Category Archives: Science & technology

Facebook billionaire gives another $20M to defeat Donald Trump one month after donating $15M to Hillary Clinton and other Democrats

I quit Facebook two years ago. Don’t. Miss. It. At. All.

Dustin Moskovitz

Dustin Moskovitz

From Daily Mail: A billionaire Facebook founder has agreed to donate $20 million to defeat Donald Trump just weeks before the election.

Dustin Moskovitz, 32, announced his latest donation in a post he wrote for Medium earlier this month, stating: ‘The events of the past few weeks have only deepened my conviction that Hillary is the best choice for America. I hope that these contributions will help make that outcome a reality.’

Just one month prior, Moskovitz revealed in another Medium post that he has donated $15 million to help elect Clinton and other Democrats. But despite these staggering donations, many in the Democratic party know very little about Moskovitz, who is worth $10.7billion according to Forbes.

Moskovitz explained his reasons for supporting Clinton and his disdain for Trump in his September Medium post. ‘We cannot ignore the remarkable alignment between these two visions for society and the choices in this year’s election. The Republican Party, and Donald Trump in particular, is running on a zero-sum vision, stressing a false contest between their constituency and the rest of the world,’ wrote Moskovitz.

‘We believe their positions, especially on immigration, which purport to improve the lives of Americans, would in practice hurt citizens and noncitizens alike. In contrast, the Democratic Party, and Hillary Clinton in particular, is running on a vision of optimism, pragmatism, inclusiveness and mutual benefit.’


A vision of mutual benefit…

Moskovitz is not the only major Facebook employee to support Clinton during this election.  Chris Hughes and his husband Sean Eldridge held a fundraiser at their $5million Soho apartment for Clinton last year. Hughes is now worth an estimated $850 million and was the owner and publisher of The New Republic before selling the magazine this past February.

Half of the $20million Moskovitz and his wife, journalist Cari Tuna, are giving will go to the League of Conservation Voters and to a political action committee called For Our Future. The latter group is a get-out-the-vote effort in battleground states that is paid for primarily by labor unions and hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer (who funds the Black Lives Matter groups).

Moskovitz and Tuna also are giving directly to Clinton’s campaign and to party committees helping Senate and congressional Democrats.

Moskovitz became the youngest self-made billionaire in history when Facebook went public. He and Tuna, a former Wall Street Journal reporter, also recently joined forces to create the philanthropic organization Good Ventures. The couple live together near Silicon Valley.

‘As a nation, we need to figure out how to bring everyone with us, and we believe the Democratic platform currently is more aligned with ensuring that happens,’ wrote Moskovitz on Medium.

Hillary trying

Hillary trying to bring everyone with her…

‘In comparison, Donald Trump’s promises to this group are quite possibly a deliberate con, an attempt to rally energy and support without the ability or intention to deliver. His proposals are so implausible that the nation is forced to worry that his interest in the presidency might not even extend beyond winning a contest and promoting his personal brand.’

Politico reports that before this cycle, Moskovitz’s only recorded political donations had been $5,200 to the failed 2014 House bid of Eldridge in New York, who lost his race by 30 points.

Only Steyer has given more this year to Democrats, campaign finance records show. The Californian has put up almost $40 million so far, to promote environmental issues and help elect Clinton and other Democrats.  Steyer is worth far less than Moskovitz however, with a net worth of just $1.61billion.

Facebook investor Peter Thiel, who is also the founder of Paypal, has donated $1.25million to the campaign of Donald Trump.


Clinton lectured State Department employees on their ‘special duty’ to maintain cyber security in an internal video

This is RICH – both that Hillary had the audacity to proclaim this and that CBS News actually reported it.

Clinton: Do as I say, not as I do

Clinton: Do as I say, not as I do

From Daily Mail: It’s a lecture she delivered, but would have been better off attending. Hillary Clinton delivered a stern warning about the duty to protect against cyber threats, an awkward 2010 government video obtained by CBS News reveals.

The then-secretary of state cut a video warning her subordinates about the ‘special duty’ to stay on guard. ‘I think this is a responsibility we all share as Americans, but as State Department employees we have a special duty to guard ourselves and our sensitive information,’ Clinton said in the video released Friday.

In grainy video presumably sent internally throughout the world, Clinton warned: ‘Potential hackers use all kinds of strategies to exploit cyber vulnerabilities and to penetrate the department’s systems.’

‘They may try to gain information by posing as someone we trust, or by using social media sites to spread viruses and other malicious code,’ she continues.

‘The bureau of diplomatic security and IT staff work around the clock to defend us against cyber attacks, but the real key to cyber security rests with you. Complying with department computing policies and being alert to potential threats will help protect all of us.

Clinton then urges staff to learn more about cyber security awareness by logging online to an internal website and subscribing to their ‘cyber security awareness newsletter.’

‘Together we can do our part to improve the security of the State Department and of our nation,’ she adds.

Since then, the government, including the State Department and the White House, has been subjected to multiple hacking threats. But so too has Hillary Clinton and her campaign, which has been subjected to the release of 23,000 emails to date hacked from the gmail account of campaign chair John Podesta. 

Read the whole story here.


Islamic State flag free to fly on Facebook in Sweden, prosecutor rules


From Fox News: A Swedish prosecutor may have set a dangerous precedent last week in regards to the Islamic State flag.

Prosecutor Gisela Sjovall announced last week that a 23-year-old man wouldn’t be charged after posting the flag to his Facebook page in June, according to The Local. Authorities in Laholm had investigated the man, who came to Sweden from Syria, on suspicion of committing “hate speech.”

In comparison to the Nazi symbol which has come to be a symbol for prejudice against Jewish people, the same couldn’t be said for the Islamic State flag, Sjovall added. “Up until now, we haven’t come to that point,” she told the Hallandsposten, a local newspaper. “That could change in ten years.”

The Local noted that under Sweden’s hate speech laws, for an image to be considered “hate speech,” it needs to threaten or disparage a group of people in connections to their race, nationality, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation.

No disparagement here...

No disparagement here…

“If there had been anything in the text (posted alongside the flag) with more specific formulations about certain groups, for example homosexuals, the ruling could have been different,” Sjovall said.  “For me, there are no doubts about the decision not to prosecute.”

Sjovall said the man told authorities in June that he does not support ISIS. The man’s lawyer said that what he posted wasn’t an ISIS flag, but a symbol of what had been used within Islam for hundreds of years before ISIS misconstrued its meaning.

The flag had already been banned in the Netherlands and Germany. Former British Prime Minister David Cameron had also said that anyone displaying the ISIS flag should be arrested, but there wasn’t a law barring people from displaying it.


CNN hack: “It’s illegal to possess (and therefore read) the Wikileaks emails”

But it’s “different for the media.”

From CNN hack Chris Cuomo:

Guess you should only find out what’s in the emails from the perspective of the liberal media hacks.

Like we’d believe anything that the media, which has been proven to be in collusion with the Clinton campaign, tries to tell us.


Hillary Clinton used variations of ‘I don’t recall’ 21 out of 25 times when answering questions about private email server

I guess some of us still care about this story. Proggies, not so much. Truth doesn’t matter to them unless they can screw republicans out of it.


From Daily Mail: Hillary Clinton used variations of ‘I don’t recall’ 21 times when asked 25 questions under oath about how she deleted 33,000 State Department emails.

Sworn written testimony obtained by Judicial Watch show the Democratic presidential candidate dodged virtually all of the questions about the correspondences she removed from her private server while she was Secretary of State.

A federal judge ordered Clinton’s legal team to turn over written responses to questions concerning the so-called ‘homebrew’ server. Clinton signed the document containing the answers, written by her lawyers on her behalf, on Monday under ‘penalty of perjury’.

The former First Lady sidestepped most of the questions, and insisted that she did not ‘recall’ if anyone told her she could be breaking the law by deleting the emails. She also said she could not remember ever being warned about hacking threats to her private account or server. But her campaign has insisted the answers are consistent with what she has said before.

The questions addressed a number of issues. She was asked why she used the private server,

‘Secretary Clinton states that she does not recall being advised, cautioned, or warned, she does not recall that it was ever suggested to her, and she does not recall participating in any communication, conversation, or meeting in which it was discussed that her use of a e-mail account to conduct official State Department business conflicted with or violated federal recordkeeping laws,’ her lawyers wrote for one answer.

Judge Judy shakes head rolls eyes

Most of the responses to questions begin with the phrase: ‘Secretary Clinton objects to the Interrogatories.’

Clinton’s answers provided no new information beyond what she told FBI agents during the recently closed investigation into whether she and her staff mishandled classified information. But it does suggest she has contradicted sworn statements she has made in the past.

According to the court documents filed this week, Clinton was asked when she decided to use her private email account to conduct government business and whom she consulted in making that decision. Clinton said she recalled making the decision in early 2009, but she ‘does not recall any specific consultations regarding the decision.’

Read the rest of the story here.


Clintons nearly drove top staffer to suicide, email claims

Well, this wouldn’t be the first time that someone associated with the Clintons was prone to suicide.

Clintons yucking it up

From NY Post: Chelsea Clinton was “more concerned” about an article in The Post “about her father and a multitude of women over the years” than about the health of two senior Clinton Foundation officials — one of whom threatened to kill herself, according to an explosive WikiLeaks email released Monday.

In a December 2011 email exchange, Bill Clinton’s closest aide, Doug Band, told other Clinton aides that he had to talk foundation COO Laura Graham out of driving her car into the water on Staten Island because she was under such stress caused by “wjc and cvc as well as that of her family.” The reference appears to be to William Jefferson “Bill” Clinton and Chelsea Victoria Clinton.

“She was on staten island in her car parked a few feet from the waters edge with her foot on the gas pedal and the car in park. She called me to tell me the stress of all of this office crap with wjc and cvc as well as that of her family had driven her to the edge and she couldn’t take it anymore,” Band wrote to Hillary Clinton’s then-State Department chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, along with Bill Clinton’s former chief of staff, John Podesta, and Justin Cooper, the aide who helped set up and maintain Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

Band said he reached her brother and her shrink, and Graham pulled back. She was the foundation COO and is now an adviser to the foundation. Band also wrote how “stress” at the Clinton Foundation directly caused “very serious health issues” for board chairman Bruce Lindsey.

Hillary Rodham Clinton

“But I’m sure Chelsea is more concerned with a mostly false story in the distinguished ny post about mf global and teneo not her role in what happened to laura/bruce, what she is doing to the organization or the several of stories that have appeared in the ny post about her father and a multitude of women over the years,” Band wrote.

“Its going to hurt teneo to have wjc on the adv bd any longer but we need come up with a reorg concept for the relationship with wjc and teneo that is lower key and handled privately and properly that we should discuss. Life is to short so let’s have a call and get this over with,” he added.

In a separate email, Clinton campaign chief Podesta also knocked a big Clinton booster, David Brock, a conservative-turned-liberal advocate, for bringing up Bernie Sanders’ health records. “Maybe he actually is a republican plant,” said Podesta in an email to former aide Neera Tanden. “Hard to think of anything more counterproductive than demanding Bernie’s medical records.”


Washington voters to decide on nation’s first carbon tax


From Washington lawmakers have tried and failed in recent years to make polluters pay for their carbon emissions to fight climate change. Now, voters will get to decide.

An initiative on the November ballot asks voters whether the state should impose the nation’s first direct carbon tax on the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and gasoline.

Sponsors say residents have a moral responsibility to curb greenhouse gas emissions, and a carbon tax is the best way to do it. The tax encourages businesses to conserve or switch to clean energy by making fossil fuels more expensive, and it makes the tax system fairer by using the revenues to reduce other taxes, they say.

Businesses say the tax will drive up fuel and energy costs and put Washington companies at a competitive disadvantage.

And in a move that has bewildered some, major environmental and other groups — including those that backed Gov. Jay Inslee’s proposal last year to cap emissions and make carbon polluters pay — oppose the initiative. They say it takes the wrong approach.

Yoram Bauman

Yoram Bauman

Yoram Bauman, an economist who founded Carbon Washington, the grassroots group that gathered more than 350,000 signatures to qualify Initiative 732, defended it as great climate and tax policy. “It does almost everything right for Washington,” he said.

Audubon Washington supports it. “Our members came down on the side of urgency. We don’t have time to wait,” said Gail Gatton, the group’s executive director. “Climate change is happening, and this is our best available option right now to protect birds.”

But the Sierra Club, Washington Environmental Council and the advocacy group Front and Centered say the initiative is the wrong carbon-pricing approach and will hurt the state’s revenues. Whereas Inslee’s pollution fee would have raised money for education, transportation, clean energy and programs to help disadvantaged communities affected by climate change, Initiative 732 provides no such investments, critics say.

Rich Stolz

Rich Stolz

“It’s not a path that makes sense for our communities,” said Rich Stolz, executive director of OneAmerica, which works on social justice issues. Stolz said the initiative ignores climate justice and lacks input from communities of color.

Stolz’s group is part of a coalition that worked on an alternative carbon-pricing measure. Last-minute talks between that coalition and I-732 supporters to collaborate on one ballot measure fizzled last year.

The initiative is designed to be revenue neutral, meaning the tax revenue increase from fossil fuels would be mostly offset by decreases in other taxes. In this case, revenues would be returned to people and businesses by cutting the state sales tax by one point, virtually eliminating business taxes for manufacturers and providing rebates for working families, sponsors say.

A state analysis, however, estimates the measure could cost the state about $800 million in lost revenues over the first six fiscal years. Initiative sponsors dispute the state’s analysis, saying it double-counted the rebates in the first year.

The carbon tax is modeled after one in the nearby Canadian province of British Columbia. California has a cap-and-trade program, which limits emissions and allows carbon polluters to buy and trade pollution credits. If approved, Washington’s carbon tax starts at $15 a ton of carbon emissions in July, goes up to $25 the next year and incrementally increases afterward.

The Washington State Tree Fruit Association, which represents growers, packers and marketers, is among those opposed. It takes a lot of fuel to grow and transport produce, and the tax will be paid by those in the state, not competitors outside it, said Jon Devaney, the group’s president. “Raising food prices in Washington state will make us less competitive compared to others,” he said.

Initiative sponsors say a $25 carbon tax would raise the price of gasoline by about 25 cents per gallon and the price of coal-fired electricity by about 2.5 cents per kilowatt-hour. They say power plants and fuel suppliers likely will pass those costs on to consumers, but that consumers will see price reductions in other things they buy because the sales tax is cut. The tax wouldn’t apply to electricity from renewables like hydro, wind or solar power.

The campaign has raised $1.2 million from nearly 1,200 unique donors; more than half of those total contributions are under $200. The No on 732 campaign sponsored by the Association of Washington Business has raised $300,000 to oppose the tax.