BBC 'climate' headlines unwittingly make the point: 5/27/17, 'World awaits Trump decision on Paris deal,' and 5/28/17, 'Trump keeps world waiting on Paris deal.' The unwitting point: US taxpayers can no longer bear the burden of being responsible for the entire world, whatever the issue may be. Nor should anyone. The US wants friendly relations with everyone and to help whenever we can, but we can't be expected to be responsible for 'the world'

BBC headlines, May 27 and May 28, 2017, referencing expectations of massive US taxpayer funding of so-called Paris "climate change" deal (on top of billions of US taxpayer dollars already diverted to alleged global CO2 danger which, even if it exists, is controlled by Communist China--as everyone knows):

May 27, 2017, "Climate change: World awaits Trump decision on Paris deal," BBC

and

May 28, 2017, "Climate change: Trump keeps world waiting on Paris deal," BBC
.........................

Added: Even "UN Secretary General [Antonio Guterres] tells the BBC the Paris agreement won't crumble regardless of US position."...

"Antonio Guterres: "The agreement doesn't collapse if a country leaves the agreement." 5/28/17. image from BBC video 




.............. 

More than any other city, Chicago has depended on Mexican immigrants to balance the slow growth of its native-born population-LA Times

May 28, 2017, "Chicago was the only major U.S. city to lose population from 2015 to 2016," LA Times, M. Eltagouri 

"By most estimates, Chicago's population will continue to decline. Over the last year, the Chicago Tribune surveyed dozens of former residents who said they packed their bags for a variety of reasons: high taxes, the state budget stalemate, crime, the unemployment rate and weather. 

Black residents have been among those leaving in search of safe neighborhoods and prosperity, with many heading to the suburbs and warm-weather states. Chicago lost about 181,000 black residents between 2000 and 2010, according to census data. 

More than any other city, Chicago has depended on Mexican immigrants to balance the slow growth of its native-born population. During the 1990s, immigration accounted for most of Chicago's growth."...




................

New French Pres. Macron hosts Putin at palace of Versailles on Monday, May 29, 2017. Says there are many international issues to discuss-AFP

"The venue will be the sumptuous palace of Versailles, where the pair will inaugurate an exhibition marking 300 years of Franco-Russian ties since the visit of Russia's modernising tsar Peter the Great to France in 1717." 

May 28, 2017, "Macron hosts Putin in latest diplomatic test," AFP, Gina Doggett 

"France's new President Emmanuel Macron was to host Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin on Monday in the latest test of his diplomatic mettle after vowing firm stands on Ukraine and Syria.

"It is essential to talk to Russia because there are many international issues that will not be resolved without a tough exchange with the Russians," Macron said at the G7 summit in Sicily which wound up on Saturday.

The 39-year-old centrist leader's meeting with Putin, 64, caps a whirlwind of diplomacy including the G7 talks as well as last week's NATO summit in Brussels.

He told a French weekly that he was not "bothered" by leaders who "think in terms of power ratios", citing Putin as an example along with US President Donald Trump.

But Macron, who became France's youngest president just three weeks ago, said he does not believe in "the diplomacy of public invective but in bilateral dialogue".

As a candidate, Macron had tough words for Russia, accusing it of following a "hybrid strategy combining military intimidation and an information war".

Since the start of the war in Ukraine in 2014, Russia has flexed its muscles with a series of war games involving tens of thousands of troops in areas bordering NATO Baltic states.

In Sicily on Saturday, Macron said he would make "not a single concession" to Russia on Ukraine as he and his G7 counterparts said they were prepared to strengthen sanctions against Moscow.

Western powers charge Russia with failing to honour its commitments under the Minsk accords framework for establishing a cessation of hostilities between Kiev forces and Moscow-backed separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine.

France helped spearhead the sanctions, which have seriously dented EU-Russia trade, with a retaliatory Russian embargo on European agricultural products hurting French farmers.

The Syrian conflict will also be high on the agenda, with Macron saying he was in favour of "building an inclusive political solution in a much more collective way".

He regretted that none of the G7 states is party to Syria peace talks under way in the Kazakh capital Astana initiated by Russia, Iran and Turkey, although there are US observers.

Separate UN-backed negotiations have become down in Geneva over the six-year-old Syrian conflict.

Putin adviser Yuri Ushakov told a Moscow news briefing that he expected an "interesting and frank" discussion on Syria.

"France is among the countries with a very severe stance towards the regime of (Syrian President) Bashar al-Assad," he said.

Coming so soon after an election in which the Kremlin was widely seen as backing Macron's far-right rival Marine Le Pen -- with Putin hosting her during a surprise visit to Moscow -- the encounter in Versailles, near Paris, will have an added personal edge.

Putin was quick to congratulate Macron on his election, urging him to "overcome mutual distrust" and "join forces to ensure international stability and security".

The visit comes seven months after the Russian leader cancelled a trip to Paris for the opening of a Russian cathedral complex near the Eiffel Tower in a spat over Syria with then president Francois Hollande, who had said Russia's bombing of Aleppo could amount to war crimes.

The venue will be the sumptuous palace of Versailles, where the pair will inaugurate an exhibition marking 300 years of Franco-Russian ties since the visit of Russia's modernising tsar Peter the Great to France in 1717.

After the talks and a joint news conference, Putin will visit the Paris Orthodox cathedral complex on his own.

On the eve of Putin's visit, central and eastern European activists staged a small anti-Putin demonstration in Paris.

"We are counting on Macron not to fall into Putin's trap," Anne-Marie Goussard, who heads a Franco-Lithuanian umbrella grouping, told AFP."

....................

FBI illegally shared data on Americans with unauthorized persons since at least 2009. FISA court finds hundreds of violations of FBI rules under Comey. FBI operates as independent state, has no timely oversight, claims to police itself-Circa.com...US intel agencies conducted illegal surveillance against Americans for 5 years during Obama admin. through late Oct. 2016-McClatchy

May 26, 2017, "Secret [FISA] court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens," McClatchy, Tim Johnson, via Miami Herald
................................ 

May 26, 2017, "Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data on Americans with private parties," Circa.com, John Solomon and Sara Carter

"The FBI has illegally shared raw intelligence about Americans with unauthorized third parties and violated other constitutional privacy protections, according to newly declassified government documents that undercut the bureau’s public assurances about how carefully it handles warrantless spy data to avoid abuses or leaks....

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article152948259.html#storylink=cpMay 26, 2017, "Declassified memos show FBI illegally shared spy data on Americans with private parties," Circa.com, by John Solomon and Sara Carter"The FBI has illegally shared raw intelligence about Americans with unauthorized third parties and violated other constitutional privacy protections, according to newly declassified government documents that undercut the bureau’s public assurances about how carefully it handles warrantless spy data to avoid abuses or leaks....

Then-FBI Director James Comey unequivocally told lawmakers his agency used sensitive espionage data gathered about Americans without a warrant only when it was “lawfully collected, carefully overseen and checked.”

Once-top secret U.S. intelligence community memos reviewed by Circa tell a different story, citing instances of “disregard” for rules, inadequate training and “deficient” oversight and even one case of deliberately sharing spy data with a forbidden party.

For instance, a ruling declassified this month by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) chronicles nearly 10 pages listing hundreds of violations of the FBI’s privacy-protecting minimization rules that occurred on Comey’s watch.

The behavior the FBI admitted to a FISA judge just last month [April 2017]ranged from illegally sharing raw intelligence with unauthorized third parties to accessing intercepted attorney-client privileged communications without proper oversight the bureau promised was in place years ago.

The court also opined aloud that it fears the violations are more extensive than already disclosed. 

“The Court is nonetheless concerned about the FBI’s apparent disregard of minimization rules and whether the FBI is engaging in similar disclosures of raw Section 702 information that have not been reported,” the April 2017 ruling declared.

The court isn’t the only oversight body to disclose recent concerns that the FBI’s voluntary system for policing its behavior and self-disclosing mistakes hasn’t been working.

The Justice Department inspector general’s office declassified a report in 2015 that reveals the internal watchdog had concerns as early as 2012 that the FBI was submitting ‘deficient” reports indicating it had a clean record complying with spy data gathered on Americans without a warrant.

The FBI normally is forbidden from surveilling an American without a warrant. But Section 702 of the Foreign Surveillance Act, last updated by Congress in 2008, allowed the NSA to share with the FBI spy data collected without a warrant that includes the communications of Americans with “foreign targets.”

But the FISA court watchdogs suggest FBI compliance problems began months after Section 702 was implemented.

The FBI’s very first compliance report in 2009 declared it had not found any instances in which agents accessed NSA intercepts supposedly gathered overseas about an American who in fact was on U.S. soil.

But the IG said it reviewed the same data and easily found evidence that the FBI accessed NSA data gathered on a person who likely was in the United States, making it illegal to review without a warrant.

“We found several instances in which the FBI acquired communications on the same day that the NSA determined through analysis of intercepted communications that the person was in the United States,” the declassified report revealed.

It called the FBI’s first oversight report “deficient” and urged better oversight.

FBI officials acknowledged there have been violations but insist they are a small percentage of the total counterterrorism and counterintelligence work its agents perform. 

Almost all are unintentional human errors by good-intentioned agents and analysts under enormous pressure to stop the next major terror attack, the officials said.

Others fear these blunders call into the question the bureau’s rosy assessment that it can still police itself when it comes to protecting Americans’ privacy 17 years after the war on terror began....

“No one on the Hill wants to look like we are soft on terrorism when you have increasing threats like Manchester-style attacks. But the evidence of abuse or sloppiness and the unending leaks of sensitive intelligence in the last year has emboldened enough of us to pursue some reforms,” a senior congressional aide told Circa, speaking only on condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to talk to the media. “Where that new line between privacy and security is drawn will depend on how many more shoes fall before the 702 renewal happens.”...

One of the biggest concerns involves so-called backdoor searches in which the FBI can mine NSA intercept data for information that may have been incidentally collected about an American. No warrant or court approval is required, and the FBI insists these searches are one of the most essential tools in combating terrorist plots.

But a respected former Justice Department national security prosecutor questions if the searching has gotten too cavalier. Amy Jeffress, the former top security adviser to former Attorney General Eric Holder, was appointed by the intelligence court in 2015 to give an independent assessment of the FBI’s record of compliance.

Jeffress concluded agents’ searches of NSA data now extend far beyond national security issues and thus were “overstepping” the constitutional protections designed to ensure the bureau isn’t violating Americans’ 4th Amendment protections against unlawful search and seizure.

“The FBI procedures allow for really virtually unrestricted querying of the Section 702 data in a way the NSA and CIA have restrained it through their procedures,” she argued before the court in a sealed 2015 proceeding.

 
“I think that in this case the procedures could be tighter and more restrictive, and should be in order to comply with the Fourth Amendment,” she added.

The court thanked Jeffress for her thoughtful analysis but ultimately rejected her recommendation to impose on the FBI a requirement of creating a written justification why each search would help pursue a national security or criminal matter....

That was late in 2015. But by early 2017, the court became more concerned after the Obama administration disclosed significant violations of privacy protections at two separate intelligence agencies involved in the Section 702 program.

The most serious involved the NSA searching for American data it was forbidden to search. But the FBI also was forced to admit its agents and analysts shared espionage data with prohibited third parties, ranging from a federal contractor to a private entity that did not have the legal right to see the intelligence....

The court’s memo suggested the FBI’s sharing of raw intelligence to third parties, at the time, had good law enforcement intentions but bad judgment and inadequate training.

“Nonetheless, the above described practices violated the governing minimization procedures,” the court chided.

A footnote in the ruling stated one instance of improper sharing was likely intentional. 

“Improper access” to NSA spy data for FBI contractors “seems to have been the result of deliberate decision-making,” the court noted.

The recently unsealed ruling also revealed the FBI is investigating more cases of possible improper sharing with private parties that recently have come to light.

The government “is investigating whether there have been similar cases in which the FBI improperly afforded non-FBI personnel access to raw FISA-acquired information on FBI systems,” the court warned. 

The ruling cited other FBI failures in handling Section 702 intel, including retaining data on computer storage systems “in violation of applicable minimization requirements.” 

Among the most serious additional concerns was the FBI’s failure for more than two years to establish review teams to ensure intercepts between targets and their lawyers aren’t violating the attorney-client privilege. 

“Failures of the FBI to comply with this ‘review team’ requirement for particular targets have been focus of the FISC’s (FISA’s?) concerns since 2014,” the court noted.

The FBI said it is trying to resolve the deficiencies with aggressive training of agents.

That admission of inadequate training directly undercut Comey’s testimony earlier this month when questioned by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. 

“Nobody gets to see FISA information of any kind unless they've had the appropriate training and have the appropriate oversight,” the soon-to-be-fired FBI director assured lawmakers.

The struggle for the intelligence court and lawmakers in providing future oversight will be where to set more limits without hampering counterterrorism effort.

The FBI told Circa in a statement, "As indicated in its opinion, the Court determined that the past and current standard minimization procedures are consistent with the Fourth Amendment and met the statutory definition of those procedures under Section 702."

Jeffress, however, warned in her 2015 brief of another dynamic that will pose a challenge too, an FBI culture to use a tool more just because it can.

 

“These scenarios suggest a potentially very large and broad scope of incidental collection of communications between a lawful target and U.S. persons that are not the type of communications Section 702 was designed to collect,” she told the court in a written memo.

And when questioned at a subsequent hearing, Jeffress observed: “I don’t think that the FBI will voluntarily set limits on its querying procedures, because law enforcement agencies tend not to take steps to restrict or limit what they can do, for obvious reasons.”"

.......................

Added: 5/26/17 McClatchy article on this topic doesn't mention FBI specifically until last two sentences, including: "The court document also criticized the FBI’s distribution of intelligence data, saying it had disclosed raw surveillance data to sectors of its bureaucracy “largely staffed by private contractors.”" 

May 26, 2016, "Secret court rebukes NSA for 5-year illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens," McClatchy, Tim Johnson, via Miami Herald

"U.S. intelligence agencies conducted illegal surveillance on American citizens over a five year period, a practice that earned them a sharp rebuke from a secret court [FISA court] that called the matter a “very serious” constitutional issue.

The criticism is in a lengthy secret ruling that lays bare some of the frictions between the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and U.S. intelligence agencies obligated to obtain the court’s approval for surveillance activities.

The ruling, dated April 26 and bearing the label “top secret,” was obtained and published Thursday by the news site Circa. 

It is rare that such rulings see the light of day, and the lengthy unraveling of issues in the 99-page document opens a window on how the secret federal court oversees surveillance activities and seeks to curtail those that it deems overstep legal authority.

The document, signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, said the court had learned in a notice filed Oct. 26, 2016, that National Security Agency analysts had been conducting prohibited queries of databases “with much greater frequency than had previously been disclosed to the court.” 

It said a judge chastised the NSA’s inspector general and Office of Compliance for Operations for an “institutional ‘lack of candor’” for failing to inform the court. It described the matter as “a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.” 

The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, and is a constitutional bedrock protection against intrusion. 

Parts of the ruling were redacted, including sections that give an indication of the extent of the illegal surveillance, which the NSA told the court in a Jan. 3 notice was partly the fault of “human error” and “system design issues” rather than intentional illegal searches.

The NSA inspector general’s office tallied up the number of prohibited searches conducted in a three-month period in 2015, but the number of analysts who made the searches and the number of queries were blacked out in the ruling.

The NSA gathers communications in ways known as “upstream” and “downstream” collection. Upstream collection occurs when data are captured as they move through massive data highways – the internet backbone – within the United States. Downstream collection occurs as data move outside the country along fiber optic cables and satellite links. 

Data captured from both upstream and downstream sources are stored in massive databases, available to be searched when analysts need to, often months or as much as two years after the captures took place.

The prohibited searches the court mentioned involved NSA queries into the upstream databanks, which constitute a fraction of all the data NSA captures around the globe but are more likely to contain the emails and phone calls of people in the United States.

Federal law empowers the NSA and CIA to battle foreign terrorist actions against the United States by collecting the electronic communications of targets believed to be outside the country. 

While communications of U.S. citizens or residents may get hoovered up in such sweeps, they are considered “incidental” and must be “minimized” – removing the identities of Americans – before broader distribution.

The court filing noted an NSA decision March 30 to narrow collection of “upstream” data within the United States. Under that decision, the NSA acknowledged that it had erred in sweeping up the communications of U.S. citizens or residents but said those errors “were not willful.” Even so, the NSA said it would no longer collect certain kinds of data known as “about” communications, in which a U.S. citizen was merely mentioned.

The NSA announced that change publicly on April 28, two days after the court ruling, saying the agency would limit its sweeps to communications either directly to or from a foreign intelligence target. That change would reduce “the likelihood that NSA will acquire communications of U.S. persons or others who are not in direct contact with one of the agency’s foreign intelligence targets.” 

The court document also criticized the FBI’s distribution of intelligence data, saying it had disclosed raw surveillance data to sectors of its bureaucracy “largely staffed by private contractors.” 

The “contractors had access to raw FISA information that went well beyond what was necessary to respond to the FBI’s requests,” it said, adding that the bureau discontinued the practice on April 18, 2016." 

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article152948259.html#storylink=cpy

..............

Jeff Bezos, owner of Washington Post and Amazon, adds to his already overpowering bully pulpit, gives $1 million to Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, largest personal contribution in the group's 46 year history-Editor and Publisher, 5/24/17

May 24, 2017, "Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press Announces $1 Million Gift From Jeff Bezos," press release, via Editor and Publisher

"On Tuesday, at the Freedom of the Press Awards, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press announced a $1 million gift — the largest personal contribution in the organization’s 46-year history — from Amazon Chief Executive Officer and Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos....

Charles Gibson, former host of Good Morning America and ABC World News with Charles Gibson emceed the event, which raised a total of $1.9 million for the Reporters Committee and its mission ensure a robust and vibrant free press by offering pro bono legal support to journalists and newsrooms. 

The Freedom of the Press Awards — recognizing career achievements in protecting press freedom — were given to Washington Post Executive Editor Marty Baron, former Senior Vice President and Executive Editor of the Associated Press Kathleen Carroll, ProPublica Executive Chairman Paul Steiger, and the Media and First Amendment practice of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP.

Attendees also heard from the New York Times Deputy General Counsel David McCraw who penned the letter that later went viral responding to a threat from then-candidate Donald Trump of a libel suit.

“When we stand up for freedom of the press, it is not just about standing up for news organizations and their journalism,” McCraw said in his remarks. “It is about standing up for people who depend on us to give them the truth and to give them a voice.” 

Major sponsors of the dinner included the Washington Post, Google, Microsoft, Davis Wright Tremaine, the Associated Press, AOL Inc., Meryl Streep, and Richard and Carole Rifkind."...

......................... 

3 comments to above at Editor and Publisher

 

........................

"Peter Adler

May 24, 2017 at 9:34 am

Permalink 

Ever heard the expression: conflict of interest? besides, who is limiting the freedom (not only of the press but of expression in general)? here’s the answer: political correctness, that’s who … and who is guilty of political correctness? a rhetorical question" …

......................

"Ron Roenigk

May 24, 2017 at 10:42 am

Permalink 

The Washington Post is no longer a newspaper, it is a lobbying tool. Talk about big money in politics, how abut buying the D.C. hometown newspaper to push your Amazon agenda?
I lost faith in the WaPo and no longer trust their reporting on anything having to do with Washington D.C. They are agenda driven."

----------------------

"Peter Adler

May 24, 2017 at 3:13 pm

Permalink 

Precisely! the wapo introduced reporting using unnamed (and thus uncheckable) sources long time ago …

 
they have been also claiming that they introduced investigative reporting … not so: any good reporting must be investigative … otherwise you might as well just publish news releases and be done with it …

besides, even though i never agreed with his world view, i recall a german-writing czech journalist named egon erwin kisch … that’s the guy who made investigative reporting his bread and butter: at the beginning of the 20th century …
 
as you stated perfectly, they are agenda-driven, and that is NOT journalism …
 
after more than a half of a century in this business, i have developed a definition: reporters are those who report news, journalists are those who think THEY are the news … and that’s what wapo has become"…

...............

Russian bank owners sue BuzzFeed for publishing dossier with unproven claims that it schemed with Russian gov. to influence 2016 U.S. presidential election. This is second entity suing BuzzFeed for publication of the dossier-Politico, 5/26/17

May 26, 2017, "Russian bank owners sue BuzzFeed over Trump dossier publication," Politico, Josh Gerstein
 
"The owners of a Russian bank are suing BuzzFeed for publishing a dossier containing unproven claims that the businessmen were involved in bribing Russian President Vladimir Putin years ago and took part in an alleged Russian government scheme to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Mikhail Fridman, Petr Aven and German Khan of Alfa Bank filed the defamation lawsuit Friday in state court in Manhattan, seeking unspecified damages from BuzzFeed as well as editor-in-chief Ben Smith, reporter Ken Bensinger and editors Miriam Elder and Mark Schoofs.

The suit seized on Smith admitting that at the time BuzzFeed published the dossier in January he knew aspects of the dossier were wrong and that other aspects of it were unproven. That admission indicates BuzzFeed had knowledge sufficient to meet the legal standard for libel, the court complaint says.

"The Article clearly states that the allegations contained in the Dossier were unverified and that the Dossier itself contained errors, including the repeated misspelling of Alfa's name, and could not be verified despite substantial efforts," wrote Alan Lewis and John Walsh of Carter Ledyard and Milburn, the law firm for the bank owners. "The false and defamatory statements published by Defendants of and concerning the Plaintiffs and Alfa, and the implications of those defamatory statements, were made with knowledge of their falsity or with reckless disregard of whether they were true or false."

In a statement, BuzzFeed defended the publication of the dossier and warned of a possible chilling effect on reporters trying to explore potential connections between President Donald Trump, his election and the Russian government....

In February, BuzzFeed was sued by a Russian internet entrepreneur Aleksej Gubarev over claims in the dossier that he and his firms used "botnets and porn traffic" to conduct a variety of cyber operations against Democratic Party leaders. At about the time the suit was filed, BuzzFeed apologized and redacted the information about Gubarev and his companies from the document on BuzzFeed's site. However, that suit has continued. BuzzFeed recently lost a bid to move the case from a federal court in Miami to one in New York."

.........................................


Added:

Second lawsuit against BuzzFeed by Russian entity ongoing. BuzzFeed failed in attempt to dismiss charges for lack of jurisdiction. Miami fed. judge says BuzzFeed must respond to Gubarev's libel charges by June 9. Mr. Gubarev says that "no one from the newssite contacted him for his side of the story." Gubarev also has slander lawsuit pending in London against former British spy Christopher Steele-Washington Times, 5/22/17

May 22, 2017, "Federal judge rules against BuzzFeed in libel lawsuit over anti-Trump dossier," Washington Times, Rowan Scarborough 

"A federal judge in Florida ruled Monday that a libel lawsuit over the infamous anti-Donald Trump dossier will remain in her Miami courtroom.

U.S. District Judge Ursula Ungaro ruled against a motion filed by the defendant Buzzfeed, which asked that the case be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The news website also had sought a change of venue to New York where it is headquartered. 

Buzzfeed posted the complete 35-page dossier written by former British spy Christopher Steele on Jan. 10. 

Mr. Steele accused Russian-born tech entrepreneur Aleksej Gubarev of taking part in an elaborate illegal hacking campaign against the Democratic Party during the 2016 election. Mr. Steele said Mr. Gubarev used botnets to bombard the Democrats’ computers with porn and bugging devices. 

Mr. Gubarev, founder of server-provider and Florida-based Webzilla, called the dossier fiction and filed a libel suit against Buzzfeed. He also filed a slander suit in London against Mr. Steele, who admitted in a court filing first reported by The Washington Times that he never verified the charge information. 

The dossier was circulated in Washington by Democratic-tied Fusion GPS, which paid Mr. Steele. 

Judge Ungaro signed an order dismissing Buzzfeed’s argument that trying the case in Florida presented a hardship for Editor Ben Smith and other employees. 

She also ordered Buzzfeed to file an answer to Mr. Gubarev charges by June. 9. 

“Although we’re confident that the case is strong no matter where it’s tried, we like the Southern District of Florida as a venue,” said Evan Fray Witzer, one of Mr. Gubarev’s attorneys. “They have smart, no-nonsense judges who like to move cases along quickly, which is what we want. The faster this case gets to trial, the faster Mr. Gubarev’s good name and reputation can be vindicated.” 

Mr. Gubarev contends that the allegations against him that Buzzfeed posted are false and that no one from the newssite contacted him for his side of the story."



............




...............

Gary Cohn demonstrates George Soros level contempt for Trump voters. Since Trump chose Cohn, he has the same contempt. Cohn says about Trump on climate and EU personnel: "He came here to learn and he came here to get smarter." Trump could become "much more knowledgable" on "climate" issue in one day by talking to EU parasites. To Cohn and Trump: Go to hell. We're "smart" too: We know we've been forced to pay billions for a global money laundering operation set up in the White House in 1990

To Gary Cohn: Please give 3 examples of how EU parasites can make Trump or anyone "smarter" on the CO2 terror issue supposedly caused by Americans in the Industrial Revolution. First, the global CO2 terror industry was created by the US political class and is alive today only because of them. Why would anyone go to an EU parasite meeting "to learn" anything other than how easy it is for monarchies to steal from peasants or commit genocide against the entire European continent? European monarchs for decades have jet setted around to "global climate" conferences--to help their US Ruling Class pals reduce industry in the US and eliminate the annoying US middle class. Targeting a group of people for extinction is Lemkin's definition of genocide. The "global climate" money laundering operation was established in 1990 by GHW Bush in the White House and 13 federal agencies (USGCRP) for the purpose of forcing US taxpayers to finance in perpetuity a new global money laundering operation, "global climate science." For decades, billions of taxpayer dollars have been diverted from the poor and needy to climate profiteers. US taxpayers are utterly defenseless against the corrupt US political class. That's why Gary Cohn can be so smug.

May 26, 2017, "White House: Trump's views 'evolving' on Paris climate agreement," Washington Examiner, Alex Pappas
 
"President Trump is still thinking through the arguments"...

[Ed. note: What "arguments?" Such as, "Why not?" Trump voters are defenseless, so why not screw them? Go full George Soros. Soros really "cares," right? You now claim you're open for discussion on an issue that has no gray area whatsoever, that has always been about the US political class permanently laughing at and enslaving Americans. We knew for sure the others considered us slaves. Now we know Trump does too.]

(continuing): "as he decides whether the United States should withdraw from the Paris climate agreement, senior administration officials said Friday.

"I think his views are evolving," White House national economic council director Gary Cohn told reporters in Sicily. 

"And he came here to learn and he came here to get smarter."

"The president is thinking about what his options are and is taking in what he learned from world leaders today," Cohn said."...

[Ed. note: Why isn't Trump "thinking about" what he "learned" for a year and a half from Americans who came to his rallies and voted for him believing in particular that he'd put an end to this decades long vicious crime? Instead, in one day Trump will "learn" something from disgusting EU parasites whose only interest (after committing genocide of European populations) is getting Trump to finish the job of genocide of the US]

(continuing): ""If he were standing here, he would tell you he feels much more knowledgeable on the topic today, even though I think he's very very knowledgable in talking with leaders and having an exchange with many leaders today that have been talking about this topic for years.""...

[Ed. note: Years? Try decades, pal. Americans have been forced to pay billions for "this topic" for decades. EU parasites will remind Trump that US taxpayers are global slaves and he can do whatever he wants to them.]

(continuing): "Trump, who has been on a foreign swing as president, is in Sicily on Friday and Saturday for the G7 summit. The White House has said Trump won't announce his decision on the Paris Agreement until after the summit."...







.................