Mediaboss Marketing

Is the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) still filing intelligence reports about journalists?

It seems like a simple question. And I confess I wasnt expecting the routine status report a federal judge ordered the government to file on Wednesday to raise my eyebrowsmuch less to warrant an article. But asked to address this apparently easy question, the Justice Department saidin essencethat its not sure and will get back to the judge in a few weeks. Defendant needs additional time to appropriately address the question. ... Defendants response could potentially have a wide implication beyond this particular case.

I dont have any idea what it means either.

This strange filing is actually the second of two bizarre positions the government has taken in my lawsuit over DHSs filing of two open source intelligence reports (OSIRs) about me in 2020. I wont rehash the story of the two reports, about which I have written in detail elsewhere. To understand the first weird position, and how it led to this second one, the only relevant facts are these.

The two intelligence reports (here is the first and here is the second) were leaked to Shane Harris of the Washington Post, along with a third about New York Times reporter Mike Baker. Following their disclosure, DHS issued a statement assuring the public that the practice had been stopped: Upon learning about the practice, Acting Secretary [Chad] Wolf directed the DHS Intelligence & Analysis Directorate to immediately discontinue collecting information involving members of the press. In no way does the Acting Secretary condone this practice and he has immediately ordered an inquiry into the matter.

I filed a Freedom of Information Act request to reveal the paper trail on the reports about Baker and me, as well as any other journalists who might have had such reports filed about them. I also sought similar open source reporting for any other people based on their First Amendment-protected activity, information about the use of such open source reports, information about any investigations of the practice after it was revealed, and information concerning policies and procedures about such reporting. In March of last year, I sued, having received no documents in response to my request.

Production of material under the suit has been slow, and its fair to say that the litigation has not yet shed significant light on how DHS came to be filing these reports on journalists, what the scope of the activity was with respect to other peoples First Amendment rights, or how the agency ultimately evaluated the propriety and legality of this sort of reporting. I remain hopeful that it will do so in good time, though under the current production schedule, it will be a while.

One thing the department has disclosed, however, is the specific reports about mebut with an important catch. The documents are highly redacted. Assuming these are the same documents that were leaked to me in full, it appears that my name cannot be releasedto me. It further appears it cannot be disclosed that my Twitter feed is the subject of the reports. Ditto the substance of my tweets, which is available to all of my more than 400,000 Twitter followers and anyone else who wants to see them.

Remarkably, the government takes the position that these redactions of publicly available unclassified information are justified on the basis of protecting intelligence sources and methods. As the government explains its position to the court:

[T]he Department will provide a declaration explaining that the redacted information within the OSIRs included the sources and methods used by I & A and that the disclosure of these documents in full would reveal intelligence sources and methods utilized by I & A.

Specifically, the records would reveal: (1) the underlying sources of information and intelligence methods that I & A relies upon to engage in information collection that forms its analytical assessments and operations; (2) information that, taken together, may reveal these methods even if it does not do so individually; and (3) information which would reveal the method in which I & A shares information with other entities. Further, to avoid irreparable harm, I & A must protect not only specific sources, but also information that would allow a reader to discern a source or type of source, information revealing intelligence or analytic methods, and information that would assist targets in evading lawful intelligence activities. The obligation to protect sources and methods is direction from Congress that may not be waived by the Department, regardless of whether the source or method is sensitive or public, and regardless of whether a plaintiff has concrete or hypothetical knowledge of the source or method being referred to.

Suffice it to say that I and my lawyers take a rather different view of the matter, and sooner or later, the court is going to have to decide whos right.

This brings us to last weeks status hearing, where the immediate issue before U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss was whether to decide this sooner or later. My lawyers (Jacob Tracer and Andrew Elliott of Jenner & Block) had asked Judge Moss to resolve the question now of whether protecting sources and methods could possibly justify these redactions, on the theory that the answer to this question could affect the rest of the governments production. If we are right and the governments position is ridiculous, we argued, it would save everyone time to know that now. The government, by contrast, asked Judge Moss to wait until all the production is done.

Judge Moss indicated, as a general matter, that he prefers to resolve disputes over production at the end, not individually along the way. But there is one thing that might change his thinking on this score, he noted, and that was if he was not confident that the underlying activitythe filing of intelligence reports about journalistshad actually ceased. It was in that context that he asked government counsel to address this question directly. To make sure she had a chance to consult with the client agency, he asked her to file a brief on the matter, rather than demanding an answer in court.

This is the background to the governments filing Wednesday, and to be frank, I was not expecting the Justice Department to be in the odd position of being unable to answer the judges question. Government counsel set her own deadline for this filing, in response to a question from the judge. She asked him for a week in which to file the brief, and he granted her that timeat the end of which she was still not able to give him a simple no in response to his question of whether DHS is still filing intelligence reports about journalists. Thats a little unnerving.

Here is the relevant portion of her status report:

On September 21, 2022, the parties appeared for a pre-motion conference and the Court ordered, inter alia, Defendant to file a status report addressing whether ... Defendant discontinued the practice of collecting information involving members of the press. ...

In terms of the first question, Defendant needs additional time to appropriately address the question, as expressed during the September 21, 2022, pre-motion conference. Defendants response could potentially have a wide implication beyond this particular case. Consequently, Defendant requests additional time, to and through October 21, 2022, to provide a response.

I may have to wait until Oct. 21 for clarity on this matter, which I agree has a wide implication beyond this particular case.

In the meantime, however, I would like to stress two things: First, I am not an intelligence source; and second, reading my Twitter feed is not a sensitive intelligence-gathering method. Much as it would flatter my ego if seeing my daily Good Morning image and #BeastOfTheDay tweets counted as an intelligence method, it doesnt. Its great if government agencies and their personnel want to read my work. But the inability to distinguish between reading a journalists social media account and a sensitive intelligence-gathering method is dangerousboth for the intelligence community that cant see the difference and for the journalists who have to operate in an environment conditioned by that inability.

Here is the original post:
I Am Not a Source; Reading My Twitter Feed Is Not a Method - Lawfare

Dear Editor: A part of the First Amendment is under attack.

There has been a renewed resurgence to declare the United States a Christian nation, no longer keeping the church separate from the state. Christian nationalists are promoting antidisestablishmentarianism.

That word has gained a renewed importance no longer just one of the longest words in the dictionary. It refers to Christian nationalists advocating for Christian churches to receive government patronage rather than be disestablished, meaning separate from state support.

Proponents believe the church should have say and sway in our country's governance and have an official status there. There is even a movement in Congress for this.

Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado is spearheading an effort to have the United States declared Christian, preferably with her own version and vision as a foundation. She has up to 61% of Republicans in her camp. But this might in numbers does not make it right.

It's stated in the First Amendment to the Constitution that Congress can neither establish, nor prohibit the practice of religion. To declare the United States Christian would violate the establishment clause and put a de facto pariah label to non-Christian religions and the agnostics and atheists among us. These groups make up to 35% of the United States population. That is a lot of people who would be given outcast status.

Many Christian nationalists cry foul over gun control regulations. They scream that their Second Amendment rights are being violated, yet when they want to violate the First Amendment with no separation of church and state, that's OK. For them the Constitution has become the Constitution is to be used as a convenient avenue to get what they want.

Bill Walters

Fitchburg

Send your letter to the editor to tctvoice@madison.com. Include your full name, hometown and phone number. Your name and town will be published. The phone number is for verification purposes only. Please keep your letter to 250 words or less.

Read the original here:
Letter | Beware the Christian nationalist movement | Letters to the Editor | captimes.com - The Capital Times

ALTERNATE NAMES: Sad Frog

Pepe the Frog is a cartoon character that has become a popular Internet meme (often referred to as the "sad frog meme" by people unfamiliar with the name of the character). The character first appeared in 2005 in the on-line cartoon Boy's Club. In that appearance, the character also first used its catchphrase, "feels good, man."

The Pepe the Frog character did not originally have racist or anti-Semitic connotations. Internet users appropriated the character and turned him into a meme, placing the frog in a variety of circumstances and saying many different things. Many variations of the meme became rather esoteric, resulting in the phenomenon of so-called "rare Pepes."

The majority of uses of Pepe the Frog have been, and continue to be, non-bigoted. However, it was inevitable that, as the meme proliferated in on-line venues such as 4chan, 8chan, and Reddit, which have many users who delight in creating racist memes and imagery, a subset of Pepe memes would come into existence that centered on racist, anti-Semitic or other bigoted themes.

In recent years, with the growth of the "alt right" segment of the white supremacist movement, a segment that draws some of its support from some of the above-mentioned Internet sites, the number of "alt right" Pepe memes has grown, a tendency exacerbated by the controversial and contentious 2016 presidential election. Though Pepe memes have many defenders, the use of racist and bigoted versions of Pepe memes seems to be increasing, not decreasing.

However, because so many Pepe the Frog memes are not bigoted in nature, it is important to examine use of the meme only in context. The mere fact of posting a Pepe meme does not mean that someone is racist or white supremacist. However, if the meme itself is racist or anti-Semitic in nature, or if it appears in a context containing bigoted or offensive language or symbols, then it may have been used for hateful purposes.

In the fall of 2016, the ADL teamed with Pepe creator Matt Furie to form a #SavePepe campaign to reclaim the symbol from those who use it with hateful intentions.

See the article here:
Pepe the Frog - ADL

The campaign for Pennsylvania governor between far-right Republican nominee Doug Mastriano and Democrat Josh Shapiro, the states current attorney general, has been one of contrasts.

The fundraising race has been no exception.

On track to shatter the record for campaign spending in a Pennsylvania governors race, Shapiros campaign received more than $25 million in contributions since June, according to his campaign finance report released Tuesday.

Mastriano, who has been largely ghosted by deep-pocketed Republican donors, raised only $3.2 million in the same period, according to records filed with the Department of State..

But in a race where Mastriano has overcome long odds before, Shapiros 8-to-1 fundraising advantage over the last three months doesnt mean the election is a foregone conclusion.

One Republican poll of more than 1,000 likely voters put Mastriano within 2 points of Shapiro. A Marist College poll, however, put Shapiros lead at 13 points.

Mastriano, a state senator from Franklin County, won a crowded primary over members of his party distancing themselves from his call for a total ban on abortion and his involvement in efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

On the campaign trail, Mastriano has called for a rollback of same-sex marriage and transgender rights, the elimination of gender and race theory from public school curricula, cuts in public education funding, and a transition to school choice vouchers, and a rollback of environmental regulations to support fossil fuel production.

Meanwhile, Shapiro, of Montgomery County, and running mate Austin Davis, the Democratic nominee for lieutenant governor from Allegheny County, have promised improvements in education and job creation, measures to curb gun crime, protection of civil rights including access to abortion, and policies to foster business growth.

Campaign finance reports show Shapiro spent nearly $28 million since June, including $17 million on advertising, for a total of $38 million since the start of the campaign. Former Gov. Ed Rendell holds the longstanding record of $40 million for the largest sum spent in a Pennsylvania governors race.

Shapiro rolled into the final seven weeks of the campaign with nearly $11 million in cash on hand, according to the report which includes transactions through Sept. 19.

Mastriano spent just less than $1 million during the same period, and less than $2.4 million overall since January. Mastriano had nearly $2.6 million on hand as of Sept. 19, according to his report.

While Shapiro is saturating the airwaves, Mastriano has favored social media livestreams of his campaign stops and speaking to voters via Facebook. Many of Mastrianos largest campaign expenses are for campaign consulting, including $18,000 to $37,500, records showed.

Shapiros largest contributions came from the Democratic Governors Association in three payments totaling $5.1 million; Shapiro received $500,000 each from labor unions AFSCME, Laborers International Union, and Service Employees International Union; former New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg; and the Philadelphia Trial Lawyers Associations political action committee.

Mastrianos largest individual contributions came from the founders of shipping and business supply company Uline, Richard and Elizabeth Uihlein, who contributed a total of $1 million.

Among the individual donations Mastriano received is $500 from Andrew Torba, the founder of the alt-right social media site Gab, which has been criticized as a haven for bigoted and anti-semetic speech. It was the platform where the gunman accused of killing 11 people at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh in 2018 posted about his plan minutes before the shooting.

Mastriano came under fire earlier in the campaign for paying $5,000 to Gab to engage with potential voters.

See the original post here:
Shapiro poised to break spending record in governor's race after raising $25M this summer - Pennsylvania Capital-Star

Cleveland Clinic has been selected as a founding partner and the leading healthcare system in a new initiative meant to spur collaboration and innovation in the quantum computing industry.

Based in Greater Washington D.C., Connected DMV and a cross-sector coalition of partners are developing the new Life Sciences and Healthcare Quantum Innovation Hub to prepare the industry for the burgeoning quantum era and align with key national and global efforts in life sciences and quantum technologies.

The U.S. Department of Commerces Economic Development Administration (EDA) has awarded more than $600,000 to Connected DMV for development of the Hub. This will include the formation of a collaboration of at least 25 organizations specializing in quantum end-use and technology build.

Cleveland Clinic was invited to join the Hub because of its work in advancing medical research through quantum computing. As the lead healthcare system in the coalition, Cleveland Clinic will help define quantums role in the future of healthcare and disseminate education to other health systems on its possibilities.

We believe quantum computing holds great promise for accelerating the pace of scientific discovery, said Lara Jehi, M.D., M.H.C.D.S., Cleveland Clinics Chief Research Information Officer. As an academic medical center, research, innovation and education are an integral part of Cleveland Clinics mission. Quantum, AI and other emerging technologies have the potential to revolutionize medicine, and we look forward to working with partners across healthcare and life sciences to solve complex medical problems and change the course of diseases like cancer, heart conditions and neurodegenerative disorders.

Last year, Cleveland Clinic announced a 10-year partnership with IBM to establish the Discovery Accelerator, a joint center focused on easing traditional bottlenecks in medical research through innovative technologies such as quantum computing, hybrid cloud and artificial intelligence. The partnership leverages Cleveland Clinics medical expertise with the technology expertise of IBM including its leadership in quantum technology which recently resulted in the Breakthrough Award in Fundamental Physics for quantum information science. The Discovery Accelerator will allow Cleveland Clinic to contribute to Connected DMVs Hub by advancing the pace of discovery with the first private sector on-premises Quantum System One being installed on Cleveland Clinics main campus.

Innovation is always iterative, and requires sustained collaboration between research, development and technology, and the industries that will benefit from the value generated, said George Thomas, Chief Innovation Officer of Connected DMV and lead of its Potomac Quantum Innovation Center initiative. Quantum has the potential to have a substantive impact on our society in the near future, and the Life Sciences and Healthcare Quantum Innovation Hub will serve as the foundation for sustained focus and investment to accelerate and scale our path into the era of quantum.

The Hub will be part of Connected DMVs Potomac Quantum Innovation Center initiative, which aims to: accelerate quantum investment, and research and development; develop an equitable and scalable talent pipeline; and scale collaboration between the public sector, academia, industry, community, and investors to accelerate the value of quantum. The Quantum Innovation Hubs are a part of this initiative to focus on accelerating quantum investment, research and development in key industry sectors.

Original post:
Cleveland Clinic Selected as Founding Partner in Greater Washington, D.C., Quantum Computing Hub - Cleveland Clinic Newsroom