The Full Belmonte, 2/18/2023
US formally accuses Russia of crimes against humanity in Ukraine, Harris says
The vice president told the Munich Security Conference that the US will hold guilty Russians and ‘their superiors’ accountable.
“MUNICH — The United States has determined that Russia is committing crimes against humanity in Ukraine, Vice President Kamala Harris announced Saturday, the latest salvo in the West’s effort to hold Moscow accountable for its wartime atrocities.
In a marquee address at the Munich Security Conference, Harris detailed that Russia is responsible for a ‘widespread and systematic attack’ against Ukraine’s civilian population, citing evidence of execution-style killings, rape, torture and forceful deportations — sometimes perpetrated against children. As a result, Russia has not only committed war crimes, as the administration formally concluded in March, but also illegal acts against non-combatants.
‘Their actions are an assault on our common values, an attack on our common humanity,’ the vice president said, referencing images of bodies lying in the streets of Bucha and the sexual assault of a four-year-old girl by a Russian soldier. ‘Barbaric and inhumane.’….” Read more at POLITICO
Sen. Rick Scott Exempts Social Security, Medicare From Rescue America Plan
Florida Republican faced bipartisan criticism over proposal
Sen. Rick Scott defended his plan in an opinion piece published on Friday.PHOTO: ANNA MONEYMAKER/GETTY IMAGES
“WASHINGTON—Sen. Rick Scott (R., Fla.) said he will exempt Social Security, Medicare and veterans programs from his plan to sunset all federal legislation in five years, bowing to criticism from Democrats as well as fellow Republicans over the proposal.
Under Mr. Scott’s revised Rescue America plan, those entitlement programs as well as national security and other essential services would no longer face regular requirements to have Congress reapprove them. The proposals were initially unveiled when Mr. Scott was the head of his party’s Senate campaign committee and became a political lightning rod even as many fellow Republicans distanced themselves from the document.
The plan ‘was obviously not intended to include entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security—programs that hardworking people have paid into their entire lives,’ he wrote in a Washington Examiner opinion piece.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) has repeatedly said that the plan was a bad idea, and last week added that he believed the plan would make Mr. Scott’s own re-election bid tough in 2024. Mr. Scott unsuccessfully challenged Mr. McConnell for the top Senate job last year.
President Biden highlighted Mr. Scott’s proposal in his recent State of the Union speech as evidence that the Republican was intent on cutting entitlements—drawing boos from many GOP lawmakers.
Republican leaders have ruled out changes to Social Security and Medicare in talks with the White House over raising the debt ceiling and cutting federal spending. GOP lawmakers have also signaled that the military would be spared deep cuts in any proposal.
Mr. Scott said his plan was being misrepresented for political purposes.
‘I have never supported cutting Social Security or Medicare, ever,’ said Mr. Scott in his opinion piece. ‘To say otherwise is a disingenuous Democrat lie from a very confused president. And Sen. Mitch McConnell is also well aware of that.’
Mr. Scott has argued that he wants to save Social Security and Medicare, and that his original plan was designed to force Congress to reckon with a looming fiscal crisis. The most recent trustees’ reports show that Social Security’s combined funds will be depleted in 2035 and Medicare’s hospital-insurance trust fund will be depleted in 2028.
Under the new plan, Congress would have to issue a report every year disclosing publicly its plans for when Social Security and Medicare run out of money with assets depleted and expenditures outpacing revenues. Besides those entitlement programs and others such as national-security services and veterans care, all federal legislation would still sunset in five years.
White House spokesman Andrew Bates said the revision proved Mr. Scott’s original plan would have threatened entitlement programs. ‘But make no mistake, his true colors are undeniable and on the record,’ Mr. Bates said of Mr. Scott….” Read more at Wall Street Journal
6 Takeaways From the Report on the Trump Investigation in Georgia
The released excerpts from the special grand jury’s report suggest that the jurors probably recommended indictments on more charges than just perjury.
On Thursday, after a lengthy criminal investigation by a Georgia special grand jury into allegations of election interference by Donald J. Trump and his allies, a judge released excerpts from a report drafted by the panel. The grand jury’s recommendations were redacted, and little new information was released, but a close reading, together with earlier reporting, offers some insights into where the case is headed. Here are some key takeaways.
Legal experts say Mr. Trump remains in real jeopardy in Georgia.
In a post on Truth Social on Thursday afternoon, Mr. Trump thanked the special grand jury for its ‘Patriotism & Courage.’
‘Total exoneration,’ he added. ‘The USA is very proud of you!!!’
In fact, the portions of the grand jury’s report that included recommendations on possible indictments were not revealed. Many legal experts continue to see two significant areas of exposure for Mr. Trump.
The first is his direct involvement in recruiting a slate of alternative presidential electors after the 2020 election, even after Georgia’s results were recertified by the state’s Republican leadership. The second are the telephone calls he made to pressure state officials after the election, including one in which Mr. Trump told Brad Raffensperger, Georgia’s secretary of state, that he needed to ‘find’ 11,780 votes, one more than President Biden’s margin of victory in the state.
‘Even before we got these initial statements from the special grand jury, we knew Trump was in deep criminal peril because of the mountain of evidence that has accumulated that he violated Georgia statutes,’ said Norman Eisen, a lawyer who served as special counsel to the House Judiciary Committee during the first impeachment and trial of Mr. Trump, and a co-author of a lengthy Brookings Institution report on the Fulton County investigation.
The jurors did make recommendations about indictments.
The special grand jury noted in its report that it had voted on indictment recommendations, though the released excerpts do not reveal what the results of those votes were. The jurors wrote that they had ‘set forth for the Court our recommendations on indictments and relevant statutes.’ (A special grand jury cannot bring indictments, but can make recommendations to the district attorney.)
In ordering that only portions of the report be released, with all names redacted, the judge handling the case may have provided a clue to the grand jury’s recommendations. The judge, Robert C.I. McBurney of Fulton County Superior Court, said he was limiting the extent of the release because the grand jury inquiry, by its nature, allowed for only ‘very limited due process’ for potential defendants. The judge’s stance would have been unlikely if the grand jury had not recommended indictments.
One specific issue raised in the excerpts is perjury. A majority of jurors believed that perjury may have been committed ‘by one or more witnesses,’ though those witnesses were not identified.
But perjury is not the only potential charge the grand jury discussed, since the jurors say that the unredacted report includes an appendix listing a number of applicable statutes.
None of the 23 jurors believes there was widespread fraud in the 2020 election in Georgia.
In the released excerpts, the jury noted that it had reached a unanimous conclusion that ‘no widespread fraud took place in the Georgia 2020 presidential election that could result in overturning that election.’
Their conclusion is not good news for Mr. Trump or his allies. It suggests that none of the jurors were hard-line Trump supporters who had adopted his false claims that the election was stolen, even though it is likely that some of the jurors did vote for Mr. Trump.
Clark D. Cunningham, a law professor at Georgia State University in Atlanta, noted that the jurors had been chosen randomly from Fulton County residents, and that 26 percent of the county’s ballots in 2020 were cast for Mr. Trump. So it was likely that some Trump voters were among the jurors — and even they were not swayed.
The jurors wrote that they had made their decision after hearing ‘extensive testimony on the subject of alleged election fraud’ from poll workers, investigators, technical experts, state officials and even ‘persons still claiming that such fraud took place.’
The effects of the perjury allegations on the broader case are unclear.
A majority of the grand jurors believed ‘that perjury may have been committed by one or more witnesses,’ and recommended that Fani T. Willis, the district attorney of Fulton County, Ga., who is leading the investigation, ‘seek appropriate indictments for such crimes where the evidence is compelling.’
The excerpts did not include any names, so it is not clear who the jurors were raising concerns about. They heard testimony from 75 witnesses. And perjury cases can be difficult to win, so it is not guaranteed that the district attorney will bring charges based on the jurors’ concerns.
The full report seems to be skinny, and that may be on purpose.
The page-numbering scheme from the excerpts suggests that the full report is only nine pages long, not counting at least one appendix.
Anthony Michael Kreis, a constitutional law expert at Georgia State University, suspects that prosecutors advised jurors to keep the report short and simple for strategic reasons. ‘If you have a lengthy document that becomes part of the court record, that gives defense attorneys a lot of rabbit holes to go down that the D.A.’s office may not want,’ he said.
He added: ‘It was as vanilla as a legal document will ever get. And I think that was by design.’
The district attorney will now decide what charges to bring.
With the report in hand, the district attorney’s office will now determine whether to use its recommendations as a basis for bringing the case to a regular grand jury, which can issue indictments.
In addition to Mr. Trump himself, nearly 20 people are known to have been named targets of Ms. Willis’s investigation and are among those who could face charges. They include Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s former personal lawyer, and David Shafer, the head of the Georgia Republican Party.
High-profile figures who were called to testify include Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Mark Meadows, who served as White House chief of staff at the time of the 2020 election.
As for the report, the full version is likely to be released — eventually. The district attorney’s office has indicated that it supports fuller disclosure, but not before its own decisions about indictments are made.
Ms. Willis said at a hearing last month that a determination on whether to seek indictments was ‘imminent,’ but she has not specified exactly what that means. Her decision is expected by May.” [New York Times]
Republicans take aim at risque jokes and romance novels with anti-sex bills
Bills are part of religious right’s post-Roe strategy, with most prevalent ones relating to age verification of sex-related websites
“A wave of proposed legislation pushed by Republicans across the US at the state level is aimed at outlawing aspects of sexuality that could have a huge impact on Americans’ private lives and businesses.
Opponents to the laws before legislatures in various states say the planned new legislation could spawn prosecution of breast-pump companies in Texas for nipples on advertising, or a bookstore might be banned from selling romance novels in West Virginia, or South Carolina could imprison standup comics if a risque joke is heard by a young person.
The bills are part of a post-Roe nationwide strategy by the religious wing of the Republican party, now that federal abortion rights have fallen. They range from banning all businesses that sell sex-related goods to anti-drag queen bills. Tyler Dees, an Arkansas state senator who wrote an anti-porn bill said: “I would love to outlaw it all,” referring to porn.
The most prevalent bills relate to age verification of sex-related websites. Seventeen states drafted porn age-verification bills, many inspired by Louisiana’s law that went into effect in January. Louisiana’s law requires websites featuring 33.33% or more pornographic content to check government-issued ID to verify users are 18 and older. Websites that don’t comply face civil penalties. Parents can sue the site if kids access it.
In Texas, a new bill requiring age verification on websites with pornographic content defines images of the female breast ‘below the top of the areola’ as porn, potentially hitting at business advertisements. In West Virginia, a bill outlawing all sexually oriented businesses is on the docket, with a definition that includes art studios with nude models and wrestling arenas. In South Carolina a bill would criminalize using ‘profane language’ related to ‘sexual or excretory organs or activities’ in front of minors during performances. The punishment? Up to a decade in prison.
Some bills define porn so broadly that anatomy textbooks or sex education websites would meet them.
‘I don’t think such laws for the internet are constitutional,’ said Eugene Volokh, a professor of Law at UCLA.
Laurie Schlegel, a Republican state senator who drafted the Louisiana law, is a sex-addiction therapist educated at Baptist seminary, who opposed transgender students from being on sports teams that align with their gender. Schlegel’s anti-LGBTQ+ views fit with the broader goal of the laws, according to Carolyn Bronstein, a professor of media studies at DePaul University.
‘These laws are really not about controlling minors’ access to violent pornography … In the conservative world view, pornography is information about LGBTQ identity, abortion, gay marriage,’ said Bronstein.
Eight states have justified their actions by saying that porn is ‘creating a public health crisis’. Louisiana’s bill claims that pornography ‘may lead to low self-esteem, body image disorders, an increase in problematic sexual activity at younger ages … impact brain development … shape deviant sexual arousal, and lead to difficulty in forming or maintaining positive, intimate relationships, as well as promoting problematic or harmful sexual behaviors and addiction.’”…. Read more at The Guardian
German airport strike grounds thousands of flights
“On Friday, a strike by staff at seven major German airports forced the cancellation of more than 2,300 flights impacting 300,000 passengers.” [Vox] [Associated Press]
“The Verdi labor union ordered the 24-hour strike to demand a 10.5 percent wage increase that keeps up with inflation.” [Vox] [CNN/ Chris Stern, Inke Kappeler, and Olesya Dmitracova]
“German workers are the latest to strike following major walkouts in France and the UK as Europe grapples with higher energy and food costs amid the war in Ukraine.” [Vox] [Reuters / Klaus Lauer]
“German airport staff went on strike in July 2022, causing chaos during the peak travel season. The union on Monday threatened another summer of disruptions if employers failed to improve pay and conditions.” [Vox] [BBC / Jenny Hill]
Microsoft Puts Caps on New Bing Usage After AI Chatbot Offered Unhinged Responses
Software giant seeks to address concerns about search engine powered by the technology behind ChatGPT
Microsoft launched the new Bing search engine last week. PHOTO: GABBY JONES/BLOOMBERG NEWS
“Microsoft Corp. is putting caps on the usage of its new Bing search engine which uses the technology behind the viral chatbot ChatGPT after testers discovered it sometimes generates glaring mistakes and disturbing responses.
The software giant launched the new Bing last week, promising a new kind of search in which people pose questions to the search engine in natural language. Bing then gives direct answers in a chat instead of links to websites.
Some users with early access to the technology have posted screenshots on social media of long interactions with it. In some cases, the search engine seems to become unhinged and express anger and love.
Microsoft says long interactions are causing some of the unwanted behavior so it is adding restrictions on how it can be used.
‘Very long chat sessions can confuse the underlying chat model in the new Bing,’ Microsoft said in a blog on Friday. ‘To address these issues, we have implemented some changes to help focus the chat sessions.’
The company said it would start limiting interactions with the new Bing to five questions per session and 50 questions in a day. Many of the testers who reported problems were having long conversations with Bing, asking question after question. With the new restrictions, users will only be able to ask five questions in a row and then will be asked to start a new topic.
Microsoft said until now only around 1% of users had more than 50 questions for Bing in a day.
‘As we continue to get your feedback, we will explore expanding the caps on chat sessions,’ the company said in the blog.
Microsoft pointed out in an earlier blog on Wednesday that the search engine is still a work in progress, describing the recent problems as learning experiences that are helping it improve the new Bing.
Microsoft said in the Wednesday blog that Bing seems to start coming up with strange answers following chat sessions of 15 or more questions after which it can become repetitive or respond in ways that don’t align with its designed tone.
The company said it was trying to train the technology to be more reliable. It is also considering adding a toggle switch, which would allow users to decide whether they want Bing to be more or less creative with its responses.
Microsoft is investing billions in ChatGPT’s creator, OpenAI. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadellasaid the company plans to incorporate AI tools into all of its products and move quickly to commercialize tools from OpenAI.
Microsoft isn’t the only company that has had trouble launching a new AI tool. When Google followed Microsoft’s lead last week by unveiling Bard, its rival to ChatGPT, the tool’s answer to one question included an apparent factual error.” [Wall Street Journal]
Facebook Parent Meta Gives Thousands of Workers Subpar Reviews
The performance ratings may signal that more job cuts are on the way
Meta recently laid off about 13% of employees at the company. PHOTO: CAROLYN FONG FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
“Facebook parent Meta Platforms Inc. gave thousands of employees subpar ratings in a recently concluded round of performance reviews, a signal that more job cuts may be on the way, people familiar with the matter said.
The company also cut a bonus metric, the people said, one of several steps senior executives are taking after Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg declared 2023 would be a ‘year of efficiency.’
Meta’s leadership expects the ratings to lead more employees to leave in the coming weeks, the people said. The company will consider another round of layoffs if not enough depart, the people said. About 11,000 workers, or about 13% of employees at the company, were recently laid off….” Read more at Wall Street Journal
“The CNN anchor Don Lemon apologized for saying on air that women older than 40 are past their ‘prime.’”
The Celtics’ Jayson Tatum.Steven Senne/Associated Press
“N.B.A. 3-point contest: The highlight of N.B.A. All-Star Weekend used to be the slam dunk contest, a thrilling combination of athletic creativity and crowd-pleasing spectacle. But lately, the participants have gotten more obscure. For real star power, try the 3-point contest, where superstars like Jayson Tatum and Damian Lillard will compete against some of the league’s best young players.” 8 p.m. Eastern tonight on TNT [New York Times]
LIV Golf’s Saudi Backers Ordered to Turn Over Information in PGA Tour Suit
Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund and its governor had argued they had sovereign immunity in the legal battle
Dustin Johnson hits from the tee during a LIV Golf event. PHOTO: LYNNE SLADKY/ASSOCIATED PRESS
“A federal judge has ruled that LIV Golf’s financial backer, Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, and its governor, Yasir Al-Rumayyan, aren’t entitled to sovereign immunity and must turn over information connected with the upstart circuit’s courtroom battle with the PGA Tour.
The PIF and Al-Rumayyan had argued that there was no court in the U.S. with jurisdiction over them, saying they were shielded because they are part of a foreign government.
It was a claim that highlighted the money—and some of the controversy—behind the new golf circuit that has upended the sport, and drawn the rivals into an array of bruising legal and political fights.
Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen, in the U.S. District Court of Northern District of California, rejected the argument in an order that was made Feb. 9, but which remained under seal as LIV and the PGA Tour fought over proposed redactions of confidential information. A redacted copy of the order was included in a filing released late Thursday.
‘The Court DENIES the motion of PIF to quash the subpoena directed to PIF on the grounds of sovereign immunity because it finds that PIF’s conduct falls within the commercial activity exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act,’ the order says. The judge also rejected other arguments made by the PIF and Al-Rumayyan to avoid being deposed, but said they could ask to sit for the depositions at a place of the Tour’s choosing in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
LIV, in a court filing, had already indicated objections to the ruling before it had been unsealed. A spokeswoman for LIV declined to comment….” Read more at Wall Street Journal