Tuesday, June 25, 2024

Sidney Powell Settles Defamation Lawsuit

 



Raw News And Politics

87.6K subscribers


Doctor: Trump MAJOR RISK of brain failure at debate

 



David Pakman Show

2.2M subscribers


Even as Julian Assange's Release Celebrated, Deep Worries Remain for Press Freedom

 

Even as Julian Assange's Release Celebrated, Deep Worries Remain for Press Freedom

"Make no mistake, the vital work of national security journalists will be more difficult today than it was yesterday."

Amid celebrations that a plea deal with the United States resulted in the release of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange from a British prison, press freedom advocates on Tuesday continued to raise serious concerns about the damage done by the U.S. government's pursuit of a journalist who helped expose state secrets and evidence of war crimes.

"Julian Assange faced a prosecution that had grave implications for journalists and press freedom worldwide," said Jodie Ginsberg, CEO of the Committee to Protect Journalists, following news of the deal.

"While we welcome the end of his detention," Ginsberg added, "the U.S.'s pursuit of Assange has set a harmful legal precedent by opening the way for journalists to be tried under the Espionage Act if they receive classified material from whistleblowers. This should never have been the case."

After spending seven years in the Ecuadorian Embassy in the United Kingdom and then five more in the London's Belmarsh Prison, Assange agreed to plead guilty to one felony to avoid more time behind bars. The 52-year-old Australian was fighting against his extradition to the United States, where he faced 18 charges under the Espionage Act and a federal computer fraud law for publishing classified material and could have been locked up for the rest of his life.

"With today's guilty plea, Julian Assange stands convicted of practicing journalism, and all investigative journalists now face greater legal peril."

"We are hugely relieved that Julian Assange is finally free—a long overdue victory for journalism and press freedom. He never should have spent a single day deprived of his liberty for publishing information in the public interest," said Rebecca Vincent, Reporters Without Borders' director of campaigns, in a statement.

"Nothing can undo the past 13 years, but it is never too late to do the right thing, and we welcome this move by the U.S. government," she added. "We will continue to campaign in support of journalists around the world who find themselves targeted for national security reporting, and for reform of the U.S. Espionage Act, so that it can never again be used to target journalistic activity."

Vincent's group is among several press freedom and human rights organizations that had long called for the U.S. Department of Justice to drop the charges against Assange—and after news of the plea deal broke, several others warned of what is to come.

Amnesty International secretary general Agnès Callamard celebrated what the deal will mean for the WikiLeaks founder and his family—including his wife Stella Assange, who plans to seek a pardon for her husband, and their young children—but said Tuesday that "the yearslong global spectacle of the U.S. authorities hell-bent on violating press freedom and freedom of expression by making an example of Assange for exposing alleged war crimes committed by the USA has undoubtedly done historic damage."

"Amnesty International salutes the work of Julian Assange's family, campaigners, lawyers, press freedom organizations, and many within the media community and beyond who have stood by him and the fundamental principles that should govern society's right and access to information and justice," she added. "We will keep fighting for their full recognition and respect by all."

Not all journalists and media outlets defended Assange, despite the precedent that his conviction could have set, and multiple Monday headlines—including at The Associated Press, The New York Times, and The Washington Post—highlighted his guilty plea. According to the BBC, Assange plans to return to Australia after finalizing the deal in the Northern Mariana Islands, a U.S. commonwealth.

"A plea deal would avert the worst-case scenario for press freedom, but this deal contemplates that Assange will have served five years in prison for activities that journalists engage in every day," said Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University. "It will cast a long shadow over the most important kinds of journalism, not just in this country but around the world."

Ben Wizner, director of the ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, emphasized that "with today's guilty plea, Julian Assange stands convicted of practicing journalism, and all investigative journalists now face greater legal peril."

"Exposing government secrets and revealing them in the public interest is the core function of national security journalism," Wizner continued. "Today, for the first time, that activity was described in a guilty plea as a criminal conspiracy. And even if the current Department of Justice stays true to its assurances that the Assange case is unique and will not provide a precedent to be wielded against other publishers, we can't be confident that future administrations will honor that commitment."

"The precedent set by this guilty plea would have been far more dangerous had it been ratified by federal courts," he added. "But make no mistake, the vital work of national security journalists will be more difficult today than it was yesterday."

"Just imagine what an attorney general in a second Trump administration will think, knowing they've already got one guilty plea from a publisher under the Espionage Act."

Seth Stern, director of advocacy for Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF), also looked to the future, tying Assange's deal to the November U.S. election in which Democratic President Joe Biden is set to face former Republican President Donald Trump.

The current administration "could have distinguished itself from Donald Trump, Biden's openly anti-press electoral opponent, whose administration first indicted Assange," Stern noted in a piece for the Daily Beast. "It could have dropped the case."

Instead, the Biden administration opted for a plea deal that "does not add any more prison time or punishment for Assange," Stern stressed, echoing his initial statement on the news. "Its only impact will be to legitimize the criminalization of routine journalistic conduct and encourage future administrations to follow suit—including a potential second Trump administration."

In a Tuesday opinion piece for The Guardian, FPF executive director Trevor Timm wrote: "Just imagine what an attorney general in a second Trump administration will think, knowing they've already got one guilty plea from a publisher under the Espionage Act. Trump, after all, has been out on the campaign trail repeatedly opining about how he would like to see journalists—who he sees as 'enemies of the people'—in jail. Why the Biden administration would hand him any ammo is beyond belief."

"So if the Biden administration is looking for plaudits for ending this case, they should get exactly none," Timm asserted. "Now we can only hope this case is an aberration and not a harbinger of things to come."

Assange

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange reached a plea deal with the U.S. government on June 24, 2024.

 (Photo: WikiLeaks/X)



Alarms Raised Over For-Profit Medicare Advantage Using AI to Deny Care to Seniors

               MEDICARE ADVANTAGE was a FOR PROFIT SCAM created by REPUBICANS 

                and is little more than a SCAM! 


                PROTECT YOURSELF! 


Alarms Raised Over For-Profit Medicare Advantage Using AI to Deny Care to Seniors

"Insurers using AI to deny needed care to seniors and people with disabilities means sacrificing patient needs on the altar of corporate greed," said one campaigner.

Dozens of Democratic U.S. lawmakers joined consumer and patient advocates on Tuesday in sounding the alarm over the use of artificial intelligence by companies providing Medicare Advantage plans to deny healthcare to their senior customers.

Fifty-one Democratic members of Congress and Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont wrote to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Chiquita Books LaSure on Tuesday expressing their concern over Medicare Advantage (MA) providers' increasing use of algorithmic systems to deny patient care.

"Plans continue to use AI tool to erroneously deny care and contradict provider assessment findings," the letter notes. "Last year, a class action lawsuit was filed alleging that UnitedHealth Group unlawfully used an AI algorithm, nH Predict, to deny rehabilitative care to sick Medicare Advantage patients."

"The lawsuit cites an investigation suggesting that UnitedHealth Group pressured employees to use the algorithm to issue payment denials to Medicare Advantage beneficiaries and set a goal for employees to keep patient rehabilitation stays within 1% of the length of stay predicted by nH Predict," the lawmakers continued.

MA plans are not part of Medicare. They are a private health insurance "scam" created by a Republican-controlled Congress and signed into law by then-President George W. Bush "as a way of routing hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars into the pockets of for-profit insurance companies," according to frequent Common Dreams opinion contributor Thom Hartmann.

Advocates have warned about the use of AI in MA denials since at least last year, while imploring congressional and regulator action to protect seniors and people with disabilities from being preyed upon by what critics have called "Medicare disadvantage" companies.

In February, CMS "clarified that Medicare Advantage organizations may use algorithms, artificial intelligence, and related technologies to assist in making coverage determinations, but these technologies may not override standards related to medical necessity and other applicable rules for how coverage determinations by Medicare Advantage organizations are made."

Rights groups echoed the lawmakers' concerns about the use of AI for MA denials.

"Medicare Advantage insurers using AI to deny needed care to seniors and people with disabilities means sacrificing patient needs on the altar of corporate greed," Public Citizen executive vice president Lisa Gilbert said. "CMS must expand upon the steps it has already taken to improve oversight of companies using AI to deny care that would be covered by traditional Medicare."

"It is time to protect enrollees by cracking down on Medicare Advantage insurers using AI to deny needed care through additional reporting requirements and increased enforcement actions against bad actors," Gilbert added.

David Lipschutz, associate director of the Center for Medicare Advocacy, said in a statement that "in our experience, MA plans' use of AI or algorithmic software has led to more inappropriate denials and premature terminations of care—this must end."

A report published earlier this month revealed that MA plans have overcharged the federal government by $612 billion since 2007—and $82 billion last year alone. Another report published last year by Physicians for a National Health Program found that MA plans are also overcharging U.S. taxpayers by up to $140 billion per year, enough to erase all Medicare Part B premiums or fully fund Medicare's prescription drug program.

A 2022 U.S. Senate Finance Committee investigation found that insurance companies and other brokers are "running amok" with "fraudsters and scam artists" making false or misleading claims to dupe seniors into buying MA plans. In February 2023, Reps. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), and Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) reintroduced legislation to change the official name of MA to "alternative private health plan" to make clear that such coverage is offered by for-profit companies.


Advocates hold signs during a news conference on Medicare Advantage plans

Advocates hold signs during a news conference on Medicare Advantage plans in front of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. on July 25, 2023.

 (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Judge Makes CRITICAL RULING before Trump SENTENCING

 
GAG ORDER amendments explained by Justice Merchan.

MeidasTouch

2.5M subscribers


MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on a major new order by Justice Merchan in the Donald Trump criminal case where Trump was convicted. Visit https://meidastouch.com for more! Support the MeidasTouch Network: https://patreon.com/meidastouch Add the MeidasTouch Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast... Buy MeidasTouch Merch: https://store.meidastouch.com Follow MeidasTouch on Twitter: https://twitter.com/meidastouch Follow MeidasTouch on Facebook: https://facebook.com/meidastouch Follow MeidasTouch on Instagram: https://instagram.com/meidastouch Follow MeidasTouch on TikTok: https://tiktok.com/@meidastouch

FED UP Maddow SHATTERS Trump’s Biggest Talking Point

MUST WATCH!

tRump TANKED THE ECONOMY! 

tRump left office with REFRIGERATED TRAILERS FILLED WITH COVID DEAD! 

US TRADE DEFICIT with CHINA EXPLODED! 

WHO COULD GET TOILET PAPER? 

Let's not re-write history when there are historical ECONOMIC REPORTS available. 

 KAROLINE LEAVITT should be BANNED from any public forum with her lunacy! 



MeidasTouch

2.5M subscribers


After a report this week detailing that almost no Fortune 500 CEO’s are planning on supporting Trump in this upcoming election, MSNBC host Rachel Maddow had enough with the MAGA talking point that Trump is good for business and finally put the myth to rest. Francis Maxwell reports. Visit https://meidastouch.com for more! Support the MeidasTouch Network: https://patreon.com/meidastouch Add the MeidasTouch Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast... Buy MeidasTouch Merch: https://store.meidastouch.com Follow MeidasTouch on Twitter: https://twitter.com/meidastouch Follow MeidasTouch on Facebook: https://facebook.com/meidastouch Follow MeidasTouch on Instagram: https://instagram.com/meidastouch Follow MeidasTouch on TikTok: https://tiktok.com/@meidastouch

Oklahoma Supreme Court Blocks First US Religious Public Charter School

           FOCUS ON EDUCATION! 


            At one time, I encountered numerous students who were educated in limited 

            environments. They were WARPED in their comprehension of the World and 

            their understanding was narrow. 

            Example: one young man insisted that AFRICAN NATIONS worshipped 

            SATAN and that explained HIV because he knew missionaries who served 

            in AFRICA. When I asked which nations, he insisted AFRICA! as if it was 

            a single nation. He ignored my explanation. 

            Another young man attended a local community college and determined that 

            all of the other students were SATAN WORSHIPPERS because he had never 

            been exposed to differing opinions. He purchased a used car that previously 

            belonged to a chain smoker and determined the car had been owned by a 

            SATAN WORSHIPPER....the headliner and interior had nicotine deposits. 

            

         OKLAHOMA RANKS 49TH IN EDUCATION

            EDUCATION STATES RANKING




Oklahoma Supreme Court Blocks First US Religious Public Charter School

One coalition said the ruling "safeguards public education and upholds the separation of religion and government."

Faith leaders, parents, and educators on Tuesday applauded the Oklahoma Supreme Court's ruling against the establishment of the first U.S. taxpayer-funded religious charter school—which was widely seen as a test case for Christian nationalists' broader efforts to break down the barrier between church and state as well as further undermine public education.

The court's decision against St. Isidore of Seville Virtual Catholic Charter School came in a case filed last October by Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond. Unlike some fellow Republicans, he argued that the Statewide Virtual Charter School Board's approval of the online institution violated the state and federal constitutions.

"This decision is a tremendous victory for religious liberty," Gentner said in response to the ruling. "The framers of the U.S. Constitution and those who drafted Oklahoma's Constitution clearly understood how best to protect religious freedom: by preventing the state from sponsoring any religion at all."

"Now Oklahomans can be assured that our tax dollars will not fund the teachings of Sharia Law or even Satanism," he continued. "While I understand that the governor and other politicians are disappointed with this outcome, I hope that the people of Oklahoma can rejoice that they will not be compelled to fund radical religious schools that violate their faith."

"If this school is kept alive through appeals, it will continue to present an existential threat to the great state of Oklahoma and to the United States writ large."

The decision was also praised by the ACLU, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Education Law Center, and Freedom From Religion Foundation, which—along with local lawyers—represent Oklahomans challenging the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa's attempt to create a publicly funded Catholic school.

"The Oklahoma Supreme Court's decision safeguards public education and upholds the separation of religion and government. Charter schools are public schools that must be secular and serve all students," the groups—which filed a brief supporting Gentner's suit—said in a joint statement Tuesday.

"St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School, which plans to discriminate against students, families, and staff and indoctrinate students into one religion, cannot operate as a public charter school," the coalition added. "We will continue our efforts to protect public education and religious freedom, including the separation of church and state."

American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten and AFT-Oklahoma president Mary Best similarly welcomed the decision as "a crucial victory for religious liberty, pluralism, and freedom over the forces of extremism and sectarianism."

"One of the clearest foundations of American democracy is the freedom to practice, or not to practice, religion," they said. "The framers never intended to require public funding of religious institutions or schools, and, in fact, religious freedom itself is reliant on the distinction. Liberty ends when someone is compelled to support another's private beliefs, and if the attorney general had lost, Oklahoma would have been forced to siphon millions of dollars from public schools into private hands."

"The combination of the Constitution's free exercise clause and the concept of separation of church and state underpins our democracy, and this decision preserves that distinction," the AFT leaders added. "This case should never have had to be brought in the first place; a charter school for religious purposes paid for by public money should have been rejected as unconstitutional from the start. If this school is kept alive through appeals, it will continue to present an existential threat to the great state of Oklahoma and to the United States writ large."

The Oklahoman reported that "it's a virtual certainty the ruling Tuesday will be appealed, likely to a federal court," and shared statements from Oklahoma City Archbishop Paul Coakley and Tulsa Bishop David Konderla as well as Oklahoma Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters, a former state education secretary who, as the newspaper noted, "tried—and failed—three times to insert himself into the legal case before the state Supreme Court."

Boy participating in online education training class with teacher using laptop at home

The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled against St. Isidore of Seville Virtual Catholic Charter School on June 25, 2024.

 (Photo: mixetto/Getty Images)

RFK Jr. UNDER FIRE as SECRET DEAL Sparks SENATE PROBE...

                                                  LOTS OF POSTS IGNORED BY BLOGGER..... OR REMOVED ON THEIR WHIM! ALL POSTS ARE AVAILABLE ON...