Social Media

Former special counsel Robert Mueller, who led the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, has issued a stark warning: the United States is still not adequately prepared to combat Russian attacks on its democratic process. This caution comes in the preface to *Interference: The Inside Story of Trump, Russia, and the Mueller Investigation*, a new book by Aaron Zebley, James Quarles, and Andrew Goldstein, all of whom served as prosecutors under Mueller during his investigation from 2017 to 2019. “It is … evident that Americans have not learned the lessons of Russia’s attack on our democracy in 2016,” Mueller writes. He points out that the evidence was undeniable in his report, which detailed how the Russian government systematically targeted the U.S. electoral process to undermine democracy and boost one candidate over another. That candidate was Donald Trump, the Republican who won the presidency over Democrat Hillary Clinton. Despite efforts by various government officials, Mueller states that the country remains ill-prepared for future Russian interference, echoing a grave concern that “Russia attacked us before and will do so again.” Mueller’s warning underscores the importance of vigilance from all Americans, as well as the need for heightened governmental readiness. The book *Interference* explores the Mueller investigation in depth, from its origins following the firing of FBI Director James Comey to its eventual conclusion in March 2019. The investigation did not find conclusive evidence of collusion between Trump and Moscow, but it did lead to indictments against three Russian entities and 34 individuals. One of those convicted was Trump’s campaign manager, Paul Manafort, who was jailed. Mueller also identified 10 potential instances of obstruction of justice by Trump, though he refrained from indicting the sitting president due to Justice Department guidelines. Mueller praises Zebley, Quarles, and Goldstein, writing that they “care deeply about the rule of law and know the importance of making decisions with integrity and humility.” He highlights the value of these principles, particularly when facing those who are unwilling to play by the rules. The book also reveals behind-the-scenes moments, including a meeting at the White House, where Mueller was considered for a return to his previous position as FBI director. According to the authors, Trump dominated the conversation, but Mueller declined the offer, despite Trump’s later claims to the contrary. In the lead-up to the 2016 election, an “October surprise” came in the form of WikiLeaks' release of hacked Democratic emails, attributed to Russian interference. This event coincided with the fallout from Trump’s infamous *Access Hollywood* tape, in which he boasted about sexual assault. The Mueller team’s investigation confirmed that Russia’s actions were aimed at tipping the scales in Trump’s favor. However, attempts to interview Trump himself were blocked by his attorneys, including Rudy Giuliani, who breached confidentiality agreements, leading Mueller to cut ties with him permanently. As the book examines the aftermath of the 2016 election, it also reflects on the broader legal challenges Trump faced during his presidency. Giuliani is now embroiled in criminal and civil proceedings linked to efforts to overturn Trump’s 2020 election loss, while Trump faces multiple charges himself, including 34 criminal counts related to hush-money payments before the 2016 election. The authors express concern over recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings that could complicate future investigations into presidential misconduct. They highlight cases such as *Trump v. United States*, which grants a president "presumptive immunity" for official actions, thereby limiting the scope of potential prosecution for presidential abuses of power. Mueller’s investigation may not have resulted in Trump’s punishment, but it played a significant role in shaping public discourse on the integrity of American elections. As the nation heads toward another presidential race, the warnings from Mueller and his team resonate even more urgently. Their book arrives at a time when new reports suggest that Russian influence operations, this time targeting Vice President Kamala Harris, are already underway. Mueller’s warning is clear: while the U.S. may have learned from the past, it remains unprepared for the challenges of tomorrow. Credit: The Guardian 2024-09-19

Kamala Harris, the vice president of the United States and a candidate for the 2024 presidential election, has indicated she is open to exploring reparations for slavery, marking a potential shift in national discourse on racial justice. During an interview with reporters from the National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ) in Philadelphia, Harris emphasized the importance of confronting the long-lasting effects of America’s historical injustices, including slavery, redlining, and Jim Crow laws. Harris’s stance on reparations could influence her standing among Black voters, a demographic that polls suggest has grown increasingly disillusioned with the Democratic Party. Some of her allies believe that embracing reparations could help win back these voters. However, others fear that the topic could alienate more voters than it attracts, given the stark racial divide on the issue. Throughout her career, Harris has largely avoided engaging in debates centered on identity politics. As the first Black woman to lead a major party’s presidential ticket, she has often navigated discussions about race with care. During the NABJ interview, she underscored the importance of not assuming support from Black voters based solely on her heritage. “I think it’s very important to not operate from the assumption that Black men are in anybody’s pocket,” she said. “Black men are like any other voting group, you’ve gotta earn their vote. So I’m working to earn the vote, not assuming I’m going to have it because I am Black.” Her comments reflect the delicate balance she must strike as she seeks to unite a broad coalition of voters in the 2024 election, particularly at a time when Republican candidate Donald Trump has been gaining traction among Black men. In contrast to Harris, Trump has consistently focused on identity politics, taking aim at Harris’s dual heritage. In his own address to the NABJ, Trump controversially claimed that Harris had only recently “happened to turn Black.” His remarks highlight the growing tensions surrounding race in the upcoming election. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-09-19

As tensions between Russia and the West intensify, the Biden administration is reportedly considering a move that could push the world to the edge of nuclear disaster. According to The New York Times, there is growing discussion about allowing Ukraine to use NATO-supplied long-range precision weapons to target Russian territories. This decision, if pursued, would bring the world closer to the threat of nuclear conflict than at any time since the Cuban Missile Crisis. Instead of prioritizing a diplomatic solution to end the war, which many argue should never have started, the current administration seems to be adopting a strategy that Russia has explicitly warned against. Russian President Vladimir Putin has made it clear that any such attack on Russian territory would be viewed as a direct act of war by NATO. “Long-range strikes in Russia will mean that NATO countries — the United States and European countries — are at war with Russia,” Putin warned. However, some American analysts dismiss this as a bluff. As The Times noted, “17 former ambassadors and generals wrote in a letter to the administration this week, ‘Easing the restrictions on Western weapons will not cause Moscow to escalate… Moscow’s response remains unchanged despite Ukraine striking Crimea and Kursk.’” These voices are advocating a dangerous form of brinksmanship, mistaking Russia’s restraint for weakness. They propose pushing the envelope further, with each escalation — from HIMARS to cluster munitions, tanks, fighter jets, and now long-range missiles — inching the world ever closer to a catastrophic nuclear war. The assumption seems to be that if a provocation doesn’t trigger a response, it’s safe to push harder. But this thinking ignores a critical factor: Russia is a nuclear power. President John F. Kennedy understood the precarious balance of nuclear deterrence. In 1963, he warned, “Nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war.” This wisdom seems to have been forgotten. Putin has repeatedly signaled that Russia could use nuclear weapons if its territorial integrity is threatened. In September 2022, he declared, “If the territorial integrity of our country is threatened, we will without doubt use all available means to protect Russia and our people — this is not a bluff.” Putin’s deal with Belarus to station tactical nuclear weapons there and Russia’s recent revision of its nuclear doctrine should be taken seriously. It is hard to imagine how the United States would react if a foreign power were arming its enemies with missiles and providing training to strike deep within its territory. The U.S. would never tolerate such actions. Why, then, should anyone expect Russia to accept these provocations? This dangerous game of nuclear brinksmanship must end. There is no further step between launching U.S.-provided missiles into Russian territory and a potential nuclear exchange. The risks could not be higher. And for what? To weaken Russia? To control Ukraine’s natural resources? No vital American interest is at stake that justifies risking nuclear conflict. The pursuit of global dominance at the cost of such peril is nothing short of madness. The war fever gripping Washington has reached alarming levels. In last Tuesday’s debate, Vice President Kamala Harris evoked the possibility of Russian forces advancing across Europe, a scenario that strains credulity. Russia has struggled to make headway in Ukraine, a country far from Europe’s greatest military powers. It is clear that Russia’s war aims, stated early on, revolved around Ukrainian neutrality and halting NATO’s expansion eastward. After so many lives lost and resources spent, no party involved in this conflict is better off. It is time to recognize the catastrophic implications of continuing down this path. A nuclear war would mean the end of civilization, and perhaps humanity itself. Former President Donald Trump has pledged to end this war, but by the time he takes office, it might be too late. The time for diplomacy is now. President Biden and Vice President Harris must reverse their current course and engage in direct negotiations with Moscow to prevent an unspeakable disaster. The stakes could not be higher, and the time to act is rapidly running out. Opinion Donald Trump Jr & Robert F. Kennedy Jr Credit: The Hill 2024-09-19

Posts derailing the topic with unsubstainitated Gaza related claims have been removed along with a reply.

A post containing an unapproved video source (Scott Ritter) Has been removed

A nonsense troll post has been removed giving a spoof location on Google maps to a missile strike. Try that again and be prepared for another posting holiday. @beautifulthailand99 An off topic post on the Trump shooting suspect which has its own topic has additionaly been removed from the same poster.

A post making a number of unsubstaniated claims has been removed.

Sean “Diddy” Combs will remain behind bars as his legal battle over sex trafficking and racketeering charges continues. On Tuesday, a federal judge denied the hip-hop mogul's request for bail, rejecting a proposal from his legal team that would have allowed him to await trial under home detention. Combs’ lawyers had pitched a $50 million bond, secured by his Miami property, as part of the deal to keep him under house arrest. However, the court sided with prosecutors, who argued that the 54-year-old entertainer was a significant flight risk and had already attempted to contact witnesses and victims in the case. According to prosecutors, some of those individuals remain fearful of Combs, adding to concerns over his release. Combs pleaded not guilty to the charges brought against him, which include sex trafficking, racketeering, and other serious offenses. The indictment, unveiled earlier on Tuesday, lays out a disturbing picture of the alleged criminal enterprise Combs is accused of operating. Prosecutors claim that he used drugs, violence, and coercion to force women into sexual exploitation, all to serve his personal desires. The 14-page indictment describes how Combs "abused, threatened, and coerced women and others around him to fulfill his sexual desires, protect his reputation, and conceal his conduct." As Combs awaits his trial, his legal team is expected to continue fighting for his release, while prosecutors push forward with what promises to be a highly publicized case. Credit: BBC 2024-09-18

Pager explosions rocked Lebanon, targeting Hezbollah members and leading to the deaths of nine people and injuries to thousands more. Fatalities are expected to rise significantly. The exact cause of the explosions is still under investigation, but experts who spoke to CNN believe that the blasts were the result of hardware tampering rather than a cybersecurity breach. However, this has yet to be confirmed by authorities. Watch The use of low-tech devices like pagers reflects Hezbollah's long-standing focus on avoiding high-tech gadgets, which could expose them to surveillance. Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah had earlier urged members and their families to avoid cell phones, calling them a security risk. "Shut it off, bury it, put it in an iron chest and lock it up," he declared in a speech, warning that cell phones could be exploited by adversaries. The explosions, which have been attributed to Israeli involvement by both Iranian and Hamas officials, have rattled Hezbollah and its supporters. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi accused Israel of orchestrating the attack, labeling it as "Israeli terrorism" during a phone conversation with Lebanese Foreign Minister Abdallah Bou Habib. Hamas also condemned the attack, blaming "Zionist terrorist aggression" and expressing solidarity with Hezbollah and the Lebanese people. This latest incident highlights the deepening tensions in the region. The attack, striking at the heart of Hezbollah’s communication network, has shaken the group and may lead to further escalation in an already fragile situation. Credit: CNN 2024-09-18

In a heartbreaking incident that shocked the community, 26-year-old Kyle Clifford has been charged with the murders of Carol Hunt, 61, and her two daughters, Hannah, 28, and Louise, 25. The tragic event, which unfolded on July 9 at the family’s home in Bushey, Hertfordshire, involved a brutal crossbow attack. Clifford, who has been in custody since July 10, is now set to appear in Westminster Magistrates' Court to face multiple charges, including three counts of murder, false imprisonment, and possession of offensive weapons. Hertfordshire Police had been unable to question Clifford immediately after the attack, as he was receiving medical treatment for an injury. However, with Clifford now charged, the judicial process can move forward, offering some hope of justice to the grieving family. Detective Chief Inspector Nick Gardner of the Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, and Hertfordshire Major Crime Unit reflected on the gravity of the situation: “Our thoughts remain with the Hunt family and their loved ones as they continue to come to terms with their loss. Over the past couple of months, we have been working hard to gather as much evidence as possible and establish the full circumstances of what happened that day. Today, we have managed to secure charges against Kyle Clifford in connection with the murders of Carol, Hannah, and Louise Hunt. Although it has taken some time to reach this stage, we can now move forward with the judicial process and seek justice for their family.” Carol Hunt, the wife of BBC racing commentator John Hunt, and their two daughters were found gravely injured in their Ashlyn Close home, leaving the close-knit family in unimaginable pain. In a statement released in July, John Hunt and his surviving daughter, Amy, expressed their profound grief, stating that their devastation "cannot be put into words." They further described the aftermath of the attack as "an extremely difficult time for us." Tributes poured in from friends, family, and colleagues, highlighting the impact the Hunt family had on those who knew them. Many described them as a "gentle, beautiful family," whose loss is deeply felt across their community. Hannah’s boyfriend, Alex Klein, took to social media to share his sorrow, posting a heartfelt message alongside a photo of the couple. He wrote: “RIP the love of my life, I will never forget you, stolen from me too soon. The brightest light in my life. My brave queen for life. Until we meet again... I love you Hansy.” Support for John Hunt and his family extended beyond their immediate circle, with colleagues from BBC and ITV publicly expressing their sympathies. BBC Radio 5 Live host Mark Chapman, visibly emotional, shared his thoughts ahead of the coverage of England’s Euro 2024 semi-final, dedicating a moment to Hunt. He said: “John Hunt is our colleague and our friend, not just to the current 5 Live sports team, but to all of those who’ve worked here with him over the past 20 years, and also to all of you who have enjoyed his superb commentaries. So, on behalf of everybody connected to 5 Live Sports, our love and thoughts and support are with John and his family.” Clifford, who hails from Rendlesham Road in Enfield, north London, will make a remote appearance in court. As the legal process begins, there remains a strong sense of grief and solidarity among those affected by this unspeakable tragedy. Lisa Ramsarran, chief crown prosecutor for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in Thames and Chiltern, reiterated this sentiment, stating: “Our thoughts remain with the Hunt family and all those who have been affected by this tragic incident.” The pain of the Hunt family and the broader community will be long-lasting, but there is hope that justice will be served as the case proceeds. Credit: The Independent 2024-09-18

Vice President Kamala Harris surged ahead with a six-point lead over former President Donald Trump after last week's presidential debate, according to a new poll released by Morning Consult. This latest poll marks a significant shift in the race, which had previously been a close contest between the two candidates. Prior to the debate, most polls had shown Harris and Trump in a near tie. However, Harris’ strong performance on various key issues seems to have altered the political landscape. Eli Yokley, a political analyst at Morning Consult, stated in an email that “a majority of likely voters — including 1 in 5 Republicans — believe Harris won the debate, and [her] performance appears to be crystalizing her national lead over the former president.” The Morning Consult poll was conducted between September 13 and 15, surveying 11,022 likely U.S. voters. The poll, which has an unweighted margin of error of +/-1 percentage point, revealed Harris with 51% of support compared to 45% for Trump. Morning Consult described this as a "new record" for Harris, making her the first Democratic presidential nominee to reach this level of support. "Her 51% of support among likely voters, which is also at a record high, is driven largely by her best figures to date among Democrats, Biden 2020 voters, liberals, women, 18- to 34-year-olds, and millennials," the poll noted. The poll's methodology focused on registered voters likely to participate in the upcoming election. Respondents were asked to rate their likelihood of voting on a scale of 1 to 10, with "1" representing those who would definitely not vote and "10" indicating those certain to vote. Only individuals who rated themselves as an "8" or higher were considered likely voters. The poll did not account for voters who were initially undecided but were later asked to indicate which candidate they were leaning toward. Both Harris and Trump are targeting young voters, a group that includes many undecided or persuadable individuals. While Trump has been trying to appeal to younger male voters through appearances on popular podcasts and at UFC events, Harris has focused on young women, many of whom have become more politically engaged in recent years, especially around issues like reproductive rights. Harris’ momentum was further boosted when pop star Taylor Swift publicly endorsed her on Instagram, where Swift has a massive following of 284 million. The singer's post encouraging voter registration led to 338,000 visits to Vote.gov within 15 hours, potentially increasing Harris’ support among young voters. According to Yokley, Harris "is enjoying a positive news cycle among the likely electorate this year that's earning her positive marks and aligns with her best numbers yet in the head-to-head contest" against Trump. Credit: AXIOS 2024-09-18

The New Tolerance Campaign (NTC), a watchdog organization, has announced it will donate $1 million to any US-based LGBTQ advocacy group willing to host a Pride parade in Gaza or the West Bank. The offer is open to groups like “Queers for Palestine,” which have gained visibility in the wake of the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel, despite homosexuality remaining highly taboo in Palestinian territories. Gay and transgender individuals in Gaza and the West Bank face severe persecution, including acts of violence. Gregory T. Angelo, president of the NTC and former leader of the Log Cabin Republicans, emphasized that the campaign serves as a wake-up call to those advocating LGBTQ equality in Palestinian regions. "This campaign emerged to call out these purported advocates of LGBT equality and put our money where their mouths are,” he said. Angelo expressed hope that the campaign would either highlight the dangers faced by LGBTQ individuals in Palestinian territories or create an opportunity for peace and pluralism in the region. NTC has secured the $1 million prize and is publicizing the offer through mobile billboards near locations like Columbia University in New York, the headquarters of the Human Rights Campaign in Washington, D.C., and UCLA in Los Angeles. Angelo noted that the flashy prize was designed to capture attention, but the core objective is to advance equality and human rights. The campaign also allows Americans to send direct messages to senior leadership at organizations like GLAAD and the LGBTQ Task Force, urging them to advocate for LGBTQ rights in Palestinian territories. Angelo pointed out that in the U.S., anti-Israel protesters often claim that LGBTQ people are mistreated domestically. However, he countered that by stating the U.S. offers significant legal protections, including anti-discrimination laws and nationwide same-sex marriage, which stand in stark contrast to the treatment of LGBTQ individuals in the Palestinian territories. “Contrast that with what you see over in the Palestinian territories where same-sex marriage isn’t something that’s even a possibility or discussed. There are no protections in terms of employment for sexual orientation or gender,” he said. In 2019, Palestinian Authority police banned LGBTQ events in the West Bank, threatening to arrest anyone participating. Meanwhile, Israel promotes itself as a safe haven for LGBTQ rights, with Tel Aviv celebrated as a top destination for gay and lesbian travelers. Angelo, who visited the West Bank in 2013, said he was stunned by the difference in human rights between Israel and the Palestinian territories. The NTC describes itself as a group that holds institutions accountable for violating their stated values of tolerance. Through campaigns like this, the organization seeks to confront double standards and promote a consistent commitment to tolerance and human rights. Credit: NYP 2024-09-18

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has commended Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni for her success in tackling illegal migration. During a visit to Italy, Starmer noted that Italy has seen a 60% drop in the number of illegal migrants arriving by sea, attributing this to Meloni’s efforts to target the criminal gangs profiting from illegal immigration. He emphasized the importance of cross-border cooperation and stated that the UK and Italy would work closely together on this issue, sharing data and intelligence. Starmer also expressed interest in Italy's offshore asylum processing plan, which involves opening two centres in Albania to handle asylum claims. In a joint press conference with Meloni in Rome, Starmer praised Italy’s approach. "You've made remarkable progress working with countries along migration routes as equals to address the drivers of migration at the source and to tackle the gangs," he said. He highlighted that irregular arrivals to Italy by sea have significantly reduced since 2022 and stressed his commitment to addressing illegal migration in the UK. Starmer visited Italy's national immigration coordination centre with Interior Minister Matteo Piantedosi, where the discussion centred on the tragic consequences of illegal migration, including the recent shipwreck in the Channel that claimed eight lives, bringing the total death toll this year to 46. Starmer also addressed his rejection of the previous UK government's controversial plan to send undocumented migrants to Rwanda while their asylum claims were processed. Drawing from his background as a chief prosecutor, he underlined the need for international collaboration to fight smuggling gangs. "I've never accepted... that we can't do the same with smuggling gangs. And now of course Italy has shown that we can," he said. During the visit, Starmer expressed his admiration for Italy’s agreement with Albania, which involves the establishment of migrant centres where undocumented migrants will be housed while their asylum claims are processed. Starmer noted that the centres are not yet operational but highlighted the potential of such a plan. He added that the reduction in migrant arrivals to Italy could be credited to Italy's deals with Tunisia and Libya, where financial assistance is exchanged for cooperation in stopping migrant departures. Starmer emphasized that preventing people from leaving their countries in the first place is more effective than dealing with those who have already arrived. Starmer's visit did not come without criticism. Labour MP Kim Johnson expressed concern, telling The Guardian that it was "disturbing that Starmer is seeking to learn lessons from a neo-fascist government, particularly after the anti-refugee riots and far-right racist terrorism that swept Britain this summer." Nevertheless, Starmer maintained his pragmatic stance, stating, "We are pragmatists first and foremost. When we see a challenge, we discuss with our friends and allies the different approaches that are being taken." Italy’s hard-right government has recently renewed a deal with Libya, initially signed in 2017, which provides the Libyan coastguard with training and funding to help deter migrants from leaving or to return those caught at sea. As a result of these measures, Italy’s interior ministry reported a significant drop in sea arrivals. Between January 1 and September 13, 44,675 people arrived in Italy, compared to 125,806 during the same period the previous year. While the EU as a whole has seen a 39% decrease in illegal migrant crossings, experts note that many migrants are simply changing their routes, with Channel crossings up 13% this year, according to the EU’s border agency, Frontex. Credit: France 24. 2024-09-18

Amber Nicole Thurman’s story is one of tragedy and loss. The 28-year-old medical assistant from Georgia lost her life due to complications that could have been prevented. After taking abortion pills, Thurman experienced a rare complication where some fetal tissue remained in her body. She sought medical help at Piedmont Henry Hospital in suburban Atlanta, needing a dilation and curettage (D&C) procedure, which would have removed the remaining tissue and treated her infection. However, in the summer of 2022, Georgia passed a law criminalizing abortions with limited exceptions. The hospital delayed providing the D&C for 20 hours, and by the time they finally performed the procedure, it was too late. Thurman’s infection had spread, her organs were failing, and she died. This death, according to an official state committee, was preventable. Tasked with reviewing pregnancy-related deaths to improve maternal health, the committee determined that the hospital’s delay in providing the necessary medical care played a significant role in Thurman’s death. “There is a good chance” that performing a D&C earlier could have saved her life, the committee concluded. Thurman’s case is one of at least two in Georgia where women have died due to delays in accessing abortion care, according to ProPublica. As abortion bans take effect across the U.S., similar cases are coming to light. Doctors and advocates have long warned that such laws, with their vague and non-medical language, would force healthcare providers to choose between protecting their patients’ health and avoiding prosecution. Dr. Melissa Kottke, an OB-GYN at Emory University, cautioned legislators in 2019, saying doctors would feel compelled to wait for their patients to get sicker before intervening. The law in Georgia does allow exceptions to save the mother’s life, but critics argue that the wording of these exceptions is unclear and difficult to interpret. Medical professionals, fearful of facing up to 10 years in prison, may delay necessary treatment. In Thurman’s case, although she presented with severe symptoms of sepsis, including critically low blood pressure, the hospital chose to wait, testing her for sexually transmitted infections and pneumonia instead of performing the D&C. Thurman’s death occurred two weeks after Georgia’s abortion ban went into effect. Her mother and six-year-old son now live with the painful absence of a woman who loved being a mother. Her son, who was at the center of her world, now faces life without her. Amber Thurman’s story is a sobering reminder of the real-life consequences of abortion bans. As states across the country continue to restrict access to abortion, stories like hers are becoming more frequent, shining a light on the dangers of political interference in medical care. Credit: ProPublica 2024-09-18

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has indicated that he will continue accepting donations from Lord Alli, a prominent Labour donor, despite controversy over clothing provided to his wife. The Prime Minister faced questions about gifts from the peer, including clothes and alterations for Lady Starmer following Labour's election victory in July. Starmer acknowledged receiving gifts but stated he would follow parliamentary rules regarding their declaration. The Prime Minister’s actions have drawn scrutiny, as it is alleged that he failed to declare the donations within the required timeframe, breaching parliamentary regulations. The donations, including clothing and personal shopping services from Lord Alli, were not initially registered in the MPs’ interests, but Starmer made a late declaration after seeking advice from parliamentary authorities. Lord Alli has been a longstanding supporter of Starmer, previously donating various items such as spectacles and accommodation. While questioned on the matter during a trip to Italy, Starmer downplayed the controversy, asserting that “all Members of Parliament get gifts” and emphasizing a distinction between declarations and corruption. He added, "The rules say, over a certain value, you’ve got to declare the gifts, so everybody can see what it was, how much it was, who it came from… that’s a good framework." The Conservative Party has called for an investigation, with a formal request sent to the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner. Tory MP Daniel Greenberg raised concerns over Starmer's delayed declaration and referenced a report suggesting that Lord Alli, despite holding no formal government role, had been granted a temporary Downing Street security pass and played an influential role in key Cabinet appointments. Starmer defended his actions, explaining that his team sought advice following the election on the proper procedure for declarations, and any delay was part of a “genuine and proper exercise.” He maintained that he had complied with all necessary rules and continued to argue that the issue at hand was one of transparency, not corruption. "There’s a massive difference between declarations and corruption," he told reporters. Starmer also addressed his receipt of complimentary football tickets, which he has accepted more than 20 times during his time in Parliament. These included tickets to Arsenal matches, where he is a regular supporter. Starmer explained that due to security concerns, he cannot sit in the stands and therefore must accept hospitality. "Never going to an Arsenal game again because I can’t accept hospitality is pushing it a bit far," he remarked. Foreign Secretary David Lammy defended the Prime Minister, arguing that donations helped ensure that Starmer and his wife could "look their best" while representing the country. Lammy compared the situation to that of the U.S., where presidents and first ladies are provided with a taxpayer-funded wardrobe. However, Starmer made it clear that he did not support such a system in the UK. The matter continues to stir debate, with calls for clarity on the Prime Minister's future handling of donations and the broader issue of transparency within the government. Despite the backlash, Starmer insists he will follow the rules, stating, “Wherever there are gifts from anyone, I’m going to comply with the rules.” Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-09-18

In a recent interview, Hillary Clinton voiced her disapproval of Elon Musk’s unsettling remarks about Taylor Swift. Clinton called out Musk for what she described as a deeply inappropriate and misogynistic attack on the pop superstar. The conversation took place during an episode of Kara Swisher's podcast *On*, where Clinton linked Musk’s behavior to a broader culture of toxic masculinity shared by influential figures like Donald Trump. Swisher, the podcast host, was quick to pick up on Clinton’s mention of Musk, asking her to elaborate on what she had called Trump’s "alter ego." Clinton referred to Musk’s recent comments in which he bizarrely suggested that he would forcibly impregnate Swift after her public endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris. During the debate night last week, Musk had tweeted, "Fine Taylor … you win … I will give you a child and guard your cats with my life." According to Clinton, Musk’s suggestion of forcibly "impregnating" Swift was "kind of another way of saying rape." “I can’t understand why he says what he says,” Clinton admitted, expressing her disbelief at Musk’s behavior. She pointed to a recurring theme among figures like Trump and Musk: “misogyny is such a part of their worldview, and they gravitate toward toughness and brutality and machoism.” Clinton added that whether it’s technology tycoons or political figures, their demeaning attitudes toward women are all too common. Clinton also took a moment to praise Taylor Swift, describing her as a “self-made billionaire who brings joy to people and imparts life lessons, particularly to girls and women.” Swift’s success, according to Clinton, makes her a target for figures like Musk and Trump. “They can’t stand it,” Clinton said, referring to their apparent discomfort with strong, independent women. Swift’s endorsement of Kamala Harris, Clinton suggested, likely provoked an even stronger reaction from Trump and Musk. The timing, coming right after the recent debate and adding to Harris’s momentum, may have only intensified their anger. "Swift’s endorsement was always going to trigger Trump," Clinton observed, noting the predictable backlash from the former president’s camp. In her criticism of Musk and Trump, Clinton highlighted a pervasive issue in modern-day power dynamics, where successful women like Swift continue to face aggressive and misogynistic attacks from powerful men who feel threatened by their accomplishments. Credit: Daily Beast 2024-09-18

Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and other popular apps, announced a significant move on Monday by banning Russia Today (RT), Rossiya Segodnya, and other Russian state-affiliated media networks from its platforms. The social media giant cited that these outlets had engaged in deceptive tactics, using covert operations to influence public opinion online. In a written statement, Meta explained, “After careful consideration, we expanded our ongoing enforcement against Russian state media outlets. Rossiya Segodnya, RT, and other related entities are now banned from our apps globally for foreign interference activity.” This decision signals Meta’s most decisive action yet against Russian state media, as it prepares to enforce the ban over the coming days across its platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Threads. This action marks a dramatic shift from Meta’s previous steps, which had included more limited actions such as blocking ads from Russian state media and reducing the reach of their posts. Now, the full ban escalates the tech giant’s stance in a much more aggressive manner. It also comes in the wake of a legal battle in the United States, where earlier this month, two RT employees were charged with money laundering. U.S. officials claim that the scheme was part of an effort to hire an American company to produce content aimed at influencing the upcoming 2024 election. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken also weighed in, stating last Friday that nations should treat the activities of Russian state broadcasters, like RT, as covert intelligence operations. In response to these moves, RT has mocked U.S. actions, accusing the United States of trying to suppress its ability to operate as a journalistic entity. According to Meta, Russian state-controlled media outlets have previously tried to evade detection and may continue to do so, using increasingly deceptive methods. Meta expects that these attempts at influence operations will likely persist, but the company is committed to remaining vigilant and enforcing these bans rigorously. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-09-18

Suella Braverman. Too many still won’t admit the truth about child grooming gangs. We must secure justice for thousands of girls and also ensure that this type of industrial-scale cover-up isn’t repeated. There are some people you never forget. For me, I’ll always remember that meeting in Rochdale with the brave women who had survived brutal sexual abuse. They told me how, as young girls, they had been preyed upon, trafficked and raped, mainly by Pakistani and Afghan men. One woman told me how the violent sexual abuse had started when she was just 12 and how she had thereafter fallen pregnant. I heard how one woman had been raped by more than 150 men by the time she was 16. They told me how police officers, social workers, teachers and councillors all knew about the paedophilia but turned a blind eye for fear of being called racist. They spoke angrily about how the authorities refused to believe them. The truth was covered up out of fear of inflaming racial tension. They told me how grateful they were to the handful of professionals like Maggie Oliver – a policewoman whistle-blower – who saved their lives. The truth is that the Rochdale and Rotherham grooming scandals are one of the biggest injustices in our country and no one should ever forget what happened, and what still happens, in many parts of our country. Last week, sentences totalling more than 100 years were handed down to seven Rotherham perpetrators. Credit must be given to the police and CPS for pursuing these investigations, eventually. Child sexual abuse cases can take years to build, involve the handling of complex and sensitive evidence and depend on the courage of the victims who have to re-live the ordeal in court for convictions to be secured. The survivors have shown immense fortitude. As Home Secretary I was passionate about making progress on this national scandal. Last year we set up a specialist task force, led by the National Crime Agency, to galvanise the investigative work with the police. I worked with the task force closely; it secured over 500 new arrests in its first year. Sadly, much was left undone by the time of the general election and so there is still a lot more to do. We must secure justice for thousands of girls and also ensure that this type of industrial-scale cover-up isn’t repeated. A legal duty on professionals to report sexual abuse is needed to break through the inertia and fear that prevail in many of our organisations. This was one of the key recommendations in the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse and needs to come into force. The police have been heavily criticised for their mishandling of the Rochdale cases for more than a decade – most recently in an independent report earlier this year. But have there been any consequences for their neglect? None. More accurate recording of the data is needed to smash the taboos around some incidents of child sexual abuse. As the independent reports confirm, in Rotherham, Rochdale and Telford, the perpetrators were mainly Pakistani. This truth that dared not speak its name was a reason for the institutional silence and that’s why we need to keep talking about it now. This is not to smear a whole class of people but to be honest about a serious problem in some of our towns and cities. And we need greater powers to deport foreign-born offenders after conviction. It cannot be right that a foreign criminal who has breached our values and rules in such an egregious way can still enjoy residency in our country. It will require political courage to confront these problems if we are serious about securing justice for the survivors and protecting children in the future. This Labour Government must put child safety above political correctness, but I’m not so sure they will. I hope they prove me wrong. Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-09-18

Personal off topic baiting post removed

Ryan Wesley Routh, a 58-year-old man suspected of attempting to assassinate former President Donald Trump, has been charged with federal gun crimes. The charges include possessing a firearm despite a previous felony conviction and possessing a firearm with an obliterated serial number. These charges come as Routh made his first court appearance in West Palm Beach, Florida, adding more tension to an already charged White House race. Watch Arrest In court, Routh appeared shackled and in a blue jumpsuit, answering routine questions about his employment and income. His public defender declined to comment on the case after the hearing. Prosecutors have requested that Routh be detained as a flight risk, and additional hearings are scheduled. An affidavit from the FBI details how they used Routh’s cellphone data to place him at the golf course for over 12 hours, beginning around 1:59 a.m. Sunday. Further investigation revealed a plastic bag with food, a loaded rifle, and a camera in the area where Routh had positioned himself. When stopped by law enforcement, Routh reportedly admitted knowing why he was being detained. Acting U.S. Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe Jr. stated that while Routh had a loaded rifle, he "did not have a line of sight to the former president" and did not fire at the agents before fleeing. U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida Markenzy Lapointe confirmed that Routh, due to prior convictions, was prohibited from owning a firearm. Routh’s past includes multiple felony convictions, including two charges for possessing stolen goods in 2002 in North Carolina. Court records also revealed that Routh has written extensively about world events, expressing extreme political views. In a 2023 self-published book titled *Ukraine’s Unwinnable War*, Routh criticized Trump, calling him a “fool” and a “buffoon” for his handling of the Iran nuclear deal and the January 6 Capitol riots. He even wrote, "You are free to assassinate Trump." In court, Routh stated that he was making around $3,000 a month with no savings or assets apart from two trucks in Hawaii. He also mentioned supporting his 25-year-old son occasionally. If convicted, Routh could face significant penalties. The charge for a convicted felon in possession of a firearm carries a possible 15-year sentence, while possession of a firearm with an obliterated serial number could add another five years. The investigation into the case is still in its early stages, with authorities continuing to gather evidence and conduct interviews. "Together we will continue to work tirelessly to ensure accountability," said U.S. Attorney Lapointe. Credit: NBC 2024-09-17

Moroccan police successfully prevented hundreds of migrants from entering the Spanish enclave of Ceuta on Sunday, following a tense day at the border. The attempted breach came after reported calls on social media urged a collective effort to cross into Spanish territory, heightening tensions in the region. Sunday’s events mirrored a pattern of increased migration attempts in the region. Local reports indicated that hundreds of young Moroccans had made it as far as Fnideq, the nearest town to Ceuta, before being apprehended by police during the night and sent home. The Moroccan authorities have been actively addressing these border-crossing efforts, with a police source telling AFP that 60 individuals were arrested between Monday and Wednesday for "fabricating and disseminating false information on social media" to encourage a collective illegal crossing attempt. Morocco and Spain have been strengthening their cooperation on migration issues since resolving a diplomatic dispute in 2022. This rift stemmed from Spain's support for Rabat's autonomy plan for Western Sahara, a longstanding point of contention between the two countries. Since then, both governments have worked together to address the growing issue of irregular migration. The Moroccan interior ministry reported that in the first eight months of this year, more than 45,000 individuals were prevented from illegally entering European territory. The rising numbers of attempted crossings reflect the desperation of many migrants to reach the EU, as well as the persistent challenges that border authorities face. Just last month, hundreds of migrants took advantage of thick mist to swim to Ceuta, in a bold attempt to avoid detection by Spanish authorities. Migration through the Ceuta and Melilla borders has long been fraught with danger. In June 2022, the stakes reached tragic heights when 23 migrants were killed during a mass attempt to breach the border. On that day, approximately 2,000 people tried to force their way into Spanish territory, leading human rights organizations in both Spain and Morocco to call for a thorough investigation into the incident. The event underscored the deadly risks that many migrants face as they seek new opportunities in Europe. Credit: Euro News 2024-09-17

Zara Mohammed, the head of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), has expressed deep concerns over the government's lack of communication with the organization during the recent summer riots. The riots saw mobs targeting Muslims and mosques, prompting Mohammed to call for a review of Downing Street’s non-engagement policy with the MCB. Mohammed, who made history three years ago as the youngest and first female secretary general of the MCB, described the government's silence as "quite shocking." During the riots, Mohammed reached out to the government, hoping to address the growing threat posed to Muslim communities. However, her appeals were ignored. While the MCB had been actively engaged with Labour’s shadow cabinet during their time in opposition, including a meeting in 2021 with Keir Starmer, who emphasized “the importance of engaging with Muslim communities,” the government remained unresponsive. Mohammed acknowledged the challenges facing the new government, including economic downturns and other national crises. However, she was disheartened by the absence of formal or meaningful engagement with the MCB, especially as far-right groups were targeting Muslims and mosques. "I think what was really disappointing, and perhaps for many in the Muslim community, quite shocking, was no formal or meaningful engagement with the Muslim Council of Britain during a time when mosques and Muslims were being targeted by the far right in a terrifying way,” she said. The Conservative government has maintained a policy of non-engagement with the MCB. On 1 August, Labour communities minister Alex Norris confirmed to parliament that “there are no plans for ministers to meet with the Muslim Council of Britain.” The rationale behind this policy was linked to past controversies. In particular, the government cited positions taken by previous MCB leaders that contradicted fundamental values, which they claimed had not been explicitly retracted. This referred to an incident in 2009, when former MCB deputy secretary general Daud Abdullah signed the Istanbul declaration, which advocated attacks on the Royal Navy if it tried to prevent arms from being smuggled to Hamas in Gaza. The then-Labour government responded by severing ties with the MCB until Abdullah stepped down. Once he resigned, and the MCB clarified that Abdullah’s views did not reflect the organization’s stance, relations were restored in the final year of Gordon Brown’s government. Engagement continued under Liberal Democrat ministers in the coalition government elected in 2010. While there have been occasional interactions since then, the overall policy has been one of exclusion. Penny Mordaunt, then a Conservative paymaster general, met with Mohammed in 2021 but faced significant media criticism. Mohammed remarked that the MCB has been "locked out" since, though there were exceptions, such as the MCB’s involvement in the appointment of Muslim chaplains by the Ministry of Defence. This collaboration was eventually cut after a Daily Telegraph article highlighted the relationship. Recently, Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner informed the Commons that the government was “actively considering” its approach to addressing Islamophobia. Mohammed remains “optimistic” that the government will reassess its stance. "I think what I’m hopeful of is that the government will review the former position and will look at offering a position of clarity as to why [they are not engaging], and having a conversation with us to see, you know, what are the challenges; what are the blocks in 2024, not in 2009," she said. Credit: The Guardian 2024-09-17

In a significant leak of Supreme Court documents, it has been revealed that Chief Justice John Roberts played a crucial role in guiding the court's decisions on major cases involving former President Donald Trump. Roberts, known for his conservative stance, actively maneuvered himself into key positions in cases concerning Trump's involvement in the January 6 Capitol attack and attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results. One of the most notable revelations is Roberts’ lead role in the March case about whether states could exclude Trump from their ballots due to his actions on January 6. Memos leaked to the New York Times show that Roberts pushed for a unanimous decision from his fellow justices. This insistence on unity highlights his desire to present a strong, cohesive stance from the court. He even took charge of the case from Justice Samuel Alito after Alito became embroiled in controversy over his wife's decision to fly an upside-down American flag at their home—a symbol often associated with distress and, in this context, interpreted as sympathy for the "Stop the Steal" movement. Roberts' concerns extended beyond the specific charges against Trump. In a February memo, he expressed his belief that the lower court ruling, which held that Trump could be prosecuted without immunity for his actions post-presidency, needed further examination. "As I read it, it says simply a former president can be prosecuted because he’s being prosecuted," Roberts commented, showing skepticism toward the appellate court's judgment. He also made it clear that he expected his colleagues to see the issue of separation of powers differently, writing, "I think it likely that we will view the separation of powers analysis differently." While some conservative justices wanted to delay any ruling until after the 2024 presidential election, Roberts pushed for an early decision. He took it upon himself to write the court's opinion, emphasizing that the ruling could have far-reaching consequences for the balance of powers and the future of the country. "Our perspective must be more farsighted," he wrote, dismissing concerns that the court should focus on “transient results.” Despite his efforts, Roberts failed to achieve the unanimity he desired. Liberal justice Sonia Sotomayor penned a sharp dissent, accusing the majority opinion of giving Trump "all the immunity he asked for and more." She warned that the decision could shield "treasonous acts" and effectively elevate the president to a status "above the law," expressing her deep concern for the implications this could have for American democracy. On the conservative side, however, Roberts received praise. Justice Brett Kavanaugh lauded his "extraordinary opinion" and "exceptional work," reflecting the support Roberts garnered from his right-leaning colleagues. Roberts' influence did not stop with the Trump ballot case. In April, when the court was asked to consider whether the Department of Justice had overreached in its prosecution of January 6 rioters, Roberts once again took center stage. Initially, the case was assigned to Justice Alito, but after Alito faced further scrutiny due to his wife's public actions, Roberts stepped in, taking control of the case and writing the opinion himself. This decision placed Roberts at the heart of legal proceedings that could impact not only the rioters but Trump’s own legal jeopardy. These memos also shed light on Roberts’ frustration with past court leaks. He was infuriated by the leak of the Roe v. Wade draft opinion in May 2022, which sidelined his more moderate approach. At that time, none of his colleagues supported his attempt to scale back abortion rights without fully overturning the precedent, leaving him isolated. The recent leaks appear to show Roberts' determination to reassert his authority over the court in subsequent cases, particularly those related to Trump’s political future. Credit: Daily Mail 2024-09-17

Boris Johnson, alongside five former defence secretaries, has called on the UK government to permit Ukraine to use British-made Storm Shadow missiles against Russia. The group, which includes prominent figures such as Grant Shapps, Ben Wallace, Gavin Williamson, Penny Mordaunt, and Liam Fox, argues that Ukraine should be granted this capability, even without the approval of the United States. The pressure on UK leadership comes after recent talks between Sir Keir Starmer and President Joe Biden in Washington. Despite discussions, there was no agreement on whether the UK and US would jointly allow Kyiv to use these long-range missiles. However, Boris Johnson and his colleagues believe there is an urgent need to act, warning that delays could bolster Russian President Vladimir Putin’s position in the ongoing war. Shapps voiced his concerns, stating, "Rather than waiting for formal approval from the US, Sir Keir needs to provide President Zelensky with what’s desperately needed today. That’s how we assumed our global leadership position in supporting Ukraine." Similarly, Wallace expressed the view that Britain risks "falling behind into the pack of ditherers, appeasers, and delayers" if immediate action isn't taken, stressing that strength and unity are essential in standing up to a leader like Putin. The calls from the former defence secretaries come at a time of increasing pressure, following Russia’s warnings that such military actions could escalate tensions between NATO countries and Moscow. Putin has said that allowing long-range missile strikes would mean that "NATO countries, the United States, and European countries are at war with Russia." Despite these warnings, Johnson remains adamant, telling the *Mail on Sunday*, "There is no conceivable case for delay. The only person who fears escalation is Vladimir Putin, and every day that goes by is a lost opportunity to save lives and bring about a just conclusion to this war." David Lammy, the UK's foreign secretary, responded to these calls on *BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg*, downplaying the focus on Storm Shadow missiles. He emphasized that "no war is won with any one weapon," and highlighted the broader support the UK has already provided to Ukraine, including training troops. Lammy also dismissed Putin's threats, noting that despite repeated warnings from the Russian leader, the West has continued to supply Ukraine with tanks and missiles. Speaking to Sky News, Lammy remarked, "We won’t be bullied by Putin’s shameless grandstanding." The intervention by Johnson and the former defence secretaries also comes amid alarming reports that Russia may have provided Iran with nuclear secrets in exchange for ballistic missiles. If true, such a development could further complicate the international situation, especially as Iran advances its uranium enrichment program. Western allies, including the US, UK, France, and Germany, have condemned Iran’s alleged arms shipments to Russia and imposed additional sanctions on Tehran. As the debate over the use of Storm Shadow missiles intensifies, Gavin Williamson added to the pressure, calling on Starmer to demonstrate decisive leadership. "From the start of this war, Britain has not hesitated to take a lead when others have hesitated," Williamson said. "Starmer needs to show that same leadership and determination. Failing to do so would be a dereliction of his duty." The situation remains fluid, with further discussions expected to take place at the United Nations later this month. But with tensions rising and Russia's continued aggression in Ukraine, the question of whether the UK will allow Kyiv to use its long-range missiles has become a pivotal issue in the West's response to the conflict. Credit: The Independent 2024-09-17

Germany has initiated widespread border controls to address increasing concerns over irregular migration, citing an overwhelmed asylum system. Starting Monday, September 16, German police began passport checks across all land borders, expanding previous controls that had been limited to the eastern and southern frontiers. This change, expected to last for at least six months, now includes the country's northern and western borders, affecting crossings with Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, and France. Germany, located at the heart of the Schengen Area—a 29-country zone with largely open borders—faces criticism for imposing such extensive measures. While internal border checks in the Schengen region are generally rare, they are permitted under certain conditions. However, member states have the autonomy to decide when such conditions are met, with only a notification required to the European Commission. The EU can issue reprimands for violating Schengen rules, though it has never done so, instead emphasizing that such controls should be a "last resort," as EU Commission spokesperson Anitta Hipper recently reiterated. German Interior Minister Nancy Faeser has justified the expanded border controls by pointing to the strain on Germany’s asylum system and the rise in irregular migration. "Our system is overloaded," she stated, expressing concern about Germany's capacity to process the influx of migrants. Germany's move is not an isolated case. In recent years, eight other Schengen members have reinstated various forms of internal border controls. France, in particular, has maintained comprehensive checks since the Islamist terrorist attacks in 2015 and 2016, citing national security threats. Germany, since 2015, has also been monitoring its border with Austria, claiming the need to reduce the risks of terrorism and manage asylum seekers. Similar actions have been taken by Austria, which controls its borders with Slovakia, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Slovenia. “Not all travelers will be required to present passports,” he explained, noting that only suspicious vehicles would be pulled over. However, a German police union raised concerns about the strain these new checks could put on police forces, arguing that an additional 5,000 officers are needed to manage the increased workload. Federal police leadership disagrees, with Germany's Interior Ministry maintaining that there are enough resources to handle the new measures. If migrants attempt to enter without authorization, they may be refused entry unless they apply for asylum. Faeser stressed the need for Germany to ensure those seeking asylum are either processed or sent back to the country where they first entered the Schengen Area. According to the EU’s Dublin Regulation, the first country of entry is typically responsible for processing asylum claims. Faeser has called for speeding up negotiations with EU member states and improving access to asylum databases to handle these cases more efficiently. From January to July 2024, about 34,000 people attempted to enter Germany illegally, with half being turned away at the border. This number is lower than the 127,000 recorded last year, but it remains unclear how many more migrants could have been intercepted with expanded controls. Hungary, which has long faced criticism for its strict stance on migration, issued a scathing statement regarding Germany's new border measures. "Funny how a few years—and a migration crisis—can change minds, isn’t it?" remarked Hungarian government spokesperson Zoltan Kovacs, pointing to the irony of Germany now adopting stricter border policies similar to those it once criticized. Credit: DW 2024-09-17