Category: Idiots

No Science to Support Mandatory Face Masks! What does it take to make the sheeple mad enough to wake up?

by nootkabear, posted in Banksters, big brother, BLM, California, Caution, CDC, child porn, Congress, constitution, corruption, Courts, Danger, Disasters, DNA, Feds, globalists, hazard, Health, Idiots

There Is No Science to Support Mandatory Face Masks. A Symbol of Social Submission?

By Renee Parsons
Global Research, July 22, 2020
Theme:

As the distraction of BLM/Antifa riots and the coronavirus have consumed much attention and energy, the social engineering agenda of the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset has taken a giant step forward in establishing the mandatory face mask as a symbol of submission to their dehumanizing agenda.  Beyond Orwellian, the face mask is being used as a guise to re shape our perception of reality in acceptance of a scientific dictatorship as an integral part of a looming totalitarian globalist agenda.

As Democratic Governors have played a leading role in advancing the myth that face masks will save lives, Colorado Gov Jared Polis announced his decision on July 16th to mandate face masks to be worn in all public places in Colorado; thus codifying a medical tyranny world view.

In a July 12th Facebook page, Polis stated that “The emerging scientific data is clear” that wearing a mask protects others and reduces the risk of contracting Coronavirus.  Polis then referred to those resistant to a face mask as a “selfish bastard.”

During Polis’s four page Executive Order issued on July 19th, there is not one mention of the ‘emerging science’ as support for his decision to mandate face masks; nor does Polis discuss how health effects will improve with masking except as “mitigating effects of the pandemic.” In announcing the mandate, Polis declared that “Wearing a mask is not a political statement. I don’t know how, in anybody’s mind, this became a game of political football.”

If the Governor is truly at a loss as to how masking or other lockdown requirements became a political football, he has not been paying attention.  Consider the following: on March 20th, California became the first state in the country to order a Lockdown which was quickly followed by other States with Democratic Governors. To date, a majority of those Governors (21 out of 24) have all approved the mandatory wearing of face masks, albeit without applying any science.  It is the arbitrary ‘shutdown’ of business as well as onerous personal requirements (such as social distancing) with a State adopting  oppressive dictatorial behavior as if they have the right to make personal decisions about any one life.

Only four states with Republican Governors, some of which may be considered RINOs, have also adopted similar Executive Orders (Alabama, Arkansas, Massachusetts, Maryland).

*

If CV is merely a variation of an infectious virus, sunshine and warm weather should have already limited its impact; reducing its spread and exposure.  Instead, as Red States attempt to re open  (ie Texas and Florida), sudden intense  CV ‘hot spots’ flare which forces the State to delay and increase its shut down requirements.  Given an advanced radio frequency weapon ability, those ‘hot spots’ may have been generated by 5G at the millimeter level on the electro magnetic Spectrum.

If, in fact, science is not the prime reason for mandatory face masks; that is, if face masks do not provide safety from contagion, then why mandate face masks at all?  What other purpose does a face mask have but to protect the wearer or to inhibit spreading  the virus?  Without evidence that masks have positively reduced exposures and thereby fatalities, then the true purpose of the mandate becomes a more nefarious political and partisan gesture of psychological manipulation and control.

New England Journal of Medicine

On April 1st the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine published its Universal Masking Report including the following highlights:

  • “We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection.”
  • “The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal.”
  • “In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.”
  • “The extent of marginal benefit of universal masking over and above these foundational measures is debatable.“
  • “What is clear, however, is that universal masking alone is not a panacea.”
  • “It is also clear that masks serve symbolic roles. Masks are not only tools, they are also talismans that may help increase health care workers’ perceived sense of safety, well-being, and trust in their hospitals. Although such reactions may not be strictly logical, we are all subject to fear and anxiety, especially during times of crisis. One might argue that fear and anxiety are better countered with data and education than with a marginally beneficial mask“

No Scientific Support for Mask Wearing

Renowned nutritionist Dr. Joseph Mercola has recently reversed his earlier support of face masks and interviewed Dr. Denis Rancourt, PhD who examined the issue on behalf of the Ontario Civil Liberties Association.  Rancourt conducted extensive research with an emphasis on masks and did a thorough review of science literature concentrating on whether any evidence exists that masks can reduce infection risk of viral respiratory disease.  As a result of examining many controlled trials with verified outcomes,  he found no statistical advantage to wearing a mask or not wearing a mask and that masks do no inhibit viral spread.

Rancourt asserted that “there is no evidence that masks are of any utility for preventing infection by either stopping the aerosol particles from coming out, or from going in. You’re not helping the people around you by wearing a mask, and you’re not helping yourself avoid the disease by wearing a mask. In addition, Rancourt explained that “Infectious viral respiratory diseases primarily spread via very fine aerosol particles that are in suspension in the air.  Any mask that allows you to breathe therefore allows for transmission of aerosolized viruses.”

In conclusion, Rancourt stated

“we’re in a state right now where the society is very gradually evolving towards totalitarianism.  As soon as you agree with an irrational order, an irrational command that is not science-based, then you are doing nothing to bring back society towards the free and democratic society that we should have.”

While the ACLU remains absent, OCLA (Ontario Civil Liberties Association) recommends Civil Disobedience against Mandatory Mask Laws.  If you are not comfortable with civil disobedience  and  your local food markets all require a face mask, don’t deny yourself the healthy food you and your family need – but DO find ways to  register your dissent against being forced to wear a face mask. Write a Letter to the Editor and contact all of your elected political leaders.  Be sure they understand  your objections that you will not comply with their unconstitutional and immoral behavior.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Renee Parsons served on the ACLU’s Florida State Board of Directors and as president of the ACLU Treasure Coast Chapter. She has been an elected public official in Colorado, an environmental lobbyist for Friends of the Earth and a staff member of the US House of Representatives in Washington DC. She can be found at reneedove3@yahoo.com.

Featured image: A woman wearing a face mask is seen in the subway in Milan, Italy, March 2, 2020. (Photo by Daniele Mascolo/Xinhua)

The original source of this article is Global Research
Copyright © Renee Parsons, Global Research, 2020

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Federal lawsuit calls Tulsa’s mask ordinance unconstitutional and unhealthy for citizens

by nootkabear, posted in above the law, Alert, Banksters, brains eaten away, CDC, Censorship, constitution, contaminated, corruption, Courts, Danger, Disasters, Georgia, hallucinating, Health, Idiots, Mayors, takeover, Toxic, UN, United Nations, United States

Federal lawsuit calls Tulsa’s mask ordinance unconstitutional and unhealthy for citizens
First amended complaint attached  –  read my www.Virus-Lies.com for more info
http://tulsabeacon.com/mask-lawsuit/
(Masks cause hypoxia by reducing Oxygen below 19.5% – in violation of OSHA directions – causes headaches, dizzyness, etc)
Doctor Robert Zoellner, Clay Clark, Doctor James Meehan, MD, and several Tulsa-based business owners have filed a federal lawsuit against Tulsa Mayor G.T. Bynum, the Executive Director of the Tulsa Health Department, Bruce Dart and the Tulsa City Council to immediately repeal the mask mandates that they claim are causing healthy people to become sick while trying to prevent the spread of a disease that is not a deadly threat to children and the vast majority of the general population.
According to the lawsuit, “The Court should invalidate and repeal Ordinance No. 24408 of the City of Tulsa (the ‘Tulsa Mask Mandate’) because face coverings create an ‘oxygen-deficient atmosphere,’ which the United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) defines as an ‘atmosphere with an oxygen content below 19.5% by volume.’  Doctors, scientists, and other medical professionals will line up in this court to demonstrate and testify that face-covering lower oxygen levels in the immediate atmosphere of someone wearing face coverings to less than the Department of Labor’s required 19.5%, normally within less than ten (10) seconds.”
The Tulsa businessmen and doctors cite OSHA’s website that reads, “…rulemaking record for the Respiratory Protection Standard clearly justifies adopting the requirement that air breathed by employees must have an oxygen content of at least 19.5 percent.  A lesser concentration of oxygen in employees’ breathing air could endanger them physiologically and diminish their ability to cope with other hazards that may be present in the workplace.”
Zoellner and Clark cite U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, who recently stated, “If you look at under age 18, the mortality rate is about one in a million, if you look at age 18-45, the mortality rate is about 10 in 100,000. Above that, it increases, but interestingly, it is still pretty small, and the vast majority – even people up to 65 years of age, it may well be between 95 and 99 percent have a very mild case of this.
“So I’m not saying it’s a benign disease, people do get sick and die from this. But your chances are good.  We shouldn’t live in fear forever.  We should take normal precautions, we should assess the risks.  People who are older should take more precautions, but we shouldn’t, you know, cover the faces of our children and say you’re gonna have to live your whole life with your mask on.
“We shouldn’t do that, and the government definitely shouldn’t mandate it.”

Other Lawsuits:
1.      When informed that mandatory masking was a fraud, and therefore a felony, the Orange County board of Supervisors abandoned their mandatory mask policy, back on June 9th, 2020. www.thehealthyamerican.org
2.    The Florida Civil Rights Coalition has filed a lawsuit against Palm Beach County, citing the county’s mask mandate is “unlawful” and “infringes upon the well-settled constitutionally protected freedoms of over a million Palm Beach County residents.”
www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lawsuit-filed-against-palm-beach-county-for-mask-mandate/ar-BB16aw3o
3.      Leon County Florida was sued over Mask Mandates:
https://tallahasseereports.com/2020/06/25/lawsuit-filed-to-stop-leon-county-mask-mandate/
4.      Georgia Governor Kemp sued Atlanta to stop them from illegally enforcing a local mask mandate, then changed to issue an executive order to stop them:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/georgia-governor-drops-lawsuit-against-atlanta-mayor-over-mask-mandate
5.      A lawsuit filed in federal court challenges the constitutionality of Minnesota’s mask mandate by a group of Republican lawmakers and voters, including the watchdog group Minnesota Voters Alliance:
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/08/04/lawsuit-challenges-state-mask-mandate
6.      Conservatives sue Gov. Abbott to stop Texas’ mask mandate from being enforced:
https://www.star-telegram.com/news/politics-government/article243987762.html
7.     Lawsuit seeks to stop Ocala Florida face mask ordinance.  https://www.ocala.com/story/news/local/2020/08/14/lawsuit-seeks-to-stop-ocala-face-mask-ordinance/113192692/
8.     Harris Co. judge sued over mandatory mask order.  abc13.com/lina-hidalgo-sued-mask-houston/6125071/

  1. Lawsuit filed against the city of St. Augustine for Jeffrey Nager. who has asthma issues, which are aggravated by wearing a mask.   https://www.staugustine.com/story/news/coronavirus/2020/07/09/mask-mandates-spark-political-debate-in-st-johns-county/112699758/

masks

The facts I present in my www.Virus-Lies.com with links to evidence by Doctors, etc
Masks don’t stop tiny Viruses & small moisture: Link1, 2, 3, 4, 5, pdf
Masks make you sick: rebreathing CO2 & germs: Dr Blaylock, Link2
Tests give false positives and test wrong thing: Link1, 2, 3
HydroxyChloroQuine HCQ best cure, not used so more Deaths:Link
If HCQ not used, Ventilators don’t work, but KILL: Link
Lockdowns only ruin Economy – more suicides & failed businesses.
CDC Director admits Lockdown Suicides More Threat than Covid 1
Deaths down & are lower than normal Flu

Deaths from Chlamydia Pneumonia Bacteria, not Virus: Link1,Link2
CDC admits 94% of Reported Deaths not “from” Covid19: Info
No Pandemic or Epidemic – only about 10,000 deaths “from” Covid19 now alleged (not 2 million or even 180,000), but deaths really from bacteria not treated with HCQ, usually Ventilator deaths

CovidDeaths_EthicalSkeptic-Just-Chart

More Tests give More “Cases” – So What?
Tests give false positives and test wrong thing: Link1, 2, 3

===============================================================================

A Must Read! Cease and Desist Your Mandatory Mask Policy by Jason Hommel

by nootkabear, posted in above the law, Attorneys, Banksters, beaches, big brother, BLM, brains eaten away, California, Caution, CDC, climate engineering, Congress, constitution, contaminated, corruption, Danger, death, degenerative brain disorder, Disappears you, disaster, foreclosure, globalists, Health, Idiots, Judges, Judicial Corruption, killing us, Legal, manifest injustice, mass die offs, Maxine Waters, Mayors, Murder, panic, pro-cop killing, Pro-Life, propaganda, Public safety, resigns, super-deadly virus, surveillance, takeover, Toxic, traitors, Trump, UN, United Nations, United States, US Senate, US Supreme Court, vaccines, Warning

CEASE AND DESIST YOUR MANDATORY MASK POLICY

 

Posted byJason Hommel

44 Comments on CEASE AND DESIST YOUR MANDATORY MASK POLICY

Jason Hommel
(530) 559 2974

 

CEASE AND DESIST YOUR MANDATORY MASK POLICY

On 7-31-2020, just before 1:30pm in the afternoon, my wife and I were asked to leave the Sprouts Store located on 82nd and Quaker, in Lubbock, TX, because they specifically said they do not recognize medical exemptions to wearing masks. We were wearing medical exemption badges, which are not required by law to be worn, to help inform others. I was given a store policy sheet, and I was invited to shop online, from home.

I hereby demand that you cease and desist requiring wearing masks to shop at your stores owned and operated by Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc.

I hereby demand that you stop violating the law in numerous ways, as follows.

  1. You are in violation of both the City of Lubbock and the State of Texas masking laws, both of which make provisions for medical exemptions. You are not allowing medical exemptions, in violation of both laws, laws which you are fraudulently attempting to enforce.

1A. You are not a police officer. You are not empowered to enforce laws.

  1. You are practicing medicine without a licence, which illegal in all States in America, which is a felony, and carries with it a prison term from 1 to 8 years. A mask to prevent viral transmission is a medical intervetion that carries with it risks, such as reduced oxygen intake, increased CO2 intake, increased risk of viral and bacterial and fungal lung infections, fungal face infections, and potential brain damage from reduced oxygen. A list of up to 131 scientific articles and reasons to avoid wearing a mask can be found online at https://revealingfraud.com/2020/05/health/refuse/ You are overriding both the science, the law, and other doctor’s orders, in overriding the legal medical exemptions, without a medical license, in violation of numerous laws. When engaged in practicing medicine without a licence, you can be sued for damages that your advice might cause, there not need be any actual damages. You can be sued for “possible brain damage” that often carries rewards exceeding $1-10 million dollars in damages, and you can be held personally and corporately liable. I hereby again claim my own medical exemption, and I’m not required by law to tell you my medical history, nor are you allowed to ask, because of medical privacy laws protected by HIPAA. But my medical history is published online at revealingfraud.com anyway.

2.(A) Medical Professionals can only “prescribe” medical procedures, which means to give advice. They are not even legally allowed to mandate a medical procedure. In order for Doctors to mandate a medical procedure, they first need to either obtain a medical power of attorney document over a patient, and/or declare the person unconscious and/or unfit to decline a life saving procedure. You neither have a medial power of attorney over me, nor have I hired you to be my doctor, nor am I unconscious. Nor am I mentally compromised in any way. By wearing a mask, you restrict your own oxygen, and you mentally compromise yourself. You might want to take off your mask, and take a few deep breaths to get oxygen to your brain, to help you understand the rest of this.

  1. You are violating the ADA Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, that requires that you make reasonable accommodation to those with disabilities that could include numerous medical disabilities that could prevent people from wearing masks, such as, but not limited to, the following: asthma, allergies, anemia, fungal infections, blood clotting disorders, diabetes, PTSD, autism, pre existing lung problems, “being a human”, and needing to meet basic OSHA air quality requirements of more then 19.5% oxygen, and less then 400 parts per million CO2. Masks have been shown to reduce oxygen to 18% and increase CO2 to over 10,000 ppm.

3.(A) To help you understand the level of offense of your illegal discrimination, try demanding that black people not enter your store on the basis that give off particles that are offensive, and requiring them to shop at home. That is as offensive as refusing service to those not wearing masks for reasons of a medical exemption. The ADA also requires you to make reasonable accommodations for people with a religious exemption to wearing masks, because discrimination based on religion is also illegal.

  1. Your demand that customers wear masks, with no medical exemptions, fraudulently assumes that masks work. They do not. Air easily slips around all masks, such as the very large air gaps around the nose, cheeks and chin. Furthermore, the particle size of the coronavirus is typically 1/1000th of the size of the spacing between threads of the mask itself. A coronavirus is 0.1 microns. Holes in cloth masks are up to 100 microns. If you “zoom in” this is like expecting two threads, spaced as far apart as three football fields, 900 feet, to filter out a shoe the size of one foot. That is insane. Furthermore, there are 1000 microns per millimeter. The air gaps around the mask, by the nose, if they are half a centimeter, are 5000 microns. A coronavirus is 0.1 microns. The difference is 50,000 times in size. This gap is so big, and the virus is so small, it’s like two lines, 10 miles apart, (52,800 feet) trying to filter out a basketball (just under a foot). Mask wearing is mental insanity. In both theory and actual fact, masks cannot possibly work to do what you expect them to do, so your position is not based on science, but rather, irrational fear, and irrational expectations that masks work, when they cannot. Since your position is based on insanity and the fraud that masks work, it cannot be said to follow the law and be “reasonable”. Furthermore, restaurants are open, with up to 60-100 people eating at once, with nobody wearing a mask while eating, and that fully complies with the law. So how could one person not wearing a mask in a grocery store be a danger compared to that? Fraud also carries with it a prison sentence, as fraud is a felony.
  2. When informed that mandatory masking was a fraud, and therefore a felony, the Orange County board of Supervisors abandoned their mandatory mask policy, back on June 9th, 2020. https://www.thehealthyamerican.org/
  3. The COVID19 scare is a fraud, from top to bottom. Politicians and the Media are immune from the consequences of lying, but commercial stores have no such immunity from practicing fraud. COVID19 is fraud for the following reasons.

A. The test kits do not work. The tests have a 50% to 80% false positive rate.

B. The rate of positives has always been about 10%, from the very beginning of the crisis. The rate of people testing positive has not gone up, they have only increased the number and rate of tests given.

C. The test kits have been reported to be contaminated. June 23, 2020: https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200623/early-cdc-covid-19-test-kits-likely-contaminated Unswabbed swabs are reported to test positive.

Nurses’ Lawsuit Claims ‘Fabricated’ COVID-19 Tests at Georgia Hospital
Max Blau June 22, 2020 https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/932722

D. While “confirmed case” counts have been going up, there is no such thing as a “confirmed case” because the test kits say directly on them “not to be used for diagnostic purposes” and therefore a fraudulent test with a high false positive rate cannot “confirm” anything.

  1. To determine the lethality of any disease, they need to compare cases to deaths. Both numbers suffer from massive fraud. Regarding death counts:

A. The death counts are overinflated, as States have been directed by the CDC to include presumptive or presumed cases that would not even include the fraudulent test kit non confirmation, which, itself, over counts things with that false positive rate of from 50% to 80%. “COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death.” https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/coronavirus/Alert-2-New-ICD-code-introduced-for-COVID-19-deaths.pdf

Furthermore, Birx says government is classifying all coronavirus death cases as COVID19 caused deaths, regardless of the cause, such as underlying health issues. See point B for further corroboration. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/birx-says-government-is-classifying-all-deaths-of-patients-with-coronavirus-as-covid-19-deaths-regardless-of-cause

B. Other nations have determined that 99% of their “died with COVID” cases did not die “from COVID” as 99% of other patients were elderly and had from 1-4 other co-morbid chronic conditions. If that is true, it takes the real death rate down to nearly nothing. This was reported by Bloomberg, back on March 18th, which basically shows and admits that this is all a media hoax. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-18/99-of-those-who-died-from-virus-had-other-illness-italy-says

C. The real death counts are not higher than the rate of normal rates of pnumonia. People vastly overestimate their chances of “catching” COVID, and vastly overestimate their chances of death, with younger people, aged 18-34 giving the highest estimations, at 90% estimated chances of catching it, and a 20% chance of death if they do catch it. https://www.nber.org/papers/w27494.pdf see chart on p. 12. These estimates would have COVID killing about 328 million x .9 x .2 = 59 million Americans. Even the White House estimations of the deaths of 2 million Americans were vastly over exaggerated, and the man responsible for that model resigned in disgrace. The “official” death toll, which is grossly over exaggerated, for multiple reasons, as I am going over, stands at 137,922, per the CDC as of July 31: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm see Table 1. That is a total death rate of the population of 0.04%, which is substantially lower than the CDC’s latest death rate estimate last month of 0.26%. Typical flu deaths in a year vary from 50,000 to 80,000.

D. Death counts are inflated from putting people into a very risky coma plus a ventilator, and that process kills people from 88% to 90% of the time. https://ktla.com/news/nationworld/nearly-90-of-covid-19-patients-put-on-ventilators-in-new-yorks-largest-health-system-died-study-finds/

E. The real death rate could well be 137,922 x 1% (no comorbidities) x 50% due to false positives, which would be 689! Given that there is no higher overall death rate than normal, the risk from a fraudulent disease that is not increasing the total death rate is zero. A real pandemic would not require fraudulently overstating things at all levels, from test kits that don’t work, to fraudulently claiming an increase in the infected, to inflated death counts, to masks that don’t work.

F. The false pandemic is a “live exercise” planned in advance, in October 18th, 2019. https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/

  1. People with honor do not practice nor support games of fraud. If managers wish to stop participating in the COVID media lies, they may wish to remind their employer of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which makes it illegal to discriminate based on religious beliefs. Sections 703 A(1)(2). My own religious beliefs also prohibit me from participating in fraud, or from lying in any way.
  2. Managers of businesses cannot be hired to break the law. You may have been told by a supervisor to “enforce store policy”, but you cannot be hired to break the law nor be hired to commit one felony, let alone multiple felonies. You always have the right to tell your supervisor, “You cannot legally require me to break the law.” You may wish to present this letter to your immediate supervisors and/or human resources department, and/or legal department and/or corporate board and/or company owners.
  3. Even if you were a doctor, and a lawyer, and a police officer, you would still not have the right to demand that free people wear masks to shop at your store.
  4. Even if you petitioned congress to change all the laws above, you would still not have the right to trample on people’s Constitutional rights, and it would remain unwise to do so.
  5. Numerous “emergency COVID orders” have already been struck down as un-Constitutional in various other states.
  6. Several other large retailers in Lubbock, at their corporate level, such as Market Street United Supermarkets and Wal-Mart, have decided to honor medical exemptions to mask wearing, presumably because they have been informed of the legal issues involved, or maybe because they are already involved in litigation over it, and are engaged in actions designed to settle the disputes.
  7. After having been informed of the law, such as through a cease and desist letter like this one, if you continue to violate the law, it will be presumed that you are “willfully” violating the law, which often carries with it additional penalties, such as double the criminal prison sentence to be served, and/or double the civil fines to be paid.

Sincerely,

Jason Hommel

Posted byJason Hommel

Post navigation

 
 
You know my response.  It would take one of the masks below, to protect you from a deadly disease spreading.  The stupid little masks that people wear, does not even cover their eyes. 
Is common sense so lacking for people?
 
Damn it sheeple wake up, you act like idiots.

fullfacemasks

McConnell: Pelosi Refuses to Release Impeachment Articles Because She’s Afraid, Unrelated to Fair Trial

by nootkabear, posted in above the law, Banksters, Blackout, California, Congress, constitution, contaminated, contamination, corruption, Danger, disaster, fallout, Idiots, Judicial Corruption, manifest injustice, Maxine Waters, Money Laundering, Obabma Treason, president, rats, Russians, sludge, takeover, traitors, Trump, vaccines, Washington DC, Whistleblower

Mc-Connell-Says-Pelosi-Is-Afraid-640x480
(Erin Schaff-Pool/Getty Images)

McConnell: Pelosi Refuses to Release Impeachment Articles Because She’s Afraid, Unrelated to Fair Trial
EDWIN MORA
19 Dec 2019 3:37
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/19/mcconnell-pelosi-refuses-to-release-impeachment-articles-because-shes-afraid-unrelated-to-fair-trial/

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) on Thursday lambasted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), often described as fearless and even never-daunted, as “too afraid” to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate that were approved mostly along party lines with three Democrats defecting.

On the Senate floor Thursday, McConnell accused Pelosi of suggesting “that House Democrats may be too afraid … to even transmit their shoddy work product to the Senate.”

Referring to the development as “comical,” McConnell said Democrats who stressed the urgency of the process now seem “content to sit on their hands.”

McConnell, one of the top Republican leaders who has been holding the party together against the impeachment-fueled onslaught against Trump and his allies, taunted Pelosi’s threat to withhold the articles of impeachment until the GOP agrees to a fair impeachment trial.

“This particular House of Representatives has let its partisan rage at this particular president create a toxic new precedent that will echo well into the future,” McConnell said from the Senate floor Thursday.

“Looks like the prosecutors are getting cold feet,” McConnell mused in remarks on the Senate floor after the House voted to impeach Trump along party lines.

Three Democrats defected, voting against at least one of the articles, while the Republicans remained together in their opposition.

House Democrats impeached Trump on abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. Trump joined the impeached president’s club as its third member.

Historically, the House sends the articles of impeachment approved in the House to the upper chamber — the Senate – for a trial.

Pelosi, however, appears to be doing what she knows best, playing legislative games. She has threatened that the Democrats would only send over the impeachment articles until she gets what she wants — the promise of a “fair” Senate process.

“We’ll make a decision… as we go along,” Pelosi told reporters Wednesday, adding that “we’ll see what the process will be on the Senate side,” Fox News reports.

“We have acted,” Pelosi continued, repeatedly refusing to commit to sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate. “Now, they’ll understand what their responsibilities are, and we’ll see what that is.”

Many Republicans have balked at Pelosi’s request because they believe Democrats denied them a fair trial while Pelosi sat by and watched the show.

McConnell’s speech on the Senate floor came after House Democrats voted to impeach Trump for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress on Wednesday night.

On Thursday, Senate majority leader McConnell deemed the House impeachment vote — which passed without the support of a single Republican — as “the most rushed, least thorough, and most unfair impeachment inquiry in modern history.”

Impeaching Trump became an obsession for many Democrats soon after he took office.

Speaker Pelosi has vowed not to send the articles of impeachment against President Trump to the Republican-controlled Senate until they agree to make the Senate trial fair. House Republicans repeatedly made similar requests, but the Democrat majority ignored them.

So now, Democrats are complaining that Republicans are denying them the legislative commodities that just a few weeks ago they gleefully refused GOP lawmakers.

Pelosi’s threat not to release the articles of impeachment until she gets what she wants is a surprise move that plunges Congress’s timeline of Trump’s trial in the Senate into even more uncertainty.

Some Red Flags About ‘Red Flag’ Laws

by nootkabear, posted in above the law, access to injustice, Banksters, big brother, brains eaten away, Clinton, confiscation, constitution, Constiution, corruption, Courts, Danger, disarmament, Feds, gun ban treaty, gun-running, guns, Idiots, impeachment, Judicial Corruption, Justice Dept., Justice Scalia, Lawyers, Maxine Waters, propaganda

Red-Flag-Laws-Beth-PP-Featured-9-24-19

Some Red Flags About ‘Red Flag’ Laws
Beth Alcazar – 09/24/2019

Some Red Flags About ‘Red Flag’ Laws

A terrible tragedy occurred in my home state of Alabama last month. As reported by the local news, a father and his son were involved in an argument that led to the 70-year-old father shooting his 45-year-old son in the chest in what he claims was self-defense.

Soon afterward, the Alabama chapter of Moms Demand Action shared the news — along with a comment — on social media. They posted:

’Investigators said James Adams and his son, Alfred Dewayne Adams, were involved in an argument Sunday night. They further stated they believe James told Alfred he was going to bed. Alfred then walked into the bedroom and James shot him in the chest. Some of the neighbors and some other family members can tell us about stuff that was happening through [sic] the years.’ This life could have been spared by utilizing a red flag law.

Some Questions

“This life could have been spared by utilizing a red flag law?” That’s quite a statement. And I wanted to post a few questions to Moms Demand Action. First of all, I wanted to ask: If the father truly used a weapon in self-defense, would a “red flag” law have disarmed him … and then spared the life of his violent son? Would the father be dead, then, in this particular situation? Beyond that, do “red flag” laws cover all weapons in the home? What if the suspect had decided to use a knife? Or what about prescription drugs or poisons? Does it cover a person’s bare hands and/or body? Could we confiscate those weapons, as well, whenever we feel there’s “some stuff that was happening through the years?”

Some Examples

And what about the terrible case in which a son killed his father and wounded his mother with a knife? Two months ago, in Arizona, the Yavapai County Sheriff’s Office reported that when the older couple returned home, “they noticed their 33-year-old son had consumed a large amount of beer. The parents argued with him over their drinking concern. He threw his phone at them and then went into the kitchen and grabbed two large knives. When he tried to stab his mother, his father intervened and attempted to restrain him while he was still in the kitchen. The son began attacking his dad. As the struggle moved from the kitchen into the living room, the son was able to stab his dad in the chest. The father collapsed to the floor.”

Or there’s this recent horror story from Illinois: A man in a Chicago suburb was arrested by local police after killing his own mother by stabbing her repeatedly with a samurai sword in the chest. Park Ridge Police had removed the murderer’s firearms two times, with the last time being in July 2019. So the suspect didn’t have a gun … but he still had evil intent. And he used whatever weapon he could find.

There’s also the atrocity from Nevada a few weeks ago in which a 36-year-old man bludgeoned a woman to death with a sledgehammer in what Las Vegas police said was a random attack at a laundromat.

I could go on. But I won’t. Perhaps you see the point.

Some Red Flags

Beyond the fear of just anyone pointing out someone else with a gun for no good reason or people wrongly having their firearms taken from them because of mistaken identity or possibly just being in the wrong place at the wrong time, there are so many red flags about “red flag” laws. Undoubtedly, we’d love to be able to stop crimes and keep bad people from harming or killing others. But this is not the movie Minority Report, in which police can employ some sort of psychic technology to arrest and convict murderers before they commit their crimes. Ultimately, we have to ask: Will “red flag” laws actually target violent people … or just people with guns? Because as the above examples (and countless others) show, the problem isn’t the firearms.

About Beth Alcazar

Author of Women’s Handgun & Self-Defense Fundamentals, associate editor of Concealed Carry Magazine and creator of the Pacifiers & Peacemakers column, Beth Alcazar has enjoyed nearly two decades of teaching and working in the firearms industry. She holds degrees in language arts, education and communication management and uses her experience and enthusiasm to share safe and responsible firearms ownership and usage with others. Beth is certified through the NRA as a Training Counselor, Chief Range Safety Officer and Certified Instructor for multiple disciplines. She is also a Certified Instructor through SIG Sauer Academy, ALICE Institute, DRAW School, TWAW and I.C.E. Training and is a USCCA Certified Instructor and Senior Training Counselor.

How many times have we heard about someone running over a bunch of people too. Even the car or truck can be a deadly weapon. If someone is dead set that they are going to kill, for whatever reason, they will find the tool to kill others with!

These gun grabbers want any possible way to take our protection from us. And these same gun grabbers are socialists/communists.

Impeachment can go more ways than one. These politicians that want to do away with the Second Amendment, work for us. When they were sworn in, they swore to honor and uphold the Constitution. Trying to do away with any of the Amendments to the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, is not honoring and upholding the Constitution. Violating one’s Oath of Office is usually grounds for them to be removed.

I say let’s remove their asses!
(Please note, I usually don’t comment on my own posts).

Universal Background Checks Won’t Stop Criminals Getting Guns

by nootkabear, posted in Banksters, big brother, Big Law, BLM, confiscation, constitution, disarmament, globalists, guns, Idiots, Judicial Corruption, Justice Scalia, malitia, manifest injustice

guns-640x480
In this Jan. 19, 2016 file photo, handguns are displayed at the Smith & Wesson booth at the Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trade Show in Las Vegas. Backers of an expanded gun background check ballot measure approved by Nevada voters in 2016 are arguing that the Nevada governor and attorney …AP Photo/John Locher, File

NRA: Universal Background Checks Won’t Stop Criminals Getting Guns
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/09/05/nra-universal-background-checks-wont-stop-criminals-getting-guns/
AWR HAWKINS5 Sep 2019

The NRA is warning universal background checks will not keep criminals from getting guns to use against innocents.
This warning comes as politicians as divergent as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) argue in favor of taking action against private gun sales. Patrick specifically argued that the NRA ought to get behind the effort to close the private sale “loophole.”

But the NRA notes that universal background checks are riddled with problems, not the least of which is that they will not prevent criminals from obtaining guns.

The NRA tweeted:
NRA
✔
@NRA
So-called “universal” background checks won’t stop criminals from obtaining guns, would criminalize private transfers and loans between friends and family, and is completely unenforceable. Criminals don’t follow the law.

A BIG NO FROM US! https://twitter.com/NBCDFW/status/1168969378660007936 …

NBC DFW
✔
@NBCDFW
Do you support universal background checks for all firearm purchases?

3,054
2:46 PM – Sep 4, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy
1,473 people are talking about this
Down Range with AWR Hawkins. Sign up today!
Enter your email address
SIGN UP
The NRA also notes universal background checks make it difficult for guns to be transferred between friends and family. Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) made this same point earlier in the week by citing a Houston woman who was able to save herself from alleged robbers by pulling her handgun and shooting the suspect. He noted, “With universal background checks, I wouldn’t be able to let my friends borrow my handgun when they travel alone like this. We would make felons out of people just for defending themselves.”

California has had universal background checks since the early 1990s, yet criminals in that state continue to be armed.

On December 9, 2018, Breitbart News reported California’s firearm homicides witnessed an 18 percent rise in firearm homicides from 2014 to 2016. How is this possible with universal background checks in place, unless such checks do not actually prevent criminals from getting and/or possessing guns?

AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com. Sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange.

Students hate Trump’s immigration, border wall quotes, don’t realize they’re from Dems

by nootkabear, posted in Banksters, borders, California, Censorship, constitution, corruption, Idiots, Judicial Corruption, Maxine Waters

Campus

VIDEO: Students hate Trump’s immigration, border wall quotes, don’t realize they’re from Dems
Cabot Phillips
Cabot Phillips
Media Director
@cabot_phillips
on Jan 08, 2019 at 10:02 AM EDT
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=11717

Campus Reform's Cabot Phillips asked students on the campus of American University if they agreed with President Donald Trump's statements on immigration and the border wall.


Only the quotes the students were given were not actually from Trump. They were from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Secretary of State Hillary of Clinton, and President Barack Obama.

This month, the federal government entered a partial shutdown after Congress was unable to reach a budget agreement, primarily on funding for President Donald Trump’s proposed wall along the southern border.

The wall, a key talking point for Trump throughout the campaign, has been decried by leaders in the Democrat party as anti-American and immoral, among other things.
“I just really think it’s hateful speech”

But their opposition to the wall and embrace of looser immigration laws seems to be a new development.

In recent years, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, President Barack Obama, and Secretary Hillary Clinton have all stated the danger in embracing illegal immigration and ignoring the laws we have on the books.

Such quotes include:

“Illegal Immigration is wrong, plain and simple. Until the American people are convinced we will stop future flows of illegal immigration, we will make no progress.” -Senator Chuck Schumer, 2009

“We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented and unchecked” -Barack Obama, 2005

“I voted numerous times… to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in. And I do think you have to control your borders.” -Hillary Clinton, 2008

Wanting to know if opponents of Trump’s border wall had opinions on these past quotes from Democrat leaders, Campus Reform’s Cabot Phillips headed to American University.

But there’s a catch… the students were told the quotes actually came from President Trump.

Upon hearing the quotes, students said Trump’s words were “dehumanizing,” “problematic,” and “jingoist.”

“I just really think it’s hateful speech,” one student said, while another added, “the way he’s referring to people across the wall is dehumanizing.”

One student said the comments held racist undertones, claiming “there are racial biases deeply embedded in there.”

But this was all before they knew these quotes were actually coming from political idols of theirs.

Watch the full video to see their reactions to being told Democrats actually the statements.

Follow the author of this article on Twitter: @Cabot_Phillips

Carbon-Trading Fraudsters at the U.N.

by nootkabear, posted in above the law, Banksters, Big Law, borders, Censorship, Climate Corporation, climate engineering, Clinton, Congress, contamination, corruption, degenerative brain disorder, Environmental Health, Feds, geoengineered, globalists, Idiots, Judicial Corruption, Killary, Obabma Treason, propaganda, psych drugs, RADIONUCLIDES, water

Carbon-Trading Fraudsters at the U.N.
October 17, 2018

Carbon-Trading Fraudsters at the U.N.

With his usual humor and wit, James Corbett gives his much-needed, succinct perspective on the report released this week by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This has led to the Mainstream Media outlets, like the UK Guardian to scream that we have “12 years to limit climate change catastrophe”. Just a year ago, the Guardian screamed we had only 3 years left till climate catastrophe but the magical cutoff date was just moved from 2020 to 2030.

Corbett eviscerates the IPCC’s faulty science and demonstrates that there is no “hockey stick” of Global Warming in our current Holocene Epoch, whether anthropogenic (human-caused) or otherwise. Previous geological eras have seen vast swings in Earth’s temperature but the planet entered into a comparatively stable period following the end of the last Ice Age about 12,000 years ago.

Corbett amply demonstrates how Global Warming aka Anthropogenic Climate Change is bad science cooked up to justify implementing carbon taxes and a “cap and trade” financial derivatives schemes that make mortgage-backed securities look like the gold standard.

A growing list of scientists is questioning the accuracy of the IPCC’s climate projections. Deplorable “Climate Change deniers” are not saying that petrochemicals aren’t toxic or that these and other environmental pollutants and plastic garbage aren’t terrible problems. Indeed, Global Warming is a distraction from the very real threats being posed to our health in our air, food and water, from thousands of environmental toxins, ranging from glyphosate, to petrochemicals, to radionulides and microwaves.

What’s being rejected is the faulty climate science, the fraudulent carbon-trading schemes and the supragovernmental bureaucracy made up of elitist U.N. psychopaths selling us out to the Globalist banksters.

Corbett closes by saying, “Even bigger than the trillion dollar climate scam that they’re trying to run right now, which of course will generate oodles of money for certain corrupt politicians and people and corporations that are in the back pockets of the banksters – yes, there is the monetary aspect to this – but it goes much deeper into the heart of the technocratic agenda, itself by way of carbon eugenics…that is going to try to get us into the technocratic enslavement grid. It is coming and you can see it clearly. The way they hype these types of UN reports, as if they are going to be the saviors of humans. Newsflash: They’re not.

“I’ll keep drilling this point home, despite the fact that there are a lot of people out there that don’t like to hear this bitter message. It is horrible and it is hard to swallow and it is nightmarish but it is the truth and I will keep telling this truth until I get de-platformed from every platform…”

Researchers released a report this week revealing “ultralow surface temperatures” in East Antarctica that surpass the coldest temperatures ever recorded on the earth’s surface.

by nootkabear, posted in Arctic, Banksters, big brother, Censorship, Climate Corporation, climate engineering, Feds, geoengineered, Georgia, Georgia Power, Idiots, Judicial Corruption


(Photo AP/Rod McGuirk)

Scientists Observe Coldest Temperatures Ever on Earth’s Surface
A group of U.S. climate scientists have had to be rescued by helicopter from Antarctica after being trapped by encroaching ice.
AP/Rod McGuirk
30 Jun 2018
https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/06/30/scientists-observe-coldest-temperatures-ever-on-earths-surface/

Researchers released a report this week revealing “ultralow surface temperatures” in East Antarctica that surpass the coldest temperatures ever recorded on the earth’s surface.

The lowest measured air temperature on earth is −89.2 °C (−129 F) on 23 July 1983, observed at Vostok Station in Antarctica, but new data published in Geophysical Research Letters this week, has found that some 100 different locations on the East Antarctic Plateau reached temperatures of -98° C (-144° F) during the Antarctic polar night between 2004–2016.

A team from the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) at the University of Colorado Boulder have identified the East Antarctic Plateau — a massive, empty expanse the size of Australia that begins near the South Pole — as the coldest place on the planet.

The East Antarctic Plateau sits some 3,500 m (11,500 ft) above sea level and the air over the Plateau is extremely still, dry and thin, providing an ideal environment for extreme cold.

“In this area, we see periods of incredibly dry air, and this allows the heat from the snow surface to radiate into space more easily,” said Ted Scambos of the University of Colorado Boulder, lead author of the study.

East Antarctica is home to extremely low air and surface temperatures brought on by intense radiative cooling of the snow surface during prolonged wintertime periods of clear sky, weak winds, and very dry atmosphere, the report revealed.

The researchers analyzed data from NASA’s Terra and Aqua satellites, as well as the NOAA’s Polar Operational Environmental Satellites, gathered during the Antarctic winters between 2004 and 2016, and found that snow surface temperatures regularly dipped below -90° C (-130° F) across the Plateau, with some 100 spots reaching a lowest temperature of -98° C (-144° F).

“Approximately 100 sites have observed minimum surface temperatures of ~−98 °C during the winters of 2004–2016,” and the researchers believe that this represents close to the absolute coldest the earth’s surface can get.

“This temperature appears to be about as low as it is possible to reach, even under clear skies and very dry conditions, because heat radiating from the cold clear air is nearly equal to the heat radiating from the bitterly cold snow surface,” the report states.

The coldest temperatures were found where pockets of air sat still for several days, allowing it to reach ultra-cold levels.

While Vostok, Antarctica, still holds the world record for the coldest temperature ever measured by a land-based weather station, the scientists hope to deploy ground-based instruments in the coldest locations of the East Antarctic Plateau in the next year or two.

Follow Thomas D. Williams on Twitter Follow @tdwilliamsrome

CA Assault Weapons Registration…Chalk Up One More for CA!

by nootkabear, posted in access to injustice, Banksters, big brother, California, Fast and Furious, Feds, globalists, guns, Idiots, Judicial Corruption, law, manifest injustice

CA Assault Weapon Registration Website Crashed As Deadline Loomed

Posted at 6:00 pm on July 2, 2018 by Tom Knighton

California wanted all so-called “assault weapons” to be registered by July 1, 2018. The state wanted it so badly that it created a website in hopes that it would make the process easy enough that most would comply with the rule. It was smart, not because registration will do anything, but in that, if you want people to comply with the law, you’d better make it easy.

However, as with so many other things in California, what worked well, in theory, turned into a colossal case of fail.

As the deadline looms for California gun owners to register their firearms that have been re-classified as “assault weapons,” the registration system has been crashing, preventing compliance with the law if the site is not fixed.

California passed a bill expanding its already lengthy definition of “assault weapon.” Under SB 880 and AB 113, which became effective in January 2017, “assault weapon” now includes firearms that are required to be equipped with a bullet button or a similar magazine locking device.

…

All applications must be completed and submitted by Saturday at 11:59 p.m. PDT. With less than a day until the deadline, the California Firearms Application Reporting System (CFARS) has had difficulty processing the high volume of applications, according to the Firearms Policy Coalition. The spike in traffic repeatedly crashed the CFARS website, preventing gun owners from registering properly.

If firearms are not registered before the deadline, gun owners could be charged with a felony and receive up to eight years in prison.

Now, waiting until the last minute is usually not a recipe for success, but as long as there was time on the clock, people are free to procrastinate. It’s up to the state of California to make sure its website works.

And it didn’t.

Constant crashes delay people being able to comply with the law, and it’s not their fault. Like I said, waiting until the last minute might not be ideal, but it’s not illegal, and it’s not their fault the state can’t build a working website.

Now, those who weren’t able to register their guns despite trying to may well be guilty of a felony as you read this. Hopefully not. So far, though, there’s been no mention of an amnesty for those who tried but were turned away by the state’s ineptitude.

To err is human. To really foul stuff up, though, you need the government involved.

This is a prime example.

Meanwhile, the state has made modern sporting rifles an endangered species, and the state’s violent crime rate has increased over the last couple of years despite the full-court press on “assault rifles.” Maybe it’s not the guns that are the problem in the first place? You know, California, I’m just throwing that out there for consideration.

Unfortunately, it’s not like the state is known for listening to reason or doing anything except the most anti-gun thing it can manage to do. California has never met a gun control proposal it didn’t like, and there’s no reason to expect that to change in the near future.

Developing nations to study ways to dim sunshine

by nootkabear, posted in above the law, Climate Corporation, climate engineering, Danger, disaster, Ecological Validity, Environmental Health, geoengineered, Idiots, Judicial Corruption


Developing nations to study ways to dim sunshine
By Editor April 4, 2018
By Alister Doyle
http://www.theeventchronicle.com/solar-watch/developing-nations-to-study-ways-to-dim-sunshine/

OSLO (Reuters) – Scientists in developing nations plan to step up research into dimming sunshine to curb climate change, hoping to judge if a man-made chemical sunshade would be less risky than a harmful rise in global temperatures.
Research into “solar geo-engineering”, which would mimic big volcanic eruptions that can cool the Earth by masking the sun with a veil of ash, is now dominated by rich nations and universities such as Harvard and Oxford.

Twelve scholars, from countries including Bangladesh, Brazil, China, Ethiopia, India, Jamaica and Thailand, wrote in the journal Nature on Wednesday that the poor were most vulnerable to global warming and should be more involved.

“Developing countries must lead on solar geo-engineering research,” they wrote in a commentary.

“The overall idea (of solar geo-engineering) is pretty crazy but it is gradually taking root in the world of research,” lead author Atiq Rahman, head of the Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies, told Reuters by telephone.

The solar geo-engineering studies may be helped by a new $400,000 research project, the Solar Radiation Management Governance Initiative (SRMGI), which is issuing a first call for scientists to apply for finance this week.

The SRMGI is financed by the Open Philanthropy Project, a foundation backed by Dustin Moskovitz, a co-founder of Facebook, and his wife, Cari Tuna, the scientists wrote.

The fund could help scientists in developing nations study regional impacts of solar geo-engineering such as on droughts, floods or monsoons, said Andy Parker, a co-author and project director of the SRMGI.

Rahman said the academics were not taking sides about whether geo-engineering would work. Among proposed ideas, planes might spray clouds of reflective sulfur particles high in the Earth’s atmosphere.

“The technique is controversial, and rightly so. It is too early to know what its effects would be: it could be very helpful or very harmful,” they wrote.

A U.N. panel of climate experts, in a leaked draft of a report about global warming due for publication in October, is skeptical about solar geo-engineering, saying it may be “economically, socially and institutionally infeasible.”

Among risks, the draft obtained by Reuters says it might disrupt weather patterns, could be hard to stop once started, and might discourage countries from making a promised switch from fossil fuels to cleaner energies.

Still, Rahman said most developed nations had “abysmally failed” so far in their pledges to cut greenhouse gas emissions, making radical options to limit warming more attractive.

The world is set for a warming of three degrees Celsius (5.7 Fahrenheit) or more above pre-industrial times, he said, far above a goal of keeping a rise in temperatures “well below” 2C (3.6F) under the 2015 Paris Agreement among almost 200 nations.

Reporting By Alister Doyle; Editing by Richard Balmforth

This article (Developing nations to study ways to dim sunshine, slow warming) was originally published on Reuters and syndicated by The Event Chronicle.

2016 STATE OF THE JUDICIARY ADDRESS THE HONORABLE CHIEF JUSTICE HUGH P. THOMPSON SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA January 27, 2016, 11 a.m. House Chambers, State Capitol

by nootkabear, posted in 10-15 million people, above the law, access to injustice, Attorneys, Banksters, big brother, Big Law, Censorship, Confederate Flag, Confederate Memorial Holiday, confiscation, Congress, Court Cases, Courts, criminal injustice, ethics cases, Fast and Furious, foreclosure, Fraud Upon the Court, Georgia, Governor Deal, IAEA, Idiots, impeachment, Injustice, Judges, Judicial Corruption, Judicial ethics, Judicial Rulings, judicial watch, judicial watchdogs, Justice Dept., law, Lawyers, Legal, Legal Aid, Lester Tate, manifest injustice, mass shootings, Monsanto, Mortality Event, Nathan Deal, plutonium, propaganda, Public safety, The American Lawyer, too little too late, Toxic, United States, US Senate, US Supreme Court, Veterans Today, Warning, Washington DC, water, weapons, Whistleblower

016 STATE OF THE JUDICIARY ADDRESS
THE HONORABLE CHIEF JUSTICE HUGH P. THOMPSON
SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA
January 27, 2016, 11 a.m.
House Chambers, State Capitol

Lt. Governor Cagle, Speaker Ralston, President Pro Tem Shafer, Speaker Pro Tem Jones, members of the General Assembly, my fellow judges and my fellow Georgians:
Good morning. Thank you for this annual tradition of inviting the Chief Justice to report on the State of Georgia’s Judiciary. Thanks in large part to your support and the support of our governor, as we move into 2016, I am pleased to tell you that your judicial branch of government is not only steady and secure, it is dynamic; it has momentum; and it is moving forward into the 21st century with a vitality and a commitment to meeting the inevitable changes before us.
Our mission remains the same: To protect individual rights and liberties, to uphold and interpret the rule of law, and to provide a forum for the peaceful resolution of disputes that is fair, impartial, and accessible to all.
Our judges are committed to these principles. Each day, throughout this state, they put on their black robes; they take their seat on the courtroom bench; and they work tirelessly to ensure that all citizens who come before them get justice.

Our Judicial Council is the policy-making body of the state’s judicial branch. It is made up of competent, committed leaders elected by their fellow judges and representing all classes of court. They are assisted by an Administrative Office of the Courts, which is under a new director – Cynthia Clanton – and has a renewed focus as an agency that serves judges and courts throughout Georgia.
A number of our judges have made the trip to be here today. Our judges are here today because the relationship we have with you is important. We share with you the same goal of serving the citizens of this great state. We could not do our work without your help and that of our governor.
On behalf of all of the judges, let me say we are extremely grateful to you members of the General Assembly for your judicial compensation appropriation last year.

Today I want to talk to you about Georgia’s 21st century courts – our vision for the future, the road we must travel to get there, and the accomplishments we have already achieved.
It has been said that, “Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.”
Since a new state Constitution took effect in 1983, our population has nearly doubled to a little over 10 million, making us the 8th most populous state in the country. We are among the fastest growing states in the nation, and in less than four years, our population is projected to exceed 12 million.
Because it is good for our economy, we welcome that growth. Today, Georgia ranks
among states with the highest number of Fortune 500 companies, 20 of which have their global headquarters here; we have 72 four-year colleges and universities; we have the world’s busiest airport and we have two deep-water ports. Georgia is a gateway to the South, and for a growing number of people and businesses from around the world, it is a gateway to this country.
All of this growth produces litigation – increasingly complex litigation – and just as our state must prepare for this growth by ensuring we have enough roads and modes of transportation, enough doctors and hospitals, and enough power to reach people throughout the state, our courts also must be equipped and modernized for the 21st
century.
While our population has nearly doubled since 1983, the number of Georgia judges has
grown only 16 percent. We must work together to ensure that our judicial system has enough judges, staff and resources in the 21st century to fulfill the mission and constitutional duties our forefathers assigned to us.
A healthy, vibrant judiciary is absolutely critical to the economic development of our state. Thanks to many leaders in the judiciary, as well as to our partnership with the governor and to you in the legislature, we are well on our way to building a court system for the 21st century.

This time next year, with your support, we will have put into place an historic shift in the types of cases handled by the Georgia Supreme Court – the highest court in the state – and by the Court of Appeals – our intermediate appellate court. Thanks to Governor Deal’s Georgia Appellate Jurisdiction Review Commission, this realignment will bring the Supreme Court of Georgia in line with other state Supreme Courts, which handle only the most critical cases that potentially change the law. Serving on the Commission are two of my colleagues – Justice David Nahmias and Justice Keith Blackwell – as well as two judges from the Court of Appeals – Chief
Judge Sara Doyle and Judge Stephen Dillard.
I thank you, Justices and Judges, for your leadership.
Under the Georgia Constitution, Supreme Court justices collectively decide every case that comes before us. Currently the state’s highest court hears divorce and alimony cases; we hear cases involving wills; we hear cases involving titles to land; and we hear disputes over boundary lines.
But the Governor’s Commission, and a number of reports by other commissions and
committees issued since 1983, have recommended that such cases should be heard by our intermediate appeals court, not by our highest court.
Both of our courts are among the busiest in the nation. But unlike the Supreme Court, which sits as a full court with all seven justices participating in, and deciding, every case, the Court of Appeals sits in panels of three. With your approval last year of three new Court of Appeals judges, that court will now have five panels, so it will have the capacity to consider five times as many cases as the Supreme Court.
Modernization of the Supreme Court makes sense. In a 19th century court system, when
most of the wealth was tied up in land, maybe title to land cases were the most important. Maybe they had the greatest implications for the public at large. But as we move into the 21st century, that is no longer true.
In answer to questions such as who owns a strip of land, what does a will mean, and who should prevail in a divorce settlement or an alimony dispute, most judicial systems believe that three judges are enough to provide the parties with a full and fair consideration of their appeal. It no longer makes sense to have seven – or nine – justices collectively review these types of cases.
There is no doubt these cases will be in good hands with the Court of Appeals.
Let me emphasize that all these cases the Commission recommended shifting to the Court of Appeals are critically important to the parties involved.
Let me also emphasize that the purpose of this historic change is not to lessen the burden on the Supreme Court. Rather, the intent is to free up the state’s highest court to devote more time and energy to the most complex and the most difficult cases that have the greatest implications for the law and society at large.
We will therefore retain jurisdiction of constitutional challenges to the laws you enact, questions from the federal courts seeking authoritative rulings on Georgia law, election contests, murder and death penalty cases, and cases in which the Court of Appeals judges are equally divided.
Significantly, we want to be able to accept more of what we call “certiorari” cases
which are appeals of decisions by the Court of Appeals. The number of petitions filed in this category during the first quarter of the new docket year is nearly 14 percent higher this year over last. Yet due to the amount of appeals the law now requires us to take, we have had to reject the majority of the petitions for certiorari that we receive.
These cases are often the most complex – and the most consequential. They involve
issues of great importance to the legal system and the State as a whole. Or they involve an area of law that has become inconsistent and needs clarification.
Businesses and citizens need to know what the law allows them to do and what it does
not allow them to do. It is our job at the highest court to reduce any uncertainty and bring consistency and clarity to the law.
Under the Commission’s recommendations, our 21st century Georgia Supreme Court will
be able to accept more of these important appeals.

As we move into the 21st century, plans are being discussed to build the first state Judicial Building in Georgia’s history that will be dedicated solely to the judiciary. We are grateful for the Governor’s leadership on this. The building that now houses the state’s highest court and the Court of Appeals was built in 1954 when Herman Tallmadge was governor. Back then, it made sense to combine the state judicial branch with part of the executive branch, by locating the Law Department in the same building.
But the world has changed since 1954, and the building we now occupy was not designed with visitors in mind. It was not designed with technology in mind. And it surely was not designed with security in mind. Indeed, it was designed to interconnect with neighboring buildings that housed other branches of government.
A proper Judicial Building is about more than bricks and mortar. Outside, this building will symbolize for generations to come the place where people will go to get final resolution of civil wrongs and injustices; where the government will go to safeguard its prosecution of criminals; and where defendants will go to appeal convictions and sentences to prison for life.
Inside such a building, the courtroom will reinforce the reality that what goes on here is serious and solemn; it is a place of great purpose, in the words of a federal judge. The parties and the lawyers will understand they are all on equal footing, because they are equal under the law.
There is a majesty about the law that gets played out in the courtroom. It is a hallowed place because it is where the truth must be told and where justice is born. The courtroom represents our democracy at its very best.
No, this building is not just about bricks and mortar. Rather it is a place that will house Georgia’s highest court where fairness, impartiality, and justice will reign for future generations.

We are no longer living in a 1950s Georgia. The courts of the 21st century must be
equipped to handle an increasingly diverse population. Living today in metropolitan Atlanta alone are more than 700,000 people who were born outside the United States. According to the Chamber of Commerce, today some 70 countries have a presence in Atlanta, in the form of a consulate or trade office. We must be ready to help resolve the disputes of international businesses that are increasingly locating in our state and capital. Our 21st century courts must be open, transparent and accessible to all. Our citizens’ confidence in their judicial system depends on it. We must be armed with qualified, certified interpreters, promote arbitration as an alternative to costly, courtroom-bound litigation, ensure that all those who cannot afford lawyers have an avenue toward justice, and be constantly updating technology with the aim of improving our courts’ efficiency while saving literally millions of dollars. For all of this, we need your help.

When I first became a judge, we had no email, no cell phones, no Internet. People didn’t Twitter or text, or post things on YouTube, Facebook or Instagram. The most modern equipment we had was a mimeograph machine.
This past year, by Supreme Court order, we created for the first time a governance
structure to bring our use of technology into the 21st century. Chaired by my colleague Justice Harold Melton, and co-chaired by Douglas County Superior Court Judge David Emerson, this permanent Judicial Council Standing Committee on Technology will lead the judicial branch by providing guidance and oversight of its technology initiatives.
Our courts on their own are rapidly moving away from paper documents into the digital age. At the Supreme Court, lawyers must now electronically file all cases. This past year, we successfully launched the next phase by working with trial courts to begin transmitting their entire court record to us electronically. The Court of Appeals also now requires the e-filing of applications to appeal, and this year, will join the Supreme Court in accepting electronic trial records.

Our goal is to develop a uniform statewide electronic filing and retrieval system so that lawyers and others throughout the judiciary can file and access data the easiest way possible.
Using a single portal, attorneys will be able to file documents with trial courts and appellate courts – and retrieve them from any court in the state. This is the system advocated by our partner, President Bob Kaufman of the State Bar of Georgia, and by attorneys throughout the state.
Such a system will not only make our courts more efficient at huge savings, but it will make Georgia safer. When our trial judges conduct bond hearings, for example, they often lack critical information about the person before them. They usually have reports about any former convictions, but they may not have information about cases pending against the defendant in other courts. The technology exists now to ensure that they do.
Also on the horizon is the expanded use of videoconferencing – another electronic
improvement that will save money and protect citizens’ lives. After a conviction and sentence to prison, post-trial hearings require courts to send security teams to pick up the prisoner and bring him to court. Without encroaching on the constitutional right of confrontation, we could videoconference the inmate’s testimony from his prison cell. Again, the technology already exists.
Our Committee on Technology will be at the forefront of guiding our courts into the 21st century.

As Georgia grows, it grows more diverse.
Our Georgia courts are required by the federal government to provide language services free of charge to litigants and witnesses, not only in criminal cases but in civil cases as well.
Even for fluent English speakers, the judicial system can be confusing and unwelcoming.
My vision for Georgia’s judiciary in the 21st century is that every court, in every city and every county in Georgia, will have the capacity of serving all litigants, speaking any language, regardless of national origin, from the moment they enter the courthouse until the moment they leave. That means that on court websites, signs and forms will be available in multiple languages, that all court staff will have the tools they need to assist any customers, and that court proceedings will have instant access to the interpreters of the languages they need.
Chief Magistrate Kristina Blum of the Gwinnett County Magistrate Court has been
working hard to ensure access to justice for all those who come to her court, most of whom are representing themselves.
Recently her court created brochures that provide guidance for civil trials, family
violence matters, warrant applications, garnishments, and landlord-tenant disputes. These brochures provide basic information about each proceeding – what to expect and how best to present their case in court.
Judge Blum, who is in line to be president of the Council of Magistrate Judges and is a member of our Judicial Council, has had the brochures translated into Spanish, Korean and Vietnamese. Such non-legalese forms and tutorial videos that our citizens can understand go a long way toward building trust in the judicial system, and in our entire government.
The Supreme Court Commission on Interpreters, chaired by Justice Keith Blackwell, is
making significant strides in ensuring that our courts uphold the standards of due process. With the help of Commission member Jana Edmondson-Cooper, an energetic attorney with the Georgia Legal Services Program, the Commission is working around the state to educate judges,court administrators and lawyers on the judiciary’s responsibilities in providing language assistance.
The essence of due process is the opportunity to be heard. Our justice system is the envy of other countries because it is open and fair to everyone seeking justice. By helping those who have not yet mastered English, we reinforce the message that the doors to the best justice system in the world are open to everyone.
Our law demands it. Our Constitution demands it.

The courts of the 21st century will symbolize a new era. A turning point in our history occurred when we realized there was a smarter way to handle criminals.
Six years ago, my colleague and then Chief Justice Carol Hunstein accompanied
Representative Wendell Willard to Alabama to explore how that state was reforming its criminal justice system. Back in Georgia, Governor Deal seized the reins, brought together the three branches of government, and through extraordinary leadership, has made criminal justice reform a reality. Georgia is now a model for the nation.
Today, following an explosive growth in our prison population that doubled between
1990 and 2011 and caused corrections costs to top one billion dollars a year, last year our prison population was the lowest it has been in 10 years. Our recidivism rate is the lowest it’s been in three decades. And we have turned back the tide of rising costs.
For the last five years, the Georgia Council on Criminal Justice Reform – created by the governor and your legislation – has been busy transforming our criminal justice system into one that does a better job of protecting public safety while holding non-violent offenders accountable and saving millions in taxpayer dollars. I am extremely grateful to this Council and commend the steady leadership of co-chairs Judge Michael Boggs of the Court of Appeals and Thomas Worthy of the State Bar of Georgia.
Throughout this historic reform, Georgia’s trial court judges have been in the trenches.
Our number one goal in criminal justice reform is to better protect the safety of our citizens.
Central to that goal is the development of our specialty courts – what some call accountability courts.
These courts have a proven track record of reducing recidivism rates and keeping our
citizens safe. Nationwide, 75 percent of drug court graduates remain free of arrest two years after completing the program, and the most conservative analyses show that drug courts reduce crime as much as 45 percent more than other sentencing options. Last year, these courts helped save Georgia more than $51 million in prison costs.
From the beginning, you in the legislature have steadfastly supported the growth in these courts, most recently appropriating more than $19 million for the current fiscal year.
Georgia now has 131 of these courts, which include drug courts, DUI courts, juvenile and adult mental health courts, and veterans courts. Today, only two judicial circuits in the state do not yet have a specialty court, and both are in the early stages of discussing the possibility of starting one. In addition to those already involved, last year alone, we added nearly 3500 new participants to these courts.
Behind that number are individual tales of lives changed and in some cases, lives saved.
Our judges, who see so much failure, take pride in these success stories. And so should you.

Chief Judge Richard Slaby of the Richmond County State Court, speaks with great pride of Judge David Watkins and the specialty courts that have grown under Judge Watkins’ direction. Today the recidivism rate among the Augusta participants is less than 10 percent.
The judges who run these courts are committed and deserve our thanks. We are grateful to leaders like Judge Slaby, who is President-Elect of the Council of State Court Judges and a member of our Judicial Council; to Judge Stephen Goss of the Dougherty Superior Court, whose mental health court has been recognized as one of the best mental health courts in our country; to Chief Judge Brenda Weaver, President of the Council of Superior Court Judges and a member of our Judicial Council. Judge Weaver of the Appalachian Judicial Circuit serves on the Council of
Accountability Court Judges of Georgia, which you created last year by statute. Its purpose is to improve the quality of our specialty courts through proven standards and practices, and it is chaired by Superior Court Judge Jason Deal of Hall County. Judge Deal’s dedication to the specialty court model in his community, and his guidance and encouragement to programs throughout the state, are described as invaluable by those who work with him.

We may not have a unified court system in Georgia. But we have judges unified in their commitment to our courts. Among our one thousand four hundred and fifty judges, Georgia has many fine leaders. I’ve told you about a number of them today. In closing, I want to mention two more.
When the United States Supreme Court issued its historic decision last year on same-sex marriage, our Council of Probate Court Judges led the way toward compliance. Three months before the ruling was issued, the judges met privately at the behest of the Council’s then president, Judge Chase Daughtrey of Cook County, and his successor, Judge Don Wilkes of Emanuel County. Together, they determined that regardless of what the Supreme Court decided, they would follow the law. Both Governor Deal and Attorney General Sam Olens also publicly announced they would respect the court’s decision, despite tremendous pressure to do otherwise.
These men are all great leaders who spared our state the turmoil other states endured. The bottom line is this: In Georgia, we may like the law, we may not like the law, but we follow the law.

The day-to-day business of the Georgia courts rarely makes the news. Rather judges,
their staff and clerks spend their days devoted to understanding the law, tediously pushing cases through to resolution, committed to ferreting out the truth and making the right decision. It is not easy, and they must often stand alone, knowing that when they sentence someone to prison, many lives hang in the balance between justice and mercy.
So I thank all of our leaders, and I thank all of our judges who are leading our courts into the 21st century.
May God bless them. May God bless you. And may God bless all the people of Georgia.
Thank you.

The Daily Sheeple: “FUKUSHIMA? 10,000 DEAD SQUID WASH UP ON CHILE BEACH”

by nootkabear, posted in 10-15 million people, americium, beaches, Chili, contaminated, contamination, cytotoxic agent, Danger, dead, death, deaths, disaster, DNA Damage, dying, fallout, Fish, fishermen, food chain, Fukushima, Health, Idiots, Injustice, inonizing radiation, Iodine 131, Japan, Japan's National Institute of Radiological Sciences, mass die offs, Mortality Event, Nuclear, nuclear catastrophe, nuked, Pacific Ocean, plutonium, Radiation, radiation poisoning, radioactive, radioactive concentration, radiocesium, RADIONUCLIDES, Raidoanalytical, Strontium, thyroid


FUKUSHIMA? 10,000 DEAD SQUID WASH UP ON CHILE BEACH
JANUARY 18, 2016 | MELISSA DYKES | THE DAILY SHEEPLE | 4,008 VIEWS
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/fukushima-10000-dead-squid-wash-up-on-chile-beach_012016

It is being referred to as Cthulhu-geddon.
Squid have washed up on Santa Maria Island off Chile this week in what some have described as biblical proportions. Thousands of dead and dying squid are piled up on the shore. While some squid normally do wash up this time of year, it’s never been in this large of a quantity.

Exact reason for this die-off is unknown, but some experts claim it might be a sudden drop in oxygen content in the water or an increase in water temperatures. They just really don’t know.

Of course, just like all the other mass die-offs up and down the Pacific coast in recent years, no one in any official capacity is pointing to the Fukushima disaster, still dumping tons of radioactive water into the sea as it has been for the last half a decade now just across the globe from Chile.


Screenshot 2016-01-18 at 8.08.59 AM

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).
Contributed by Melissa Dykes of The Daily Sheeple.
Melissa Dykes is a writer, researcher, and analyst for The Daily Sheeple and a co-creator of Truthstream Media with Aaron Dykes, a site that offers teleprompter-free, unscripted analysis of The Matrix we find ourselves living in. Melissa also co-founded Nutritional Anarchy with Daisy Luther of The Organic Prepper, a site focused on resistance through food self-sufficiency. Wake the flock up!
Wake The Flock Up! Please Share With Sheeple Far & Wide:

Daily Report and Andrew Phillips: Analyzing the Suit Over Georgia Voters’ Personal Data Leak

by nootkabear, posted in 10-15 million people, above the law, Attorneys, Big Law, Caution, corruption, Court Cases, Courts, Danger, disaster, ethics cases, fallout, Georgia, hazard, Headlines, Idiots, Lawyers, manifest injustice, Public safety, stability issues, Warning

Analyzing the Suit Over Georgia Voters’ Personal Data Leak
Andrew Phillips, Daily Report
November 20, 2015
http://www.dailyreportonline.com/id=1202743008663/Analyzing-the-Suit-Over-Georgia-Voters-Personal-Data-Leak?mcode=0&curindex=0&curpage=ALL


Andrew Phillips
Andrew Phillips is senior counsel in McGuireWoods’ Atlanta office, where he is editor of the firm’s “Password Protected” blog, in which a version of this article first appeared. His practice focuses on representing and counseling clients in a variety of class action and high stakes civil litigation.

John Disney/Daily Report

Did the Georgia secretary of state release the Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers, and dates of birth of every registered Georgia voter? Those are the allegations first made by putative class representatives Elise Piper and Yvette Sanders in a recently filed Fulton County Superior Court lawsuit and confirmed by recent statements by the secretary of state.

The office of Secretary of State Brian Kemp attributes the data leak to a “clerical error,” which it alleges involved the dissemination of CD-ROMs containing extraneous data to only 12 recipients and that the disks are in the process of being recovered.

Piper and Sanders also allege that, despite being on notice of the leak, the state failed to notify the affected voters, or credit reporting agencies, in violation of the Georgia Personal Identity Protection Act of 2007 (GPIPA).

As troubling as the release of this information may be to voters—who may be dubious that the leak has been contained and are concerned about the risk of identity theft or fraud—it is unclear what, if any, legal remedy is available to plaintiffs.

The Data Leak
Per the complaint, the Social Security and driver’s license numbers were collected as part of the voter registration process. However, the suit alleges that although the voter registration process only required the last four digits of each voter’s Social Security number, the Secretary of State’s Office nonetheless maintained “each voter’s complete Social Security and driver’s license number.”

Some voter identification information, such as names and addresses—but not Social Security and driver’s license numbers—is regularly maintained in a “voter file” which is routinely provided on CD-ROM to media members and political parties free of charge. The voter file is also available to the general public for a $500 fee. However, plaintiffs allege, when the October 2015 voter file was distributed, it not only contained standard voter identification information but also the Social Security number, driver’s license number, and date of birth for all 6,184,281 registered Georgia voters.

The Georgia Personal Identity Protection Act
Legally, the type of data released is a distinction with a difference. GPIPA—like many similar state data breach notification statutes—defines “personal information,” in relevant part, as “an individual’s first name or first initial and last name in combination with any one or more of the following data elements,” including a Social Security number or driver’s license number. Thus, while the dissemination of the standard voter file containing voters’ names and addresses alone likely did not constitute a release of protected personal information, the alleged release of that information in conjunction with Social Security and driver’s license numbers could be deemed a breach.
Of course, even if the information was—as it appears to be—”personal information,” that is not the end of the inquiry. Other key questions include whether the Georgia Secretary of State is an “information broker or data collector” subject to the act, whether the release of the information was a “breach of the security of the system” within the meaning of the act, and whether the state failed to comply with the notice requirements of GPIPA.

Based on what we know, it would appear the answers to the first two questions are yes. GPIPA defines a data collector to include state agencies and actors as long as they are not maintaining records “primarily for traffic safety, law enforcement or licensing purposes or for purposes of providing public access to court records or to real or personal property information.” Assuming the Office of the Secretary of State cannot meet any of these exceptions—as seems likely—it is a “data collector.”

Likewise, the act defines “breach of the security of the system” to mean “unauthorized acquisition of an individual’s electronic data that compromises the security, confidentiality or integrity of personal information.” Again, based on the available information, this definition would appear to have been met by the dissemination of the personal information to media and political parties.

That said, the secretary of state may argue that the release of the information to a mere dozen people, followed by prompt efforts to recover the disks and contain the leak, did not jeopardize “the security, confidentiality, or integrity of personal information.” Of course, the fact that plaintiffs’ counsel apparently ended up with one of the disks undermines these arguments.

Turning to the next question, if GPIPA applies and the release was a breach, what was the Office of the Secretary of State required to do?
Under GPIPA, any information broker or data collector “shall give notice of any breach of the security of the system following discovery or notification of the breach” to Georgia residents whose unencrypted personal information was “acquired by an unauthorized person.”
With regard to timing, the notice shall be made “in the most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay, consistent with the legitimate needs of law enforcement.” Law enforcement may delay notification if “a law enforcement agency determines that the notification will compromise a criminal investigation.”

Finally, where, as here, a breach requires notification to more than 10,000 residents, the data collector must also inform “all consumer reporting agencies.” Per the complaint, the secretary of state’s office did not provide notice to affected voters or consumer reporting agencies in the approximately one-month since the release, which could constitute a lack of notice.

On the other hand, perhaps the state can argue that the length of time that has passed since the potential breach without notification was not an “unreasonable delay” in light of the facts surrounding the release.

As for the type of notice required, the act typically requires written, telephonic, or, with prior permission, electronic notice. However, where the cost of the notice, as here, would exceed $50,000 or the breach affected more than 100,000 individuals, “substitute notice” may be appropriate. This can include notice by email (when known), conspicuous notice on the entity’s website, and notification via statewide media.
Thus, in this case, the statute could likely be satisfied with a press release and conspicuous notification on the Secretary of State web page—an embarrassment, perhaps, but not a huge logistical hurdle.

Do Plaintiffs Have a Case?
Despite the possibility that the secretary of state’s office may have violated GPIPA, plaintiffs’ remedy, if any, is unclear. Notably, plaintiffs have not sued for damages—likely because GPIPA does not expressly allow damages, and, regardless, seeking damages would likely trigger a sovereign immunity fight. Rather, the suit seeks equitable relief requiring the secretary of state to comply with GPIPA’s notification requirements and “prevent future harm due to the disclosure,” and attorneys’ fees.

While it is difficult to imagine that GPIPA was enacted without any enforcement mechanism or remedy—unlike many other states’ data privacy laws—GPIPA does not expressly create an independent civil cause of action, contain any statutory remedies or provide for an award of attorneys’ fees.

Moreover, while the only two published cases that have examined the act have not foreclosed a private right of action, neither has expressly found one, either. In the first, Willingham v. Global Payments, the Northern District of Georgia held the act inapplicable because the plaintiffs in that case were not residents of Georgia.
More recently, in an opinion arising out of the In re Target data breach litigation, the court allowed plaintiffs’ GPIPA claim to survive a motion to dismiss because “Georgia’s data-breach-notice statute is silent as to enforcement” and “neither party cites any case regarding how a court should interpret silence as to enforcement under Georgia law.”

The plaintiffs’ chance of success is unclear based on the paucity of case law examining GPIPA—and the fact that no court has affirmatively found a private cause of action.

Lessons for Government and Industry
Although the merits of plaintiffs’ suit are an open question—both because the secretary of state may have a viable defense and because GPIPA may be relatively toothless—it still carries important lessons for businesses and others collecting and processing personal information.

First, the Secretary of State Office’s “clerical error” illustrates the risk of collecting more data than needed. If only the last four digits of voters’ Social Security numbers were necessary, then the retention of complete Social Security and driver’s license numbers appears to have been an unnecessary risk that, in this case, led to a substantial data leak and litigation.

Second, those collecting and processing personal information should know—and comply with—data breach notification laws. For larger companies, this likely means compliance with various states’ disclosure laws—many of which have much clearer penalties and enforcement mechanisms than GPIPA.

Finally—and perhaps most fundamentally—data collectors and custodians should have a robust information management program in place that is commensurate with the volume and sensitivity of the data at issue. Simply put, a data management system with sufficient checks and safeguards should prevent a “clerical error” from potentially putting millions at risk.

Andrew Phillips is senior counsel in McGuireWoods’ Atlanta office, where he is editor of the firm’s “Password Protected” blog, in which a version of this article first appeared. His practice focuses on representing and counseling clients in a variety of class action and high stakes civil litigation.

Read more: http://www.dailyreportonline.com/id=1202743008663/Analyzing-the-Suit-Over-Georgia-Voters-Personal-Data-Leak#ixzz3sCITf37b

Can the Senate Get Much More Full of Shit? “Expert: Plutonium contamination of Pacific Ocean food chain from Fukushima now suspected; “Real source of potential long term problems for humans” — Newspaper: “Leakage of highly contaminated water into sea must be dealt with immediately” — Gov’t: Effect on health of US public not ‘significant’ “

by nootkabear, posted in contamination, Danger, death, dying, food chain, Fukushima, Idiots, killing us, Pacific Ocean, radiation poisoning, Strontium, US Senate
«
  »

Expert: Plutonium contamination of Pacific Ocean food chain from Fukushima now suspected; “Real source of potential long term problems for humans” — Newspaper: “Leakage of highly contaminated water into sea must be dealt with immediately” — Gov’t: Effect on health of US public not ‘significant’ (VIDEO)

Published: September 14th, 2014 at 9:45 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
54 comments
http://enenews.com/expert-plutonium-contamination-pacific-ocean-food-chain-fukushima-suspected-be-underway-real-source-potential-long-term-problems-humans-newspaper-leakage-highly-contaminated-water-sea-be-dealt-imme

The Yomiuri Shimbun, Sept. 11, 2014: TEPCO measures fail to hold water — Three and a half years after the outbreak of the crisis at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant, efforts to contain water contaminated with radioactive substances at the plant are at a crossroads… [TEPCO] has been unable to curb the growing volume of contaminated water… Yomiuri Shimbun reporters entered the Fukushima No. 1 plant on Monday morning… Ocean still remains vulnerable — Leakage of highly contaminated water into the sea is another problem that must be dealt with immediately…

Nuclear Safety In The Age Of Chernobyl And Fukushima (pdf), website of Ulrich H. Kurzweg, University of Florida Professor Emeritus in the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Dec. 10, 2013: Strontium, cesium and plutonium are the real source of potential long term problems for humans as they can cause cell damage over many years especially if they get into the food chain as may be happening at the moment to people in Japan and to fish in the Pacific… The worry at Fukushima at the moment is… the leakage of radioactive water into the Pacific…

U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Meeting, Japanese Nuclear Plant Crisis in March 2011 (emphasis added):

  • Bill Borchardt, Executive Director of Operations at Nuclear Regulatory Commission (at 13:00 in): Units 2 and 3 appear to have some primary containment damage. There have been releases of radioactivity that are of significant concern, including a significant contamination in the lower levels of Unit 2 and Unit 3 turbines… On Friday, March 11 [2011 the NRC’s] first concern was for a possible tsunami impact on U.S. plants and radioactive materials on the West Coast.
  • U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska (31:15 in): There’s a lot of concern about what may end up in our oceans, impact to the fisheries. Do we have radiation monitors off of Honshu that are measuring anything in the ocean? Or is it just monitors that are evaluating the air?
  • Peter B. Lyons Assistant Secretary of Nuclear Energy at US Dept. of Energy (in 31:45): The Dept. of Energy systems [are] not over the ocean… I am not aware of monitoring capability within the ocean that we have… That certainly could be added if it was deemed necessary. I should add that the Department of Energy, through the calculational capabilities — using the source terms developed by the NRC as being the worst cases —we do not anticipate a significant health effect in any of the United States areas.
  • U.S. Senator John Barrasso, R-Wyoming (53:30 in): In the New York Times today, it reported that highly contaminated water… could leak into the ocean. What are the implications of that?
  • Lyons (53:45 in): Well, certainly that has to be monitored from the standpoint of fisheries, food products. There are other agencies within our government that would betracking whether there were any concerns from a U.S. perspective.

Watch the Senate meeting on C-SPAN here