Right-wing social media personalities criticized YouTube’s decision Wednesday to demonetize a conservative comedian’s videos after he mocked and harassed a gay journalist for months.

YouTube made the decision less than 24 hours after it initially said it wouldn’t take action against Steven Crowder for his repeated comments about Vox writer Carlos Maza.

Maza’s Twitter thread detailing the harassment from Crowder and his fans generated widespread attention and a response from the Google-owned video company.

Other right-wing influencers, many of whom rely on social media platforms to reach their audiences and generate income, lashed out at the decision, painting it as an ideologically-motivated attack on conservatives and an infringement on free speech.

ADVERTISEMENT

“If @YouTube is now going to police insulting speech — not violent speech, not incitement, not actual fake news — because a virulently censorious, radical activist masquerading as a journalist complains about being insulted, they’re a joke,” the commentator Ben Shapiro wrote on Twitter.

“YouTube is free to curate content for its views based on ideology, of course, but if that’s the case, they can no longer claim to be a platform,” added Lauren Chen, a YouTube blogger. “They are a publisher, and should be held legally accountable as such.”

But YouTube ultimately found what many critics that Crowder’s comments — which included calling Maza a “lispy queer” and the “gay Mexican from Vox” — were in clear violation of the company’s policies against content “that makes hurtful and negative personal comments/videos about another person.”

YouTube also cited a link posted on Crowder’s page to a store selling “Socialism Is For Fags” t-shirts.

Many on the right, including President TrumpDonald John TrumpPelosi privately told Democrats she wants Trump ‘in prison’: report Pelosi privately told Democrats she wants Trump ‘in prison’: report Warren invokes Obama, Trump when asked about electability MORE and other leading GOP lawmakers, have claimed Silicon Valley companies are biased against conservatives, relying largely on anecdotal evidence to level accusations of censorship and slanting search results against them.

Internet companies like Facebook, Google and Twitter have all denied that politics motivates their content decisions.

Click Here: Sports Water Bottles

The Democratic-led House Armed Services Committee’s version of the annual defense policy bill would prohibit funding to deploy low-yield nuclear warheads, committee staffers said Monday.

The inclusion of the provision in the strategic forces subcommittee’s portion of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is unsurprising, given that Chairman Adam SmithDavid (Adam) Adam SmithOvernight Defense: 1,500 troops heading to Mideast to counter Iran | Trump cites Iran tensions to push through Saudi arms sale | Senate confirms Army, Navy chiefs before weeklong recess Trump to send 1,500 troops to Middle East to counter Iran Overnight Defense: Iran worries dominate foreign policy talk | Pentagon reportedly to send WH plans for 10K troops in Mideast | Democrats warn Trump may push through Saudi arms sale | Lawmakers blast new Pentagon policy on sharing info MORE (D-Wash.) has said he wants to “kill” the low-yield warhead.

But it is the first concrete example of Smith working to fulfill his goal of curtailing the U.S. nuclear arsenal since he became chairman this year.

Click Here: online rugby store malaysia

ADVERTISEMENT

And it portends a partisan fight as the committee considers the bill, starting with the strategic forces subcommittee’s markup on Tuesday.

A spokesman for Republicans on the committee said Rep. Mike TurnerMichael Ray TurnerOvernight Defense: NATO chief urges US to support alliance on its 70th anniversary | Turkey rebuffs Pentagon pressure over Russia deal | Rand Paul, liberals team up to push Trump on Syria withdrawal GOP House Intel member says Schiff ‘needs to step aside’ after Mueller investigation Don’t look for House GOP to defy Trump on border wall MORE (R-Ohio), the subcommittee’s ranking member, and Rep. Mac ThornberryWilliam (Mac) McClellan Thornberry2020 Democrats have thin legislative resumes Overnight Defense: 1,500 troops heading to Mideast to counter Iran | Trump cites Iran tensions to push through Saudi arms sale | Senate confirms Army, Navy chiefs before weeklong recess Trump to send 1,500 troops to Middle East to counter Iran MORE (R-Texas), the full committee’s ranking member, “fundamentally disagree” with provisions in the subcommittee’s portion of the bill.

“Mr. Turner and even Mr. Thornberry view some of the provisions of this mark as a departure from the bipartisan tradition of the committee pushing those more contentious issues to the full committee, and they fundamentally disagree with some of the policy choices in the mark,” spokesman Claude Chafin told reporters.

In a statement later, Turner and Thornberry added that they think the bill “makes us less safe, hinders our ability to defend ourselves, weakens our ability to deter our adversaries, and therefore enables them to challenge us.”

The Trump administration proposed the low-yield warhead, known as the W76-2, as part of its Nuclear Posture Review. The National Nuclear Security Administration is expected to finish production of the warhead this year, but the Pentagon still needs money to deploy them.

The subcommittee’s portion of the NDAA would also throw Congress’s support behind a multilateral agreement known as the Open Skies Treaty, which allows signatories to conduct unarmed observation flights over the entirety of others’ countries in hopes of increasing transparency and reducing the risk of miscalculation.

Republicans have targeted the treaty over alleged Russian violations including claims that Moscow is denying requests to fly over some parts of its country. NDAAs the last two years, when Republicans controlled both chambers of Congress, have restricted funding related to the treaty.

But now that Democrats control the House, this year’s House Armed Services NDAA would fence off funding for any Pentagon effort to withdraw from the treaty unless certain conditions are met, including Russia being in material breach and coordination with allies.

The Trump administration is in the process of withdrawing from a separate arms control treaty with Russia known as the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. Arms control advocates also fear the administration will scrap another nuclear treaty with Russia known as New START.

Right now, there are no provisions in the strategic forces portion of the NDAA dealing with either the INF Treaty or New START, and a staffer would not comment on if those will be addressed by the full committee’s draft of the bill.

The strategic forces subcommittee is also in charge of space. But its portion of the bill says nothing about the Trump administration’s proposed Space Force military branch.

The staffer said Space Force will be “addressed” at the full committee level, without elaborating on how.

Updated at 4:11 p.m.

The House Appropriations Committee on Tuesday advanced a $137.1 billion spending bill covering transportation and housing, about $6 billion above current levels and $17.3 billion more than President TrumpDonald John TrumpYouTube declines to take action against commentator accused of racist, homophobic harassment YouTube declines to take action against commentator accused of racist, homophobic harassment US officials respond to China blaming Trump admin for derailing trade negotiations MORE‘s request.

The measure was approved in a 29-21 vote, divided mostly along party lines. The Trump administration had requested an $11 billion reduction in spending.

Click Here: toulon rugby shop melbourne

ADVERTISEMENT

“The Department of Transportation should prioritize safety, and this bill would equip the Department to fund safety upgrades on our roads and rails as well as safety research,” House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita LoweyNita Sue LoweyHouse advances B agriculture bill House advances B agriculture bill House committee advances 7 billion transportation, housing bill MORE (D-N.Y.) said in a statement.

The legislation would provide $75.8 billion in discretionary spending — $4.7 billion above current levels.

The bill would provide $86.6 billion to the Department of Transportation, a slight increase, while the Department of Housing and Urban Development would receive most of the $6 billion increase, bringing its funding to $50.1 billion.

The bill would block a public housing rule on undocumented immigrants from the administration that Democrats say would “threaten the housing tenure of 55,000 children who are citizens or legal residents.”

Republicans opposed the legislation largely on account of the overall dollar amount. They argued that appropriations bills should not move forward until the House, Senate and White House agree on a deal to raise statutory spending limits.

“It was drafted at a funding level that does not have broad consensus needed to be signed into law,” said Rep. Kay GrangerNorvell (Kay) Kay GrangerHouse advances B agriculture bill House advances B agriculture bill House committee advances 7 billion transportation, housing bill MORE (R-Texas), the ranking member on the committee.

GOP lawmakers unsuccessfully offered an amendment to reallocate funds from a California rail project, which Trump has said he would cancel.

California is suing the administration over the cancellation of $929 million for the project, alleging that the move was an attempt at political retribution over the state’s stance on Trump’s proposed border wall.

Democrats plan to advance all 12 spending bills on the House floor this month, starting with a five-bill package next week.

House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold NadlerJerrold (Jerry) Lewis NadlerOvernight Health Care: ‘Medicare for All’ gets boost from high-ranking Democrat | Anti-abortion group vows to spend M in 2020 election | Dems make Medicaid center of Kentucky governor fight Overnight Health Care: ‘Medicare for All’ gets boost from high-ranking Democrat | Anti-abortion group vows to spend M in 2020 election | Dems make Medicaid center of Kentucky governor fight Democrats, Republicans in Congress spar over state abortion laws MORE (D-N.Y.) is dismissing a bid from the Justice Department to renew negotiations with his panel if the lower chamber cancels a vote to hold Attorney General William BarrWilliam Pelham BarrNadler rejects DOJ offer on Barr contempt vote Nadler rejects DOJ offer on Barr contempt vote Democrats addicted to gambling on losing challenges to Donald Trump MORE in contempt next week.

In a letter to Attorney General William Barr Tuesday evening, Nadler urged the Justice Department “to return to the accommodation process without conditions” and said the House was not moving prematurely to punish Barr for failing to comply with the committee’s demands.

“The pace with which we are proceeding is consistent with the exceptional urgency of this matter: an attack on our elections that was welcomed by our President and benefited his campaign, followed by acts of obstruction by the President designed to interfere with the investigation of that attack,” Nadler wrote.

In a letter to Nadler earlier Tuesday, Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd wrote that the Justice Department is “prepared to resume negotiations” with the committee on a narrowed request for special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerSchiff says Intel panel will hold ‘series’ of hearings on Mueller report Schiff says Intel panel will hold ‘series’ of hearings on Mueller report Key House panel faces pivotal week on Trump MORE’s materials “provided that the Committee takes reasonable steps to restore the status quo ante by mooting its May 8 vote and removing any threat of an imminent vote by the House of Representatives to hold the Attorney General in contempt.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Boyd cited what he described as a willingness expressed by the committee in previous correspondence to narrow the scope of the subpoena.

“The Department believes that the Committee’s new offer reflects a more reasonable request and could mitigate some of the legal barriers to disclosure that we have discussed,” Boyd wrote. 

House leaders on Monday scheduled a vote to hold Barr in contempt of Congress on June 11 for failing to comply with a subpoena for the full, unredacted Mueller report as well as its underlying evidence.

It’s unclear whether the department will continue to negotiate with the committee in light of Nadler’s response. Nadler wrote that his committee stands “ready to negotiate as early as tomorrow morning” if the Justice Department returns to the table.

The House could ultimately decide to cancel the contempt vote if the two parties reach some kind of agreement before next Tuesday, but that appears unlikely given the nature of negotiations thus far.

The Justice Department has offered to allow a select group of lawmakers to view a less-redacted version of the report than has been released to the public in a secure room provided they don’t discuss its contents, but Democrats, who have criticized Barr’s handling of the report, have rejected the arrangement as far too limited. 

Click Here: cheap kanken backpack

Nadler subpoenaed the materials following the release of Mueller’s redacted report in April. The Justice Department engaged in negotiations with the committee but refused the committee’s demands as laid out in the subpoena, saying releasing the full report — including grand jury material and details on ongoing investigations — to the panel would amount to violating the law.

Trump asserted executive privilege over the subpoenaed materials on Barr’s recommendation on May 8 as the committee moved to approve a contempt resolution for the attorney general.

In his letter Tuesday, Boyd reiterated the Justice Department’s position that the contempt vote was “premature and unnecessary” and said the department was further “disappointed” by reports that the House had scheduled the contempt vote for June 11.

Boyd wrote that the department is “mindful of its constitutional obligation” and willing to explore ways to accommodate the committee’s “legitimate interests.” He pointed to the Justice Department’s breakthrough in negotiations with the House Intelligence Committee, which had subpoenaed for foreign intelligence and counterintelligence materials related to Mueller’s investigation as well as the unredacted report and underlying evidence.

Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam SchiffAdam Bennett SchiffNadler rejects DOJ offer on Barr contempt vote Nadler rejects DOJ offer on Barr contempt vote Schiff calls Barr ‘the second-most dangerous man in the country’ MORE (D-Calif.) postponed a vote to enforce that subpoena last month, after the department agreed to begin producing some of the intelligence documents sought by the committee. The agreement did not cover the committee’s demands for the full Mueller report.

Olivia Beavers contributed.

The White House has instructed former officials Hope HicksHope Charlotte HicksThe Hill’s 12:30 Report: Trump warns GOP not to challenge him on tariffs The Hill’s 12:30 Report: Trump warns GOP not to challenge him on tariffs White House tells Hicks, Donaldson not to turn over certain documents to House Judiciary MORE and Annie Donaldson not to turn over documents to the House Judiciary Committee that relate to their work in the administration.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold NadlerJerrold (Jerry) Lewis NadlerOvernight Health Care: ‘Medicare for All’ gets boost from high-ranking Democrat | Anti-abortion group vows to spend M in 2020 election | Dems make Medicaid center of Kentucky governor fight Overnight Health Care: ‘Medicare for All’ gets boost from high-ranking Democrat | Anti-abortion group vows to spend M in 2020 election | Dems make Medicaid center of Kentucky governor fight Democrats, Republicans in Congress spar over state abortion laws MORE (D-N.Y.) had subpoenaed the two on May 21, setting a deadline of 10 a.m. on June 4 for them to produce documents and demanding they provide testimony — Hicks in a public appearance on June 19 and Donaldson in a closed-door deposition June 24.

ADVERTISEMENT

CNN first reported the White House had instructed them not to turn over documents stemming from their time in the Trump administration sought by the subpoena. A committee source confirmed the development to The Hill.

Nadler said later in a statement that the move was evidence of President TrumpDonald John TrumpYouTube declines to take action against commentator accused of racist, homophobic harassment YouTube declines to take action against commentator accused of racist, homophobic harassment US officials respond to China blaming Trump admin for derailing trade negotiations MORE’s “continued obstruction” of congressional investigations.

“The White House has instructed both Hope Hicks and Annie Donaldson not to turn over records in response to subpoenas issued by our Committee last month,” Nadler said. “The President has no lawful basis for preventing these witnesses from complying with our request.”

Republicans pushed back against that characterization.

“The notion the White House directed Hope Hicks or Annie Donaldson to defy a subpoena is not accurate,” a spokesperson for Rep. Doug CollinsDouglas (Doug) Allen CollinsOvernight Health Care: ‘Medicare for All’ gets boost from high-ranking Democrat | Anti-abortion group vows to spend M in 2020 election | Dems make Medicaid center of Kentucky governor fight Overnight Health Care: ‘Medicare for All’ gets boost from high-ranking Democrat | Anti-abortion group vows to spend M in 2020 election | Dems make Medicaid center of Kentucky governor fight Democrats, Republicans in Congress spar over state abortion laws MORE (Ga.), the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said in a statement. “In fact, the White House again invited Judiciary Committee Democrats to direct their requests there, which they have yet to do. This isn’t about ignoring subpoenas—it’s about following standard operating procedure for documents that don’t belong to Ms. Hicks or Ms. Donaldson, may be subject to certain privileges, and they, therefore, are unable to provide.”

White House counsel Pat Cipollone in a Tuesday letter argued that the records sought by Democrats remain under White House control.

“Those documents include White House records that remain legally protected from disclosure under longstanding constitutional principles, because they implicate significant Executive Branch confidentiality interests and executive privilege,” Cipollone wrote to Nadler, according to a copy of the letter obtained by The Hill. “Because Ms. Talley [Donaldson] and Ms. Hicks do not have the legal right to disclose the White House records to third parties, I would ask that the Committee direct any request for such records to the White House, the appropriate legal custodian.”

Nadler said Hicks has provided some documents to the committee related to her time on the Trump campaign. And he argued the president, under federal law, can’t assert executive privilege over documents that have left the White House.

Democrats view both former White House officials as key witnesses as they look to further investigate Trump’s conduct.

Special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerSchiff says Intel panel will hold ‘series’ of hearings on Mueller report Schiff says Intel panel will hold ‘series’ of hearings on Mueller report Key House panel faces pivotal week on Trump MORE interviewed both Hicks, the former White House communications director, and Donaldson, who was chief of staff to former White House counsel Don McGahn, as part of his investigation, and their testimony appears in his exhaustive report. The 448-page report also repeatedly references notes that Donaldson took in the course of her work under McGahn in the White House.

Nadler is pressing for specific documents — including Hicks’s diary and Donaldson’s notes that she kept while working under McGahn — in what appears to be an effort to obtain records that detail the day-to-day events within the administration.

Hicks’ attorney Bob Trout wrote to Nadler Tuesday that his client would “respectfully decline” to provide documents from her time on the presidential transition or in the White House on instructions from the Trump administration.

Hicks provided a disk of documents related to her work on the campaign, according to Trout’s letter, which was obtained by The Hill.

“We have redacted from these documents personal identifying information such as private email addresses and phone numbers,” the letter states. “This disc does not include any documents that we already provided to the Committee on March, 22, 2019.”

Trout also wrote that Hicks would not provide the committee with documents her lawyer received from the Trump campaign for the purpose of preparing for interviews with congressional committees and Mueller’s office, but said some documents responsive to the subpoena had already been provided to the House Intelligence Committee.

The White House has already blocked a number of requests Nadler has issued as part of his panel’s sweeping investigation into allegations of obstruction, public corruption and other abuses of power by Trump and his associates.

Trump successfully instructed McGahn not to appear before the committee for public testimony last month, citing a Justice Department legal opinion arguing he is immune from compelled congressional testimony. The committee had subpoenaed McGahn for documents and testimony and threatened to hold him in contempt for failing to comply.

House leaders have scheduled a vote on June 11 to hold McGahn and Attorney General William BarrWilliam Pelham BarrNadler rejects DOJ offer on Barr contempt vote Nadler rejects DOJ offer on Barr contempt vote Democrats addicted to gambling on losing challenges to Donald Trump MORE in contempt for failing to comply with the panel’s demands. Nadler had also issued a subpoena for the Justice Department to turn over Mueller’s full, unredacted report and underlying evidence to the committee, but Barr has thus far declined, saying it would amount to him violating the law by releasing grand jury material and details on ongoing investigations to Congress.

The White House also rejected the Judiciary panel’s sweeping request for documents, accusing the panel of attempting a “do-over” of Mueller’s investigation and suggesting Nadler narrow the scope of the request.

In an effort to push forward with his investigation and get around an uncooperative White House, Nadler announced on Monday a series of hearings on Mueller’s report that will call in witnesses to testify about the president’s conduct. The first one will feature former White House counsel John Dean on June 10.

Updated: 1:38 p.m.

The Department of Justice on Monday sought to refute new allegations that a GOP redistricting operative played a significant role in getting a citizenship question on the 2020 census, calling the claims false and without merit.

In a new court filing, DOJ lawyers offered a biting rebuke to the allegations made against Trump administration officials of attempting to obscure the role of the late GOP operative Thomas Hofeller in adding the citizenship question.

“The motion borders on frivolous, and appears to be an attempt to reopen the evidence in this already-closed case and to drag this Court into Plaintiffs’ eleventh-hour campaign to improperly derail the Supreme Court’s resolution of the government’s appeal,” the letter filed in federal court in New York reads.

ADVERTISEMENT

The ACLU on Friday dropped what appeared to a bombshell court filing, alleging that Hofeller conducted a 2015 study that found asking about citizenship on the census would help Republicans and hurt Latinos and Democrats in redistricting. And the group claimed that officials did not disclose Hofeller’s role in getting the question added to the census.

The DOJ, in this new court filing, said contrary to the ACLU’s claims, the group has no evidence DOJ official John Gore “ever read, received, or was even aware of the existence of that unpublished study” or that he knew of it when writing an agency letter in favor of the citizenship question.

And they pushed back against the claim that language authored by Hofeller made it into administration documents promoting the question.

Click Here: cheap kanken backpack

“There is no smoking gun here; only smoke and mirrors,” the filing states.

The DOJ lawyers also fired back at the claim that Gore and Mark Neuman, who advised the Commerce Department on the citizenship question, didn’t disclose Hofeller’s role surrounding the question. They said that the two men were never directly asked questions that would have caused them to discuss Hofeller’s alleged involvement.

They wrote that the “lack of testimony from Gore” about receiving a draft letter from Neuman promoting the creation of the question, and Neuman also not sharing that information during his own testimony, “is thus traceable to Plaintiffs’ inadequate deposition questioning.”

The DOJ further argued that it was too late to add the evidence to the ongoing litigation surrounding the question, as the case has since been closed in district court in New York and is now under review by the Supreme Court.

And they said that the heart of the legal issue is whether Commerce Secretary Wilbur RossWilbur Louis RossNew evidence throws census citizenship case into question Florida senators back push for federal help with red tide ACLU files notice to Supreme Court about new evidence on census citizenship question MORE, who formally oversaw the question’s addition, had “an objectively rational basis for his decision to reinstate the citizenship question.”

“Nothing in the private files of a deceased political operative can affect the resolution of that issue,” the filing states.

The court document also asserts that Hofeller’s 2015 study didn’t find that asking about citizenship would impact redistricting, but rather that basing districts on citizen voting age population would have the resulting effect.

“The Department of Justice takes accusations of false testimony very seriously. For the reasons set forth above and in the attached charts, Plaintiffs’ accusations are meritless,” Monday’s filing reads. “Plaintiffs had an obligation to conduct a pre-filing investigation before leveling such inflammatory accusations, especially against a high-ranking DOJ official.

The Hill has reached out to the ACLU for comment. Both parties in the case are set to appear before a federal judge on Wednesday, as he determines whether to issue any sanctions against the Trump administration over the new allegations.

The debate over adding the citizenship question to the 2020 census has engulfed both Congress and the courts.

Three federal judges have ruled against the question, but the Supreme Court’s conservative majority appears poised to allow its inclusion on the decennial census.

And shortly before DOJ made its court filing, House Oversight and Reform Committee Chairman Elijah CummingsElijah Eugene CummingsCummings accuses Education Dept of blocking probe into attempted removal of internal watchdog On The Money: US banks see profits rise | Pelosi ‘optimistic’ on infrastructure deal with Trump | Former Black Caucus staffers flex clout on K Street Former Congressional Black Caucus staffers flex clout on K Street MORE (D-Md.) announced that his panel will vote to hold Ross and Attorney General William BarrWilliam Pelham BarrManchin knocks Barr: He should be focused on protecting the Constitution Warner: ‘Height of irresponsibility’ that Congress hasn’t improved election security Clear leaders have emerged in the Democratic pack MORE in contempt for failing to comply with congressional subpoenas issued in a probe surrounding the citizenship question.

Cummings gave the officials until Thursday to hand over certain documents pertaining to the census investigation, including those on Hofeller’s alleged involvement, before moving forward with the contempt votes.

A spokesperson for the Commerce Department in a statement called the threat to hold Ross in contempt an attempt “to desperately and improperly influence the Supreme Court with mere insinuations and conspiracy theories.”

George Nader, a Lebanese American businessman with links to associates of President TrumpDonald John TrumpHead of Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers to depart administration The Guardian editorial board says Trump is ‘not welcome’ in U.K. ahead of his first state visit Kushner casts doubt on the ability of Palestinians to govern themselves MORE, has been arrested on a charge of transporting child pornography.

U.S. officials arrested Nader at John F. Kennedy Airport on Monday morning, the Justice Department said. Nader was charged under seal after he arrived in Washington from Dubai in January 2018 with a cellphone containing images of minors engaged in sexual conduct, officials said.

ADVERTISEMENT

The criminal complaint, dated April 19, 2018, was made public after his arrest Monday.

Nader was a key figure in special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerMueller seeks quiet retreat from public life Democratic lawmaker: ‘The only thing I can get on TV to talk about’ is impeachment Biden campaign: Impeachment ‘may be unavoidable’ now MORE’s investigation into Russian interference, sitting for multiple interviews and providing information on his effort to broker a meeting in the Seychelles between Trump ally and Blackwater founder Erik Prince and a Russian financier.

He was arrested after landing at JFK and is expected to be arraigned Monday afternoon, according to the Department of Justice.

Nader pleaded guilty to the same charge in 1991.

An affidavit that was unsealed Monday alleges that a search warrant approved in a “matter unrelated to child pornography” allowed for the search of any items on Nader’s person as well as his baggage. Among the items cleared for search were electronic devices, including cellphones.

After Nader flew into Dulles International Airport, located in the D.C. area, on January 17, 2018, he was “voluntarily interviewed by FBI agents regarding a matter unrelated to child pornography,” the document states.

Following the interview, Nader was told of the search warrant, and all three iPhones he had with him were seized.

As one of the phones was being reviewed for other evidence, “the case agent in that other matter uncovered multiple files which appeared to contain child pornography,” the court filing reads.

Another search warrant was then issued to find potential child pornography on the phone, and 12 sexually explicit videos of minors were uncovered, according to the affidavit.

Nader, if convicted on the charge, faces a minimum of 15 years and up to 40 years in prison.

Nader’s name is mentioned in Mueller’s report extensively in sections discussing links between associates and members of the Trump campaign and Moscow.

The report states that Nader sat for “multiple interviews” with the special counsel’s office, including one that was conducted under a “proffer agreement” — a potential signal Nader believed he could be charged with crimes and spoke to prosecutors on the condition his statements wouldn’t be used against him.

The report details that Nader, who has advised the United Arab Emirates, helped set up the meeting between Prince and Kirill Dmitriev, a Russian banker with ties to Russian President Vladimir PutinVladimir Vladimirovich PutinTrump’s evolving remarks on Russian election interference Bob Mueller got it right — now it’s up to Congress to begin the impeachment process Trump says Russia did not help him win, contradicting tweet MORE, in the Seychelles days before Trump took office. The meeting was one of numerous contacts between campaign associates and Russians that Mueller examined in the course of his investigation.

“Nader developed contacts with both U.S. presidential campaigns during the 2016 election, and kept Dmitriev abreast of his efforts to do so,” the report says. “According to Nader, Dmitriev said that his and the government of Russia’s preference was for candidate Trump to win and asked Nader to assist him in meeting members of the Trump Campaign.”

Nader did not introduce Dmitriev to anyone linked to the Trump campaign prior to the 2016 election, according to Mueller.

“Nader informed Prince that the Russians were looking to build a link with the incoming Trump Administration,” the report states. “Nader suggested, in light of Prince’s relationship with Transition Team officials, that Prince and Dmitriev meet to discuss issues of mutual concern.”

Mueller did not find sufficient evidence to charge members or associates of the Trump campaign with conspiring with Russia. The special counsel concluded his investigation in late March and delivered his first public remarks on his report last week.

Click Here: kanken mini cheap

Amazon and Google shares fell Monday morning after news broke over the weekend that regulators had laid the groundwork for potential antitrust investigations into the two internet giants.

Shares for Google’s parent company, Alphabet, were down around 6 percent after the markets opened Monday morning. Amazon stock was down nearly 4 percent.

ADVERTISEMENT

Multiple media outlets reported over the weekend that the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) had agreed to divide antitrust oversight of the two companies — a move that signals that the government is serious about looking into the competition concerns swirling around the firms.

It’s unclear whether either agency is actually planning to launch an investigation or even what issues would be of concern. But both Amazon and Google have been subject to increasing scrutiny over their market power and its effect on competition.

Google has been subject to three major antitrust fines totaling about $9 billion from European Union authorities in recent years for its search, advertising and bundling practices.

And the EU’s top competition regulator has also hinted at a potential antitrust inquiry into questions about whether Amazon has used its control over its marketplace to hurt third-party vendors and tip the scales in its favor.

A growing movement of tech critics in the U.S. has been pushing regulators to take a similarly tough stance on Silicon Valley. In 2013, the FTC closed an antitrust investigation into Google after the company agreed to change some of its business practices that had raised anti-competition concerns.

Click Here: kanken mini cheap

But in recent years, worries about the tech behemoths have grown and become a top political flashpoint.

“Google has too much power, and they’re using that power to hurt small businesses, stifle innovation, and tilt the playing field against everyone else,” Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenWith debates on horizon, Democrats sharpen attack lines How old is ‘too old’ to run for president? Top Dems tread carefully on impeachment MORE (D-Mass.), a presidential candidate who has proposed breaking up Silicon Valley’s biggest companies. “It’s time to fight back.”

Blood testing group Quest Diagnostics announced Monday that the personal information of 11.9 million patients has been breached, including Social Security numbers, financial information and medical data.

The company said in a statement that an “unauthorized user” gained access to the American Medical Collection Agency (AMCA) system, a billing collection service provider for Quest.

ADVERTISEMENT

Quest noted in its official statement on the breach that it had not yet received “complete information” on the details of the breach from the AMCA, such as which customers were impacted, and that it has also not been able to verify that the breach took place. The company said that it does not believe that laboratory test results were accessed.

Quest said it is “committed to keeping our patients, health care providers, and all relevant parties informed as we learn more,” adding that the company “is taking this matter very seriously and is committed to the privacy and security of our patients’ personal information.” 

The AMCA originally notified both Quest and Optum360, another group that utilizes billing services from the AMCA, about the potential unauthorized activity on its system on May 14, but did not reveal the number of customers impacted by the data breach until May 31.

A spokesperson for Optum360 told The Hill that “while Optum360 data systems were not impacted by this situation, data security is critically important to us, and we are actively working with Quest and AMCA to understand this issue and ensure appropriate actions are being taken.”

Click Here: kanken mini cheap

The American Medical Collection Agency (AMCA) said it is notifying law enforcement and conducting internal reviews following a data breach that exposed the personal information of 11.9 million customers of blood testing company Quest Diagnostics.

The AMCA told The Hill on Monday it is in the process of investigating the breach of its system, which Quest announced earlier in the day involved an “unauthorized user” gaining access to personal information including Social Security numbers, medical data, and financial information. The AMCA is a billing collection service provider for Quest. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“Upon receiving information from a security compliance firm that works with credit card companies of a possible security compromise, we conducted an internal review, and then took down our web payments page,” a spokesperson for AMCA said.

The spokesperson noted the AMCA “hired a third-party external forensics firm to investigate any potential security breach in our systems, migrated our web payments portal services to a third-party vendor, and retained additional experts to advise on, and implement, steps to increase our systems’ security. We have also advised law enforcement of this incident.” 

The AMCA “remains committed to our system’s security, data privacy, and the protection of personal information,” the spokesperson said.

Quest said Monday it is “taking the situation very seriously,” and is “committed to the privacy and security of our patients’ personal information.” The company also said laboratory results were not accessed by the unauthorized user.

Quest also said the AMCA has not yet given them “complete information” on the breach, including details on which customers were impacted. The company promised to work with Optum360, another group that utilizes billing services from the AMCA, “to ensure that Quest patients are appropriately notified consistent with the law.”

Stephen Breidenbach, the co-chair of the Cybersecurity, Privacy, and Technology Practice Group at New York law firm Moritt Hock & Hamroff, told The Hill the AMCA needs to zero in “closing the door” the attacker used to get into the company’s system.

“It’s very important at this stage that AMCA contain the breach and ensure the attacker has not established a method to reenter AMCA’s systems,” Breidenbach said, such as identifying any potential software that may have contained a vulnerability that allowed the attacker access.

Breidenbach cautioned that even if the AMCA believes it has identified how the attacker got into the system, it needs to make sure there aren’t still other avenues for them to use again. 

“Just because the company found and closed the door that the attacker came through does not mean all the doors to the business (e.g., other unpatched programs) are shut,” Breidenbach told The Hill. “It also doesn’t prove that the attacker never established an alternative method of entry, such as installing his/her own software that allows the attacker to reconnect to the network independent of the vulnerability.”