On the Confirmation of Loretta Lynch

…for Attorney General to replace Eric Holder.

During confirmation hearings which started yesterday [emphasis added],

Her biggest challenge could be explaining her support and participation in civil forfeitures, a legal process in which law enforcement agencies can seize money and other assets without charging or convicting the owners….

And so

After nearly three years of legal battles, the federal government last week dropped its case against the Hirschs, who own a distribution company that serves convenience stores on Long Island. The government agreed to return more than $446,000 in assets and cash seized by the Internal Revenue Service in 2012 under federal civil asset forfeiture laws, even though the Hirsch family was never charged with a crime.

This was a case approved and brought by US Attorney for the Eastern District of New York Loretta Lynch.

Hmm….

Privacy Misbehavior

Andrea Peterson of The Washington Post has a warning.

Recall that ‘way last November, Verizon was exposed as using a supercookie that they’d developed for the purpose: it sits on your cell phone and tracks, ostensibly for their own use, your cell usage (supposedly limited to your use on the Internet). And you can’t delete it.

It turns out that Turn, an online advertising company that works with Google and Facebook,

uses [the Verizon supercookie] to collect data that makes it easier for advertisers to place targeted online ads, according to the researchers.

Verizon says they’re “looking into this,” but they don’t say they’re putting a stop to it.

We are evaluating how third parties are using the UIDH in this evolving ecosystem and considering any appropriate response[.]

Peterson suggests that

Turn’s use of the identifier highlights how data about someone’s online tracking practices can sometimes be deployed beyond its original intent—making it harder than ever for consumers to control who has knowledge about their online activities.

And

Turn’s General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer, Max Ochoa, confirmed Mayer’s analysis of how its program worked in an interview with The Post.

Ochoa also thinks this is perfectly jake [emphasis his].

Clearing cookies is not a reliable way for a user to express their desire not to receive tailored advertising….

It is vital to note that clearing a cookie cache is not a widely recognized method of reliably expressing an opt-out preference.

Yeah—because the user didn’t use a bureaucrat’s special hoop. This, of course, is nonsense. The user didn’t clear the cookies because he didn’t have anything better to do with his time, so he just started putzing around with his cell phone. Leave it to an advertiser—and one that does his data collection for his clients in an entirely behind-the-scenes way—to pretend to this level of obtuseness.

Just as disappointingly, Verizon is pretending innocence in all of this.

“[I]t is unlikely that sites and ad entities will attempt to build customer profiles for online advertising” and noting that the identifier “changes frequently.”

Never mind that

While you have a Turn tracking cookie and are on the Verizon network, it kept track of the linkage between your Turn cookie and that Verizon Wireless tracking header,” he explained. “But if you get rid of the Turn cookie, the back end of that system would notice and reinstate that cookie based on the header.

It strains my credulity to think that the IT experts at Verizon wouldn’t understand this as they developed their supercookie and deployed it.

Hmm….

I Think the Man Overstates His Case

In a Fox News op-ed this week, pollster Doug Schoen decried President Barack Obama’s offensive refusal to present himself in Paris to stand beside French President François Hollande and with dozens of other world leaders who stood with Hollande as all of them called out Islamic terrorists’ despicable murders in Charlie Hebdo‘s* publication offices, of a French cop, and of four innocents in a Jewish bakery, all of which occurred in the French capital, Paris.ParisMarch2

Wrote Schoen [emphasis in the original]:

To speak about the most serious terrorist attack on Western soil since 9/11 in between speeches about his free community college plan demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding for the gravity of the situation in Paris and, indeed, the world.

To this end, it is not surprising that President Obama is the only Western leader who has refused to call this attack Islamic terrorism, even though President Hollande has declared that France is it at war with radical Islam.

But then Schoen went, I think, too far.

And to not even send Vice President Joe Biden or Secretary of State John Kerry in his place shows a level of disrespect that makes me ashamed of our nation.

I disagree. I remain very much proud of my nation and the steps America is taking, or attempting to take, to fight Evil in this world.

I am embarrassed and shamed by President Barack Obama and his failure here.

 

*If you follow the link to Charlie Hebdo‘s Web site, you’ll be greeted, also, by a pop-up. The French caption, translated, reads

Freedom of expression is a right

Weekly Charlie [Charlie Hebdo] needs you to survive

Support by making a donation!

Feel free to support them, in the name of freedom. Give ’til it hurts. Charlie Hebdo already has.

Distractions

House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R, LA) spoke, a dozen years ago, to a white supremacist group founded by KKK-er David Duke. He did this as a state legislator on the stump and speaking to any group willing to listen in an effort to push his then pending state tax legislation. There’s nothing in his record since, no behavior since, to indicate he agrees with the group’s or Duke’s “principles;” Scalise has, in fact, explicitly repudiated them.

Yet this speech is being touted as a serious distraction to the new Republican majorities in both houses of Congress.

On what basis, though, is it a distraction? How many Republican votes are lost to this “distraction” from the 247 about to appear in the House? How many Republican votes are lost from the 54 in the Senate?

What bills under consideration, what bills being readied for consideration in the next two years, will not be brought to votes because of this “distraction?” There’s no distraction here.

The “distraction” is entirely manufactured: the minority party Democrats are desperate to change the subject away from the conservative, nationally beneficial legislation that’s likely to be passed over these next two years, and away from the conservative, nationally beneficial reversal of Democrat damage done over the preceding six years. The NLMSM is desperate to not have to report on the successes of those legislative efforts or on the message being sent to Americans by President Barack Obama’s vetoes of those legislations.

The minority party is willing to be racist in its desperation to change that subject, just as it’s been willing to be racist all along in its blind opposition to anything Republican.