white construction workers in Los Angeles in 2014 compared with 1980, a decline of about 40%.

Latinos, however, have significantly upped their representation. There were more than 185,000 Latino construction workers in Los Angeles in 2014, five times as many as there were in 1980.

Manufacturing has been slashing jobs in the county over the last three decades. The number of black and white Angelenos in manufacturing declined by the same rate — about 77% — from 1980 to 2014. Latinos also lost some ground, but their ranks shrank by only 5% over the same period.

“The way that we heard in the Rust Belt we lost middle-class manufacturing jobs, you could say the same for black workers here in L.A.,” says Saba Waheed, a researcher at the UCLA Labor Center who co-authored the study.

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-black-workers-los-angeles-20170320-story.html

2017-03-21

Be GREAT!


Song: Motown Records "Be Great" by Kevin Ross

AURN/Sheridan Broadcasting Sued Over Employee Plan Payments

Story by Inside Radio

Pittsburgh-based privately held Sheridan Broadcasting Networks has been sued by trustees of both the AFTRA Retirement Fund and the SAG-AFTRA Health Fund. The claim is that Sheridan has failed to pay required contributions to the employee plans.

Filed March 15 in the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of New York, those overseeing the multi-employer health and retirement plans allege that Sheridan owes contributions to the funds, as required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), and following collective bargaining agreements between Sheridan and SAG-AFTRA—the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, which represents station employees.

According to the suit, ERISA cites Sheridan’s failure as an “employer who is obligated to make contributions to a multi-employer plan under the terms of the plan or under the terms of a collectively bargained agreement to make such contributions in accordance with the terms and conditions of such plan or such agreement.” Sheridan, the plaintiffs state, has failed “to pay delinquent contributions owed to the Funds.”

Under law, AFTRA and SAG-AFTRA insist, the court should award the plans unpaid contributions, interest on those contributions, legal costs and “liquidated damages provided for under the plan in an amount not in excess of 20% of the unpaid contributions.” Sheridan has been given 21 days to respond to the charges.

The lawsuit is the latest conundrum for the struggling broadcast company. It follows Sheridan’s filing for chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization in March 2016. The then-majority owner of American Urban Radio Networks, Sheridan owns gospel and R&B oldies stations in Atlanta, Birmingham and Buffalo, NY.

Sheridan and AURN co-owner NBN had earlier decided to separate by March 1 with Sheridan agreeing to make three payments to acquire the remainder of AURN. After making two payments, Sheridan requested more time to deliver the third, threatening to file for bankruptcy protection if an extension wasn’t granted. The extension was denied and Sheridan subsequently followed through on that action.

2017-03-20

James Brown medley by Usher


James Brown medley by Usher (Video Credit: Opinionated Me)

Once a major D.C. record chain, Kemp Mill Music is closing its last location


Co-owner Danny Lamb, left, talks music with Lawrence Herring, a regular who comes from Baltimore to shop at Kemp Mill Music in Temple Hills, Md. (J. Lawler Duggan/For The Washington Post)

Story by Washington Post
Written by Justin Wm. Moyer

The last remaining Kemp Mill Music store closes Saturday after losing its lease, but one item isn’t for sale: a battered cardboard cutout of go-go icon Chuck Brown.

Armando Cruz is turning out the lights on the once-ubiquitous regional chain that boasted more than 30 locations in the Washington metro area at its peak. He’s held on to the Brown promotional cutout for years and once rejected a $500 offer for it.

Selling music was never really about the money, anyway.

“You’re doing it for the love of it,” said Cruz, who co-owns the Temple Hills, Md., store. He bought Kemp Mill after its parent company went bankrupt in 2003 (http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2003/08/11/daily36.html), then closed all but one location five years later. “You’re not going to make crazy money.”

On Thursday, two days before the store was set to close, Kemp Mill’s dwindling inventory was on display. Side by side on one shelf of beaten records: Schoolly D’s 1988 single “No More Rock N’ Roll” for $5.99 and “The Second Barbra Streisand Album” (1963) for $1.99. If offerings like these don’t appeal, the store has a wicked collection of incense at the front counter.

Here, in a weathered strip mall on Branch Avenue in Prince George’s County, where racks of CDs and DVDs greet shoppers, the music industry’s much-ballyhooed vinyl revival isn’t apparent. Danny Lamb, the store’s other owner, said he and Cruz have contemplated getting deep into the used-vinyl game, taking trips up to New York to become crate-diggers.

“We just can’t find the time,” said Lamb, 55. Another problem: “Vinyl is very expensive. You’re paying two to three times as much for music on a record.”


The last location of Kemp Mill Music, once a regional chain, in Temple Hills, Md. (J. Lawler Duggan/For The Washington Post)

Instead of chasing a hipster trend, Kemp Mill, founded in the early 1970s, offered something else: community, particularly for the region’s R&B, gospel and go-go fans. A business that once had 275 employees and $30 million in annual sales, with outlets from Dupont Circle to Springfield Mall, also consigned records by local artists and hosted in-store performances.

Wanda Mahan, a regular customer over the years, walked out of the store Thursday with a handful of CDs as she recalled seeing R&B singer Will Downing at Kemp Mill. A digital download couldn’t match that, she said.

“I prefer the physical because when the artist signs it to me, it makes the CD so much more valuable,” said Mahan, 59. “The artist knows me.”

For go-go, getting up close and personal was crucial. The store was an oasis for a genre that people outside Washington barely knew.

“They realized the value of go-go music and power of it, too — the power of selling it,” said Salih “Bootsy Vegas” Williams, vocalist for go-go group O.P. Tribe and formerly of the “Donnie Simpson Morning Show” on WPGC 95.5 FM. “You have to understand the culture of go-go, how much it means to people.”

On Thursday, Shon Morant, 45, browsed racks of live go-go performances as his two young daughters spun circles in the aisle. His kids don’t share his musical tastes.

“The only thing they know about music is what they see in cartoons,” he said.

Morant was there to scratch an itch felt by many a go-go fan: trying to find a live recording of a specific show, maybe even one he’d seen. Alas, the one he was here to find, a performance by Vybe Band, was sold out.

But the search, even if unsuccessful, is what go-go is all about, said Charles “Shorty Corleone” Garris, a vocalist with legendary go-go group Rare Essence.

“It’s that experience,” he said. “It’s that understanding of what the crowd does to a live band and what the live band does back to the crowd.” He added, “Kemp Mill understands that music is a part of the culture of the DMV and there needs to be a platform for it to be readily available.”


A girl looks at some of the signed posters at the last location of Kemp Mill Music in Temple Hills, Md. (J. Lawler Duggan/For The Washington Post)

Kemp Mill’s problem wasn’t the business, which, while “pretty volatile,” was profitable, Lamb said. When the store was unwilling to sign a long-term lease, the building’s owner, former record retailer and D.C. developer Douglas Jemal, went with someone who would.

“I guess we don’t fit into their plans,” Cruz said.

Efforts to reach Jemal were unsuccessful.

For music fans, there is hope: Cruz and Lamb may decide to reboot the business elsewhere. Like many things going gentle into that good night, Kemp Mill’s pending closure has revived interest in the business.

Lamb said gospel lovers get most emotional about Kemp Mill.

“One woman completely broke down in the store,” he said. “She said, ‘I can’t get my music anywhere else.’ ”

Lamb said he once ordered more than $400 worth of CDs for a man who printed a list from the Internet. For whatever reason — inability to use a computer or unwillingness to put his personal information online — the man preferred that Kemp Mill handle the transaction.

And sometimes it’s nice to have someone put a record in your hand.

“I’m down with the computer and all that, but there’s nothing like having the original,” said 60-year-old customer Darrell Price. “I’m old-school. I like to have my own.”

Father of Rock and Roll Chuck Berry passes at 90


In Memoriam: Chuck Berry October 18, 1926 – March 18, 2017


Song: Johnny B. Goode by Chuck Berry


Live: Johnny B. Goode by Chuck Berry


Interview and Performances by Chuck Berry on the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson


Full Concert 1972: Chuck Berry


Full Concert 1082: Chuck Berry


Song: Roll over Beethoven by Chuck Berry


Song: Maybellene by Chuck Berry


Song: No Particular Place to go by Chuck Berry


Song: Nadine by Chuck Berry and Keith Richards


Live in Concert: Chuck Berry, Eric Clapton, Keith Richards jam


Live in Concert: Chuck Berry, Eric Clapton, Keith Richards jam


Live in Concert: Chuck Berry and Tina Turner


Song: Johnny B. Goode by Chuck Berry and John Lennon


Song: My Ding-A-Ling by Chuck Berry

Stanford Economist and Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis study states that "Today the American Dream is a Dream"


Comedian George Carlin speaks on the American Dream.

_______________________________________________
Chetty concluded that American children have a whopping 7.5% chance on average of actually achieving the American Dream in America.
_______________________________________________

Story by the Daily Steeple
Written by Piper McGowin

We all know what comedian George Carlin said about the American Dream: that you have to be asleep to believe it.

Well, now the Federal Reserve is agreeing with him.

In a new study published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, they admit the so-called American Dream is now largely an impossible goal for a majority of the country.

In other words, the American Dream is officially dead.

In the study, Stanford economist Raj Chetty measured, “the probability that a child born to parents in the bottom fifth of the income distribution makes the leap all the way to the top fifth of the income distribution.”

Chetty concluded that American children have a whopping 7.5% chance on average of actually achieving the American Dream in America.

Sure, a chance is still a chance, but that’s a really low chance.

As it turns out, Americans who actually want to achieve “the dream” would have a better chance of doing so in Canada (13.5%), Denmark (11.7%), or even the UK (9%) than here in the US.

So Americans would basically have almost twice the chances of achieving the American Dream in Canada, making it the Canadian Dream.

But 7.5% is just the average, mind you. That factors in super wealthy neighborhoods. When you get down into the major cities where the majority of people live, 7.5% looks more like a cruel, unachievable joke.

“In the city of Baltimore, you unfortunately have only a 3.5 percent chance of making that leap from the bottom fifth to the top fifth. That compares with 4.7 percent in D.C.

Of course, your chances are higher if you are a child graced with the luck of being born in a predominantly wealthy, suburban neighborhood, but come on everybody knew that already.

It’s just “rich” to hear the Federal Reserve officially admit the American Dream is dead, that’s all.

2017-03-17

Dog eats banana


Dog eats banana. (RM Video)

2017-03-16

What Trump cut in his budget - Trump federal budget 2018: Massive cuts to the arts, science and the poor



Story by Washington Post
Written by Kim Soffen and Denise Lu

On Thursday, the Trump administration released a preliminary 2018 budget proposal, which details many of the changes the President wants to make to the federal government’s spending. The proposal covers only discretionary, not mandatory, spending.

Defense spending increase

To pay for an increase in defense spending, a down payment on the border wall and school voucher programs, among other things, funding was cut from the discretionary budgets of other Executive Departments and Agencies. The Environmental Protection Agency, the State Department and the Agriculture Department took the hardest hits.

In total, the budget proposes to eliminate funding for these 19 agencies:

* African Development Foundation
* Appalachian Regional Commission
* Chemical Safety Board
* Corporation for National and Community Service
* Corporation for Public Broadcasting
* Delta Regional Authority
* Denali Commission
* Institute of Museum and Library Services
* Inter-American Foundation
* U.S. Trade and Development Agency
* Legal Services Corporation
* National Endowment for the Arts
* National Endowment for the Humanities
* Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation
* Northern Border Regional Commission
* Overseas Private Investment Corporation
* U.S. Institute of Peace
* U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness
* Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
____________________________

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-presidential-budget-2018-proposal/?utm_term=.48a63cef2da2

2017 versus Trumps' 2018 budget: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-presidential-budget-2018-proposal/?utm_term=.193acdcf07cb#defunded

United States of America at War 95 percent of its' History


2017-03-15

US Congress: "No evidence Trump Tower was wiretapped by President Obama" - House Intel Committee

Story by RT

CNN - http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/14/politics/wiretapping-congressional-investigation/
NPR - http://www.npr.org/2017/03/15/520252977/house-intelligence-chair-no-evidence-of-alleged-trump-tower-wiretap

Although the Justice Department asked for more time to send congressional intelligence committees evidence that Trump Tower was wiretapped during the campaign, the leaders of the House committee said they never received any.

"It deeply concerns me that the president would make such an accusation without basis," Representative Adam Schiff (D-California), the ranking member, told reporters, calling it "irresponsible" of President Donald Trump to suggest that his predecessor ordered a wiretap of him.

There is the possibility that someone in Trump’s campaign was swept up in incidental collection by speaking with someone under surveillance, Chair Devin Nunes (R-California) said, but no one in the campaign was a target.

“If you’re going to take the tweets literally, then clearly the president was wrong,” Nunes said.

Schiff blasted the White House for the suggestion, noting that White House press secretary Sean Spicer has said that he was not aware of any investigation that would target Trump, and that there was no court-ordered surveillance.

These statements “cannot both be true,” he said, unless Spicer was implying “a rogue FBI operation unsupervised by any court.”

There is “absolutely no evidence, no suggestion of any evidence of that,” Schiff added.

FBI Director James Comey is set to testify in front of the House Intelligence Committee on Monday. The bureau is set to brief the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday afternoon.

In a series of early-morning tweets on March 4, Trump accused President Barack Obama of wiretapping Trump Tower during the 2016 presidential campaign, calling such an activity “McCarthyism” and “A NEW LOW!” Trump also called his predecessor a “bad (or sick) guy!”

An Obama spokesman denied the claims as “simply false.”

“As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any US citizen," spokesman Kevin Lewis said. "Any suggestion otherwise is simply false.”

On March 5, the White House asked the House and Senate Intelligence Committees to “exercise their oversight authority to determine whether executive branch investigative powers were abused in 2016.”

Two senators, Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island), sent a letter to the Department of Justice and the FBI, requesting “copies of any warrant applications and court orders… related to wiretaps of President Trump, the Trump Campaign, or Trump Tower.”

Graham is the chair and Whitehouse the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism.

The House Intelligence Committee also sought evidence of Trump’s wiretapping accusations, giving the DOJ a deadline of Monday to comply. However, the department asked the committee for “additional time to review the request in compliance with the governing legal authorities and to determine what if any responsive documents may exist.”

The committee granted that request, giving the DOJ until this coming Monday to submit evidence. Despite that allowance, Nunes and Schiff said Wednesday that they didn’t think they would receive any proof.

"As I told you last week about the issue with the president talking about tapping Trump Tower, that evidence still remains the same, that we don't have any evidence that that took place," Nunes said. "In fact, I don't believe just in the last week of time, the people we've talked to, I don't think there was an actual tap of Trump Tower."

Read more: https://www.rt.com/usa/380449-mccain-trump-wiretap-obama-russia/

2017-03-13

Congressman Cummings Condemns GOP Health Repeal Bill After CBO Report Finds 14 Million Would Lose Health Coverage Next Year



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Jennifer Werner
March 13, 2017 (202) 226-5181

Washington, D.C. (March 13, 2017)—Today, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, issued the following statement after the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released a report concluding that 14 million Americans would lose health insurance coverage in 2018 if Republicans pass their bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act:

“This Republican bill is not healthcare legislation—it’s an annihilation. Fourteen million people will have their healthcare wiped out if Republicans get their way. Republicans can make all the false promises they want, but the cold hard facts are that their bill will decimate coverage for millions of American families, gut Medicaid for the poorest among us, and force consumers to pay much more for far less.”

President Trump and other Republicans have promised repeatedly that their health care plan would improve access to health coverage:

• In 2013, Trump tweeted: “When I say I would end Obamacare, I would also come up with a plan that would be far better, much easier to understand, and cost less!”

• When he launched his campaign in June 2015, Trump said: “Save Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security without cuts… Have to do it… People have been paying in for years, and now many of these candidates want to cut it.”

• On September 27, 2015, Trump said: “Everybody's got to be covered.” He added: “I am going to take care of everybody. I don't care if it costs me votes or not. Everybody's going to be taken care of much better than they're taken care of now.”

• On January 5, 2017, Trump tweeted: “...time for Republicans & Democrats to get together and come up with a healthcare plan that really works - much less expensive & FAR BETTER!” On March 9, 2017, Trump tweeted, “Despite what you hear in the press, healthcare is coming along great. We are talking to many groups and it will end in a beautiful picture!”

• On December 5, 2016, House Speaker Paul Ryan said the Republican healthcare plan will leave “no one worse off.” On Sunday, HHS Secretary Tom Price said: “Nobody will be worse off financially” under the Republican bill.

Yet, today’s CBO estimate shows the devastating impact that the GOP American Health Care Act would have on our system of health care. The legislation would increase the number of uninsured by 14 million in 2018, rising to 21 million in 2020 and 24 million in 2026. In total, CBO estimates that 52 million would be uninsured in 2026, compared with 28 million under current law.

CBO estimates that by 2026, 14 million Medicaid enrollees will lose coverage, a reduction of 17 percent. Importantly, CBO also projects that Medicaid spending would be 25 percent less than under current law, suggesting that the level of benefits will also decrease.

For those in the private insurance market, CBO suggests that new tax credits for low-income people would be smaller than under current law, though individuals with higher incomes would see larger credits under the GOP proposal.

The value of coverage would also decrease with the repeal of actuarial value requirements. CBO finds that this would lead insurers to offer cheaper, less robust options that appeal to young, healthy people, segregating individuals with complex, high-cost needs.

Finally, CBO finds that fewer employers would offer health insurance due to the repeal of the employer mandate.

Taken together, these changes have devastating impacts on recent efforts to make insurance affordable and accessible for all people, particularly those with low incomes or chronic conditions. These changes have the potential to undermine the private insurance market and erase recent gains in coverage.

The Government Is Still the Enemy of Freedom



Story by Information Clearing House
Commentary by Constitutional Attorney and Author John W. Whitehead

“Rights aren’t rights if someone can take them away. They’re privileges. That’s all we’ve ever had in this country, is a bill of temporary privileges. And if you read the news even badly, you know that every year the list gets shorter and shorter. Sooner or later, the people in this country are gonna realize the government … doesn’t care about you, or your children, or your rights, or your welfare or your safety… It’s interested in its own power. That’s the only thing. Keeping it and expanding it wherever possible.”— George Carlin

March 10, 2017 "Information Clearing House" - My friends, we’re being played for fools.

On paper, we may be technically free.

In reality, however, we are only as free as a government official may allow.

We only think we live in a constitutional republic, governed by just laws created for our benefit.

Truth be told, we live in a dictatorship disguised as a democracy where all that we own, all that we earn, all that we say and do—our very lives—depends on the benevolence of government agents and corporate shareholders for whom profit and power will always trump principle. And now the government is litigating and legislating its way into a new framework where the dictates of petty bureaucrats carry greater weight than the inalienable rights of the citizenry.

We’re in trouble, folks.

Freedom no longer means what it once did.

This holds true whether you’re talking about the right to criticize the government in word or deed, the right to be free from government surveillance, the right to not have your person or your property subjected to warrantless searches by government agents, the right to due process, the right to be safe from soldiers invading your home, the right to be innocent until proven guilty and every other right that once reinforced the founders’ belief that this would be “a government of the people, by the people and for the people.”

Not only do we no longer have dominion over our bodies, our families, our property and our lives, but the government continues to chip away at what few rights we still have to speak freely and think for ourselves.

If the government can control speech, it can control thought and, in turn, it can control the minds of the citizenry.

The unspoken freedom enshrined in the First Amendment is the right to think freely and openly debate issues without being muzzled or treated like a criminal.

In other words, if we no longer have the right to tell a Census Worker to get off our property, if we no longer have the right to tell a police officer to get a search warrant before they dare to walk through our door, if we no longer have the right to stand in front of the Supreme Court wearing a protest sign or approach an elected representative to share our views, if we no longer have the right to protest unjust laws by voicing our opinions in public or on our clothing or before a legislative body—no matter how misogynistic, hateful, prejudiced, intolerant, misguided or politically incorrect they might be—then we do not have free speech.

What we have instead is regulated, controlled speech, and that’s a whole other ballgame.

Protest laws, free speech zones, bubble zones, trespass zones, anti-bullying legislation, zero tolerance policies, hate crime laws and a host of other legalistic maladies dreamed up by politicians and prosecutors are conspiring to corrode our core freedoms purportedly for our own good.

For instance, the protest laws being introduced across the country—in 18 states so far—are supposedly in the name of “public safety and limiting economic damage.”

Don’t fall for it.

No matter how you package these laws, no matter how well-meaning they may sound, no matter how much you may disagree with the protesters or sympathize with the objects of the protest, these proposed laws are aimed at one thing only: discouraging dissent.

In Arizona, police would be permitted to seize the assets of anyone involved in a protest that at some point becomes violent.

In Minnesota, protesters would be forced to pay for the cost of having police on hand to “police” demonstrations.

Oregon lawmakers want to “require public community colleges and universities to expel any student convicted of participating in a violent riot.”

A proposed North Dakota law would give drivers the green light to “accidentally” run over protesters who are blocking a public roadway. Florida and Tennessee are entertaining similar laws.

Pushing back against what it refers to as “economic terrorism,” Washington wants to increase penalties for protesters who block access to highways and railways.

Anticipating protests over the Keystone Pipeline, South Dakota wants to apply the governor’s emergency response authority to potentially destructive protests, create new trespassing penalties and make it a crime to obstruct highways.

In Iowa, protesters who block highways with speeds posted above 55 mph could spend five years in prison, plus a fine of up to $7,500. Obstruct traffic in Mississippi and you could be facing a $10,000 fine and a five-year prison sentence.

A North Carolina law would make it a crime to heckle state officials. Under this law, shouting at a former governor would constitute a crime.

Indiana lawmakers wanted to authorize police to use “any means necessary” to breakup mass gatherings that block traffic. That legislation has since been amended to merely empower police to issue fines for such behavior.

Georgia is proposing harsh penalties and mandatory sentencing laws for those who obstruct public passages or throw bodily fluids on “public safety officers.”

Virginia wants to subject protesters who engage in an “unlawful assembly” after “having been lawfully warned to disperse” with up to a year of jail time and a fine of up to $2,500.

Missouri wants to make it illegal for anyone participating in an “unlawful assembly” to intentionally conceal “his or her identity by the means of a robe, mask, or other disguise.”

Colorado wants to lock up protesters for up to 18 months who obstruct or tamper with oil and gas equipment and charge them with up to $100,000 in fines.

Oklahoma wants to create a sliding scale for protesters whose actions impact or impede critical infrastructure. The penalties would range from $1,000 and six months in a county jail to $100,000 and up to 10 years in prison. And if you’re part of an organization, that fine goes as high as $1,000,000.

Michigan hopes to make it easier for courts to shut down “mass picketing” demonstrations and fine protesters who block entrances to businesses, private residences or roadways up to $1,000 a day. That fine jumps to $10,000 a day for unions or other organizing groups.

Ask yourself: if there are already laws on the books in all of the states that address criminal or illegal behavior such as blocking public roadways or trespassing on private property—because such laws are already on the books—then why does the government need to pass laws criminalizing activities that are already outlawed?

What’s really going on here?

No matter what the politicians might say, the government doesn’t care about our rights, our welfare or our safety.

How many times will we keep falling for the same tricks?

Every despotic measure used to control us and make us cower and fear and comply with the government’s dictates has been packaged as being for our benefit, while in truth benefiting only those who stand to profit, financially or otherwise, from the government’s transformation of the citizenry into a criminal class.

Remember, the Patriot Act didn’t make us safer. It simply turned American citizens into suspects and, in the process, gave rise to an entire industry—private and governmental—whose profit depends on its ability to undermine our Fourth Amendment rights.

Placing TSA agents in our nation’s airports didn’t make us safer. It simply subjected Americans to invasive groping, ogling and bodily searches by government agents. Now the TSA plans to subject travelers to even more “comprehensive” patdowns.

So, too, these protest laws are not about protecting the economy or private property or public roads. Rather, they are intended to muzzle discontent and discourage anyone from challenging government authority.

These laws are the shot across the bow.

They’re intended to send a strong message that in the American police state, you’re either a patriot who marches in lockstep with the government’s dictates or you’re a pariah, a suspect, a criminal, a troublemaker, a terrorist, a radical, a revolutionary.

Yet by muzzling the citizenry, by removing the constitutional steam valves that allow people to speak their minds, air their grievances and contribute to a larger dialogue that hopefully results in a more just world, the government is deliberately stirring the pot, creating a climate in which violence becomes inevitable.

When there is no steam valve—when there is no one to hear what the people have to say, because government representatives have removed themselves so far from their constituents—then frustration builds, anger grows and people become more volatile and desperate to force a conversation.

Then again, perhaps that was the government’s plan all along.

As John F. Kennedy warned in March 1962, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”

The government is making violent revolution inevitable.

How do you lock down a nation?

You sow discontent and fear among the populace. You terrorize the people into believing that radicalized foreigners are preparing to invade. You teach them to be non-thinkers who passively accept whatever is told them, whether it’s delivered by way of the corporate media or a government handler. You brainwash them into believing that everything the government does is for their good and anyone who opposes the government is an enemy. You acclimate them to a state of martial law, carried out by soldiers disguised as police officers but bearing the weapons of war. You polarize them so that they can never unite and stand united against the government. You create a climate in which silence is golden and those who speak up are shouted down. You spread propaganda and lies. You package the police state in the rhetoric of politicians.

And then, when and if the people finally wake up to the fact that the government is not and has never been their friend, when it’s too late for peaceful protests and violence is all that remains to them as a recourse against tyranny, you use all of the tools you’ve been so carefully amassing—the criminal databases and surveillance and identification systems and private prisons and protest laws—and you shut them down for good.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, once a government assumes power—unconstitutional or not—it does not relinquish it. The militarized police are not going to stand down. The NSA will continue to collect electronic files on everything we do. More and more Americans are going to face jail time for offenses that prior generations did not concern themselves with.

The government—at all levels—could crack down on virtually anyone at any time.

Martin Luther King saw it coming: both the “spontaneous explosion of anger by various citizen groups” and the ensuing crackdown by the government.

“Police, national guard and other armed bodies are feverously preparing for repression,” King wrote shortly before he was assassinated. “They can be curbed not by unorganized resort to force…but only by a massive wave of militant nonviolence….It also may be the instrument of our national salvation.”

Militant nonviolent resistance.

“A nationwide nonviolent movement is very important,” King wrote. “We know from past experience that Congress and the President won’t do anything until you develop a movement around which people of goodwill can find a way to put pressure on them… This means making the movement powerful enough, dramatic enough, morally appealing enough, so that people of goodwill, the churches, laborers, liberals, intellectuals, students, poor people themselves begin to put pressure on congressmen to the point that they can no longer elude our demands.

“It must be militant, massive nonviolence,” King emphasized.

In other words, besides marches and protests, there would have to be civil disobedience. Civil disobedience forces the government to expend energy in many directions, especially if it is nonviolent, organized and is conducted on a massive scale. This is, as King knew, the only way to move the beast. It is the way to effect change without resorting to violence. And it is exactly what these protest laws are attempting to discourage

We are coming to a crossroads. Either we gather together now and attempt to restore freedom or all will be lost. As King cautioned, “everywhere, ‘time is winding up,’ in the words of one of our spirituals, corruption in the land, people take your stand; time is winding up.”

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People (SelectBooks, 2015) is available online at www.amazon.com. Whitehead can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.
_____________________________________________

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.

2017-03-10

Study: Online TSL Leaps to 2B Total Listening Hours.



Story by Inside Radio

After two years of declines, Time Spent Listening to online radio—both broadcast radio streams and internet pureplays—rose sharply in 2017. TSL for the 140 million Americans who listen weekly to online radio rose to 14 hours, 39 minutes a week in 2017, up from 12:08 in 2016.

Put another way, online radio expanded from 1.65 billion aggregate listening hours in 2016 to just over 2 billion in 2017. The turnaround amounts to 24% growth in just one year.

These are among the findings from the 20th annual Infinite Dial survey of digital media behavior in the U.S., fielded in January and February by Edison Research and Triton Digital. Online radio is defined in the survey as online listening of AM/FM radio station streams or listening to streamed audio content available only on the internet, such as internet music services. This part of the study looked only at live listening—podcasting isn’t included in these numbers.

The sizeable TSL increase is backed up by Triton Digital’s own census-based data, which shows a 23% jump in listening hours over the same period. But time spent isn’t the only online radio metric on the rise. Cume, both monthly and weekly, also continued its upward trajectory. Online radio now reaches 61% of the 12+ population every month, up 4% from last year and 22% from five years ago. “Looking all the way back to 2008, the year the iPhone was introduced, monthly reach has almost tripled, from 21% to 61%,” John Rosso, president of market development at Triton Digital, said Thursday during a webinar, pointing to a “close correlation” between smartphone ownership and online audio consumption. More than eight in ten Americans, or an estimated 226 million, now own a smartphone. Based on Triton data, Rosso attributed “all of the growth” in online listening during the last five years to mobile devices and predicted the rise of smart speaker systems such as Amazon’s Alexa and Google Home will further accelerate growth in the coming years.

The data shows online radio has become a weekly habit for 53% of the total 12+ population (about 140 million Americans), up from 50% in 2016. The demo with the biggest increase in weekly listening is 12-24, which shot up to 83% in 2017 from 73% last year. But online radio has also become a more regular habit for a growing number of persons aged 55+, climbing from 24% to 32%, and for 25-54-year-olds (56% to 59%).

Meanwhile, the number of cellphone owners that have connected their phone to a car audio system to listen to internet radio also continued to creep up. Four in ten cellphone owners report having ever done so.

When drilling down into individual audio brands, the Edison-Triton study identified a small group of market leaders among a larger universe of players, most of which are growing. Pandora and iHeartRadio had the highest awareness levels at 86% and 71%, respectively. Edison Research VP of strategy and marketing, Tom Webster, called the elevated familiarity with iHeart a “testament to the power of radio in general since broadcast radio promotion has done much to build that particular brand.” Bunched up tightly after iHeart are Spotify (62% awareness), Apple Music (60%) and Amazon Music (60%). “While there are category leaders, the space is supporting a lot of brands and companies right now,” Webster said, with 14 different audio brands enjoying double-digit awareness percentages.

Nearly one-third of monthly online radio listeners (32%) used Pandora in the past month, followed by a surging Spotify (18%) and iHeartRadio (13%). Among these market leaders, Spotify had the largest year-over-year gain, up from 13% in 2016, followed by iHeart (up from 12% in 2016). Pandora was flat while Apple Music lost some ground, going from 12% in 2016 to 8% in 2017.



Spotify’s rapid growth is being fueled in large part by 12-24-year-olds—45% listened to the service in the last month, up from 30% one year ago. Meanwhile, iHeart grew from 14% to 19% while Pandora lost ground in the demo for a third-consecutive year (55%-54%-43%-39%) and Apple Music dipped 22%-20%. Spotify also grew with 25-54s but by a smaller percentage (12%-16%) while Pandora (39%) and iHeart (15%) were both flat and Apple dropped 11% to 7%.

“The big picture here for this universe of brands is that the space is continuing to grow,” Webster said. “There is still a market leader here in Pandora but the space is maturing and stabilizing into a medium that supports several strong players. These players don’t necessarily cannibalize one another as much as you might think because the overall listening is growing quite steadily.”

When internet radio listeners were asked which audio brand they used most often, Pandora remained out front at 40%, but down considerably from 48% in 2016. Over the same period, Spotify jumped by one-third (14% to 21%) and iHeartRadio inched up to 10% from 9%. But perhaps the most significant change came in the growth of “others” from 19% in 2016 to 23% this year. Said Webster, “There’s plenty of room on the Infinite Dial for many of these players.”

Oversight Committee Republicans Take First Steps to Harm Workers and Eliminate Federal Labor Unions


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Jennifer Werner
March 10, 2017 (202) 226-5181

Washington, D.C. (Mar. 10, 2017)—Today, Republican Members of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform voted in favor of a bill that would significantly harm middle-class workers, impair the effectiveness and efficiency of federal agencies, and fundamentally damage the interests of American taxpayers as part of a broader Republican campaign to eliminate unions from the federal workplace.

H.R. 1364, the Official Time Reform Act of 2017, would:

• harm middle-class American workers by taking the drastic step of stripping pensions from employees who serve as shop stewards and union representatives at federal agencies;

• effectively end “official time” across the federal government by slashing pensions to discourage workers from serving in these roles;

• harm agency whistleblowers who report waste, fraud, and abuse by undermining union efforts to protect these workers against retaliation;

• harm victims of discrimination who rely on assistance from union representatives to safeguard their rights;

• harm federal agencies by undermining key mechanisms for improving agency efficiency and effectiveness; and

• harm the interests of American taxpayers who rely on the benefits of union efforts to improve agency operations, protect whistleblowers, and safeguard worker rights.

Democrats offered eight amendments to:
• preserve existing protections for whistleblowers who report waste, fraud, and abuse;
• protect the rights of veterans and safeguard their working conditions;
• ensure that conflicts of interest at federal agencies can continue to be identified and addressed;
• continue protecting employees at national security agencies who identify and prevent illegal activity relating to foreign governments, including Russia;
• ensure the ongoing protection of employees from sexual harassment;
• continue safeguarding employees from unlawful discrimination;
• protect current efforts to ensure workplace safety; and
• ensure that all federal employees, including non-union members, continue to receive fair representation.
Republicans unanimously rejected all of them. Democrats voted against final passage of the legislation.

Good government, civil rights, and labor groups strongly oppose this legislation, including:

• Project on Government Oversight
• Government Accountability Project
• The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
• American Federation of Government Employees
• National Treasury Employees Union
• American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
• AFL-CIO
• International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers
• National Air Traffic Controllers Association
• National Education Association

2017-03-08

Radio One's CEO Alfred Liggins: Radio is ‘Shining Star’ of Traditional Media

Story by Inside Radio
Photo left: Radio One CEO Alfred Liggins

Calling the broadcast radio industry the “shining star” of traditional media, Radio One President and CEO Alfred Liggins says the industry is holding up well in a highly competitive media landscape. He cited radio’s ability to hold steady, revenue-wise, as a plus compared to print and, to an extent, television.

“Radio has hung in there being kind of flattish, even if it is down 1% or 2%, that’s way better than newspapers or magazines and even, if you look at the broadcast television advertising numbers, my understanding is TV’s success is largely driven by retransmission and the actual advertising number is flattish to up a bit,” Liggins said Tuesday on a conference call with analysts to discuss fourth-quarter results.

Liggins’ enthusiasm for the broadcast radio business’ future was somewhat tempered however by what he called “the current structure of the industry” where he said iHeartMedia, which owns and operates 850 radio stations, has a lock on a lot of national advertising dollars.

“My personal view is that the industry needs to be restructured. You can’t have [one company] controlling that much national revenue,” Liggins said, adding the rest of the industry should consider attempting to offset iHeart’s place atop the market. “The current structure, given iHeart’s dominance, is problematic for those of us who are smaller,” Liggins said.

Still, buoyed by strong political advertising, its niche cable channel and improved ratings at several key radio clusters, Radio One did report an uptick in Q4 2016 revenue Tuesday and predicted that its diversifying portfolio will help lift 2017 into positive territory.

Factoring in about $5.7 million in political money, Radio One’s radio revenue increased 1.2% in Q4 2016, compared to the same period in 2015. Excluding political, radio revenue was down 8.5% to $51.02 million, compared with Q4 2015. “Q4 political was a good tail wind for us,” Liggins said. The company’s Charlotte, Cleveland, Indianapolis, Raleigh and St. Louis markets posted solid revenue growth, while Dallas, Houston and Washington DC suffered declines. Syndicated radio unit Reach Media’s revenue was down 5.5%, a drop the company said resulted from lower ad revenue.

Compared to its Miller-Kaplan market averages, which were down 0.9%, Radio One stations fared better, up fractionally at 0.1%. In Q4 2016, Radio One says local revenue dropped 4.1%, while national ticked up 7.3%.

Among advertising categories, Radio One said that government and public, driven by political, was strong in Q4, as was entertainment, health care and travel/transport. Retail, automotive, telecom and food services all decreased in the quarter, executives said.

Radio One was also boosted by positive results for its cable network TV One, which increased ad revenue 18%. The company is seeing the first injection of revenue from its investment in the new MGM National Harbor casino-hotel, which opened in December. Under its terms, Radio One will receive 1% of the Maryland operation’s gaming revenue, which Liggins said is pacing to be about $6 million in 2017.

Those injections of revenue should help offset what Radio One executives expect to be a softer year for radio. Looking ahead to Q1, Radio One says its radio stations are pacing down low- to mid-single digits, excluding political, while Reach Media is off double digits, largely because two major advertisers, including Wal-Mart, scaled back their Q1 campaigns compared to a year ago. (Radio One says Wal-Mart will return to normal advertising levels later in the year.)

“We think there is going to be enough upside on TV One and MGM to offset any negative swings on radio and Reach Media,” Liggins said.

The company plans to close on a $25 million sale of 15 FM towers in late March or early April, which will provide another cash infusion for 2017.

Liggins said that Radio One is continuing to evolve beyond its radio roots to both serve its audience more broadly and weather market fluctuations. When asked by analysts if the company plans to make future acquisitions, Liggins was measured, saying he expected to make smaller moves rather than any large purchases. “We will continue to look at areas where we can find cost synergies,” he said.

2017-03-07

Ben Carson Refers to Slaves as ‘Immigrants’ in First Remarks to HUD Staff


Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson made the comment during a speech to department employees Monday (Video by REUTERS)

Story by NY Times
Written by Liam Stack

Ben Carson’s first full week as secretary of Housing and Urban Development got off to a rough start on Monday after he described African slaves as “immigrants” during his first speech to hundreds of assembled department employees. The remark, which came as part of a 40-minute address on the theme of America as “a land of dreams and opportunity,” was met with swift outrage online.

Mr. Carson turned his attention to slavery after describing photographs of poor immigrants displayed at the Ellis Island National Museum of Immigration. These new arrivals worked long hours, six or seven days a week, with little pay, he said. And before them, there were slaves.

“That’s what America is about, a land of dreams and opportunity,’’ he said. “There were other immigrants who came here in the bottom of slave ships, worked even longer, even harder for less. But they too had a dream that one day their sons, daughters, grandsons, granddaughters, great-grandsons, great-granddaughters, might pursue prosperity and happiness in this land.”

The comparison was first reported by USA Today and quickly drew the ire of social media users who attacked the secretary, who is African-American, for what they saw as racially insensitive comments. On Twitter, the comedian and actress Whoopi Goldberg recommended Mr. Carson watch the 1980s mini-series “Roots.”

The Department of Housing and Urban Development was stunned by the uproar and spent part of the afternoon responding to the news media on Twitter. In a statement, it said critics were watching only a short clip from a 30-minute speech and were viewing the remarks in bad faith.

“This is the most cynical interpretation of the secretary’s remarks to an army of welcoming HUD employees,” the department said in a statement. “No one honestly believes he equates voluntary immigration with involuntary servitude!”

A spokesman for the department said Mr. Carson’s speech appeared to cause little upset among the employees who had gathered to hear him speak. Several hundred people attended the event and many lingered afterward to snap selfies with Mr. Carson, who was sworn in last Thursday.

On Monday night, following a radio interview in which he defended his remarks earlier in the day, Mr. Carson also did so on Twitter. “You can be an involuntary immigrant,” he said, adding that “slaves didn’t just give up and die, our ancestors made something of themselves.” He continued, “An immigrant is: ‘a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country.’”

But later that night, on Facebook, Mr. Carson drew a clear distinction between immmigrants and slavery: “The Immigrants made the choice to come to America. They saw this country as a land of opportunity. In contrast, slaves were forced here against their will and lost all their opportunities. We continue to live with that legacy.”

Mr. Carson’s speech was not the first time that a newly minted Trump official has caused offense with their handling of African-American history.

Mr. Trump himself has described “inner city” neighborhoods as a crime-ridden “hell” in need of a tough police response, a vision of urban life that has been received unfavorably by many minority leaders.

Last week, the new education secretary, Betsy DeVos, caused an uproar by describing historically black colleges and universities — founded because black students were not allowed to attend segregated white schools — as “real pioneers” of school choice.

She later backtracked, saying in a statement that the history of black colleges and universities “was born, not out of mere choice, but out of necessity, in the face of racism, and in the aftermath of the Civil War.”

2017-03-06

Study Says Black People Are The Only Race That Are 100% Pure Human


Study Says Black People Are The Only Race That Are 100% Pure Human

2017-03-03

Nancy Wilson turned 80 on February 20th with over 50 years in show business. How about some Nancy Wilson Music "Live"?


Nancy Wilson performs live at the Newport Jazz Festival in 08/15/1987.


Nancy Wilson live in Japan.


Nancy Wilson interview


Nancy Wilson - Jazz Scene USA 1962.

2017-03-02

Attorney General Sessions Recuses Himself From Probe Of Russian Election Interference

Story by NBC News
Written by Corky Stemaszko

Embattled Attorney General Jeff Sessions bowed to pressure Thursday and said he would recuse himself from any federal probe of Russian meddling in the presidential election.

Insisting again that he had no improper contacts with the Russians, Sessions said he nevertheless will withdraw because of his involvement in the Trump campaign.

Sessions said he met with ethics lawyers and concluded: "I should not be involved in investigating a campaign I had a role in."

And that goes for any investigations pertaining to the presidential campaigns as well, he said.

"I have decided to recuse myself from any existing or future investigations of any matters related in any way to the campaigns for President of the United States," Sessions laid out in his statement.

"This announcement should not be interpreted as confirmation of the existence of any investigation or suggestive of the scope of any such investigation," Sessions added in the statement.

Sessions is under fire for not disclosing during his confirmation hearing that he met with the Russian ambassador during the campaign.

"In retrospect, I should have slowed down and said, 'But I did meet with one Russian official a couple times, that would be the ambassador'," he told reporters, adding that he intends to write the Judiciary Committee to explain his testimony.

Sessions spoke shortly after President Donald Trump told reporters he had "total" confidence in his AG amid calls from some lawmakers that he recuse himself or even resign from the Justice Department.

Earlier, Sessions denied meeting with Russian officials during the course of the presidential election to discuss the Trump campaign.

"I have not met with any Russians at any time to discuss any political campaign," he told NBC News, "and those remarks are unbelievable to me and are false. And I don't have anything else to say about that."

Asked whether he would bow to demands from a growing chorus of Democratic and Republican lawmakers that he step aside from investigating alleged ties between Trump's surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government, Sessions answered, "I have said whenever it's appropriate, I will recuse myself. There's no doubt about that."

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) said he welcomed Sessions' recusal but added that the AG still needs to answer questions about his contacts with the Russians.

"He has to be brought back to the Judiciary Committee and provide an explanation," Blumenthal told NBC News.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) applauded Sessions' move on Twitter.